Since the start of the operation in western Mosul on February 19, the Iraqi Army and the Federal Police have retaken a number of areas from ISIS terrorists, including the Mosul Airport, the Ghazlani military camp, the districts of Jawsaq and al-Tayaran and further advanced inside the city.
According to reports from the ground, US Special Forces are actively participating in the operation. They play role of forward air controllers and at least sometimes offensive units. For example, US troops were directly engaged in clashes against ISIS in al-Tayaran. At the same time, available photos show that ISIS had made an antitank ditch between the Mosul Airport and the southwestern neighborhood of Mosul. This means that ISIS units had withdrawn from the airport almost without fighting in order to avoid casualties from artillery and air strikes. This also allowed the terrorist group to increase defenses in the urbanized areas.
https://southfront.org/wp-content/plugins/fwduvp/content/video.php?path=https%3A%2F%2Fsouthfront.org%2Firaqi-war-report-february-28-2017-storm-of-mosul%2F&pid=803Meanwhile, Iraqi government forces and its allies were still not able to set a pontoon ferry and to cut across the Tigris from eastern Mosul. The attempt was made at the Fourth Bridge but the Iraqi troops deployed at the western bank were attacked by ISIS terrorists and pushed to retreat. At the same time, Iraqi government forces entrenched at the eastern bank of the Tigris, preparing for possible diversions and raids by the terrorist group’s members.
US sources now estimate the number of ISIS fighters inside the city is about 2,000 fighters. This pushes ISIS to retreat further inside western Mosul in order to shorten the frontline. Just a month ago, US sources reported about 10,000-15,000 ISIS militants in western Mosul. Thus, a major part of the terrorist likely withdrew from the city or the initial reports were very wrong. Most likely ISIS just preferred a guerrilla warfare to the direct confrontation against the superior enemy.
These facts explain the rapid advances of the anti-ISIS forces and indicate that even if western Mosul is liberated the war will be far from over.
MOCKINGBIRD MIRROR: Declassified Docs Depict Deeper Link Between the CIA and American Media
21st Century Wire says…
Over the past month, more than 12 million declassified documents from the CIA have been reportedly published online. While the intelligence docu-dump supposedly sheds additional light on covert war programs, psychic research and the Cold War era, it also contains more evidence confirming the symbiotic relationship between the CIA and American media.
In late January the UK’s Guardian reported that the CIA themselves released millions of documents online:
“The CIA has published more than 12 million pages of declassified documents online, making decades of US intelligence files more easily accessible and searchable.
“Although all of the documents in Crest were part of the public record before Tuesday, they could only be inspected by visiting the National Archives in Maryland in person. Once at the archives, just four computers available only during business hours provided access to Crest. A lawsuit from the open-government nonprofit MuckRock prompted the CIA to make the documents available online. Further pressure to publish the documents came from the transparency advocate and journalist Michael Best, who began steadily scanning and uploading the documents one by one.”
Continuing, the Guardian reported that “the CIA also kept files and documents on media organizations and individual reporters.”
In 2014, Best from MuckRock, filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit in order to get the CIA to post all of its documents online. Along the way, Best reportedly crowd-funded more than $15000 to “print out and then publicly upload the records, one by one, to apply pressure to the CIA.”
Although some mainstream outlets have been somewhat congratulatory of the CIA, many of the files released remain heavily redacted.
In the early 1950’s, the CIA ran a wide-scale program called Operation Mockingbird that was said to have infiltrated the American news media in particular, which propagandized the public through various front organizations, magazines and cultural groups.
‘THE COMPANY’ – The Central Intelligence Agency of the United States. (Image Source: zerohedge.com)
“Until earlier this month, a longstanding federal law made it illegal for the US Department of State to share domestically the internally-authored news stories sent to American-operated outlets broadcasting around the globe. All of that changed effective July 2, when the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) was given permission to let US households tune-in to hear the type of programming that has previously only been allowed in outside nations.”
“The Smith-Mundt Act has ensured for decades that government-made media intended for foreign audiences doesn’t end up on radio networks broadcast within the US. An amendment tagged onto the National Defense Authorization Act removed that prohibition this year.”
More from Washington’s Blog below…
Newly-declassified documents show that a senior CIA agent and Deputy Director of the Directorate of Intelligence worked closely with the owners and journalists of many of the largest media outlets:
The United States Senate Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities found in 1975 that the CIA submitted stories to the American press:
Wikipedia adds details:
After 1953, the network was overseen by Allen W. Dulles, director of the CIA. By this time, Operation Mockingbird had a major influence over 25 newspapers and wire agencies. The usual methodology was placing reports developed from intelligence provided by the CIA to witting or unwitting reporters. Those reports would then be repeated or cited by the preceding reporters which in turn would then be cited throughout the media wire services.
The Office of Policy Coordination (OPC) was funded by siphoning off funds intended for the Marshall Plan [i.e. the rebuilding of Europe by the U.S. after WWII]. Some of this money was used to bribe journalists and publishers.
In 2008, the New York Times wrote:
During the early years of the cold war, [prominent writers and artists, from Arthur Schlesinger Jr. to Jackson Pollock] were supported, sometimes lavishly, always secretly, by the C.I.A. as part of its propaganda war against the Soviet Union. It was perhaps the most successful use of “soft power” in American history.
A CIA operative told Washington Post owner Philip Graham … in a conversation about the willingness of journalists to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories:
You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month.
Famed Watergate reporter Carl Bernstein wrote in 1977:
More than 400 American journalists … in the past twenty‑five years have secretly carried out assignments for the Central Intelligence Agency, according to documents on file at CIA headquarters.
In many instances, CIA documents show, journalists were engaged to perform tasks for the CIA with the consent of the managements of America’s leading news organizations.
Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency were [the heads of CBS, Time, the New York Times, the Louisville Courier‑Journal, and Copley News Service. Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include [ABC, NBC, AP, UPI, Reuters], Hearst Newspapers, Scripps‑Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, the Miami Herald and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald‑Tribune.
There is ample evidence that America’s leading publishers and news executives allowed themselves and their organizations to become handmaidens to the intelligence services. “Let’s not pick on some poor reporters, for God’s sake,” William Colby exclaimed at one point to the Church committee’s investigators. “Let’s go to the managements.
The CIA even ran a formal training program in the 1950s to teach its agents to be journalists. Intelligence officers were “taught to make noises like reporters,” explained a high CIA official, and were then placed in major news organizations with help from management.
Once a year during the 1950s and early 1960s, CBS correspondents joined the CIA hierarchy for private dinners and briefings.
Allen Dulles often interceded with his good friend, the late Henry Luce, founder of Time and Life magazines, who readily allowed certain members of his staff to work for the Agency and agreed to provide jobs and credentials for other CIA operatives who lacked journalistic experience.
In the 1950s and early 1960s, Time magazine’s foreign correspondents attended CIA “briefing” dinners similar to those the CIA held for CBS.
When Newsweek was purchased by the Washington Post Company, publisher Philip L. Graham was informed by Agency officials that the CIA occasionally used the magazine for cover purposes, according to CIA sources. “It was widely known that Phil Graham was somebody you could get help from,” said a former deputy director of the Agency. “Frank Wisner dealt with him.” Wisner, deputy director of the CIA from 1950 until shortly before his suicide in 1965, was the Agency’s premier orchestrator of “black” operations, including many in which journalists were involved. Wisner liked to boast of his “mighty Wurlitzer,” a wondrous propaganda instrument he built, and played, with help from the press.)
In November 1973, after [the CIA claimed to have ended the program], Colby told reporters and editors from the New York Times and the Washington Star that the Agency had “some three dozen” American newsmen “on the CIA payroll,” including five who worked for “general‑circulation news organizations.” Yet even while the Senate Intelligence Committee was holding its hearings in 1976, according to high‑level CIA sources, the CIA continued to maintain ties with seventy‑five to ninety journalists of every description—executives, reporters, stringers, photographers, columnists, bureau clerks and members of broadcast technical crews. More than half of these had been moved off CIA contracts and payrolls but they were still bound by other secret agreements with the Agency. According to an unpublished report by the House Select Committee on Intelligence, chaired by Representative Otis Pike, at least fifteen news organizations were still providing cover for CIA operatives as of 1976.
Those officials most knowledgeable about the subject say that a figure of 400 American journalists is on the low side ….
“There were a lot of representations that if this stuff got out some of the biggest names in journalism would get smeared” ….
An expert on propaganda testified under oath during trial that the CIA now employs THOUSANDS of reporters and OWNS its own media organizations. Whether or not his estimate is accurate, it is clear that many prominent reporters still report to the CIA.
A 4-part BBC documentary called the “Century of the Self” shows that an American – Freud’s nephew, Edward Bernays – created the modern field of manipulation of public perceptions, and the U.S. government has extensively used his techniques.
More from Washington’s Blog here…
READ MORE PROPAGANDA NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Propaganda Files
A Time For Vigilance
Testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee on foreign cyber security threats, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper affirmed that the intelligence community has grown more “resolute” in its assessment that Russian intelligence was involved in the hacks aimed at the DNC and Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta. What is, however, of greater relevance to our current predicament and to the integrity of our electoral process is, unfortunately, hardly being discussed amidst the enthusiasm of bipartisan Russian fear mongering. That is, did the release of the emails affect the outcome of the election by turning voters against Hillary Clinton and giving the presidency to a Russian sycophant; and if so how?
Since, as we’ve been told, all the “deplorables” in this country were already committed to Donald Trump, if the information allegedly hacked by the Russians and released by Wikileaks truly impacted the election, allowed Trump to win the electoral college, then it must have been by influencing the “non deplorables,” the sane and reasonable Americans, not to vote for Hillary Clinton. Certainly this information, little if any of which has yet to be adequately refuted, would not have been available were it not for the Russians and Wikileaks, but what requires clarification is how providing relevant information to voters poses a threat to our democracy. Consequently, if the hacked emails did in fact influence the outcome of the election, Trump’s victory must be attributed not to Putin, the Russian hackers, Wikileaks, or to ignorance, racism, misogyny, homophobia and xenophobia, but to the subsequent disgust and contempt of reasonable voters for the misconduct documented in the emails of the DNC and the Clinton campaign. Conduct that corrupted our electoral process and marginalized Bernie Sanders, thereby ensuring that Hillary Clinton receive her party’s nomination for president. Conduct that arguably cost the Democrats the election, and gave America and the world Donald Trump.
The Main Stream Media (MSM), the all important 4th estate, much of which supported the candidacy of Hillary Clinton, for all intents and purposes, ignored the election tampering brought to light by Wikileaks choosing rather to perpetuate the distraction of Russian interference. As an informed citizenry is, after all, necessary for a vibrant, well functioning democracy, American voters have a right to know ALL information relevant to determining for whom they will cast their ballot. The information released by Wikileaks, then, served to augment the enthusiastic reporting of the MSM of Trump’s many, many negatives. By informing the voting public about the election tampering, information that the MSM and our government lacked or refused to share, perhaps Putin, the Russians, if in fact they were behind the hacks, and Wikileaks in releasing it, deserve praise for strengthening rather than condemnation for sabotaging our democracy.
These observations in no way give Donald Trump credibility, undermine concern for the dire situation this country and the world faces as a consequence of his Presidency, or diminish the importance of demonstration and dissent. But as we struggle against the attacks on our civil liberties and progressive values by a Trump Administration, we must learn from past mistakes and ensure that this fiasco never be repeated. We must not be silenced or blinded to the corruption of those, no matter their party affiliation, race, or gender, who, in their lust for power, sabotage our democracy, undermine our electoral process, and, to distract from the criminality of their unscrupulous behavior, perpetuate a “wag the dog” scenario that brings this country and the world to the brink of nuclear war.