Michael Ledeed interviews the late James Jesus Angleton;
ML: Huh? What’s that supposed to mean? You telling me you’re responsible for setting up McCarthy’s conversations with Dana Priest? You’ve been dead for a long time, how could you manage that from, uh, where you’re at?
JJA: You might put it that way. It all goes back to Watergate, of course, which hardly anybody understands. Haven’t I explained it to you?
ML: No, but it’s never too late, go for it.
JJA: Well you know how Nixon hated the CIA, he thought we were all a bunch of effete Ivy League intellectuals who despised him, a simple soul from a Quaker background, etc., and he didn’t trust CIA analyses.
ML: Okay, nothing new there. When I was in the Reagan administration there was general distrust of those analyses too.
JJA: Right, especially the stuff about the Soviets, which invariably put the most benign possible interpretation on their actions. Part of that came from the instincts of the analysts, but part of it came from the actions of the KGB, both abroad and, to a frightening degree, within the CIA. Our shop had identified many likely KGB and GRU moles inside CIA, and some of our people wanted to start a very aggressive mole hunt, but Nixon wouldn’t hear of it, despite his antipathy to the place.
ML: Because of political fallout?
JJA: Yes, there was that � the ACLU and the 1st Amendment extremists would have been all over it, arguing that it was just an excuse for the politicization of intelligence, suppression of dissent, and so forth � but there were also the practical considerations, which I shared: the place was so riddled with penetrations that we’d never be able to feel confident we’d solved the problem. Second, any investigation would risk blowing the cover of the good operations we were running against the Soviets, and third, the publicity would worry our allies, who would cut back on their cooperation with us.
ML: Yeah, and meanwhile there were congressional investigations, endless leaks to the press…
It’s all starting to make sense….
James Jesus Angleton: Traitor extraordinaire. It’s a wonder it took people so long to figure out he was a mole for the Soviets.
From CBCpravda this morning.
Galbraith was one of America’s best-known liberals, a label that he seemed to like. He wrote forcefully and clearly on the need for government intervention in modern society.
always interesting how liberalism changed faces from “liberal” meaning expansive to “intervention and control” absonding with the definition.
similar to how “gay” changed meanings in less than a decade- from happy in the 60s to homosexual in the 70s.
Spook also means the third person of the trinity: Moh, Al, and Ahmajihad/Basiji. +
Israel zooms in on Iran (cutting edge spysat tech)
daily times pakistan ^ | 5/1/06 | ap
Posted on 04/30/2006 7:06:33 PM PDT by voletti
* Spy satellite is capable of capturing images as small as 27.6 inches
JERUSALEM: The first high-quality images from an Israeli spy satellite designed to track Iran�s nuclear program arrived at a ground station over the weekend, an Israeli official said on Sunday.
The Eros B, launched last week from Russia, is capable of capturing images on the ground as small as 27.6 inches. The satellite, which can remain in orbit for six years, reaches equatorial areas once every five days and crosses over the North Pole 16 times a day, said Shimon Eckhaus, chief executive officer of ImageSat, which oversees the satellite. However, the satellite can take pictures of images 500 kilometers to the right or left of it, so it can snap pictures of the same spot more often, Eckhaus said.
Satellite pictures published in Israeli newspapers on Sunday showed vivid images of a Syrian dam, helicopters in Sudan and a military port in an unidentified country.
But the satellite�s main purpose is to track Iran�s nuclear programme at a time when Tehran is refusing to comply with UN demands to halt uranium enrichment and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is calling for Israel�s destruction. +
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1624387/posts
Forget where I saw this, so you will just have to take it with a grain of salt.
There are sveral people in the white house translations department who are known to be passing information to the [various], enemy.
Wish I could remember the links and the convolouted reasons why these people are not promptly fired and penalized.
Probably something to do with the passing of misleading or entrapment information when the occaision calls for it. TG
[I*m just guessing here.]
Galbraith was the most error ridden economist of all time. Yet, because of his tall stature and likeable nature, [socialized with presidents], no one seems to have had the guts to tell him to shape up.
But then economists are notorious for making bad forcasts and they, [unlike other professions], never get slapped for their mistakes.
Pollsters come to mind for never getting nailed for sloppy work too. Few people ever seem to recall that in Canada, results have always leaned towards the liberals.
Some of the results have been shamefully off base. We need a standards board, like the UL label for appliances for pollsters. TG