Evidence of CIA type infiltration of Liberal blogs/web-sites?

[Lee Cahalan]

Granted nothing sounds much more PARANOID than an accusation of CIA type operatives posing as members of say, Democratic Underground. (www.democraticunderground.com). However let me run a couple of thoughts by everyone.

1. Over at D/U all threads discussing 9/11 are instantly removed and sent to the "September 11th" forum. Either that or locked altogether.

2. Then once you find your "loathsome thread" effectively expelled to the Liberal equivalent of a "Free Speech Zone" (the dumpster in other words) you will find several posters automatically call you a weirded out conspiracy geek. Almost like they are waiting in line to pounce on any attempt to even discuss the slightest deviation from the official cover story.

Now wait a minute here... Wouldn't it be wise of a Liberal site to promote the idea of investigating 9/11? Seems to me that they would have much to gain and little to lose.

However such ideas get shot down in an instant.

Who was? Think it was the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan who made a conservative estimate of some nearly 200,000 CIA operatives working within the media. Hatching plots to further their agenda. Sending out disinformation to mold public opinion. Or keeping an eye on editors and reporters who strayed from the official party line.

Now that was way back in the 1970's. At the time the great Senator admitted that he thought his estimate was quite low. So it seems to me that if the CIA was doing those things in mass scale (and it seems most definite that they were) then in the decade of 9/11 they would appear almost remiss if they didn't infiltrate the blogs too.

As it is Democratic Underground seems more worried about Conservative plants who regularly sabotage good "approved" Liberal threads. And I suppose the moderators there do need to keep an eye out for the nut case righties.

However if what I'm witnessing in those removed/locked posts about 9/11 is true and it seems that it is? Well the Freepers are the least of their problems.

[Lee Cahalan]

I'm told under good personal source that the Readers Digest was pretty much published out of Langley, VA.

Shawn Hamilton said:

Interesting post. This subject came up recently on the comment board for an Examiner article, "Anders Bjorkman Interview." One of the respondents says, "Why don't tell us about your engineering credentials? Why are you so desperate to cover up the Truth about 9/11? Do you get paid to post lies on the Internet or what?" This idea may seem "paranoid" but there is a basis for it. It's pretty well common knowledge that the CIA produced, in disguise, books, articles, theses, and other forms of media to manipulate the public's perception of the causes and effects of the Vietnam War. While we have to be very careful not to jump to conclusions in individual cases, the practice is real.

[Lee Cahalan]

Well consider the readership...

I have a childhood recollection of meeting a man who worked at a distinguished position in Readers Digest, Was head of the "Condensed Books" division. My neighbor's grandfather. Nice guy, generous, well traveled. One of those Yale types. Ungodly wealthy.

I should have stayed in touch with his grand daughter. Good looking and easy. Like a lot of rich brats...

(hope she doesn't read this forum "Hi Sheri!")

Yale seems so much at the helm of the movers and shakers and so-called "intelligence work". If I had some anonymity here I'd tell you more about an in law and former Yale prof. Is some kind of Kissinger protege and running the Bank of Boston or something similar. A Skull & Bones type. Brilliant but ethically challenged. Global Warming denier.

Back in the late 1960's he had the audacity to tell my father "I like the idea of the world being run by the elite". Dad said he'd agree if he himself was included among the elite. Kind of stopped that conversation in it's tracks.



Shawn Hamilton said:

That's hilarious--and easily believable. I would expect The Company to have better writers though. :)

[Lee Cahalan]

The Griffin memo explains a lot.

Still sets question marks off in my brain when I think of a forum like Democratic Underground throwing all "nasty 9/11 conspiracy" threads to the dungeon. Or locked and deleted. It's not the Huffington Post and I'm not a noted, paid writer!

D/U doesn't return e-mails on the subject either. Scaredy cats...

[Lee Cahalan]

What it is...

The Left's refusal to acknowledge clear inconsistencies with the official story and 9/11 almost makes Alex Jones appear reasonable. At least on the one issue of 9/11.

I too was disappointed with reading the Chomsky denials.

[Lee Cahalan]

Hee hee. Let's see how long Griffin's quotes stay up at Democratic Underground. I'm a true bastard. Just keep hounding their butts 24/7. See here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_al...

Hopefully I have everyone's permission to cut & paste. Yes, I'm "Wiley"

Surprised the powers that be at D/U haven't bounced me permanently.



Shawn Hamilton said:

The issue of the Left's "gatekeepers" is becoming increasingly relevant to me as a language teacher and reporter. I first got a clue about this years ago when progressive stalwarts like Noam Chomsky, Alexander Cockburn, David Corn, Cornel West and others said the most ridiculous things about the JFK assassination--things you'd expect to hear from people who hadn't spent five minutes looking at the evidence such as, "Oswald acted alone," and, "It doesn't matter who killed JFK." Crap like that. We're seeing a repeat of the JFK assassination in 9-11, and I really resent the Left's contribution to the coverups. Like you suggested, they're supposed to be on our side!

Lee Cahalan said:

The Griffin memo explains a lot.

Still sets question marks off in my brain when I think of a forum like Democratic Underground throwing all "nasty 9/11 conspiracy" threads to the dungeon. Or locked and deleted. It's not the Huffington Post and I'm not a noted, paid writer!

D/U doesn't return e-mails on the subject either. Scaredy cats...

[Lee Cahalan]

My loathsome topic is still alive (over at Democratic Underground) for the moment though it could disappear in a nanosecond.

I just posted it for yours and the forum's (here) amusement. I really don't care what they think about it over at D/U ...

Possibly this one will last because I arm twisted the moderators right up front. Titled with the words "Suppression of free speech" in it. Traditional Liberals get really upset when accused of censorship matters. In retaliation they just may try and label me as a redneck or worse.

I still use D/U as a news source and agree with them most of the time. They just hate my guts lol.


Shawn Hamilton said:

It will be interesting to see what happens... :)

Lee Cahalan said:

Hee hee. Let's see how long Griffin's quotes stay up at Democratic Underground. I'm a true bastard. Just keep hounding their butts 24/7. See here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_al...

Hopefully I have everyone's permission to cut & paste. Yes, I'm "Wiley"

Surprised the powers that be at D/U haven't bounced me permanently.



Shawn Hamilton said:

The issue of the Left's "gatekeepers" is becoming increasingly relevant to me as a language teacher and reporter. I first got a clue about this years ago when progressive stalwarts like Noam Chomsky, Alexander Cockburn, David Corn, Cornel West and others said the most ridiculous things about the JFK assassination--things you'd expect to hear from people who hadn't spent five minutes looking at the evidence such as, "Oswald acted alone," and, "It doesn't matter who killed JFK." Crap like that. We're seeing a repeat of the JFK assassination in 9-11, and I really resent the Left's contribution to the coverups. Like you suggested, they're supposed to be on our side!

Lee Cahalan said:

The Griffin memo explains a lot.

Still sets question marks off in my brain when I think of a forum like Democratic Underground throwing all "nasty 9/11 conspiracy" threads to the dungeon. Or locked and deleted. It's not the Huffington Post and I'm not a noted, paid writer!

D/U doesn't return e-mails on the subject either. Scaredy cats...

[Lee Cahalan]

It's now locked.

This is beyond obscene. I swear that this absolutely must be more than candy ass moderators worried about upsetting traditional Liberals and the status quo. Feels like something deeper. Like when the Huffington Post pulled Jesse Ventura

Even Cenk Uygur and Rachel Maddow won't touch this third rail.

[Lee Cahalan]

Guess what? They finally bounced me permanently! Copy of my private message:



ERROR: Your posting privileges have been revoked. If you do not know why this has happened, please take a moment to read our Message Board Rules.

If, after reading our rules, you still cannot figure out why your posting privileges were revoked, then it may have been an error. If so, you may appeal by sending an email to [e-mail]. Please include your forum username.

We do occasionally reinstate posting privileges for members who have been banned, after a cooling-off period has passed. If you would like to have your privileges reinstated you may state your case by sending an email to [e-mail]. Please include your forum username.

We read all correspondence sent to us. If you do not get a response to your appeal, it is because your request was denied.

Don't remember your password?
Click here to receive a new password for your account

Discussion Forum Rules
These are the basic rules. For a detailed explanation of how we enforce these rules, please click here.

Last updated November 7, 2005.
1. This is a moderated discussion forum with rules. We have a team of volunteer moderators who delete posts and ban disruptors. Members are strongly urged to familiarize themselves with our rules, and make an effort to become a positive member of our community. Those who do not risk having their posts deleted or their posting privileges revoked.
2. Who We Are: Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office. Democratic Underground is not affiliated with the Democratic Party, and comments posted here are not representative of the Democratic Party or its candidates.
3. Civility: Treat other members with respect. Do not post personal attacks against other members of this discussion forum.
4. Content: Do not post messages that are inflammatory, extreme, divisive, incoherent, or otherwise inappropriate. Do not engage in anti-social, disruptive, or trolling behavior. Do not post broad-brush, bigoted statements. The moderators and administrators work very hard to enforce some minimal standards regarding what content is appropriate. But please remember that this is a large and diverse community that includes a broad range of opinion. People who are easily offended, or who are not accustomed to having their opinions (including deeply personal convictions) challenged may not feel entirely comfortable here. A thick skin is necessary to participate on this or any other discussion forum.
5. Copyrights: Do not copy-and-paste entire articles onto this discussion forum. When referencing copyrighted work, post a short excerpt (not exceeding 4 paragraphs) with a link back to the original.
6. Forum Administration: Respect the moderators and administrators, and respect their decisions. You can help make their job easier by clicking the "Alert" link on any post that might need moderator attention. Please understand that moderating errors and inconsistencies are inevitable on a large website like this. If you have a question about DU policies, or if you have a concern about an action a moderator has taken, please contact an admin privately.
7. More Information: For a detailed explanation of how we enforce these rules, please click here.

[Lee Cahalan]

You know until I ran in D/U I always pooh poohed the concept of "Liberal Socialism". Even after a friend I know lost her chair on the local Democratic Party board just because she didn't oppose school vouchers. School vouchers being a Conservative idea, and not one I agree with, but I don't think my friend should have lost her seat because of only that.

Or to put another way, the typical condemnation of Liberals by the nutcase Right wing comparing Democrats to "Communism" etc. Always seemed absurd.

Now? I'm still reserving judgment but the idea of a "lockstep" Democratic party seems somewhat more plausible. In the hierarchy at least. Not the rank and file.

[Lee Cahalan]

I've always seen problems even with the traditional Liberal Democrat. However I'm not ready to diss them at this point. Seems to me that their ideology is at least something the world can live with. The same can't be said for Conservatism which inevitably leads to the neo con fools we see now. Both in governance and the rank &and file republican.

Even more thoughtful Republicans like the late Barry Goldwater and President Eisenhower will eventually bring the system down. Ike begat Nixon and Goldwater Ronald Reagan. Worse still later we see these give the keys to the kingdom to the Bush's I and II. Like giving the keys to the new car to the ner-do -well alcoholic son. Who in turn wrecks the whole vehicle and blames someone else for it. No accountability.

I don't expect a lot out of a Democratic Congress but feel a slight comfort that we could be doing a whole hell of a lot worse.With more democrats in places of power we at least slow the steepness downwards on the road to hell.

Conservatives love to paint all politicians as equally corrupt. They win elections this way. Disenfranchising Moderates. The GOP rank and file, not caring about their obscenely corrupt types like Tom Delay or David Vitter whom have, up till now still received plenty of votes from the so-called "Christian Right". The tactic of painting all politicians as slime actually helps the Right and corporate, war mongering, polluting industry. Low voter turnout is very helpful to the republicans. Their base being like creatures similar to those zombies from "Night Of The Living dead". Clueless fools who mindlessly show up at the polls voting for the worst candidates possible,

With the low voter turnout the Zombies "win".

In the meantime I will at least support Obama. Given enough time and awareness the thirty years of the Reagan disaster may be replaced by something better.

Thanks for the discussion Shawn.

Shawn Hamilton said:

This Democrat/Republican polarization is false in describing societal division anyway, for it wrongly assumes that rich and poor are equal in the United States.
As my hero Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. said, "The two real political parties in America are the Winners and the Losers. The people don't acknowledge this. They claim membership in two imaginary parties, the Republicans and the Democrats, instead."
He goes on to say that the Democratic and Republican parties are both Winners. Many US citizens are Losers but can't admit it.


Lee Cahalan said:

You know until I ran in D/U I always pooh poohed the concept of "Liberal Socialism". Even after a friend I know lost her chair on the local Democratic Party board just because she didn't oppose school vouchers. School vouchers being a Conservative idea, and not one I agree with, but I don't think my friend should have lost her seat because of only that.

Or to put another way, the typical condemnation of Liberals by the nutcase Right wing comparing Democrats to "Communism" etc. Always seemed absurd.

Now? I'm still reserving judgment but the idea of a "lockstep" Democratic party seems somewhat more plausible. In the hierarchy at least. Not the rank and file.

[bill smith]

Hello everybody. I am bill smith and I normally post on the jref 9/11 subforum and have done so for more than a year. I must be a sucker for punishment but I do enjoy pulling their tails...