Sunday, August 26, 2018


Senator McCain has passed. While I pray for his family as I would anyone who suffered a loss, I say, this is the man who stonewalled the House Committee to Investigate prisoners left behind in Vietnam. I could perhaps look past him singing to the Communists.... but I will never forgive he and his father's betrayal of their fellow servicemen; many of which lost their lives on the U.S.S. Liberty. I will never forget nor forgive his duplicity in the cover-up of the attack of the U.S.S. Liberty. I happen to be honored to be friends with a few survivors of the Liberty. And we all know what happened. As so did Songbird Johnny the Prince of Hanoi. The following videos and articles, are testimony to that effect.

The Betrayal of American Veterans
Americans who volunteer for military service effectively write a blank check, payable to the United States of America for an amount "up to and including their lives." The United States, in turn, promises to spend these checks responsibly. That bargain implicitly includes a promise by the United States to protect them and to seek retribution against anyone who harms them. In the case of USS Liberty, the United States and especially John McCain, has failed to keep its end of the bargain.

May God have mercy on his soul.

The next video is of the testimony of a man who I have had the honor of having on my radio show and on our network, who explained to me from his perspective of the events of that fateful day that John McCain slights and continues to cover up. Phil Tourney. An American Patriot.

RTR Truth Media - Tom Lacovara-Stewart

John McCain Confronted about the USS Liberty

The Loss of Liberty -- Why Did the U.S. Allow Israel To Attack Its Largest Spyship Killing 34 Americans and Wounding Over 170 Others?

The USS Liberty was an electronic intelligence-gathering ship that was cruising international waters off the Egyptian coast on June 8, 1967. Israeli planes and torpedo boats opened fire on the Liberty in the midst of what became known as the Israeli-Arab Six-Day War. 34 Americans were killed and more than 170 were wounded in the attack. Israel and its supporters have long maintained that the attack was a "tragic case of misidentification," an explanation that Lyndon Johnson's administration did not formally challenge. 

Israel claimed its forces thought the ship was an Egyptian vessel and apologized to the United States. After the attack, a Navy court of inquiry concluded there was insufficient information to make a judgment about why Israel attacked the ship, stopping short of assigning blame or determining whether it was an accident. On Wednesday, a former top Navy attorney publicly said for the first time that ...

"President Lyndon Johnson and Defense Secretary Robert McNamara ordered the U.S. military investigation to conclude that the Israeli attack was an accident". 

The attorney, retired Captain Ward Boston, said ...

..."the White House ordered investigators to conclude that the attack was a case of 'mistaken identity' despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary." 

Boston was the senior legal counsel to the Navy's 1967 review of the attack. He said he was prompted to come forward following the publication of the recent book "The Liberty Incident" which concluded the attack was an accident.

"Those sailors who were wounded, who were eyewitnesses, have not been heard from by the American public. . . [Their story] leaves no doubt but what this was a premeditated, carefully reconnoitered attack by Israeli aircraft against our ship."

-- US Senator Adlai Stevenson III in interview with Wm. J. Small, UPI, for publication September 28, 1980

"The Loss of Liberty", excerpts from the independent documentary about the Liberty attack produced by Howard Films, written and directed by Tito Howard. James Bamford, investigative journalist and author of the books "The Puzzle Palace: A Report on America's Most Secret Agency" and "Body of Secrets: Anatomy of the Ultra-Secret National Security Agency." Admiral Thomas Moorer, retired four-star admiral who served as chief of Naval Operations and as a chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He is the only American admiral to command both the Atlantic and Pacific fleets and chief of naval operations for two terms and chairman of the joint chiefs for two terms. He led a year-long independent commission investigating the bombing of the USS Liberty and is now calling for a full Congressional investigation.

And then there was Cindy McCain.....

The War Secrets Sen. John McCain Hides
Former POW Fights Public Access to POW/MIA Files
By Sydney Schanberg

NEW YORK ( — The voters who were drawn to John S. McCain in his run for the Republican presidential nomination this year often cited, as the core of his appeal, his openness and blunt candor and willingness to admit past lapses and release documents that other senators often hold back. These qualities also seemed to endear McCain to the campaign press corps, many of whom wrote about how refreshing it was to travel on the McCain campaign bus, “The Straight Talk Express,” and observe a maverick speaking his mind rather than a traditional candidate given to obfuscation and spin.

But there was one subject that was off-limits, a subject the Arizona senator almost never brings up and has never been open about — his long-time opposition to releasing documents and information about American prisoners of war in Vietnam and the missing in action who have still not been accounted for. Since McCain himself, a downed Navy pilot, was a prisoner in Hanoi for 5 1/2 years, his staunch resistance to laying open the POW/MIA records has baffled colleagues and others who have followed his career. Critics say his anti-disclosure campaign, in close cooperation with the Pentagon and the intelligence community, has been successful. Literally thousands of documents that would otherwise have been declassified long ago have been legislated into secrecy.

For example, all the Pentagon debriefings of the prisoners who returned from Vietnam are now classified and closed to the public under a statute enacted in the 1990s with McCain’s backing. He says this is to protect the privacy of former POWs and gives it as his reason for not making public his own debriefing.

But the law allows a returned prisoner to view his own file or to designate another person to view it. has repeatedly asked the senator for an interview for this article and for permission to view his debriefing documents. He has not responded. His office did recently send an e-mail, referring to a favorable article about the senator in the Jan. 1 issue of Newsweek. In the article, the reporter, Michael Isikoff, says that he was allowed to review McCain’s debriefing report and that it contained “nothing incriminating” — although in a phone interview Isikoff acknowledged that “there were redactions” in the document. Isikoff declined to say who showed him the document, but has learned it was McCain.

Many Vietnam veterans and former POWs have fumed at McCain for keeping these and other wartime files sealed up. His explanation, offered freely in Senate hearings and floor speeches, is that no one has been proven still alive and that releasing the files would revive painful memories and cause needless emotional stress to former prisoners, their families and the families of MIAs still unaccounted for. But what if some of these returned prisoners, as has always been the case at the conclusion of wars, reveal information to their debriefing officers about other prisoners believed still held in captivity? What justification is there for filtering such information through the Pentagon rather than allowing access to source materials? For instance, debriefings from returning Korean war POWs, available in full to the American public, have provided both citizens and government investigators with important information about other Americans who went missing in that conflict.

Would not most families of missing men, no matter how emotionally drained, want to know? And would they not also want to know what the government was doing to rescue their husbands and sons? Hundreds of MIA families have for years been questioning if concern for their feelings is the real reason for the secrecy.

Prisoners left behind

A smaller number of former POWs, MIA families and veterans have suggested there is something especially damning about McCain that the senator wants to keep hidden. Without release of the files, such accusations must be viewed as unsubstantiated speculation. The main reason, however, for seeking these files is to find out if there is any information in the debriefings, or in other MIA documents that McCain and the Pentagon have kept sealed, about how many prisoners were held back by North Vietnam after the Paris peace treaty was signed in January 1973. The defense and intelligence establishment has long resisted the declassification of critical records on this subject. McCain has been the main congressional force behind this effort.

The prisoner return in 1973 saw 591 Americans repatriated by North Vietnam. The problem was that the U.S. intelligence list of men believed to be alive at that time in captivity — in Vietnam, Laos and possibly across the border in southern China and in the Soviet Union — was much larger.

Possibly hundreds of men larger. The State Department stated publicly in 1973 that intelligence data showed the prisoner list to be starkly incomplete. For example, only nine of the 591 returnees came out of Laos, though experts in U.S. military intelligence listed 311 men as missing in that Hanoi-run country alone, and their field reports indicated that many of those men were probably still alive. Hanoi said it was returning all the prisoners it had. President Nixon, on March 29, 1973, seconded that claim, telling the nation on television: “All of our American POWs are on their way home.” This discrepancy has never been acknowledged or explained by official Washington. Over the years in Washington, McCain, at times almost single-handedly, has pushed through Pentagon-desired legislation to make it impossible or much harder for the public to acquire POW/MIA information and much easier for the defense bureaucracy to keep it hidden.

The Truth Bill

In 1989, 11 members of the House of Representatives introduced a measure they called “The Truth Bill.” A brief and simple document, it said: “[The] head of each department or agency which holds or receives any records and information, including live-sighting reports, which have been correlated or possibly correlated to United States personnel listed as prisoner of war or missing in action from World War II, the Korean conflict and the Vietnam conflict shall make available to the public all such records and information held or received by that department or agency. In addition, the Department of Defense shall make available to the public with its records and information a complete listing of United States personnel classified as prisoner of war, missing in action, or killed in action (body not returned) from World War II, the Korean conflict, and the Vietnam conflict.”

Opposed by Pentagon

Bitterly opposed by the Pentagon, “The Truth Bill” got nowhere. It was reintroduced in the next Congress in 1991 — and again disappeared. Then, suddenly, out of the Senate, birthed by the Arizona senator, a new piece of legislation emerged. It was called “The McCain Bill.” This measure turned “The Truth Bill ” on its head. It created a bureaucratic maze from which only a fraction of the available documents could emerge. And it became law. So restrictive were its provisions that one clause actually said the Pentagon didn’t even have to inform the public when it received intelligence that Americans were alive in captivity.

First, it decreed that only three categories of information could be released, i.e., “information … that may pertain to the location, treatment, or condition of” unaccounted-for personnel from the Vietnam War. (This was later amended in 1995 and 1996 to include the Cold War and the Korean conflict.) If information is received about anything other than “location, treatment or condition,” under this statute, which was enacted in December 199l, it does not get disclosed.

Second, before such information can be released to the public, permission must be granted by the primary next of kin, or PNOK. In the case of Vietnam, letters were sent by the Department of Defense to the 2,266 PNOK. More than 600 declined consent (including 243 who failed to respond, considered under the law to be a “no”).

Hurdles and limitations

Finally, in addition to these hurdles and limitations, the McCain act does not specifically order the declassification of the information. Further, it provides the Defense Department with other justifications for withholding documents. One such clause says that if the information “may compromise the safety of any United States personnel … who remain not accounted for but who may still be alive in captivity, then the Secretary [of Defense] may withhold that record or other information from the disclosure otherwise required by this section.”

Boiled down, the preceding paragraph means that the Defense Department is not obligated to tell the public about prisoners believed alive in captivity and what efforts are being made to rescue them. It only has to notify the White House and the intelligence committees in the Senate and House. The committees are forbidden under law from releasing such information.

At the same time, the McCain act is now being used to deny access to other sorts of records. For instance, part of a recent Freedom of Information Act request for the records of a mutiny on merchant marine vessel in the 1970s was rejected by a Defense Department official who cited the McCain act. Similarly, requests for information about Americans missing in the Korean War and declared dead for the last 45 years have been denied by officials who reference the McCain statute. (Read a denial letter.)

Another bill gutted in 1996

And then there is the Missing Service Personnel Act, which McCain succeeded in gutting in 1996. A year before, the act had been strengthened, with bipartisan support, to compel the Pentagon to deploy more resources with greater speed to locate and rescue missing men. The measure imposed strict reporting requirements.

McCain amended the heart out of the statute. For example, the 1995 version required a unit commander to report to his theater commander within two days that a person was missing and describe what rescue and recovery efforts were underway. The McCain amendments allowed 10 days to pass before a report had to be made.

In the 1995 act, the theater commander, after receiving the MIA report, would have 14 days to report to his Cabinet secretary in Washington. His report had to “ certify” that all necessary actions were being taken and all appropriate assets were being used “to resolve the status of the missing person.” This section was stricken from the act, replaced with language that made the Cabinet secretary, not the theater commander, the recipient of the report from the field. All the certification requirements also were stricken. ‘Turn commanders into clerks’ “This, ” said a McCain memo, “transfers the bureaucracy involved out of the field to Washington.” He argued that the original legislation, if left intact, “ would accomplish nothing but create new jobs for lawyers and turn military commanders into clerks.”

In response, the backers of the original statute cited the Pentagon’s stained record on MIA’s and argued that military history had shown that speed of action is critical to the chances of recovering a missing man. Moving “the bureaucracy ” to Washington, they said, was merely a way to sweep the issue under a rug.

Chilling effect cited

One final evisceration in the law was McCain’s removal of all its enforcement teeth. The original act provided for criminal penalties for anyone, such as military bureaucrats in Washington, who destroy or cover up or withhold from families any information about a missing man. McCain erased this part of the law. He said the penalties would have a chilling effect on the Pentagon’s ability to recruit personnel for its POW/MIA office.

McCain does not deal lightly with those who disagree with him on any of these issues or who suggest that the evidence indeed shows that a significant number of prisoners were alive and cached away as future bargaining chips when he came home in the group of 591 released in 1973.

Over the years, he has regularly vilified any group or person who keeps trying to pry out more evidence about MIAs. He calls them “hoaxers” and “charlatans ” and “conspiracy theorists.” He decries the “bizarre rantings of the MIA hobbyists” and describes them as “individuals primarily who make their living off of keeping the issue alive.” Before he died last year of leukemia, retired Col. Ted Guy, a highly admired POW and one of the most dogged resisters in the camps, wrote an angry open letter to the senator in an MIA newsletter. In it, he said of McCain’s stream of insults: “John, does this include Senator Bob Smith and other concerned elected officials? Does this include the families of the missing where there is overwhelming evidence that their loved ones were ‘last known alive? ’ Does this include some of your fellow POWs?”

Sightings dismissed

McCain has said again and again that he has seen no “credible” evidence that more than a tiny handful of men might have been alive in captivity after the official prison return in 1973. He dismisses all of the subsequent radio intercepts, live sightings, satellite photos, CIA reports, defector information, recovered enemy documents and reports of ransom demands — thousands and thousands of pieces of information indicating live captives — as meaningless. He has even described these intelligence reports as the rough equivalent of UFO and alien sightings.

In Congress, colleagues and staffers who have seen him erupt — in the open and, more often, in closed meetings — profess themselves confounded by his behavior. Insisting upon anonymity so as not to invite one of his verbal assaults, they say they have no easy way to explain why a former POW would work so hard and so persistently to keep POW/MIA information from coming out. Typical is the comment of one congressional veteran who has watched McCain over many years: “This is a man not at peace with himself.” McCain’s sense of disgrace

Some McCain watchers searching for answers point to his recently published best-selling autobiography, Faith of My Fathers, half of which is devoted to his years as a prisoner. In the book, he says he felt badly throughout his captivity because he knew he was being treated more leniently than his fellow POWs owing to his propaganda value as the son of Adm. John S. McCain II, who was then the CINCPAC — commander in chief of all U.S. forces in the Pacific region, including Vietnam. (His captors considered him a prize catch and nicknamed him the “Crown Prince.”)

Also in the book, the Arizona Senator repeatedly expresses guilt and disgrace at having broken under torture and given the North Vietnamese a taped confession, broadcast over the camp loudspeakers, saying he was a war criminal who had, among other acts, bombed a school. “I felt faithless and couldn’t control my despair,” he writes. He writes, revealing that he made two half-hearted attempts at suicide. Most tellingly, he said he lived in “dread” that his father would find out. “I still wince,” he says, “when I recall wondering if my father had heard of my disgrace.”

After McCain returned home, he says he told his father about the confession, but “ never discussed it at length.” The admiral, McCain says, didn’t indicate he had heard anything about it before.

McCain’s father died in 1981. McCain writes: “I only recently learned that the tape … had been broadcast outside the prison and had come to the attention of my father.”

McCain wasn’t alone — it’s well-known that a sizeable percentage of prisoners of war will break down under torture. In fact, many of his supporters view McCain’s prison travails as evidence of his overall heroism. Fears unpublished details?

But how would McCain’s forced confession alone explain his endless campaign against releasing MIA/POW information?

Some veterans and other McCain watchers have speculated that McCain’s mortification, given his family’s proud military tradition (his grandfather was also an admiral), was so severe that it continues to haunt him and make him fear any opening up of information that could revive previously unpublished details of the era, including his own nagging history.

Another question that defies easy explanation is why there has never been any significant public outcry over the POWs who didn’t come home or about the machinations of public officials like McCain who carefully wove a blanket of secrecy around this issue. It can only be understood in the context of what the Vietnam War did to the American mind.

Forgetting the Vietnam War

It was the longest war in our history and the only one in which we accepted defeat and brought our troops home. It had roiled the country more than any conflict but the Civil War — to the point where almost everyone, regardless of their politics, wanted to get away from anything that reminded them of this bloody failure. Only a small band of Americans, led by Vietnam veterans and MIA families, kept asking for more information about the missing men and demanding that the government keep its promise to do everything possible to bring them home. Everyone else seemed to be running away from all things Vietnam.

Knowledgeable observers note that it’s quite possible that Nixon, leading the country’s withdrawal, accepted the peace treaty of Jan. 27, 1973, while telling himself that somehow he would negotiate the release of the remaining POWs later. But when Congress refused to provide the $3 billion to $4 billion in proposed national development reparations that National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger had dangled as a carrot to Hanoi, the prospects for the abandoned men began to unravel.

Observers also point out that over the years that followed, Washington continued to reject paying what it branded as ransom money and so, across six presidencies, including the present one, the issue of POWs who may have been left behind remained unacknowledged by the White House and the Pentagon. Hanoi refused to correct the impression that all the prisoners had been returned, and Washington, for its part, refused to admit that it had known about abandoned POWs from the beginning.


Mainstream press indifferent

Of course, the government and many mainstream scholars reject this theory. And whether any such prisoners remain alive to this day is impossible for the outsider to know. Intelligence sources privately express the belief that most of the men had either died or been executed by the early 1990s. Presumably, these sources say, the POW’s lost their bargaining value to Hanoi as time passed and ransom dollars never materialized. Eventually Hanoi began seeking another path to the money — the renewal of relations with Washington. Diplomatic ties were restored by President Clinton in 1994, and American economic investment quickly followed.

One factor in the nation’s indifference to the POWs was the stance of the national press. From the very start to the present, the mainstream media showed little interest. With just a smattering of exceptions, the journalistic community, like the rest of the country, ran away from the story. During the war, thousands of American journalists poured into Vietnam in shifts; now only a handful cover the country, most of them filing business stories about Nike and other conglomerates opening up factories to avail themselves of the cheap labor.

Even reporters who had covered the war came to view the MIA story, in the years afterward, as a concoction of the far right. Without doing much, if any, first-hand reporting, such as digging into the available documents in the National Archives, nearly all these journalists dismissed the MIA story as unfounded.

Generated a hero aura

In McCain’s recently suspended campaign for the presidency, it was almost as if, in the press’s eyes, he was to be treated differently and quite gingerly because of the hero aura generated by his POW experience. None of his political opponents ever dared criticize him for his legislative history on withholding POW information, and the press never brought itself to be direct enough to even question him on the issue.

It’s not that he didn’t give reporters plenty of openings to ask the right Vietnam questions. For one thing, he used his history as a Vietnam prisoner as a constant campaign theme in his speeches. Rarely did he appear without a larger-than- life photo backdrop showing him in battle gear as a Navy pilot before he was shot down over Hanoi in 1967.

Here is a passage typical of the soft, even erroneous reporting on McCain — this from a March 4 story in The New York Times: “His most striking achievement came when he joined with another Vietnam veteran, Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, to puncture the myth that Vietnam continued holding American prisoners. ” The piece went on to speak with admiration about “his concern over the prisoners-of-war issue” — but, tellingly, it offered no details.

Tepid veterans’ vote 

The press corps, covering the state-by-state primary vote, made an assumption, based apparently on sentiment, that McCain, as the war hero, would capture the significant veterans’ vote by stunning margins. Actually, he didn’t capture it at all. He carried veterans only in the states that he won, like Michigan and New Hampshire, but was rejected by them in the larger number of states that he lost, like New York, Ohio and California. Added together, when the states were tallied up, the veterans’ vote went to George W. Bush.

The Washington press corps had gone openly soft once before on the prisoner issue, again benefiting McCain. That was in 1991-93, during the proceedings of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs. McCain starred on that committee, working hand in hand with his new ally, Sen. John Kerry, the panel’s co-chairman, to play down voluminous evidence that sizeable numbers of men were still held alive after the prisoner return in 1973. One example: At the time of the committee’s hearings, the Pentagon had received more than 1,600 firsthand sightings of live American prisoners and nearly 14,000 secondhand reports. The intelligence officers who gathered these reports from refugees and other informants in the field described a large number of them as “credible” and so marked the reports. Some of the informants had been given lie-detector tests and passed.

But the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency, after reviewing all the reports, concluded that they “do not constitute evidence” that men were still alive at the time.

McCain and Kerry endorsed the Pentagon’s findings. They also treated both the Pentagon and the CIA more as the committee’s partners than as objects of its inquiry. As one committee staff investigator said, in a memo preserved from the period: “Speaking for the other investigators, I can say we are sick and tired of this investigation being controlled by those we are supposedly investigating.”

McCain stood out because he always showed up for the committee hearings where witnesses were going to talk about specific pieces of evidence. He would belittle and berate these witnesses, questioning their patriotism and otherwise scoffing at their credibility. All of this is on record in the National Archives.

Confrontation with witness

One such witness was Dolores Apodaca Alfond, chairwoman of the National Alliance of Families, an all-volunteer MIA organization. Her pilot brother, Capt. Victor J. Apodaca, out of the Air Force Academy, was shot down over Dong Hoi, North Vietnam, in the early evening of June 8, 1967. At least one person in the two-man plane survived. Beeper signals from a pilot’s distress radio were picked up by overhead helicopters, but the cloud cover was too heavy to go in. Hanoi has recently turned over some bone fragments that are supposed to be Apodaca’s. The Pentagon first declared the fragments to be animal bones. But now it is telling the family — verbally — that they came from the pilot. But the Pentagon, for unexplained reasons, will not put this in writing, which means Apodaca is still unaccounted for. Also the Pentagon refuses to give Alfond a sample of the fragments so she can have testing done by an independent laboratory.

Alfond’s testimony, at a hearing of the POW/MIA committee Nov. 11, 1992, was revealing. She pleaded with the committee not to shut down in two months, as scheduled, because so much of its work was unfinished. Also, she was critical of the committee, and in particular Kerry and McCain, for having “discredited the overhead satellite symbol pictures, arguing there is no way to be sure that the [distress] symbols were made by U.S. POWs.” She also criticized them for similarly discounting data from special sensors, shaped like a large spike with an electronic pod and an antenna, that were airdropped to stick in the ground along the Ho Chi Minh trail.

These devices served as motion detectors, picking up passing convoys and other military movements, but they also had rescue capabilities. Specifically, someone on the ground — a downed airman or a prisoner on a labor detail — could manually enter data into the sensor pods. Alfond said the data from the sensor spikes, which was regularly gathered by Air Force jets flying overhead, had showed that a person or persons on the ground had manually entered into the sensors — as U.S. pilots had been trained to do — “no less than 20 authenticator numbers that corresponded exactly to the classified authenticator numbers of 20 U.S. POWs who were lost in Laos.”

Other than the panel’s second co-chairman, Sen. Bob Smith, R-N.H., not a single committee member attended this public hearing. But McCain, having been advised of Alfond’s testimony, suddenly rushed into the room to confront her. His face angry and his voice very loud, he accused her of making “allegations … that are patently and totally false and deceptive.” Making a fist, he shook his index finger at her and said she had insulted an emissary to Vietnam sent by President Bush. He said she had insulted other MIA families with her remarks. And then he said, through clenched teeth: “And I am sick and tired of you insulting mine and other people’s [patriotism] who happen to have different views than yours.”

Brought to tears 

By this time, tears were running down Alfond’s cheeks. She reached into her handbag for a handkerchief. She tried to speak: “The family members have been waiting for years — years! And now you’re shutting down.” He kept interrupting her. She tried to say, through tears, that she had issued no insults. He kept talking over her words. He said she was accusing him and others of “some conspiracy without proof, and some cover-up.” She said she was merely seeking “some answers. That is what I am asking.” He ripped into her for using the word “fiasco.” She replied: “The fiasco was the people that stepped out and said we have written the end, the final chapter to Vietnam.” “No one said that,” he shouted. “No one said what you are saying they said, Ms. Alfond.” And then, his face flaming pink, he stalked out of the room, to shouts of disfavor from members of the audience.

As with most of McCain’s remarks to Alfond, the facts in his closing blast at her were incorrect. Less than three weeks earlier, on Oct. 23, 1992, in a ceremony in the White House Rose Garden, President Bush — with John McCain standing beside him — said: “Today, finally, I am convinced that we can begin writing the last chapter in the Vietnam War.”

The committee did indeed, as Alfond said they planned to do, shut down two months after the hearing.

Cannot discuss it

As for her description of the motion sensor evidence about prisoners in Laos, McCain’s response at the hearing was that this data was in a 1974 report that the committee had read but was still classified, so “I cannot discuss it here. … We hope to get it declassified.”

The question to the senator now is: What happened to that report and what happened to the pilots who belonged to those authenticator numbers? Intelligence sources in Washington say the report was never declassified. It became clear over the months of hearings and sparrings that the primary goal of the Kerry-McCain alliance was to clear the way for normalization of relations with Vietnam. They did it in two ways — first, by regularly praising Hanoi for its “cooperation” in the search for information about the unaccounted-for prisoners and then by minimizing and suppressing the volume of evidence to the contrary that had been unearthed by the committee’s staff investigators.

Recasting the issue

Kerry and McCain also tried, at every opportunity, to recast the issue as a debate about how many men could still be alive today, instead of the real issue at stake: How many men were alive in 1973 after the 591 were returned? Although much evidence was kept out of the committee’s final report in January 1993, enough of it, albeit watered down by the committee’s majority, was inserted by the determined staff to demonstrate conclusively that all the prisoners had not come home. Still, if the reader didn’t plow through the entire 1,223-page report but scanned just the brief conclusions in the 43-page executive summary at the beginning, he or she would have found only a weak and pallid statement saying that there was “evidence … that indicates the possibility of survival, at least for a small number” after the repatriation of 1973. On page 468 of the report, McCain provided his own personal statement, saying that “we found no compelling evidence to prove that Americans are alive in captivity today. There is some evidence — though no proof — to suggest only the possibility that a few Americans may have been kept behind after the end of American’s military involvement in Vietnam.”

Two defense secretaries

And even these meager concessions were not voluntary. They had been forced by the sworn public testimony before the Senate committee of two former defense secretaries from the Nixon Administration, Melvin Laird and James Schlesinger. Both these men testified that they believed in 1973, from strong intelligence data, that a number of prisoners in Vietnam and Laos had not been returned. Their testimony has never been challenged. Schlesinger, before becoming defense secretary, had been the CIA director. During his committee appearance, Schlesinger was asked why Nixon would have accepted the prisoners being held back in 1973. He replied: “One must assume that we had concluded that the bargaining position of the United States … was quite weak. We were anxious to get our troops out and we were not going to roil the waters …” Then he was asked “a very simple question. In your view, did we leave men behind?” ‘Some were left behind’ “I think that as of now,” replied the former Pentagon secretary, “that I can come to no other conclusion [that] … some were left behind.” The press went along once again with the debunkers. The Schlesinger-Laird testimony, which seemed a bombshell, became but a one-day story in the nation’s major media. The press never followed it up to explore its implications. On Jan. 26, 1994, when a resolution ardently backed by McCain and Kerry came up in the Senate calling for the lifting of the two-decade-old economic embargo against Vietnam, some members — in an effort to stall the measure — tried to present new evidence about men left behind. McCain rose to his feet and, offering no rebuttal evidence of his own, proceeded to chide “the professional malcontents, conspiracy mongers, con artists and dime-store Rambos who attend this issue.” The resolution passed, 62-38. ‘Isolated Personnel’ These days, the Pentagon seems to be moving toward closing its POW/MIA books completely. In recent statements and reports, it has begun describing prisoners not as POWs but as IPs — Isolated Personnel.

And in a 1999 booklet, the Pentagon said: “By the end of the year 2004, we will have moved from the way the US government conducts the business of recovery and accounting [now] to an active program of loss prevention, immediate rescues, and rapid post-hostility accounting.” More important, there seems to be no allocation of funds in 2004 for the task force that now conducts POW/MIA investigations, searches for remains and does archival research.As for McCain, he continues to stonewall on his own POW records. Through numerous phone calls, faxes and letters to his office, has been trying since late January to interview the Senator and get his permission to view his POW debriefing. The response has been that the senator has been occupied by his campaign schedule.

Call for openness and disclosure 

During the campaign, McCain, who is chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, had to address a controversy over queries he had made to the Commerce Department on behalf of a major campaign contributor. To deal with the press interest, he announced he was releasing all of his correspondence with the Commerce Department, not just the letters involving the one case. In addition, to show his full commitment to openness and disclosure, he called on every other government agency to release his communications with them. On Jan. 9 on the CBS program Face the Nation, he announced: “Today, we are asking the federal government to release all correspondence that I’ve had with every government agency.”

McCain’s staff has acknowledged that this request includes the Pentagon. But the Pentagon says it needs an official document from McCain designating a surrogate before it can show his debriefing report to anyone else. has repeatedly asked the senator for this waiver. He does not respond.

Sydney H. Schanberg is the editor of’s investigative unit. He was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for his 1975 coverage of political and social chaos in Cambodia. His news reports and a best-selling book about his experiences in Southeast Asia became the basis for the Academy Award-winning film The Killing Fields.

And a parting shot.....

Tuesday, August 21, 2018

Documents Now Declassified Reveal KGB Spies in the United States - US News and World Report

Alger Hiss, Elizabeth Bentley, and Bernard Redmont are the subjects of scrutiny.
By Alex Kingsbury, Staff Writer Originally published - July 17, 2009

DURING ONE OF THE MOST high-profile spy cases in U.S. history, onetime State Department official and accused Communist spy Alger Hiss was convicted of perjury based in part on several rolls of film found inside a pumpkin on a Maryland farm. In 1975, when the film was declassified, one roll was revealed to be completely blank; another contained such mundane information as manuals for military parachutes and fire extinguishers. Hiss claimed until his death in 1996 that the evidence known as the Pumpkin Papers vindicated him, but his claims often fell on deaf ears.
Despite decades of FBI scrutiny, frenzied Red scares, blacklists, loyalty boards, and show trials aimed at ferreting out Communist infiltration, many, perhaps most, of those who acted in the service of the Soviet Union never had a Pumpkin Papers moment. But newly released documents from U.S. and Soviet archives show that hundreds of people, from the famous to the obscure, crossed paths with Soviet intelligence during the pre-World War II years. They include the country's most famous physicist, Robert Oppenheimer, novelist Ernest Hemingway, and civil servants like Hiss. There were journalists, too, like Walter Lippmann, I. F. Stone, and Bernard Redmont, a former correspondent for U.S. News who has been denying spying allegations for more than a half century.
In the two decades since the end of the Cold War, various archives in formerly Communist countries, from Georgia to East Germany, have been opened to historians, who have eagerly pored over their files in the hopes of fitting more pieces into the Cold War's most vexing jigsaw puzzles. (It is an unfortunate irony, some scholars note, that some of the best Cold War documents come from abroad rather than from the United States, where they are still classified.)
A new history of Soviet espionage in the United States during those critical pre-World War II years takes full advantage of a brief peek at one of the crown jewels of Cold War history, the brown and green file folders of the KGB's American Department. Spies: The Rise and Fall of the KGB in America (Yale University Press) was written by a pair of American Cold War scholars, John Haynes and Harvey Klehr, and a former KGB officer and journalist, Alexander Vassiliev.
For a tantalizingly brief two-year period in the early 1990s, Vassiliev was given access to Stalin-era KGB files in order to write about KGB operations. The new book shows how the Soviets went about the business of spying, its failures and successes, and, most interestingly, the names of the Americans from whom the KGB received information.
Since Vassiliev wasn't able to take the originals outside the archive, he filled more than 1,100 notebook pages with the text and marginal notes of thousands of KGB files, often verbatim. Years later, he smuggled the notes out of Russia. Last month, Vassiliev donated the original notebooks to the Library of Congress. The project is not without controversy, partly because researchers have had access only to the notes which Vassiliev, a former Russian spy, took but also because the copies are often the only piece of evidence against those fingered as spies, most of whom are long dead.

But the Vassiliev notebooks are just one piece of the spying puzzle. In 1996, the National Security Agency released voluminous records of the top-secret Venona Project, including many partially decoded Soviet cables detailing spying. Because the cables used code names to shield the identities of KGB sources, they were of limited use to U.S. intelligence. What's significant about the newly released Vassiliev documents is that they contain both the code names from the Venona cables and the actual identities.
A final confirmation? The most famous person who crops up in the new book and accompanying documents is Hiss, who had been convicted of perjury because of the Pumpkin Papers but was never convicted of more serious crimes.
The material in the Vassiliev notebooks corroborates the suspicion that Hiss was a longtime agent of Soviet military intelligence. That echoes the findings of Venona Project analysts, who concluded years ago that the code name "Ales" in the intercepted Soviet cables was "probably Alger Hiss."
The KGB files also corroborate that Julius Rosenberg, who was executed for espionage in 1953 along with his wife, Ethel, was indeed a Soviet agent.
Other Americans are vindicated by Vassiliev's KGB notes. For instance, they say that Robert Oppenheimer continuously refused to help the KGB, much to Moscow's frustration. After a public investigation into his loyalty, Oppenheimer lost his U.S. security clearance. Like many other accused "Red sympathizers," he spent the rest of his life defending his reputation. The Vassiliev documents concur with numerous other sources that show it was other scientists and technicians on the atomic bomb program who helped the Soviets develop a nuclear weapon.
One of the most compelling pieces of Vassiliev's notes is a 1948 memo from Anatoly Gorsky, the chief Soviet spy handler in Washington until 1945. It lists the code names and true identities of members of a spy ring run by Elizabeth Bentley. A private citizen who was a member of the Communist Party of the United States, Bentley triggered one of the most public spy trials in history when she began naming names of all those who had helped her spy for the Soviets in the years before the war.
The Vassiliev notes show that the Bentley ring was one of the most successful that the Soviets ever orchestrated. "The single most disastrous event in the history of Soviet intelligence in America was Elizabeth Bentley's decision to turn herself in to the FBI in 1945 and tell all she knew," Vassiliev and his coauthors conclude in Spies.
Refuting allegations. Bentley ran a network of spies that included, she claimed, a former press officer for the State Department named Bernard Redmont. After Bentley's confession, but before any trial, the FBI began tailing Redmont and his wife.
Based on Bentley's confession, government agents read his mail, tapped his phone, and kept tabs on his job applications, according to declassified FBI reports. One of the jobs for which Redmont, a former marine, applied was as a correspondent with a new publication run by prominent conservative columnist David Lawrence. The G-men erroneously listed the magazine in their surveillance reports as U.S. Reports & World News.
In a trial stemming from the Bentley case, Redmont, then the Paris correspondent for U.S. News,denied being a Communist or a spy. He said that he and Bentley "discussed only material that was available and given to hundreds of other newspaper reporters and agencies and that could have been gotten by listening to the radio any day of the week." But the fact that his name was all over the front pages was enough to shatter his reputation. Lawrence fired Redmont as soon as his testimony hit the papers.
Years later, he found work again in newspapers and then with CBS News, leading to a distinguished career that took him to Boston University, where he served as the dean of the journalism school. Now retired, he lives in Massachusetts.
But the KGB documents offer evidence that Redmont may have been a spy after all, one who operated under the Soviet code name "Mon," according to Vassiliev and his coauthors. Haynes, a historian with the manuscript division of the Library of Congress, says the evidence against Redmont is strong. KGB memos from December 1945 and 1948 reported that Mon had been compromised when Bentley talked to the FBI. "He may have been a minor source, but documentary evidence is that he was a source," the authors write.
But the case against Redmont is anything but closed and, unlike many others named in the book, he is able to refute the charges. What emerges from the Moscow archives and the Venona cables is a picture of two agencies, the FBI and Soviet intelligence, that were both under intense political pressure and inclined to exaggerate their own efficacy. The FBI was largely unable to thwart Soviet spies, was prone to abuses in its hunt for enemies, and often overstated its successes, says Athan Theoharis, a professor at Marquette University and an expert on FBI counterintelligence. Soviet spy handlers, meanwhile, were also under tremendous pressure to produce results and justify, among other things, their expense accounts. They'd sometimes listen to commercial radio news reports or read newspapers, summarize them, and send the results back to Moscow as if they'd gathered top-secret information through their spy networks.
There may be a strikingly benign explanation for the fact that Redmont's name appears on a list in the Moscow archives, says Svetlana Chervonnaya, a scholar and documentary producer in Russia. She suggests that Redmont may have been considered by the KGB as a "journalistic asset," someone used to obtain information and, more important, as an avenue for promoting the Soviet line in the media. The latter was of particular interest as early as the 1930s. "Most often, the journalists were not aware they dealt with intelligence operatives who were undercover as Soviet Embassy press officers or did not deal directly with the Soviets at all," says Chervonnaya. That was the case with Walter Lippmann, the Spies authors conclude. I. F. Stone, meanwhile, actively assisted the KGB, and Ernest Hemingway, according to the files, was given a code name "Argo" but never provided any information. 
No one has ever been able to point to any information (secret or otherwise) that Redmont passed to Soviet handlers, nor is there evidence he ever took KGB money. Years of FBI surveillance turned up nothing, and bureau agents repeatedly asked that the investigation into him and his wife be closed. No one ever alleged that he had in any way compromised national security.
Redmont said in an interview last year when the Vassiliev documents surfaced that he "never understood why anyone would name me as a spy. I am not now a spy, and I have never been a spy." And he now says he's dismayed to have the issue dredged up after so many years. "It was a very sad and poisoned period in American history where an allegation was equivalent to a conviction. I'd like to think we've moved beyond that, but maybe we haven't," he says.
Soviet paranoia. The parade of declassified materials raises a larger and perhaps more important question for historians of Cold War spying. Namely, was it worth it? In another new Yale University Press book, Alger Hiss and the Battle for History, journalist Susan Jacoby agrees that Hiss was most likely guilty. Yet that fact is insufficient to justify the McCarthyism and self-destructive Red-baiting that ensued, she writes. The same could be said of the Redmont kerfuffle.
If anything, scholars at a recent Smithsonian conference on Vassiliev's notebooks suggested, KGB reports to Stalin probably reassured the paranoid Soviet leader of the true intent of U.S. foreign policy. Much as mutually assured destruction with nuclear arsenals perversely calmed Cold War nuclear tensions, mutual spying may have reassured policymakers that they truly understood the other side.
Nonetheless, the Soviet Union exhausted considerable efforts to identify and detain suspected agents provocateurs and built a police state on a foundation of denouncers and gulags. The United States, meanwhile, had its own show trials and televised denunciations before the House Un-American Activities Committee and shattered often innocent lives with allegations and innuendo. Even if new evidence suggests that all the smoke was not without fire, McCarthyism remains in the lexicon as the embodiment of politically motivated character assassination. While spy hunts did catch some of the guilty, it is unclear if it was worth the cost to the innocent when nations turned on themselves for crimes both real and imagined.

    Monday, August 20, 2018

    John Stossel Confronts Seemingly Totally Corrupt Edgewater NJ Politicians and Makes Them Squirm

    An apartment developer paid millions for prime real estate in Edgewater, New Jersey, with a beautiful view of Manhattan. Nearly 2,000 apartments would be built. The developer also offered to build public parks, parking, a ferry terminal, and a pier, all at no cost to taxpayers. But Edgewater's mayor, Michael McPartland, and city council said: No, you may not build! That's not that unusual. Local officials often keep new developments out. But in this case, they also voted to seize the developer's land using eminent domain. John Stossel asks: Why would they do that? The developer says he knows. He filed a lawsuit alleging a "corrupt relationship" between politicians in Edgewater and an established developer, Fred Daibes. The lawsuit claims Daibes was upset because he wanted the property himself. "Daibes even directly threatened Plaintiff's representatives that they 'should have come to me in the beginning,'" the lawsuit states. "'I own and built this town. Now it will be condemned; I am your neighbor on all sides.'" The lawsuit then lays out alleged corruption: The mayor lives in a Fred Daibes' apartment building, where he gets a subsidized rent (an accustation the mayor denies). Four city council members also received loans from a Daibes-controlled bank. The lawyer for the plaintiff tells John Stossel that many have "ongoing relationships with [Daibes]. Jobs...undervalued for their business purposes through a bank that Mr. Daibes started and has the controlling interest in." But the mayor and city council say they have a legitimate reason for blocking the development. It "would kill the infrastructure. It's just too much," McPartland told The New York Times. But then why did they approve an even bigger development for Fred Daibes? It's twice as tall as the project the city council blocked. That sounds like possible corruption to Stossel.

    (It does to us at RTR TRUTH MEDIA as well)

    Neither Daibes, the mayor, nor anyone on the city council agreed to be interviewed for this story. So Stossel went to a town council meeting to see if the politicians would answer questions. "Are you on the take?" Stossel asks. He then lays out some of the allegations. But the council members and mayor don't respond to the issues. Their lawyer criticized Stossel's "objectionable tone" and advised the mayor not to comment. "You've had your time. You may sit down," the mayor eventually tells Stossel. That was that. Developers can't tell other developers "you can't build here" unless they have cronies in government, Stossel points out. That's not capitalism, that's crony capitalism. Or corruption. That harms people who now won't be able to live in apartments near Manhattan. It harms the developer who loses a multi-million dollar investment. It harms citizens of Edgewater who lose out on free parks and other amenities.

    FACEBOOK VERSION if You so feel inclined....

    GO JOHN GO....this is a real the main stream.....thank you John.

    Sunday, August 19, 2018

    Ammon Bundy In Depth on Resurrect the Republic with Tom Lacovara-Stewart - Responding to the Blue ISIS Controversy and More

    Ammon Bundy Joins Tom Lacovara-Stewart on the Resurrect the Republic Radio Show in an in depth interview. A 3 hour conversation covering a wide variety of topics related to freedom of speech, tyranny, freedom, and so much more.

    A statement about the concept of the term #BlueIsis we have heard so much about that I would ask everyone to consider.... Read completely before commenting.

    Many terms have been used to describe the major issues in American Law Enforcement. While I can understand the correlation between many abuses of power and terrorism, because it surely does promulgate fear and uncertainty, the more appropriate term I believe is far more accurate is historically based and used by #Lenin - the term is #UsefulIdiots. This is not my term, but as I said Stalin’s regarding those who he used to enforce his agenda. I am not using this as an act of name calling, but as a historically accurate and provable term. We have seen these agencies used as political assassins. We have seen them have a terrorizing and chilling effect on speech, action, and Freedom. Look at how the FBI was weaponized to dismantle our sitting President. Love him hate him or do as I do and assess point for point, a Federal law enforcement agency used fake information to politically attempt to ruin him like they have done with countless far less famous every day folks. So consider this.... When Lenin was consolidating the #Bolshevik revolution, he wrote how he would implement the #communist bureaucracy without hardcore #Marxist believers. While the elite rulers of his inner circle understood the structure he was building, ​Lenin said he would exploit the natural vanity and ambition of people to forward his agenda without them knowing what they were really doing​. The tactic was deceptive in order to garner the participation and support of those who would implement this agenda. (Fusion of an honorable profession like serving and protecting - while causing many of the ills the people would need to be protected from)
    Problem creation solution - Hegelian Dialectics.
    Those who were either eager to gain his favor and to enhance their political careers, or to join in the “service to the community” they would eventually fall all over themselves trying to promote his agenda or be too invested to do much about altering it. (Protecting ones career) He called these types of people "​useful Idiots​ for a reason, and before you criticize that I am “name calling” please realize that I too was once one. Now before you brand every #police officer you see as an undercover Marxist, understand tha​t most of them comprehend little of what they are participating in​.


    In reality, most officers intuitively know that something is wrong in their organization, but they ​play the game rather than risk damaging their career​. Sadly, they constitute a vast army of "​useful idiots​." I'm all for "promoting mutual trust" and "cooperation between the people and the police" and "empowering neighborhoods." These "positive social changes" are the selling points for ​Community Oriented Policing​....or COPS.  But in reality, those appealing ideals camouflage the vehicle of Marxist change. Who asked the citizenry if they wanted their c​communities "transformed" and their government "reinvented"​?
    - Who asked parents if they wanted their ​children to learn with their feelings instead of learning facts?
    - Who asked your local police officers if they ​wanted their beliefs and attitudes manipulated​?
    No one asked because if someone did, they would have been run out of town.

     Instead, using dialectic-reasoning skills, ​they have schemed to seduce, deceive and manipulate every community in the radical transformation of society. So before we demonize all law enforcers we must come to the realization that if we are to ever hope to fix this, we must begin with educating them and the public.

    Does it light a bulb off above your head when you realize that the #SouthernPovertyLawCenter or #SPLC has participated openly in media training and education among the #DOJ and #FBI as well as police departments, social media network Marxist “hate speech” monitoring etc.? Combating indoctrination and incremental radical change with hostility and name can be unproductive. Yes, it can generate a conversation and either make people think. But it can also immediately close minds by triggering immediate cognitive dissonance. Once that happens the mind is closed to realizing the real problem. By sharing information like this with police... by sitting down with them, buying them a cup of coffee and putting into their minds and thereby their hearts that you care about their freedom, the Freedom of their children, as well as the rest of Americans, we can force multiply. We can win hearts and minds and fight for Freedom through education. Most police get into the job for an extremely honorable reason. In my opinion we should try to appeal to that which is inside of them that caused them to seek to serve. Deprogramming of the Marxist global transformation should be our goal. The deliberate dumbing down of America took place over decades to prevent us all - that’s me too - from being able to see it coming. And for the love of God stop letting words thoughts ideas and emotions divide us. Try to be dignified, and remain in honor. Make our founders proud because #ItMattersHowYouStand and allowing this fight to go hot would mean all of us would lose a lot, as there are not enough people who are aware enough that this is part of the plan of the #NewWorldOrder. They don’t mind the chaos, like Rahn Emmanuel stated, they would use that crisis to do things they would not otherwise be able to do. #PatriotAct #NDAA I think you get my point. 
    Thomas Lacovara-Stewart #RTRTruthMedia #ResurrectTheRepublic

    You may comment or share the above post on facebook if you wish. The post is here:
    Come join us on our brand new decentralized social media account at

    The following list of resources to show how where and who has altered the tradition of the American peace officer is a presentation solely of my own. I make the presentation on my own and this edit was added after the interview with Ammon Bundy. I do not present or speak for Ammon or the Bundy Family, but make this presentation as a historical supplement of research and understanding. In no way do I or anyone at RTR advocate for violence or bigotry, but in truth and accuracy it compels me to explain that individuals who use their own cultural heritage to spy on, subvert, and introduce foreign ideologies that do not comport with the U.S. Constitution are enemies to the Republic. The ADL and Southern Poverty Law Center are both two of the most anti-Christian anti-Conservative organizations in America. I am not an anti-anything but anti-tyranny, anti-corruption, anti-Christian attack, and I do not blame an entire people for a perversion "among" their ideology and cultural identity. They call the Holy Bible in specificity the New Testament as "Hate Speech".......let that sink deeply in before you reject our presentation. The ADL has spied on and stolen resources from American law enforcement agencies historically. 

    Additional Resources:
    It's Time to Bring the Southern Poverty Law Center to Justice
    DOD to Continue Using Liberal Southern Poverty Law Center as a Training Resource (2014)
    FBI uses Applied NeoMarxist HATE CRIMES Concepts in it's Training
    ADL Law Enforcement Training - Marxist in Nature

    This is according to the Anti Defamation League's website:
    More law enforcement agencies turn to ADL than to any other non-governmental organization for training, information and resources—to combat hate crimes, extremism and terrorism. ADL works with every major federal, state, local and military law enforcement agency, from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to major city police departments, state police, highway patrol and sheriffs’ departments. Over the past decade, we have trained 100,000 law enforcement personnel—at no cost to taxpayers. Our newest program, ADL’s Managing Implicit Bias for Law Enforcement, provides police with the skills and strategies to counter implicit bias and build trust with the people and communities they serve.

    Read the following and ask yourself why the FBI is associating itself with a Progressive organization with deep ties to organized crime 

    The ADL tries to cover its anti-free speech activities by giving out a Free Speech "Torch of Liberty" award occasionally. The most prominent recipient is flesh peddler and woman denigrator Hugh Hefner. Obscene pornographer Larry Flynt is another supporter who has contributed 100,000's of dollars to the ADL.
    ADL's Criminal and Spying Operations
    In 1993 the San Francisco and Los Angeles offices of the ADL were raided for evidence of criminal wrongdoing in many spheres. The raids turned up evidence of the ADL's compliance in the theft of confidential police files stolen from California police departments. The ADL had been paying Roy Bullock a salary for decades to spy on people and steal police files. He stole files from SFPD through corrupt cop Tom Gerard. His illicit contact in San Diego was white racist sheriff Tim Carroll.
    The ADL has been linked closely to organized crime, especially Las Vegas Mafia boss Meyer LanskyTheodore Silbert worked simultaneously for the ADL and the Sterling National Bank (a Mafia operation controlled by the Lansky syndicate). As a matter of fact the granddaughter of the Mafia boss Lansky, Mira Lansky Boland herself is the ADL's liaison to law enforcement. (What a convenient arrangement! She used ADL money to treat Tim Carroll and Tom Gerard to an all- expense paid luxury vacation in Israel.)
    Another Las Vegas gangster, Moe Dalitz was honored by the ADL in 1985. Another among the shady contributors to the ADL's supremacist activities is the Milken Family Fund, of "junk bond" fame. The ADL uses its well-oiled propaganda machine to protect their "friends" in the Mafia and pornography industry by shrieking "Anti-Semitism!" at the slightest movement of the law against these perverse interests.
    ADL's Ethnic Intimidation
    The ADL has mastered the art of intimidation and blackmailing unlike any of the powerful Mafiosi they are associated with. The ADL has influential contacts in media and politics that can ruin a person or business if they don't follow ADL's agenda.
    Already mentioned are instances of bad cops falling under the allure of the ADL, ones such as Tom Gerard and Tim Carroll. Yet now good cops and even freshmen cops are being "conditioned" for the type of anti-free speech, anti-cultural diversity, police state that the ADL would like for our country. Throughout the nation the ADL is threatening police departments with all kinds of retribution if they don't initiate state-funded lectures and seminars for law enforcement given by ADL spokesmen. The ADL rakes in large sums of money for these sessions, boosting their already overflowing coffers. Already ADL men have been seen at the scene of crimes ordering cops on how investigations are to be conducted.
    Perhaps at no time in history has any other criminal organization, such as the ADL, been able to infiltrate and influence law enforcement to such an extent, and its tentacles are growing.
    Freshmen sheriffs in San Diego are now being personally "trained" to respond to "crimes" by the Southwestern Director of the ADL, Morris Casuto.
    The most alarming part
    The ADL is a very powerful, secretive racial/religious supremacist organization, with substantial ties to the underworld of crime and pornography. To burrow their way into the minds of children the ADL has created the "World of Difference" program designed to influence them at an early stage.
    In a report to its few, but wealthy supporters in 1995, ADL boasts that it has reached more than ten million students and more are ready to be indoctrinated. The ADL hopes to make children susceptible to the world of crime and vice they and their criminal associates have in store for the USA.

    Gallery of The Criminal ADL:
    • FoxmanAbe Foxman   National Chairman of the hate group Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith. His main job is to write to celebrities and powerful people who say something unkosher and temporarily forget that Jews are a special criticism-proof people. Claims whole family was "holocausted" in the last war.
    • Roy Bullock   The ADL's paid informant who rummaged through trash for decades for the ADL, until he was given the sensitive position of being the conduit for stolen police files coming from the San Francisco Police Department by way of Tom Gerard. He was paid $550 per week for his services. Also an associate of racist sheriff Tim Carroll. His existence was discovered after the FBI raids on ADL offices in 1993 and resulted in the publicizing of 750 pages of information on the spying operations of the ADL.
    • Tom Gerard   San Francisco Police Officer who stole sensitive, confidential files from his agency and gave them to Roy Bullock to assist ADL's spying operations on Americans. Among files stolen were ones on the Black Muslims, Arabs and right-wing organizations that were in any way critical of ADL. Received an all-expense paid luxury vacation in Israel, courtesy of the ADL.
    • Tim Carroll   Racist ex-detective in San Diego's Sheriff Department. Remarked in 1993 that he would like to see "all illegal aliens shot" and "all the niggers sent back to Africa on a banana boat". An associate of both Roy Bullock and Tom Gerard. He mysteriously retired from the Sheriff's Department after the raids on the ADL offices at the early age of 54. Also received an all-expense paid luxury vacation in Israel, courtesy of the ADL. Despite his overtly racist nature, he was put in charge of security at the ADL's National Convention in September, 1997 using strong-arm tactics against participants and visitors. This is interesting considering it was his bumbling confessions to an investigator that led to the raids on the ADL.
    • Mira Lansky Boland  The "law-enforcement liaison" for the ADL. She arranged luxurious trips to Israel for certain key police officers who could have something to offer the ADL in return. Among these were file thief Tom Gerard and racist Tim Carroll. She is uniquely positioned in that she is the granddaughter of Meyer Lansky, one of the most powerful Mafia figures in US history.
    • Hugh Hefner   Famous pornographer who was honored by the ADL with its ridiculous "Torch of Freedom" award. From him proceeds protection for all pornography in the US, which is and has always been associated with vice elements like the mob and ADL.
    • Larry Flynt   This pornographer is a major contributor to the ADL of 100,000's of dollars. He has been jailed often for "obscene pornography" and the general hideous defiling of women in his Hustler magazine (whose description is beyond the limits allowed on a decent web page).
    • Theodore Silbert   Mob associate of Meyer Lansky, employee of the ADL and Mafia front "Sterling Bank." Was simultaneously the CEO of "Sterling Bank" and National Commissioner of the ADL.
    • Moe Dalitz   Las Vegas mob figure and close associate of Meyer Lansky who was honored by the ADL in 1985.
    • Michael Milken   Family Fund Billion dollar fund that has given extensively to the ADL, the money of which was made in the "junk bond" scandals.
    • Morris Casuto   Jewish Southwestern Director of the ADL who personally trains freshmen law enforcement to do the bidding of him and his criminally indicted organization. Morris Casuto is also close friends with white racist Tim Carroll. Boasted in March 1999 that Alex Curtis' "luck will run out. And he will be sent to prison for a very long time." Is this a threat from a man whose group has already been criminally indicted for nefarious connections to rogue police agents?
    • Rick Barton   National Commissioner of ADL . Another racial integrationist who lives on an expensive cul-de-sac in pure white Olivenhain.
    • Teresa Santana   Deputy DA of San Diego who works with the criminal ADL and prosecutes non-Jews for imaginary "hate crimes" against Jews.
    • Bill Kolender   Jewish Head of San Diego Sheriff's Office who is a member of B'nai B'rith, the racist secret society that oversees the criminal ADL. The anti-Zionist organisation The Nationalist Observer was raided by the SDSO in April 1999 for political reasons.
    • Jessica Lerner   Jewish Assistant Director of the San Diego hate office. Morris' back- up spokeswoman when he is out of town or on his annual pleasure trip to Amsterdam, The Netherlands - sin capital of the world.
    • Dan Willis   La Mesa Police Department detective who is in close contact with Morris Casuto and has personally raided the home of Alex Curtis and the offices of The Nationalist Observer three times in the last year and a half.
    • From -

    An excerpt from the New York Times: 
    A lawsuit filed (in 1993) charges that the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith deviated from its civil rights work by conspiring with police agencies to spy, harass and intimidate several political groups.
    The suit, filed in Federal District Court in Los Angeles, accuses the defense league and its longtime San Francisco-based investigator, Roy Bullock, of obtaining confidential files about political activists from the San Francisco police and from sheriff's officers in Los Angeles and San Diego.
    The suit also accuses the law-enforcement agencies of illegally collecting and distributing information about the political activities and personal lives of members of the 12 organizations in the suit.
    The New York Times tried to flower up this article with a few lies, but they had no choice but to report the case -

    So what is this organization doing with deep ties inside the FBI? Here is an overt example by Director James (Clinton Foundation) Comey:
    James B. Comey
    Federal Bureau of Investigation

    Anti-Defamation League National Leadership Summit
    Washington, D.C.
    May 8, 2017

    The FBI and the ADL: Working Together to Fight Hate
    Speech given to the ADL
    I first met with you in the spring of 2014, when I was relatively new on the job—just seven months in.

    I sang your praises as an organization that fights for inclusivity and diversity, equality and justice. (MARXIST LANGUAGE

    An organization that works with us to fight hate crime (MARXIST LANGUAGE) and terrorism, (the WAR on a TACTIC) to educate law enforcement, and to build bridges with underrepresented communities.(SUBSTITUTE for MARGINALIZED PEOPLES - MORE NEO-MARXIST LANGUAGE)

    I labeled that last speech a love letter to the ADL. Three years later I can say, from the perspective of the FBI, we’re still in love with you.

    When the Mafia Got as Organized as the ADL
    Was Meyer Lansky the 'best I man ' in the ADL's marriage to the,FBI?

    Israeli Security Forces Are Training American Cops Despite History of Human Rights Abuses -