9
911review.org
Guest
Mockingbirds Cannistraro and McGovern - CIA - iran contra
http://911review.org/Alex/reference/Cannistraro-McGovern_CIA.html
Many people publicly criticize the CIA and the US government. This is
not surprising. But these days,
quite a few of these critics are people who, we are told, used to work
for the CIA.
This is remarkable.
McGovern and Cannistraro -- media darlings -- are both examples of
this phenomenon.
Now, consider the following two mutually exclusive hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1: 'Former CIA' people are telling the truth.
Hypothesis 2: 'Former CIA' people are telling lies.
I find the second hypothesis more immediately plausible, but a
scientific preference for this
hypothesis will nevertheless require a demonstration, or a series of
them. I will offer one.
Raymond McGovern is dishonest: I lay out the preliminaries
_____________
As mentioned earlier, Raymond (Ray) McGovern "is on the Steering Group
of Veteran Intelligence
Professionals for Sanity," or VIPS.[1]
This is a group of supposedly disaffected 'former CIA officials,' now
supposedly concerned citizens, who say they want to save US
Intelligence.
Raymond McGovern publishes prolifically, attacking the US government
left and right,
and VIPS produces a constant stream of 'memoranda,' published in
various places,
addressed to the president of the United States and other
officials, telling them what they ought to be doing.
According to a New York Times piece dated 30 May 2003 and entitled
"Save our Spooks,"
members of VIPS are very upset that the Bush administration
allegedly
used phony intelligence to justify the war on Iraq.
"The outrage among the intelligence professionals is so widespread
that they have formed a group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for
Sanity,
that wrote to President Bush this month to protest what it called 'a
policy and intelligence fiasco of monumental proportions.'"[2]
McGovern and VIPS have also repeatedly accused the US
government of lying, and they strike a rather sanctimonious pose.
Here's McGovern:
". . .no other President of the United States has ever lied so baldly
and so often
and so demonstrably [as George Bush Jr.]
. . .The presumption now has to be that he's lying any time that he's
saying anything."[3]
The impression one gets is not only that Raymond McGovern hates Bush
Jr.,
but that he is really very offended by lying.
Now, the question for us is this: When 'former CIA officials' such as
McGovern
and other members of VIPS make various sorts of claims on their
authority
as 'former CIA officials,' should we believe them?
To get a sense for that, let us get a better sense for Raymond
McGovern.
Raymond McGovern is described by the press as "a retired CIA
agent"[4]
who "for 27 years [was] serving seven U.S. presidents and routinely
presenting
the morning intelligence briefings at the White House."[5]
More specifically, "Ray McGovern was a CIA analyst from 1963 to 1990
[and]
during the '60s his responsibilities included analysis of Soviet
policy toward Vietnam."[6]
At this time, "Mr McGovern worked near the very top of his profession,
giving direct advice to Henry Kissinger during the Nixon era."[7]
Later "Ray McGovern [became] one of President Ronald Reagan's
intelligence briefers from 1981-85"[8]
when he was in charge of "preparing the President's daily security
brief."[9]
He also "briefed President Bush's father [i.e. Bush Sr.] in the White
House in the 1980's."[10]
Close contact with Bush Sr. during those years probably explains why
"Ray McGovern counts
himself a personal friend of George [H.W.] Bush, the president's
father,"[11]
but remarkably this does not inconvenience his new identity as
"outspoken Bush [Jr.]
critic Ray McGovern."[12]
Finally, although Raymond McGovern is supposedly "distinguished as
a Soviet specialist and cold warrior,"[13]
this is not his only specialty, for he is also called "Ray McGovern,
former CIA chief for the Middle East."[14]
But what is most interesting here, given that Raymond McGovern
claims to be violently offended by lying, is that "Ray McGovern [is]
a former CIA operations officer,"[15]
which is to say that "Ray McGovern [is] a 27-year veteran of the CIA's
clandestine service."[16]
What is the CIA's clandestine service? As the Washington Post
explains,
"[The Central Intelligence Agency's] Directorate of Operations, the
agency's clandestine service. . .,
manages the agency's counterterrorism center, espionage and
paramilitary operations."[17]
The New York Times explains why the US ruling elite likes the CIA's
clandestine service so much:
"The appeal of covert operations is that they are relatively cheap
[and] do not require American troops."[18]
In theory, American troops cannot be launched against another country
without congressional authorization and, moreover, American troops
tend to be relatively visible.
So "the appeal of covert operations" run out of the CIA is that they
allow the US ruling elite
to subvert democratic politics and do all sorts of things in secret
that
the United States citizenry may not agree with in the least.
For example, it allows the CIA to engage in "paramilitary operations"
that will
employ terrorists in order to destroy foreign countries.
Here follow three examples from a long list:
1) the CIA's 1953 right-wing coup against the democratic government of
Mohammed Mossadeq in Iran,
which was followed by the US-sponsored and repressive right-wing
dictatorship of the Shah;
2) the CIA's 1954 right-wing coup against the democratic government of
Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala,
which was followed by a US-sponsored and repressive right-wing
dictatorship; and
3) the CIA training and financing of the Nicaraguan Contras, a
terrorist force composed of Anastasio
Somoza's right wing thugs. Somoza was a US-sponsored repressive right-
wing dictator
who had been ousted by the Sandinista movement.
The US-trained Contras slaughtered innocent Nicaraguan peasants
wholesale for no greater crime
than opposing the repressive Somoza regime under which they had
suffered for many years.
I say all this to put Raymond McGovern in context. The question is
this: If the CIA clandestine service
does stuff like that and lies to the American people about it, should
we believe "Ray McGovern,
a 27-year veteran of the CIA's clandestine service"? My first guess
would be 'no,'
but as you shall now see there is no need to guess.
You've probably heard the press saying that the intelligence
used by Bush Jr.'s administration to justify the attack on Iraq
-- namely, the claim that Iraq was trying to get uranium from Niger
for use in nuclear weapons -- was based on a forgery.
Raymond McGovern and VIPS have told everybody that they are very upset
about this forgery,
and McGovern recently wrote the following:
"Who authored the forgery remains a mystery --
but one that our Republican-controlled Congress has avoided trying to
solve. . .
So those searching for answers are reduced to asking the obvious: Cui
bono?
Who stood to benefit from such a forgery? A no-brainer -- those
lusting for war on Iraq.
And who might they be? Look up the 'neo-conservative' writings on the
website of the
Project for the New American Century. There you will find information
on people like Michael Ledeen,
'Freedom Analyst' at the American Enterprise Institute
and a key strategist among 'neoconservative' hawks in and out of the
Bush administration.
Applauding the invasion of Iraq, Ledeen asserted -- with equal
enthusiasm --
that the war could not be contained, and that 'it may turn out to be a
war to remake the world.'"[19]
McGovern is very clear. According to him, those with a motive to
produce the Iraq-Niger deception are the
so-called 'neoconservatives' ('neo-cons' for short).
The author of this deception, he tells us next, was none other than
neo-con Michael Ledeen:
"Beyond his geopolitical punditry, Ledeen's curriculum vitae shows he
is no stranger
to rogue operations. A longtime Washington operative, he was fired as
a 'consultant'
for the National Security Council under President Ronald Reagan for
running fool's errands
for Oliver North during the Iran-Contra subterfuge.
One of Ledeen's Iran-Contra partners in crime, so to speak, was Elliot
Abrams,
who was convicted of lying to Congress about Iran-Contra.
Abrams was pardoned before jail time, however, by George H. W. Bush,
and he is now
George W. Bush's deputy national security adviser.
Ledeen is said to enjoy easy entr�e to the office of the vice
president as well as to his friend Abrams.
During a radio interview with Ian Masters on April 3, 2005, former CIA
operative Vincent Cannistraro
charged that the Iraq-Niger documents were forged in the United
States.
Drawing on earlier speculation regarding who forged the documents,
Masters asked,
'If I were to say the name Michael Ledeen to you, what would you say?'
Cannistraro replied,
'You're very close.'
Ledeen has denied having anything to do with the forgery. Yet the
company he keeps with other prominent
Iran-Contra convictees/pardonees/intelligence contractors suggests
otherwise."
Let us now examine Raymond McGovern's argument, the better to make a
decision about his credibility.
McGovern argues that because Ledeen wanted the war against Iraq, he
had a motive, hence he must be the
forger. As anybody familiar with criminal law understands, showing
that somebody had a motive to
commit a crime does not convict that person:
there is usually more than one person with a plausible motive
(McGovern himself says we have a whole multitude of them here: the
'neoconservatives'),
and so the job for an investigator is to find, among those who had a
motive,
the person or persons to whom the evidence actually points.
But in lieu of referring us to any evidence that Michael Ledeen forged
anything, McGovern merely
repeats a third-party accusation against Ledeen, which is supposedly
authoritative
because made by "former CIA operative Vincent Cannistraro."
It really is awkward that McGovern should stand on this accusation
because Vincent Cannistraro, like McGovern, was "a member of the CIA's
clandestine service,"[20]
which specializes in deceiving the American people.
Pressing his case, McGovern tells us that Michael Ledeen's friend
"Elliot Abrams�was convicted of lying
to Congress about Iran-Contra," by way of laying down the principle
that people associated with the Contra
program are liars. With this principle in hand, McGovern argues that,
given "the company [Ledeen]
keeps with other prominent Iran-Contra convictees/pardonees/
intelligence contractors" his
denials may be dismissed. In other words, if you can't trust the
Contra people,
says Raymond McGovern, why then Ledeen must be the Iraq-Niger
forger!
The conclusion doesn't follow.
And given that McGovern relies so strongly on Vincent Cannistraro's
accusation against Ledeen,
the premise -- namely, that those associated with the Contra program
must be liars --
is also a bit of a problem here. For it turns out, you see, that
Cannistraro ran the Contra program.
You read correctly. I shall review the relevant facts.
Vincent Cannistraro created and ran the Contras from start to finish
_____________
Before 1984,Vincent Cannistraro was a "CIA agent in Central
America"[21]
and "a member of the CIA's clandestine service"[22]
-- right when the CIA's clandestine service was training the Contra
terrorists
in Central America. This suggests that Vincent Cannistraro had
something to do with training the
Contras. He did. The man at the very top of the Contra structure was
Lt. Col. Oliver North,
and "Following the 1984 flap over a CIA-sponsored manual for the
contras that advocated assassination,
North helped arrange a job on the NSC staff for Vincent Cannistraro,
the CIA officer who had run the agency's task force on the
contras."[26]
So we see above that, indeed, Cannistraro was the guy responsible for
creating the Contra force
on the ground.
What sort of a job did Cannistraro get with Oliver North at the NSC
in 1984?
Vincent Cannistraro became "Director of NSC [National Security
Council]
Intelligence from 1984 to 1987."[23]
In other words, in the year 1984, Oliver North brought Vincent
Cannistraro
from the CIA's clandestine service and made him the highest
intelligence official in Ronald Reagan's NSC.
Did this have anything to do with North's Contras, whom Cannistraro
had just been creating
and training in the field? You would think so, because Ronald Reagan
"transferred the Contra
program from the CIA to the NSC after congressional authorization
for the CIA's Contra program expired in mid 1984,"[24]
And indeed: "Cannistraro�was assigned...to work with North on Contra
affairs,
and in his role of coordinating intelligence programs throughout the
administration,
he headed several inter-agency meetings on aid for the rebels."[25]
Please take note of the word 'headed' -- as in 'directed,' 'led,'
'presided over,' 'managed,' and
'ran.' Cannistraro was running the Contras from start to finish.
Michael Ledeen, by contrast, does not have such a central role in the
Contra program.
Why then does Raymond McGovern accept an accusation from Vincent
Cannistraro against Michael Ledeen
as authoritative, but dismisses Michael Ledeen's denial as
unbelievable?
By his own principle, which is that contact with the Contra program
makes someone a liar,
he should be telling us not to believe Cannistraro's accusation
against Ledeen,
because Vincent Cannistraro is Mr. Contra.
So, what is the matter with Raymond McGovern?
_______________________________________________
There are two possibilities, here:
Hypothesis 1: Raymond McGovern never knew and still doesn't know that
Cannistraro
was running the Contras, in which case Raymond McGovern is not very
smart.
Hypothesis 2: Raymond McGovern knows that Cannistraro was running the
Contras but he doesn't tell us
because he wants Cannistraro's accusation to appear credible against
Ledeen's denials.
In this case, Raymond McGovern is dishonest.
Whichever hypothesis we choose, it has already been established that
adopting the outspoken Raymond
McGovern's opinions about anything will be risky, to say the least.
But which hypothesis is more plausible? That can be decided.
Here is another description of Raymond McGovern:
"Ray McGovern was a member of the CIA for 27 years and he served as
the 'All Intelligence Agent'
during the Reagan administration. He was responsible for briefing the
President, the Vice President,
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Cabinet and National Security
Advisor."[27]
So let's see. We have to ask ourselves the following:
Is it really possible that Raymond McGovern, a man who "worked near
the very top of his profession,"[7]
this being the intelligence gathering profession, and who "served as
the 'All Intelligence Agent'
during the Reagan administration," never knew and still doesn't know
that Vincent Cannistraro,
in the same Reagan administration, was running the Contra program?
Hold that thought.
We also learn above, since the secretaries of Treasury and Defense are
included in "the Cabinet,"
that McGovern was briefing every senior member of Reagan's National
Security Council (NSC)
on intelligence matters.[28]
So is it possible that Raymond McGovern never knew and still doesn't
know that Reagan (or North)
brought Cannistraro to the NSC to continue running the Contra program
in the year 1984,
even though in the same year of 1984 McGovern, the 'All Intelligence
Agent'
during the Reagan administration," was doing intelligence briefings
for everybody at the NSC?
. . .even though Cannistraro first ran the Contra program as a CIA
clandestine service operation
and Raymond McGovern is a "27-year veteran of the CIA's clandestine
service"?[16]
. . . . . .even though the Contra program was a cold war effort and
Raymond McGovern
is a "distinguished�cold warrior"?[13]
. . . . . . . .even though Cannistraro's Contra role was scandalously
reported in the papers
while Raymond McGovern was still a Reagan administration official?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .even though Raymond McGovern (and any
10-year-old),
using the publicly available online media search-engine Lexis-Nexis,
can find out
in five minutes (as I did) that the mainstream press reported in the
80s
that Cannistraro had been running the Contra program?
I think that Raymond McGovern knows perfectly well that Vincent
Cannistraro was running the Contra
program. Raymond McGovern is a hypocrite and a liar.
People should now definitely ask themselves what the point of Raymond
McGovern's dishonest public
activities might be. But from here onwards what people should
certainly not do
is automatically believe anything that Raymond McGovern says.
Neither should people soften their skepticism for the Western mass
media, which, as we have seen,
incessantly pushes Raymond McGovern as a trusty 'expert.'
Why does the media do this? Is it because the mainstream Western media
cannot do the analysis
I have just presented, where I demonstrate that McGovern is
dishonest?
But that was trivial to do, and the mainstream media has resources
that easily eclipse my own.
The most innocent hypothesis here would be that the media is
spectacularly lazy and/or incompetent.
And yet we must reject that hypothesis, because the mainstream media
is also quite fond of Vincent
Cannistraro, and it is impossible that the media does not know that
Vincent Cannistraro created
and ran the Contra terrorists because. . .they -- the media --
reported on this.
Next I examine the astonishing manner in which the media covers up
Cannistraro's Contra history.
After that we shall take a look at what both McGovern and Cannistraro
say about
the Arab-Israeli conflict all over the same media.
Continue to part 4:
http://www.hirhome.com/israel/mprot4.htm
________________________________________________________
Footnotes and Further Reading
________________________________________________________
[1] "Cheney Wasn't Involved Either... Right"; By Ray
McGovern; t r u t h o u t | Perspective; Wednesday 20
July 2005.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/072005C.shtml
[2] Save Our Spooks , The New York Times, May 30,
2003 Friday, Late Edition - Final , Section A; Column
6; Editorial Desk; Pg. 27, 727 words, By NICHOLAS D.
KRISTOF; E-mail: nicholas@nytimes.com
[3] NO PRESIDENT HAS LIED SO BALDLY AND SO OFTEN AND
SO DEMONSTRABLY' Ray McGovern: voicing the concerns of
the CIA, Independent on Sunday (London), November 9,
2003, Sunday, FOREIGN NEWS; Pg. 19, 469 words
[4] Standing for principle sparks a crisis, Chicago
Sun-Times, December 21, 1997, SUNDAY, Late Sports
Final Edition, SHOW; PAPERBACKS; Pg. 24; NC, 837
words, BY DOLORES FLAHERTY AND ROGER FLAHERTY
[5] Q & A / RAY McGOVERN, former CIA analyst: 'We're
trying to spread a little truth', The Atlanta
Journal-Constitution, December 7, 2003 Sunday, Home
Edition, Pg. 2F, 948 words, DAN CHAPMAN
[6] How lies replaced intelligence at the CIA; RAY
McGOVERN; Ray McGovern was a CIA analyst from 1963 to
1990. During the '60s his responsibilities included
analysis of Soviet policy toward Vietnam. , The Boston
Globe, October 7, 1999, Thursday, ,City Edition,
OP-ED; Pg. A27, 822 words, By Ray McGovern
[7] NO PRESIDENT HAS LIED SO BALDLY AND SO OFTEN AND
SO DEMONSTRABLY' Ray McGovern: voicing the concerns of
the CIA, Independent on Sunday (London), November 9,
2003, Sunday, FOREIGN NEWS; Pg. 19, 469 words
[8] Missing: Iraq WMD, American credibility, St.
Petersburg Times (Florida), June 8, 2003 Sunday,
PERSPECTIVE; Pg. 1D, 1578 words, DAVID BALLINGRUD
[9] NO PRESIDENT HAS LIED SO BALDLY AND SO OFTEN AND
SO DEMONSTRABLY' Ray McGovern: voicing the concerns of
the CIA, Independent on Sunday (London), November 9,
2003, Sunday, FOREIGN NEWS; Pg. 19, 469 words
[10] Save Our Spooks , The New York Times, May 30,
2003 Friday, Late Edition - Final , Section A; Column
6; Editorial Desk; Pg. 27, 727 words, By NICHOLAS D.
KRISTOF; E-mail: nicholas@nytimes.com
[11] THE EPIC SLAUGHTER IN IRAQ ALSO DESERVES AN
INQUIRY; THE OVERVIEW, Independent on Sunday
(London), August 24, 2003, Sunday, COMMENT; Pg. 22,
1157 words, JOHN PILGER
[12] A CONSUMMATE BUREAUCRAT ADEPT AT CURRYING FAVOUR,
The Independent (London), June 4, 2004, Friday, First
Edition; NEWS; Pg. 4, 658 words, ANDREW GUMBEL IN LOS
ANGELES
[13] THE EPIC SLAUGHTER IN IRAQ ALSO DESERVES AN
INQUIRY; THE OVERVIEW, Independent on Sunday
(London), August 24, 2003, Sunday, COMMENT; Pg. 22,
1157 words, JOHN PILGER
[14] Comment&Analysis: There was no failure of
intelligence: US spies were ignored, or worse, if they
failed to make the case for war, The Guardian (London)
- Final Edition, February 5, 2004, Guardian Leader
Pages, Pg. 26, 1185 words, Sidney Blumenthal
[15] TERROR SUSPECTS' TORTURE CLAIMS HAVE MASS. LINK,
The Boston Globe, November 29, 2004, Monday, THIRD
EDITION, Pg. A1, 1448 words, By Farah Stockman, Globe
Staff
[16] US INTELLIGENCE SHAKE-UP MEETS GROWING CRITICISM,
The Boston Globe, January 2, 2005, Sunday, THIRD
EDITION, Pg. A1, 1016 words, By Bryan Bender, Globe
Staff
[17] The Washington Post, August 09, 2002, Friday,
Final Edition, A SECTION; Pg. A01, 2035 words, The
Slowly Changing Face of the CIA Spy; Recruits Eager to
Fight Terror Are Flooding In, but Few Look the Part, Dana Priest,
Washington Post Staff Writer.
[18] Hallucinations About Iraq, The New York Times,
July 28, 1998, Tuesday, Late Edition - Final, Section
A; Page 14; Column 1; Editorial Desk , 370 words
[19] "Cheney Wasn't Involved Either... Right"; By Ray
McGovern; t r u t h o u t | Perspective; Wednesday 20
July 2005.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/072005C.shtml
[20] "Vince Cannistraro, a former member of the CIA's
clandestine service and one-time director of
intelligence programs at the National Security
Council." -- Associated Press, March 2, 1997, Sunday,
AM cycle, Washington Dateline, 788 words, CIA cuts off
more than 1,000 informants, many for criminality, By
JOHN DIAMOND, Associated Press Writer, WASHINGTON
[21] United Press International, June 15, 1987,
Monday, AM cycle, Washington News, 519 words, Walsh
draws testimony from NSC officials, By LORI SANTOS,
WASHINGTON
[22] "Vince Cannistraro, a former member of the CIA's
clandestine service and one-time director of
intelligence programs at the National Security
Council." -- Associated Press, March 2, 1997, Sunday,
AM cycle, Washington Dateline, 788 words, CIA cuts off
more than 1,000 informants, many for criminality, By
JOHN DIAMOND, Associated Press Writer, WASHINGTON
[23] "Director of NSC Intelligence from 1984 to 1987,
[Vincent] Cannistraro went on to serve as chief of
operations for the CIA's Counterterrorism Center and
to lead the CIA's investigation into the bombing of
Pan Am 103..." -- From a PBS interview that may be
read here:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/interviews/
[24] Kornbluh, P., and M. Byrne. 1993. The Iran-Contra
Scandal: The declassified history. New York: The New
Press. (p.xviii): President Reagan "transferred the
Contra program from the CIA to the NSC after
congressional authorization for the CIA's Contra
program expired in mid 1984."
[25] United Press International, June 15, 1987,
Monday, AM cycle, Washington News, 519 words, Walsh
draws testimony from NSC officials, By LORI SANTOS,
WASHINGTON
[26] Tale of Two White House Aides: Confidence and
Motivation; North Viewed as a Can-Do Marine Who Went
Too Far in Zealousness, The Washington Post, November
30, 1986, Sunday, Final Edition Correction Appended,
FIRST SECTION; PAGE A1, 2694 words, David Ignatius,
Washington Post Staff Writer, FOREIGN NEWS, NATIONAL
NEWS, BIOGRAPHY
[27] http://www.webactive.com/page/148
[28] "The National Security Council is chaired by the
President. Its regular attendees (both statutory and
non-statutory) are the Vice President, the Secretary
of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary
of Defense, and the Assistant to the President for
National Security Affairs [i.e. the National Security
Advisor]"
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/
www.hirhome.com
< Part 1 - Introduction: The "Protocols of Zion" in
the broadest historical perspective.
< Part 2 - The mainstream Western media loves
Raymond McGovern and Vincent Cannistraro, former CIA
agents and anti-Israeli propagandists.
< Part 3 - Should you believe 'former CIA officials'
such as Raymond McGovern and Vincent Cannistraro?
< Part 4 - How the mass media covers for Vincent
Cannistraro, terrorist, and creator of the Nicaraguan
Contras.
< Part 5 - McGovern and Cannistraro both attack
Israel - with lies.
< Part 6 - Why doesn't the US government expose
McGovern and Cannistraro?
< Part 7 - Why do people say that 'the Jews' control
the media? They don't.
Notify me of new HIR pieces!
http://911review.org/Alex/reference/Cannistraro-McGovern_CIA.html
http://911review.org/Wiki/TruthLiesLegend.shtml
http://www.911review.org/Wiki/TruthLiesPearl.shtml
http://911review.org/Wget/www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/local/2001/12/15dafbstaffmakepr.html
http://911review.org/JohnDoe2/hijackers.html
http://911review.org/Wiki/HijackersPatsies.shtml
http://911review.org/Wiki/HijackersAliveAndWell.shtml
http://911review.org/Wiki/Flight93Somerset.shtml
http://911review.org/debunkingconspiracies.html
http://911review.org/Alex/Bluegrass_Conspiracy_Patsy.html
http://911review.org/Sept11Wiki/Anthrax-911-Gate.shtml
http://911review.org/Sept11Wiki/Smith,Katherine.shtml
http://911review.org/brad.com/team8plus/Offutt _AFB_Buffett.html
http://www.911review.org/Wiki
http://911review.org/Alex/reference/Cannistraro-McGovern_CIA.html
Many people publicly criticize the CIA and the US government. This is
not surprising. But these days,
quite a few of these critics are people who, we are told, used to work
for the CIA.
This is remarkable.
McGovern and Cannistraro -- media darlings -- are both examples of
this phenomenon.
Now, consider the following two mutually exclusive hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1: 'Former CIA' people are telling the truth.
Hypothesis 2: 'Former CIA' people are telling lies.
I find the second hypothesis more immediately plausible, but a
scientific preference for this
hypothesis will nevertheless require a demonstration, or a series of
them. I will offer one.
Raymond McGovern is dishonest: I lay out the preliminaries
_____________
As mentioned earlier, Raymond (Ray) McGovern "is on the Steering Group
of Veteran Intelligence
Professionals for Sanity," or VIPS.[1]
This is a group of supposedly disaffected 'former CIA officials,' now
supposedly concerned citizens, who say they want to save US
Intelligence.
Raymond McGovern publishes prolifically, attacking the US government
left and right,
and VIPS produces a constant stream of 'memoranda,' published in
various places,
addressed to the president of the United States and other
officials, telling them what they ought to be doing.
According to a New York Times piece dated 30 May 2003 and entitled
"Save our Spooks,"
members of VIPS are very upset that the Bush administration
allegedly
used phony intelligence to justify the war on Iraq.
"The outrage among the intelligence professionals is so widespread
that they have formed a group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for
Sanity,
that wrote to President Bush this month to protest what it called 'a
policy and intelligence fiasco of monumental proportions.'"[2]
McGovern and VIPS have also repeatedly accused the US
government of lying, and they strike a rather sanctimonious pose.
Here's McGovern:
". . .no other President of the United States has ever lied so baldly
and so often
and so demonstrably [as George Bush Jr.]
. . .The presumption now has to be that he's lying any time that he's
saying anything."[3]
The impression one gets is not only that Raymond McGovern hates Bush
Jr.,
but that he is really very offended by lying.
Now, the question for us is this: When 'former CIA officials' such as
McGovern
and other members of VIPS make various sorts of claims on their
authority
as 'former CIA officials,' should we believe them?
To get a sense for that, let us get a better sense for Raymond
McGovern.
Raymond McGovern is described by the press as "a retired CIA
agent"[4]
who "for 27 years [was] serving seven U.S. presidents and routinely
presenting
the morning intelligence briefings at the White House."[5]
More specifically, "Ray McGovern was a CIA analyst from 1963 to 1990
[and]
during the '60s his responsibilities included analysis of Soviet
policy toward Vietnam."[6]
At this time, "Mr McGovern worked near the very top of his profession,
giving direct advice to Henry Kissinger during the Nixon era."[7]
Later "Ray McGovern [became] one of President Ronald Reagan's
intelligence briefers from 1981-85"[8]
when he was in charge of "preparing the President's daily security
brief."[9]
He also "briefed President Bush's father [i.e. Bush Sr.] in the White
House in the 1980's."[10]
Close contact with Bush Sr. during those years probably explains why
"Ray McGovern counts
himself a personal friend of George [H.W.] Bush, the president's
father,"[11]
but remarkably this does not inconvenience his new identity as
"outspoken Bush [Jr.]
critic Ray McGovern."[12]
Finally, although Raymond McGovern is supposedly "distinguished as
a Soviet specialist and cold warrior,"[13]
this is not his only specialty, for he is also called "Ray McGovern,
former CIA chief for the Middle East."[14]
But what is most interesting here, given that Raymond McGovern
claims to be violently offended by lying, is that "Ray McGovern [is]
a former CIA operations officer,"[15]
which is to say that "Ray McGovern [is] a 27-year veteran of the CIA's
clandestine service."[16]
What is the CIA's clandestine service? As the Washington Post
explains,
"[The Central Intelligence Agency's] Directorate of Operations, the
agency's clandestine service. . .,
manages the agency's counterterrorism center, espionage and
paramilitary operations."[17]
The New York Times explains why the US ruling elite likes the CIA's
clandestine service so much:
"The appeal of covert operations is that they are relatively cheap
[and] do not require American troops."[18]
In theory, American troops cannot be launched against another country
without congressional authorization and, moreover, American troops
tend to be relatively visible.
So "the appeal of covert operations" run out of the CIA is that they
allow the US ruling elite
to subvert democratic politics and do all sorts of things in secret
that
the United States citizenry may not agree with in the least.
For example, it allows the CIA to engage in "paramilitary operations"
that will
employ terrorists in order to destroy foreign countries.
Here follow three examples from a long list:
1) the CIA's 1953 right-wing coup against the democratic government of
Mohammed Mossadeq in Iran,
which was followed by the US-sponsored and repressive right-wing
dictatorship of the Shah;
2) the CIA's 1954 right-wing coup against the democratic government of
Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala,
which was followed by a US-sponsored and repressive right-wing
dictatorship; and
3) the CIA training and financing of the Nicaraguan Contras, a
terrorist force composed of Anastasio
Somoza's right wing thugs. Somoza was a US-sponsored repressive right-
wing dictator
who had been ousted by the Sandinista movement.
The US-trained Contras slaughtered innocent Nicaraguan peasants
wholesale for no greater crime
than opposing the repressive Somoza regime under which they had
suffered for many years.
I say all this to put Raymond McGovern in context. The question is
this: If the CIA clandestine service
does stuff like that and lies to the American people about it, should
we believe "Ray McGovern,
a 27-year veteran of the CIA's clandestine service"? My first guess
would be 'no,'
but as you shall now see there is no need to guess.
You've probably heard the press saying that the intelligence
used by Bush Jr.'s administration to justify the attack on Iraq
-- namely, the claim that Iraq was trying to get uranium from Niger
for use in nuclear weapons -- was based on a forgery.
Raymond McGovern and VIPS have told everybody that they are very upset
about this forgery,
and McGovern recently wrote the following:
"Who authored the forgery remains a mystery --
but one that our Republican-controlled Congress has avoided trying to
solve. . .
So those searching for answers are reduced to asking the obvious: Cui
bono?
Who stood to benefit from such a forgery? A no-brainer -- those
lusting for war on Iraq.
And who might they be? Look up the 'neo-conservative' writings on the
website of the
Project for the New American Century. There you will find information
on people like Michael Ledeen,
'Freedom Analyst' at the American Enterprise Institute
and a key strategist among 'neoconservative' hawks in and out of the
Bush administration.
Applauding the invasion of Iraq, Ledeen asserted -- with equal
enthusiasm --
that the war could not be contained, and that 'it may turn out to be a
war to remake the world.'"[19]
McGovern is very clear. According to him, those with a motive to
produce the Iraq-Niger deception are the
so-called 'neoconservatives' ('neo-cons' for short).
The author of this deception, he tells us next, was none other than
neo-con Michael Ledeen:
"Beyond his geopolitical punditry, Ledeen's curriculum vitae shows he
is no stranger
to rogue operations. A longtime Washington operative, he was fired as
a 'consultant'
for the National Security Council under President Ronald Reagan for
running fool's errands
for Oliver North during the Iran-Contra subterfuge.
One of Ledeen's Iran-Contra partners in crime, so to speak, was Elliot
Abrams,
who was convicted of lying to Congress about Iran-Contra.
Abrams was pardoned before jail time, however, by George H. W. Bush,
and he is now
George W. Bush's deputy national security adviser.
Ledeen is said to enjoy easy entr�e to the office of the vice
president as well as to his friend Abrams.
During a radio interview with Ian Masters on April 3, 2005, former CIA
operative Vincent Cannistraro
charged that the Iraq-Niger documents were forged in the United
States.
Drawing on earlier speculation regarding who forged the documents,
Masters asked,
'If I were to say the name Michael Ledeen to you, what would you say?'
Cannistraro replied,
'You're very close.'
Ledeen has denied having anything to do with the forgery. Yet the
company he keeps with other prominent
Iran-Contra convictees/pardonees/intelligence contractors suggests
otherwise."
Let us now examine Raymond McGovern's argument, the better to make a
decision about his credibility.
McGovern argues that because Ledeen wanted the war against Iraq, he
had a motive, hence he must be the
forger. As anybody familiar with criminal law understands, showing
that somebody had a motive to
commit a crime does not convict that person:
there is usually more than one person with a plausible motive
(McGovern himself says we have a whole multitude of them here: the
'neoconservatives'),
and so the job for an investigator is to find, among those who had a
motive,
the person or persons to whom the evidence actually points.
But in lieu of referring us to any evidence that Michael Ledeen forged
anything, McGovern merely
repeats a third-party accusation against Ledeen, which is supposedly
authoritative
because made by "former CIA operative Vincent Cannistraro."
It really is awkward that McGovern should stand on this accusation
because Vincent Cannistraro, like McGovern, was "a member of the CIA's
clandestine service,"[20]
which specializes in deceiving the American people.
Pressing his case, McGovern tells us that Michael Ledeen's friend
"Elliot Abrams�was convicted of lying
to Congress about Iran-Contra," by way of laying down the principle
that people associated with the Contra
program are liars. With this principle in hand, McGovern argues that,
given "the company [Ledeen]
keeps with other prominent Iran-Contra convictees/pardonees/
intelligence contractors" his
denials may be dismissed. In other words, if you can't trust the
Contra people,
says Raymond McGovern, why then Ledeen must be the Iraq-Niger
forger!
The conclusion doesn't follow.
And given that McGovern relies so strongly on Vincent Cannistraro's
accusation against Ledeen,
the premise -- namely, that those associated with the Contra program
must be liars --
is also a bit of a problem here. For it turns out, you see, that
Cannistraro ran the Contra program.
You read correctly. I shall review the relevant facts.
Vincent Cannistraro created and ran the Contras from start to finish
_____________
Before 1984,Vincent Cannistraro was a "CIA agent in Central
America"[21]
and "a member of the CIA's clandestine service"[22]
-- right when the CIA's clandestine service was training the Contra
terrorists
in Central America. This suggests that Vincent Cannistraro had
something to do with training the
Contras. He did. The man at the very top of the Contra structure was
Lt. Col. Oliver North,
and "Following the 1984 flap over a CIA-sponsored manual for the
contras that advocated assassination,
North helped arrange a job on the NSC staff for Vincent Cannistraro,
the CIA officer who had run the agency's task force on the
contras."[26]
So we see above that, indeed, Cannistraro was the guy responsible for
creating the Contra force
on the ground.
What sort of a job did Cannistraro get with Oliver North at the NSC
in 1984?
Vincent Cannistraro became "Director of NSC [National Security
Council]
Intelligence from 1984 to 1987."[23]
In other words, in the year 1984, Oliver North brought Vincent
Cannistraro
from the CIA's clandestine service and made him the highest
intelligence official in Ronald Reagan's NSC.
Did this have anything to do with North's Contras, whom Cannistraro
had just been creating
and training in the field? You would think so, because Ronald Reagan
"transferred the Contra
program from the CIA to the NSC after congressional authorization
for the CIA's Contra program expired in mid 1984,"[24]
And indeed: "Cannistraro�was assigned...to work with North on Contra
affairs,
and in his role of coordinating intelligence programs throughout the
administration,
he headed several inter-agency meetings on aid for the rebels."[25]
Please take note of the word 'headed' -- as in 'directed,' 'led,'
'presided over,' 'managed,' and
'ran.' Cannistraro was running the Contras from start to finish.
Michael Ledeen, by contrast, does not have such a central role in the
Contra program.
Why then does Raymond McGovern accept an accusation from Vincent
Cannistraro against Michael Ledeen
as authoritative, but dismisses Michael Ledeen's denial as
unbelievable?
By his own principle, which is that contact with the Contra program
makes someone a liar,
he should be telling us not to believe Cannistraro's accusation
against Ledeen,
because Vincent Cannistraro is Mr. Contra.
So, what is the matter with Raymond McGovern?
_______________________________________________
There are two possibilities, here:
Hypothesis 1: Raymond McGovern never knew and still doesn't know that
Cannistraro
was running the Contras, in which case Raymond McGovern is not very
smart.
Hypothesis 2: Raymond McGovern knows that Cannistraro was running the
Contras but he doesn't tell us
because he wants Cannistraro's accusation to appear credible against
Ledeen's denials.
In this case, Raymond McGovern is dishonest.
Whichever hypothesis we choose, it has already been established that
adopting the outspoken Raymond
McGovern's opinions about anything will be risky, to say the least.
But which hypothesis is more plausible? That can be decided.
Here is another description of Raymond McGovern:
"Ray McGovern was a member of the CIA for 27 years and he served as
the 'All Intelligence Agent'
during the Reagan administration. He was responsible for briefing the
President, the Vice President,
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Cabinet and National Security
Advisor."[27]
So let's see. We have to ask ourselves the following:
Is it really possible that Raymond McGovern, a man who "worked near
the very top of his profession,"[7]
this being the intelligence gathering profession, and who "served as
the 'All Intelligence Agent'
during the Reagan administration," never knew and still doesn't know
that Vincent Cannistraro,
in the same Reagan administration, was running the Contra program?
Hold that thought.
We also learn above, since the secretaries of Treasury and Defense are
included in "the Cabinet,"
that McGovern was briefing every senior member of Reagan's National
Security Council (NSC)
on intelligence matters.[28]
So is it possible that Raymond McGovern never knew and still doesn't
know that Reagan (or North)
brought Cannistraro to the NSC to continue running the Contra program
in the year 1984,
even though in the same year of 1984 McGovern, the 'All Intelligence
Agent'
during the Reagan administration," was doing intelligence briefings
for everybody at the NSC?
. . .even though Cannistraro first ran the Contra program as a CIA
clandestine service operation
and Raymond McGovern is a "27-year veteran of the CIA's clandestine
service"?[16]
. . . . . .even though the Contra program was a cold war effort and
Raymond McGovern
is a "distinguished�cold warrior"?[13]
. . . . . . . .even though Cannistraro's Contra role was scandalously
reported in the papers
while Raymond McGovern was still a Reagan administration official?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .even though Raymond McGovern (and any
10-year-old),
using the publicly available online media search-engine Lexis-Nexis,
can find out
in five minutes (as I did) that the mainstream press reported in the
80s
that Cannistraro had been running the Contra program?
I think that Raymond McGovern knows perfectly well that Vincent
Cannistraro was running the Contra
program. Raymond McGovern is a hypocrite and a liar.
People should now definitely ask themselves what the point of Raymond
McGovern's dishonest public
activities might be. But from here onwards what people should
certainly not do
is automatically believe anything that Raymond McGovern says.
Neither should people soften their skepticism for the Western mass
media, which, as we have seen,
incessantly pushes Raymond McGovern as a trusty 'expert.'
Why does the media do this? Is it because the mainstream Western media
cannot do the analysis
I have just presented, where I demonstrate that McGovern is
dishonest?
But that was trivial to do, and the mainstream media has resources
that easily eclipse my own.
The most innocent hypothesis here would be that the media is
spectacularly lazy and/or incompetent.
And yet we must reject that hypothesis, because the mainstream media
is also quite fond of Vincent
Cannistraro, and it is impossible that the media does not know that
Vincent Cannistraro created
and ran the Contra terrorists because. . .they -- the media --
reported on this.
Next I examine the astonishing manner in which the media covers up
Cannistraro's Contra history.
After that we shall take a look at what both McGovern and Cannistraro
say about
the Arab-Israeli conflict all over the same media.
Continue to part 4:
http://www.hirhome.com/israel/mprot4.htm
________________________________________________________
Footnotes and Further Reading
________________________________________________________
[1] "Cheney Wasn't Involved Either... Right"; By Ray
McGovern; t r u t h o u t | Perspective; Wednesday 20
July 2005.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/072005C.shtml
[2] Save Our Spooks , The New York Times, May 30,
2003 Friday, Late Edition - Final , Section A; Column
6; Editorial Desk; Pg. 27, 727 words, By NICHOLAS D.
KRISTOF; E-mail: nicholas@nytimes.com
[3] NO PRESIDENT HAS LIED SO BALDLY AND SO OFTEN AND
SO DEMONSTRABLY' Ray McGovern: voicing the concerns of
the CIA, Independent on Sunday (London), November 9,
2003, Sunday, FOREIGN NEWS; Pg. 19, 469 words
[4] Standing for principle sparks a crisis, Chicago
Sun-Times, December 21, 1997, SUNDAY, Late Sports
Final Edition, SHOW; PAPERBACKS; Pg. 24; NC, 837
words, BY DOLORES FLAHERTY AND ROGER FLAHERTY
[5] Q & A / RAY McGOVERN, former CIA analyst: 'We're
trying to spread a little truth', The Atlanta
Journal-Constitution, December 7, 2003 Sunday, Home
Edition, Pg. 2F, 948 words, DAN CHAPMAN
[6] How lies replaced intelligence at the CIA; RAY
McGOVERN; Ray McGovern was a CIA analyst from 1963 to
1990. During the '60s his responsibilities included
analysis of Soviet policy toward Vietnam. , The Boston
Globe, October 7, 1999, Thursday, ,City Edition,
OP-ED; Pg. A27, 822 words, By Ray McGovern
[7] NO PRESIDENT HAS LIED SO BALDLY AND SO OFTEN AND
SO DEMONSTRABLY' Ray McGovern: voicing the concerns of
the CIA, Independent on Sunday (London), November 9,
2003, Sunday, FOREIGN NEWS; Pg. 19, 469 words
[8] Missing: Iraq WMD, American credibility, St.
Petersburg Times (Florida), June 8, 2003 Sunday,
PERSPECTIVE; Pg. 1D, 1578 words, DAVID BALLINGRUD
[9] NO PRESIDENT HAS LIED SO BALDLY AND SO OFTEN AND
SO DEMONSTRABLY' Ray McGovern: voicing the concerns of
the CIA, Independent on Sunday (London), November 9,
2003, Sunday, FOREIGN NEWS; Pg. 19, 469 words
[10] Save Our Spooks , The New York Times, May 30,
2003 Friday, Late Edition - Final , Section A; Column
6; Editorial Desk; Pg. 27, 727 words, By NICHOLAS D.
KRISTOF; E-mail: nicholas@nytimes.com
[11] THE EPIC SLAUGHTER IN IRAQ ALSO DESERVES AN
INQUIRY; THE OVERVIEW, Independent on Sunday
(London), August 24, 2003, Sunday, COMMENT; Pg. 22,
1157 words, JOHN PILGER
[12] A CONSUMMATE BUREAUCRAT ADEPT AT CURRYING FAVOUR,
The Independent (London), June 4, 2004, Friday, First
Edition; NEWS; Pg. 4, 658 words, ANDREW GUMBEL IN LOS
ANGELES
[13] THE EPIC SLAUGHTER IN IRAQ ALSO DESERVES AN
INQUIRY; THE OVERVIEW, Independent on Sunday
(London), August 24, 2003, Sunday, COMMENT; Pg. 22,
1157 words, JOHN PILGER
[14] Comment&Analysis: There was no failure of
intelligence: US spies were ignored, or worse, if they
failed to make the case for war, The Guardian (London)
- Final Edition, February 5, 2004, Guardian Leader
Pages, Pg. 26, 1185 words, Sidney Blumenthal
[15] TERROR SUSPECTS' TORTURE CLAIMS HAVE MASS. LINK,
The Boston Globe, November 29, 2004, Monday, THIRD
EDITION, Pg. A1, 1448 words, By Farah Stockman, Globe
Staff
[16] US INTELLIGENCE SHAKE-UP MEETS GROWING CRITICISM,
The Boston Globe, January 2, 2005, Sunday, THIRD
EDITION, Pg. A1, 1016 words, By Bryan Bender, Globe
Staff
[17] The Washington Post, August 09, 2002, Friday,
Final Edition, A SECTION; Pg. A01, 2035 words, The
Slowly Changing Face of the CIA Spy; Recruits Eager to
Fight Terror Are Flooding In, but Few Look the Part, Dana Priest,
Washington Post Staff Writer.
[18] Hallucinations About Iraq, The New York Times,
July 28, 1998, Tuesday, Late Edition - Final, Section
A; Page 14; Column 1; Editorial Desk , 370 words
[19] "Cheney Wasn't Involved Either... Right"; By Ray
McGovern; t r u t h o u t | Perspective; Wednesday 20
July 2005.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/072005C.shtml
[20] "Vince Cannistraro, a former member of the CIA's
clandestine service and one-time director of
intelligence programs at the National Security
Council." -- Associated Press, March 2, 1997, Sunday,
AM cycle, Washington Dateline, 788 words, CIA cuts off
more than 1,000 informants, many for criminality, By
JOHN DIAMOND, Associated Press Writer, WASHINGTON
[21] United Press International, June 15, 1987,
Monday, AM cycle, Washington News, 519 words, Walsh
draws testimony from NSC officials, By LORI SANTOS,
WASHINGTON
[22] "Vince Cannistraro, a former member of the CIA's
clandestine service and one-time director of
intelligence programs at the National Security
Council." -- Associated Press, March 2, 1997, Sunday,
AM cycle, Washington Dateline, 788 words, CIA cuts off
more than 1,000 informants, many for criminality, By
JOHN DIAMOND, Associated Press Writer, WASHINGTON
[23] "Director of NSC Intelligence from 1984 to 1987,
[Vincent] Cannistraro went on to serve as chief of
operations for the CIA's Counterterrorism Center and
to lead the CIA's investigation into the bombing of
Pan Am 103..." -- From a PBS interview that may be
read here:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/target/interviews/
[24] Kornbluh, P., and M. Byrne. 1993. The Iran-Contra
Scandal: The declassified history. New York: The New
Press. (p.xviii): President Reagan "transferred the
Contra program from the CIA to the NSC after
congressional authorization for the CIA's Contra
program expired in mid 1984."
[25] United Press International, June 15, 1987,
Monday, AM cycle, Washington News, 519 words, Walsh
draws testimony from NSC officials, By LORI SANTOS,
WASHINGTON
[26] Tale of Two White House Aides: Confidence and
Motivation; North Viewed as a Can-Do Marine Who Went
Too Far in Zealousness, The Washington Post, November
30, 1986, Sunday, Final Edition Correction Appended,
FIRST SECTION; PAGE A1, 2694 words, David Ignatius,
Washington Post Staff Writer, FOREIGN NEWS, NATIONAL
NEWS, BIOGRAPHY
[27] http://www.webactive.com/page/148
[28] "The National Security Council is chaired by the
President. Its regular attendees (both statutory and
non-statutory) are the Vice President, the Secretary
of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary
of Defense, and the Assistant to the President for
National Security Affairs [i.e. the National Security
Advisor]"
http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/
www.hirhome.com
< Part 1 - Introduction: The "Protocols of Zion" in
the broadest historical perspective.
< Part 2 - The mainstream Western media loves
Raymond McGovern and Vincent Cannistraro, former CIA
agents and anti-Israeli propagandists.
< Part 3 - Should you believe 'former CIA officials'
such as Raymond McGovern and Vincent Cannistraro?
< Part 4 - How the mass media covers for Vincent
Cannistraro, terrorist, and creator of the Nicaraguan
Contras.
< Part 5 - McGovern and Cannistraro both attack
Israel - with lies.
< Part 6 - Why doesn't the US government expose
McGovern and Cannistraro?
< Part 7 - Why do people say that 'the Jews' control
the media? They don't.
Notify me of new HIR pieces!
http://911review.org/Alex/reference/Cannistraro-McGovern_CIA.html
http://911review.org/Wiki/TruthLiesLegend.shtml
http://www.911review.org/Wiki/TruthLiesPearl.shtml
http://911review.org/Wget/www.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/local/2001/12/15dafbstaffmakepr.html
http://911review.org/JohnDoe2/hijackers.html
http://911review.org/Wiki/HijackersPatsies.shtml
http://911review.org/Wiki/HijackersAliveAndWell.shtml
http://911review.org/Wiki/Flight93Somerset.shtml
http://911review.org/debunkingconspiracies.html
http://911review.org/Alex/Bluegrass_Conspiracy_Patsy.html
http://911review.org/Sept11Wiki/Anthrax-911-Gate.shtml
http://911review.org/Sept11Wiki/Smith,Katherine.shtml
http://911review.org/brad.com/team8plus/Offutt _AFB_Buffett.html
http://www.911review.org/Wiki
