CIA EAGER TO OUT-LIBERAL LIBERAL-DEMOCRAT MEDIA

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP90-00552R000505120073-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 27, 2010
• Sequence Number: 73
• Publication Date: February 21, 1983
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00552R000505120073-0
V
NEW YORK NEWS-WORLD
21 February 1983
,CIA ea-aer to out-liberal,,_
libera1Democrat media
t
still "som
backward country
k
Y
As of today, the CIA has done
nothing to investigate the complic-
ity of the Soviet-Bulgarian secret
police in the assassination attempt
on Pope John Paul H.
This is no news to me. In my
studies of the CIA which I began in
1973 and finally published as an
article in 1978, I demonstrated that
the CIA's top secret reports are
actually compilations of Soviet
propaganda publications.
But something else has
emerged from the pope-
assassination case. Far from mak-
ing any contribution to the
investigations, the CIA tried to
impede them and downplay their
results.
CIA record
This comes as a total surprise to
many. The liberal-Democrat media
have been representing the CIA as
a den of rightist cloak-and-dagger
cold-warriors who would be only
too glad to be the first to rush
headlong into whatever
incriminates the Soviet regime..
And here it has been found that
while even the Italian communists
support the assassination-attempt
investigations, the CIA has been
hampering them.
It's true that in the late '40s and
early '50s the CIA was fighting the ?
Cold War against Soviet aggres-
sion. So was The New York Times.
But then?
In the late '50s, The New York
Times declared that Castro had
nothing to do with Soviet commu-
nism. The CIA, with Allen Dulles at
the head, said the same, though
there was strong evidence that
Castro had been Stalin's agent
since 1948.
or
In the mid= 60s, The New
Times began to consider the war in
defense of South Vietnam unwin-
nable and our bombing of the
aggressor ineffective. So did the
CIA, and The New York Times even
quoted the CIA editorially.
Up to 1976, if not 1979, the
liberal-Democrat media repre-
sented the Soviet war regime as a
peaceful, backward country, and in
1973 the CIA, in its (top secret!)
"annual estimate" of Russia,
announced a "new era of interna-
tional and commercial relations;"
and stated to the Congress that the
"Soviet defense burden ... is no
greater than that of the United
States"
In 1974, the CIA reported (top
secret!) that the Soviet "share of
gross national product spent on
defense has been falling;" and,
indeed, the percentage of Soviet
"expenditures for military invest-
ment" dropped in 1972 by half com-
pared with 1960. This peacefulness
of the Soviet regime follows from
its pathetic overall backwardness
in everything "from electric shav-
ers to missiles:' Thus, in 1975, the
CIA deputy director explained to
Congress that the "U.S.S.R. is
where the United States was some-
where in the early 1940s." So Rus-
sia is something like a big Mexico
or Afghanistan. No wonder she is
such a peaceful society, vast miser-
able backwoods wishing only to be
left unmolested by modern pow-
erful countries.
Accordingly, way back in 1973,
the CIA offered "prescriptions for
improved [Soviet) economic per-
formance;' and in particular rbc-
ommended to "expand [Soviet]
commercial relations with devel-
oped nations to facilitate technol-
ogy transfers:" A student of
American intelligence data on the
Soviet regime in 1964 to 1975 may
conclude that the CIA is a charita-
ble institution, studying a peaceful
e-
,
where in the early 1940s,' in order
to help it industrialize and catch up
with modern societies.
CIA experts
Who are these CIA experts who
have been writing in their top
secret reports exactly what the
liberal-Democrat media have been
printing and broadcasting? Just
those same university graduates
who majored in the humanities
taught by predominantly liberal-
Democrat professors who sub-
scribe to The New York Times as
their one and only national newspa-
per.
In the mid-'70s, the Russian
Department of Columbus Univer-
sity in Ohio had the imprudence to
invite me to give several lectures
on Russia. The audience received
me well, but at the end a post-
graduate student majoring in Rus-
sian studies stood up and said, "Sir,
I enjoyed your lectures very much,
and you sound so authentic and
credible. But if I am to believe you,
then all that I've been taught here
for eight years and all that I've read
in The New York Times is dan-
gerous nonsense:'
So it was. Of course, I was never
invited to that university again. It
is this "dangerous nonsense" that
these graduates, masters and doc-
tors carried to the media and aca-
demic world - and the CIA.
Their attitude toward the Soviet
complicity in the assassination
attempt on the pope stems from the
prevalent liberal-Democrat atti-
tude of American Sovietology:
"The Soviet KGB nearly did the
poor pope in. We know it. But let's
play it down as much as possible.
Unless we do, the Soviet regime,
which is, basically, a peaceful soci-
ety on the defensive, may be badly
aroused, and there'll be a threat to
detente, peace and cultural
exchange, while all those conser-
vatives, reactionaries. and cold-
warriors will rejoice:'
ZVAMN TED
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2010/08/27: CIA-RDP90-00552R000505120073-0