Choose Search Type
Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» The FBI status of the case
Today at 2:20 am by Goban Saor

» question on odio
Yesterday at 2:47 pm by greg parker

» Hyde My Paine
Yesterday at 7:02 am by barto

» Cops never do wrong
Sun 23 Jul 2017, 12:54 pm by Jake Sykes

» Remembering Gary Mack: The No Rose-Colored Glasses Version
Sun 23 Jul 2017, 4:11 am by Stan Dane

» No Shots Fired From The TSBD
Sat 22 Jul 2017, 5:06 am by Ed. Ledoux

» The Unitarian Church
Fri 21 Jul 2017, 4:01 pm by Ed. Ledoux

» Connecting the Dots
Thu 20 Jul 2017, 5:22 pm by barto

» the cia and cultural exchange programs
Thu 20 Jul 2017, 4:21 pm by Ed. Ledoux

Log in

I forgot my password

Social bookmarking

Social bookmarking Digg  Social bookmarking Delicious  Social bookmarking Reddit  Social bookmarking Stumbleupon  Social bookmarking Slashdot  Social bookmarking Yahoo  Social bookmarking Google  Social bookmarking Blinklist  Social bookmarking Blogmarks  Social bookmarking Technorati  

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

Keywords

RSS feeds


Yahoo! 
MSN 
AOL 
Netvibes 
Bloglines 


Affiliates
free forum
 



history of State Department covert action policy

View previous topic View next topic Go down

history of State Department covert action policy

Post by Guest on Mon 08 Sep 2014, 7:16 pm

US law currently states:

Title 50, Section 413(b)(a): “The President may not authorize the conduct of a covert action by departments, agencies, or entities of the United States Government unless the President determines such an action is necessary to support identifiable foreign policy objectives of the United States and is important to the national security of the United States, which determination shall be set forth in a finding that shall meet the following conditions: (1) Each finding shall be in writing.”

Interesting, that. So I did a little checking. And found this nice little summary, which is well worth a read:

http://cryptome.org/ic-black4701.htm

This is the rest of the series: http://cryptome.org/ic-black.htm

It seems clear from this that the State Department played a vital role in shaping US covert policies in the early 60's, and one must therefore conclude in the late 50's as well, when John Foster Dulles was the Secretary of State.

In the 60's, with Bobby, it's almost like someone didn't trust the Kennedys. But they tried to carry on anyway...

http://fas.org/irp/ops/policy/church-chile.htm

Much like the current Mr. Obama, Bobby Kennedy may have found himself at the helm of an organization that wouldn't respond to his commands. Therefore instead of trying to reshape and reorganize the beast, he chose to go outside and bypass it entirely.

However John Foster Dulles was exactly the opposite, and if he had any questions he could always ask his brother. Both Dulles brothers would have been well versed with greasing the squeaky wheels of an unwilling bureaucracy, and for Allen in particular this must have been a bit of rather unsavory business at times.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum