Spitfire List Web site and blog of anti-fascist researcher and radio personality Dave Emory.
The tag 'Cover-Up' is associated with 347 posts.

The Pierre Omidyar School of Journalism

We have noted journalistic icon Glenn Greenwald’s history as a Nazi fellow-traveler. We have also highlighted Greenwald’s journalistic financial angel Pierre Omidyar and his financing of the rise of both Narendra Modi’s Hindutva fascist organization in India and the Ukrainian OUN/B successor fascists in Ukraine. The assassination of Modi critic Gauri Lankesh–the latest in a string of unsolved murders of critics of Modi, his BJP and the Hindutva fascist RSS (for which the BJP is a political cat’s paw)–underscores the grotesque nature of Omidyar’s undeserved status as an icon of journalism and investigative reporting. In Ukraine, the OUN/B successor organizations whose elevation was assisted by Omidyar, have also violently suppressed those who would “speak truth to power.” All of the contents of this website as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 37+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of videotaped lectures are available on a 32GB flash drive. Dave offers his programs and articles for free–your support is very much appreciated.


FTR #965 Are We Going to Have a Third World War?

Recent developments are suggestive of the ominous possibility of an imminent Third World War. We present some new information and recap and further analyze stories covered in previous programs in order to underscore and highlight the potential devastation of these events.

As the furor (“fuehrer”?) surrounding the potentially lethal political hoax known as “Russia-gate” gains momentum, it should be noted that the point man for the Trump business interests in their dealings with Russia is Felix Sater. A Russian-born immigrant, Sater is a professional criminal and a convicted felon with historical links to the Mafia. Beyond that, and more importantly, Sater is an FBI informant and a CIA contract agent: “. . . . There is every indication that the extraordinarily lenient treatment resulted from Sater playing a get-out-of-jail free card. Shortly before his secret guilty plea, Sater became a freelance operative of the Central Intelligence Agency. One of his fellow stock swindlers, Salvatore Lauria, wrote a book about it. The Scorpion and the Frog is described on its cover as ‘the true story of one man’s fraudulent rise and fall in the Wall Street of the nineties.’ According to Lauria–and the court files that have been unsealed–Sater helped the CIA buy small missiles before they got to terrorists. He also provided other purported national security services for a reported fee of $300,000. Stories abound as to what else Sater may or may not have done in the arena of national security. . . .”

Sater was active on behalf of the Trumps in the fall of 2015: “. . . . Sater worked on a plan for a Trump Tower in Moscow as recently as the fall of 2015, but he said that had come to a halt because of Trump’s presidential campaign. . . .”

Sater was initiating contact between the Russians and “Team Trump” in January of this year: “ . . . . Nevertheless, in late January, Sater and a Ukrainian lawmaker reportedly met with Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, at a New York hotel. According to the [New York] Times, they discussed a plan that involved the U.S. lifting sanctions against Russia, and Cohen said he hand-delivered the plan in a sealed envelope to then-national security advisor Michael Flynn. Cohen later denied delivering the envelope to anyone in the White House, according to the Washington Post. . . .”

A stunning development concerns extreme reticence on the part of the U.S. intelligence community:

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence had an “interesting” response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit demanding the release of the classified report given to President Obama back in January purporting to show the Russian government was behind the hacks. According to the ODNI, the requested document would present a risk to human intelligence sources by revealing the comparative weight given to human vs technical evidence, risking US sources and methods. But the ODNI went further, suggesting that even releasing a fully redacted document would present similar risks!

It is NOT easy to see the ODNI’s reluctance to release even a fully-redacted copy of the report as anything but disingenuous. In the context of potentially devastating deterioration of Russian/U.S. relations over Syria, Ukraine, and the Russian “election-hacking” uproar, the ODNI’s behavior cannot be anything but disquieting:

” . . . . The intelligence official argued that a redacted version of the original report would allow a trained eye to assess ‘comparative weight’ of human intelligence and signals intelligence reporting included in the compendium. Release of some of the information the privacy-focused organization wants made public ‘could prove fatal to U.S. human intelligence sources,’ [Deputy Director of National Intelligence for Intelligence Integration Edward] Gistaro warned.

Gistaro also appears to argue that even if officials blacked out the whole report, highly classified information would be at risk.

‘I agree with the [National Intelligence Council] that a heavily or even fully redacted version of the classified report can not be publicly released without jeopardizing national security information properly classified as SECRET or TOP SECRET,’ he wrote. . . . ‘The ODNI should release the complete report to EPIC so that the public and the Congress can understand the full extent of the Russian interference with the 2016 Presidential election,’ EPIC’s Marc Rotenberg told POLITICO Tuesday. ‘It is already clear that government secrecy is frustrating meaningful oversight. The FBI, for example, will not even identify the states that were targeted by Russia.’ . . . ”

With the high-profile hacks being attributed–almost certainly falsely–to Russia, there are ominous developments taking place that may well lead to a Third World War. During the closing days of his Presidency, Obama authorized the planting of cyber weapons on Russian computer networks. Obama did this after talking with Putin on the Hot Line, established to prevent a Third World War. Putin denied interfering in the U.S. election.

The conclusion that Russia hacked the U.S. election on Putin’s orders appears to have been based on a CIA source in the Kremlin. Even when that intelligence was delivered, other agencies weren’t ready to accept the CIA’s conclusion and it took intelligence from another nation (not named) to provide the final intelligence tipping point that led to a broad-based conclusion the not only was the Russian government behind the cyberattacks but that Vladimir Putin himself ordered it.

That ally’s intelligence is described as “the most critical technical intelligence on Russia,” however the NSA still wasn’t convinced based on what sounds like a lack of confidence in that source. Thus, it looks like a CIA Kremlin source and an unnamed foreign intelligence agency with questionable credentials are the basis of what appears to be a likely future full-scale US/Russian cyberwar.

Of paramount significance is the fact that IF, on Putin’s orders (and we are to believe such) Russia continued to hack U.S. computer systems to influence the election, Putin would have to have gone utterly mad. Those hacks would have precluded any rapprochement between Russia and the United States under a President Trump. There is no indication that Putin went off the deep end.

Also auguring a possible Third World War are two developments in Syria. Seymour Hersh published an article in “Die Welt” revealing that, not only was the April 4 alleged Sarin attack NOT a chemical weapons attack but there was widespread knowledge of this in American military and intelligence circles.

What did the intelligence community know about the attack? The Russian and Syrian air force had informed the US in advance of that airstrike that they had intelligence that top level leaders of Ahrar al-Sham and Jabhat al-Nusra were meeting in that building and they informed of the US of the attack plan in advance of the attack and that it was on a “high-value” target. And the attack involved the unusual use of a guided bomb and Syria’s top pilots. ” . . . . Russian and Syrian intelligence officials, who coordinate operations closely with the American command posts, made it clear that the planned strike on Khan Sheikhoun was special because of the high-value target. ‘It was a red-hot change. The mission was out of the ordinary – scrub the sked,’ the senior adviser told me. ‘Every operations officer in the region’ – in the Army, Marine Corps, Air Force, CIA and NSA – ‘had to know there was something going on. The Russians gave the Syrian Air Force a guided bomb and that was a rarity. They’re skimpy with their guided bombs and rarely share them with the Syrian Air Force. And the Syrians assigned their best pilot to the mission, with the best wingman.’ The advance intelligence on the target, as supplied by the Russians, was given the highest possible score inside the American community. . . .”

Following the attack, US intelligence concluded that there was no sarin gas attack, Assad wouldn’t have been that politically suicidal. The symptoms of chemical poisoning following the bombing was likely due to a mixture of chlorine, fertilizers, and other chemicals stored in the building that was targeted by the Syrian airforce created by secondary explosions from the initial bombing. ” . . . ‘This was not a chemical weapons strike,’ the adviser said. ‘That’s a fairy tale. . . .”

The symptoms of chemical poisoning following the bombing was likely due to a mixture of chlorine, fertilizers, and other chemicals stored in the building that was targeted by the Syrian airforce created by secondary explosions from the initial bombing. ” . . . . A Bomb Damage Assessment (BDA) by the U.S. military later determined that the heat and force of the 500-pound Syrian bomb triggered a series of secondary explosions that could have generated a huge toxic cloud that began to spread over the town, formed by the release of the fertilizers, disinfectants and other goods stored in the basement, its effect magnified by the dense morning air, which trapped the fumes close to the ground. . . .”

The behavior of the Trump administration was not only in direct conflict with intelligence on the attack, but reinforced propaganda by some of the Al-Qaeda-linked jihadists the West has been using as proxy warriors in Syria and elsewhere: ” . . . . ‘The Salafists and jihadists got everything they wanted out of their hyped-up Syrian nerve gas ploy,’ the senior adviser to the U.S. intelligence community told me, referring to the flare up of tensions between Syria, Russia and America. ‘The issue is, what if there’s another false flag sarin attack credited to hated Syria? Trump has upped the ante and painted himself into a corner with his decision to bomb. And do not think these guys are not planning the next faked attack. Trump will have no choice but to bomb again, and harder. He’s incapable of saying he made a mistake.’ . . .”

Program Highlights Include: Review of a Trump administration warning of another supposed, impending “Syrian chemical weapons strike”–a warning that has since been retracted; discussion of brilliant Nazi hacker Andrew Auerenheimer’s orchestration of an “Alt-right” online intimidation campaign against CNN employees; Auerenheimer’s current residence in Ukraine; the ominous possibility of the activation/manipulation of the NSA cyber-weapons installed on Russian computer networks by a third party (perhaps someone with the capabilities of the brilliant Auerenheimer); review of the observations by a German professor–opposed to Nazism/Hitler–who described the essence of what it was like, subjectively, to live through the rise of Hitler–his observation presented in the context of the ODNI’s decision not to release even a fully-redacted version of the intelligence report on “Russian meddling” in the U.S. election: ” . . . . . . . . What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise, to receiving decisions deliberated in secret, to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand because of nationality security, so dangerous that even if the people the people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security. . . .”


FTR #964 Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics

As we have noted in many previous broadcasts and posts, cyber attacks are easily disguised. Perpetrating a “cyber false flag” operation is disturbingly easy to do.

This is of paramount significance in evaluating the increasingly neo-McCarthyite New Cold War propaganda about “Russian interference” in the U.S. election.

Compounding the situation are some recent disclosures and developments:

1.–We learn that the CIA’s hacking tools are specifically crafted to mask CIA authorship of the attacks. Most significantly, for our purposes, is the fact that the Agency’s hacking tools are engineered in such a way as to permit the authors of the event to represent themselves as Russian.

2.–The NSA’s elite hacking technology has been made widely available to the hacking community, courtesy of “The Shadow Brokers.”

3.–During the 2016 Presidential campaign, Michael Flynn was professionally involved with numerous cyber-security and cyber arms manufacturing firms: “ . . . . The month before Flynn joined the advisory board of OSY Technologies, NSO Group opened up a new arm called WestBridge Technologies, Inc., in the D.C. region. (The company was originally registered in Delaware in 2014, but formed in Maryland in April 2016.) Led by NSO Group co-founder Lavie, WestBridge is vying for federal government contracts for NSO Group’s products. Hiring Flynn would provide NSO Group with a well-connected figure in Washington, to help get its foot in the door of the notoriously insular world of secret intelligence budgeting. . . .When you’re trying to build up your business, you need someone who has connections, someone who is seen as an authority and a legitimate presence,” Johnson said. Hiring someone with Flynn’s background in intelligence would ‘open up doors that they wouldn’t have had access to,’ Johnson said.Throughout 2016, Flynn worked for a number of cybersecurity firms personally and through his consulting firm, Flynn Intel Group. In addition to his advisory board seat at OSY Technologies, he sat on the board of Adobe Systems, a large software company with Pentagon contracts, and the boards of the cybersecurity companies GreenZone Systems and HALO Privacy. (Though Flynn described himself as an Adobe advisory board member in his financial disclosure paperwork, the group said in a statement that he provided only “periodic counsel to Adobe’s public sector team.”) . . .”

4.–NSO Group and OSY Technologies specialize in spear-fishing attacks, one of the methodologies used in the hacks of U.S. election computers. Is there any link between Flynn’s cyber-security/cyber arms links and the high-profile hacks during the campaign?

5.–A GOP tech database–Deep Root–Exposed the data of almost two hundred million American voters to widespread scrutiny. Is there any connection between Deep Root, the GOP and the alleged Russian hacking of U.S. voting computers?

Following a Bloomberg report about widespread Russian hacking of American elections systems: “ . . . . Kay Stimson, spokeswoman for the National Association of Secretaries of State, said the members of her group — which represents the chief election officials in 40 states — were taken aback by the allegation that 39 states were hacked. ‘We cannot verify any information in that report,’ Stimson told Benzinga. “It has some claims that have raised some red flags. I don’t know where they’re getting it. We’re not able to assess to the credibility.’ She said that some cybersecurity firms were engaging in scare tactics at the state and local levels. ‘There are cybersecurity firms making some wild claims,’ she said. ‘It is a very aggressive industry.’ . . .”

With the high-profile hacks being attributed–almost certainly falsely–to Russia, there are ominous developments taking place that may well lead to a Third World War. During the closing days of his Presidency, Obama authorized the planting of cyber weapons on Russian computer networks. Obama did this after talking with Putin on the Hot Line, established to prevent a Third World War. Putin denied interfering in the U.S. election.

The conclusion that Russia hacked the U.S. election on Putin’s orders appears to have been based on a CIA source in the Kremlin. Even when that intelligence was delivered, other agencies weren’t ready to accept the CIA’s conclusion and it took intelligence from another nation (not named) to provide the final intelligence tipping point that led to a broad-based conclusion the not only was the Russian government behind the cyberattacks but that Vladimir Putin himself ordered it.

That ally’s intelligence is described as “the most critical technical intelligence on Russia,” however the NSA still wasn’t convinced based on what sounds like a lack of confidence in that source. Thus, it looks like a CIA Kremlin source and an unnamed foreign intelligence agency with questionable credentials are the basis of what appears to be a likely future full-scale US/Russian cyberwar.

Of paramount significance is the fact that IF, on Putin’s orders (and we are to believe such) Russia continued to hack U.S. computer systems to influence the election, Putin would have to have gone utterly mad. Those hacks would have precluded any rapprochement between Russia and the United States under a President Trump. There is not indication that Putin went off the deep end.

Also auguring a Third World War are two developments in Syria. Seymour Hersh published an article in Die Welt revealing that, not only was the April 4 alleged Sarin attack NOT a chemical weapons attack but there was widespread knowledge of this in American military and intelligence circles.

Ominously, the Trump White House is claiming they have advance knowledge of an impending Syrian chemical weapons strike and will punish Syria heavily, and hold Russia accountable.

Program Highlights Include: The fact that the bulk of activity detected by the DHS on U.S. election systems was “scanning”–standard operating procedure for hacking; a former NSA hacking specialist–Jake Williams–said that spear-phishing operation was of “medium sophistication” that “practically any hacker can pull off”; the question of whether or not GOP Secretaries of State might have deliberately responded to the spear-phishing e-mails that permitted the “hit” on U.S. election systems; the Russian authorization of the use by the Syrian air force of a smart bomb to eliminate Al-Qaeda-linked jihadists; the release of a chemical cloud as a result of that strike that was caused by secondary explosions; Cambridge Analytica’s hiring of GOP online data-basing kingpin Darren Bolding.


FTR #963 Watergate and the Assassination of President Kennedy, Part 3

As comparisons between the Watergate scandal and “Russia-gate” saturate the media (in the summer of 2017), the program reviews information about connections between the Watergate scandal and the assassination of President Kennedy. Nixon told aides that he didn’t want to release the White House tape recordings because he was afraid “the whole Bay of Pigs thing” might come out. Nixon aide H.R. Haldeman said in his book “The Ends of Power” that “the whole Bay of Pigs thing” was a code word in the Nixon White House for the assassination of President Kennedy. (It should be remembered that Nixon was in Dallas on 11/22/63, yet he told the FBI in February of 1964 that he had left Dallas two days prior to Kennedy’s assassination.)

When interviewed by the Warren Commission, Jack Ruby indicated that he had been part of a conspiracy to kill Kennedy and that he feared for his life. The Warren Commission turned a deaf ear to his desire to go to Washington and “spill the beans.” Gerald Ford (who succeeded Nixon as President and pardoned him of all crimes committed), Leon Jaworski (a Warren Commission counsel who was a director of a CIA domestic funding conduit and who was selected by Nixon to be Watergate Special Prosecutor) and Arlen Specter (another Warren Commission counsel who was Nixon’s first choice as his personal defense attorney in the Watergate affair.) were present at Ruby’s de facto confession.

Warren Commission Counsel J. Lee Rankin is also present at this interview. Nixon first selected J. Lee Rankin to serve as Watergate Special Prosecutor. Rankin was subsequently tabbed to review the Watergate tapes and determine which would be released. Rankin was the Warren Commission’s liaison between the commission and both the CIA and the FBI. Rankin was a key proponent of the so-called “Magic Bullet Theory.”

It is interesting to contemplate the text of a letter that Jack Ruby smuggled out of prison. In the letter, Ruby hints that Nazis and Japanese fascists participated in the assassination of President Kennedy. Certainly, elements of what were to become the World Anti-Communist League (including the Asian Peoples Anti-Communist League) were involved.

” . . . Don’t believe the Warren [Commission] Report, that was only put out to make me look innocent. . . . I’m going to die a horrible death anyway, so what would I have to gain by writing all this. So you must believe me. . . . that [sic] is only one kind of people that would do such a thing, that would have to be the Nazi’s [sic], and that is who is in power in this country right now. . . . Japan is also in on the deal, but the old war lords are going to come back. South America is also full of these Nazi’s [sic]. . . . if those people were so determined to frame me then you must be convinced that they had an ulterior motive for doing same. There is only one kind of people that would go to such extremes, and that would be the Master Race. . . .”

The late investigative reporter and “What’s My Line” panelist Dorothy Kilgallen published Ruby’s Warren Commission Testimony and had told associates she would “break this case wide open.” Shortly afterward, she was found dead of alcohol and barbiturate poisoning–suicide and accidental death have both been put forward as reasons for her demise. Her widower refused public commentary on her death and eventually “committed suicide” himself.

We excerpt The Guns of November, Part 2, highlighting Kilgallen’s death. Interestingly and significantly, “What’s My Line” host and moderator John Charles Daly was Earl Warren’s son-in-law, as discussed in FTR #190. Did Daly purposefully or inadvertently convey information to Warren about Kilgallen’s investigation? Was that in any way connected with her death?

On the Daly/Warren in-law relationship–note that Daly worked as a White House correspondent and globe-traveling reporter for CBS radio news, a vice-presidency at ABC in charge of news and also headed the Voice of America, which had strong links to the intelligence community. Those journalistic positions, as well as his role as director of VOA may well have brought him into the fold of the intelligence community.

The late investigative reporter and “What’s My Line” panelist Dorothy Kilgallen published Ruby’s Warren Commission Testimony and had told associates she would “break this case wide open.” Shortly afterward, she was found dead of alcohol and barbiturate poisoning–suicide and accidental death have both been put forward as reasons for her demise. Her widower refused public commentary on her death and eventually “committed suicide” himself.

Next, the program excerpts FTR #253, featuring an intriguing commentary by the late, veteran CIA officer Gordon Novel. Highlights of that program include:

1. The broadcast highlights the controversy surrounding Richard Nixon’s White House tapes. These tape recordings were, ultimately, the vehicle for forcing his exit from the White House. That event was the culmination of the Watergate affair. There was discussion in the fall of 2000 among electronics experts concerning the possibility of utilizing advanced, high-tech equipment to recover material from a famous 18 ½ minute erasure on one of the tapes.
(The San Francisco Examiner; 9/22/2000; p. A2.)
2. The subject of whether or not the erasure had been deliberate was a significant element of controversy during the Watergate affair. (Nixon’s secretary, Rose Mary Woods, claimed that she “accidentally” erased the tape. Most experts rejected her version of events. Interestingly, the tape that was erased was a recording of a conversation between White House aide H.R. Haldeman and Nixon. In an autobiography about the Watergate affair, Haldeman wrote that “the whole Bay of Pigs thing” was a code word within the Nixon White House for the JFK assassination. Nixon refused to release the Watergate tapes for fear that release would lead to exposure of “the whole Bay of Pigs thing.”
3. Much of the program consists of excerpts from other broadcasts. In an excerpt from G-3, the broadcast highlights a veteran covert intelligence operative and private investigator named Gordon Novel. Among Novel’s many talents is electronic counterintelligence. His name crops up in the context of both the JFK case and the Watergate scandal. Novel was the source for an important piece of information that figured in the Jim Garrison investigation. That report concerned a raid on a munitions cache to obtain arms for anti-Castro activities, the CIA’s Bay of Pigs invasion, in particular.
(“Coincidence or Conspiracy?”; Bernard Fensterwald and the Committee to Investigate Assassinations; copyright 1976 by Zebra Books, a division of Kensington Publishers.)
4. This operation allegedly involved David Ferrie and Guy Bannister, two of the key figures in Garrison’s investigation. Novel was later consulted by White House aide Charles Colson concerning the feasibility of electronically erasing the tapes. (Coincidence or Conspiracy?)
5. Novel’s tangential involvement in the Watergate investigation surfaced in a magazine called Technology Illustrated. In 1983, the magazine ran an article about Novel’s presence at a gathering of veteran covert intelligence operatives, including convicted Watergate burglar G. Gordon Liddy.
(“Technology Illustrated”; 4/83.)
6. In a letter to the editor, Mr. Novel took issue to some of the comments about him in the April issue.
(Technology Illustrated; 7/83.)
7. In that letter, Novel made reference to his ultra high technology role “to erase the Watergate tapes.” (Idem.)
In 1984, Mr. Emory was a guest on a late-night commercial talk show and Mr. Novel phoned in, taking issue with Mr. Emory’s description of his position in Garrison’s investigation.
(The Express Way show with Larry Johnson on KOME-FM in San Jose, California; 10/29/1984.)
8. Most of the second side of this program consists of an excerpting of the conversation with the late, formidable Novel. In his conversation with Mr. Emory, Novel denied any involvement in Kennedy’s assassination and criticized Garrison’s investigation. (Idem.)
9. When the subject of Watergate came up, Mr. Emory asked Mr. Novel if he denied actually having erased the Watergate tapes. Novel replied “only because they didn’t pay me.” (Idem.)
When pressed further, Novel clarified his statement, saying he didn’t erase any portions of the Watergate tapes. He did state that he was one of a panel of experts who analyzed the 18 ½-minute gap and stated that it could have been made accidentally. (Idem.)
10. Intriguingly, Novel added that he was also on the panel of electronics experts that testified that the Dictaphone recording from a Dallas police motorcycle was accurate in its revealing of a fourth shot–which neutralized the single bullet theory.
11. In FTR #190, Novel confirmed his role in the burglary of the Schlumberger facility and maintained that he was involved with a plan to give anti-Castro Cubans [Castro] army uniforms to wear while attacking the U.S. Marines at Guantanamo, thereby triggering a U.S. invasion of Cuba.
12. After Mr. Novel’s death, it emerged that he was serving as a mole in Jim Garrison’s investigation, funneling information to Allen Dulles.


FTR #962 Watergate and the Assassination of President Kennedy, Part 2

This broadcast continues our review of the profound connections between the Watergate scandal and the assassination of President Kennedy. For purposes of convenience and continuity, we recap an overview of some of these links from the description of FTR #961:

With Watergate being bruited about by our media in conjunction with the “investigations” into Trump and “Russia-gate,” we are taking time to dig into the archives and recap information about one of the factors that underlay the Watergate scandal–the Assassination of JFK.

The first of these programs excerpts The Guns of November, Part 3 (recorded on 11/15/1983) at length. From the description for that program:

Richard Nixon’s political demise came through the Watergate scandal. Nixon initiated the Watergate cover-up because he feared that “the whole Bay of Pigs thing” would come out. In his political memoir The Ends of Power, Nixon aide H.R. Haldeman wrote that the phrase “Bay of Pigs” was a code-word within the Nixon White House for the Kennedy assassination.

The program documents many of the areas of overlap between the Watergate and Kennedy investigations.

Nixon himself was in Dallas on November 22, 1963, as a lawyer for Pepsico (the parent company of Pepsi Cola.) Flying out of Dallas roughly two hours before Kennedy was slain, Nixon told the FBI in February of 1964 that the only time he had been in Dallas in 1963 had been “two days prior to the assassination.” This blatant lie is negated by a wire service interview Nixon gave in Dallas on November 21. Text of the interview ran in the New York Times and other major newspapers.

(A Pepsi Cola executive said that Nixon was present in Dallas at a company meeting when the announcement came that President Kennedy had been killed.)

Watergate Special Prosecutor Leon Jaworski was selected by Nixon to replace the illegally fired Archibald Cox. Jaworski had previously served as a Warren Commission Counsel, while at the same time serving as director of a CIA domestic funding conduit.

Nixon named former Warren Commission member Gerald Ford to replace Vice President Agnew. Ford then replaced Nixon as President and pardoned him of all crimes he may have committed. . . .

. . . . The program discusses evidentiary tributaries connecting numerous other figures to the both investigations, including Watergate Judge John Sirica and Watergate burglar Frank Sturgis.

To attempt selective erasure of the all-important Watergate tapes, Nixon sought the assistance of Gordon Novel, a veteran intelligence agent, electronics expert, anti-Castro veteran and a figure in Jim Garrison’s investigation in New Orleans. At least one key tape was partially erased (the famous 18 1/2 minute gap), though no culprit was ever identified.

In this second broadcast of the series, we draw on Miscellaneous Archive Show M59–Richard Nixon’s Greatest Hits: Highlights of Richard Nixon’s Political Career. In that program (recorded on 5/1/1994), we reviewed an addendum to the original The Guns of November, Part 3. That addendum–recorded in June of 1972 (the 20th anniversary of the original Watergate break-in)–builds on the information from FTR #961.

After reviewing information about Nixon’s presence in Dallas, Texas on 11/22/1963, the program presents research by the late Penn Jones that maintains that Nixon and J. Edgar Hoover, among others, were present at a gathering at oilman Clint Muchison’s home the evening before the assassination–a meeting Jones felt was a planning session for the JFK assassination.

The bulk of this program is gleaned from Bernard J. Fensterwald’s Coincidence or Conspiracy. (Fensterwald was Watergate Burglar James McCord’s chief defense attorney.)

Among the many links between Watergate and the JFK assassination are the Warren Commission members and counsels who were tabbed by Nixon and/or other figures in the investigation to serve in various capacities:

a) Nixon first selected J. Lee Rankin to serve as Watergate Special Prosecutor. Rankin was subsequently tabbed to review the Watergate tapes and determine which would be released. Rankin was the Warren Commission’s liaison between the commission and both the CIA and the FBI. Rankin was a key proponent of the so-called “Magic Bullet Theory.”
b) Warren Commission counsel Arlen Specter, the author of the “Magic Bullet Theory”–was Nixon’s first choice as his personal defense attorney in the Watergate case.
c) Nixon also attempted to requisition Warren Commission member John J. McCloy as Watergate Special Prosecutor.
d) Former Warren Commission counsel Albert Jenner was Nixon’s first choice to serve as the GOP’s minority counsel before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Jenner later withdrew from that position.
e) John Dean selected former Warren Commission counsel Charles Shaffer as his attorney.
f) White House aide John Ehrlichmann tabbed former Warren Commission counsel Joseph Ball to represent him.
g) Nixon’s secretary Rose Marie Woods selected former Warren Commission counsel Charles Rhyne to represent her in a possible investigation of the famous 18 1/2 minute gap in one of the tapes.
h) Nixon Treasury Secretary John Connally’s obstruction of Jim Garrison’s extradition request for Sergio Archacha Smith.

Program Highlights Include:

1.The Nixon White House’s interest in the assassination attempt on George Wallace, which eliminated the Alabama Governor as a possible third-party threat to Nixon’s so-called “Southern Strategy.” Exactly who shot Wallace remains a mystery, but it was most assuredly NOT Arthur Bremer.
2. Two long-time Nixon friends and political associates’ sponsorship of the family of Sirhan Sirhan into the United States. Sirhan did NOT kill Robert F. Kennedy, however the creation of the false cover story to set up the patsy is important. Nixon, of course, won the 1968 election, after Robert Kennedy’s murder eliminated him as a front runner.
3. The role of former Lockheed director of security James Golden as chief of security for Nixon’s 1968 campaign. Many researchers of the RFK assassination believe that the actual shooter of Robert Kennedy was American Nazi Thane Eugene Caesar, who was employed at Lockheed’s Burbank facility, in an area involved with the U-2 spy plane project. (Oswald was also involved with the U-2.)
4. A veritable trove of Warren Commission letter and memoranda pertaining to the above figures involved in the Warren Commission and tabbed by the Nixon team for roles in Watergate that were missing from the National Archives.


FTR #961 Watergate and the Assassination of President Kennedy, Part 1

With Watergate being bruited about by our media in conjunction with the “investigations” into Trump and “Russia-gate,” we are taking time to dig into the archives and recap information about one of the factors that underlay the Watergate scandal–the Assassination of JFK.

The first of the programs excerpts The Guns of November, Part 3 (recorded on 11/15/1983) at length. From the description for the program:

“Richard Nixon’s political demise came through the Watergate scandal. Nixon initiated the Watergate cover-up because he feared that “the whole Bay of Pigs thing” would come out. In his political memoir “The Ends of Power,” Nixon aide H.R. Haldeman wrote that the phrase “Bay of Pigs” was a code-word within the Nixon White House for the Kennedy assassination.

The program documents many of the areas of overlap between the Watergate and Kennedy investigations.

Nixon himself was in Dallas on November 22, 1963, as a lawyer for Pepsico (the parent company of Pepsi Cola.) Flying out of Dallas roughly two hours before Kennedy was slain, Nixon told the FBI in February of 1964 that the only time he had been in Dallas in 1963 had been “two days prior to the assassination.” This blatant lie is negated by a wire service interview Nixon gave in Dallas on November 21. Text of the interview ran in the New York Times and other major newspapers.

Watergate Special Prosecutor Leon Jaworski was selected by Nixon to replace the illegally fired Archibald Cox. Jaworski had previously served as a Warren Commission Counsel, while at the same time serving as director of a CIA domestic funding conduit.

Nixon named former Warren Commission member Gerald Ford to replace Vice President Agnew. Ford then replaced Nixon as President and pardoned him of all crimes he may have committed. . . .

. . . . The program discusses evidentiary tributaries connecting numerous other figures to the both investigations, including Watergate Judge John Sirica and Watergate burglar Frank Sturgis (aka Frank Fiorini).

To attempt selective erasure of the all-important Watergate tapes, Nixon sought the assistance of Gordon Novel, a veteran intelligencer, electronics expert, anti-Castro veteran and a figure in Jim Garrison’s investigation in New Orleans. At least one key tape was partially erased (the famous 18 1/2 minute gap), though no culprit was ever identified.

Program Highlights Include: Leon Jaworski’s role as Koreagate Special Prosecutor, which permitted the eclipsing of the Moon organization’s links to the CIA; the role of the Unification Church–the Moon organization–in generating support for Nixon during Watergate; Jude Sarah Hughes’s involvement with a CIA domestic funding conduit; Hughes’s administration of the oath of office to LBJ on the plane flying back to Washington DC; Judge Sirica’s electoral support for Richard Nixon (“Maximum John” Sirica was the Judge in the Watergate case); the fact that the suit by JFK researcher Harold Weisberg and attorney James Lesar sought information from the Warren Commission, part of the executive branch of government; that body was a Presidential fact-finding commission with no legal status whatsoever; Sirica’s ruling against the plaintiffs was a contravention of the Constitution; Jaworski’s role as one of two heads of the Texas Court of Inquiry, the body formed by the state of Texas in order to investigate the assassination;”ex” CIA officer James McCord’s decisive role in both betraying the Watergate burglars and in seeing to it that the investigation would go forward; Frank Sturgis and his role (as Frank Fiorini) in running the Mob’s casinos in Cuba pre-Castro; Sturgis’s role in generating disinformation pointing toward Castro as the architect of the assassination; an article from a 1983 technology publication in which Gordon Novel discusses his ultra high-technology role “to erase the Watergate tapes” (this will be discussed at greater length in future programs.)


Ukrainian Intelligence Officer in Charge of MH17 Investigation: “Jews aren’t Ukrainians and I will destroy you . . .”

In a long series of programs and posts over the last four years, we have chronicled the re-institution of the OUN/B World War II-era fascists as the foundational element of the Ukrainian government. Of particular significance in that regard is the Nazification of the Ukrainian intelligence service, the SBU. Former SBU officer Vasily Vovk called for the extermination of Ukraine’s Jews. Vovk headed the SBU’s “investigation” into the MH 17 shootdown. The SBU appears complicit in the murder of investigative journalist Pavel Sheremet. All of the contents of this website as of 12/19/2014–Dave Emory’s 37+ years of research and broadcasting–as well as hours of videotaped lectures are available on a 32GB flash drive. Dave offers his programs and articles for free–your support is very much appreciated.


FTR #955 Syrian Chemical Weapons Attack? Not So Fast, Part 2

Supplementing FTR #954, this broadcast continues analysis of the alleged Assad government chemical weapons attack. Key points of discussion include:

1. Further analysis by MIT expert Theodore Postol, who sees the photographic evidence alleged to support the Trump administration’s allegations as questionable. ” . . . ‘This addendum provides data that unambiguously shows that the assumption in the WHR that there was no tampering with the alleged site of the sarin release is not correct. This egregious error raises questions about every other claim in the WHR. … The implication of this observation is clear – the WHR was not reviewed and released by any competent intelligence expert unless they were motivated by factors other than concerns about the accuracy of the report. . . .”

2. Particularly suspicious (laughable?) is a picture showing personnel examining the purported sarin attack site with woefully inadequate protective clothing. ” . . . . ‘If there were any sarin present at this location when this photograph was taken everybody in the photograph would have received a lethal or debilitating dose of sarin. The fact that these people were dressed so inadequately either suggests a complete ignorance of the basic measures needed to protect an individual from sarin poisoning, or that they knew that the site was not seriously contaminated. This is the crater that is the centerpiece evidence provided in the WHR for a sarin attack delivered by a Syrian aircraft.’ . . . . ”

3. Questionable analysis in the alleged chlorine gas attacks also attributed to the al-Assad regime. ” . . . In one of the chlorine cases, however, Syrian eyewitnesses came forward to testify that the rebels had staged the alleged attack so it could be blamed on the government. In that incident, the U.N. team reached no conclusion as to what had really happened, but neither did the investigators – now alerted to the rebels’ tactic of staging chemical attacks – apply any additional skepticism to the other cases. In one case, the rebels and their supporters also claimed to know that an alleged ‘barrel bomb’ contained a canister of chlorine because of the sound that it made while descending. There was no explanation for how that sort of detection was even possible. . . .”

4. A British doctor who was a focal point of PR coverage of the alleged sarin attack has a jihadist background. ” . . . . A British doctor who documented a suspected chemical weapons attack in Syria was considered a ‘committed jihadist’ by MI6 and was struck off the General Medical Council in 2016. Shajul Islam, 31, posted several videos on Twitter in the aftermath of the Tuesday’s (4 April) attack where he appeared to be treating patients in Khan Sheikhoun. He appeared on several television networks such as NBC to discuss what he saw, but it has now emerged Islam was previously charged on terror offences in the UK. . . .”

4. The underlying strategic reason for some of the Trump/Russian interface, one that dovetails with the Syrian provocation/escalation: ” . . . . The United Arab Emirates arranged a secret meeting in January between Blackwater founder Erik Prince and a Russian close to President Vladi­mir Putin as part of an apparent effort to establish a back-channel line of communication between Moscow and President-elect Donald Trump, according to U.S., European and Arab officials. The meeting took place around Jan. 11 — nine days before Trump’s inauguration — in the Seychelles islands in the Indian Ocean, officials said. Though the full agenda remains unclear, the UAE agreed to broker the meeting in part to explore whether Russia could be persuaded to curtail its relationship with Iran, including in Syria, a Trump administration objective . . . .”

5. George W. Bush administration officials are confident another terrorist attack is coming appear to be concerned that the Trump could use terror to grab and abuse executive powers. We present some of their thoughts against the background of our discussion in FTR #953 about Bernie Sanders’ paving the way for Muslim Brotherhood-linked elements: ” . . . . ‘We can assume there will be another terrorist attack in the U.S. If the executive order is in place, he will point to the attack as support for the executive order and the need to expand it to other countries with bad dudes (Muslims). If the executive order has been struck down, Trump will blame judges and Democrats for the attack. . . .’We both wholly believe that Trump needs a bogeyman. But, more importantly, he needs distraction and a blame source. In terrorists, he has his bogeyman. In his control of the prevailing press narrative via tweet, he has distraction. And, in the judiciary, he has a source of blame for why his way was right from the beginning.’ . . . . ‘I am fully confident that an attack is exactly what he wants and needs.’ . . . .”

Whereas the Syrian alleged sarin incident appears to have been effected by some of the West’s al-Qaeda surrogates in the conflict, past provocations have involved more direct involvement by elements of the intelligence community. In May of 1963, with then South Vietnamese president Diem pushing for a reduction in U.S. forces in Vietnam (against American wishes), a bombing occurred at a Hue radio station that was the focal point of Buddhist protests of the government’s policy toward Buddhists. The authorship of that attack and a 1952 Saigon bombing, was not the Vietcong.

Key points of analysis:

1. The May, 1963 attack in Hue: “ . . . . As Dang Sy and his security officers were approaching the area in armored cars about fifty meters away, two powerful explosions blasted the people on the veranda of the station, killing seven on the spot and fatally wounding a child. At least fifteen others were injured. . . .”

2. Forensic analysis of the wounds of the victims: “ . . . Dr. Le Khac Quyen, the hospital director at Hue, said after examining the victims’ bodies that he had never seen such injuries. The bodies had been decapitated. He found no metal in the corpses, only holes. There were no wounds below the chest. In his official finding, Dr. Quyen ruled that ‘the death of the people was caused by an explosion which took place in mid-air, blowing off their heads and mutilating their bodies.’ . . . ”

3. Dr. Quyen’s conclusions about the source of the victims’ wounds in the 1963 attack: “ . . . . The absence of any metal in the bodies or on the radio station’s veranda pointed to powerful plastic bombs as the source of the explosions. . . .”

4. Analysis of the 1952 bombing in Saigon: “ . . . . Who did possess such powerful plastic bombs? An answer is provided by Graham Greene’s prophetic novel The Quiet American, based on historical events that occurred in Saigon eleven years before the bombing in Hue. Greene was in Saigon on January 9, 1952, when two bombs exploded in the city’s center, killing ten and injuring many more. A picture of the scene, showing a man with his legs blown off, appeared in Life magazine as the ‘Picture of the Week.’ The Life caption said the Saigon bombs had been ‘planted by Viet Minh Communists’ and ‘signaled general intensification of the Viet Minh violence.’ In like manner, the New York Times headlined: ‘Reds’ Time Bombs Rip Saigon Center.’ . . .”

5. In the 1952 bombing, the operational coordination between U.S. media outlets and the perpetrators of the attack is noteworthy for our purposes: “ . . . . General The’s bombing material, a U.S. plastic, had been supplied to him by his sponsor, the Central Intelligence Agency. Greene observed in his memoir, Ways of Escape, it was no coincidence that ‘the Life photographer at the moment of the explosion was so well placed that he was able to take an astonishing and horrifying photograph which showed the body of a trishaw driver still upright after his legs had been blown off.’ The CIA had set the scene, alerting the Life photographer and Times reporter so they could convey the terrorist bombing as the work of ‘Viet Minh Communists’ to a mass audience. . . .”

6. South Vietnamese investigation of the May, 1963 attack, arrived at a conclusion similar to Graham Greene’s discovery in the 1952 attack: “ . . . . According to an investigation carried by the Catholic newspaper Hoa Binh. . . . a Captain Scott . . . . had come to Hue from Da Nang on May 7, 1963. He admitted he was the American agent responsible for the bombing at the radio station the next day. He said he used ‘an explosive that was still secret and known only to certain people in the Central Intelligence Agency, a charge no larger than a matchbox with a timing device.’. . . .”


FTR #943 The Gehlen Gang, the High-Profile Hacks and the New Cold War

With a new Cold War gaining momentum and charges of Russian interference in the U.S. election, this program takes stock of information pointing in the other direction. After reviewing previous discussion of why the DNC, John Podesta and NSA “hacks” do not withstand scrutiny, the broadcast sets forth information indicating that Ukrainian fascists and related elements may well be the authors of a “cyber false-flag” operation.

Not only is the so-called “evidence” characteristic of a relatively clumsy false-flag operation–albeit one conducted on the internet–but the so-called “experts,” link to the milieu of the Reinhard Gehlen “Org.”

The joint CIA/FBI/NSA declassified version of the Intelligence Report on Russian hacking came out. There is no substantive detail in the report:“ . . . . To summarize, the report says that the CIA, FBI, and National Security Agency believe that Russian hackers—directed ultimately by Vladimir Putin—hacked email accounts belonging to the Democratic National Committee and to Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta and then passed the material they obtained on to WikiLeaks through a third party. This was done, the report asserts, because the Russians believed that Donald Trump would be friendlier to their country’s interests, as president, than Hillary Clinton. And … that’s about it. Not counting intro pages or appendices, the report is five pages long and does not include any description of the actual evidence that Russian actors were responsible for the DNC/Podesta hacks (an assertion that’s supported by publicly available evidence analyzed by third parties) or the assertion that Putin ultimately directed the release of hacked material in order to help elect Donald Trump (an assertion that’s harder to verify independently). . . . .”

The Bitly technology used in the hacks enabled the entire world to see what was going on! This strongly indicates a cyber-false flag operation: ” . . . . Using Bitly allowed ‘third parties to see their entire campaign including all their targets— something you’d want to keep secret,’ Tom Finney, a researcher at SecureWorks, told Motherboard. It was one of Fancy Bear’s ‘gravest mistakes,’ as Thomas Rid, a professor at King’s College who has closely studied the case, put it in a new piece published on Thursday in Esquire, as it gave researchers unprecedented visibility into the activities of Fancy Bear, linking different parts of its larger campaign together. . . .”

It should be noted that while this report is signed off on by the CIA, NSA, and FBI, the FBI never examined the DNC’s hacked server. Instead, according to the DNC, the job was outsourced to CrowdStrike! Neither the FBI, nor any other U.S. government entity has run an independent forensic analysis on the system! ” . . . Six months after the FBI first said it was investigating the hack of the Democratic National Committee’s computer network, the bureau has still not requested access to the hacked servers, a DNC spokesman said. No US government entity has run an independent forensic analysis on the system, one US intelligence official told BuzzFeed News. . . .The FBI has instead relied on computer forensics from a third-party tech security company, CrowdStrike, which first determined in May of last year that the DNC’s servers had been infiltrated by Russia-linked hackers, the U.S. intelligence official told BuzzFeed News. . .’CrowdStrike is pretty good. There’s no reason to believe that anything that they have concluded is not accurate,’ the intelligence official said, adding they were confident Russia was behind the widespread hacks. . . It’s unclear why the FBI didn’t request access to the DNC servers, and whether it’s common practice when the bureau investigates the cyberattacks against private entities by state actors, like when the Sony Corporation was hacked by North Korea in 2014. BuzzFeed News spoke to three cybersecurity companies who have worked on major breaches in the last 15 months, who said that it was “par for the course” for the FBI to do their own forensic research into the hacks. None wanted to comment on the record on another cybersecurity company’s work, or the work being done by a national security agency. . . .”

The FBI claims that the DNC denied them access to the servers! Right! Note the prominence of CrowdStrike in this imbroglio. More about them below. ” . . . . The FBI struck back at the Democratic National Committee on Thursday, accusing it of denying federal investigators access to its computer systems and hamstringing its investigation into the infiltration of DNC servers by Russia-backed hackers. ‘The FBI repeatedly stressed to DNC officials the necessity of obtaining direct access to servers and data, only to be rebuffed until well after the initial compromise had been mitigated. This left the FBI no choice but to rely upon a third party for information,’ a senior law enforcement official told BuzzFeed News in a statement. ‘These actions caused significant delays and inhibited the FBI from addressing the intrusion earlier.’ . . . The warring statements are the latest twists in an extraordinary standoff between the Democrats and federal investigators that reached a fever pitch over the bureau’s probe into Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s private email server. . . . The FBI announced it was investigating the hack of the DNC’s servers in July, after a third-party computer security firm, Crowdstrike, said it had evidence of Kremlin-backed hackers infiltrating its system. . . .”

The DNC responded to the FBI’s counter-assertion by reasserting that it’s giving the FBI full access to whatever it requested. If there’s a problem with the FBI getting access to that server, it’s a problem between the FBI and Crowdstrike: ” . . . The FBI had previously told lawmakers on the Hill that the DNC had not allowed federal investigators to access their servers. After BuzzFeed News reported on Wednesday that the DNC claimed FBI agents had never asked for the servers, congressional officials pressured the FBI for answers. A senior law enforcement official issued a public statement on the matter Thursday night. ‘Someone is lying their ass off,’ a US intelligence official said of the warring statements. But officials with the DNC still assert they’ve ‘cooperated with the FBI 150%.They’ve had access to anything they want. Anything that they desire. Anything they’ve asked, we’ve cooperated,’ the DNC official said. ‘If anybody contradicts that it’s between Crowdstrike and the FBI.’ . . .Without direct access to the computer network, another US intelligence official told BuzzFeed, federal investigators had been forced to rely on the findings of the private cybersecurity firm Crowdstrike for computer forensics. From May through August of 2016, the Democratic National Committee paid Crowdstrike $267,807 dollars for maintenance, data services and consulting, among other things, according to federal records. . . .”

An important article underscores that many tech experts disagree with the government’s so-called analysis: ” . . . . Yet despite the scores of breathless media pieces that assert that Russia’s interference in the election is ‘case closed,’might some skepticism be in order? Some cyber experts say ‘yes.’ . . . Cyber-security experts have also weighed in. The security editor at Ars Technica observed that ‘Instead of providing smoking guns that the Russian government was behind specific hacks,’ the government report ‘largely restates previous private sector claims without providing any support for their validity.’ Robert M. Lee of the cyber-security company Dragos noted that the report ‘reads like a poorly done vendor intelligence report stringing together various aspects of attribution without evidence.’ Cybersecurity consultant Jeffrey Carr noted that the report ‘merely listed every threat group ever reported on by a commercial cybersecurity company that is suspected of being Russian-made and lumped them under the heading of Russian Intelligence Services (RIS) without providing any supporting evidence that such a connection exists.’ . . .”

CrowdStrike–at the epicenter of the supposed Russian hacking controversy is noteworthy. Its co-founder and chief technology officer, Dmitry Alperovitch is a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, financed by elements that are at the foundation of fanning the flames of the New Cold War: “In this respect, it is worth noting that one of the commercial cybersecurity companies the government has relied on is Crowdstrike, which was one of the companies initially brought in by the DNC to investigate the alleged hacks. . . . Dmitri Alperovitch is also a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. . . . The connection between [Crowdstrike co-founder and chief technology officer Dmitri] Alperovitch and the Atlantic Council has gone largely unremarked upon, but it is relevant given that the Atlantic Council—which is is funded in part by the US State Department, NATO, the governments of Latvia and Lithuania, the Ukrainian World Congress, and the Ukrainian oligarch Victor Pinchuk—has been among the loudest voices calling for a new Cold War with Russia. As I pointed out in the pages of The Nation in November, the Atlantic Council has spent the past several years producing some of the most virulent specimens of the new Cold War propaganda. . . . ”

There was an update back in December from the German government regarding its assessment of the 2015 Bundgestag hacks (attributed to “Fancy Bear” and “Cozy Bear,” as mentioned in the Sandro Gaycken post above) that it attributed to APT28 and Russia: while it asserts the hacks did indeed take place, the leaked documents were later determined to be an insider leak (via Google translate). “ . . . . According to the report, federal security authorities are convinced that not hackers had stolen the 2420 documents published by the Internet platform Wikileaks in early December. There was certainly no evidence that the material had been stolen in the cyber attack on the Bundestag in 2015, it was called into security crises. . . . ”

Another article details at length the skepticism and outright scorn many cybersecurity experts feel concerning the report. ” . . . . Did the Russian government hack the DNC and feed documents to WikiLeaks? There are really two questions here: who hacked the DNC, and who released the DNC documents? These are not necessarily the same. An earlier intrusion into German parliament servers was blamed on the Russians, yet the release of documents to WikiLeaks is thought to have originated from an insider. [35] Had the Russians hacked into the DNC, it may have been to gather intelligence, while another actor released the documents. But it is far from certain that Russian intelligence services had anything to do with the intrusions. Julian Assange says that he did not receive the DNC documents from a nation-state. It has been pointed out that Russia could have used a third party to pass along the material. Fair enough, but former UK diplomat Craig Murray asserts: ‘I know who the source is… It’s from a Washington insider. It’s not from Russia.’ [We wonder if it might have been Tulsi Gabbard–D.E.] [36] . . . .”

Exemplifying some of the points of dissension in the above-linked story: ” . . . . Cybersecurity analyst Robert Graham was particularly blistering in his assessment of the government’s report, characterizing it as “full of garbage.” The report fails to tie the indicators of compromise to the Russian government. ‘It contains signatures of viruses that are publicly available, used by hackers around the world, not just Russia. It contains a long list of IP addresses from perfectly normal services, like Tor, Google, Dropbox, Yahoo, and so forth. Yes, hackers use Yahoo for phishing and maladvertising. It doesn’t mean every access of Yahoo is an ‘indicator of compromise’.’ Graham compared the list of IP addresses against those accessed by his web browser, and found two matches. ‘No,’ he continues. ‘This doesn’t mean I’ve been hacked. It means I just had a normal interaction with Yahoo. It means the Grizzly Steppe IoCs are garbage. . . .”

The source code used in the attacks traces back to Ukraine! ” . . . . In conjunction with the report, the FBI and Department of Homeland Security provided a list of IP addresses it identified with Russian intelligence services. [22] Wordfence analyzed the IP addresses as well as a PHP malware script provided by the Department of Homeland Security. In analyzing the source code, Wordfence discovered that the software used was P.A.S., version 3.1.0. It then found that the website that manufactures the malware had a site country code indicating that it is Ukrainian. [Note this!–D.E.] The current version of the P.A.S. software is 4.1.1, which is much newer than that used in the DNC hack, and the latest version has changed ‘quite substantially.’ Wordfence notes that not only is the software ‘commonly available,’ but also that it would be reasonable to expect ‘Russian intelligence operatives to develop their own tools or at least use current malicious tools from outside sources.’ To put it plainly, Wordfence concludes that the malware sample ‘has no apparent relationship with Russian intelligence.’ . . .”

The program concludes with a frightening piece of legislation signed into law by Barack Obama in December. It is an ominous portent of the use of government and military power to suppress dissenting views as being “Russian” propaganda tools! “. . . . The new law is remarkable for a number of reasons, not the least because it merges a new McCarthyism about purported dissemination of Russian ‘propaganda’ on the Internet with a new Orwellianism by creating a kind of Ministry of Truth – or Global Engagement Center – to protect the American people from ‘foreign propaganda and disinformation.’ . . . As part of the effort to detect and defeat these unwanted narratives, the law authorizes the Center to: ‘Facilitate the use of a wide range of technologies and techniques by sharing expertise among Federal departments and agencies, seeking expertise from external sources, and implementing best practices.’ (This section is an apparent reference to proposals that Google, Facebook and other technology companies find ways to block or brand certain Internet sites as purveyors of ‘Russian propaganda’ or ‘fake news.’) . . .”

Program Highlights Include: review of information from previous programs linking the disinformation about the high-profile hacks to the milieu of Ukrainian fascism; review of Alexandra Chalupa’s role in disseminating the “Russia did it” meme; review of “Eddie the Friendly Spook” Snowden’s role in the disinformation about the high-profile hacks; the implementation of a frightening new law authorizing the Pentagon and other government agencies to act to counter any information seen as “Russian propaganda.”


FTR #926 Painting Oswald “Red,” Part 2: “Oswald” in Mexico City

Just as JFK’s assassination–pinned on the ersatz Communist Lee Harvey Oswald–destroyed JFK’s attempts at detente with the Soviet Union, the “op” fronted for by Edward Snowden–the “Obverse Oswald”–destroyed the Obama/Clinton State Department’s attempts at a “re-boot” with Russia. This program is the second in a series reviewing how Oswald was “painted red.” For purposes of convenience and continuity, we begin the discussion by reviewing and synopsizing information indicating that Russia has been framed for the “Shadow Brokers” alleged hack of the NSA, much as it appears to have been framed for the DNC hack.

Indeed, with both the DNC hack and the “Shadow Brokers” non-hack of the NSA, the evidence points increasingly toward “Team Snowden” (including WikiLeaks) and Eddie the Friendly Spook himself. The process of propagandizing the high-profile hacks as effected by “Russia” is analogous to the “painting of Oswald Red.” This broadcast details a visit to Mexico City by “Oswald,” in which the patsy-to-be of the JFK assassination went to lengths to reinforce the image of a Communist, linked to, among other elements, the KGB’s assassination expert Valery Kostikov.

The “Oswald” operating in Mexico City did not look like Oswald: ” . . . He was described as ‘apparent age 35, athletic build, circa 6 feet, receding hairline, balding top.’ In a CIA cable back to Mexico City on October 10, the Lee Oswald who defected to the U.S.S.R. in October 1959 was described as not quite 24, ‘five feet ten inches, one hundred sixty five pounds, light brown wavy hair, blue eyes.’ . . .” He did not speak like Oswald: ” . . . . Equally noteworthy in the October 9 cable is the evidence it provides that the “Lee Oswald” who made the October 1 phone call was an impostor. The caller, it said, “spoke broken Russian.” The real Oswald was fluent in Russian. . . .”

The “Oswald” in Mexico City had unusual credentials: ” . . . [Cuban diplomat Silvia] Duran was a little suspicious of Oswald. She felt the American was too eager in displaying his leftist credentials: membership cards in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee and the American Communist Party, old Soviet documents, a newspaper clipping on his arrest in New Orleans, a photo of Oswald being escorted by a policeman on each arm that Duran thought looked Phony. Duran also knew that belonging to the Communist Party was illegal in Mexico in 1963. For that reason, a Communist would normally travel in the country with only a passport. Yet here was Oswald documented in a way that invited his arrest. . . .”

The “Oswald” in Mexico City displayed unusual behavior: ” . . . He took a revolver from his jacket pocket, placed it on a table, and said, ‘See? This is what I must now carry to protect my life.’ The Soviet officials carefully took the gun and removed its bullets. They told Oswald once again they could not give him a quick visa. They offered him instead the necessary forms to be filled out. Oswald didn’t take them. Oleg Nechiporenko joined the three men as their conversation was ending. For the second day in a row, he accompanied a depressed Oswald to the gate of the embassy, this time with Oswald’s returned revolver and its loose bullets stuck back in his jacket pocket. Nechiporenko says that he, Kostikov, and Yatskov then immediately prepared a report on Oswald’s two embassy visits that they cabled to Moscow Center. . . .”

A CIA telephonic intercept of the “Oswald” appears to have been a fabrication: ” . . . . The CIA’s transcript states that the Saturday, September 28, call came from the Cuban Consulate. The first speaker is identified as Silvia Duran. However, Silvia Duran has insisted repeatedly over the years, first, that the Cuban Embassy was closed to the public on Saturdays, and second, that she never took part in such a call. ‘Duran’ is said to be phoning the Soviet Consulate. Oleg Nechiporenko denies in turn that this call occurred. He says it was impossible because the Soviet switchboard was closed. The ‘Duran’ speaker in the transcript says that an American in her consulate, who had been in the Soviet Embassy, wants to talk to them. She passes the phone to a North American man. The American insists that he and the Soviet representative speak Russian. They engage in a conversation, with the American speaking with the translator describes as ‘terrible hardly recognizable Russian.’ This once again argues against the speaker being Oswald, given his fluent Russian. . . .”

The net effect of the phony Oswald in Mexico City was to reinforce the notion that a Communist killed Kennedy, increasing pressure for retaliation against Russia and/or Cuba and escalating Cold War tensions. ” . . . . One must give the CIA (and the assassination sponsors that were even further in the shadows) their due for having devised and executed a brilliant setup. They had played out a scenario to Kennedy’s death in Dallas that pressured other government authorities to choose among three major options: a war of vengeance against Cuba and the Soviet Union based on the CIA’s false Mexico City documentation of a Communist assassination plot; a domestic political war based on the same documents seen truly, but a war the CIA would fight with every covert weapon at its command; or a complete cover-up of any conspiracy evidence and a silent coup d’etat that would reverse Kennedy’s efforts to end the Cold War. . . .” The propaganda blitzkrieg against Russia over the high-profile hacks, Ukraine and Syria have positioned Hillary Clinton in an analogous fashion. It will be VERY difficult for her to avoid being sucked into the New Cold War dynamics. Program Highlights Include: Review of the disinformation linking Oswald to the KGB’s alleged assassination of Stephan Bandera (head of the OUN/B); review of the role of Pierre Omidyar in the Maidan coup; review of Oswald’s altogether improbable activities in the U.S., given his supposed Communist status.