The Constant Flow of JFK Disinformation

[Bob]

Please see this great piece from Russ Baker and Milicent Cranor:http://whowhatwhy.org/2015/11/24/the-my ... formation/

[Tommy Wilkens]

And Bob don't leave out the disinformation not only going out trying to screw the everyday Joe up on who did what but all the disinformation spewed out in discrediting individuals that had gotten to close to revealing the real truth.First of course comes to mind is Jim Garrison .Before the MSM was done with him he was labeled a complete wacko.And then the MSM total destroying of Willem Oltmans and his findings which still to today are looked on as completely self centered and money hungry.The thing that has always amazed me is Oltmans was a free lance journalist who made his living by writing and reporting stories and then was paid for his work.For some reason when he revealed his long ten year investigation and friendship with George de Mohrenschildt he was labeled a hustler.A journalist with a price.But then turn around and look at today's journalist like Bill O'Reilly who has made millions and millions of dollars off of his journalistic work and no one says a word and people keep on buying his poorly written books and listening to his garbage that his spews out on the hateful est television news station "FOX" that has ever been in the history of television.

[kenmurray]

O'Reilly as we all know when he was a journalist on Inside Edition did several stories on the JFK Assassination like this one he did with Harold Weisberg and the Roscoe White story.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPw8YzGd0w4Not only has he sold his soul to the devil now but so has Geraldo who presented us the Z- film on his program in 1975. Geraldo now believes Oswald as the lone Assassin. Go figure!

[Tommy Wilkens]

Your so right Ken .... And the list can go on and on .In Oltmans notes he told of the hatefulness and jealousy and animosity he experienced from American journalist because he had managed to enter George de Mohrenschildt's private world. No American journalist could get a real interview were more than just the cover story was discussed like with Dick Russell.But the number one journalist that Oltmans despised with a passion was Walter Cronkite...LOL...We found several amusing notes from Oltmans were he called Cronkite "that old rusted relic" and the"self proclaimed Pope of commentators"....

[Tom Bigg]

Most of the journalists are fools. Who would stay in the professions when they witness all the greed, dishonesty, incompetence, etc.? Brian Williams is local to Connecticut, I remember a story by a lady I worked with who was at a party where Williams said we had to remove Saddam Hussein because he was evil or crazy. That is the level of idiocy these physically appealing idiots are at--the guy never even graduated from college, not that that would be an indication of excellence, sometimes it is. Government intelligence would make it difficult for any journalist who bucked the system. They are always open to the presstitutes....

[Bob]

Let's look at the people who have changed sides over the years. I'm talking about people like Vince Bugliosi, Gary Mack and Bill O'Reilly, who once were on the conspiracy theorist side of the aisle, but shifted their views to the lone nut side of the ledger.The story of Bugliosi is a very interesting story, as I noted in this blog I wrote:https://greenbaybobfox.wordpress.com/20 ... ons/Things seemed to change for Vince once he became an associate of David Atlee Phillips. Not only that, but Vince was also reportedly paid $1,000,000 for his book called Reclaiming History, which basically says that the Warren Commission got it right about Lee Harvey Oswald being the lone nut assassin of JFK.So what does that say about Vince? Well, he basically became a well-paid CIA operative.There is also the case of Larry Dunkel, better known as Gary Mack. Mack played a big role in the A&E series in 1988 called The Men Who Killed Kennedy. Mack came off as a big crusader for everyone who believed the JFK assassination was a conspiracy.A few years later,the CIA helped to create the Sixth Floor Museum, as you can see here:http://jfkfacts.org/assassination/news/ ... museum/The job as curator of the museum was first offered to Robert Groden, but he turned down that pay-off...er...job. But Mack took the job, which also gave him a reported salary of $180,000 per year.So once again we see a CIA and a money connection.O'Reilly once did some fine journalistic work for Inside Edition, as he reported about the connection of Lee Harvey Oswald to Maurice Bishop, better known as David Atlee Phillips. This information came from Antonio Veciana, who was a Cuban exile leader who worked Bishop/Phillips.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3i7OidcsB3sBut all of this changed once O'Reilly started working for FOX News. Bullshitting Bill makes at least $20,000,000 a year (his salary in 2013) doing The O'Reilly Factor. In addition to that, O'Lielly has also made over $28,000,000 in royalties from his books, which included Killing Kennedy, another LHO did it alone appraisal.Most of you have heard about Operation Mockingbird. That was a program put together by the CIA to place operatives in the media. If you are not familiar with it, please this article by Carl Bernstein, who wrote this piece for Rolling Stone in the late 70s. It's a very ironic article, as I believe that his co-author in All The President's Men, Bob Woodward, was definitely a CIA operative.CIA and the MediaBy Carl BernsteinIn 1953, Joseph Alsop, then one of America’s leading syndicated columnists, went to the Philippines to cover an election. He did not go because he was asked to do so by his syndicate. He did not go because he was asked to do so by the newspapers that printed his column. He went at the request of the CIA.Alsop is one of more than 400 American journalists who in the past twenty-five years have secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency, according to documents on file at CIA headquarters.Some of these journalists’ relationships with the Agency were tacit; some were explicit. There was cooperation, accommodation and overlap. Journalists provided a full range of clandestine services -- from simple intelligence gathering to serving as go-betweens with spies in Communist countries. Reporters shared their notebooks with the CIA. Editors shared their staffs. Some of the journalists were Pulitzer Prize winners, distinguished reporters who considered themselves ambassadors-without-portfolio for their country. Most were less exalted: foreign correspondents who found that their association with the Agency helped their work; stringers and freelancers who were as interested it the derring-do of the spy business as in filing articles, and, the smallest category, full-time CIA employees masquerading as journalists abroad. In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements America’s leading news organizations.The history of the CIA’s involvement with the American press continues to be shrouded by an official policy of obfuscation and deception...Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency were William Paley of the Columbia Broadcasting System, Henry Luce of Time Inc., Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the Louisville Courier-Journal and James Copley of the Copley News Service. Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include the American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, The Miami Herald, and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald-Tribune. By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with The New York Times, CBS, and Time Inc.From the Agency’s perspective, there is nothing untoward in such relationships, and any ethical questions are a matter for the journalistic profession to resolve, not the intelligence community...Many journalists were used by the CIA to assist in this process and they had the reputation of being among the best in the business. The peculiar nature of the job of the foreign correspondent is ideal for such work; he is accorded unusual access, by his host country, permitted to travel in areas often off-limits to other Americans, spends much of his time cultivating sources in governments, academic institutions, the military establishment and the scientific communities. He has the opportunity to form long-term personal relationships with sources and -- perhaps more than any other category of American operative - is in a position to make correct judgments about the susceptibility and availability of foreign nationals for recruitment as spies.The Agency’s dealings with the press began during the earliest stages of the Cold War. Allen Dulles, who became director of the CIA in 1953, sought to establish a recruiting-and-cover capability within America’s most prestigious journalistic institutions. By operating under the guise of accredited news correspondents, Dulles believed, CIA operatives abroad would be accorded a degree of access and freedom of movement unobtainable under almost any other type of cover.American publishers, like so many other corporate and institutional leaders at the time, were willing us commit the resources of their companies to the struggle against “global Communism.” Accordingly, the traditional line separating the American press corps and government was often indistinguishable: rarely was a news agency used to provide cover for CIA operatives abroad without the knowledge and consent of either its principal owner; publisher or senior editor. Thus, contrary to the notion that the CIA era and news executives allowed themselves and their organizations to become handmaidens to the intelligence services. “Let’s not pick on some poor reporters, for God’s sake,” William Colby exclaimed at one point to the Church committee’s investigators. “Let’s go to the managements. They were witting” In all, about twenty-five news organizations (including those listed at the beginning of this article) provided cover for the Agency...Many journalists who covered World War II were close to people in the Office of Strategic Services, the wartime predecessor of the CIA; more important, they were all on the same side. When the war ended and many OSS officials went into the CIA, it was only natural that these relationships would continue.Meanwhile, the first postwar generation of journalists entered the profession; they shared the same political and professional values as their mentors. “You had a gang of people who worked together during World War II and never got over it,” said one Agency official. “They were genuinely motivated and highly susceptible to intrigue and being on the inside. Then in the Fifties and Sixties there was a national consensus about a national threat. The Vietnam War tore everything to pieces - shredded the consensus and threw it in the air.” Another Agency official observed: “Many journalists didn’t give a second thought to associating with the Agency. But there was a point when the ethical issues which most people had submerged finally surfaced. Today, a lot of these guys vehemently deny that they had any relationship with the Agency.”The CIA even ran a formal training program in the 1950s to teach its agents to be journalists. Intelligence officers were “taught to make noises like reporters,” explained a high CIA official, and were then placed in major news organizations with help from management. “These were the guys who went through the ranks and were told, “You’re going to be a journalist,” the CIA official said. Relatively few of the 400-some relationships described in Agency files followed that pattern, however; most involved persons who were already bona fide journalists when they began undertaking tasks for the Agency. The Agency’s relationships with journalists, as described in CIA files, include the following general categories:* Legitimate, accredited staff members of news organizations - usually reporters. Some were paid; some worked for the Agency on a purely voluntary basis.* Stringers and freelancers. Most were payrolled by the Agency under standard contractual terms.* Employees of so-called CIA “proprietaries.” During the past twenty-five years, the Agency has secretly bankrolled numerous foreign press services, periodicals and newspapers -- both English and foreign language -- which provided excellent cover for CIA operatives.* Columnists and commentators. There are perhaps a dozen well-known columnists and broadcast commentators whose relationships with the CIA go far beyond those normally maintained between reporters and their sources. They are referred to at the Agency as “known assets” and can be counted on to perform a variety of undercover tasks; they are considered receptive to the Agency’s point of view on various subjects.Murky details of CIA relationships with individuals and news organizations began trickling out in 1973 when it was first disclosed that the CIA had, on occasion, employed journalists. Those reports, combined with new information, serve as casebook studies of the Agency’s use of journalists for intelligence purposes.The New York Times - The Agency’s relationship with the Times was by far its most valuable among newspapers, according to CIA officials. [It was] general Times policy to provide assistance to the CIA whenever possible...CIA officials cite two reasons why the Agency’s working relationship with the Times was closer and more extensive than with any other paper: the fact that the Times maintained the largest foreign news operation in American daily journalism; and the close personal ties between the men who ran both institutions...The Columbia Broadcasting System -- CBS was unquestionably the CIA’s most valuable broadcasting asset. CBS president William Paley and Allen Dulles enjoyed an easy working and social relationship. Over the years, the network provided cover for CIA employees, including at least one well-known foreign correspondent and several stringers; it supplied outtakes of newsfilm to the CIA; established a formal channel of communication between the Washington bureau chief and the Agency; gave the Agency access to the CBS newsfilm library; and allowed reports by CBS correspondents to the Washington and New York newsrooms to be routinely monitored by the CIA. Once a year during the 1950s and early 1960s, CBS correspondents joined the CIA hierarchy for private dinners and briefings...At the headquarters of CBS News in New York, Paley’s cooperation with the CIA is taken for granted by many news executives and reporters, despite the denials. Paley, 76, was not interviewed by Salant’s investigators. “It wouldn’t do any good,” said one CBS executive. “It is the single subject about which his memory has failed.”Time and Newsweek magazines - According to CIA and Senate sources, Agency files contain written agreements with former foreign correspondents and stringers for both the weekly news magazines. The same sources refused to say whether the CIA has ended all its associations with individuals who work for the two publications. Allen Dulles often interceded with his good friend, the late Henry Luce, founder of Time and Life magazines, who readily allowed certain members of his staff to work for the Agency and agreed to provide jobs and credentials for other CIA operatives who lacked journalistic experience...At Newsweek, Agency sources reported, the CIA engaged the services of several foreign correspondents and stringers under arrangements approved by senior editors at the magazine...“To the best of my knowledge:’ said [Harry] Kern, [Newsweek’s foreign editor from 1945 to 1956] “nobody at Newsweek worked for the CIA.... The informal relationship was there. Why have anybody sign anything? What we knew we told them [the CIA] and the State Department.... When I went to Washington, I would talk to Foster or Allen Dulles about what was going on .... We thought it was admirable at the time. We were all on the same side.” CIA officials say that Kern's dealings with the Agency were extensive...When Newsweek was purchased by the Washington Post Company, publisher Philip L. Graham was informed by Agency officials that the CIA occasionally used the magazine for cover purposes, according to CIA sources. “It was widely known that Phil Graham was somebody you could get help from,” said a former deputy director of the Agency... But Graham, who committed suicide in 1963, apparently knew little of the specifics of any cover arrangements with Newsweek, CIA sources said...Information about Agency dealings with the Washington Post newspaper is extremely sketchy. According to CIA officials, some Post stringers have been CIA employees, but these officials say they do not know if anyone in the Post management was aware of the arrangements...Other major news organizations - According to Agency officials, CIA files document additional cover arrangements with the following news gathering organizations, among others: the New York Herald Tribune, Saturday Evening Post, Scripps-Howard Newspapers, Hearst Newspapers, Associated Press, United Press International, the Mutual Broadcasting System, Reuters and The Miami Herald...“And that's just a small part of the list,” in the words of one official who served in the CIA hierarchy. Like many sources, this official said that the only way to end the uncertainties about aid furnished the Agency by journalists is to disclose the contents of the CIA files - a course opposed by almost all of the thirty-five present and former CIA officials interviewed over the course of a year.The CIA’s use of journalists continued virtually unabated until 1973 when, in response to public disclosure that the Agency had secretly employed American reporters, William Colby began scaling down the program. In his public statements, Colby conveyed the impression that the use of journalists had been minimal and of limited importance to the Agency.He then initiated a series of moves intended to convince the press, Congress and the public that the CIA had gotten out of the news business. But according to Agency officials, Colby had in fact thrown a protective net around his most valuable intelligence assets in the journalistic community...At the headquarters of CBS News in New York, Paley’s cooperation with the CIA is taken for granted by many news executives and reporters, despite the denials. Paley, 76, was not interviewed by Salant’s investigators. “It wouldn’t do any good,” said one CBS executive. “It is the single subject about which his memory has failed.”After Colby left the Agency on January 28th, 1976, and was succeeded by George Bush, the CIA announced a new policy: “Effective immediately, the CIA will not enter into any paid or contract relationship with any full-time or part-time news correspondent accredited by any US news service, newspaper, periodical, radio or television network or station.” ... The text of the announcement noted that the CIA would continue to “welcome” the voluntary, unpaid cooperation of journalists. Thus, many relationships were permitted to remain intact.Bottom line, Operation Mockingbird is alive and well in today's media. It may not have the same name, but it's definitely out there. Bugliosi, Mack and O'Reilly are prime examples. So are people like Chris Matthews, Rachel Maddow and Charlie Rose, all who continue to spout the lone nut theory. But nobody is more obnoxious about that subject than Matthews. Apparently, he gets the worst ratings of any show on MSNBC, but he is kept on for some reason. I wonder why? Speaking of Rose, some of you may have heard this story. But Rose had a 50th anniversary show about JFK's assassination, in which one of his guests was Robert Kennedy Jr. In that show, RFK Jr. gushed about JFK And The Unspeakable by James Douglass.He talked about what a great book it was and how his dad never believed the Warren Commission. Wouldn't you have liked to have seen that show? But as it turns out, the show never aired. Either Rose or his producer decided that the public didn't need to see it. All I can say is that Joseph Goebbels would be very proud of the work done by Bugliosi, Mack, O'Reilly, Matthews, Maddow, Rose and so many others in the MSM.

[Bob Jonas]

Regarding those who have changed their stories, I just wonder what "influenced" them to jump ship? I read Robert Dallek's great book on the life of JFK titled 'An Unfinished Life'. It was full of amazing detail and tedious research about every angle of Kennedy's complex life, but when it came to his assassination, it's almost as if a middle-school student wrote it. He blindly dismisses any criticism or examination of the Warren Report as nothing but a bunch of wacky conspiracy theorists grasping for nothing. Ironically, the remainder of his book was all about "opening the hood" and critically examining all other aspects of JFK's life. Whoever got to Dallek, likely got to the others. Was it money? Was it a threat? Was it blackmail? What convinced them to change their minds?Oh, and my other thought about disinformation is that much of it is tossed out there to play upon our emotions. For example, if we hate LBJ, then we will tend to latch onto theories (no matter how far-fetched) that implicate him. Same for the Bush haters. Same for the military industrial complex haters. Hate is the fuel of choice required for disinformation to spread like wildfire. Heck, those responsible for spreading such disinformation don't even care if their "theories" implicate parties who actually played a part in the assassination as long as it make you (the conspiracy theorist) look like a kook to the rest of the country. That's why I am always careful not to buy into theories too fast (or at all) unless I'm given tangible, first-hand testimony or hard evidence. What we have been witnessing is classic mass manipulation and yet we don't even recognize we're falling for it.

[kenmurray]

Why CBS Covered up the JFK Assassination. New article from Jim DIEugenio:http://www.ctka.net/2016/FeinmanCBS1.html

[kenmurray]

Here is part 2 from Jim DiEugenio:http://www.ctka.net/2016/FeinmanCBS2.html

[Bob Jonas]

Some may say that Americans don't want to know the truth about 1963.11.22 or that they don't care, but I say they do (on both counts). They do, or else those wacky JFK assassination theory books wouldn't sell. What the citizens of this country don't care about is misinformation or wacky theories that can't be logically proven. What needs to happen is for Jimmy to, once and for all, lay out all the facts about Dallas to the masses when he's free. Then go on a crusade to substantiate the story with what he's given us in the two interviews. Even if it means leaving directions to "the box" in his will. People are worn out from all the unprovable theories. We want facts to sink our teeth into. Only then will this country have a great awakening to what really happens in our government. Until then, the constant flow of disinformation will continue to erode our resolve.