RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment

Parry writes: "Forty years ago, a car-bomb exploded in Washington killing Chile's ex-Foreign Minister Orlando Letelier, an act of state terrorism that the CIA and its director George H.W. Bush tried to cover up."

Former president George H.W. Bush. (photo: AP)
Former president George H.W. Bush. (photo: AP)

George H.W. Bush, the CIA and a Case of State Terrorism

By Robert Parry, Consortium News

29 September 16


Forty years ago, a car-bomb exploded in Washington killing Chile’s ex-Foreign Minister Orlando Letelier, an act of state terrorism that the CIA and its director George H.W. Bush tried to cover up, Robert Parry reported in 2000.

n early fall of 1976, after a Chilean government assassin had killed a Chilean dissident and an American woman with a car bomb in Washington, D.C., George H.W. Bush’s CIA leaked a false report clearing Chile’s military dictatorship and pointing the FBI in the wrong direction.

The bogus CIA assessment, spread through Newsweek magazine and other U.S. media outlets, was planted despite CIA’s now admitted awareness at the time that Chile was participating in Operation Condor, a cross-border campaign targeting political dissidents, and the CIA’s own suspicions that the Chilean junta was behind the terrorist bombing in Washington.

In a 21-page report to Congress on Sept. 18, 2000, the CIA officially acknowledged for the first time that the mastermind of the terrorist attack, Chilean intelligence chief Manuel Contreras, was a paid asset of the CIA.

The CIA report was issued almost 24 years to the day after the murders of former Chilean diplomat Orlando Letelier and American co-worker Ronni Moffitt, who died on Sept. 21, 1976, when a remote-controlled bomb ripped apart Letelier’s car as they drove down Massachusetts Avenue, a stately section of Washington known as Embassy Row.

In the report, the CIA also acknowledged publicly for the first time that it consulted Contreras in October 1976 about the Letelier assassination. The report added that the CIA was aware of the alleged Chilean government role in the murders and included that suspicion in an internal cable the same month.

“CIA’s first intelligence report containing this allegation was dated 6 October 1976,” a little more than two weeks after the bombing, the CIA disclosed.

Nevertheless, the CIA – then under CIA Director George H.W. Bush – leaked for public consumption an assessment clearing the Chilean government’s feared intelligence service, DINA, which was then run by Contreras.

Relying on the word of Bush’s CIA, Newsweek reported that “the Chilean secret police were not involved” in the Letelier assassination. “The [Central Intelligence] agency reached its decision because the bomb was too crude to be the work of experts and because the murder, coming while Chile’s rulers were wooing U.S. support, could only damage the Santiago regime.” [Newsweek, Oct. 11, 1976]

Bush, who later became the 41st president of the United States (and is the father of the 43rd president), has never explained his role in putting out the false cover story that diverted attention away from the real terrorists. Nor has Bush explained what he knew about the Chilean intelligence operation in the weeks before Letelier and Moffitt were killed.

Dodging Disclosure

As a Newsweek correspondent in 1988, a dozen years after the Letelier bombing, when the elder Bush was running for president, I prepared a detailed story about Bush’s handling of the Letelier case.

The draft story included the first account from U.S. intelligence sources that Contreras was a CIA asset in the mid-1970s. I also learned that the CIA had consulted Contreras about the Letelier assassination, information that the CIA then would not confirm.

The sources told me that the CIA sent its Santiago station chief, Wiley Gilstrap, to talk with Contreras after the bombing. Gilstrap then cabled back to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia, Contreras’s assurances that the Chilean government was not involved. Contreras told Gilstrap that the most likely killers were communists who wanted to make a martyr out of Letelier.

My story draft also described how Bush’s CIA had been forewarned in 1976 about DINA’s secret plans to send agents, including the assassin Michael Townley, into the United States on false passports.

Upon learning of this strange mission, the U.S. ambassador to Paraguay, George Landau, cabled Bush about Chile’s claim that Townley and another agent were traveling to CIA headquarters for a meeting with Bush’s deputy, Vernon Walters. Landau also forwarded copies of the false passports to the CIA.

Walters cabled back that he was unaware of any scheduled appointment with these Chilean agents. Landau immediately canceled the visas, but Townley simply altered his plans and continued on his way to the United States. After arriving, he enlisted some right-wing Cuban-Americans in the Letelier plot and went to Washington to plant the bomb under Letelier’s car.

The CIA has never explained what action it took, if any, after receiving Landau’s warning. A natural follow-up would have been to contact DINA and ask what was afoot or whether a message about the trip had been misdirected. The CIA report in 2000 made no mention of these aspects of the case.

After the assassination, Bush promised the CIA’s full cooperation in tracking down the Letelier-Moffitt killers. But instead the CIA took contrary actions, such as planting the false exoneration and withholding evidence that would have implicated the Chilean junta.

“Nothing the agency gave us helped us to break this case,” said federal prosecutor Eugene Propper in a 1988 interview for the story I was drafting for Newsweek. The CIA never volunteered Ambassador Landau’s cable about the suspicious DINA mission nor copies of the fake passports that included a photo of Townley, the chief assassin. Nor did Bush’s CIA divulge its knowledge of the existence of Operation Condor.

FBI agents in Washington and Latin America broke the case two years later. They discovered Operation Condor on their own and tracked the assassination back to Townley and his accomplices in the United States.

In 1988, as then-Vice President Bush was citing his CIA work as an important part of his government experience, I submitted questions to him asking about his actions in the days before and after the Letelier bombing. Bush’s chief of staff, Craig Fuller, wrote back, saying Bush “will have no comment on the specific issues raised in your letter.”

As it turned out, the Bush campaign had little to fear from my discoveries. When I submitted my story draft – with its exclusive account of Contreras’s role as a CIA asset – Newsweek’s editors refused to run the story. Washington bureau chief Evan Thomas told me that Editor Maynard Parker even had accused me of being “out to get Bush.”

The CIA’s Admission

Twenty-four years after the Letelier assassination and 12 years after Newsweek killed the first account of the Contreras-CIA relationship, the CIA admitted that it had paid Contreras as an intelligence asset and consulted with him about the Letelier assassination.

Still, in the sketchy report in 2000, the spy agency sought to portray itself as more victim than accomplice. According to the report, the CIA was internally critical of Contreras’s human rights abuses and skeptical about his credibility. The CIA said its skepticism predates the spy agency’s contact with him about the Letelier-Moffitt murders.

“The relationship, while correct, was not cordial and smooth, particularly as evidence of Contreras’ role in human rights abuses emerged,” the CIA reported. “In December 1974, the CIA concluded that Contreras was not going to improve his human rights performance. …

“By April 1975, intelligence reporting showed that Contreras was the principal obstacle to a reasonable human rights policy within the Junta, but an interagency committee [within the Ford administration] directed the CIA to continue its relationship with Contreras.”

The CIA report added that “a one-time payment was given to Contreras” in 1975, a time frame when the CIA was first hearing about Operation Condor, a cross-border program run by South America’s military dictatorships to hunt down dissidents living in other countries.

“CIA sought from Contreras information regarding evidence that emerged in 1975 of a formal Southern Cone cooperative intelligence effort – ‘Operation Condor’ – building on informal cooperation in tracking and, in at least a few cases, killing political opponents. By October 1976, there was sufficient information that the CIA decided to approach Contreras on the matter. Contreras confirmed Condor’s existence as an intelligence-sharing network but denied that it had a role in extra-judicial killings.”

Also, in October 1976, the CIA said it “worked out” how it would assist the FBI in its investigation of the Letelier assassination, which had occurred the previous month. The spy agency’s report offered no details of what it did, however. The report added only that Contreras was already a murder suspect by fall 1976.

“At that time, Contreras’ possible role in the Letelier assassination became an issue,” the CIA’s report said. “By the end of 1976, contacts with Contreras were very infrequent.”

Even though the CIA came to recognize the likelihood that DINA was behind the Letelier assassination, there never was any indication that Bush’s CIA sought to correct the false impression created by its leaks to the news media asserting DINA’s innocence.

After Bush left the CIA with Jimmy Carter’s inauguration in 1977, the spy agency distanced itself from Contreras, the new report said. “During 1977, CIA met with Contreras about half a dozen times; three of those contacts were to request information on the Letelier assassination,” the CIA report said.

“On 3 November 1977, Contreras was transferred to a function unrelated to intelligence so the CIA severed all contact with him,” the report added. “After a short struggle to retain power, Contreras resigned from the Army in 1978. In the interim, CIA gathered specific, detailed intelligence reporting concerning Contreras’ involvement in ordering the Letelier assassination.”

Remaining Mysteries

Though the CIA report in 2000 contained the first official admission of a relationship with Contreras, it shed no light on the actions of Bush and his deputy, Walters, in the days before and after the Letelier assassination. It also offered no explanation why Bush’s CIA planted false information in the American press clearing Chile’s military dictatorship.

While providing the 21-page summary on its relationship with Chile’s military dictatorship, the CIA refused to release documents from a quarter century earlier on the grounds that the disclosures might jeopardize the CIA’s “sources and methods.” The refusal came in the face of President Bill Clinton’s specific order to release as much information as possible.

Perhaps the CIA was playing for time. With CIA headquarters officially named the George Bush Center for Intelligence and with veterans of the Reagan-Bush years still dominating the CIA’s hierarchy, the spy agency might have hoped that the election of Texas Gov. George W. Bush would free it from demands to open up records to the American people.

For his part, former President George H.W. Bush declared his intent to take a more active role in campaigning for his son’s election. In Florida on Sept. 22, 2000, Bush said he was “absolutely convinced” that if his son is elected president, “we will restore the respect, honor and decency that the White House deserves.”

Investigative reporter Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories for The Associated Press and Newsweek in the 1980s. You can buy his latest book, America’s Stolen Narrative, either in print here or as an e-book (from Amazon and your social media marketing partner


A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

+61 # RMDC 2016-09-29 17:14
Thanks for this. Robert Parry is really a role model for what a good journalist can be. When I see the wretched garbage that fills up so much of RSN -- ThinkProgress, NYTimes, Reuters, Guardian -- I begin to give up hope for reading anything good on line. Then a Parry article comes up and RSN is worth reading again.

There's a truly excellent article on the CIA's support of Syrian terrorists now on Parry's webpage -- consortiumnews. com. Maybe RSN will publish it here.

There simply has not been enough work done on exposing the full role of George H. W. Bush in the CIA. For example. why is the official name of the CIA the George H. W. Bush Center for Intelligence. He was only director for less than a year. As this article shows, he was deeply involved with the rise of fascism in Latin America. But did he or did Prescott Bush do more for the development of the CIA than someone like Alan Dulles or William Donovan. Why was the CIA not named after them?

The Bush family is still very poorly understood.

The CIA was renamed in Bill Clinton's presidency. No one writes enough about Clinton's connections to the CIA. And to the Bush family.
+28 # futhark 2016-09-29 23:09
For further in depth examination of the links connecting the Bush dynasty, the CIA, the military-indust rial complex, and corrupt investment banks, read "Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, America's Invisible Government, and the Hidden History of the Last Fifty Years" (2008) by Russ Baker.
+5 # Floridatexan 2016-09-30 08:59
I read it, and I highly recommend it.
+4 # Radscal 2016-10-02 12:35
I'm putting this comment up here in the hopes more will see it. I just reread the part of Mark Lane’s book, “Final Judgement” on the JFK murder which has direct ties to these murders.

Guillermo Novo and Alvin Ross Diaz were convicted of the murders of Orlando Letelier and Ronni Moffitt.

Both the Novo brothers (Guillermo and Ignacio), Orlando Bosch and Watergate burglars E Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis are also implicated in JFK's murder by the testimony under oath of female CIA agent Marita Lorenz in 1985. She was the former mistress of Fidel Castro and girl friend of Frank Sturgis. Her testimony in a libel suit brought by E. Howard Hunt, places all these men in Dallas on 11/22/1963.

Ms. Lorenz testified in the court case in which E. Howard Hunt was suing Spotlight magazine for publishing that Hunt was involved in JFK’s murder. She testified that Hunt, Sturgis and the Novo brothers transported weapons from New Orleans to Dallas (where they were met by Jack Ruby).

The jury found that Hunt and elements within the CIA were involved in the murder of our President.

In his “death bed confession,” Hunt said that was true.

It’s fascinating that a jury found these men and others within CIA guilty of murdering JFK, and yet the corporate media has kept that critically important court case in the shadows.
+4 # dandevries 2016-10-03 18:01
And then there's Harvey & Lee, a massive self-published tome so loaded with typographical errors it can be brutally hard going at times, but may be the best work of individual research on the JFK murder.

Or, if one is not inclined to purchase a 5 LB 1000 page book that costs $90 + S&H, there's always John Armstrong's website at

I really think H&L is the source text on the assassination.
+17 # Salus Populi 2016-09-30 08:13
Bush not only misled the FBI and the whoreporate press regarding Chile's [and Argentina's, Paraguay's, Uruguay's and Bolivia's] role in the murders, which spread as far as Rome and specifically targeted the most effective ex-Allende ministers; he had the infernal gall to publicly suggest that Fidel Castro, who had granted Letelier asylum in the wake of the fascist coup, had ordered the assassination to "create a martyr." Quite a number of U.S. stenographers to power, aka the "free press," went with that deliberate propagandistic lie, and virtually none of them ever apologized or corrected the record.

Nor is it credible that the CIA only gradually became aware of Townley's role -- the ambassador to Paraguay had forwarded his picture when he applied to Paraguay, then run by the terrorist dictator Stroessner, for a visa. Further, the CIA was intimately involved in the coup that brought Pinochet and his fellow-Nazis in all but name to power, and helped him locate and execute "subversives" in the wake of the coup. One was an American, as told in Costa-Gavras's movie "State of Siege."

Moreover, as has been pointed out before, the 40 Committee, the stomping ground of Clinton's admired mentor Henry Kissinger, had been plotting and planning the coup since the day Allende was first elected, and it stretches the bounds of credulity to pretend that Bush _pére_ was not "in the loop" during his relatively brief tenure as Director of the CIA.
+9 # Radscal 2016-09-30 16:59
Not mentioned in this article is the overwhelming evidence that serial mass-murder and war criminal, Henry Kissinger was behind Operation Condor from the start.

Many of us have long appreciated Robert Parry's excellent coverage and analyses of US operations, especially in Syria and Ukraine over the past several years. However, we've been critical of his providing cover for President Obama by claiming he was the victim of Neo-Cons in his Administration (specifically that he'd "inherited" them, despite his actually appointing the worst of them).

Parry certainly knows Kissinger was at least complicit in, if not fully in charge of the coup in Chile and reign of terror it brought.

So, I must ask, is he providing cover for HRC by not mentioning that her decades-long friend and mentor had actively participated in Letelier murder/cover up and the full range of atrocities surrounding it?
+5 # John S. Browne 2016-09-30 18:26

Excellent point and question. I don't trust Parry, anymore than I trust any journalist any longer. He and/or they may tell a lot of truth, but they support and/or defend things, etc., that no truly conscientious and/or conscionable person can defend or support.

Parry's support and defense of HRC is abominable. If she gets into the presidency (of course, DT probably will too if he gets in), she'll likely INCREASE the drone program, not to mention get us into more endless war(s) [and W.W.4?---four because the neoliberal neocons, of which HRC is a part, consider the Cold War to have been W.W.3; so, according to them, the next world war will be W.W.4].

Yes, HRC does the bidding of the "Kissingers" of this world, and those who pull their strings, the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, etc., and behind them the Roman Catholic Church and the Vatican, the most vile, evil people on the face of the planet.

And to think that Zbigniew Brzezinski is one of "Odrona's" top advisers, another in the "Kissinger" line. It goes to show that "Odrona" was a neoliberal neocon all along, too. Deep state shadow government players all.

Parry's probably controlled opposition, or at the very least he's still quite brainwashed about some things. It reminds me of those (Parry likely among them) who after fifteen years still haven't looked into 9/11 Truth and still refuse to, falsely believing it to be unimportant, etc.

We live in the most interesting, dangerous and evil time right now.

+8 # Radscal 2016-09-30 19:32
Thanks, and yes. I recommend to everyone to never just accept anything presented by any source, regardless of how "trusted" the source may be (in fact, humans are more gullible when we trust the source). When supporting information comes from several separate sources, then the reliability of that information is greater, but rarely sure.

In some cases, I suspect that journalists have been threatened, either with severe bodily harm/death or at least with career-ending black listing.

Parry uncovered the Iran/Contra weapons and cocaine crime spree back in the 1980s. It cost him his rising career with NY Times/Newsweek.

Then he saw Gary Webb separately uncover much the same criminal enterprise, only to be journalisticall y assassinated by the NY Times, WaPo and LA Times, and ultimately "suicided" by two gunshots to the head.

So, for years now, Parry has made a moderate living on the edges, but he never goes beyond certain borders.

Other "journalists" are known to be CIA assets, or receive their funding from "Foundations" that have known agendas.

It all boils down to eternal vigilance, and thinking critically about everything. Easier said than done. ;-)
0 # John S. Browne 2016-09-30 20:21

And you're not "preaching to the choir", correct? I mean, you said all of that for the benefit of others, and realize that I know all of that already, right? Thank you though [ I think :o) ] for reminding me of all of it.

Forgive my short-term memory problems, but remind me, who was that journalist who has also disclosed a lot of truth unwelcome to the PTB, and who not too long ago (a few years) was "crashed" into a lightpost or whatever, and also thus murdered while it was made to look like an "accident"? And remind me, too, what was the subject matter of the important stuff he outed? [So many monumental things have happened the past fifteen years in particular, that it is difficult to recall it all---but you seem to be doing much better than me in that regard ( at least presently? :op ).]

Btw, guess what I'm listening to right now? T.O.P. (Tower of Power)! "Back to Oakland", etc. They were my high school graduation band at George Washington High in "The City". Presently I'm listening to the "40th Anniversary" album, "Live at the Fillmore Auditorium, S.F."; great stuff! Some really wonderful special guest stars as well! That album, along with three other T. of P. albums, are available for free Amazon Prime streaming right now.

(Continued below)
+2 # John S. Browne 2016-09-30 20:22

I know I told you some of my "stories", but did I tell you that I used to go to Fillmore West when I was a very young kid (as you may recall, they allowed children as long as they stayed away from the liquor bar---of course, everything was passed to us anyway). The most memorable concert I sat right in front of the stage for, was watching and listening to Aretha Franklin and Elvin Bishop jam together (I was just a few feet from them)!

[I also went to concerts at Winterland, the Greek Theater, the Concord Pavilion, and even up on Mt. Tam.; but, for some odd reason, I never went to one down at that venue on the Peninsula (what is it called again?---I can't think of it at the moment); and, in addition, much to my consternation, and surprise, to this day, I never went to one at the old "Family Dog" out on the Great Highway either, before it closed---but at least I got to enjoy the great Filmore West several times before it closed!]

Oh, T.O.P. and one of my other absolute favorite artist-musician -songwriters, Taj Mahal, played for free at City College of S.F. (CCSF) when I attended there for three years (1973-1976); so, of course, I went to and enjoyed those great concerts, as well.

(Continued below)
0 # John S. Browne 2016-09-30 20:47

Btw also, I believe I lost my virginity when I was 17 (1973) to the 27-year-old (to think, if she's still alive, she would be 70 now---where has all the time gone!?) married past-wife, Brenda, of one the Hollywood Hutton sons, who had a house and lived across from, either the Cannery or Ghirardelli Square, I can't remember for sure which. She claimed they had an open relationship and that he was bi. I met her in my first year in the Photography Department at CCSF (I was a Photography major). I say, "I believe", because her name was Brenda Hutton, but I never knew for sure if she was married to a Hollywood Hutton, yet I'm pretty sure he was one of them. She told me he was down in L.A. visiting his boyfriend at the time. [Thank God this was pre-HIV/AIDS!]


+2 # Radscal 2016-10-01 00:08
Very cool. My wife's been to all those places, and I to most of them.

A couple years ago, Taj Mahal played at the little community center in the town we live in now. I've seen him perform a couple of times, but this was incredible. He did the whole show solo, and absolutely captivated the audience for almost 2 hours.
+3 # Radscal 2016-10-01 00:05
Yep, I know you're hip to most of this stuff.

I bet you're referring to Michael Hastings who died in a bizarre single auto crash that former "Anti-Terrorism Czar" Richard Clarke said looked like a CIA hit caused by taking over the Mercedes Benz's computer.

Hastings had brought down General McChrystal in a Rolling Stone article in which McChrystal was very openly opposed to Obama's tactics, and clearly disliked him personally. McChrystal is the guy who turned Special Ops into Murder Incorporated.

Hastings told friends he was about to break an even bigger story, and that the FBI was after him because of it.
+4 # John S. Browne 2016-10-01 10:54

Yes, Hastings, that's who it was. As "Murder, Inc." murders more and more people and makes it look like other than murder, it is difficult to remember all of the incidents. Every time somebody important allegedly falls down a set of stairs and breaks their neck, I don't automatically swallow the official story, and I doubt its veracity. I don't even believe Robin Williams committed "suicide". I think he pissed off the wrong people in "Hollyweird", or in the intelligence community [perhaps refusing to do an "al CIAduh(!)" propaganda movie one too many times?], or he was just worth more dead to certain people.

Yah, how "convenient" that Hastings "happens" to have such a major, catastrophic "accident" at such a time. That is the kind of fascist government we have now, that it increasingly assassinates its critics. Pretty soon, if it isn't happening already, it will include "small fries" or "little fish" like you and me. What a government!

I feel so sorry for the majority of "Amerikans" who still live in la-la-land and think that the U.S. government is "the good guys". One cannot even talk to most of them about anything important, and try to show them ANY of the "conspiracy FACTS", without their running away from you as quick as they can, and/or it setting off a firestorm of recriminations. Most "Amerikans" have no idea what's really going on, and they literally don't want to know, but prefer to remain willfully-ignor ant, standing for nothing of any importance.

+3 # Radscal 2016-10-02 01:36
Gore Vidal said he wasn't a "Conspiracy Theorist." He was a Conspiracy Analyst.

Getting people to automatically shut down when they hear "conspiracy theory" was one of the most successful MK Ultra projects ever. Even people who do recognize many of the so-called CT's as actually true, still close their minds off when the first they hear about some event is that it's a "conspiracy theory."
+4 # JoaquinWalking 2016-10-01 13:54
For a comprehensive understanding of this, here are four books which will answer the points you raised:

1. With No Apologies: The Personal and Political Memoirs of United States Senator Barry M. Goldwater by Barry M. Goldwater-1979
Publisher: William Morrow and Company

2. The Rockefellers: An American Dynasty by Peter Collier & David Horowitz -1976
Publisher: Holt, Rinehart And Winston

3. American Dynasty: Aristocracy, Fortune and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush by Kevin Phillips-2004
Publisher: Viking Penguin (USA) 2004

4. Of Rats and Men: Oscar Goodman’s Life From Mob Mouthpiece to Mayor of Las Vegas by John L. Smith-2003
Publisher: Huntington Press

For example in book number 3 there is documented evidence that George H. W. Bush was probably a CIA agent shortly upon graduation of Yale University. Fascism in Germany and Latin America are covered in books 2 and 3. Such as: Remington arms found there way into the hands of the S.A (Brown Shirts) in the 1920's when Prescott Bush was on the board of directors of same.
+4 # Radscal 2016-10-01 19:06
Thanks for the recommendations .

Prescott Bush's father, Samuel was the Remington Rifles connection. He actually became Chief of the Ordnance, Small Arms and Ammunition Section of the US War Industries Board, and so was able to sell Remington Rifles to both Germany and the US during WW I.

And naturally, a Rockefeller was both Sam's patron, and the owner of Remington Arms. Just as a Rockefeller was behind Prescott Bush's Union Bank that continued to do business with the Nazis even after the US was at war with them.

One rarely has to go deeper than 2 degrees of separation to find a Rockefeller or Rothschild profiting off of havoc and horror.
+41 # Navigatio di Brendani 2016-09-29 21:18
And now we are expected to believe the CIA when it tells 9/11 Families that high-placed Saudis had nothing to do with 9/11 attacks.
+22 # futhark 2016-09-29 23:12
If the Saudis are challenged in court to produce proof that they did not instigate or execute the 9/11 attacks, it is not impossible that the true source of these events may be revealed.
+21 # vt143 2016-09-30 05:24
Rule 1: Believe nothing the CIA ever says.
+17 # indian weaver 2016-09-30 06:00
Rule 2: Believe nothing Obama ever says, or dubya, or ... the list is long, but in summary, do not believe our government officials, the 3-letter agencies (FBI, DEA ..) and politicians, ever.
+10 # REDPILLED 2016-09-30 12:00
Or corporate CEOs, who fund this oligarchy.
+9 # Radscal 2016-09-30 17:03
Or the supra-national banksters who fund or funnel every cent each of those fiendish groups spend.
+7 # dickbd 2016-09-30 14:53
I once wrote a paid column that appeared in the San Diego Tribune many years ago about the alphabet agencies. I had included the IRS, but it is basically toothless now.

It is difficult to rank them in regard to venality, but I would go CIA, DEA, and then the FBI. We need to return to the times that the FBI was an unarmed investigative agency. They basically have their own armies now.

As for the CIA, I never get tired of quoting this, "If the CIA ever did anything right, it is the only thing that this vile agency ever kept secret!"
+5 # librarian1984 2016-09-30 15:59
Where would you put NSA and DHS?

+5 # dickbd 2016-09-30 16:03
Oh, yeah, you're right! I wasn't thinking about them, many years ago, or now, apparently! Thanks.
+3 # John S. Browne 2016-09-30 16:20

And the TSA (although they are under DHS now, as is the FBI, etc.)? [Contemporary Nazi agencies all, right out of the Nazi-German playbook, especially DHS, proving that we're under the "Fourth Reich" now, aka globalism, aka global government, aka global enslavement, aka the "New World Order (NWO)".]

+4 # Skyelav 2016-10-01 12:54
Or the EPA (Flint water) or Hillary
+5 # Skyelav 2016-10-01 12:55
Wait, wait I thought WE brought down the towers? We certainly did Building 7.
+3 # Radscal 2016-10-02 12:07
EPA is the quintessential example of what Ralph Nader brought to light decades ago.

A group of well-intentione d activists create an organization to rein in some of the worst abuses inevitable in capitalism, and manage to get some great stuff done to the betterment of the 99%.

But gradually, the 0.01% infiltrate and eventually take control over that organization. It retains the public image of being a bulwark against the worst abuses and exploitation of the capitalist structure it was created to ameliorate, but actually ends up providing cover for the capitalist pigs.

And since the organization has the image of being on "our side," it is able to get away with stuff that even the original capitalist structure would have gotten heat over.
+11 # jdd 2016-09-30 06:03
It's too late. The previously secret 28 page concluding chapter of the Joint Congressional Inquiry report into 9/11 documents in detail role of former Saudi Ambassador to the United States Prince Bandar bin-Sultan in supporting at least two of the 9/11 terrorists, along with evidence of ties to the hijackers by scores of other Saudi officials at all levels of government and the Royal Family.

The role of Bandar is of special significance because of his close ties to the Bush family and even closer ties to the British. Bandar was the broker, along with Margaret Thatcher, of the Al Yamamah deal, barteringf British weapons for Saudi oil. in which billion of dollars were hidden in off-shore joint Anglo-Saudi accounts for the purpose of funding terrorism, assassinations and political coups.
+10 # John S. Browne 2016-09-30 00:09

"...(T)the respect, honor and decency that the..." mass-murdering "...White House deserves...", as if they deserve ANY respect and honor AT ALL, and as if they have any decency at all. The White House and the presidency, and indeed the entire "black ops" and "intelligence" community of the U.S. government, have become worse and worse, perpetrating more and more, and darker and blacker, evil all over the world. And now, that same deep state shadow government that has erected mass-murdering totalitarian militarized dictatorships and police states in other countries for many a decade, is now finishing turning the U.S. itself into a mass-murdering totalitarian militarized dictatorship and police state.

It is corporate-fasci sm on steroids, making the entirety of the U.S. populace less and less safe at the hands of its own government, as it increasingly does what such totalitarian "national '(in-) security'" states and dictatorships do [in this case, in the U.S., a dictatorship of many (globalist) corporate-fasci st dictators through the U.S. and global deep state shadow government and its personnel], more and more go after all those who are True Americans and stand for nothing but True Liberty(ies) and Freedom(s) in the now 'land of the slaves and the home of the cowards', in order to seek to stop all dissent, and/or any hope(s) of restoring True Freedom(s) and Liberty(ies) in same.

(Continued below)
+9 # John S. Browne 2016-09-30 00:20

But the "totaliterroriz ing" and "totalitarianiz ation" of the U.S. is not only happening there, it is also happening, and "suit-following " erection of corporate-fasci st, mass-murdering totalitarian militarized police states is taking place, in the other Western countries as well, eradicating all True Liberty(ies) and Freedom(s). Thus, all of the Western countries, and all of us, are being systematically "treated" to the opposite of True Freedom(s) and Liberty(ies), enslavement.

We are having our outward liberties and freedoms eradicated, and all of us are systematically being locked down more and more under Western and global(ist) corporate-fasci st slavery. Evil at the highest echelons of the elitist oligarchy and the global(ist) deep state shadow government is calling the shots, and they run the White House, the presidency and all important factions of the U.S. government, as well as of the governments of the other Western countries. We are at the apex of evil Western and global(ist) government, and thus are right now caught up in their very end game and the finalization of global government enslavement.

(Continued below---due to an edit and running out of space in this comment block)

+4 # indian weaver 2016-09-30 06:03
Obama's and dubya's regimes already surpass the sum total of Hitler / Nazi atrocities waged during their reigns, considering the 100s of millions of innocent people's lives, and all life / animals / livestock / pets / crops / air / water / ground destroyed by dubya and Obama. No comparison. Hitler didn't have near the power or international reach, either in political power, manpower and weapons of mass destruction that Obama and dubya do. Obama's harvest of mutilated / burned /dismembered bodies and genocide numbers surpass Hitler's harvest of human bodies.
+1 # John S. Browne 2016-09-30 16:41

You have said something similar before in an earlier thread, but I didn't address it then: How do you figure? Over ten million mass-murdered during the "BushCON" and "Odrona" regimes? I don't think we're there yet... unless there are numbers I don't know about. But, even if one includes all of the smaller wars the U.S. and the West are waging in over seven countries now, along with the death toll of innocent civilians in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen and Libya, I don't think we're closely-approac hing ten million yet. Not counting the Iraq sanctions period (1991 to 2003), the mass-murder toll of civilians is "only" about two to two and a half million in those "worst" five countries alone (perhaps three and a half million at the highest---five million including the sanctions period).

So, sincerely, if you have proof that I don't know about, please share with me (/us) how you believe it's over ten million? I too believe that "BushCON" and "Odrona" are vile mass-murderers; and, as much as I might like to believe that they are more vile than Hitler, I don't (yet?) see how I can now believe that. Thus, don't you think you're exaggerating?

+3 # John S. Browne 2016-09-30 16:26

Somehow, and in many ways, We the People of the U.S. and the world have got to take our country(ies) and government(s) back, or truly make them ours, really for the first time, or we are all going to be doomed to a hell on earth in the U.S. and the West, at the hands of these completely insane corporate-fasci st elitist globalists, as never before seen, and it will make Nazi Europe look like child's play.

+13 # Bruce Gruber 2016-09-30 04:53
Time, perhaps, for DEMOS REDUX!

Surely after a quarter of a Millenium, our capacity as citizens has evolved beyond 17th Century concepts of democracy vs. oligarchy. The status-quo "system" envisioned and pursued by philosophers, prophets, demagogues and priests over more than 100 generations deserves some restudy and consideration.

If only because of experience and knowledge enhanced - particularly in the scale of 'change' our human capacities exact from both Gaea and the life forces it supports - the investment of resolution of philosophic and deterministic aspects of our species' inconsistencies , conflicts and 'dead' end competitions deserves the time and energy of RECONSIDERATION of the value and purposes of "LIFE" - meditation on a GOAL of reason ... for 'being'.

Daily, monthly, quarterly or annual 'measurements of 'profit and loss', acquisition, incorporation, and 'market' control offer ZERO insight into cost-benefits of humanity - or our planet. We fail to THINK grandly - of a future, collectively, with "humanity". Divided by 'individual' needs and desires, we are squandering our potential ... and our very existence. For what?
+9 # Ted 2016-09-30 07:28
Bruce, I think I agree with you.

For many, many reasons, It may be time to re-think the whole "American Experiment".

If all that we are dealing with today doesn't lead us to the conclusion that the U.S.A. is a failed state that is inherently damaging to, and very possibly lethal to, Humanity in general, what will?

Although we Progressives tell ourselves we are constantly and consistently working toward positive change, in truth we are really only working on constant repairs of the continual damage that is consistently and continually being wreaked on our society and the world.

We are seemingly forever behind the eightball and perhaps now it's time to consider major change in the very structure of our Nation's framework to, at the very least, get us back on the track our founders originally intended us to follow.

(how's THAT for 'Our Revolution', Jeff Weaver?)
+10 # Bruce Gruber 2016-09-30 07:45
I believe it was Floyd Wickham who observed, "Aim LOW! They're riding Shetlands." It is fairly clear that "enough" is never enough. It is only a way to maintain the status-quo for those who are comfortably satisfied.
Acceptance of the lesser of two evils is acceptance of BOTH 'evil' AND 'lesser' ... a pretty dubious achievement.
+6 # Ted 2016-09-30 07:59
Ha! Good point.

But perhaps a good start would be to replace our current system of governance (by whatever name we could call it) with an actual Democracy that is fiercely and innately protected from the influence of special interests of any kind (you know, like a DEMOCRACY), and see where it goes from there.
+2 # Bruce Gruber 2016-09-30 14:46
Participation and responsibility combine in any endeavor. The opportunistic expectation of "rights" cannot demonstrate value without some balance between them. It is the interaction between and among us as citizens that conveys inquiry, resolution, and implementation of change as improvement is developed or discovered.

Democracy is a concept of equalization of influence within a group. The 'vote' is its means of expression. However, the process of voting is regularly abused by defining the 'group', limiting access to the actual voting process, or by control of the availability of neutral or unbiased information on which to make 'choices' among alternative decisions.

The "sense" of responsibility - TO VOTE, and the 'sense' to vote KNOWINGLY and PURPOSEFULLY toward a determination of common good require motivation, awareness, and opportunity - ALL ideals. The democratic process is a start, but it is not, in itself, a solution to the inequities we have proven allow us to make 'democratic' decisions that are contrary to our interests and principles.

It is within the basic concepts of fairness, freedom, opportunity, and resolution that issues of truth (or accuracy) and justice (reward and punishment) that civilized debate is required. We need, somehow, to reach a human philosophy that marks the boundaries of our actions.
+2 # Ted 2016-09-30 14:52

But like I said, it may be a good start if we replace the governance system we have now, which only responds to the influence of money, with a true Democracy.
+5 # librarian1984 2016-09-30 15:02
What? A democracy, you say? What's that?
+3 # Bruce Gruber 2016-10-01 10:36
In its purest (and most derided sense), everybody gets together and votes on 'everything' ... all the time. The 'republican' (or representative democracy) we created accomplished 'control' by the "haves", though the wording suggests equality of opportunity ... something we still have to fight to even acknowledge.
+8 # vt143 2016-09-30 05:25
Watch out, Robert Parry. You are not the type of journalist those who run this government want!
+7 # economagic 2016-09-30 10:32
While Bush was not CIA director at the time, it's interesting that Parry does not mention the context of the Letelier-Moffit t murders, namely the CIA-backed coup on 9/11/1973 that deposed Salvador Allende, the elected president of Argentina, ushering in the reign of terror of General Augusto Pinochet. We remember that especially here in Durham, NC, where Allende's friend and advisor Ariel Dorfman eventually landed after escaping the country. Dorfman was scheduled to be on duty at the presidential palace the night before the coup but had traded shifts with a colleague who was killed. He has been a professor of literature and Latin-American studies at Duke since 1985. A poet and playwright, he has told his story eloquently many times.
+3 # Helen Marshall 2016-10-02 10:32
Here's Dorfman's powerful lament for the September 11 coup in Chile (there's an 11 de septiembre street in Buenos Aires...memoria lizing the coup that Kissinger and co at least supported if not instigated).
+2 # Duderino 2016-10-02 07:54
Pick up and read the book, "Operation Condor". It will knock your socks off.

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.