Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"The Voice of the White House" column from TBRNews.org

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
blue4barb Donating Member (367 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 06:04 PM
Original message
"The Voice of the White House" column from TBRNews.org
has an updated report from Feb. 4. One of the revelations is about an Internal Corruption Program of the CIA which intends to spend lots of money in many countries to covertly change their governments. The list is astounding-- some are the usual suspects of Iran, Syria, Russia but many others are mentioned to be in various stages including CANADA.
Could this be true?

If anyone has any knowledge if the so-called anonymous insider at the White House who writes this column is legit or credible, please respond. It is a very frightening scenario, IMO. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
HeeBGBz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 06:09 PM
Response to Original message
1. I wish I knew
I find the blog fascinating. True or not, it's an interesting read.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clark2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Wasn't it the VoWH the one who said there was many more dead
American GIs than has been reported?
The reason I ask is because the handyman I hire to do odd jobs was here the other night. His cousin is in the Marines in Iraq and his neighbor (Army) just got back from Iraq. Both have told him that the government is covering up just how many GIs have been killed and that there are a lot more than on the official doles.
Now, this guy (the handyman) isn't an Internet blogger. He heard this from people he knows and not from some "conspiracy theorist."
I wonder how that could happen, though? If your family member was dead and wasn't listed on the official doles, wouldn't you be raising Cain? Or do they purposely leave off the list the dead of families who are brain-washed Bush supporter/sympathizer and wouldn't make a stink about it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
latteromden Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. You're right. I was wondering after I read that if the government could
be just not telling people about their family members that have been killed... it's a disturbing thought, but I wouldn't really put it past them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. Face it, families of the dead don't get together in a park ...
and take a look at one big list of the war dead and assess if their loved ones' names are listed on it at once.

Furthermore, suppose you are here illegally, and your son has grown up here as an illegal. Your son enlists, and is sent to Iraq. He is killed. He was promised that if he served, he would obtain citizenship at the end. Well, he is killed. It is my understanding that he will not be counted in the U.S. dead because he was not a citizen at the time he is killed.

Stunning how they lie!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justsomegirl Donating Member (197 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. Not a park, but...
No, but if someone started something akin to the AIDS quilt, we might be able to get a count...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-06-05 12:59 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. I sure would like to see it.
But the Boooshies would probably put enormous pressure on anyone who tried to assemble the data ... if not worse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue4barb Donating Member (367 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
4. Yes, "The Voice" has a recurring theme
Edited on Sat Feb-05-05 06:46 PM by blue4barb
about how the bush admin is hiding the true number of wounded and killed in Iraq.

In the latest update from yesterday, "The Voice" claims the number is close to 7000 dead. Other GIs captured and tortured that MSM is not reporting. There is a paragraph about it in yesterday's column.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atommom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 07:15 PM
Response to Original message
6. Wonder if this has any relation to the operation Sy Hersh
referred to ... in which special ops forces would go undercover in various countries to "run with the bad boys" and manipulate local politics in various (possibly illegal) ways. Of course, Hersh's sources said this would be managed by the Pentagon directly, circumventing the CIA, Congress, and everyone else. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
atommom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-05 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. BTW, the Hersh article is here, if anyone missed it...
http://www.newyorker.com/printable/?fact/050124fa_fact

Rumsfeld planned and lobbied for more than two years before getting Presidential authority, in a series of findings and executive orders, to use military commandos for covert operations. One of his first steps was bureaucratic: to shift control of an undercover unit, known then as the Gray Fox (it has recently been given a new code name), from the Army to the Special Operations Command (socom), in Tampa. Gray Fox was formally assigned to socom in July, 2002, at the instigation of Rumsfeld’s office, which meant that the undercover unit would have a single commander for administration and operational deployment. Then, last fall, Rumsfeld’s ability to deploy the commandos expanded. According to a Pentagon consultant, an Execute Order on the Global War on Terrorism (referred to throughout the government as gwot) was issued at Rumsfeld’s direction. The order specifically authorized the military “to find and finish” terrorist targets, the consultant said. It included a target list that cited Al Qaeda network members, Al Qaeda senior leadership, and other high-value targets. The consultant said that the order had been cleared throughout the national-security bureaucracy in Washington.

In late November, 2004, the Times reported that Bush had set up an interagency group to study whether it “would best serve the nation” to give the Pentagon complete control over the C.I.A.’s own élite paramilitary unit, which has operated covertly in trouble spots around the world for decades. The panel’s conclusions, due in February, are foregone, in the view of many former C.I.A. officers. “It seems like it’s going to happen,” Howard Hart, who was chief of the C.I.A.’s Paramilitary Operations Division before retiring in 1991, told me.

There was other evidence of Pentagon encroachment. Two former C.I.A. clandestine officers, Vince Cannistraro and Philip Giraldi, who publish Intelligence Brief, a newsletter for their business clients, reported last month on the existence of a broad counter-terrorism Presidential finding that permitted the Pentagon “to operate unilaterally in a number of countries where there is a perception of a clear and evident terrorist threat. . . . A number of the countries are friendly to the U.S. and are major trading partners. Most have been cooperating in the war on terrorism.” The two former officers listed some of the countries—Algeria, Sudan, Yemen, Syria, and Malaysia. (I was subsequently told by the former high-level intelligence official that Tunisia is also on the list.)

Giraldi, who served three years in military intelligence before joining the C.I.A., said that he was troubled by the military’s expanded covert assignment. “I don’t think they can handle the cover,” he told me. “They’ve got to have a different mind-set. They’ve got to handle new roles and get into foreign cultures and learn how other people think. If you’re going into a village and shooting people, it doesn’t matter,” Giraldi added. “But if you’re running operations that involve finesse and sensitivity, the military can’t do it. Which is why these kind of operations were always run out of the agency.” I was told that many Special Operations officers also have serious misgivings.

There's much, much more in the full article.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon Sep 16th 2024, 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC