Mizgin’s Desk Reports

Our first look at the life of Richard Armitage, the new American Turkish Council chairman, focused on his adventures in Southeast Asia. Today we’ll look at his history in Washington.

Back in Washington in 1980, Armitage served as a foreign policy advisor to President-elect Ronald Reagan, and was soon appointed by Reagan to the position of Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for East Asia and Pacific Affairs. Armitage held that position from 1981 until 1983, when he was promoted to the position of Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy. Wikipedia has a list of the duties associated with Armitage’s position as Assistant Secretary of Defense. He held this position until 1989.

During this time, Armitage became involved with US arms shipments from Israel to Iran that eventually became known as the Iran-Contra Affair. In a report by Independent Counsel Lawrence Walsh, it was determined that US weapons were, in fact, delivered to the Islamic Republic of Iran by Israel on behalf of the US. Neoconservative Michael Ledeen and Iranian businessman Manucher Ghorbanifar facilitated links between the US, Israel, and Iran and they would be mentioned years later when a subsequent US administration sought to manufacture evidence of yellowcake sales to Iraq.

LTC Oliver North modified the original plan of arms sales to Iran in order to divert money to the Nicaraguan Contras and it is through North that Armitage became entangled in the affair. According to the History Commons, with links to reports by the Independent Counsel on Iran-Contra Affairs:

“National Security Council (NSC) officer Oliver North has become far more outspoken among government officials about his illegal funding of the Nicaraguan Contras (see May 16, 1986). During a meeting of his Restricted Interagency Group (RIG—see Late 1985 and After), CIA official Alan Fiers, a member of the group, is discomfited at North’s straightforward listing of the many activities that he is causing to be conducted on behalf of the Contras, everything from supplying aircraft to paying salaries. Fiers is even less sanguine about North’s frank revelations about using illegally solicited private funding for the Contras (see May 16, 1986). North goes down the list, asking if each activity should be continued or terminated, and, according to Fiers, making it very clear that he can cause his Contra support program (which he now calls PRODEM, or “Project Democracy”) to respond as he directs. North also begins arranging, through Assistant Secretary of State Elliott Abrams, for $2 million in stopgap funding for the project. North will confirm the $2 million in an e-mail to NSC Director John Poindexter. North will conduct similar meetings in August and September 1986, at least one of which will include Assistant Defense Secretary Richard Armitage (see July 22, 1987) and other Defense Department officials (see November 13, 1990). It is not until Fiers testifies in 1991 about North’s behaviors that verification of North’s discussion of such specifics about Contra activities and funding will be made public (see July 17, 1991).”

In September, 1986, North brought up for discussion in an RIG meeting in Armitage’s office the fact that the Panamanian dictator, Manuel Noriega, would be willing to conduct sabotage inside Nicaragua for money. The discussion focuses on the possibility of paying Noriega from private funds. The offer is ultimately rejected. Read more ?

Now Accepting Applications

The State Department seeks a ‘viable’ Iranian political candidate to lead and channel the current dissenter factions in Iran to topple the current Anti-US regime and replace it with one certified and approved by the United States Government and US ‘special’ business interests. The latest developments in Iran have presented our ‘real’ policy makers with a golden opportunity to execute their plan for Iran and to at long last achieve their objectives. The previous administration’s bold and hawkish methodology and their overly used and exhausted ‘Weapons of Mass Destruction’ and ‘evilization’ rhetoric failed to achieve these objectives, which are shared by those who actually ‘matter’ in our country. Today we have a new administration brought to power by brilliantly and masterfully utilizing the rhetoric of ‘change.’ This new slogan of ‘change’ includes a new style and methodology in addressing long-sought Iran objectives. This opportunity is mutual, where the Iranian candidate of our choice will enjoy not only the symbolic power position supported and protected by US intelligence and military services, but enormous monetary benefits he or she will be able and allowed to parasitically extract from the resources and people of Iran. This may be your opportunity.

Listed below are the candidate qualification criteria and ‘some’ of the unclassified major benefits we are committed to providing the chosen ‘viable’ candidate. Also attached are two appendixes to provide you with examples of ‘real life’ candidates we have successfully installed and supported. In order to make them even more relevant we chose examples from your neighboring countries. Once you submit your application you will receive an initial package containing additional examples, similar to those listed in these two appendices, in much greater detail.

Candidate Qualifications

• Applicants must hold an Advanced Degree obtained in the United States or the United Kingdom, during which time extracurricular activities will have occurred and relationships formed. Candidates with degrees obtained elsewhere may be considered on a case by case basis with evidence of exceptional qualifications in other criteria.
• Applicants must provide evidence of previous covert or overt relationship(s) with the US intelligence apparatus, preferably the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or its UK counterpart, MI6.
• Applicants should have previous formal or informal connections with ‘key’ nongovernmental agencies (NGOs) and or think tanks involved in ‘development’ and/or ‘endowing democracy’, supported by US Government agencies and/or congressionally designated funding.
• Applicants are favored who possess an appealing criminal record. Record may include, but not necessarily be limited to: successful executions of fraud and embezzlement schemes, money laundering, bribery – as either recipient or donor, weapons smuggling, and/or mid to high level international narcotics trafficking. Candidates will be credited with their spouses’ criminal records.
• Applicants will be screened for an Interesting Bill of Mental Health, with the following preferred conditions: Pathological Lying Tendencies; Narcissism; Sadistic Mindset; Non-debilitating Psychotic Behavior. Those inflicted with moral, ethical, or conscientious predispositions need not apply.
• Applicants preferred with immediate family members connected to established mafia and/ or similar underground criminal groups and/or their related financial institutions, whether in Iran or elsewhere.
• Applicants should be exceptionally experienced in the art of ‘Multiple Image Projection’, with ability to smoothly but rapidly switch from a pious image satisfactory to the mullah sector, to a modern and progressive image to pacify the youth segment, to a pragmatic business-minded image to please the business (Bazaar) sector, to a patriotic nationalist image to garner support from the military.
• Applicants will be required to successfully complete our ‘BS detector’ exam, designed to test a candidate’s ability to deliver an expansive repertoire of ‘BS’ promises and messages undetected by the general population. This is not to be confused with an ordinary ‘polygraph test’, which is used for criminal suspects and lower level public servants. This sophisticated measuring system is solely designed to measure a political candidate’s ability to deliver ‘BS’. Further, the requirement to take this test is not ‘discriminatory’ to Middle Eastern political candidates. US presidential candidates are also required to pass this test before they are selected and declared ‘viable’ by our establishment and the media. For further analysis see our ‘BS’ record breaking 2008 presidential candidate.
• Applicants must evidence willingness and make a commitment to take the ‘US Ally Pledge’ – ‘thou shall always put US strategic and resources interests above the irrelevant public interest in Iran.’ This pledge is also known as the ‘Mi Casa, Su Casa Pledge,’ meaning, you consider your country, its resources, its strategic location, ours.

Benefits Provided

• You will be provided with necessary logistical support to enable you to build a positive international image in order to garner domestic and international support for your candidacy and post election rule. A quick look at our record in this area will evidence our successful dominance in national and international PR.
• You will be provided with direct and indirect military, educational and development aid worth billions of dollars. We will leave the allocation and consumption of this monetary assistance completely up to you. You may do as you wish, as you please.
• We will ensure that you secure additional external and international aid for the duration of your presidency. In addition to direct military aid and indirect ‘democratization & development’ aid, you will be granted a considerable allotment from IMF, and as indicated above, you will have complete freedom to consume, disseminate, waste, misdirect, and/or embezzle as you wish. No questions will be asked.
• You and your regime will benefit from our direct and indirect participation in your security and protection. You will have at your disposal the intelligence we collect on your dissenters and those in opposition factions. We will train your security and intelligence forces with our state of the art technology and methodology. This will include our intense and enhanced interrogation techniques and associated video capture and photography. During the initial training period, until you accumulate your own prisoners and detainees, we will provide you with subjects selected from among our own detainees globally. In addition, we will designate up to two of our special Gulfstream jets to exclusively assist you in your extraordinary renditions – reserved for your special and high profile dissenters.
• You and your immediate family will be granted US and/or UK citizenship status in case of any unlikely future regime failure. This will be supplemented with safe financial havens for you to deposit any and all funds you gather prior to and throughout your presidency. No questions will be asked regarding the sources of these funds, and any external attempts to question and or investigate them will be tactfully quashed.
• You will be guaranteed immunity from any international charges and or prosecution throughout your presidency and afterwards. Similarly, you will be retroactively immunized from any and all charges and or prosecutions that may deal with your deeds prior to your candidacy.
• You will not be subjected to prohibitions regarding acquiring weapons of mass destruction. In fact we may indirectly assist you in obtaining and developing such weapons. Our record should be a sufficient indicative of this pledge (please refer to Pakistan & AQ Khan, also Pre- 1988 Iraq and Saddam Hussein).
• You will be given a permanent ‘pass’ for any of your direct participation in previous and future Human Rights violations. All our chosen and installed third world leaders carry similar passes. Any international and/or organizational attempt to bring charges will be successfully quashed.

Appendix A

Turkey and Former Prime Minister Tansu Ciller

Former Prime Minister of Turkey, Ms. Tansu Ciller is a perfect example of a Middle Eastern leader who was selected, declared ‘viable,’ supported, promoted, installed, and protected by the United States. As can be seen Ms. Ciller met many if not all of the qualifications criteria listed above:

1. Ms. Ciller completed her advanced degrees in the United States – M.S. from the University of New Hampshire and PhD from the University of Connecticut. During this extended period while she resided in the US we had ample time and opportunity to train and mold her for the leadership position in Turkey.

2. Ms. Ciller was granted citizenship in the United States. In order to keep this fact from tarnishing her image during her candidacy campaign in Turkey and afterwards, we designated her US citizenship status ‘Classified and Top Secret’ on the grounds of Sensitive Diplomatic Relations. To this date, despite all attempts, Turkish authorities have been unable to have these files opened.

3. Ms. Ciller and her husband Ozer Ciller were closely involved with certain CIA operations prior to and after her return to Turkey, and their intimate relationship continued throughout her tenure as Prime Minister of the Republic of Turkey. In fact, the CIA’s Roger Tamraz (see BCCI) was their partner in two front companies: ‘Emperyal’, which acquired and operated six (6) Casinos in Turkmenistan, and, ‘Lapis,’ involved with the oil pipeline project.

4. Ms. Ciller and her husband, before being considered ‘viable’ by us, already had an established shady financial past, including involvement in an embezzlement scandal connected to the collapse of ‘Istanbul Bankasi’, one of Turkey’s largest private banks. This along with involvements fortified Ms. Ciller’s qualification criteria when compared to competing applicants.

5. Ms. Ciller understood and participated in Turkey’s important strategic and operational role in the supply and transportation of heroin. She skillfully and very aggressively combined and furthered the marriage between the state military-police-intelligence and the underground heroin industry. Her notoriety even reached the German Courts, where she was accused of supporting and protecting the drug mafia – active not only in Turkey but elsewhere, including Europe and Central Asia.

6. Ms. Ciller played a direct role in scandals involving corruption, embezzlement, and state sponsored terrorism and narcotics operations. The best known scandal, one of her masterpieces, is known as ‘Susurluk’. Ciller and her husband – who is known for his mafia links and dealings, were directly implicated in Susurluk. The high profile kept by Ms. And Mr. Ciller during these scandals and their handling of them afterwards significantly bolstered their ‘value’ and ‘viability’ for us.

7. Ms. Ciller’s ‘known’ wealth is confirmed to be over $50 million, all of which was gained after she became a ‘’viable’ candidate supported directly by the US. A large portion of her investments and accounts are in the United States. We will not list the exact amount at this point, however, the selected candidate will be given an opportunity to see the ‘real’ dollar amount, and even consult with Ms. Ciller directly.

We can list many other desirable qualities of former Prime Minister Ciller, however for this appendix the above points should suffice. Interested candidates can conduct their own research and compare their qualifications to Ms. Ciller to get a better understanding of our ‘viability’ criteria for those candidates we select, support, promote, install, and sustain in ‘that’ part of the world. As you can see, we helped Ms. Ciller weather all accusations, investigations, and official charges, whether in Turkey or internationally. We made sure she and her government continuously received our military aid, development funds, and of course IMF funds. How she chose to spend, divert, or ‘lose’ these funds were left completely up to her, with no questions asked. Today she enjoys her incredible, almost fairytale like lifestyle, made possible with the enormous wealth accumulated through her official position, gained and sustained by our backing. We are pleased to take full credit for this. We will guarantee similar benefits for our candidate of choice in Iran.

Appendix B

Pakistan & Former Prime Minister Bhutto

Former Prime Minister of Pakistan, Ms. Benazir Bhutto provides another appropriate profile of our ‘ideal and desired’ leadership candidate for your part of the world. As can be seen there are remarkable similarities between Ms. Bhutto and Ms. Ciller:

1. Ms. Bhutto obtained her bachelor degree in the United States – BA from Radcliffe College at Harvard University. Later she attended Oxford University in the UK where she pursued International Law and Diplomacy. She spent a total of eight years in the US and UK – 1969-1977. Again, this time was ideal for the satisfactory grooming of Ms. Bhutto for ‘installment.’

2. Ms. Bhutto was granted British Citizenship and maintained her dual citizenship throughout her career as a candidate and later as the Prime Minister of Pakistan. Her husband, the current President of Pakistan, also received British citizenship and has maintained his dual citizenship to date. The perceived conflict of interest back in her home country did not prove to be an obstacle for ‘us’ or the Bhuttos, thanks to our PR and global image projection activities.

3. Ms. Bhutto and her husband maintained intimate relationships with the underground economy and high level players of the heroin pipeline. Ms. Bhutto was a close ally, protector, and intimate friend of convicted Pakistani Drug Baron and Former Parliamentarian, Ayub Afridi, who like Bhutto, was given protection and safe haven in Dubai, one of our closest allies. These relationships and direct connections, some of which were directly inherited from her father, significantly bolstered Ms. Bhutto’s value for us and our British counterparts.

4. Ms. Bhutto and her husband proved to be desirably ambitious and admirably skilled in using their power, position, and connections, together with our protection, to misuse their proceeds of corruption and embezzlements to accumulate great wealth. Today her husband, who inherited this wealth, is the fifth richest man in Pakistan with a net worth of nearly $2 billion. As confirmation of their successful accumulation of wealth, in the 90s Ms. Bhutto and her husband purchased a 20-bedroom mansion in Surrey, England. They were known for their proficiency in receiving ‘kickbacks.’ Just the kickbacks they received from Swiss Cargo Inspection Companies alone were worth $12 million, which they stashed wisely in offshore companies in Swiss bank accounts. Ms. Bhutto’s record truly authenticates the future benefits of becoming our ‘ideal and viable’ candidate.

5. Ms. Bhutto’s Bill of Mental Health was not of much interest. However, she was permitted to transfer credits from her husband, Mr. Ali Asif Zardari. His is a far more interesting mental health record, made all the more interesting since she pledged to place him in an official position of power. He and his ‘mental health’ conditions proved to be extremely useful in ‘necessary’ operations involving murder, drug smuggling, corruption, and embezzlement, thus our making an exception for Ms. Bhutto was justified in this particular case.

6. Ms. Bhutto demonstrated tremendous talent in dealing with weapons of mass destruction from both sides of the issue. She successfully presented her image as a proponent of nuclear nonproliferation, while ambitiously pursuing proliferation domestically and internationally. Even AQ Khan had to admit who was the ‘real boss’ when it came to supplying Iran with centrifuge equipment and drawings from 1988 to 1990. Ms. Bhutto’s clever and original plot to use her family dentist in deals related to providing ‘rogue’ regimes with nuclear technology was awe inspiring even among the crustiest WMD dealers in leadership positions.

7. Ms. Bhutto exhibited great skills in ‘Multiple Image Projection’. With our direct backing and promotion she quickly sold her image as a needed progressive, democratic, and pro humanitarian leader for Pakistan. Just as quickly, at home in Pakistan, she was able to establishherself as equal to if not better than her dictatorial predecessors by sanctioning and carrying out extrajudicial killings, torture, persecution of religious minorities, and arbitrary detention. She also determinedly took extraordinary measures to muzzle the independent media. These skills were also applied to her utilization and exploitation of feministic support. At the same time she was portraying herself as a progressive and feminist example for ‘that’ part of the world, she was making deals and establishing close ties with the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, notorious for their abuse of women…

As with ‘Exhibit A’ we can list many other desirable qualities of former Prime Minister Bhutto, but for this appendix the above points should suffice. We actively, directly and indirectly, selected, supported and protected Ms. Bhutto prior to, during, and after her position as PM. We provided her with billions of dollars in aid and billions of dollars in IMF loans. She in return was given complete discretion to use these funds to purchase our weapons, and of course to accumulate her and her family’s enormous wealth, during and after her position as PM. We shielded her despite serious charges and evidence of corruption and embezzlement brought against her and her husband, in Pakistan and worldwide, over nearly two decades. We continue this support and courting to date, after her assassination, through her husband, President Zardari. We will guarantee similar benefits for our candidate of choice in Iran.

*This satirical essay was neither created nor sanctioned by the U.S. Department of State, and the author has no direct knowledge that the Department has such a program currently in place for Iran.

Part 3 – Gang Pressure

In 1996 Gary Webb, a prize-winning investigative journalist at San Jose Mercury News, found himself at the center of a major storm caused by his three-part investigative series published under the title “Dark Alliance.” The series connected the CIA to the contra-cocaine scandal and alleged that Nicaraguan drug traffickers had used the drug profits from selling crack cocaine in the U.S. to finance the CIA-supported Nicaraguan Contras. The connections documented by Webb did not claim ‘direct involvement’ by the CIA but thoroughly established that the CIA was aware of the cocaine transactions and the large shipments of cocaine into the U.S. by Contra personnel. Webb’s story was supported by hundreds of documents obtained through FOIA, transcripts, and audio interviews – all of which were published later on his website.

The attacks on and denials of Webb’s series began right away. The ‘Gang of Three’ – Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, and The Washington Post, put on a united front and viciously attempted to debunk the link between the crack epidemic in the U.S. and the Contras. A decade earlier, the same ‘Gang’ had either downplayed or dismissed the 80s contra-cocaine scandal. Despite all the facts that came out of Sen. Kerry’s half-way Contra Hearings, despite sound evidence presented in an AP article by Robert Parry and Brian Berger, the ‘Gang’ never truly followed up or provided deserved coverage of Contra Crimes.

Here is what Robert Parry had to say on this:

“Webb’s “Dark Alliance” series offered a unique opportunity for the major news outlets to finally give the contra-cocaine scandal the attention it deserved. But that would have required some painful self-criticism among Washington journalists whose careers had advanced in part because they had not offended Reagan supporters who had made an art out of punishing out-of-step reporters for pursuing controversies like the contra-cocaine scandal.”

And here is another plausible reason offered by Mr. Parry:

“There was the turf issue, too. Since Webb’s stories coincided with the emergence of the Internet as an alternate source for news and the San Jose Mercury News was at the center of Silicon Valley, the big newspapers saw a threat to their historic dominance as the nation’s gatekeepers for what information should be taken seriously.”

The ‘gang’ attacks and the pressure did not deter Webb. In fact they increased his resolve to dig deeper and pursue the story further. However, the same pressure did its magic when it came to the editors at Mercury News. After their initial support and back-patting of Webb, they bent under the pressure, made their 180 degree turn, and caved in. First, they issued their retreat in writing, which did not retract on the factualness of the report but turned it into a matter of ‘gray areas’ such as “…presented “only one interpretation of complicated, sometimes-conflicting pieces of evidence” in a “few key instances.”” Next, they refused to publish the rest of the series. Then, the paper transferred Webb from Sacramento to the paper’s outpost in Cupertino (a four-hour commute) and told him he was no longer an investigative reporter; finally succeeding in having him resign and leave the paper.

In 1996, prompted by Webb’s series, the CIA started its investigation of the agency’s involvement in cocaine sales in the U.S. The CIA released the report in 1998, and George Tenet came out publicly and denied Webb’s allegations. Interestingly, weeks prior to the release of the report, ‘mysterious leaks’ made their way, and again interestingly, into The Washington Post and The New York Times stories, alleging that ‘no direct or indirect links’ were ever found between the CIA and traffickers. Of course, once the heavily redacted report was released these publications had their field day smearing and attacking Webb’s report.

While Tenet’s statement and the report’s vaguely worded conclusion were used as weapons in Webb bashing, the ‘actual’ content of the report was completely ignored and blacked out by the MSM ‘gang.’ For example: the report described a cable from the CIA’s Directorate of Operations dated October 22, 1982, describing a meeting between Contra leaders in Costa Rica for “an exchange” (in the U.S.) of narcotics for arms, which then are shipped to Nicaragua.

Six weeks after the release of the report, the CIA IG testified before the House Intelligence Committee congress and here is an excerpt from his testimony:

“As I said earlier, we have found no evidence in the course of this lengthy investigation of any conspiracy by CIA or its employees to bring drugs into the United States. However, during the Contra era, CIA worked with a variety of people to support the Contra program. These included CIA assets, pilots who ferried supplies to the Contras, as well as Contra officials and others. Let me be frank about what we are finding. There are instances where CIA did not, in an expeditious or consistent fashion, cut off relationships with individuals supporting the Contra program who were alleged to have engaged in drug trafficking activity or take action to resolve the allegations.”

Almost anyone, even those with only vague familiarity of covert intelligence operations would recognize damning information like this, buried ‘in between the lines’ and delivered using a ‘bureaucratic CYA’ choice of words.

More significantly, the CIA Inspector General admitted that CIA officers were not required to report allegations of drug trafficking involving ‘non-employees,’ – defined as paid and non-paid CIA ‘assets’ such as pilots tasked with transporting supplies to the contras. Meaning, the so-called report published ‘by the CIA’ on ‘possible CIA illegal activities’ conveniently left out any incriminating report or information involving CIA ‘assets.’

In July of the same year DOJ IG Michael Bromwich also released a report which corroborated Webb’s report. It claimed that the Reagan-Bush administration was aware of cocaine traffickers in the Contra movement and did nothing to stop the criminal activity. Robert Parry nicely summarizes the key findings of the DOJ-IG report supporting Webb:

• Bromwich’s report revealed example after example of leads not followed, corroborated witnesses disparaged, official law-enforcement investigations sabotaged, and even the CIA facilitating the work of drug traffickers.

• The report showed that the contras and their supporters ran several parallel drug-smuggling operations, not just the one at the center of Webb’s series.

• The report also found that the CIA shared little of its information about contra drugs with law-enforcement agencies, and on three occasions disrupted cocaine-trafficking investigations that threatened the contras.

• Though depicting a more widespread contra-drug operation than Webb had understood, the Justice report also provided some important corroboration about a Nicaraguan drug smuggler, Norwin Meneses, who was a key figure in Webb’s series. Bromwich cited U.S. government informants who supplied detailed information about Meneses’s operation and his financial assistance to the contras.

• The Justice report also disclosed repeated examples of the CIA and U.S. embassies in Central America discouraging Drug Enforcement Administration investigations, including one into contra-cocaine shipments moving through the international airport in El Salvador.

Despite the ‘real content’ of the CIA IG Report, the corroborating findings of the DOJ-IG Report, and various congressional hearings and investigations filled with direct or indirect admissions, the MSM never eased up on its attacks and criticism of Webb’s articles.

In March 1998 Barbara Osborn wrote a well-executed piece on the ostracizing of Gary Webb titled ‘Are You Sure You Want to Ruin Your Career,’ subtitled ‘Gary Webb’s Fate a Warning to Gutsy Reporters.’ It’s a fairly short piece and I encourage you to take the time to read it. The article cites the following ‘loaded’ exchange:

“…Gary Webb didn’t know what was at risk. When he first spoke with Bob Parry–the Associated Press reporter who, along with Brian Barger, broke the Contragate and Contra/drug stories–Webb thought Parry was being “overly cautious.” “I thought he was being kind of foolish,” Webb recalled, when Parry asked him: “Are you sure you want to ruin your career?”

Unfortunately Parry proved to be the ‘realist.’

Osborn’s piece cites several enlightening quotes from Professor James Aucoin, a former journalist and a University of South Alabama communications professor who specializes in the history of investigative reporting. Here is one:

“Another aspect of the “Dark Alliance” aftermath which strikes Aucoin as significant is who attacked the story. In the days when investigative journalist Ida Tarbell took on Standard Oil in the pages of Harper’s, Standard Oil came after Tarbell. “In the case of Gary Webb’s charges against the CIA and the Contras,” he said, “the major dailies came after him. Media institutions are now part of the establishment and they have a lot invested in that establishment.””

And finally, here are a few thought provoking quotes from Gary Webb as reported by Osborne:

“The government side of the story is coming through the Los Angeles Times, the New York Times, the Washington Post,” he said. “They use the giant corporate press rather than saying anything directly. If you work through friendly reporters on major newspapers, it comes off as the New York Times saying it and not a mouthpiece of the CIA.”

“The only way you’re going to do effective journalism is to be truly independent. It’s a difficult thing to do, but George Seldes and I.F. Stone did it. There’s no reason modern-day journalists can’t do it too. You don’t get 401-Ks and health benefits, but at least you get to tell the truth.”

Webb’s case is only one example where the corporate media unite and gang up to smear, marginalize, and silence colleagues who dare to sidestep the conventional establishment trend, who insist on carrying out real investigative journalism independently and objectively, and who actually succeed in unveiling the truth buried in between the layers of the secrecy web created by the government. Sadly, ‘the gang’ has been effective and successful. Take a look at the field; how many Webbs do you see still standing? The last time I counted, not many.

And now it is your turn. When the MSM gangs up against these reporters:

Are they acting on behalf of the ‘establishment,’ as an extension of the government, as simply a mouthpiece; or as we discussed before on the Bernstein piece, as ‘Agents’?

Is it simply a turf battle, jealousy, and ego?

Is it the Big Corporate media v small independent media or independent investigative journalists?

Does the blame lie, partially, with ‘we the people’ for allowing this?

I am looking forward to reading ‘your’ thoughts and views on this.