CIA en 70 jaar desinformatie in Europese opiniebladen…………

Het Ron
Paul Institute (for Peace and Prosperity) publiceerde afgelopen dinsdag een
artikel van Philip Giraldi, waarin deze uitlegt hoe de CIA al 70 jaar
lang de vinger in de internationale ‘opinepap’ houdt……

Als een
geheime dienst ‘fake news’ verspreidt, noemt men dit ‘desinformatie’,
wat in het geval van landen buiten de VS onder geheime acties valt. Geheime
acties om de publieke opinie te beïnvloeden, of ‘vijandige’
regeringen te destabiliseren en uiteindelijk ten val te brengen (neem
Venezuela, Honduras, Libie, Syrië en Oekraïne)

Lees dit
uitgebreide artikel over de smerige acties die de VS en dan m.n. haar
geheime diensten speelden en spelen in onze wereld……. Russiagate
is gebleken een FBI/Clinton leugen te zijn geweest, terwijl de CIA,
FBI en Clinton aangaven dat Rusland de boel had gemanipuleerd en
gehackt, precies zoals de CIA dat al 70 jaar lang doet*, samen met economische oorlogsvoering, beproefde VS methoden om haar macht te vestigen of te
verstevigen…….

Als je
de ongebreidelde agressie van de VS ziet de laatste 70 jaar, waarbij
‘maar liefst’ meer dan 22 miljoen mensen werden vermoord**, snap je
werkelijk niet waarom men in het westen en dan m.n politici, de
reguliere media en de financiële maffia, nog steeds achter deze
grootste terreurentiteit op aarde aanlopen……..

Lees het zoveelste ontluisterden artikel (met een aantal nieuwe feiten) over terreurorganisatie CIA:

70
Years of Disinformation: How the CIA Funded Opinion Magazines in
Europe

undefined

written
by
 philip
giraldi
tuesday
january 16, 2018

When
an intelligence agency arranges to disseminated fake news it is
called “disinformation” and it is a subset of what is referred to
as covert action, basically secret operations run in a foreign
country to influence opinion or to disrupt the functioning of a
government or group that is considered to be hostile.

During
the Cold War, disinformation operations were run by many of the
leading players in both the 
North
Atlantic Treaty Organization
 and
in the opposition 
Warsaw
Pact
.
Sometimes the activity and the sponsorship were clearly visible, as
when Radio Free Europe and Radio Moscow would exchange barbs about
just how bad daily life was in the opposition alliance. Sometimes,
however, it took the form of clandestinely placing stories in the
media that were clearly untrue but designed to shift public
perceptions of what was taking place in the world. The Vietnam War
provided a perfect proxy playing field, with stories emanating from
the US government and its supporters presenting a narrative of a
fight for democracy against totalitarianism while the Communist bloc
promoted a contrary tale of colonial and capitalist oppression of a
people striving to be free.

The
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) inherited the mantle of covert
action operations as a legacy from its OSS predecessor, which had had
considerable success in conducting disinformation operations during
World War 2. But there was from the start considerable opposition to
continuing such programs as they were both expensive and subject to
devastating blowback when they were identified and exposed. In
Western Europe, powerful domestic communist parties were quick to
publicize US intelligence missteps, but nevertheless the ability to
manipulate the news and information media to place stories critical
of the Soviets and their allies led to major programs that funded
magazines and books while also seeking to acquire a cadre of
journalists that would produce pieces on demand proved too tempting
to ignore.

There
has been considerable ex post facto examination of the CIA’s use of
covert funding mechanisms including the Congress of Cultural Freedom
to fund writers and magazines in Europe, the best known of which
were 
The
Paris Review
 and Encounter out
of London. As there was a low intensity war going on against
communism, a conflict which many patriotic writers supported, funding
magazines and finding contributors to write appropriate material was
relatively easy and hardly challenged. Some senior editors knew or
strongly suspected where their funding was coming from while some did
not, but most didn’t ask any questions because then as now patrons
of literary magazines were in short supply. Many of the writers were
in the dark about the funding, but wrote what they did because of
their own personal political convictions. The CIA, seeking value for
money, would urge certain editorial lines but was not always very
aggressive in doing so as it sought to allow the process to play out
without too much interference.

Opinion
magazines were one thing, but penetrating the newspaper world was
quite a different story. It was easy to find a low or mid-level
journalist and pay him to write certain pieces, but the pathway to
actual publication was and is more complicated than that, going as it
does through several editorial levels before appearing in print. 
A
recent book
 cites
the belief that CIA had “an agent at a newspaper in every world
capital at least since 1977” who could be directed to post or kill
stories. While it is true that US Embassies and intelligence services
had considerable ability to place stories in capitals in Latin
America and parts of Asia, the record in Europe, where I worked, was
somewhat mixed. I knew of only one senior editor of a major European
newspaper who was considered to be an Agency resource, and even he
could not place 
fake
news
 as
he was answerable both to his editorial board and the conglomerate
that owned the paper. He also refused to take a salary from CIA,
which meant that his cooperation was voluntary and he could not be
directed.

CIA did indeed have a considerable number of
journalist “assets” in Europe but they were generally stringers
or mid-level and had only limited capability to actually shape the
news. They frequently wrote for publications that had little or no
impact. Indeed, one might reasonably ask whether the support of
literary magazines in the fifties and sixties which morphed into more
direct operations seeking journalist agents had any significant
impact at all in geopolitical terms or on the Cold War itself.

More
insidious was so-called Operation Mockingbird, which began in the
early 1950s and which more-or-less openly obtained the cooperation of
major American publications and news outlets to help fight communist
“subversion.” The activity was exposed by Seymour Hersh in 1975
and was further described by the Church Commission in 1976, after
which point CIA operations to influence opinion in the United States
became illegal and the use of American journalists as agents was also
generally prohibited. It was also learned that the Agency had been
working outside its founding charter to infiltrate student groups and
antiwar organizations under Operation Chaos, run by the CIA’s
controversial if not completely crazy counterintelligence Czar
James Jesus Angleton
.

As
the wheel of government frequently ends up turning full circle, we
appear to be back in the age of disinformation, where the national
security agencies of the US government, including CIA, are now
suspected of peddling stories that are intended to influence opinion
in the United States and produce a political response. The
Steele Dossier on Donald Trump
 is
a perfect example, a report that surfaced through a deliberate series
of actions by then CIA Director John Brennan, and which was filled
with unverifiable innuendo intended to destroy the president-elect’s
reputation before he took office. It is undeniably a positive
development for all Americans who care about good governance that
Congress is now intending to investigate the dossier to determine who
ordered it, paid for it, and what it was intended to
achieve.

Reprinted
with permission from the 
American
Herald Tribune
.

==========================================

*  Uiteraard voor het digitale tijdperk niet middels hacken, zoals je begrijpt, maar o.a. met ‘false flag’ operaties, of zoals in het besproken artikel middels het beïnvloeden van de media, om zo onrust en en uiteindelijk opstanden te creëren, die moeten leiden tot een staatsgreep, waar de VS wat betreft de opstanden en staatsgrepen, niet schroomt om de regie op zich te nemen (CIA)…….

** Zie: VS buitenlandbeleid sinds WOII: een lange lijst van staatsgrepen en oorlogen……….

Zie ook: ‘‘VS ‘ministerie van propaganda’ had supervisie over meer dan 800 films en minstens duizend tv series……..

Iran: moderne oorlogspropaganda ingezet door VS tegen ‘ongehoorzaam land…

VS en GB brengen propaganda die moet verdoezelen wat er echt gebeurt in Syrië…….. Door VS gebombardeerde ‘gifgasfabriek’ niet bestaand….

CIA 70 jaar: 70 jaar moorden, martelen, coups plegen, nazi’s beschermen, media manipulatie enz. enz………

Russiagate, of: hoe de media u belazeren met verhalen over Russische bemoeienis met de VS presidentsverkiezingen……..‘ 

Publicly Available Evidence Doesn’t Support Russian Gov Hacking of 2016 Election

Democraten VS kochten informatie over Trump >> Forgetting the ‘Dirty Dossier’ on Trump

Russia Is Trolling the Shit out of Hillary Clinton and the Mainstream Media

Russische ‘hacks’ door deskundigen nogmaals als fake news doorgeprikt >> Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russia Hack’ Evidence

Rusland krijgt alweer de schuld van hacken, nu van oplichters Symantec en Facebook……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

CIA chef Pompeo waarschuwt voor complot van WikiLeaks om de VS op alle mogelijke manieren neer te halen……. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!

‘Russiagate’ een verhaal van a t/m z westers ‘fake news…..’

FBI, de spin in het Russiagate web……..

Clinton te kakken gezet: Donna Brazile (Democratische Partij VS) draagt haar boek op aan Seth Rich, het vermoorde lid van DNC die belastende documenten lekte

CIA deed zich voor als het Russische Kaspersky Lab, aldus Wikileaks Vault 8…..‘ (zie ook de andere links onder dat bericht)

RT America één van de eerste slachtoffers in een heksenjacht op westerse alternatieve media en nadenkend links……

‘Rusland heeft niets van doen met manipulaties van de VS presidentsverkiezingen via Facebook, wel maakt Facebook meer kapot dan je lief is…….

De Russiagate samenzweringstheorie dient de machthebbers………

‘False flag terror’ bestaat wel degelijk: bekentenissen en feiten over heel smerige zaken……….



Massamedia VS vergeven van CIA ‘veteranen’, alsof die media nog niet genoeg ‘fake news’ ofwel leugens brengen……..

Bang voor Amerika

Janet Yellen voorspelt crisis door tegenovergestelde te beweren!!! Een truc die al eerder misliep!

Alweer een verrassend artikel van Republikein Ron Paul. Dit keer neemt hij Janet Yellen de maat.

Yellen kondigde een paar dagen geleden aan dat de VS (en daarmee de rest van het westen) een lange tijd van voorspoed tegemoet kan zien en dat een crisis zoals die in 2008 zich niet meer kan herhalen…….. ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Dit terwijl de VS in feite al lang failliet had moeten gaan, de geldpersen maken overuren en de staatsschuld is al bijna niet meer in cijfers uit te drukken………

Paul stelt dan ook dat de geruststellende woorden van Yellen in feite een waarschuwing voor een komenden (enorme) crisis zijn……..

Ook de banken hebben niets geleerd van de crisis, al moet ik zeggen, dat ze dit ook niet wilden. Obama heeft praktisch niets ondernomen om een crisis als in 2008 in de toekomst te voorkomen, precies als de voorganger van Yellen, grootoplichter Greenspan daar niets tegen heeft ondernomen……..Ja men voerde wat schoonheidsregels door, die het volk in comateuze slaap moesten brengen (en dat is aardig gelukt!)………..

Ach, lees liever het volgende artikel van Paul, o.a. gepubliceerd op Anti-Media, een gedegen analyse van de stand van financiële VS zaken:

Ron
Paul: Janet Yellen is a False Prophet of Prosperity

July
13, 2017 at 9:29 am

Written
by 
Ron
Paul

(RPIFederal
Reserve Chair Janet Yellen recently predicted that, thanks to the
regulations implemented after the 2008 market meltdown, America would
not experience another economic crisis “in our lifetimes.”
Yellen’s statement should send shivers down our spines, as there
are few more reliable signals of an impending recession, or worse,
than when so-called “experts” proclaim that we are in an era of
unending prosperity.

For
instance, in the years leading up to the 2008 market meltdown,
then-Fed Chair Ben Bernanke repeatedly denied the existence of a
housing bubble. In February 2007, Bernanke not only denied that
“sluggishness” in the housing market would affect the general
economy, but predicted that the economy would expand in 2007 and
2008. Of course, instead of years of economic growth, 2007 and 2008
were marked by a market meltdown whose effects are still being felt.

Yellen’s
happy talk ignores a number of signs that the economy is on the verge
of another crisis. In recent months, the US has experienced a decline
in economic growth and the value of the dollar. The only economic
statistic showing a positive trend is the unemployment rate — and
that is only because the official unemployment rate does not count
those who have given up looking for work. The real unemployment rate
is at least 50 percent higher than the manipulated “official”
rate.

A
recent Treasury Department report’s called for rolling back of bank
regulations could further

destabilize
the economy. This seems counterintuitive, as rolling back regulations
usually contributes to economic growth. However, rolling back bank
regulations without ending subsidies like deposit insurance that
create a moral hazard that incentivizes banks to engage in risky
business practices could cause banks to resume the unsound lending
practices that were a major contributor to the growth, and collapse,
of the housing bubble.

The
US economy is already faced with several bubbles that could implode
at any time. These include bubbles in student loans and automobiles
sales, and even another housing bubble. The most dangerous of these
bubbles is the government bubble caused by excessive spending.
According to a 2016 study by the Mercatus Center, at least four
states could soon join Puerto Rico and Illinois in facing bankruptcy.

Of
course, the mother of all government bubbles is the federal spending
bubble. Despite claims of both defenders and critics of the
president’s budget, neither President Trump nor the Republican
Congress have any plans for, or interest in, reducing spending in any
area. Even the so-called cuts in Medicare and other entitlement
programs that have generated such hysterics are not real cuts, but
“reductions in the rate of growth.”

Some
fiscal conservatives are praising the administration’s proposal to
finance transportation spending via government bonds. However, the
people will eventually have to pay for these bonds either directly
through income taxes or indirectly through the inflation tax.
Government-issued bonds harm the economy by diverting investment
capital away from the private sector to the “mixed economy”
controlled by politicians, bureaucrats, and crony capitalists.

If
Congress continues to increase spending and the Federal Reserve
continues to facilitate that spending by monetizing the debt,
Americans will face an economic crisis more severe than the Great
Depression. The crisis will likely result from a rejection of the
dollar as the world’s reserve currency. Those of us who know the
truth must redouble our efforts to ensure a peaceful transition away
from the Keynesian system of welfare, warfare, and fiat currency to a
society of peace, prosperity, and liberty.

By Ron
Paul
 /
Republished with permission / 
RPI / Report
a typo


Zie ook: Ever More Official Lies From The US Government

  ‘A Bitcoin Bro Just Trolled the Sh*t out of the Federal Reserve on Live TV‘ 

Ron Paul (republikein, Tea Party) pissig over VS aanvallen op reguliere Syrische leger dat IS bestrijdt…….

Ron Paul is een rechtse hufter van formaat, maar zo nu en dan kan deze zakkenwasser met uiterst steekhoudende argumenten, smerige zaken aan de kaak stellen, zaken die op z’n zachtst gezegd niet veel steun van zijn Republikeinse partij krijgen.

Lees wat Paul schrijft over de oorlog in Syrië. Oké, e.e.a. was al bekend, echter het is meegenomen, als zelfs een rechtse houwdegen, als Paul, die NB aan de wieg van de Tea Party stond, zaken bevestigt. Al moet gezegd worden dat hij een verkeerde kijk heeft op een aantal zaken, zoals de reden waarom de VS illegaal in Syrië aanwezig is: het afzetten van Assad en zijn regering………..

Verder maakt Paul geen woorden vuil aan hoe en wie ‘de opstand’ in Syrië heeft gecreëerd (met hulp van vooral veel buitenlandse agitators, zoals die uit Saoedi–Arabië en door de VS aangevoerde terroristen uit o.a. Libië) in Syrië heeft gecreëerd. De VS is daarvoor aan te merken als hoofdverantwoordelijke, al in 2006 was deze terreurentiteit bezig met voorbereidingen van een opstand, die moest uitmonden in een staatsgreep tegen Assad…… Assad weigerde pijpleidingen voor gas en olie over zijn grondgebied richting Europa toe te staan, tja dan ga je op heel veel tenen staan….

Bovendien was en is Syrië al decennialang een bondgenoot van de Russen en de Iraniërs, daarmee haal je je de woede van de VS op de hals, de VS dat denkt de wereld te regeren ……

Hier een pleidooi van Paul tegen VS bemoeienis in Syrië, gisteren o.a. gepubliceerd op Anti-Media:

Why
Are We Attacking the Syrians Who Are Fighting ISIS?

June
12, 2017 at 6:55 am

Written
by 
Ron
Paul

The
Ron Paul Institute

(RPIJust
when you thought our Syria policy could not get any worse, last week
it did. The US military twice attacked Syrian government forces from
a military base it illegally occupies inside Syria. According to the
Pentagon, the attacks on Syrian government-backed forces were
“defensive” because the Syrian fighters were approaching a US
self-declared “de-confliction” zone inside Syria. The Syrian
forces were pursuing ISIS in the area, but the US attacked anyway.

The
US is training yet another rebel group fighting from that base,
located near the border of Iraq at al-Tanf, and it claims that Syrian
government forces pose a threat to the US military presence there.
But the Pentagon has forgotten one thing: it has no authority to be
in Syria in the first place! Neither the US Congress nor the UN
Security Council has authorized a US military presence inside Syria.

So
what gives the Trump Administration the right to set up military
bases on foreign soil without the permission of that government? Why
are we violating the sovereignty of Syria and attacking its military
as they are fighting ISIS? Why does Washington claim that its primary
mission in Syria is to defeat ISIS while taking military actions that
benefit ISIS?

The
Pentagon issued a statement saying its presence in Syria is necessary
because the Syrian government is not strong enough to defeat ISIS on
its own. But the “de-escalation zones” agreed upon by the
Syrians, Russians, Iranians, and Turks have led to a reduction in
fighting and a possible end to the six-year war. Even if true that
the Syrian military is weakened, its weakness is due to six years of
US-sponsored rebels fighting to overthrow it!

What
is this really all about? Why does the US military occupy this base
inside Syria? It’s partly about preventing the Syrians and Iraqis
from working together to fight ISIS, but I think it’s mostly about
Iran. If the Syrians and Iraqis join up to fight ISIS with the help
of Iranian-allied Shia militia, the US believes it will strengthen
Iran’s hand in the region. President Trump has recently returned
from a trip to Saudi Arabia where he swore he would not allow that to
happen.

But
is this policy really in our interest, or are we just doing the
bidding of our Middle East “allies,” who seem desperate for war
with Iran? Saudi Arabia exports its radical form of Islam worldwide,
including recently into moderate Asian Muslim countries like
Indonesia. Iran does not. That is not to say that Iran is perfect,
but does it make any sense to jump into the Sunni/Shia conflict on
either side? The Syrians, along with their Russian and Iranian
allies, are defeating ISIS and al-Qaeda. As candidate Trump said,
what’s so bad about that?

We
were told that if the Syrian government was allowed to liberate
Aleppo from al-Qaeda, Assad would kill thousands who were trapped
there. But the opposite has happened: life is returning to normal in
Aleppo. The Christian minority there celebrated Easter for the first
time in several years. They are rebuilding. Can’t we finally just
leave the Syrians alone?

When
you get to the point where your actions are actually helping ISIS,
whether intended or not, perhaps it’s time to stop. It’s past
time for the US to abandon its dangerous and counterproductive Syria
policy and just bring the troops home.

By Ron
Paul
 /
Republished with permission / 
RPI / Report
a typo

================================

Klik voor meer berichten n.a.v. het bovenstaande, op één van de labels, die u hieronder terug kan vinden, dit geldt (nog) niet voor het label ‘R. Paul’.