31-12-2013, 10:42 PM
Hi Peter... hope you are well...
Joan writes:
The working group recommends thecreation of another office within the DD/P called "Paramilitary and Air SupportOperations." This would develop CIA's capability for covert military and airsupport operations. Its chief would be located away from the CIA's headquartersbuilding.
Thehead of this component would be drawn from the military service and be a"Senior Colonel or a Brigadier General with wartime paramilitary experience." St[B]udying the politics of CIA, it is all too apparent that in the chain ofpower, the military takes its orders from the Agency, and not the other wayaround.[/B]
I'm sorry here Peter but that is absurd. The CIA may have manipulated the chain of power in their best interest by placing "Senior Military Officials" in key roles (after these officials spent time in their civilian capacities as consultants to the Defense Industry) and backing the DoD into making advantageous decisions for the CIA... but the DoD taking order from Dulles? McCone? Helms? the "CIA"... sorry, no way.
I find this conclusion completely at odds with how the Military used the CIA... the first DCI's? Military.. Dulles? Military OSS background.
It's as if Joan completely forgets the Intelligence organizations that existed prior to the CIA were military. Does Joan actually think the ONI took orders from the CIA?
As I read this thru it appears she is writing with a bit too much foreknowledge and is looking back instead of taking us thru this crucial paper in its contextual time.
She also concludes that after the assassination it is the CIA who is firmly in charge
So I wonder Peter... who does Joan think Allen Dulles got his marching orders from... the "CIA"?
How is it that McGeorge Bundy is at exactly the right spots to
1) stop the bombing of the last three Cuban plans
2) change NSAM 263 to 273
3) inform AF-1 about Oswald on the flight home
I find it unbelieveabley naive to push the notion that "CIA" (whatever she means by that) was at the top of the political power food chain... they were the guard dogs of the MICC - and as guard dogs they were to remain propped up and aggressive at all times - they would be given the illusion of power while those with much bigger concerns than than the CIA made the decisions ...of course they wanted to KNOW everything... that way the SPONSOR level (which OWNS the MICC) remains fully informed and can pull the levers as needed.
Do they make foriegn policy? Of course, via their actions... some rogue, some not but all within an accepted agenda... an agenda that benefits the SPONSORS to the tune of trillions and maintains the "same as it ever was" environment - that it LOOKS like it changes is the trick....
Have you ever traced the organizational changes of the top Financial institutions from their inception? Makes the CIA reorg look like a child's building blocks, let alone the DoD reorgs...
Joan writes:
The working group recommends thecreation of another office within the DD/P called "Paramilitary and Air SupportOperations." This would develop CIA's capability for covert military and airsupport operations. Its chief would be located away from the CIA's headquartersbuilding.
Thehead of this component would be drawn from the military service and be a"Senior Colonel or a Brigadier General with wartime paramilitary experience." St[B]udying the politics of CIA, it is all too apparent that in the chain ofpower, the military takes its orders from the Agency, and not the other wayaround.[/B]
I'm sorry here Peter but that is absurd. The CIA may have manipulated the chain of power in their best interest by placing "Senior Military Officials" in key roles (after these officials spent time in their civilian capacities as consultants to the Defense Industry) and backing the DoD into making advantageous decisions for the CIA... but the DoD taking order from Dulles? McCone? Helms? the "CIA"... sorry, no way.
I find this conclusion completely at odds with how the Military used the CIA... the first DCI's? Military.. Dulles? Military OSS background.
It's as if Joan completely forgets the Intelligence organizations that existed prior to the CIA were military. Does Joan actually think the ONI took orders from the CIA?
As I read this thru it appears she is writing with a bit too much foreknowledge and is looking back instead of taking us thru this crucial paper in its contextual time.
She also concludes that after the assassination it is the CIA who is firmly in charge
So I wonder Peter... who does Joan think Allen Dulles got his marching orders from... the "CIA"?
How is it that McGeorge Bundy is at exactly the right spots to
1) stop the bombing of the last three Cuban plans
2) change NSAM 263 to 273
3) inform AF-1 about Oswald on the flight home
I find it unbelieveabley naive to push the notion that "CIA" (whatever she means by that) was at the top of the political power food chain... they were the guard dogs of the MICC - and as guard dogs they were to remain propped up and aggressive at all times - they would be given the illusion of power while those with much bigger concerns than than the CIA made the decisions ...of course they wanted to KNOW everything... that way the SPONSOR level (which OWNS the MICC) remains fully informed and can pull the levers as needed.
Do they make foriegn policy? Of course, via their actions... some rogue, some not but all within an accepted agenda... an agenda that benefits the SPONSORS to the tune of trillions and maintains the "same as it ever was" environment - that it LOOKS like it changes is the trick....
Have you ever traced the organizational changes of the top Financial institutions from their inception? Makes the CIA reorg look like a child's building blocks, let alone the DoD reorgs...
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter