Posted on 11/14/2004 9:18:51 AM PST by TapTheSource
ping!
They have to be up to the challenge. The CIA is worse than worthless, and needs rebuilding from the ground up.
BUMP!
This purge long over due!
The benefits are incalcuable.
I'm really confused here. THIS speech below, this is the Daniel Ellsberg, intelligence specialist, that leaked the Pentagon Papers? Didn't he ever get charged for that? And why is he speaking in foreign countries about our operation plans and how he influenced them?
Isn't this inappropriate?
Daniel Ellsberg, who revealed the Pentagon Papers to the New York Times during the Vietnam War, speaking in Tel Aviv, Israel on 13 October 1996 at a conference chaired by Joseph Rotblat in support of Mordechai Vanunu, the world's longest imprisoned anti-nuclear activist, described what he calls
"the most evil plans that have ever been made in the history of humanity."
Broadcast by Co-op Radio, CFRO Vancouver, on 30 November 1996, from a tape made by Mordechai Briemberg of the Vancouver Committee to free Vanunu.
(Transcribed by David Morgan)
''In 1961 I drafted a question for the president, John F.Kennedy, to ask the Joint Chiefs of Staff(JCS). I was in the process of drafting for the Secretary of Defense, Robert MacNamara, the Kennedy Administration Annual Operating Plans for General Nuclear War. I wrote a twenty-page top-secret draft, which was adopted totally by MacNamara, who sent it to the JCS, thus changing completely the general war plans from those of the Eisenhower Administration. I was very proud of doing that for reasons that you will see in a moment; I thought the Eisenhower plans were disastrous and that those I had drafted were much better. I can still say that they were better, but I fooled myself that they were that much better. They were still disastrous, and I bear that on my conscience. But in the course of drafting these new plans, I was in a very good position as a consultant to pose the following question for the President to give to the JCS:
"If your plans, i.e., the Eisenhower plans, which were still in effect in early 1961, were executed as planned (and weren't disrupted by some typhoon, total incompetence or some pre-emptive attack by the Soviets) how many people would die in the Soviet Union and China?"
Now I actually asked that question believing that they did not have an answer. I had been working with the planners for some time had asked the same question, but they had never seen any such estimate done by the Air Force staff, and I didn't think that it existed. I assumed that they didn't WANT to know how many people they could kill. So I thought that they would either have to waffle and admit that they didn't have an answer, which would be very embarrassing for a bureaucrat and would put them off balance, and less resistive to my revisions, or they would come up with some fast estimate that would be absurdly low, and thus have the same effect.
Actually they did have an answer. It was addressed, "for the President's eyes only," but since I had written the question, they showed it to my eyes. So I held in my hands a very unusual piece of paper, a one-page sheet with a graph on it. It showed the number of people they expected to be killed in the Soviet Union and China alone--which is what I had asked, since I didn't want them to have an excuse for delaying by saying "we don't have the figures for Albania, give us another month."
So I had the graph for the Soviet Union and China. It was an ascending line, a simple graph, starting with the immediate deaths the first day and the deaths from fall-out over the next six months, and the total figure was three hundred and twenty million (320,000,000) dead. So they knew what their plans entailed!
It was obviously a computer model. They had done the calculations, so I figured let's ask the rest then--how about the rest of the Sino-Soviet block?
Well I won't go through the whole thing, but there were 100 million in West Europe if the winds blew the wrong way over our NATO allies; 100 million in East Europe; neutral countries adjacent to the Soviet Union, like Finland, Afghanistan, Austria, Japan were wiped out by fallout from our attacks, without getting into any calculation of what Russian retaliation to our first strike, might have done. So the total body count over the next couple of weeks was about 600 million (six hundred million)--that means one hundred holocausts!
I asked myself how colonels and majors that I drank beer with, saw in the evening, worked with every day, how they could have written such plans. These were not just hypothetical plans--they were the estimates used for the targeting of planes that were on alert all over the world, misssiles, submarines, all the machinery was out there. This was not ten years in the future, this was next week if we went to war. This is what would have happened if we had gone to war over Cuba, which was really possible in 1962, or Berlin in 1961. Six hundred million people!
I thought they were the most evil plans that had ever been made in the history of humanity and I've spent the thirty five years since trying to understand how humans, how Americans, had created such plans and such machinery.''
Daniel Ellsberg, 13 October 1996, Tel Aviv, Israel
WOW!.. Didn't know that about william Colby. ..should've been fired/fined/jailed long time ago.
Bump to read later
Probably won't be restricted to CIA and State Dept. although the CIA is definitely the most resistant when it comes to information sharing with other segments of the IC. I think there is definitely a move to a more hawk-ish IC and State Dept. If Rumsfeld does not step down, then it's likely that his departure will be delayed in order to shape the focus of the IC and State Dept.
"Daniel Ellsberg, 13 October 1996, Tel Aviv, Israel"
You are right. Ellsberg is a traitor.
He is another, along with Kerry/Fonda who should have been "fried" for treason!!
You might want to check out the following link and then read Epstein's piece on Angleton just below it. Very eye opening stuff!!!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1224848/posts
WAS ANGLETON RIGHT?
What does it say about the state of US intelligence in the late nineteen-eighties and early ninety-nineties that two top counterintellgence officials-- Aldrich Ames in the CIA's anti-Soviet counterintelligence and Robert Phillip Hanssen in the FBI Soviet counterintelligence-- were moles for the Russian Intelligence Service? Under such circumstances, who controlled the recruitments the CIA and FBI were making during this period?
ANSWER:
James Jesus Angleton, the chief of the CIA's counterintelligence staff from in 1953 to 1974, principal concern was not with "moles" per se, but with the inherent vulnerability of intelligence services to systematic deception. To him, "moles" were a means to this end if, and only if, they were in a position to provide timely feedback to an adversary about what channels his intelligence service were monitoring and how it is was interpreting the data it was intercepting. With such a feedback loop in place, he believed perfect deception was possible. Imagine, he suggested, a wife, attempting to deceiving her husband and using his psychiatrist as her feedback source. By bribing the psychiatrist to tell her on an ongoing basis how her husband was interpreting her lies and deceptions, she would be able to modify them, elaborating on those stories which he believed and discarding or altering those stories which he doubted. Through this trial and error process, she could continue to fit her deception perfectly to what her husband believed. "The deceived becomes his own deceiver" in Angleton's example. (You might recall Woody Allen used such a similar device to seduce Julia Roberts in the movie Everyone Says I Love You)
While manipulating a suspicious spouse might require only a bribed shrink, manipulating an entire intelligence service would require a feedback source capable of getting access to secret information that is both compartmentalized and restricted on a "need to know" basis. Angleton held that a penetration able to accomplish this feat would most probably located in the counterintelligence branch, which through its investigative function can access to multiple compartments. Even so, the access of a single mole would be limited by what cases he had been assigned. What would greatly expand the feedback would be two moles, each located in a different counterintelligence branch, for example, CIA counterintelligence and FBI counterintelligence. Such a combination, if efficiently managed, could cosmically expand their access, since each could produce leads for the other to investigate--- leads which would generate a legitimate need to know for each mole. For example, if such a combo existed, Mole A in CIA could inform the FBI through the CIA-FBI liaison that there was suspicion about X. The FBI, charged with investigating all espionage in the US, which turn the case over to its counterintelligence branch, which would give Mole B the access and need to know to delve into the concerning X. Angleton feared that such a dual penetration would allow the KGB to effectively control the assessment of American intelligence Others, including J. Edgar Hoover in the FBI and William Colby in the CIA, did not share Angleton's concern. Hoover threatened to sever its cooperation with Angleton~s staff and Colby characterized the likelihood of the Russian intelligence service recruiting moles simultaneously in both the CIA and FBI counterintelligence as preposterous and Angleton as paranoid. Angleton was fired.
Yet, the dual recruitment Angleton feared is precisely happened in the nineteen-eighties when both Aldrich Ames, heading the CIA's anti-Soviet counterintelligence, and Robert Phillip Hanssen, working in the FBI Soviet counterintelligence, both operated as moles for the Russian Intelligence Service.
http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/question_angleton.htm
You mentioned Hanssen.
One CIA official that just resigned, Stephen Kappes, was probably responsible for getting Hanssen.
Kappes ran a mole in the Russian Intelligence Service.
That man probably gave us Hanssen.
So you got to wonder what is going on.
Yet,.....J. Edgar Hoover 'really' shared "Jesus'"....Bi-counterintelligence view,....(even decades before '73').....and cause of death?....naw.
/sarcasm
.......American intelligence Others, including J. Edgar Hoover in the FBI and William Colby in the CIA, did not share Angleton's concern. Hoover threatened to sever its cooperation with Angleton~s staff and Colby characterized the likelihood of the Russian intelligence service recruiting moles simultaneously in both the CIA and FBI counterintelligence as preposterous and Angleton as paranoid. Angleton was fired.(Hoover-DEAD) Yet, the dual recruitment Angleton feared is precisely happened in the nineteen-eighties when both Aldrich Ames, heading the CIA's anti-Soviet counterintelligence, and Robert Phillip Hanssen, working in the FBI Soviet counterintelligence, both operated as moles for the Russian Intelligence Service.
(The 'Iceberg' is NOT the 'tip'.....)
/sarcasm
Porter.....happy hunting!
Some food for thought...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1224848/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1252938/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1220747/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1265538/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1260168/posts
http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=161248
http://www.worldthreats.com/russia_former_ussr/Russia%20911.htm
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/9/23/171350.shtml
http://www.newsmax.com/hottopics/China!Taiwan.shtml
Snapple, instead of constantly beating the drum for Stephen Kappes (and attacking the new management as "trash"), why don't you explain your view of the whole picture of what is going on at Langley.
You sure are pushing a lot of proaganda lately for a newbie.
You sure are pushing a lot of propaganda lately for a newbie.
Truth is the Truth. Here's alot more. PS Why on earth would you want to identify with the Leftist new-ager John Lenin? Just curious.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1224848/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1252938/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1220747/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1265538/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1260168/posts
http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm?include=detail&storyid=161248
http://www.worldthreats.com/russia_former_ussr/Russia%20911.htm
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/9/23/171350.shtml
http://www.newsmax.com/hottopics/China!Taiwan.shtml
Read my about page, does it look like I'm still a fan of John Lennon,,, err Lenin.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.