India's 'silent' prime minister becomes a tragic figure

sob

Mod
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
6,425
Likes
3,805
Country flag
It all boils down to the dynamics of succession in the congress. Sonia Gandhi cannot become the PM, not then and not now, so she chose the safest candidate that was available- Mr.Manmohan Singh. The big idea in 2003-04 was to stabilise the party for 5 years and come back to power in 2009 with a majority of their own. Unfortunately the script went wrong, Congress did not get the seats and Mr.Rahul Gandhi did not step forward to fill in the shoes of the PM. The only option was to continue as it is and hope for a mid term course correction.

Again UP elections put rest to that course also. And this advantage has been taken by every jackass who got the opportunity. As our own Mr.Singh has pointed out, MMS is a very shrewd player, you do not get to this stage by being dumb and honest to the core. At this stage he does not give a damn to what is happening to the party which has used him in such a cavalier fashion.

Remember he always has his autobiography to fall on, post retirement.
 

Raj30

Senior Member
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
1,325
Likes
1,603
Indian prime minister’s office responds to Washington Post’s profile on Manmohan Singh - BlogPost - The Washington Post

Indian prime minister's office responds to Washington Post's profile on Manmohan Singh
By Anup Kaphle

The office of India's prime minister objected to The Washington Post's front-page article, published Sept. 5, 2012, on Manmohan Singh's evolution as a leader.

The following is a letter from the Prime Minister's office:

Dear Simon,
We do not complain about criticism of the government which is a journalist's right. But I am writing this letter for pointing out unethical and unprofessional conduct at your part.
I would like to put on record my complaint about your article which was published today on many counts:
— Despite all lines of conversations open, you never got in touch with us for our side of the story though you regularly talk to me about information from the PMO. This story thus becomes totally one sided.
— You have been telling the media here in India that your request for an interview was declined though the mail below says clearly that the interview was declined "till the Monsoon Session" of the Parliament which gets over in two days.
— When I rang you up to point this out, you said sorry twice though you tell the media here that you never apologised.
— Your website where we could have posted a reply is still not working, 11 hours after you said sorry the third time for its inaccessibility.
— The former Media Adviser to the PM Dr Sanjaya Baru has complained that you "rehashed and used" an 8 month old quote from an Indian Magazine.
We expected better from the correspondent of the Washington Post for fair and unbiased reporting.
Without going into your one sided assessment of the Prime Minister's performance, as comment is free in journalism, I hope you will carry this communication in full in your paper and your website so your readers can judge for themselves what is the truth.
Sincerely
Pankaj Pachauri
Communications Adviser to the Prime Minister's Office
New Delhi - India


Below is a response to the letter from Simon Denyer, author of the article and our India bureau chief:

Thanks for your comments. I wanted to respond point-by-point:

— I requested an interview with the PM on three occasions, and also with T.K.A Nair, Advisor to the Prime Minister, and with Pulok Chatterji, Principal Secretary in the Prime Minister's Office. Those requests were either ignored or declined.

— When I made my final request for an interview with the PM in July, I was told on July 30 "The PM has declined all interview requests till the Monsoon session is over." At that stage the current session of parliament (known as the Monsoon session) of parliament had not even begun. There was no mention of the possibility of an interview afterwards. In any case my story touches on the fact that parliament has been adjourned every day throughout the current session by opposition calls for the PM to resign, which is a story I felt should be told, interview or not.

Indeed, we remain extremely interested in speaking to the prime minister.

— My apology was for the fact that the website was down and the PM's office could not post a reply directly. As soon as the problem was fixed, I informed them. I stand by the story.

— I spoke to Dr Baru personally on the telephone during the reporting for the story. He confirmed that these sentiments were accurate.

Regards,

Simon Denyer
 

parijataka

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
4,916
Likes
3,751
Country flag
Congress govt cannot treat foreign media the way they do Indian media unfortunately. Are there any unbiased channels today that are truthful and cannot be bought and/or threatened by the powers that be ?
 

parijataka

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
4,916
Likes
3,751
Country flag
Ditherers, Underachievers Can't Quite Embrace Singh

NEW DELHI–The Indian Society of Ditherers, Underachievers and Failures came close to issuing an honorary membership to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh Wednesday.

"We talked about it and talked about it, then we agreed to form a committee to review his credentials but, as per usual, it never met because the members couldn't be bothered," said Rakesh G., the association's president in absentia.

Prime Minister Singh caught the organization's attention after he was described as "dithering," "an underachiever" and in danger of becoming "a failure" in two recent articles in the western media. The pieces sparked outrage among the handful of Congress party officials who consider Mr. Singh to be dynamic, forceful, and completely in charge of a government he doesn't run.

"We briefly saw this brouhaha as a chance to show the nation that our attributes are something to be celebrated in public service," said Mr. Rakesh. "George W. Bush was a decider, not a ditherer, and he disastrously invaded Afghanistan and Iraq."

"Bush would qualify for membership on the other two grounds though," he added.

Mr. Rakesh noted that in the eight years of Mr. Singh's two terms in office, he has failed to start a war with either China or Pakistan or to expose India to widespread radiation; achieved less than anticipated in terms of destroying the nation's retail sector; and prevaricated so long in naming Rahul Gandhi to a Cabinet position that the chances of the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty retaining power at the next general election are rapidly dimming.

"That makes him a hero in our book," said Mr. Rakesh, "It's just a shame that we never got around to inviting him in. It makes us look ineffectual. Tragic, in fact. But I'm sure the PM will understand."
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
BY responding to the Washington Post article, the issue has given a breath of life to the article.

A snub by ignoring would have been more effective.

Using the paid up media and personalities instead to run a salvo against Washington Post would have done more than responding directly.
 

SADAKHUSH

Senior Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
1,839
Likes
780
Country flag
I tried to post the following at 4:12 PM Canadian time but was not successful due to expired token on the forum.out one after another.

I want start by giving the credit to Singh for posting similar views about silent but active PM who is at work to destroy the "Dynastic Rulers" of our Bharatvarsh.
As we all know how well he is regarded for his honesty in Bharatvarsh and as well as abroad this is the day he was waiting for to get in the position of power and bring the like minded result oriented bureaucrats who can deliver. I am quiet sure that the present CAG must have had previous working relationship with Dr. MMS as a result of that he was appointed to the post to orchestrate the down fall of habitual parasites engaged in milking the system for their selfish motives. I also believe General V.K. Singh was part of the same team busy in cleaning up the mess of the last 65 years.

Since has worked in various capacity as a public servant he must have seen and learned the shenanigans taking place on a regular basis in GOI departments so therefore he must have set his sight on PM's chair once there he has started cleaning up the house one scandal at a time without making too much noise.
He is setting a stage where Congress will go down so low in the public polls before the next general election that we will see infighting in the Congress party thus leading to implosion which will send the party into oblivion. Therefore this post is in a way tied to the thread which posed a question "How to send Congress into oblivion"?
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
I don't think that MMS would be a mole within the Congress just to wreck it up from within.

If that is what I have understood from some of the posts.

He is too much of a good man for such underhand doings.

Call him what you want, but I wonder if he will do such a thing.
 

Cliff@sea

C'est la vie
Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
2,370
Likes
1,028
Country flag
So Washington post has just confirmed what would be only too apparent to anyone with even a mere passing interest in Indian Politics.

an Honest and Just assessment to appraise the World of Manmohan Singh's Infirmity and numerous failing's of the bungling UPA Govt ,

Or Is it ?

Let's have a closer look

Firstly the timing of this article

- What this Article states isn't exactly news but it's come at a time when UPA is facing a barrage of assaults from all quarters both with in and without , and is literally struggling for air.
Quite clearly Washington Post has chosen to attack Indian PM when it would hurt him the most

- The other important event that this article follows behind is the recent NAM summit in Tehran , where American interference in Syria was vehemently denounced with India stating it opposes all outside (Read US) intervention in Syrian Crisis

- Comes in the wake of India's repeated snubs to the US's constant pressure to distance itself from Iran , and to cut off our Oil imports from them,

-When India far from yielding to US's compulsion has only been getting more cozy with Iran with both nations jointly musing over their interests in Afghanistan


Next to the article Itself ,

- That Congress supremo Sonia Gandhi is the real power behind the throne, and
Manmohan Singh merely enjoys regency at her pleasure is not exactly a secret,
yet the author curiously fails to mention her name even once , throughout the article,
absolving her of any complicity in the sad state of affairs in the GOI

- Its probably worth noting that Sonia Gandhi when this article was published ,
was most probably herself breathing in the clear and life affirming Amercian air.

How long a debate would it take to guess
if the Washington Post would have been just as forthcoming in this Honestly critical assessment of Manmohan Singh ,
at this crucial juncture for the UPA,
If he would have meekly towed the US line. ?

I bet the jury wont be out on that for more than fifteen minutes.

This Gentlemen IMO is the very best of US spin doctors at work.
This isn't journalism folks , this is coercion ! .

The whole episode merely serves to prove how easy it is for the US media to spin the Indians.

Let's not give this affair more then its due ,

Indians frankly dont need a nasty piece of a little journalistic value , from a US daily
That is shoddy and and superficial at best to state for them the Obvious.

What it does the tell you from the way Manmohan Singh has been specifically targetted is that
India's Foreign policy for a change was actually being decided from the PMO rather than 10 Janpath.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ray

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
The article in the Post is nothing but regurgitating what is already known and has been said ad nauseum.

But indeed, it is true that the timing is what is interesting a point to note!
 

Iamanidiot

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2009
Messages
5,325
Likes
1,504
Twitter is abuzz MMS will be removed similar to Sitaram Kesri
 

parijataka

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
4,916
Likes
3,751
Country flag
So Washington post has just confirmed what would be only too apparent to anyone with even a mere passing interest in Indian Politics.

an Honest and Just assessment to appraise the World of Manmohan Singh's Infirmity and numerous failing's of the bungling UPA Govt ,
Or Is it ?
Let's have a closer look
Firstly the timing of this article

- What this Article states isn't exactly news but it's come at a time when UPA is facing a barrage of assaults from all quarters both with in and without , and is literally struggling for air.
Quite clearly Washington Post has chosen to attack Indian PM when it would hurt him the most

- The other important event that this article follows behind is the recent NAM summit in Tehran , where American interference in Syria was vehemently denounced with India stating it opposes all outside (Read US) intervention in Syrian Crisis

- Comes in the wake of India's repeated snubs to the US's constant pressure to distance itself from Iran , and to cut off our Oil imports from them,

-When India far from yielding to US's compulsion has only been getting more cozy with Iran with both nations jointly musing over their interests in Afghanistan


Next to the article Itself ,

- That Congress supremo Sonia Gandhi is the real power behind the throne, and
Manmohan Singh merely enjoys regency at her pleasure is not exactly a secret,
yet the author curiously fails to mention her name even once , throughout the article,
absolving her of any complicity in the sad state of affairs in the GOI

- Its probably worth noting that Sonia Gandhi when this article was published ,
was most probably herself breathing in the clear and life affirming Amercian air.

How long a debate would it take to guess
if the Washington Post would have been just as forthcoming in this Honestly critical assessment of Manmohan Singh ,
at this crucial juncture for the UPA,
If he would have meekly towed the US line. ?

I bet the jury wont be out on that for more than fifteen minutes.

This Gentlemen IMO is the very best of US spin doctors at work.
This isn't journalism folks , this is coercion ! .

The whole episode merely serves to prove how easy it is for the US media to spin the Indians.

Let's not give this affair more then its due ,

Indians frankly dont need a nasty piece of a little journalistic value , from a US daily
That is shoddy and and superficial at best to state for them the Obvious.

What it does the tell you from the way Manmohan Singh has been specifically targetted is that
India's Foreign policy for a change was actually being decided from the PMO rather than 10 Janpath.
You really think so ? Media abroad might not be compromised in the manner it is in India, what you are implying is a conspiracy against MMS at a high level.
 

Cliff@sea

C'est la vie
Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
2,370
Likes
1,028
Country flag
Twitter is abuzz MMS will be removed similar to Sitaram Kesri
Just clearing the way for RG , You have to be blind to not see it coming .

or is their another twist in the tale waiting to happen ?

To underestimate MMS would be a sin now , my fingers are crossed .
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
The media abroad are also malleable.

Murdoch is one of the best examples and he control the media in the UK and the US.

He is a slimeball and a wheeler dealer.
 

Cliff@sea

C'est la vie
Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
2,370
Likes
1,028
Country flag
You really think so ? Media abroad might not be compromised in the manner it is in India, what you are implying is a conspiracy against MMS at a high level.
Compromised by whom . . . . The US administration ?

I wont call that 'being compromised', This is 'serving the Nation'

I have presented the facts to you ,

The dots are there , its upto you , How you chose to connect them .
 
Last edited:

parijataka

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
4,916
Likes
3,751
Country flag
/\/\/\

Yes but they are oppenly aligned to some group/ideology or other. Fox TV is rabidly Right Wing, Guardian of UK is ultra-liberal left wing, etc. Do they have paid media like in India where Congress misdeeds are sought to be covered up (obviously because Congress party is the party with the deepest pockets).
 

parijataka

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
4,916
Likes
3,751
Country flag
Compromised by whom . . . . The US administration ?
I wont call that 'being compromised'
I have presented the facts to you ,
The dots are there , its upto you , How you chose to connect them .
Let us see, perhaps MMS will go down ignominiouslly like Sitaram Kesri or shunted out like PVNR.
 

Cliff@sea

C'est la vie
Senior Member
Joined
May 31, 2012
Messages
2,370
Likes
1,028
Country flag
a Media Group unaligned is a Unicorn sir

It doesnt exist.
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Media Manipulation and the Drums of War: How Media is used to Whip the Nation into Wartime Frenzy


VIDEO: Faking It: How the Media Manipulates the World into War
- by James Corbett – 2012-01-02

The centuries-long history of how media has been used to whip the nation into wartime frenzy, dehumanize the supposed enemies, and even to manipulate the public into believing in causes for war that, decades later, were admitted to be completely fictitious.


As the drums of war begin to beat once again in Iran, Syria, the South China Sea, and other potential hotspots and flashpoints around the globe, concerned citizens are asking how a world so sick of bloodshed and a population so tired of conflict could be led to this spot once again.

To understand this seeming paradox, we must first understand the centuries-long history of how media has been used to whip the nation into wartime frenzy, dehumanize the supposed enemies, and even to manipulate the public into believing in causes for war that, decades later, were admitted to be completely fictitious.

The term "yellow journalism" was coined to describe the type of sensationalistic, scandal-driven, and often erroneous style of reporting popularized by newspapers like William Randolph Hearst's New York Journal. In one of the most egregious examples of this phenomenon, Hearst's papers widely trumpeted the sinking of the Maine as the work of the Spanish. Whipped into an anti-Spanish frenzy by a daily torrent of stories depicting Spanish forces' alleged torture and rape of Cubans, and pushed over the edge by the Maine incident, the public welcomed the beginning of the US-Spanish war. Although it is now widely believed that the explosion on the Maine was due to a fire in one of its coal bunkers, the initial lurid reports of Spanish involvement stuck and the nation was led into war.

In many ways, the phrase infamously attributed to Hearst in reply to his illustrator "You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war," apocryphal as the story may be, nevertheless perfectly encodes the method by which the public would be led to war time and again through the decades.

The US was drawn into World War I by the sinking of the Lusitania, a British ocean liner carrying American passengers that was torpedoed by German U-boats off the coast of Ireland, killing over 1,000 of its passengers. What the public was not informed about at the time, of course, was that just one week before the incident, then-First Lord of the Admiralty Winston Churchill had written to the President of the Board of Trade that it was "most important to attract neutral shipping to our shores, in the hopes especially of embroiling the United States with Germany." Nor did reports of the attack announce that the ship was carrying rifle ammunition and other military supplies. Instead, reports once again emphasized that the attack was an out-of-the-blue strike by a maniacal enemy, and the public was led into the war.

The US involvement in World War II was likewise the result of deliberate disinformation. Although the Honolulu Advertiser had even predicted the attack on Pearl Harbor days in advance, the Japanese Naval codes had already been deciphered by that time, and that even Henry Stimson, the US Secretary of War, had noted in his diary the week before that he had discussed in a meeting with Roosevelt "how we should maneuver them [the Japanese] into the position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves," the public were still led to believe that the Pearl Harbor attack had been completely unforeseen. Just last month, a newly-declassified memo emerged showing that FDR had been warned of an impending Japanese attack on Hawaii just three days before the events at Pearl Harbor, yet the history books still portray Pearl Harbor as an example of a surprise attack.

In August 1964, the public was told that the North Vietnamese had attacked a US Destroyer in the Gulf of Tonkin on two separate occasions. The attacks were portrayed as a clear example of "communist aggression" and a resolution was soon passed in Congress authorizing President Johnson to begin deploying US forces in Vietnam. In 2005, an internal NSA study was released concluding that the second attack in fact never took place. In effect, 60000 American servicemen and as many as three million Vietnamese, let alone as many as 500,000 Cambodians and Laotians, lost their lives because of an incident that did not occur anywhere but in the imagination of the Johnson administration and the pages of the American media.

In 1991, the world was introduced to the emotional story of Nayirah, a Kuwaiti girl who testified about the atrocities committed by Iraqi forces in Kuwait.

What the world was never told was that the incident had in fact been the work of a public relations firm, Hill and Knowltown, and the girl had actually been the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador. Once again, the public was whipped into a frenzy of hatred for the Hussein regime, not for the documented atrocities that it had actually committed on segments of its own population with weapons supplied to them by the United States itself, but on the basis of an imaginary story told to the public via their televisions, orchestrated by a pr firm.

In the lead-up to the war on Iraq, the American media infamously took the lead in framing the debate about the Iraqi government's weapons of mass destruction NOT as a question of whether or not they even existed, but as a question of where they had been hidden and what should be done to disarm them. The New York Times led the way with Judith Miller's now infamous reporting on the Iraqi WMD story, now known to have been based on false information from untrustworthy sources, but the rest of the media fell into line with the NBC Nightly News asking "what precise threat Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction pose to America", and Time debating whether Hussein was "making a good-faith effort to disarm Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." Reports about chemical weapons stashes were reported on before they were confirmed, although headlines boldly asserted their existence as indisputable fact. We now know that in fact the stockpiles did not exist, and the administration premeditatedly lied the country into yet another war, but the most intense opposition the Bush administration ever received over this documented war crime was some polite correction on the Sunday political talk show circuit.

Remarkably, the public at large has seemingly learned nothing from all of these documented historical manipulations. If anything, the media has become even bolder in its attempts to manipulate the public's perceptions, perhaps emboldened by the fact that so few in the audience seem willing to question the picture that is being painted for them on the evening news.

Later that year, CNN aired footage of a bombed out Tskhinvali in South Ossetia, falsely labeling it as footage of Gori, which they said had been attacked by the Russians.

In 2009, the BBC showed a cropped image of a rally in Iran which they claimed was a crowd of protesters who assembled to show their opposition to the Iranian government. An uncropped version of the same photograph displayed on the LA Times' website, however, revealed that the photo in fact came from a rally in support of Ahmedinejad.

In August of 2011, the BBC ran footage of what they claimed was a celebration in Tripoli's Green Square. When sharp-eyed viewers noticed that the flags in the footage were in fact Indian flags, the BBC was forced to admit that they had "accidentally" broadcast footage from India instead of Tripoli.

Also that month, CNN reported on a story from the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights claiming that eight infants in incubators had died in a hospital in Hama when Syrian authorities cut off power in the area. Some news sites even carried pictures of the infants. The images were later admitted to have been taken in Egypt and no evidence has ever emerged to back up the accusations.

As breathtaking as all of these lies, manipulations and so-called "mistakes" are, they in and of themselves don't represent the only functions of the media for the war machine. Now, the US government is taking the lead in becoming more and more directly involved with the shaping of the media message on war propaganda, and the general public is becoming even more ensnared in a false picture of the world through the Pentagon's own lens.

In 2005, the Bush White House admitted to producing videos that were designed to look like news reports from legitimate independent journalists, and then feeding those reports to media outlets as prepackaged material ready to air on the evening news. When the Government Accountability Office ruled that these fake news reports in fact constituted illegal covert propaganda, the White House simply issued a memo declaring the practice to be legal.

In April 2008, the New York Times revealed a secret US Department of Defense program that was launched in 2002 and involved using retired military officers to implant Pentagon talking points in the media. The officers were presented as "independent analysts" on talk shows and news programs, although they had been specially briefed beforehand by the Pentagon. In December of 2011, the DoD's own Inspector General released a report concluding that the program was in perfect compliance with government policies and regulations.

Earlier this year, it was revealed the the US government had contracted with HBGary Federal to develop software that create fake social media accounts in order to steer public opinion and promote propaganda on popular websites. The federal contract for the software sourced back to the MacDill Air Force Base in Florida.

As the vehicle through which information from the outside world is captured, sorted, edited and transmitted into our homes, the mass media has the huge responsibility of shaping and informing our understanding of events to which we don't have first-hand access. This is an awesome responsibility in even the most ideal conditions, with diligent reporters guided by trustworthy editors doing their level best to report the most important news in the most straightforward way.

But in a media landscape where a handful of companies own virtually all of the print, radio and television media in each nation, the only recourse the public has is to turn away from the mainstream media altogether. And that is precisely what is happening.

As study after study and report after report has shown, the death of the old media has accelerated in recent years, with more and more people abandoning newspapers and now even television as their main source of news. Instead, the public is increasingly turning toward online sources for their news and information, something that is necessarily worrying for the war machine itself, a system that can only truly flourish when the propaganda arm is held under monopolistic control.

But as citizens turn away from the New York Times and toward independent websites, many run and maintained by citizen journalists and amateur editors, the system that has consolidated its control over the minds of the public for generations seems to finally be showing signs that it may not be invincible.

Surely this is not to say that online media is impervious to the defects that have made the traditional media so unreliable. Quite the contrary. But the difference is that online, there is still for the time being relative freedom of choice at the individual level. While internet freedom exists, individual readers and viewers don't have to take the word of any website or pundit or commentator on any issue. They can check the source documentation themselves, except, perhaps not coincidentally, on the websites of the traditional media bastions, which tend not to link source material and documentation in their articles.

Hence the SOPA Act, Protect IP, the US government's attempts to seize websites at the domain name level, and all of the other concerted attacks we have seen on internet freedoms in recent years.

Because ultimately, an informed and engaged public is far less likely to go along with wars waged for power and profit. And as the public becomes better informed about the very issues that the media has tried to lie to them about for so long, they realize that the answer to all of the mainstream media's war cheerleading and blatant manipulation is perhaps simpler than we ever suspected: All we have to do is turn them off.

References

The Media War on Libya: Justifying War through Lies and Fabrications
by Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya

Using Fake Intelligence to Justify War on Iran
by Michel Chossudovsky

Demonizing the Enemy: Preparing Americans and the World for an All Out Attack against Iran
by Russ Baker

Killing the Truth: Western Mainstream Media Complicit in NATO War Crimes in Libya
by Finian Cunningham

The Corporate Media Complex: Drawing Back the Veil on the U.S. Propaganda Machine
by Dr. Robert P. Abele

Media Manipulation and the Drums of War: How Media is used to Whip the Nation into Wartime Frenzy | Global Research
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
Spies and Journalists: Taking a Look at Their Intersections
Moscow recruited journalists for their access, insights and confidential information.

By Murray Seeger

Spies and journalists, journalists and spies: Is there a difference? Tightly embraced, the two disciplines historically played off each other in the search for foreign news and information.

Sometimes there were no degrees of separation. U.S. agencies used journalists as covert agents until the reforms of the Vietnam era. As a Congressional committee reported in the early 1970's, "Full-time correspondents for major U.S. publications have worked concurrently for the CIA, passing along information received in the normal course of their regular jobs and even, on occasion, traveling to otherwise non-newsworthy areas to acquire data."

The agency also had stringers and other freelancers who collected information and rumors and planted stories in foreign media that were fed into the international news traffic and sometimes appeared in U.S. print and electronic outlets.

Of course, the rationale was, "everyone does it." The British certainly did. Kim Philby, the most notorious double agent in modern times, was placed in Beirut by British intelligence as correspondent for three icons of the London media, The Times, The Economist, and The Observer. He ran to Moscow with the wife of an American colleague after London finally discovered his higher allegiance.

Still, the grand champions at mixing the two trades were the Russians with their ubiquitous KGB and GRU, the military intelligence arm. In this new, encyclopedic book about Soviet spies, one of the authors, Alexander Vassiliev describes how he was recruited for the American division of the KGB.

He was "clean," meaning no Jews in his family; he had high grades and good language skills, and he was politically loyal and sober. "Plus, I was going to get a degree in international journalism, and that profession was considered the best cover for an intelligence officer."

After a year of honest presswork to assume his disguise, Vassiliev went to work for the KGB until the agency was shut down by the collapse of the Soviet Union. By chance, the post-Soviet security agency assigned Vassiliev to collect information from secret files on espionage for publication in the United States. These files provide the core of "Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America."

This book is a thorough documentation of the recruitment and operation of Moscow's spy networks. It follows three previous essential books also produced by John Earl Haynes, a historian at the Library of Congress, and Harvey Klehr, a professor at Emory University: "Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America," "The Secret World of American Communism," and "The Soviet World of American Communism."

"Spies" has received greatest attention for closing the cases of Alger Hiss and Julius and Ethel Rosenberg as genuine Soviet agents and clearing any remaining doubts about Robert Oppenheimer, who was not a spy.

No, this is not a rerun of the McCarthy hearings. These are nonpolitical case studies that produce clear verdicts of individual culpability. And the authors do not pretend to have exhausted the subject. The notes that Vassiliev collected are not complete. His access was cut off after the reform government was replaced and former Communists took charge of the SVR, the successor to the KGB.

The new material has made it possible for the authors to close the headline cases, delve deeper into the entire range of Soviet espionage, and devote a chapter to spies and journalists. One conclusion they reach is that everyone's favorite leftist journalist, I.F. Stone, was a paid Soviet agent in 1936-38 and that he kept close contact with Soviet intelligence for at least six more years.

The authors discuss the disagreement among those who believe Stone was only a Soviet sympathizer and those who think he was an active Soviet agent. The use of a specific Russian phrase in his files is what led Haynes and Klehr to conclude that Stone was paid to spy for the Soviets. The file states that Stone entered "the channel of normal operational work" in 1936. This term was reserved for paid agents. (Others who've written about "Spies," such as Nicholas Lemann, are not persuaded; he wrote in his New Yorker review that the authors were not able to "establish that Stone was paid or had more than occasional contact with the KGB.")

Under his birth name, Isidor Feinstein, Stone was given the undercover name "bliny" or pancake and asked to supply tidbits of information and to recruit or identify other possible agents or informants. The authors claim that he acted as the intermediary between at least one recruit and the KGB.

His name disappeared from the files after 1938, presumably because, like many American leftists, Stone resented the notorious 1939 pact between Stalin and Hitler. Now known under his new byline, I.F. Stone was again in contact with KGB sources in 1942 and, in 1943, he employed the wife of Stanley Graze, a KGB source, as his personal secretary. In 1944, a well-known KGB agent, Vladimir Plavdin, tried to re-enlist Stone, but was rebuffed because Stone, the father of three children, feared he would be identified by the FBI.

Dan Froomkin reviewed MacPherson's book in the Summer 2007 issue of Nieman Reports.Still, dear old "Izzy" has outspoken defenders. Myra MacPherson, a skilled journalist who wrote the 2006 book, "All Governments Lie: The Life and Times of Rebel Journalist I.F. Stone," published a blog post in May for The Huffington Post that admitted Stone was myopic about Russia, "But being misled and naive does not make one a spy."

Stone had been recruited by Frank Palmer, a labor journalist and KGB agent who ran Federated Press, a leftist news agency that supplied material to union newspapers and radical publications in the 1930's. Palmer also signed up Louis Budenz, who became managing editor of the Communist Party paper, the Daily Worker, and later reappeared as a rabid anti-Communist.

The KGB in 1941 counted 22 journalists among its American agents, plus 49 engineers, four economists, and eight professors. While Moscow had a priority for technical information, it recruited journalists "for their access to inside information and sources on politics and policy, insights into personalities, and confidential and nonpublic information that never made it into published stories."

Dozens of other American journalists met regularly with Russians who identified themselves as journalists but were KGB or GRU officers. Only Soviet citizens with the highest security clearance could meet openly with foreigners. The Americans thought they were getting inside information from these contacts, but the Russians peddled dross. The gossip Americans offered had higher value to the Kremlin and sometimes earned them cover names for the files.

Ernest Hemingway had enough contacts to be given a KGB code name, "Argo," but he was written off after he attacked the Soviet Union in print. The KGB was fascinated by the well-connected columnist, Walter Lippmann, a liberal whose position in journalism has never been replicated. The KGB called him "Imperialist," but only penetrated his office by planting Mary Price, a Communist, as his secretary.

Pravdin, the agent who failed to re-enlist Stone or seduce Lippmann, was ostensibly a TASS correspondent, but actually was number two in the New York KGB station. He was the complete KGB agent; in 1944, in Switzerland, he assassinated Ignace Poretsky, a KGB defector.

Whittaker Chambers, a GRU agent who was later a highly respected writer for Time, and Helen Bentley, operator of a KGB network, reported for PM, a short-lived New York tabloid that employed many leftists. She recruited Bernard Redmont, one of the best-known reporters named in this book, who was called "Berny" in the Communist Party and "Mon" in the KGB files.

Redmont supplied marginal material to his handlers until he was cut off in 1945. He always denied his Communist connections through a long career with U.S. News & World Report, CBS and Westinghouse Broadcasting, and Boston University.

Among other names identified in "Spies," Winston Burdett was called "Eagle" by the KGB, since he was a foreign correspondent for the former Brooklyn Eagle, who contacted foreign agents in his European travels. George Seldes reported from Moscow for the Chicago Tribune and later joined the Communist Party and published a left-wing newsletter with Bruce Minton, a KGB contact. Robert Allen, best known as Drew Pearson's partner in the hard-hitting column Washington Merry-Go-Round, was paid $100 a month by the KGB early in his career.

The journalist chapter is only a small part of this massive study that melds together the new material with the research from the authors' three previous books. Many of the journalists here were marginal to the trade, but there are enough of them to affirm the conclusion the authors reach:

Unlike government employees or scientists who broke the law by turning over classified material to the KGB, most of the journalists profiled "¦ violated no statute of that era. Few had any access to secret data. Members of a profession dedicated to openness, however, they covertly enlisted in an organization dedicated to deception.

They used their access to information to deceive their employers, their colleagues, and their publics about their loyalties and veracity. They betrayed confidences and pursued political agendas while pretending to be professional journalists.

Citing Stone, the authors pointed out that some reporters "wrote prolifically about issues of subversion and espionage without ever acknowledging that they knew far more about how the KGB operated than they cared to express."

Murray Seeger, a 1962 Nieman Fellow, covered the former Soviet Union, Eastern and Central Europe for 10 years for the Los Angeles Times. He is the author of "Discovering Russia: 200 Years of American Journalism."

Nieman Reports | Spies and Journalists: Taking a Look at Their Intersections
What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander!
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,835
One does not become a media Tsar without the blessings of the powers that be.

You play ball to win!
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top