Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

What a house of mirrors!

I became so disgusted with Snepp's absurd rationalization for his view that the best intelligence officer is 'amoral' that I almost stopped transcribing half way through. But I hadn't seen this kind of information before so I kept transcribing. Can't say I felt too sorry for him when the government sued him for writing about his adventures, given what Snepp said he'd been doing
in Vietnam.

He seems to flicker between telling the truth and lying,  sometimes his blinking upon answering seemed exagerated and made me wonder if he was 'that bad' at concealing information or he was signaling that the information was not true the only way he could. Oh I don't know.

His comment about the Pentagon Papers re Washington Post and NYTimes reminded me that those publications sold out to the deep state before the time of the interview (Church committee was 1975 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_Committee ), and that the Supreme Court'S decision re Pentagon Papers was probably just the courts working hand in glove with WaPo and NYT to gag the public. Just watching a CIA goon talk for 10 minutes chewed away at the rusted, broken brackets that used to hold my trust in the government.

I came across this interview with Snepp after I posted about the PBS censor, Katherine Maher,, who also is with the WEF, saying that the First Amendment made it hard to stop the public from saying things.

On Twitter, another user snarked about Katherine Maher's criticism of 'influence peddlers' and cited instead the influence peddling done by the CIA, and hence, the Snepp interview.

 

I have no idea what to believe. He worked for news agencies and the CIA and is still alive - so he didn't make them THAT angry with him, apparently. He supposedly stayed on in 'Nam but was infuriated that the gov wouldn't rescue Vietnamese who helped the US, but that's according to the CIA infiltrated Wikipedia.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Snepp

 


1 posted on 04/17/2024 9:06:59 PM PDT by ransomnote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: ransomnote

“ when in fact, what he’d gotten was simply an echo of what I’d given him in the first place”

Like fooling the FISA court with “evidence” from newspapers which they themselves had planted.


2 posted on 04/17/2024 9:29:14 PM PDT by NWFree (Sigma male 🤪)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ransomnote

So they could spy on Trump


3 posted on 04/17/2024 9:44:43 PM PDT by NWFree (Sigma male 🤪)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ransomnote

> and he is subject to a lifelong gag order which means he must continue to submit his statements to the government for approval.

i.e. you can NEVER trust an ex-government employee to tell the truth. By working for the federal government one becomes PERMANENTLY compromised under the law.


5 posted on 04/17/2024 11:25:14 PM PDT by glorgau
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ransomnote
broken brackets that used to hold my trust in the government. I came across this interview with Snepp after I posted about the PBS censor, Katherine Maher,, who also is with the WEF, saying that the First Amendment made it hard to stop the public from saying things.

What about trust in the MSM, which hardly seemed to find that the First Amendment made it hard to stop the public left from promoting lies:

The Vietnam War, in which America was the victor in military battles, is perhaps the most manifest modern example of how propaganda affected the outcome of a war, with much of the mainstream media being an all too willing instrument of such, especially CBS News with Walter Cronkite. Cronkite’s infamous report on the Tet Offensive was suspected to be one of the reasons why then-President Lyndon B. Johnson decided not to pursue reelection.[67]

In an exchange during one of his liaison trips to Hanoi, Colonel Harry G. Summers, Jr. told his North Vietnamese counterpart, Colonel Tu, “You know, you never beat us on the battlefield,” Colonel Tu responded, “That may be so, but it is also irrelevant.”[68]

The Tet Offensive was portrayed by the New York liberal media as a defeat for the U.S., while in fact, it was an almost disastrous defeat for the North Vietnamese, as General Westmoreland and historians agree. The Viet Cong not only lost half of the 90,000 troops they had committed to battle, but it was virtually destroyed as an army.[69] Some false reports made by biased journalists include claiming the VC managed to overrun five floors of the American embassy, when in reality they never even managed to get past the main entrance, or Newsweek showing 18 out of 29 images depicting Marines either dead or huddled behind cover, neglecting to mention that they were pushing back the NVA onslaught.[70]
British “Encounter” journalist Robert Elegant stated,

For the first time in modern history, the outcome of a war was determined not on the battlefield but on the printed page and television screens - never before Vietnam had the collective policy of the media sought, by graphic and unremitting distortion, the victory of the enemies of the correspondent’s own side.[71]

Some journalists have admitted that their reporting was decidedly biased, and had profound effects on history. West German correspondent Uwe Siemon-Netto confessed, “Having covered the Viet Nam war over a period of five years for West German publications, I am now haunted by the role we journalists have played over there.” In relation to not reporting the true nature of the Hanoi regime and its actions resulting from the American withdrawal, he asked,

What prompted us to make our readers believe that the Communists, once in power in all of Viet Nam, would behave benignly? What made us, first and foremost Anthony Lewis, belittle warnings by U.S. officials that a Communist victory would result in a massacre?... Are we journalists not in part responsible for the death of the tens of thousands who drowned? And are we not in part responsible for the hostile reception accorded to those who survive?...However, the media have been rather coy; they have not declared that they played a key role in the conflict. They have not proudly trumpeted Hanoi’s repeated expressions of gratitude to the mass media of the non-Communist world, although Hanoi has indeed affirmed that it could not have won “without the Western press.”[72] Ironically, it was also because of the bias from the Western press, in particular The New York Times, that caused the NVA to undergo their Tet Offensive with overconfidence that they would cause the entire South Vietnamese to embrace Communism and go against Capitalism and Saigon.[73]

CBS Evening News with Walter Cronkite regularly carried news reports from its Moscow Bureau Chief, Bernard Redmont. When peace negotiations commenced with North Vietnam in Paris, Redmont became CBS News Paris Bureau Chief. What Redmont never reported during the ten year conflict was that he had been a KGB operative since the 1930s, and member of the notorious Silvermaster group.[74] Redmont was the only journalist to whom his fellow Comintern party member, and North Vietnamese chief negotiator, Mai Van Bo, granted an interview to bring the Communist point of view into American living rooms in what has been called “the living room war.”

The single most explicit example of such biased reporting is typically seen to be the portrayal of the Tet offensive, as mentioned above, in which Western media was charged with inspiring and aiding the propaganda war of the Communists.

Truong Nhu Tang, a founder of the National Liberation Front, and a minister of justice for the Viet Cong Provisional Revolutionary Government - one of the most determined adversaries of the US during the war - stated years later,

The Tet Offensive proved catastrophic to our plans. It is a major irony of the Vietnam War that our propaganda transformed this debacle into a brilliant victory. The truth was that Tet cost us half our forces. Our losses were so immense that we were unable to replace them with new recruits. (Truong Nhu Tang, The New York Review, October 21, 1982)

In addition to Cronkite’s biased reporting, FBI documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request by Yahoo! News offer evidence that legendary CBS News anchor Walter Cronkite collaborated with anti-Vietnam War activists in the 1960s, going so far as to offer advice on how to raise the public profile of protests and even promising that CBS News would rent a helicopter to take liberal Senator Edmund Muskie to and from the site of an anti-war rally.[75] - https://www.conservapedia.com/Liberal_bias#Vietnam_War


6 posted on 04/18/2024 4:10:10 AM PDT by daniel1212 (Turn 2 the Lord Jesus who saves damned+destitute sinners on His acct, believe, b baptized+follow HIM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ransomnote

So of course we should trust a guy who planted false information to be telling the truth this time, right?


7 posted on 04/18/2024 5:22:30 AM PDT by PIF (They came for me and mine ... now its your turn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: ransomnote
When listen to former spies there are a few questions to ask and find answers. First is how trustworthy they are - or not? Second, are they fully rational or has their time in espionage given them a selectively warped view of the world? Espionage can leave a person jaded, not right in the head, or both and then some.

From the video transcript posted:

Reporter: Straighten me out on one thing. If you write on anything else other than the CIA in your experiences you do not have to submit it, right?

Frank Snepp: Novels, screenplays…all are submitted.

Reporter: Everything?

Frank Snepp: Everything. Not to the CIA, to the US government for censorship.

That interview was 40 years ago. On his YouTube channel and website, he talks a lot about sensitive subjects. If he still needs to get approval for all this, who is approving it?

Despite his claims of experienced based objectivity, on his YouTube channel, "Biden's Handling of Afghan Crisis Was Better than You Think Made by Headliner":

"The popular view, perhaps the majority view, is that it was a lousy job that Biden bungled it. But as I see it the opposite is true he made the best of a very bad situation which he had inherited from Donald Trump"
The Taliban did not attempt any dirty tricks under Trump, because he spoke their language and made it clear he would use force as necessary if they tried. It was Biden's follow through that failed, leading to a withdrawal of US forces in the most backwards way possible.

Biden had the military leave first, abandoning civilians and equipment, necessitating the emergency airlift. Trump wanted to get civilians and equipment out first, the military last, and wanted it started before the last minute. It wasn't Trump who stalled, it was the generals who dragged their feet. Shepp ignores all of this to blame Trump.

He's another former (government / military / intelligence / pick one) looking to cash in by telling a gullible audience what they want to hear.

8 posted on 04/18/2024 3:37:10 PM PDT by Widget Jr (🇺🇸 Trump 2024 🇺🇸)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson