PNEWS-L ARCHIVES ->http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/pnews-l.html
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
I find it extraordinarily suspicious that James Bamford received so much cooperation from the National Security Agency with the publication of his last book about the National Security Agency. This is very unlike NSA unless, they wanted him to write "Body of Secrets" _their way_. It really makes more sense to me that one of the reasons he found it so easy to obtain documents (the second time around) was because these documents were being fed to him in order to put an intentional positive spin on NSA activities.
The National Security Agency is so secretive that for many years the government would not admit it existed at all. While I was in the army I worked with NSA in the White House where I was assigned in a civilian capacity. (I also worked with the Chiefs of Staff at the War Room in the Pentagon) There is NOT a lot of information written about NSA and that is precisely because of NSA's ultra secrecy.
There is not all of a sudden this openness with NSA and other intelligence agencies in the U.S. If anything they have clamped down on exactly what it is they do and it just makes a lot more sense considering their ultra secrecy that they should want to control their own propaganda.
Bamford claims that the information about Operation Northland was disclosed in declassed documents uncovered during preparation for writing the book, "Body of Secrets", and those documents also claimed that Operation Northland, when it was passed UP to Dod was rejected. Suppose it wasn't? Would they admit it? I don't think they would. There are other secrets which are in vaults and not to be disclosed for a lot longer than this one. Is NSA all of a sudden coming out? I don't think so. There is a limit to what one can obtain using FOI and then only portions of any document are made available. You have all seen how they are marked up and essential portions blacked out. I am certain the operation was proposed. Otherwise, why mention it? But, I am not certain it was not carried out.
Here is an excerpt from an interview given by James Bamford four months ago on National Public Radio:
"Northwoods Halver(ph) was not an NSA
operation. It was a Joint Chiefs of Staff operation. The Joint Chiefs
of Staff, during the early 1960s, wanted to invade Cuba. They weren't
very happy with the CIA's plan, which was a covert operation using
exiles. The Joint Chiefs wanted to have a full-scale invasion with the
Army, Air Force and Navy, and in order to do that, they had to get the
support of the Kennedy administration, they had to get the support of
the American public and world opinion. And they knew they weren't
going to get it just for a overt attack of the island."
"So what they wanted to do was create these phony instances that made
it look like Cuba was actually attacking the United States and that
the United States was responding. They came up with these plans. One
of them was to create terrorism in the United States. The document
actually says people will be shot on the street. Boatloads of refugees
fleeing Cuba will be sunk on the high seas. At one point, they talked
about planting phoney evidence in case John Glenn, on his very first
space mission--in case that rocket blew up, they were going to plant
phony evidence indicating that Cuba was responsible for destroying the
rocket."
"So it was a very outrageous plan, and it was approved by the chairman
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and went up to Secretary of Defense
Robert McNamara, who apparently turned it down."
~~~~~~~~~~
OR WAS IT???
There are almost 40,000 people who work for NSA and it has the LARGEST budget of any U.S. intelligence agencies.
NSA is a super secret spy organization which eavesdrops everywhere in the world. Those huge antenna farms you wondered about all over the world with signs that say, "Property of the United States. Keep Out!" belong to NSA.
The National Security Agency is all about listening or obtaining by other means foreign intelligence and then analyzing it. Bamford almost did not get his first book about NSA ("Puzzle Palace") published because of the secrecy and NSA made two attempts at prosecuting him. I believe they decided to cooperate because that was easier than trying to stop Bamford from publishing his book and they could assure success in getting out the information they wanted out exactly as they wanted it disseminated. It is not improbable that even with his first book the objections to it and attempts to stiffle it's publication were staged and NSA really did not have objections to it but wanted it to appear on the surface that they did. I read "Puzzle Palace" and I did not find it uncomplimentary. I didn't find anything they would not have approved (IMO) for publication.
Bamford says he provided information on Operation Northwoods from formerly declassed documents. The Chiefs of Staff laid out a plan for domestic terrorism, that including shooting people and sinking boatloads of refugees. He says the plan was submitted to Dod and rejected. But, suppose it wasn't. Would they admit to it? Hardly. The documents would have either been buried so deep no one would ever see them or they would be destroyed (like those tapes) and no one would see them. Special operations are always denied and denied forever. Deniability is a standard operational feature of these "black operations."
Bamford also goes into some detail about the U.S.S. Liberty (an NSA spy ship) which I have also written an essay about at:
(http://pnews.org/art/art.shtml).
Bamford said the declassed documents expressed "an awful lot of skepticism about the Israeli explanation, which was that the whole thing was an accident." In my analysis, which included studying the investigations conducted in Israel and what I knew about NSA and the Israeli situation in that war, that this was a case of friendly fire. Bamford suggested circumstantial evidence that Israel was culpable. I don't buy it. By saying so would take the heat off NSA, somthing they have never been able to do on their own.
As noted, I lean in favor of Israel on this one because of the explanation which is in line with other incidents of friendly fire and the collateral damage which accompanies EVERY war. I read ALL the transcripts of all Israeli investigations which I believe were held fairly with a real effort to get at the truth and there was no evidence that the attack on the U.S.S. Liberty was anything but accidental and collateral damage during a very confused moment in that war.
Mr Bamford does some speculation about Israeli "atrocities" (his word) and intentionally killing Egyptians. (a suggestion he may have either picked up from NSA or his assumption). I take exception to it because there is absolutely no evidence that this ever happened.
So I do part company with him there and if on that other points he makes in his book must also be considered questionable. There is no proof that Israelis carried out any "atrocities" or intentionally "killed Egyptions" and it is completely out of character for the Israelis. [I am a veteran of that war]
Bamford's second book was accepted quite differently than the first. With "Body of Secrets" he received the cooperation of NSA and was even given a book signing at NSA headquarters. If anything can be considered out of character, it would be that, unless NSA already knew what was in the book and approved of it. I believe they did. I believe he exonerated NSA on Northland by shifting blame from NSA to the Chiefs of Staff and was especially careful about limiting the damage by stating that the plan was rejected after it had been approved by the entire Chiefs of Staff and passed on to DoD for FINAL APPROVAL. NSA and the Chiefs of Staff also worked together with the U.S.S. Liberty spy ship. NSA also cooperated with the Chiefs of Staff, who according to April Oliver, who was the producer at CNN for that expose and is now a subscriber and participant in PNEWS-L, managed the Tailwin Operation; another Black Op which has always been denied.
Otherwise, I found Bamford's books informative and interesting for the reason I found much of it familiar because I had performed some of the crytographic functions described in the book.
TheGolem http://pnews.org/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ The flag represents allegiance to the "nation state" view which was first established in the 16th century and that view promulgates the position that nation states are to be held higher than human collective rights - that rights first belong to the state. This was a major shift in loyalty and morality and is basically a cultural trap to get you to obey the state. It is totalitarian. Respect for "law and order" (even obviously bad and immoral law), "patriotism", and elevating a piece of cloth, the "flag" above the misdeeds of American history, which it represents, as supreme values are all major characteristics of a totalitarian society.
BURN THE FLAG, NOT PEOPLE! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ http://pnews.org/art/5art/ourFLAG.shtml (Understanding Patriotism & FLAG) http://pnews.org/art/1art/AFFORDbasics.shtml (Struggle for the Basics) http://pnews.org/art/5art/REACTparenti.shtml (Terrorism Meets Reactionism)
http://pnews.org/art/5art/warHORROR.shtml (RACIST WAR Against Arabs) http://pnews.org/art/5art/nationSTATE.shtml (Solution to Terrorism)
http://www.progressive.org/0801issue/nagy0901.html
(How U.S. Intentionally Destroyed Iraq's Water Supply)
___
/ o o \ ===OO=====OO================================================================= TheGolemsPlace (Where everything REALLY begins,including Black Hills Gold)
West Server -: http://pnews.org/ East Server -: http://g0lem.net/ PNEWS-L (since 1982) - 350 Message Board Forums - http://blackhillsg0ld.com =============================================================================
\_/ \_/
[PNEWS-L -> http://pnews.org/signup.shtml]