"I do consider it noteworthy, however, that on November 30, 1973, the Washington Star-News reported that the CIA employed some forty journalists who doubled as undercover contacts.
The back and forth series of memos from Congress to CIA claim that the list of forty CIA employed journalists was known but not released to the public at the time.
The CIA promised to cease and desist the program of running journalists.
Why are the above [public declassified docs] highly protected?
Q
Because obviously the CIA is back in the running of the media, if in fact they ever truly got out of the business.
The CIA has been running things for a while now. I thought their mission was FOREIGN intelligence. Am I mistaken?
Me thinks Mike Wallace is behind there somewhere ... I remember when Ted Koppel gave that testimony to Arlen Specter. Stansfield Turner died last month.
Well, those two documents made for jaw dropping reading.
For those without time to read the docs:
The memos exchanged in the 70’s reflect the fully-fledged entitlement and power of the CIA (out of control and answers to no one, lies on demand). When asked if the CIA employs journalists, a song and dance ensues and no real information is ever relayed.
Regarding the other document re the intel committee in the 90’s, I don’t know why Ted Koppel didn’t end up with a bullet in his head later for stating the truth during the committee meeting (wasn’t the CIA director still there?).
The swamp maneuvers seem child-like in a way. The feigned shock (SHOCK) that anyone should be discussing the topic of CIA using journalists, clergy and Peace Corp at all (ever), the assertion on the part of the CIA Director that his actions must not be overseen by anyone, ever. The director doubled down by suggesting any CIA director who needed any oversight at all was clearly one who needed to be replaced with one who didn’t. Unelected, unlimited, unaccountable and in my opinion, unAmerican.
Ted Koppel pointed to one of the elephants among the herd in the room by saying the CIA had, at that point in time, a well-established history of doing whatever it wanted, ignoring the rules, and getting away with it.
No one ever addressed the elephants having to do with Project Mocking Bird and the real history and intentions of the CIA. The conversation centered on ridiculous exemplars (what if a journalist had intel that could save the lives of hostages or prevent a nuclear attack?) without ever nearing the terrain of the CIA preying on the American public with disinformation and worse.
Terry Anderson rightly said that it was unlikely a journalist would keep life saving information to themselves (so why would the CIA “need” to enlist the aid of journalists). That statement indirectly hi-lighted one of the larger elephants in the room- the CIA’s indirect implication that journalists don’t share their information or are prone to keeping the most important information from everyone.
Aldeman was a piece of work. He said that Ted Koppel’s belief that historically the CIA breaks the law and gets away with it must mean Ted was in a “time warp” because that was a problem in the 70’s (no mention of Project Mockingbird in the 50’s or all the intervening years to the time of the hearing). Aldeman also asserted that Ted’s concern that affiliation with the CIA would taint journalism’s reputation was misguided; instead, Aldeman asserts that the public views the media with distaste and the CIA with great respect, so such an affiliation could only benefit journalism’s reputation. You really can’t make this stuff up! The CIA is known for its self-interest, but no one in the room would dare suggest that such favorable polling information was the product of CIA propaganda.
Why was that information and the memo wherein the CIA refuses to cooperate with oversight classified? I suppose to ensure the unfettered dominance of the CIA until it had complete control of our country and her people.
The CIA and television companies had already gone before congress in the 50’s regarding Project Mockingbird and said whatever they needed to say to escape accountability. They were exposed 20 years later in the 70’s but that didn’t stop them. They were exposed in the 90’s (this hearing material) and that didn’t stop them. They have grown unchecked with an ever increasing sense of entitlement and autonomy. I’m sure the CIA didn’t want the public to know the soft coup was in progress until it was complete. The hearing in the 90’s proved the CIA’s manipulation of the American public’s perceptions discovered in the 50’s was only the tip of the CIA’s aspirations.
The CIA and the (news) media have a looong history; just think: in the (foreign) field their agents have the same job duties: to gather pertinent and hidden information. They both even recruit sources. Sometimes they have to cross-employ.