(Laughter in the audience.) It was going to be a tough decision at first, but then the CIA insisted that if, if I joined that, they’d want me to do the first duty assignment in Washington, DC, and I hate Washington, DC. Six years in Washington, DC [inaudible] that makes the decision a lot easier.”
Moulitsas considers the CIA “a very liberal institution,” never mind the agency, according to John Stockwell, former CIA Station Chief in Angola (see my John Stockwell: The Third World War video), is responsible for killing more than six million people.
This is a very liberal institution. And in a lot of ways, it really does attract people who want to make a better, you know, want to make the world a better place…. Of course, they’ve got their Dirty Ops and this and that, right but as an institution itself the CIA is really interested in stable world.
That’s what they’re interested in. And stable worlds aren’t created by destabilizing regimes and creating wars…. I don’t think it’s a very partisan thing to want a stable world. And even if you’re protecting American interests, I mean that can get ugly at times, but generally speaking I think their hearts in the right place. As an organization their heart is in the right place. I’ve never had any problem with the CIA. I’d have no problem working for them
Is it possible Mr. Moulitsas does not have a problem with the documented fact the CIA’s predecessor, the Overseas Secret Service, imported Nazis to work for the soon to be created CIA under General Reinhard Gehlen?
"Gehlen was far from the only Nazi war criminal employed by the CIA. Others included Klaus Barbie (’the Butcher of Lyon’), Otto von Bolschwing (the Holocaust mastermind who worked closely with Eichmann) and, SS Colonel Otto Skorzeny (a great favorite of Hitler’s),” writes Mark Zepezauer (The CIA’s Greatest Hits, Odonian Press, 1994). “There’s even evidence that Martin Bormann, Hitler’s second-in-command at the end of the war, faked his own death and escaped to Latin America, where he worked with CIA-linked groups.
Or that the CIA financed the P-2 Masonic lodge, connected with the Vatican and the Mafia, and enthusiastically supported Operation Gladio, the “strategy of tension” terrorist “stay behind army” effort in Europe, responsible of train station bombings and assassinations, run by former SS Nazis?
Is it possible Mr. Moulitsas supports the CIA effort to create shell banks such as the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, accurately characterized by former CIA director and current Sec. Def. Robert Gates as “the Bank of Crooks and Criminals International”?
Does Moulitsas support the idea of MK-ULTRA, a program designed to test “radiation, electric shocks, electrode implants, microwaves, ultrasound and a wide range of drugs on unwitting subjects, including hundreds of prisoners at California’s infamous Vacaville State Prison,” as Zepezauer notes?
Or what about the CIA getting into the heroin business with the Corsican Mafia, paving the way for highly profitable drug importation operations in Central America and Afghanistan, money used not only to enrich the “investment” (in death and misery) bankers but also used for the CIA’s black budget?
How liberal is it to engage in assassination, genocide, and plotting the overthrow of governments in Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia (where more than 500,000 people were put to death, many of them due to CIA drafted “death lists”), and dozens of other countries?
Of course, the CIA long ago penetrated the “liberal” as well as the “conservative” corporate media in America. “Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency were William Paley of the Columbia Broadcasting System, Henry Luce of Time Inc., Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the Louisville Courier-Journal and James Copley of the Copley News Service. Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include the American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, The Miami Herald, and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald-Tribune. By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with The New York Times, CBS, and Time Inc.,” writes Watergate journalist Carl Bernstein (Rolling Stone, Oct. 20, 1977). “From the Agency’s perspective, there is nothing untoward in such relationships, and any ethical questions are a matter for the journalistic profession to resolve, not the intelligence community.”
Indeed, it would appear Markos Moulitsas finds nothing “untoward in such relationships,” if we are to believe his above quoted comments.
Finally, Moulitsas’ relationship with the CIA makes perfect sense, as Daily Kos appears to be yet another political front operation tasked with cracking the whip over “progressive” Democrats and marching them off to support the Bilderberger Queen Hillary Clinton and her probable running mate, Barack Obama, both on record as supporting the neocon plan to reduce the Muslim world to a smoldering wasteland, albeit with stylistic policy changes.
It is no secret the CIA has long stage managed the controlled opposition and Moulitsas’ admitted relationship with the agency should be considered a coup de grâce, an effort designed to reduce the “progressive” Democrat opposition to the invasion and occupation of Iraq and the impending attack to be leveled against Iran as little more than an empty and absurd rhetorical slogan.