The Memory Hole

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ The Salvadoran Civil War (Spanish: guerra civil de El Salvador) was a twelve-year period of civil war in El Salvador that was fought between the government of El Salvador and the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN), a coalition or "umbrella organization" of left-wing groups backed by the Cuban regime of Fidel Castro as well as the Soviet Union.[17] A coup on 15 October 1979 followed by government killings of anti-coup protesters is widely seen as the start of civil war.[18] The war did not formally end until after the collapse of the Soviet Union, when, on 16 January 1992 the Chapultepec Peace Accords were signed in Mexico City.[19] The United Nations (UN) reports that the war killed more than 75,000 people between 1979 and 1992, along with approximately 8,000 disappeared persons. Human rights violations, particularly the kidnapping, torture, and murder of suspected FMLN sympathizers by state security forces and paramilitary death squads – were pervasive.[20][21][22] The Salvadoran government was considered an ally of the U.S. in the context of the Cold War.[23] During the Carter and Reagan administrations, the US provided 1 to 2 million dollars per day in economic aid to the Salvadoran government.[24] The US also provided significant training and equipment to the military. By May 1983, it was reported that US military officers were working within the Salvadoran High Command and making important strategic and tactical decisions.[25] The United States government believed its extensive assistance to El Salvador's government was justified on the grounds that the insurgents were backed by the Soviet Union.[26] Counterinsurgency tactics implemented by the Salvadoran government often targeted civilian noncombatants. Overall, the United Nations estimated that FMLN guerrillas were responsible for 5 percent of atrocities committed during the civil war, while 85 percent were committed by the Salvadoran security forces.[27] Accountability for these civil war-era atrocities has been hindered by a 1993 amnesty law. In 2016, however, the Supreme Court of Justice of El Salvador ruled in case Incostitucionalidad 44-2013/145-2013[28] that the law was unconstitutional and that the Salvadoran government could prosecute suspected war criminals.[29] Background El Salvador has historically been characterised by extreme socioeconomic inequality.[30] In the late 19th century, coffee became a major cash crop for El Salvador, bringing in about 95 percent of the country's income. This income was restricted to only 2 percent of the population, however, exacerbating a divide between a small but powerful land-owning elite and an impoverished majority.[31] This divide grew through the 1920s and was compounded by a drop in coffee prices following the stock-market crash of 1929.[32][33] In 1932, the Central American Socialist Party was formed and led an uprising of peasants and indigenous people against the government. The FMLN was named after Farabundo Martí, one of the leaders of the uprising.[34] The rebellion was brutally suppressed in La Matanza, during which approximately 30,000 civilians were murdered by the armed forces.[35] La Matanza – 'the slaughter' in Spanish, as it came to be known – allowed military dictatorships to monopolize political power in El Salvador while protecting the economic dominance of the landed elite.[35] Opposition to this arrangement among middle-class, working-class, and poor Salvadorans grew throughout the 20th century.[35] On 14 July 1969, an armed conflict erupted between El Salvador and Honduras over immigration disputes caused by Honduran land reform laws. The conflict (known as the Football War) lasted only four days but had major long-term effects for Salvadoran society. Trade was disrupted between El Salvador and Honduras, causing tremendous economic damage to both nations. An estimated 300,000 Salvadorans were displaced due to battle, many of whom were exiled from Honduras; in many cases, the Salvadoran government could not meet their needs. The Football War also strengthened the power of the military in El Salvador, leading to heightened corruption. In the years following the war, the government expanded its purchases of arms from sources such as Israel, Brazil, West Germany and the United States.[36] The 1972 Salvadoran presidential election was marred by massive electoral fraud, which favored the military-backed National Conciliation Party (PCN), whose candidate Arturo Armando Molina was a colonel in the Salvadoran Army. Opposition to the Molina government was strong on both the right and the left. Also in 1972, the Marxist–Leninist Fuerzas Populares de Liberación Farabundo Martí (FPL) – established in 1970 as an offshoot of the Communist Party of El Salvador – began conducting small-scale guerrilla operations in El Salvador. Other organizations such as the People's Revolutionary Army (ERP) also began to develop. The growth of left-wing insurgency in El Salvador occurred against a backdrop of rising food prices and decreased agricultural output exacerbated by the 1973 oil crisis. This worsened the existing socioeconomic inequality in the country, leading to increased unrest. In response, President Molina enacted a series of land reform measures, calling for large landholdings to be redistributed among the peasant population. The reforms failed, thanks to opposition from the landed elite, reinforcing the widespread discontent with the government.[37] Gen. Carlos Humberto Romero, military president of El Salvador (1977–1979). His presidency was characterized by increased civil unrest and government repression. On 20 February 1977, the PCN defeated the National Opposing Union (UNO) in the presidential elections. As was the case in 1972, the results of the 1977 election were fraudulent and favored a military candidate, General Carlos Humberto Romero. State-sponsored paramilitary forces – such as the infamous Organización Democrática Nacionalista (ORDEN) – reportedly strong-armed peasants into voting for the military candidate by threatening them with machetes.[38] The period between the election and the formal inauguration of President Romero on 1 July 1977 was characterized by massive protests from the popular movement, which were met by state repression. On 28 February 1977, a crowd of political demonstrators gathered in downtown San Salvador to protest the electoral fraud. Security forces arrived on the scene and opened fire, resulting in a massacre as they indiscriminately killed demonstrators and bystanders alike. Estimates of the number of civilians killed range between 200[39] and 1,500.[40]: 109–110  President Molina blamed the protests on "foreign Communists" and immediately exiled a number of top UNO party members from the country.[41] Repression continued after the inauguration of President Romero, with his new government declaring a state-of-siege and suspending civil liberties. In the countryside, the agrarian elite organized and funded paramilitary death squads, such as the infamous Regalado's Armed Forces (FAR) led by Hector Regalado. While the death squads were initially autonomous from the Salvadoran military and composed of civilians (the FAR, for example, had developed out of a Boy Scout troop), they were soon taken over by El Salvador's military intelligence service, National Security Agency of El Salvador (ANSESAL), led by Major Roberto D'Aubuisson, and became a crucial part of the state's repressive apparatus, murdering thousands of union leaders, activists, students and teachers suspected of sympathizing with the left.[42] The Socorro Jurídico Cristiano (Christian Legal Assistance) – a legal aid office within the archbishop's office and El Salvador's leading human rights group at the time – documented the killings of 687 civilians by government forces in 1978. In 1979 the number of documented killings increased to 1,796.[43][40]: 1–2, 222  The repression prompted many in the Catholic Church to denounce the government, which responded by repressing the clergy.[44] Historian M. A. Serpas[citation needed] posits displacement and dispossession rates with respect to land as a major structural factor leading ultimately to civil war. El Salvador is an agrarian society, with coffee fueling its economy, where "77 percent of the arable land belonged to .01 percent of the population. Nearly 35 percent of the civilians in El Salvador were disfranchised from land ownership either through historical injustices, war or economic downturns in the commodities market. During this time frame, the country also experienced a growing population amidst major disruption in agrarian commerce and trade."[citation needed] A threat to land change meant a challenge to a state where "marriages intertwined, making the wealthiest coffee processors and exporters (more so than the growers) also those with the highest ties in the military. — M. A. Serpas Coup d'état, repression and insurrection: 1979–1981 Military coup October 1979 With tensions mounting and the country on the verge of an insurrection, the civil-military Revolutionary Government Junta (JRG) deposed Romero in a coup on 15 October 1979. The United States feared that El Salvador, like Nicaragua and Cuba before it, could fall to communist revolution.[45] Thus, Jimmy Carter's administration supported the new military government with vigor, hoping to promote stability in the country.[46] While Carter provided some support to the government, the subsequent Reagan administration significantly increased U.S. spending in El Salvador.[47] By 1984 Ronald Reagan's government would spend nearly $1 billion on economic aid for the Salvadoran government.[48] The JRG enacted a land reform program that restricted landholdings to a 100-hectare maximum, nationalised the banking, coffee and sugar industries, scheduled elections for February 1982, and disbanded the paramilitary private death squad Organización Democrática Nacionalista (ORDEN) on 6 November 1979.[49] The land reform program was received with hostility from El Salvador's military and economic elites, however, which sought to sabotage the process as soon as it began. Upon learning of the government's intent to distribute land to the peasants and organize cooperatives, wealthy Salvadoran landowners began killing their own livestock and moving valuable farming equipment across the border into Guatemala, where many Salvadoran elites owned additional land. In addition, most co-op leaders in the countryside were assassinated or "disappeared" soon after being elected and becoming visible to the authorities.[50] The Socorro Jurídico documented a jump in documented government killings from 234 in February 1980 to 487 the following month.[1]: 270  Under pressure from the military, all three civilian members of the junta resigned on 3 January 1980, along with 10 of the 11 cabinet ministers. On 22 January 1980, the Salvadoran National Guard attacked a massive peaceful demonstration, killing up to 50 people and wounding hundreds more.[49] On 6 February, US ambassador Frank Devine informed the State Department that the extreme right was arming itself and preparing for a confrontation in which it clearly expected to ally itself with the military.[51][52] Aims of the junta's violent repression "The immediate goal of the Salvadoran army and security forces—and of the United States in 1980, was to prevent a takeover by the leftist-led guerrillas and their allied political organizations. At this point in the Salvadoran conflict the latter were much more important than the former. The military resources of the rebels were extremely limited and their greatest strength, by far, lay not in force of arms but in their 'mass organizations' made up of labor unions, student and peasant organizations that could be mobilized by the thousands in El Salvador's major cities and could shut down the country through strikes."[53] Critics of US military aid charged that "it would legitimate what has become dictatorial violence and that political power in El Salvador lay with old-line military leaders in government positions who practice a policy of 'reform with repression.'" A prominent Catholic spokesman insisted that "any military aid you send to El Salvador ends up in the hands of the military and paramilitary rightist groups who are themselves at the root of the problems of the country."[54] "In one case that has received little attention", Human Rights Watch noted, "US Embassy officials apparently collaborated with the death squad abduction of two law students in January 1980. National Guard troops arrested two youths, Francisco Ventura and José Humberto Mejía, following an anti-government demonstration. The National Guard received permission to bring the youths onto Embassy grounds. Shortly thereafter, a private car drove into the Embassy parking lot. Men in civilian dress put the students in the trunk of their car and drove away. Ventura and Mejía were never seen again."[55] Motivation for the resistance Death squad victims in San Salvador, (c. 1981) As the government began to expand its violence towards its citizens, not only through death squads but also through the military, any group of citizens that attempted to provide any form of support whether physically or verbally ran the risk of death. Even so, many still chose to participate.[56] But the violence was not limited to activists but also anyone who promoted ideas that "questioned official policy" were tacitly assumed to be subversive against the government.[57] A marginalized group that metamorphosed into a guerilla force that would end up confronting these government forces manifested itself in campesinos or peasants. Many of these insurgents joined collective action campaigns for material gain; in the Salvadoran Civil War, however, many peasants cited reasons other than material benefits in their decision to join the fight.[58] Piety was a popular reason for joining the insurrection because they saw their participation as a way of not only advancing a personal cause but a communal sentiment of divine justice.[59] Even prior to the civil war, numerous insurgents took part in other campaigns that tackled social changes much more directly, not only the lack of political representation but also the lack of economic and social opportunities not afforded to their communities.[60] While the FMLN can be characterized as an insurrectionist group, other scholars have classified it as an "armed group institution." Understanding the differentiation is crucial. Armed group institutions use tactics to reinforce their mission or ideology. Ultimately influencing the behavior and group norms of their combatants. In this regard, the FMLN had a more effective approach than El Salvador's army in politically educating their members about their mission. Individuals who aligned themselves with the FMLN were driven by a profound sense of passion and purpose. They demonstrated a willingness to risk their lives for the greater good of their nation. The FMLN strategy focused on community organization, establishing connections within the church and labor unions. In contrast, El Salvador's army had inadequate training, and many of its combatants reported joining out of job insecurity or under intimidation from the government.These disparities were notably reflected in their respective combat methods. Further, the Salvadoran military caused more civilian casualties than the FMLN.[61] In addition, the insurgents in the civil war viewed their support of the insurrection as a demonstration of their opposition to the powerful elite's unfair treatment of peasant communities that they experienced on an everyday basis, so there was a class element associated with these insurgencies.[62] They reveled in their fight against injustice and in their belief that they were writing their own story, an emotion that Elisabeth Wood titled "pleasure of agency".[63] The peasants' organization thus centered on using their struggle to unite against their oppressors, not only towards the government but the elites as well, a struggle that soon evolved into a political machine that came to be associated with the FMLN. In the early months of 1980, Salvadoran guerilla groups, workers, communists, and socialists, unified to form the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front (FMLN).[34] The FMLN immediately announced plans for an insurrection against the government, which began on 10 January 1981, with the FMLN's first major attack. The attack established FMLN control of most of Morazán and Chalatenango departments for the war's duration. Attacks were also launched on military targets throughout the country, leaving hundreds of people dead. FMLN insurgents ranged from children to the elderly, both male and female, and most were trained in FMLN camps in the mountains and jungles of El Salvador to learn military techniques. Much later, in November 1989, the FMLN launched a large offensive that caught Salvadoran military off guard and succeeded in taking control of large sections of the country and entering the capital, San Salvador. In San Salvador, the FMLN quickly took control of many of the poor neighborhoods as the military bombed their positions—including residential neighborhoods to drive out the FMLN. This large FMLN offensive was unsuccessful in overthrowing the government but did convince the government that the FMLN could not be defeated using force of arms and that a negotiated settlement would be necessary.[64] Assassination of Archbishop Romero Archbishop Óscar Romero In February 1980, Archbishop Óscar Romero published an open letter to US President Jimmy Carter in which he pleaded with him to suspend the United States' ongoing program of military aid to the Salvadoran regime. He advised Carter that "Political power is in the hands of the armed forces. They know only how to repress the people and defend the interests of the Salvadoran oligarchy." Romero warned that US support would only "sharpen the injustice and repression against the organizations of the people which repeatedly have been struggling to gain respect for their fundamental human rights".[65] On 24 March 1980, the Archbishop was assassinated while celebrating Mass, the day after he called upon Salvadoran soldiers and security force members to not follow their orders to kill Salvadoran civilians. President Carter stated this was a "shocking and unconscionable act".[66] At his funeral a week later, government-sponsored snipers in the National Palace and on the periphery of the Gerardo Barrios Plaza were responsible for the shooting of 42 mourners.[67] On 7 May 1980, former army major, Roberto D'Aubuisson, was arrested with a group of civilians and soldiers at a farm. The raiders found documents connecting him and the civilians as organizers and financiers of the death squad who killed Archbishop Romero, and of plotting a coup d'état against the JRG. Their arrest provoked right-wing terrorist threats and institutional pressures forcing the JRG to release D'Aubuisson. In 1993, a U.N. investigation confirmed that D'Aubuisson ordered the assassination.[68] A week after the arrest of D'Aubuisson, the National Guard and the newly reorganized paramilitary ORDEN, with the cooperation of the Military of Honduras, carried out a large massacre at the Sumpul River on 14 May 1980, in which an estimated 600 civilians were killed, mostly women and children. Escaping villagers were prevented from crossing the river by the Honduran armed forces, "and then killed by Salvadoran troops who fired on them in cold blood".[69] Over the course of 1980, the Salvadoran Army and three main security forces (National Guard, National Police and Treasury Police) were estimated to have killed 11,895 people, mostly peasants, trade unionists, teachers, students, journalists, human rights advocates, priests, and other prominent demographics among the popular movement.[43] Human rights organizations judged the Salvadoran government to have among the worst human rights records in the hemisphere.[70] Murder and rape of US nuns On 2 December 1980, members of the Salvadoran National Guard were suspected to have raped and murdered four American, Catholic church women (three religious women, or nuns, and a laywoman). Maryknoll missionary sisters Maura Clarke and Ita Ford, Ursuline sister Dorothy Kazel, and laywoman Jean Donovan were on a Catholic relief mission providing food, shelter, transport, medical care, and burial to death squad victims. In 1980 alone, at least 20 religious workers and priests were murdered in El Salvador. Throughout the war, the murders of church figures increased. For example, the Jesuit University of Central America stated that two bishops, sixteen priests, three nuns, one seminarian, and at least twenty-seven lay workers were murdered. By killing Church figures, "the military leadership showed just how far its position had hardened in daring to eliminate those it viewed as opponents. They saw the Church as an enemy that went against the military and their rule."[71] U.S. military aid was briefly cut off in response to the murders but was renewed within six weeks. The outgoing Carter administration increased military aid to the Salvadoran armed forces to $10 million, which included $5 million in rifles, ammunition, grenades and helicopters.[72] In justifying these arms shipments, the administration claimed that the regime had taken "positive steps" to investigate the murder of four American nuns, but this was disputed by US Ambassador, Robert E. White, who said that he could find no evidence the junta was "conducting a serious investigation".[72] White was dismissed from the foreign service by the Reagan administration after he had refused to participate in a coverup of the Salvadoran military's responsibility for the murders at the behest of Secretary of State Alexander Haig.[73] Repression stepped up Other countries allied with the United States also intervened in El Salvador. The military government in Chile provided substantial training and tactical advice to the Salvadoran Armed Forces, such that the Salvadoran high command bestowed upon General Augusto Pinochet the prestigious Order of José Matías Delgado in May 1981 for his government's avid support. The Argentine military dictatorship also supported the Salvadoran armed forces as part of Operation Charly. During the same month, the JRG strengthened the state of siege, imposed by President Romero in May 1979, by declaring martial law and adopting a new set of curfew regulations.[74] Between 12 January and 19 February 1981, 168 persons were killed by the security forces for violating curfew.[75] "Draining the Sea" Further information: Scorched earth In its effort to defeat the insurgency, the Salvadoran Armed Forces carried out a "scorched earth" strategy, and adopted tactics similar to those being employed in neighboring Guatemala by its security forces. These tactics were inspired and adapted from U.S. counterinsurgency strategies used during the Vietnam War.[76] An integral part of the Salvadoran Army's counterinsurgency strategy entailed "draining the sea" or "drying up the ocean", that is, eliminating the insurgency by eradicating its support base in the countryside. The primary target was the civilian population – displacing or killing them in order to remove any possible base of support for the rebels. The concept of "draining the sea" had its basis in a doctrine by Mao Zedong that emphasized that "The guerrilla must move amongst the people as a fish swims in the sea."[77] Aryeh Neier, the executive director of Americas Watch, wrote in a 1984 review about the scorched earth approach: "This may be an effective strategy for winning the war. It is, however, a strategy that involves the use of terror tactics—bombings, strafings, shellings and, occasionally, massacres of civilians."[78] Beginning in 1984, the Salvadoran Air Force was able to locate guerrilla strongholds reportedly using intelligence from U.S. Air Force planes flying over the country.[79][80] Scorched earth offensives of 1981 On 15 March 1981, the Salvadoran Army began a "sweep" operation in Cabañas Department in northern El Salvador near the Honduran border. The sweep was accompanied by the use of scorched earth tactics by the Salvadoran Army and indiscriminate killings of anyone captured by the army. Those displaced by the "sweep" who were not killed outright fled the advance of the Salvadoran Army; hiding in caves and under trees to evade capture and probable summary execution. On 18 March, three days after the sweep in Cabañas began, 4–8,000 survivors of the sweep (mostly women and children) attempted to cross the Rio Lempa into Honduras to flee violence. There, they were caught between Salvadoran and Honduran troops. The Salvadoran Air Force, subsequently bombed and strafed the fleeing civilians with machine gun fire, killing hundreds. Among the dead were at least 189 persons who were unaccounted for and registered as "disappeared" during the operation.[81] A second offensive was launched, also in Cabañas Department, on 11 November 1981 in which 1,200 troops were mobilized, including members of the Atlácatl Battalion. Atlácatl was a rapid response counter-insurgency battalion organized at the U.S. Army School of the Americas in Panama in 1980. Atlácatl soldiers were trained and equipped by the U.S. military,[82][83] and were described as "the pride of the United States military team in San Salvador. Trained in antiguerrilla operations, the battalion was intended to turn a losing war around."[84] The November 1981 operation was commanded by Lt. Col. Sigifredo Ochoa, a former Treasury Police chief with a reputation for brutality. Ochoa was close associate of Major Roberto D'Aubuisson and was alleged to have been involved in the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero. D'Aubuisson and Ochoa were both members of La Tandona, the class of 1966 at the Captain General Gerardo Barrios Military School.[85] From the start, the invasion of Cabanas was described as a "cleansing" operation by official sources.[86] Hundreds of civilians were massacred by the army as Col. Ochoa's troops moved through the villages. Col. Ochoa claimed that hundreds of guerrillas had been killed but was able to show journalists only fifteen captured weapons, half of them virtual antiques, suggesting that most of those killed in the sweep were unarmed.[87] El Mozote massacre The memorial at the El Mozote. This operation was followed by additional "sweeps" through Morazán Department, spearheaded by the Atlácatl Battalion. On 11 December 1981, one month after the "sweep" through Cabañas, the Battalion occupied the village of El Mozote and massacred at least 733 and possibly up to 1,000 unarmed civilians, including women and 146 children, in what became known as the El Mozote Massacre.[88][89] The Atlácatl soldiers accused the adults of collaborating with the guerrillas. The field commander said they were under orders to kill everyone, including the children, who he asserted would just grow up to become guerrillas if they let them live. "We were going to make an example of these people," he said.[90] The US steadfastly denied the existence of the El Mozote massacre, dismissing reports of it as leftist "propaganda", until secret US cables were declassified in the 1990s.[91] The US government and its allies in US media smeared reporters of American newspapers who reported on the atrocity and, more generally, undertook a campaign of whitewashing the human rights record of the Salvadoran military and the US role in arming, training and guiding it. The smears, according to journalists like Michael Massing writing in the Columbia Journalism Review and Anthony Lewis, made other American journalists tone down their reporting on the crimes of the Salvadoran regime and the US role in supporting the regime.[84][92][93][82][83][94] As details became more widely known, the event became recognized as one of the worst atrocities of the conflict. In its report covering 1981, Amnesty International identified "regular security and military units as responsible for widespread torture, mutilation and killings of noncombatant civilians from all sectors of Salvadoran society." The report also stated that the killing of civilians by state security forces became increasingly systematic with the implementation of more methodical killing strategies, which allegedly included use of a meat packing plant to dispose of human remains.[95] Between 20 and 25 August 1981, eighty-three decapitations were reported. The murders were later revealed to have been carried out by a death squad using a guillotine.[96] The repression in rural areas resulted in the displacement of large portions of the rural populace, and many peasants fled. Of those who fled or were displaced, some 20,000 resided in makeshift refugee centers on the Honduran border in conditions of poverty, starvation and disease.[97] The army and death squads forced many of them to flee to the United States, but most were denied asylum.[98] A US congressional delegation that, on 17–18 January 1981, visited the refugee camps in El Salvador on a fact finding mission, submitted a report to Congress that found: "[T]he Salvadoran method of 'drying up the ocean' is to eliminate entire villages from the map, to isolate the guerrillas, and deny them any rural base off which they can feed."[99] In total, Socorro Jurídico registered 13,353 individual cases of summary execution by government forces over the course of 1981. Nonetheless, the true figure for the number of persons killed by the Army and security services could be substantially higher, due to the fact that extrajudicial killings generally went unreported in the countryside and many of the victims' families remained silent in fear of reprisal. An Americas Watch report described that the Socorro Jurídico figures "tended to be conservative because its standards of confirmation are strict"; killings of persons were registered individually and required proof of being "not combat related".[100] Socorro Jurídico later revised its count of government killings for 1981 up to 16,000 with the induction of new cases.[101][102] Lieutenant Colonel Domingo Monterrosa was chosen to replace Colonial Jaime Flores and became military commander of the whole eastern zone of El Salvador. He was a rare thing: "pure, one-hundred-percent soldier, a natural leader, a born military man."[103] Monterrosa did not want wholesale bloodshed, but he wanted to win the war at any costs. He tried to be more relatable and less arrogant to the local population in the way he presented his military. When he first executed massacres he didn't think much of it because it was part of his military training and because it was tactically approved by the High Command, but he didn't consider whether it would become a political problem. He was accused of responsibility for what happened at El Mozote, though he denied it. Monterrosa later began to date a Salvadoran woman who worked in the press corps, for an American television network. Monterrosa's girlfriend let her co-worker know that something had gone wrong at El Mozote, though she did not go into detail. But people knew that he had lost radio contact with his men and that it was unfortunate and something that later brought regrettable consequences. Although he says he lost contact with his men, the guerrillas did not believe it and said it was well known to everyone that he had ordered the massacre. In an interview with James LeMoyne, however, he stated that he did in fact order his men to "clean out" El Mozote.[104] Interim government and continued violence: 1982–1984 Peace offer and rejection José Napoleón Duarte at a Christian Democratic Party press conference during the Salvadoran war (1982) In 1982, the FMLN began calling for a peace settlement that would establish a "government of broad participation". The Reagan administration said the FMLN wanted to create a Communist dictatorship.[105] Elections were interrupted with right-wing paramilitary attacks and FMLN-suggested boycotts. El Salvador's National Federation of Lawyers, which represented all of the country's bar associations, refused to participate in drafting the 1982 electoral law. The lawyers said that the elections couldn't possibly be free and fair during a state of siege that suspended all basic rights and freedoms. FMLN steps up campaign Attacks against military and economic targets by the FMLN began to escalate. The FMLN attacked the Ilopango Air Force Base in San Salvador, destroying six of the Air Force's 14 Bell UH-1 Iroquois helicopters, five of its 18 Dassault Ouragan aircraft and three C-47s.[106] Between February and April, a total of 439 acts of sabotage were reported.[107] The number of acts of sabotage involving explosives or arson rose to 782 between January and September.[108] The United States Embassy estimated the damage to the economic infrastructure at US$98 million.[109] FMLN also carried out large-scale operations in the capital city and temporarily occupied urban centres in the country's interior. According to some reports, the number of rebels ranged between 4,000 and 5,000; other sources put the number at between 6,000 and 9,000.[110] Interim government Pursuant to measures implemented by the JRG junta on 18 October 1979, elections for an interim government were held on 29 April 1982. The Legislative Assembly voted on three candidates nominated by the armed forces; �lvaro Alfredo Magaña Borja was elected by 36 votes to 17, ahead of the Party of National Conciliation and the hard right Nationalist Republican Alliance (ARENA) candidates. Roberto D'Aubuisson accused Jaime Abdul Gutiérrez Avendaño of imposing on the Assembly "his personal decision to put �lvaro Alfredo Magaña Borja in the presidency" in spite of a "categorical no" from the ARENA deputies. Magana was sworn into office on 2 May. Decree No. 6 of the National Assembly suspended phase III of the implementation of the agrarian reform, and was itself later amended. The Apaneca Pact was signed on 3 August 1982, establishing a Government of National Unity, whose objectives were peace, democratization, human rights, economic recovery, security and a strengthened international position. An attempt was made to form a transitional government that would establish a democratic system. Lack of agreement among the forces that made up the government and the pressures of the armed conflict prevented any substantive[clarification needed] changes from being made during Magaña's presidency.[111] More atrocities by the government The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights reported that, on 24 May 1982, a clandestine cemetery containing the corpses of 150 disappeared persons was discovered near Puerta del Diablo, Panchimalco, approximately twelve kilometers from San Salvador.[112] On 10 June 1982, almost 4,000 Salvadoran troops carried out a "cleanup" operation in the rebel-controlled Chalatenango province. Over 600 civilians were reportedly massacred during the Army sweep. The Salvadoran field commander acknowledged that an unknown number of civilian rebel sympathizers or "masas" were killed, while declaring the operation a success.[113] Nineteen days later, the Army massacred 27 unarmed civilians during house raids in a San Salvador neighborhood. The women were raped and murdered. Everyone was dragged from their homes into the street and then executed. "The operation was a success," said the Salvadoran Defense Ministry communique. "This action was a result of training and professionalization of our officers and soldiers."[114] During 1982 and 1983, government forces killed approximately 8,000 civilians a year.[40]: 3  Although the figure is substantially less than the figures reported by human rights groups in 1980 and 1981, targeted executions as well as indiscriminate killings nonetheless remained an integral policy of the army and internal security forces, part of what Professor William Stanley described as a "strategy of mass murder" designed to terrorize the civilian population as well as opponents of the government.[40]: 225  General Adolfo Blandón, the Salvadoran armed forces chief of staff during much of the 1980s, has stated, "Before 1983, we never took prisoners of war."[115] Government murder of human rights and labor union leaders In March 1983, Marianella García Villas, president of the non-governmental Human Rights Commission of El Salvador, was captured by army troops on the Guazapa volcano, and later tortured to death. Garcia Villas had been on Guazapa collecting evidence about the possible army use of white phosphorus munitions. In April 1983, Melida Anaya Montes, a leader of the Popular Forces for Liberation (FPL) "Farabundo Martí", a communist party-affiliated militia, was murdered in Managua, Nicaragua. Salvador Cayetano Carpio, her superior in the FPL, was allegedly implicated in her murder. He committed suicide in Managua shortly after Anaya Montes' murder. Their deaths influenced the course within the FMLN of the FPL's Prolonged Popular War strategy.[citation needed] On 7 February 1984, nine labor union leaders, including all seven top officials of one major labor federation, were arrested by the Salvadoran National Police and sent to be tried by a military court. The arrests were part of Duarte's moves to crack down on labor unions after more than 80 trade unionists were detained in a raid by the National Police. The police confiscated the union's files and took videotape mugshots of each union member. During a 15-day interrogation, the nine labor leaders were beaten during late-night questioning and were told to confess to being guerrillas. They were then forced to sign a written confession while blindfolded. They were never charged with being guerrillas but the official police statement said they were accused of planning to "present demands to management for higher wages and benefits and promoting strikes, which destabilize the economy." A U.S. official said the embassy had "followed the arrests closely and was satisfied that the correct procedures were followed."[116] Duarte presidency: 1984–1989 Fixed elections and lack of accountability Mesa Grande refugee camp in Honduras 1987 President Ronald Reagan with José Napoleón Duarte. In 1984 elections, Christian Democrat José Napoleón Duarte won the presidency (with 54 percent of the votes) against Army Major Roberto d'Aubuisson of the Nationalist Republican Alliance (ARENA). The elections were held under military rule amidst high levels of repression and violence, however, and candidates to the left of Duarte's brand of Christian Democrats were excluded from participating.[117] Fearful of a d'Aubuisson presidency for public relations purposes, the CIA financed Duarte's campaign with some two million dollars.[118] $10 million were put into the election as a whole, by the CIA, for electoral technology, administration and international observers.[119] After Duarte's victory, human rights abuses at the hands of the army and security forces continued, but declined due to modifications made to the security structures. The policies of the Duarte government attempted to make the country's three security forces more accountable to the government by placing them under the direct supervision of a Vice Minister of Defense, but all three forces continued to be commanded individually by regular army officers, which, given the command structure within the government, served to effectively nullify any of the accountability provisions.[120][121] The Duarte government also failed to decommission personnel within the security structures that had been involved in gross human rights abuses, instead simply dispersing them to posts in other regions of the country.[122] Days of Tranquillity U.S. Ambassador to El Salvador Thomas Pickering and U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Jeane Kirkpatrick. Following a proposal from Nils Thedin to UNICEF, "Days of tranquillity" were brokered between Government and rebel forces, under the direction of UNICEF Executive Director James Grant. For three days in 1985, all hostilities ceased to allow for mass-immunisation of any child against polio, measles, diphtheria, tetanus and whooping cough. The program was successful. More than half of El Salvador's 400,000 children were immunised from 2,000 immunisation centres by 20,000 health workers, and the program was repeated in subsequent years until the conclusion of the war. Similar programs have since been instituted in Uganda, Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Sudan.[123][124] Army massacres continue While reforms were being made to the security forces, the army continued to massacre unarmed civilians in the country side. An Americas Watch report noted that the Atlácatl Battalion killed 80 unarmed civilians in Cabanas in July 1984, and carried out another massacre one month later, killing 50 displaced people in the Chalatenango province.[125] The women were raped and then everyone was systematically executed.[126] ERP combatant Perquín 1990 Through 1984 and 1985, the Salvadoran Armed Forces enacted a series of "civic-action" programs in Chalatenango province, consisting of the establishment of "citizen defense committees" to guard plantations and businesses against attacks by insurgents and the establishment of a number of free-fire zones. These measures were implemented under former Cabanas commander, Lieutenant Colonel Sigifredo Ochoa Perez, who had previously been exiled to the US Army War College for mutiny.[127] By January 1985 Ochoa's forces had established 12 free-fire zones in Chalatenango in which any inhabitants unidentified by the army were deemed to be insurgents. Ochoa stated in an interview that areas within the free fire zone were susceptible to indiscriminate bombings by the Salvadoran Air Force. Ochoa's forces were implicated in a massacre of about 40 civilians in an Army sweep through one of the free fire zones in August 1985. Ochoa refused to permit the Red Cross to enter these areas to deliver humanitarian aid to the victims.[128] Ochoa's forces reportedly uprooted some 1,400 civilian rebel supporters with mortar fire between September and November 1984.[129] In its annual review of 1987, Amnesty International reported that "some of the most serious violations of human rights are found in Central America", particularly Guatemala and El Salvador, where "kidnappings and assassinations serve as systematic mechanisms of the government against opposition from the left".[130] On 26 October 1987, unknown gunmen shot and killed Herbert Ernesto Anaya, Director of El Salvador's nongovernmental Human Rights Commission. Anaya was in his car in his driveway with his wife and children at the time. Some human rights groups linked the increase of death squad-style killings and disappearances to the reactivation of the popular organizations, which had been decimated by mass state terror in the early 1980s.[131] Col. Renee Emilio Ponce, the Army operations chief, asserted that the guerrillas were "returning to their first phase of clandestine organization" in the city, "and mobilization of the masses".[132] Peace talks During the Central American Peace Accords negotiations in 1987, the FMLN demanded that all death squads be disbanded and the members be held accountable. In October 1987, the Salvadoran Assembly approved an amnesty for civil-war-related crimes. The Amnesty law required the release of all prisoners suspected of being guerrillas and guerrilla sympathizers. Pursuant to these laws, 400 political prisoners were released. Insurgents were given a period of fifteen days to turn themselves over to the security forces in exchange for amnesty.[133] Despite amnesty being granted to guerillas and political prisoners, amnesty was also granted to members of the army, security forces and paramilitary who were involved in human rights abuses.[134] Army death squads continue In October 1988, Amnesty International reported that death squads had abducted, tortured, and killed, hundreds of suspected dissidents in the preceding eighteen months. Most of the victims were trade unionists and members of cooperatives, human rights workers, members of the judiciary involved in efforts to establish criminal responsibility for human rights violations, returned refugees and displaced persons, and released political prisoners.[135] The squads comprised intelligence sections of the Armed Forces and the security services. They customarily wore plain clothes and made use of trucks or vans with tinted windows and without license plates. They were "chillingly efficient", said the report. Victims were sometimes shot from passing cars, in the daytime and in front of eyewitnesses. At other times, victims were kidnapped from their homes or on the streets and their bodies found dumped far from the scene. Others were forcefully "disappeared." Victims were "customarily found mutilated, decapitated, dismembered, strangled or showing marks of torture or rape." The death squad style was "to operate in secret but to leave mutilated bodies of victims as a means of terrifying the population."[135] FMLN offensive of 1989 and retaliation President Alfredo Cristiani, September 1989 Outraged by the results of the 1988 fixed elections and the military's use of terror tactics and voter intimidation, the FMLN launched a major offensive known as the "final offensive of 1989" with the aim of unseating the government of President Alfredo Cristiani on 11 November 1989. This offensive brought the epicenter of fighting into the wealthy suburbs of San Salvador for essentially the first time in the history of the conflict, as the FMLN began a campaign of selective assassinations against political and military officials, civil officials, and upper-class private citizens.[136] The government retaliated with a renewed campaign of repression, primarily against activists in the democratic sector.[136] The non-governmental Salvadoran Human Rights Commission (CDHES) counted 2,868 killings by the armed forces between May 1989 and May 1990.[137] In addition, the CDHES stated that government paramilitary organizations illegally detained 1,916 persons and disappeared 250 during the same period.[138] On 13 February, the Atlácatl Battalion attacked a guerrilla field hospital and killed at least 10 people, including five patients, a physician and a nurse. Two of the female victims showed signs that they had been raped before they were executed. US message Nearly two weeks earlier, US Vice President Dan Quayle on a visit to San Salvador told army leaders that human rights abuses committed by the military had to stop. Sources associated with the military said afterword that Quayle's warning was dismissed as propaganda for American consumption aimed at the US Congress and public.[139] At the same time, critics argued US military advisors were possibly sending a different message to the Salvadoran military: "Do what you need to do to stop the commies, just don't get caught".[140] A former US intelligence officer suggested the death squads needed to leave less visual evidence, that they should stop dumping bodies on the side of the road because "they have an ocean and they ought to use it".[141] The School of the Americas, founded by the United States, trained many members of the Salvadoran military, including Roberto D'Aubuisson, organizer of death squads, and military officers linked to the murder of Jesuit priests.[142] In a 29 November 1989 press conference, Secretary of State James A. Baker III said he believed President Cristiani was in control of the army and defended the government's crackdown on opponents as "absolutely appropriate".[143] The US Trade Representative told Human Rights Watch that the government's repression of trade unionists was justified on the grounds that they were guerrilla supporters.[144][145] Government terrorism in San Salvador In San Salvador on 1 October 1989, eight people were killed and 35 others were injured when a death squad bombed the headquarters of the leftist labor confederation, the National Trade Union Federation of Salvadoran Workers (UNTS).[146] Earlier the same day, another bomb exploded outside the headquarters of a victims' advocacy group, the Committee of Mothers and Family Members of Political Prisoners, Disappeared and Assassinated of El Salvador, injuring four others.[147] Death squads take on the church As early as the 1980s, the University of Central America fell under attack from the army and death squads. On 16 November 1989, five days after the beginning of the FMLN offensive, uniformed soldiers of the Atlácatl Battalion entered the campus of the University of Central America in the middle of the night and executed six Jesuit priests—Ignacio Ellacuría, Segundo Montes, Ignacio Martín-Baró, Joaquín López y López, Juan Ramón Moreno, and Amando López—and their housekeepers (a mother and daughter, Elba Ramos and Celia Marisela Ramos). The priests were dragged from their beds on the campus, machine gunned to death and their corpses mutilated. The mother and daughter were found shot to death in the bed they shared.[148] The Atlácatl Battalion was reportedly under the tutelage of U.S. special forces just 48 hours before the killings.[149] One day later, six men and one youth were slaughtered by government soldiers in the capital, San Salvador. According to relatives and neighbors who witnessed the killings, the six men were lined up against a masonry wall and shot to death. The seventh youth who happened to be walking by at the time was also executed.[150] The Salvadoran government then began a campaign to dismantle a liberal Catholic church network that the army said were "front organizations" supporting the guerrillas. Church offices were raided and workers were arrested and expelled. Targets included priests, lay workers and foreign employees of humanitarian agencies, providing social services to the poor: food programs, healthcare, relief for the displaced.[151] One church volunteer, who was a U.S. citizen, said she was blindfolded, tortured and interrogated in Treasury Police headquarters in San Salvador while a U.S. vice consul "having coffee with the colonel in charge" did nothing to intervene.[152] Pressures to end stalemate Protest against the Salvadoran Civil War Chicago 1989 The murder of the six Jesuit priests and the November 1989 "final offensive" by the FMLN in San Salvador, however, were key turning points that increased international pressure and domestic pressure from war-weary constituents that alternatives to the military stalemate needed to be found. International support for the FMLN was declining with the end of the Cold War just as international support for the Salvadoran armed forces was weakening as the Reagan administration gave way to the less ideological Bush administration, and the end of the Cold War lessened the anti-Communist concerns about a potential domino effect in Central America.[153] By the late 1980s, 75 percent of the population lived in poverty.[30] The living standards of most Salvadorans declined by 30 percent since 1983. Unemployment or underemployment increased to 50 percent.[154] Most people, moreover, still didn't have access to clean water or healthcare. The armed forces were feared, inflation rose almost 40 percent, capital flight reached an estimated $1 billion, and the economic elite avoided paying taxes.[155] Despite nearly $3 billion in American economic assistance, per capita income declined by one third.[30] American aid was distributed to urban businesses although the impoverished majority received almost none of it.[155] The concentration of wealth was even higher than before the U.S.-administered land reform program. The agrarian law generated windfall profits for the economic elite and buried the cooperatives in debts that left them incapable of competing in the capital markets. The oligarchs often took back the land from bankrupt peasants who couldn't obtain the credit necessary to pay for seeds and fertilizer.[156] Although, "few of the poor would dream of seeking legal redress against a landlord because virtually no judge would favor a poor man."[155] By 1989, 1 percent of the landowners owned 41 percent of the tillable land, while 60 percent of the rural population owned 0 percent.[30] Death squads and peace accords: 1990–1992 ERP combatants Perquín 1990 The Chapultepec Peace Accords. After 10 years of war, more than one million people had been displaced out of a population of 5,389,000. 40 percent of the homes of newly displaced people were completely destroyed and another 25 percent were in need of major repairs.[157] Death squad activities further escalated in 1990, despite a UN Agreement on Human Rights signed 26 July by the Cristiani government and the FMLN.[158] In June 1990, U.S. President George Bush announced an "Enterprise for the Americas Initiative" to improve the investment climate by creating "a hemisphere-wide free trade zone."[159] President Bush authorized the release of $42.5 million in military aid to the Salvadoran armed forces on 16 January 1991.[160] In late January, the Usulután offices of the Democratic Convergence, a coalition of left-of-center parties, were attacked with grenades. On 21 February, a candidate for the Democratic National Unity (UDN) party and his pregnant wife were assassinated after ignoring death squad threats to leave the country or die. On the last day of the campaign, another UDN candidate was shot in her eye when Arena party gunmen opened fire on campaign activists putting up posters. Despite fraudulent elections orchestrated by Arena through voter intimidation, sabotage of polling stations by the Arena-dominated Central Elections Council and the disappearing of tens of thousands of names from the voting lists, the official U.S. observation team declared them "free and fair."[161] Death squad killings and disappearances remained steady throughout 1991 as well as torture, false imprisonment, and attacks on civilians by the Army and security forces. Opposition politicians, members of church and grassroots organizations representing peasants, women and repatriated refugees suffered constant death threats, arrests, surveillance and break-ins all year. The FMLN killed two wounded U.S. military advisers and carried out indiscriminate attacks, kidnappings and assassinations of civilians.[citation needed] The war intensified in mid-1991, as both the army and the FMLN attempted to gain the advantage in the United Nations-brokered peace talks prior to a cease-fire. Indiscriminate attacks and executions by the armed forces increased as a result.[162] Eventually, by April 1991, negotiations resumed, resulting in a truce that successfully concluded in January 1992, bringing about the war's end.[citation needed] On 16 January 1992, the Chapultepec Peace Accords were signed in Chapultepec Castle, Mexico City, to bring peace to El Salvador.[163] The Armed Forces were regulated, a civilian police force was established, the FMLN metamorphosed from a guerrilla army to a political party, and an amnesty law was legislated in 1993.[164] Aftermath A monument carved in black marble that contains on the names of thousands of victims of the civil war. The peace process set up under the Chapultepec Accords was monitored by the United Nations from 1991 until June 1997 when it closed its special monitoring mission in El Salvador. In 1996, U.S. authorities acknowledged for the first time that U.S. military personnel had died in combat during the civil war. Officially, American advisers were prohibited from participating in combat operations, but they carried weapons, and accompanied Salvadoran army soldiers in the field and were subsequently targeted by rebels. 21 Americans were killed in action during the civil war and more than 5,000 served.[2] During the 2004 elections, White House Special Assistant Otto Reich gave a phone-in press conference at ARENA party headquarters. He reportedly said he was worried about the impact an FMLN win could have on the country's "economic, commercial, and migratory relations with the United States." In February 2004, Assistant Secretary of State Roger Noriega told voters to "consider what kind of a relationship they want a new administration to have with us." He met with all the candidates except Schafik Handal, the FMLN candidate. This prompted 28 US Congress members to send a letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell saying Mr. Noriega "crossed a boundary" and that his remarks were perceived as "interference in Salvadoran electoral affairs." A week later, two US congressmen blasted Reich's comments as inflammatory.[165] Truth Commission Main article: Truth Commission for El Salvador At war's end, the Commission on the Truth for El Salvador registered more than 22,000 complaints of political violence in El Salvador, dating between January 1980 and July 1991, 60 percent about summary killing, 25 percent about kidnapping, and 20 percent about torture. These complaints attributed almost 85 percent of the violence to the Salvadoran Army and security forces alone. The Salvadoran Armed Forces, which were massively supported by the United States (4.6 billion dollars in 2009),[166] were accused in 60 percent of the complaints, the security forces (i.e. the National Guard, Treasury Police and the National Police) in 25 percent, military escorts and civil defense units in 20 percent of complaints, the death squads in approximately 10 percent, and the FMLN in 5 percent.[166] The Truth Commission could collect only a significant sample of the full number of potential complaints, having had only three months to collect it.[167] The report concluded that more than 70,000 people were killed, many in the course of gross violation of their human rights. More than 25 per cent of the populace was displaced as refugees before the U.N. peace treaty in 1992.[168][169] The statistics presented in the Truth Commission's report are consistent with both previous and retrospective assessments by the international community and human rights monitors, which documented that the majority of the violence and repression in El Salvador was attributable to government agencies, primarily the National Guard and the Salvadoran Army.[170][171][172] A 1984 Amnesty International report stated that many of the 40,000 people killed in the preceding five years had been murdered by government forces, who openly dumped their mutilated corpses in an apparent effort to terrorize the population.[173][174] The government mostly killed peasants, but many other opponents suspected of sympathy with the guerrillas—clergy (men and women), church lay workers, political activists, journalists, labor unionists (leaders, rank-and-file), medical workers, liberal students and teachers, and human-rights monitors were also killed.[175] The killings were carried out by the security forces, the Army, the National Guard, and the Treasury Police;[1]: 308 [176] but it was the paramilitary death squads that gave the Government plausible deniability of, and accountability for the killings. Typically, a death squad dressed in civilian clothes and traveled in anonymous vehicles (dark windows, blank license plates). The deaths squads tactics included publishing future-victim death lists, delivering coffins to said future victims, and sending the target-person an invitation to his/her own funeral.[177][178] Cynthia Arnson, a Latin American-affairs writer for Human Rights Watch, says: the objective of death-squad-terror seemed not only to eliminate opponents, but also, through torture and the gruesome disfigurement of bodies, to terrorize the population.[179] In the mid-1980s, state terror against civilians became open with indiscriminate bombing from military airplanes, planted mines, and the harassment of national and international medical personnel. Author George Lopez writes that "although death rates attributable to the death squads have declined in El Salvador since 1983, non-combatant victims of the civil war have increased dramatically".[180] Though the violations of the FMLN accounted for five percent or less of those documented by the Truth Commission, the FMLN continuously violated the human rights of many Salvadorans and other individuals identified as right-wing supporters, military targets, pro-government politicians, intellectuals, public officials, and judges. These violations included kidnapping, bombings, rape, and killing.[167] Military reform In accordance with the peace agreements, the constitution was amended to prohibit the military from playing an internal security role except under extraordinary circumstances. During the period of fulfilling of the peace agreements, the Minister of Defense was General Humberto Corado Figueroa. Demobilization of Salvadoran military forces generally proceeded on schedule throughout the process. The Treasury Police and National Guard were abolished, and military intelligence functions were transferred to civilian control. By 1993—nine months ahead of schedule—the military had cut personnel from a wartime high of 63,000 to the level of 32,000 required by the peace accords. By 1999, ESAF's strength stood at less than 15,000, including uniformed and non-uniformed personnel, consisting of personnel in the army, navy, and air force. A purge of military officers accused of human rights abuses and corruption was completed in 1993 in compliance with the Ad Hoc Committee's recommendations.[citation needed] National Civil Police The new civilian police force, created to replace the discredited public security forces, deployed its first officers in March 1993, and was present throughout the country by the end of 1994. In 1999, the PNC had over 18,000 officers. The PNC faced many challenges in building a completely new police force. With common crime rising dramatically since the end of the war, over 500 PNC officers had been killed in the line of duty by late 1998. PNC officers also have arrested a number of their own in connection with various high-profile crimes, and a "purification" process to weed out unfit personnel from throughout the force was undertaken in late 2000.[181] Human Rights Commission of El Salvador On 26 October 1987, Herbert Ernesto Anaya, head of the Human Rights Commission of El Salvador (CDHES), was assassinated. His killing provoked four days' of political protest—during which his remains were displayed before the U.S. embassy and then before the Salvadoran armed forces headquarters. The National Union of Salvadoran Workers said: "Those who bear sole responsibility for this crime are José Napoleón Duarte, the U.S. embassy...and the high command of the armed forces". In its report the Commission on the Truth for El Salvador, established as part of the El Salvador peace agreement, stated that it could not establish for sure whether the death squads, the Salvadoran Army or the FMLN was responsible for Anaya's death. Moreover, the FMLN and the Revolutionary Democratic Front (FDR) also protested Mr. Anaya's assassination by suspending negotiations with the Duarte government on 29 October 1987. The same day, Reni Roldán resigned from the Commission of National Reconciliation, saying: "The murder of Anaya, the disappearance of university labor leader Salvador Ubau, and other events do not seem to be isolated incidents. They are all part of an institutionalized pattern of conduct". Mr. Anaya's assassination evoked international indignation: the West German government, the West German Social Democratic Party, and the French government asked President Duarte to clarify the circumstances of the crime. United Nations Secretary Gen

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Carpet bombing, also known as saturation bombing, is a large area bombardment done in a progressive manner to inflict damage in every part of a selected area of land.[1][2][3][4] The phrase evokes the image of explosions completely covering an area, in the same way that a carpet covers a floor. Carpet bombing is usually achieved by dropping many unguided bombs. Carpet bombing of cities, towns, villages, or other areas containing a concentration of protected civilians has been considered a war crime since 1977,[5] through Article 51 of Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions.[6][7][8] The term obliteration bombing is sometimes used to describe especially intensified bombing with the intention of destroying a city or a large part of the city. The term area bombing refers to indiscriminate bombing of an area and also encompasses cases of carpet bombing, including obliteration bombing. It was used in that sense especially during World War II and the Korean War.[9] Early history One of the first attempts at carpet bombing was at the Battle of El Mazuco during the Spanish Civil War in 1937,[10][11] against widely-dispersed infantry on rocky slopes, and the attacking Condor Legion learned that carpet bombing was not very effective in such terrain. In March 1938, the Bombing of Barcelona saw Italian and German airstrikes killing up to 1,300 people and wounding 2,000. It is considered the first carpet bombing of a city,[12][failed verification] and set precedent for several such bombings in World War II. The Japanese bombing of China's wartime capital Chongqing from 18 February 1938 to 23 August 1943 caused 23,600 deaths and over 30,000 wounded.[citation needed] During World War II Pre-war expectation In the inter-war years, a growing expectation developed that, on the outbreak of war, cities would be rapidly destroyed by bombing raids. The use of poison gas was expected and a high level of devastation was anticipated from high explosive bombs. This originated, in part, from the views of military experts such as Douhet, and was taken up by politicians and journalists, with, for example, Stanley Baldwin coining the phrase "‘The bomber will always get through’. The targeting of the civilian population would, some theories suggested, cause a breakdown in morale that would lead to civil unrest that would compel a government to surrender. The combatant powers could, according to Baldwin, be in a competition to break the morale of the other side's civilian population first.[13] There were two results from this. Firstly, civil defence programs were set up, with gas masks being issued, plans for air raid shelters were set up and organisations to manage civilians before a raid and deal with damage and casualties after one were put in place. Secondly, agreements were sought to make the targeting of civilians illegal under international law. At the time that Douhet and others were publishing their ideas, no air force had planned their capabilities with the intent of making a "knockout blow" against civilian targets.[13] The Hague Rules of Air Warfare were developed in 1922/23 to prevent deliberately attacking civilians, yet it was not ratified by any country.[14] At the start of World War II, the Royal Air Force had an initial instruction to abide by the Hague Rules for as long as the enemy did. This restraint was followed by both Britain and Germany until 11 May 1940, when, with Winston Churchill now in the role of Prime Minister and the war in France going badly, the RAF attacked industrial and transport infrastructure targets in Mönchengladbach. This raid caused civilian casualties.[15] Bombing by Germany In the European Theatre, the first city to suffer heavily from aerial bombardment was Warsaw, on 25 September 1939.[16] Continuing this trend in warfare, the Rotterdam Blitz was an aerial bombardment of Rotterdam by 90 bombers of the German Air Force on 14 May 1940, during the German invasion of the Netherlands. The objective was to support the German assault on the city, break Dutch resistance, and force the Dutch to surrender. Despite a ceasefire, the bombing destroyed almost the entire historic city centre, killing nearly nine hundred civilians and leaving 30,000 people homeless. The destructive success of the bombing led the Oberkommando der Luftwaffe (OKL) to threaten to destroy the city of Utrecht if the Dutch Government did not surrender. The Dutch capitulated early the next morning.[17] As the war progressed, the Battle of Britain developed from a fight for air supremacy into the strategic and aerial bombing of London, Coventry and other British cities. Bombing by the Western Allies At the beginning of war, RAF Bomber Command lacked both the navigation systems for finding a target and the numbers of bombers that were needed to make attacks of any scale in Germany. As heavy bombers were brought into service and technology and tactics were improved, the selection of targets was changed. The intention of avoiding civilian casualties as collateral damage disappeared. Instead, the civilian population which worked in war-related industries – and their housing – became the target. Some of this change came from a wish to retaliate for the German attack on Coventry.[a] It was also based on what was learnt from being the target in the Blitz. It had been found that factory buildings were more resistant to critical damage than the homes of their workers. Absenteeism of the workforce rose significantly if their housing was uninhabitable, so affecting industrial production. Whilst morale was still discussed, the meaning of the word changed from its pre-war usage. Now a reduction in morale was intended to reduce industrial production that supported the war effort.[19] The Eighth Air Force of the USAAF arrived in Britain over the summer of 1942. Despite Roosevelt's pleas to Hitler to avoid bombing civilians prior to the US joining the war, he was a supporter of bombing Germany. Both Churchill and Roosevelt were in the position that Stalin was pressing for the Western Allies to open a new front in Europe – something which they were not ready to do. Therefore a bombing campaign was all they could offer to support the Soviet Union. This came together with the firebombing of Hamburg, which caused substantial damage to the city, especially the housing of industrial workers. Attacks of this sort (though not with such major effect) continued throughout the war, with Dresden being one of the final targets.[20] Carpet bombing was also used as close air support (as "flying artillery") for ground operations. The massive bombing was concentrated in a narrow and shallow area of the front (a few kilometers by a few hundred meters deep), closely coordinated with the advance of friendly troops. The first successful use of the technique was on 6 May 1943, at the end of the Tunisia Campaign. Carried out under Sir Arthur Tedder, it was hailed by the press as Tedder's bomb-carpet (or Tedder's carpet). The bombing was concentrated in a four by three-mile area, preparing the way for the First Army.[21] This tactic was later used in many cases in the Normandy Campaign; for example, in the Battle for Caen.[22] Pacific War In the Pacific War, carpet bombing was used extensively against Japanese cities such as Tokyo.[23][24] On the night of 9–10 March 1945, 334 B-29 Superfortress heavy bombers were directed to attack the most heavily populated civilian sectors of Tokyo.[25] In just one night, over 100,000 people burned to death from a heavy bombardment of incendiary bombs,[25] comparable to the wartime number of U.S. casualties in the entire Pacific theater.[25] Another 100,000 to one million Japanese were left homeless.[26] These attacks were followed by similar ones against Kobe, Osaka, and Nagoya, as well as other sectors of Tokyo, where over 9,373 tons[25] of incendiary bombs were dropped on civilian and military targets. By the time of the dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, light and medium bombers were being directed to bomb targets of convenience, as most urban areas had already been destroyed. In the 9-month long bombing campaign, over 300,000 Japanese civilians died and 400,000 were wounded.[27] USS Essex TBF-1 Avenger dropping a bomb over the Pasig River in Manila targeting the dockyard, November 14, 1944 During the final months of the war in the Philippines, the United States military used carpet bombing against the Japanese forces in Manila and Baguio, reducing much of the cities to rubble.[28][29] Manila became the second-most-destroyed city of World War II.[30][31] Vietnam War During the Vietnam War, with the escalating situation in Southeast Asia, twenty-eight B-52Fs were fitted with external racks for twenty-four 750-pound (340 kg) bombs under project South Bay in June 1964; an additional forty-six aircraft received similar modifications under project Sun Bath.[32] In March 1965, the United States commenced Operation Rolling Thunder. The first combat mission, Operation Arc Light, was flown by B-52Fs on 18 June 1965, when 30 bombers of the 9th and 441st Bombardment Squadrons struck a communist stronghold near the Bến Cát District in South Vietnam. The first wave of bombers arrived too early at a designated rendezvous point, and while maneuvering to maintain station, two B-52s collided, which resulted in the loss of both bombers and eight crewmen. The remaining bombers, minus one more that turned back for mechanical problems, continued toward the target.[33] Twenty-seven Stratofortresses dropped on a one-mile by two-mile target box from between 19,000 and 22,000 feet (5,800 and 6,700 m), a little more than 50% of the bombs falling within the target zone.[34] The force returned to Andersen AFB except for one bomber with electrical problems that recovered to Clark AFB, the mission having lasted 13 hours. Post-strike assessment by teams of South Vietnamese troops with American advisors found evidence that the VC had departed the area before the raid, and it was suspected that infiltration of the south's forces may have tipped off the north because of the ARVN troops involved in the post-strike inspection.[35] Against a blue sky with white clouds, a B-52F releases bombs over Vietnam. B-52F releasing its payload of bombs over Vietnam The B-52s were restricted to bombing suspected Communist bases in relatively uninhabited sections, because their potency approached that of a tactical nuclear weapon. A formation of six B-52s, dropping their bombs from 30,000 feet (9,100 m), could "take out"... almost everything within a "box" approximately five-eighths mile (1.0 km) wide by two miles (3.2 km) long. Whenever Arc Light struck ... in the vicinity of Saigon, the city woke from the tremor.. Neil Sheehan, war correspondent, writing before the mass attacks to heavily populated cities including North Vietnam's capital.[36] Beginning in late 1965, a number of B-52Ds underwent Big Belly modifications to increase bomb capacity for carpet bombings.[37] While the external payload remained at twenty-four 500-pound (227 kg) or 750-pound (340 kg) bombs, the internal capacity increased from twenty-seven to eighty-four 500-pound bombs or from twenty-seven to forty-two 750-pound bombs.[38] The modification created enough capacity for a total of 60,000 pounds (27,215 kg) in one hundred and eight bombs. Thus modified, B-52Ds could carry 22,000 pounds (9,980 kg) more than B-52Fs.[39] Designed to replace B-52Fs, modified B-52Ds entered combat in April 1966 flying from Andersen Air Force Base, Guam. Each bombing mission lasted 10 to 12 hours with an aerial refueling by KC-135 Stratotankers.[40] In spring 1967, the aircraft began flying from U Tapao Airfield in Thailand giving the aircraft the advantage of not requiring in-flight refueling.[38] The zenith of B-52 attacks in Vietnam was Operation Linebacker II (sometimes referred to as the Christmas Bombing) which consisted of waves of B-52s (mostly D models, but some Gs without jamming equipment and with a smaller bomb load). Over 12 days, B-52s flew 729 sorties[41] and dropped 15,237 tons of bombs on Hanoi, Haiphong, and other targets.[42] Originally 42 B-52s were committed to the war; however, numbers were frequently twice this figure.[43] See also Aerial bombardment and international law Aerial bombing of cities Area bombardment Bombing of Warsaw in World War II Churchill's advocacy of chemical strike against German cities Civilian casualties of strategic bombing Giulio Douhet, an early theorist of bombing Roerich Pact Strategic bombing Tactical bombing Terror bombing Notes The war cabinet agreed, in November 1940, the indiscriminate bombing of a German city as retaliation for the German raid on Coventry.[18] References "carpet-bombing". Memidex/WordNet Dictionary. Archived from the original on 28 January 2013. Retrieved 25 July 2011. Keane, Michael (2005). Dictionary of modern strategy and tactics. Annapolis (MD): Naval Institute Press. pp. 30–31. ISBN 1-59114-429-9. Dickson, Paul (2004). War slang : American fighting words and phrases since the Civil War (2. ed.). Washington, DC: Brassey's. pp. 139, 209, 303–304. ISBN 1-57488-710-6. Gooderson, Ian (1997). Air power at the battlefront: Allied Close Air Support in Europe, 1943–45 (1st ed.). London: F. Cass. p. 129. ISBN 0-7146-4680-6. "Crimes of War – Carpet or Area Bombing". Archived from the original on 2 December 2015. Retrieved 8 December 2015. "Carpet bombing". Britannica.com. Retrieved 21 June 2019. "Treaties, States parties, and Commentaries - Additional Protocol (I) to the Geneva Conventions, 1977 - 51 - Protection of the civilian population". International Committee of the Red Cross. 8 June 1977. Retrieved 21 June 2019. "Treaties, States parties, and Commentaries - Additional Protocol (I) to the Geneva Conventions, 1977 - 51 - Protection of the civilian population - Commentary of 1987". Paragraph 5. International Committee of the Red Cross. Retrieved 21 June 2019. Primoratz, Igor, ed. (2010). Terror from the sky : the bombing of German cities in World War II (1. publ. ed.). New York: Berghahn Books. pp. 45–53. ISBN 978-1-84545-687-0. Juan Antonio de Blas, "El Mazuco (La defensa imposible)" (pp369–383), in La guerra civil en Asturias, Ediciones Júcar, Gijón 1986. "El Mazuco (The Impossible Defense)". www.speleogroup.org. Translated by Mike Cowlishaw. Retrieved 21 June 2019. Thomas, Hugh (2003). The Spanish Civil War (4th ed.). London: Penguin. ISBN 9780141011615. OCLC 53806663. Overy 2013, p. 19-37. Overy 2013, p. 29. Overy 2013, p. 239, 243. Bevan, Robert (2016). The Destruction of Memory: Architecture at War. Reaktion Books. p. 97. ISBN 978-1-78023-608-7. Hooton 2007, p. 52. Overy 2013, p. 262. Overy 2013, p. 255-259, 264. Overy 2013, p. 255-259, 282, 391. Richards, Denis (1975). "XII Torch and Tunisia". Volume II: The Fight Avails (Pbk. ed.). London: H.M.S.O. pp. 270–271. ISBN 0-11-771593-X. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help) Levine, Alan J. (1992). The strategic bombing of Germany : 1940–1945 (1. publ. ed.). Westport, Conn. u.a.: Praeger. pp. 141–142. ISBN 0-275-94319-4. "Tokyo remembers 1945 bombing raid". BBC News. 10 March 2005. Retrieved 1 April 2010. Colhoun, Jack. "Strategic Bombing". Institute for Energy and Environmental Research. Retrieved 21 June 2019. Nie, Jing-Bao (17 August 2010). Japan's Wartime Medical Atrocities: Comparative Inquiries in Science, History, and Ethics. Taylor & Francis. ISBN 978-0-415-58377-0. Selden, Mark (2007). "A Forgotten Holocaust: US Bombing Strategy, the Destruction of Japanese Cities & the American Way of War from World War II to Iraq". The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus. 5. "The Strategic Bombing Survey estimated that 87,793 people died in the raid, 40,918 were injured, and 1,008,005 people lost their homes. Robert Rhodes, estimating the dead at more than 100,000 men, women and children, suggested that probably a million more were injured and another million were left homeless." Selden, Mark (2007). "A Forgotten Holocaust: US Bombing Strategy, the Destruction of Japanese Cities & the American Way of War from World War II to Iraq". The Asia-Pacific Journal Japan Focus. 5. "Overall, by one calculation, the US firebombing campaign destroyed 180 square miles of 67 cities, killed more than 300,000 people and injured an additional 400,000, figures that exclude the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki." Guy, Mary E.; Mastracci, Sharon H.; Yang, Seung-Bum (3 September 2019). The Palgrave Handbook of Global Perspectives on Emotional Labor in Public Service. Springer Nature. p. 345. ISBN 978-3-030-24823-9. Retrieved 22 August 2023. Shaw, Angel Velasco; Francia, Luis H. (December 2002). Vestiges of War: The Philippine-American War and the Aftermath of an Imperial Dream 1899-1999. NYU Press. p. 219. ISBN 978-0-8147-9791-4. Boldorf, Marcel; Okazaki, Tetsuji (24 March 2015). Economies under Occupation: The hegemony of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan in World War II. Routledge. pp. 194. ISBN 978-1-317-50650-8. Retrieved 28 March 2022. Synott, John P. (22 November 2017). Teacher Unions, Social Movements and the Politics of Education in Asia: South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-351-73424-0. Retrieved 28 March 2022. Lake International Air Power Review Summer 2003, p. 103. Anderson, William. "Guam Jets Bomb S. Viet." Archived 17 June 2013 at the Wayback Machine Chicago Tribune, 18 June 1965. Hobson 2001, pp. 22–23. Schlight 1988, p. 52. Condor 1994, p. 37. Lake & Styling 2004, p. 30. Dick & Patterson 2006, p. 161. Knaack 1988, p. 256. Donald 1997, pp. 161–162. Dick & Patterson 2006, p. 187. Condor 1994, p. 38; Budiansky 2004, p. 394. Lake & Styling 2004, p. 32. Bibliography Budiansky, Stephen (2004). Air Power: The Men, Machines, and Ideas that Revolutionized War, from Kitty Hawk to Iraq. New York: Penguin Books. ISBN 978-0-670-03285-3. Condor, Albert E (1994). Air Force Gunners (AFGA): The Men Behind the Guns, The History of Enlisted Aerial Gunnery, 1917–1991. Nashville, Tennessee: Turner Publishing. ISBN 978-1-56311-167-9. Dick, Ron; Patterson, Dan (2006). Aviation Century: War & Peace In The Air. Eden Prairie, Ontario: Boston Mills Press. ISBN 978-1-55046-430-6. Donald, David (1997). The Encyclopedia of World Aircraft. Etobicoke, Ontario, Canada: Prospero Books. ISBN 978-1-85605-375-4. Hobson, Chris (2001). Vietnam Air Losses, USAF, USN, USMC, Fixed-Wing Aircraft Losses in Southeast Asia 1961–1973. North Branch, Minnesota: Specialty Press. ISBN 978-1-85780-115-6. Hooton, E. R. (2007). Luftwaffe at War; Blitzkrieg in the West. London: Chevron/Ian Allan. ISBN 978-1-85780-272-6. Knaack, Marcelle Size (1988). Post-World War II Bombers, 1945–1973 (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Office of Air Force History. ISBN 978-0-16-002260-9. Lake, Jon; Styling, Mark (2004). B-52 Stratofortress Units in Combat 1955–73. London: Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84176-607-2. Overy, Richard (2013). The Bombing War, Europe 1939-45 (Kindle, 2014 ed.). London: Penguin Books Ltd. ISBN 978-0-141-92782-4. Schlight, John (1988). The War in South Vietnam: The Years of the Offensive, 1965–1968 (The United States Air Force in Southeast Asia). Washington, D.C.: Office of Air Force History, United States Air Force. ISBN 978-0-912799-51-3.

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Dennis Lynn Rader (born March 9, 1945), also known as BTK (an abbreviation he gave himself for "bind, torture, kill"), is an American serial killer who murdered at least ten people in Wichita and Park City, Kansas, between 1974 and 1991. Although Rader occasionally killed or attempted to kill men and children, he typically targeted women. His victims were often bound, sometimes with objects from their homes, and either suffocated with a plastic bag or manually strangled with a ligature.[4] In addition, Rader stole keepsakes from his female victims, including underwear, licenses, and personal items. He often sent taunting letters to police and media outlets, describing the details of his crimes.[5][6] After a 13-year hiatus, Rader resumed sending letters, in 2004, leading to his 2005 arrest and subsequent guilty plea. He is currently serving ten consecutive life sentences at the El Dorado Correctional Facility.[2] Life and background The eldest of four sons, Dennis Lynn Rader was born in Pittsburg, Kansas, on March 9, 1945, to bookkeeper Dorothea Mae Rader (née Cook; September 17, 1925 – October 14, 2007) and Kansas Gas Service worker William Elvin Rader (November 21, 1922 – December 27, 1996).[7][8][9] Rader grew up in Wichita. Both parents worked long hours and paid little attention to their children at home. Later, Rader described feeling ignored by his mother, in particular, and resenting her for it.[10] From a young age, Rader harbored sadistic sexual fantasies about torturing "trapped and helpless" women.[10][11] He also exhibited zoosadism by torturing, killing and hanging small animals.[12][13] Rader acted out sexual fetishes for voyeurism, autoerotic asphyxiation, and cross-dressing. He often spied on female neighbors, while dressed in women's clothing, including women's underwear that he had stolen, and masturbated with ropes or other bindings around his arms and neck.[14] Years later, during his "cooling off" periods, between murders, Rader would take pictures of himself wearing women's clothes and a female mask, while bound. He later admitted that he was pretending to be his victims, as part of a sexual fantasy.[15] However, Rader kept his sexual proclivities well-hidden, and he was widely regarded, in his community, as "normal, polite, and well mannered".[13] After graduating from Wichita Heights High School,[16] Rader attended Kansas Wesleyan University. He received only mediocre grades and dropped out, after one year. Rader served in the United States Air Force, from 1966 to 1970.[17] On discharge, he moved to Park City (a suburb of Wichita), where he worked in the meat department of an IGA supermarket, which is also where his mother was employed, as a bookkeeper.[18] Rader married Paula Dietz, on May 22, 1971. They had two children, Kerri and Brian.[19][20] He attended Butler County Community College, in El Dorado, earning an associate degree in Electronics Engineering Technology in 1973.[21] Then, he enrolled at Wichita State University and graduated, in 1979, with a Bachelor of Science degree, majoring in Administration of Justice. Initially, Rader worked as an assembler for the Coleman Company, an outdoor supply company, before working at the Wichita-based office of ADT Security Services, from 1974 to 1988, where he installed security alarms, as part of his job, which he did, in many cases, for homeowners concerned about the BTK killings.[19][22] Rader was a census field operations supervisor for the Wichita area, in 1989, before the 1990 federal census.[23] In May 1991, Rader became a dogcatcher and compliance officer in Park City.[19][24][25][26] In this position, neighbors recalled him as being sometimes overzealous and extremely strict, as well as taking special pleasure in bullying and harassing single women.[27] One neighbor complained that Rader killed her dog, for no reason.[28] Rader was a member of Christ Lutheran Church, in Wichita, and at one point, he was elected president of the church council.[19][29] He was also a Cub Scout leader.[19] By the 2000s, the public's memories of the murders had begun to fade. Local author Robert Beattie began writing a book about the killings, after being shocked that so many young people he spoke to had never heard of them. Hungry for attention, Rader re-emerged as BTK, in 2004, after learning that a book was being written.[30] On July 26, 2005, after Rader's arrest, his wife was granted an "emergency divorce" (waiving the normal 60-day waiting period).[31][20][32][33] In an interview with ABC News, in 2019, Rader's daughter, Kerri, said she still writes to her father and has now forgiven him, but she still struggles to reconcile him with the BTK killer, stating that her childhood was normal, describing her formative years as a "normal American family".[34] Case history Confirmed murders On January 15, 1974, four members of the Otero family were murdered in Wichita, Kansas.[35] The victims were Joseph Otero Sr., 38; Julia Maria "Julie" Otero, 33; Joseph "Joey" Otero II, 9; and Josephine "Josie" Otero, 11. Their bodies were discovered by the family's three older children, who had been at school at the time of the killings.[35][36] After his 2005 arrest, Rader confessed to killing the Otero family.[37] Rader claimed that he first targeted the family two months prior to their murders, when he spotted Julie leaving to take her children to school and followed them. On the morning of January 15, Rader cut the phone lines and entered the Otero residence, when Joey opened the back door for the family dog.[37] Rader told the Otero family that he was a "wanted" man in California, before he ordered them to lie on the living room floor at gunpoint. Then, he led the family into a bedroom and bound them, with rope he had prepared. Joseph and Joey were on the floor, while Julie and Josie were on the bed.[37] The wrists and feet of Joseph and Julie were restrained. Joseph's head was covered by a plastic bag, which Rader, then, secured with ropes, but after he chewed a hole in the bag, another bag was tightened over his head, causing Joseph to slowly suffocate to death.[37] Rader attempted to strangle Julie, and according to Rader: "Mrs. Otero woke back up. She was pretty upset with what was going on, and she asked me to save her son, so I took the bag off. She screamed, “You killed my boy! You killed my boy!� After the initial realization and shock, she communicated, “God have mercy on your soul,� before I put her down, permanently." Rader strangled her to death, with rope.[37] With both parents dead, Rader, then, also placed another plastic bag, with two T-shirts, and an additional bag over it on Joey's head and watched, as he thrashed about, while being suffocated.[37] Afterward, Rader led Josie down into the basement, where he hung her, with a noose from a pipe. Later, police found Rader's semen, near her partially-clothed body. Rader, then, eventually wrote a letter that he stashed inside an engineering book in the Wichita Public Library, in October 1974, describing, in detail, the killing of the Otero family.[23] On April 4, 1974, Rader broke into the Wichita home of 21-year-old Kathryn Doreen Bright, through her screen door but was taken aback to discover her 19-year-old brother, Kevin Bright, was also present in the property. He transported Kathryn to another bedroom and tied her down, after forcing Kevin, who was being held at gunpoint, to restrain his sister with a rope Rader had provided.[38] Rader attempted to strangle Kathryn to death, before stabbing her, three times, in the back and lower abdomen with a knife, when she struggled too much.[39] Kevin was also strangled and shot in the head, but he survived by feigning death and later escaping.[40][41] On March 17, 1977, 25-year-old Shirley Ruth Relford was found dead in her home, in Wichita. Rader was pursuing Relford and located her by following her 5-year-old son to her home. (Relford had not been feeling well and had sent the boy out for soup). Rader entered their residence and pulled a handgun out from under his jacket, frightening the family. After tying up her three children and locking them in the bathroom, Rader took Relford to the back bedroom. Rader had Shirley restrained, while she vomited, before tying her legs to her bedpost. Then, he strangled her with rope, after placing a plastic bag over her head, while her children screamed and banged down the hallway. Similar to the Otero murders, Rader intended to murder Relford's children, although they were ultimately able to escape, before he could do so.[42] When Rader noticed 25-year-old Nancy Jo Fox going into her home, in Wichita, he marked her as a potential victim and began stalking her. On December 8, 1977, Rader knocked at her door. When nobody answered, he cut the phone lines, before breaking in to wait for Fox in her kitchen. Fox's murder would be described, by Rader, as "what I call a perfect – perfect hit. Although she gave me a lot of verbal static, she cooperated, and she didn’t fight me. I had complete control of her, that’s why it was one of the more enjoyable kills, as I call them." Rader killed Fox by strangling her, with his belt, on her bed. Before she died, Rader told her that he was responsible for the prior Otero murders. The following day, Rader called police, from a phonebooth, telling them they would find Fox's body at her home.[43] The subliminal message to Rader which was flashed by KAKE-TV in 1978 On February 10, 1978,[44] Rader sent another letter to television station KAKE, in Wichita, claiming responsibility for the murders of the Oteros, Bright, Vian Relford, and Fox.[23] He suggested many possible names for himself, including "BTK.� He demanded media attention, in this second letter, saying "How many do I have to kill, before I get a name in the paper or some national attention?" A poem was enclosed titled "Oh! Death to Nancy," a parody of the lyrics to the American folk song "O Death".[45][46] In the letter, he claimed to be driven to kill by "factor X,� which he characterized as a supernatural element that also motivated Jack the Ripper, the Son of Sam, and the Hillside Stranglers.[47] He also asked for the police to send him a hidden message. In response, and with the knowledge that Rader watched KAKE, police decided to flash a subliminal message during one of the station's evening newscasts, for a split second. The message stated: "Now call the chief,� and featured a drawing of an upside-down pair of glasses, which were found at the Nancy Jo Fox crime scene.[44][48] They hoped the message would influence Rader to turn himself in, but it was unsuccessful.[49] During this time, Rader also intended to have killed others, such as 63-year-old Anna Williams, who, in 1979, escaped death by returning home much later than expected. Rader explained, during his confession, that he became obsessed with Williams and was "absolutely livid,� when she evaded him. He spent hours waiting at her home but became impatient and left, when she did not return home from visiting friends.[50] Marine Hedge, aged 53, was found on May 5, 1985, at East 53rd Street North between North Webb Road and North Greenwich Road in Wichita. Rader killed her on April 27 and took her dead body to Christ Lutheran Church, where he was the president of the church council. There, he photographed her body in various bondage positions. Rader had previously stored black plastic sheets and other materials at the church, in preparation for the murder and then, later, dumped the body in a remote ditch.[51][46] Two women Rader stalked, in the 1980s, and one, whom he stalked in the mid-1990s, filed restraining orders against him. One of them also changed her address, to avoid him.[52] On September 16, 1986, Rader strangled 28-year-old Vicki Lynn Wegerle to death with a nylon stocking, at her house in Wichita. Rader entered the residence by pretending to be a telephone repairman. He rearranged her clothes, post-mortem, and he took a number of photographs of her nude body. Rader's final victim, 62-year-old Dolores Earline "Dee" Davis, was found dead on February 1, 1991, at West 117th Street North and North Meridian Street in Park City, Kansas. Rader had killed her on January 19, by strangling her with pantyhose.[53] Suspected murders On August 23, 2023, the Associated Press reported that Rader was considered the prime suspect in two further killings in Oklahoma and Missouri. Authorities discovered "possible trophies" from victims, after launching a search for evidence at his former Kansas home, resulting in the investigation of Rader's potential involvement in additional unsolved disappearances and murders:[54] 16-year-old Cynthia Dawn Kinney was last seen in Osage, Oklahoma, on June 23, 1976, at Osage Laundromat.[55] Witnesses said she left the laundromat at 9:30 a.m. and got into a faded beige 1965 Plymouth Belvedere.[56] In 2023, Osage Sheriff Eddie Virden claimed that Rader was identified as a prime suspect, after it was determined that Rader was involved in Boy Scouts in the area and when it was learned that Rader had included the phrase "bad wash day" in his writings. A bank was also having new ADT alarms installed, across the street from the laundromat, when Kinney went missing. Rader was a regional installer for ADT, at the time. Furthermore, Rader has allegedly claimed to have "fantasized about kidnapping a girl from a laundromat."[57] Rader has denied involvement in the murder. Sheriff Virden has stated he believes Rader's denial is because being tied to a murder in Oklahoma could open him up to retrial and the death penalty.[58] Cold case By 2004, the investigation of the BTK Killer was considered a cold case. Then, Rader initiated a series of eleven communications to the local media. This activity led directly to his arrest in February 2005. In March 2004, The Wichita Eagle received a letter from someone using the name "Bill Thomas Killman". The author of the letter claimed that he had murdered Vicki Wegerle on September 16, 1986, and enclosed photographs of the crime scene and a photocopy of her driver's license, which had been stolen at the time of the crime.[59] Before this, it had not been definitively established that Wegerle was killed by BTK.[59] DNA collected from under Wegerle's fingernails provided police with previously unknown evidence. They then began DNA testing hundreds of men in an effort to find the serial killer.[60] Altogether, more than 1,300 DNA samples were taken and later destroyed by court order.[61] In May 2004, KAKE received a letter with chapter headings for the "BTK Story", fake IDs, and a word puzzle.[18] On June 9, a package was found taped to a stop sign at the corner of First and Kansas roads in Wichita. It had graphic descriptions of the Otero murders and a sketch labeled "The Sexual Thrill Is My Bill."[62] Also enclosed was a chapter list for a proposed book titled The BTK Story, which mimicked a story written in 1999 by Court TV crime writer David Lohr. Chapter One was titled "A Serial Killer Is Born." In July, a package dropped into the return slot at a public library contained more bizarre material, including the claim that he was responsible for the death of 19-year-old Jake Allen in Argonia, Kansas, earlier that month. This claim was false, and the death was ruled a suicide.[63] After his capture, Rader admitted in his interrogation that he had been planning to kill again and he had set a date (October 2004) and was stalking his intended victim.[52] In October 2004, a manila envelope was dropped into a UPS box in Wichita. It had many cards with images of terror and bondage of children pasted on them, a poem threatening the life of lead investigator Lieutenant Ken Landwehr, and a false autobiography with many details about Rader's life. These details were later released to the public.[64] In December 2004, Wichita police received another package from the BTK killer.[65] This time, the package was found in Wichita's Murdock Park. It had the driver's license of Nancy Fox, which was noted as stolen from the crime scene, as well as a doll that was symbolically bound at the hands and feet, and had a plastic bag tied over its head.[63] In January 2005, Rader attempted to leave a cereal box in the bed of a pickup truck at a Home Depot in Wichita, but the box was discarded by the truck's owner.[66] It was later retrieved from the trash after Rader asked what had become of it in a later message. Surveillance tape of the parking lot from that date revealed a distant figure driving a black Jeep Cherokee leaving the box in the pickup. In February 2005, more postcards were sent to KAKE, and another cereal box left at a rural location was found to contain another bound doll.[67] In his letters to police, Rader asked if his writings, if put on a floppy disk, could be traced or not. The police answered his question in a newspaper ad posted in The Wichita Eagle, saying it would be safe to use the disk. On February 16, 2005, Rader sent a purple 1.44-Megabyte Memorex floppy disk to Fox affiliate KSAS-TV in Wichita.[68][69] Also enclosed were a letter, a gold-colored necklace with a large medallion, and a photocopy of the cover of Rules of Prey, a 1989 novel by John Sandford about a serial killer.[69] Police found metadata embedded in a deleted Microsoft Word document that was, unknown to Rader, still stored on the floppy disk.[70] The metadata contained the words "Christ Lutheran Church", and the document was marked as last modified by "Dennis".[71] An Internet search determined that a "Dennis Rader" was president of the church council.[68] When investigators drove by Rader's house, a black Jeep Cherokee—the type of vehicle seen in the Home Depot surveillance footage—was parked outside.[72] This was strong circumstantial evidence against Rader, but they needed more direct evidence to detain him.[73] Police obtained a warrant to test a pap smear taken from Rader's daughter at the Kansas State University medical clinic. DNA tests showed a "familial match" between the pap smear and the sample from Wegerle's fingernails; this indicated that the killer was closely related to Rader's daughter and, combined with the other evidence, was enough for police to arrest Rader.[74] Arrest Wikinews has related news: Suspect in BTK killings arrested after 25 years in hiding Rader was arrested while driving near his home in Park City shortly after noon on February 25, 2005.[75] An officer asked, "Mr. Rader, do you know why you're going downtown?" Rader replied, "Oh, I have suspicions why."[76][77] Wichita Police, the Kansas Bureau of Investigation, the FBI, and ATF agents searched Rader's home and vehicle, seizing evidence including computer equipment, a pair of black pantyhose retrieved from a shed, and a cylindrical container. The church he attended, his office at City Hall, and the main branch of the Park City library were also searched. At a press conference the next morning, Wichita Police Chief Norman Williams announced, "the bottom line: BTK is arrested."[78][79] Legal proceedings On February 28, 2005, Rader was charged with 10 counts of first degree murder.[80] Soon after his arrest, the Associated Press cited an anonymous source alleging that Rader had confessed to other murders in addition to those with which he had been connected.[81] However, the Sedgwick County district attorney denied the story, yet refused to say whether Rader had made any confessions, or if investigators were looking into Rader's possible involvement in more unsolved killings.[82] On March 5, news sources claimed to have verified by multiple sources that Rader had confessed to the 10 murders he was charged with, but no other ones.[83] On March 1, Rader's bail was set at US$10 million, and a public defender was appointed to represent him.[84] On May 3, the judge entered not guilty pleas on Rader's behalf, as Rader did not speak at his arraignment;[85] however, on June 27, the scheduled trial date, Rader changed his plea to guilty. He described the murders in detail and made no apologies.[86] [87][88][89][90] At Rader's August 18 sentencing, victims' families made statements, after which Rader apologized in a rambling 30-minute monologue[91] that the prosecutor likened to an Academy Awards acceptance speech.[92] His statement has been described as an example of an often-observed phenomenon among psychopaths: their inability to understand the emotional content of language.[93] He was sentenced to 10 consecutive life sentences, with a minimum of 175 years.[94] Kansas had no death penalty at the time of the murders.[92] On August 19, he was moved to the El Dorado Correctional Facility.[95] Rader talked about innocuous topics such as the weather during the 40-minute drive to El Dorado, but began to cry when the victims' families' statements from the court proceedings came on the radio. He is now in solitary confinement for his protection (with one hour of exercise per day, and showers three times per week). This will likely continue indefinitely. Beginning in 2006, he was allowed access to television and radio, to read magazines, and other privileges for good behavior.[95][96] Further investigations Following Rader's arrest, police in Wichita, Park City and several surrounding cities looked into unsolved cases with the cooperation of the state police and the FBI. They particularly focused on cases after 1994, when the death penalty was reinstated in Kansas. Police in surrounding states such as Nebraska, Missouri, Colorado, Oklahoma and Texas also investigated cold cases that fit Rader's pattern to some extent. The FBI and local jurisdictions at Rader's former duty stations checked into unsolved cases during Rader's time in the service.[citation needed] After exhaustive investigations, none of these agencies discovered any further murders attributable to Rader, supporting early suspicions that Rader would have taken responsibility for any additional murders that he had committed. As a result, the ten known murders were at that point believed to be the only murders for which Rader was actually responsible, although Wichita police are fairly certain that Rader stalked and researched a number of other potential victims. This includes one person who was saved when Rader called off his planned attack upon his arrival near the target's home due to the presence of construction and road crews nearby. Rader stated in his police interview that "there are a lot of lucky people", meaning that he had thought about and developed various levels of murder plans for other victims.[21] Evaluation by Robert Mendoza Massachusetts psychologist Robert Mendoza was hired by Rader's court-appointed public defenders to conduct a psychological evaluation of Rader, and determine if an insanity-based defense might be viable. He conducted an interview after Rader had pleaded guilty on June 27, 2005. Mendoza diagnosed Rader with narcissistic, obsessive-compulsive, and antisocial personality disorders: He observed that Rader has a grandiose sense of self, a belief that he is "special" and therefore entitled to special treatment; a pathological need for attention and admiration; a preoccupation with maintaining rigid order and structure; and a complete lack of empathy.[97] The videotape of Mendoza's interview ended up being used on NBC's Dateline. NBC claimed Rader knew the interview might be televised, but this was false according to the Sedgwick County Sheriff's Office. Rader mentioned the interview during his sentencing statement. On October 25, 2005, the Kansas attorney general filed a petition to sue Mendoza and Tali Waters, co-owners of Cambridge Forensic Consultants, LLC, for breach of contract, claiming that they intended to benefit financially from the use of information obtained through involvement in Rader's defense. On May 10, 2007, Mendoza settled the case for US$30,000 with no admission of wrongdoing.[98] Victims Name Sex Age Date of murder Place of murder Cause of death Weapon used Joseph Otero M 38 January 15, 1974 803 N. Edgemoor Street, Wichita Suffocated Plastic bag Julia Maria Otero F 33 Strangled Rope Joseph Otero Jr. M 9 Suffocated Plastic bag Josephine Otero F 11 Hanged Rope Kathryn Doreen Bright F 21 April 4, 1974 3217 E. 13th Street N., Wichita (died at Wesley Medical Center) Stabbed three times in abdomen[99] Knife Kevin Bright M 19 - Escaped Survived Gun[100][101] Shirley Ruth Vian Relford F 24 March 17, 1977 1311 S. Hydraulic Street, Wichita Strangled Rope Nancy Jo Fox F 25 December 8, 1977 843 S. Pershing Street, Wichita Strangled Belt Marine Wallace Hedge F 53 April 27, 1985 6254 N. Independence Street, Park City Strangled Hand(s) Vicki Lynn Wegerle F 28 September 16, 1986 2404 W. 13th Street N., Wichita Strangled Nylon stocking Dolores Earline Johnson Davis F 62 January 19, 1991 6226 N. Hillside Street, Wichita (east of Park City) Strangled Pantyhose In media Forensic psychologist Katherine Ramsland compiled Confession of a Serial Killer from her five-year correspondence with Rader.[102] Multiple works draw on the case: Stephen King has said his novella A Good Marriage, and the film based on it, were inspired by the BTK killer.[103] Novelist Thomas Harris has said that the character of Francis Dolarhyde in his 1981 novel Red Dragon is partially based on the then-unidentified BTK Killer.[104] Episode 4 of season 6 (2004) of Law & Order: Special Victims Unit is based on this case.[105] Episode 15 of season 1 (2006) of Criminal Minds is based on Rader's murders.[106][107] Rader's case is portrayed in Episode 2 of season 2 (2022) on the Netflix series Catching Killers.[108] A character based on Rader played by actor Sonny Valicenti appears in the Netflix series Mindhunter.[109][110] Writer-director Ulli Lommel depicted Rader's murder spree and subsequent capture in the highly fictionalized B.T.K. Killer (2005).[111] Kane Hodder portrays Rader in the 2008 movie B.T.K., a half biopic and half fictionalized account of the murders.[112] The antagonist from the movie The Clovehitch Killer was inspired by Dennis Rader.[113] Thrash metal band Exodus wrote a song entitled "BTK" for their album Blood In, Blood Out, which was inspired by Dennis Rader's crime history.[114] The song "Raider II" from Steven Wilson's 2011 album Grace for Drowning is written primarily about Rader's murders.[115] See also I Survived BTK List of serial killers in the United States List of serial killers by number of victims References "KDOC inmate number 0083707". Retrieved July 25, 2019. "Disclaimer". kdocrepository.doc.ks.gov. Hegeman, Roxana (March 17, 2015). "BTK suspect served in Alabama". The Gadsden Times. Gadsden, Alabama. Associated Press. Siegel, Larry (January 19, 2012). Criminology: Theories, Patterns, and Typologies. Boston, Massachusetts: Cengage Learning. p. 353. ISBN 978-1-133-71052-3. Archived from the original on July 28, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. Bauer, Craig P. (March 25, 2013). Secret History: The Story of Cryptology. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. p. 17. ISBN 978-1-4665-6186-1. Archived from the original on July 27, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. Hickey, Eric W. (2012). Serial Murderers and Their Victims. Boston, Massachusetts: Cengage Learning. p. 254. ISBN 978-1-285-40168-3. Archived from the original on July 20, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. Douglas, John (2008). Inside the Mind of BTK. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley. p. 130. ISBN 9780470325155. "Dennis Lynn Rader was born just outside the tiny town of Columbus, Kansas, on March 9, 1945 ..." Ramsland, Katherine M. (2016). Confession of a Serial Killer. Lebanon, New Hampshire: University Press of New England. p. 36. ISBN 9781611689730. Minutaglio, Rose (August 30, 2018). "The BTK Killer Brutally Murdered 10 People. In Chilling New Audio, He Explains Why". Esquire. Retrieved June 27, 2021. "Rader was born on March 9, 1945 in the tiny town of Pittsburg, Kansas." "BTK serial killer Dennis Rader said 'a demon within me' made him murder". Fox News. New York City: News Corp. September 4, 2018. Retrieved October 17, 2019 – via news.au.com. Murphy, Hannah (September 12, 2016). "BTK Serial Killer: What We Learned From Confessional New Book". Rolling Stone. New York City: Wenner Media LLC. Retrieved October 15, 2019. Mellor, Lee (2016). "Sexually Sadistic Homicide Offenders". In Swart, Joan; Mellor, Lee (eds.). Homicide: A Forensic Psychology Textbook. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. p. 138. ISBN 978-1-315-37001-9. Crawford, Matthew I. (March 8, 2017). "Profile of a Serial Killer: Dennis Rader, the BTK Strangler". The Crimewire. Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University. Ramsland, p.131 Vander Hayden, Aly (August 31, 2018). "The Creepy Bondage Selfies The BTK Took In Between His Murders". Oxygen. New York City: NBCUniversal. Retrieved October 17, 2019. Bonn, Scott A. (February 7, 2022). "Evolution of a Serial Killer: Dennis Rader, BTK". Psychology Today. Sylvester, Ron (March 14, 2007). "Investigators tell of grisly crimes, Rader's delight". The Wichita Eagle. Archived from the original on February 19, 2014. Retrieved April 21, 2019. "A Double Life: Dennis Rader lived quietly while killing 10" (PDF). The Wichita Eagle. Archived (PDF) from the original on January 3, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. King, Gary C.; Allen, Kevin P. "Criminal Profile: Dennis Lynn Rader". Investigation Discovery. Discovery Communications. Archived from the original on December 31, 2012. Retrieved July 11, 2014. "Raders' divorce granted". The Wichita Eagle. March 27, 2012. Archived from the original on July 14, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. Wenzl, Roy; Potter, Tim; Laviana, Hurst; Kelly, L. (May 27, 2008). Bind, Torture, Kill: The Inside Story of BTK, the Serial Killer Next Door. New York City: HarperCollins. ISBN 978-0-06-137395-4. Archived from the original on July 29, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. Twiddy, David (March 1, 2005). "BTK Suspect's Career in Security Probed". Associated Press. Archived from the original on July 14, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. McClellan, Janet (May 18, 2010). Erotophonophilia: Investigating Lust Murder. Amherst, New York: Cambria Press. pp. 157, 173. ISBN 978-1-62196-929-7. Archived from the original on July 29, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. Buselt, Lori O'Toole (March 3, 2005). "Park City Council dismisses Rader". The Wichita Eagle. Archived from the original on March 5, 2005. Retrieved January 21, 2015. "Neighbor: I Watched BTK Suspect Shoot Dog". ABC News. February 27, 2005. Archived from the original on July 15, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. Meadows, Bob; Klise, Kate; Comander, Lauren; Grisby, Lorna; Haederle, Michael (March 21, 2005). "The BTK Case: the Killer Unmasked?". People. Vol. 63, no. 11. New York City: Meredith Corporation. Archived from the original on July 15, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. "The trait served Rader well in his next job, as a compliance officer for Park City, a Wichita suburb—but his nit-picking won him few friends." Romano, Lois (March 6, 2005). "Portrait of Suspect in BTK Cases Emerging". The Washington Post. Retrieved January 8, 2022. Interview with Misty King; A&E Documentary Special—The BTK Killer Speaks "The BTK Killer Speaks (2005)". Serial Killer Documentaries. December 4, 2012. Retrieved June 9, 2023. jpark (August 9, 2018). "Did Society Help the BTK Killer?". Professor Ramos' Blog. Retrieved June 9, 2023. "People at CLC – Christ Lutheran Church – Wichita, Kansas". Archived from the original on February 6, 2005. The Wichita Eagle, 2005 "Paula and Dennis Raders' divorce granted". kansas.com. July 27, 2005. Retrieved June 9, 2023. "BTK killer's wife granted an emergency divorce". NBC News. Associated Press. July 27, 2005. Archived from the original on July 14, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. "How Do I File for Divorce in Kansas?". divorcenet.com. Retrieved June 9, 2023. Dooley, Sean; Effron, Lauren; Smith, Jenner (January 22, 2019). "BTK serial killer's daughter: 'We were living our normal life. ... Then everything upended on us'". ABC News. Retrieved January 30, 2021. Potter, Tim (May 11, 2013). "Charlie Otero finds peace, stability nearly 40 years after BTK murders". The Wichita Eagle. Wichita, Kansas: McClatchy. Archived from the original on July 1, 2018. Retrieved July 1, 2018. "BTK serial killer's victim families to address court". The New York Times. New York City. August 18, 2005. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved January 30, 2021. "BTK: 'I took her to the basement and...hung her'". CNN. Atlanta, Georgia: Turner Broadcasting Systems. June 27, 2005. Archived from the original on July 7, 2018. Retrieved July 1, 2018. Finger, Stan (July 2, 2005). "Victim's family files suit against Rader". The Wichita Eagle. Wichita, Kansas: McClatchy. CROWE, ROBERT (March 2, 2005). "BTK arrest relieves victim now in Livingston". Chron. Retrieved July 17, 2023. "CNN.com - Victim's brother describes killing linked to BTK - Mar 2, 2005". www.cnn.com. Retrieved July 17, 2023. "Survivor recalls serial killer's attack". The Oklahoman. Retrieved July 17, 2023. "CNN.com - Son of BTK victim still haunted - Mar 2, 2005". www.cnn.com. Retrieved July 17, 2023. "BTK Shares Bone-Chilling Nancy Fox Murder Details in Confession of a Serial Killer Clip". E! News. January 7, 2022. Retrieved July 17, 2023. "KAKE | BTK Back". February 11, 2005. Archived from the original on February 11, 2005. Retrieved May 1, 2024. "Transcription of poem "Oh! Death to Nancy"" (PDF). www.wichita.gov. Wichita, Kansas: City of Wichita. Archived from the original (PDF) on June 3, 2006. Retrieved August 9, 2011. Douglas, John; Dodd, Johnny (November 3, 2008). Inside the Mind of BTK: The True Story Behind the Thirty-Year Hunt for the Notorious Wichita Serial Killer. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. p. 83. ISBN 978-0-470-43768-1. Archived from the original on July 24, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. "City's 'BTK Strangler' claims he's killed 7". The Wichita Eagle. Wichita, Kansas: McClatchy. February 11, 1978. Retrieved October 17, 2019 – via Kansas.com. "'MSNBC Reports' BTK Killer for May 3". NBC News. May 4, 2005. Retrieved May 1, 2024. Stroebe, Wolfgang (May 1, 2012). "How Advertisements Manipulate Behavior". Scientific American. Retrieved May 1, 2024. Bardsley, Marilyn; Bell, Rachael; Lohr, David. "The BTK Story – More Clues Revealed". Crime Library. Archived from the original on May 29, 2008. Retrieved May 25, 2008. "BTK took body to church, says investigator". CNN. Atlanta, Georgia: Turner Broadcasting Systems. August 18, 2005. Archived from the original on August 2, 2018. Retrieved February 20, 2019. A&E Documentary Special – The BTK Killer Speaks Geberth, Vernon (2010). Sex-Related Homicide and Death Investigation: Practical and Clinical Perspectives. Boca Raton. Florida: CRC Press. p. 628. ISBN 978-1-4398-2656-0. Hollingsworth, Heather; Ballentine, Summer (August 23, 2023). "Oklahoma authorities name the BTK killer as the 'prime suspect' in at least two unsolved cases". Associated Press News. Retrieved August 24, 2023. "Cynthia Dawn Kinney". The Charley Project. Retrieved August 24, 2023. "Cynthia Dawn Kinney". Oklahoma Cold Cases. Retrieved August 24, 2023. "Authorities search BTK serial killer's former property in connection with 1976 missing person case and other unsolved cases". CNN. August 23, 2023. Retrieved August 24, 2023. Killman, Curtis (September 10, 2023). "Sheriff details investigation into BTK killer as suspect in Oklahoma girl's disappearance". Tulsa World. Retrieved September 10, 2023. "BTK Strangler resurfaces after 25 years". The Scotsman. March 28, 2004. Archived from the original on July 14, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. "'BTK' serial killer caught". The Age. February 27, 2005. Archived from the original on May 28, 2012. Retrieved October 17, 2011. "Police destroy 1,326 DNA samples taken in BTK investigation". USA Today. May 31, 2006. Archived from the original on June 16, 2009. Retrieved May 1, 2010. Singular, Stephen (March 27, 2007). Unholy Messenger: The Life and Crimes of the BTK Serial Killer. Simon & Schuster. pp. 115–116. ISBN 978-1-4165-3154-8. Archived from the original on July 24, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. Potter, Tim (July 10, 2005). "After 31 years and 10 deaths pieces fall in place". The Wichita Eagle. Archived from the original on December 29, 2014. Retrieved January 21, 2015. Saunokonoko, Mark (August 28, 2019). "How vanity and a rogue Microsoft Word document led to the capture of evil 'BTK' serial killer". 9news.com.au. Retrieved July 22, 2021. Girard, James E. (2013). Criminalistics: Forensic Science, Crime, and Terrorism. Burlington, Massachusetts: Jones & Bartlett Publishers. p. 417. ISBN 978-1-4496-9180-6. Archived from the original on July 18, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. "The Home Depot where BTK left one of his letters". Retrieved May 30, 2023. Hansen, Mark (May 1, 2006). "How the Cops Caught BTK: Playing to a serial killer's ego helped crack the case". ABA Journal. Chicago, Illinois: American Bar Association. Retrieved July 22, 2021. "Cops Make Arrest in BTK Probe". Fox News. New York City: News Corp. February 27, 2005. Archived from the original on July 15, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. Sandford, John (March 3, 2005). "Camp novel crops up in the BTK case". Star-Tribune. Archived from the original on May 9, 2008. Retrieved June 2, 2008 – via johnsandford.org. Girard, James E. (2013). Criminalistics: Forensic Science, Crime, and Terrorism. Jones & Bartlett Publishers. p. 417. ISBN 978-1-4496-9180-6. Archived from the original on July 18, 2014. Retrieved January 21, 2015. "BTK Kansas Serial Killer – Full BTK Story". Crime Library. Archived from the original on June 15, 2008. Potter, Tim (March 14, 2007). "Police tell details of BTK hunt". The Wichita Eagle. Archived from the original on November 12, 2012. Retrieved June 1, 2012. Potter, Tim; Finger, Stan (July 10, 2005). "Policeman details capture of BTK killer". Lawrence Journal-World. Archived from the original on December 29, 2013. Retrieved September 13, 2014. Nakashima, Ellen (April 21, 2008). "From DNA of Family, a Tool to Make Arrests". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on December 4, 2014. Retrieved January 21, 2015. Nye, Valerie; Barco, Kathy (2012). True Stories of Censorship Battles in America's Libraries. American Library Association. p. 133. ISBN 978-0-8389-1130-3. Archived from the original on July 24, 2014. Retrieved July 11, 2014. Magnus, Edie (August 24, 2005). "31 years of the BTK killer". MSNBC. Archived from the original on October 26, 2015. Retrieved October 19, 2015. Fox, James Alan; Levin, Jack (March 14, 2011). Extreme Killing: Understanding Serial and Mass Murder. Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications. p. 11. ISBN 978-1-4129-8031-9. Retrieved July 11, 2014. "CNN.com – Report: Daughter of BTK suspect alerted police – Apr 19, 2005". CNN. Archived from the original on September 24, 2015. Retrieved October 19, 2015. Samuelson, Andy (February 27, 2005). "Wichita police: 'BTK is arrested'". Lawrence Journal-World. Lawrence, Kansas: Ogden Newspapers Inc. Archived from the original on May 22, 2008. Retrieved June 2, 2008. "BTK Serial Killer Suspect's Charges – State of Kansas v. Dennis Rader (page 6)". findlaw.com. February 28, 2005. Archived from the original on April 16, 2008. Retrieved June 2, 2008. "'BTK' Serial Killer in Custody, Claims Police". St. Petersburg Times. March 1, 2005. Archived from the original on April 9, 2008. Retrieved June 2, 2008. "BTK Suspect Said to Confess to 6 Slayings". USA Today. Associated Press. February 27, 2005. Archived from the original on May 27, 2008. Retrieved June 2, 2008. Finger, Stan; Potter, Tim (March 6, 2005). "Rader has admitted to killings, daily says". Deseret News. Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret News Company. Archived from the original on January 8, 2009. Retrieved June 2, 2008. "Victim's brother describes killing linked to BTK". CNN. March 2, 2005. Archived from the original on October 10, 2008. Retrieved June 2, 2008. Strongin, Dana; Laviana, Hurst (May 5, 2005). "Families of BTK victims prepare to wait". The Wichita Eagle. Wichita, Kansas. Archived from the original on March 21, 2018. Retrieved March 20, 2018. "BTK Confession, full version". YouTube. February 26, 2014. "BTK CONFESSION (DENNIS L RADER) – COURT TRANSCRIPT". Serial Killers Info. February 4, 2018. "Anger, Relief Over BTK Confessions". CBS News. June 28, 2005. Archived from the original on September 6, 2008. Retrieved June 2, 2008. Hansen, Mark (April 21, 2006). "How the Cops Caught BTK". ABA Journal. American Bar Association. Archived from the original on January 21, 2015. Retrieved January 21, 2015. Sales, Leigh (June 28, 2005). "US Serial Killer pleads guilty to ten murders". The World Today. Archived from the original on February 10, 2015. Retrieved January 21, 2015. "BTK Dennis Rader's Sentencing Statement". YouTube. February 26, 2014. "BTK killer sentenced to 10 consecutive life terms". WHO-TV (AP). August 19, 2005. Archived from the original on August 9, 2007. Retrieved August 7, 2007. Gray, Richard M. (2010). "Psychopathy and the Will to Power: Ted Bundy and Dennis Rader". In Waller, Sara (ed.). Serial Killers – Philosophy for Everyone: Being and Killing. Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishing. pp. 198–99. ISBN 978-1-4443-4140-9. "For most people, emotional words and scenes lead to heightened activity in the amygdala as the emotional sense of the situation overcomes them, often shutting down higher functions. For psychopaths, the amygdala responds less powerfully to the same items and when it does respond it does so in step with higher cortical activity. The cortex is the brain area associated with rational thought and interpretive functions. So, psychopaths presented with an emotional stimulus have to think about its meaning and rationally make sense of it in order to parse their response. They do not feel the effects of others' fear, sadness, or pain, so they have to work to interpret their environment. This characteristic appears clearly in the allocution of Dennis Rader, the BTK Killer. Standing in court before the judge, the victims' families, and the assembled press, Rader listened as the judge read out the details of his offenses. Without blinking an eye, Rader stopped the judge at several junctures to correct some minor detail. Unmoved by the enormity of his crimes or the responses of the people gathered there, Rader makes almost casual responses to the facts in the case; at one point making mouth noises as he sought a precise fact. This is a man who cannot even begin to appreciate the impact he had on others." Coates, Sam (August 19, 2005). "Rader Gets 175 Years For BTK Slayings". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on October 24, 2014. Retrieved February 20, 2009. "Dennis Rader's listing on the Kansas Department of Corrections Kansas Adult Supervised Population Electronic Repository site". Archived from the original on November 25, 2007. Retrieved June 2, 2008. Vries, Lloyd (April 24, 2006). "BTK Killer Gets Extra Jail Perks". CBS News. New York City: CBS Corporation. Archived from the original on October 25, 2012. Retrieved March 20, 2018. Ramsland, pp. 217–218. "BTK Psychologist to Pay State". WIBW. Associated Press. May 10, 2007. Archived from the original on February 11, 2015. Retrieved February 10, 2015. Dangelo, Adrian (November 12, 2014). Robert Beattie Nightmare in Wichita: The Hunt for the BTK Strangler. p. 47. Retrieved January 19, 2019. "Living victim sues Rader". The Witchita Eagle. August 19, 2019. Retrieved October 28, 2022. Hayden, Aly Vander (August 20, 2019). "Everything You Need To Know About BTK, The Disturbing Killer Shown In 'Mindhunter'". Oxygen Official Site. Retrieved October 28, 2022. Ramsland, pg. 1 Wenzl, Roy (September 26, 2014). "Daughter of Wichita serial killer BTK; Stephen King 'exploiting my father's 10 victims'". The Kansas City Star. Kansas City, Missouri: McClatchy. Archived from the original on March 17, 2015. Retrieved March 17, 2015. Beattie, Robert (2005). Nightmare in Wichita. New York City: Penguin Books. ISBN 0-451-21738-1. "Ahead of the Season 22 Premiere, We Ranked the 30 Best Law & Order: SVU Episodes Ever". November 12, 2020. Ramsland, Katherine (2010). The Forensic Psychology of Criminal Minds. New York City: Penguin Publishing. p. 36. ASIN B0030CHFQC. La Jeunesse, Marilyn, Marilyn (March 1, 2019). "11 episodes of 'Criminal Minds' that were likely inspired by real-life crimes". Business Insider. Archived from the original on December 8, 2019. Retrieved December 8, 2019. "Catching Killers". IMDb. February 9, 2022. Leiker, Amy Renée (October 16, 2017). "That creepy ADT guy on 'Mindhunter'? He's based on a Kansas serial killer". The Wichita Eagle. Wichita, Kansas. Archived from the original on October 27, 2017. Retrieved October 26, 2017. Robinson, Joanna (October 17, 2017). "Mindhunter: Who is the ADT Killer from Kansas?". Vanity Fair. New York City: Condé Nast. Archived from the original on October 19, 2017. Retrieved October 23, 2017. "B.T.K. Killer". IMDb. October 14, 2023. "B.T.K." IMDb. July 8, 2008. "Is The Clovehitch Killer Based On The BTK Murders True Story?". ScreenRant. May 10, 2021. Retrieved November 11, 2021. "Lyrics for BTK by Exodus". Songfacts. Retrieved February 13, 2022. The Raven that Refused to Sing – Concert Review Further reading Beattie, Robert. Nightmare in Wichita: The Hunt for the BTK Strangler. New American Library, 2005. ISBN 0-451-21738-1. Davis, Jeffrey M. The Shadow of Evil: Where Is God in a Violent World?. Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company, 1996. ISBN 0-7872-1981-9. (Davis is the son of BTK victim Dolores Davis.) Douglas, John E. Inside the Mind of BTK: The True Story Behind Thirty Years of Hunting for the Wichita Serial Killer. Jossey Bass Wiley, 2007. ISBN 978-0-7879-8484-7. Ramsland, Katherine. Confession of a Serial Killer: The Untold Story of Dennis Rader, the BTK Killer. Foredge, 2016. ISBN 978-1-5126-0152-7. Rawson, Kerri. A Serial Killer's Daughter: My Story of Faith, Love, and Overcoming. Thomas Nelson, 2019. ISBN 978-1400201754. Singular, Stephen. Unholy Messenger: The Life and Crimes of the BTK Serial Killer. Scribner Book Company, 2006. ISBN 1-4001-5252-6. Smith, Carlton. The BTK Murders: Inside the "Bind Torture Kill" Case that Terrified America's Heartland. St. Martin's True Crime, 2006. ISBN 0-312-93905-1. Wenzl, Roy; Potter, Tim; Laviana, Hurst; Kelly, L. Bind, Torture, Kill: The Inside Story of the Serial Killer Next Door. HC an imprint of HarperCollins, 2007. ISBN 978-0-06-124650-0. Welch, Larry. Beyond Cold Blood: The KBI from Ma Barker to BTK. University Press of Kansas, 2012. ISBN 978-0-7006-1885-9. External links Wikimedia Commons has media related to Dennis Rader. Wikiquote has quotations related to Dennis Rader. B.T.K. – The Worlds Most Elusive Serial Killer Sedgwick County 18th Judicial District collection of legal documents on the Rader case The Wichita Eagle Collection of articles and videos about BTK KAKE Collection of articles and videos on BTK Dennis Rader's listing on the Kansas Department of Corrections Kansas Adult Supervised Population Electronic Repository site, including current location and disciplinary actions. "Finding BTK" Investigation Discovery When your father is the BTK serial killer, forgiveness is not tidy Portals: Biography icon Law flag Kansas Authority control databases Edit this at Wikidata International FAST ISNI VIAF WorldCat National Catalonia Israel United States Categories: 1945 birthsLiving people20th-century American criminalsAmerican LutheransAmerican male criminalsAmerican mass murderersAmerican murderers of childrenAmerican people convicted of murderAmerican people of Danish descentAmerican people of German descentAmerican people of Swiss descentAmerican prisoners sentenced to life imprisonmentAmerican serial killersButler Community College alumniCrime in KansasMilitary personnel from KansasPeople convicted of murder by KansasPeople from Pittsburg, KansasPeople from Sedgwick County, KansasPeople with antisocial personality disorderPeople with obsessive-compulsive personality disorderPrisoners sentenced to life imprisonment by KansasSerial killers from KansasSerial killers who worked in law enforcementTorture in the United StatesUnited States Air Force non-commissioned officersViolence against women in the United StatesWichita State University alumni

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Uranium mining in the United States produced 173,875 pounds (78.9 tonnes) of U3O8 in 2019, 88% lower than the 2018 production of 1,447,945 pounds (656.8 tonnes) of U3O8 and the lowest US annual production since 1948. The 2019 production represents 0.3% of the anticipated uranium fuel requirements of the US's nuclear power reactors for the year.[1][2] Production came from five in-situ leaching plants in Nebraska and Wyoming (Crow Butte, Lost Creek Project, Ross CPP, North Butte, and Smith Ranch-Highland), and one underground mine.[3] From 1949 to 2019, total US production of uranium oxide (U3O8) was 979.9 million pounds (444,500 tonnes).[2] History While uranium is used primarily for nuclear power, uranium mining had its roots in the production of radium-bearing ore from 1898 from the mining of uranium-vanadium sandstone deposits in western Colorado. The 1950s saw a boom in uranium mining in the western U.S., spurred by the fortunes made by prospectors such as Charlie Steen. The United States was the world's leading producer of uranium from 1953 until 1980. In 1980 annual U.S. production peaked at 43.7 million pounds of U3O8.[2] Until the early 1980s, there were active uranium mines in Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wyoming.[4] Price declines in the late 1970s and early 1980s forced the closure of numerous mines. Most uranium ore in the United States comes from deposits in sandstone, which tend to be of lower grade than those of Australia and Canada. Because of the lower grade, many uranium deposits in the United States became uneconomic when the price of uranium declined sharply in the late 1970s. By 2001, there were only three operating uranium mines (all in-situ leaching operations) in the United States. Annual production reached a low of 779 metric tons of uranium oxide in 2003, but then more than doubled in three years to 1672 metric tons in 2006, from 10 mines.[5] The U.S. DOE's Energy Information Administration reported that 90% of U.S. uranium production in 2006 came from in-situ leaching.[6] The average spot price of uranium oxide (U3O8) increased from $7.92 per pound in 2001 to $39.48 per pound ($87.04/kg) in 2006.[7] In 2011 the United States mined 9% of the uranium consumed by its nuclear power plants.[8] The remainder was imported, principally from Russia and Kazakhstan (38%), Canada, and Australia.[9][10][11] Although uranium production has declined to low levels, the United States has the fourth-largest uranium resource in the world, behind Australia, Canada, and Kazakhstan.[10] United States uranium reserves are strongly dependent on price. At $50 per pound U3O8, reserves are estimated to be 539 million pounds; however, at a price of $100 per pound, reserves are an estimated 1227 million pounds.[12] Rising uranium prices since 2001 have increased interest in uranium mining in Arizona, Colorado, Texas and Utah.[13][14] The states with the largest known uranium ore reserves (not counting byproduct uranium from phosphate) are (in order) Wyoming, New Mexico, and Colorado.[15] The radiation hazards of uranium mining and milling were not appreciated in the early years, resulting in workers being exposed to high levels of radiation. Radon gas is a colorless, odorless, radioactive gas that forms naturally from the decay of radioactive elements like uranium, found in rocks and soil. Inhalation of radon gas caused sharp increases in lung cancers among underground uranium miners employed in the 1940s and 1950s.[16][17][18] In 1950, the US Public Health service began a comprehensive study of uranium miners, leading to the first publication of a statistical correlation between cancer and uranium mining, released in 1962.[19] In 1969, the federal government regulated the standard amount of radon in mines.[20] In 1990, Congress passed the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA), granting compensation for those affected by mining.[19] Out of 50 present and former uranium milling sites in 12 states, 24 have been abandoned and are the responsibility of the US Department of Energy.[21] By state A billet of highly enriched uranium. Alabama Uranium in Alabama is found in the Coosa Block of the Northern Alabama Piedmont. Metamorphic uranium occurrences have been found in the Higgins Ferry Group in Coosa and Clay Counties. Some exploration has been done, but no economic deposits have been found to date. Alaska Alaska's only uranium mine, Ross-Adams, was discovered in 1955 by an airborne gamma radiation survey. The deposit is on the side of Bokan Mountain on Prince of Wales Island. The principal ore mineral is uranothorite, which occurs in veinlets in granite. Accessory minerals are primarily hematite and calcite, with lesser amounts of fluorite, pyrite, galena, quartz, and rare earth minerals. Mining commenced in 1957, when approximately 18,000 tonnes of thorium-bearing uranium ore grading 1% U3O8 was recovered from an open pit. Additional mining took place in 1961–1962 (6800 tonnes of ore), 1963 (10,880 tonnes), and 49,885 tonnes from 1968–1971 from underground operations.[22] A total of 1.3 million pounds of U3O8 at a grade of 0.76% was produced from open pit and underground operations, with milling taking place in Washington and Utah.[23] Arizona Main article: Uranium mining in Arizona Uranium mining in Arizona has taken place since 1918. Prior to the uranium boom of the late 1940s, uranium in Arizona was a byproduct of vanadium mining of the mineral carnotite.[24] California Uranium was discovered in 1954 in the Sierra Nevada of Kern County, along the Kern River about 30 miles (50 km) northeast of Bakersfield. Two mines, the Kergon mine and the Miracle mine, made small shipments in 1954 and 1955. Uranium occurs as uraninite and autunite in shear zones in granodiorite. Accessory minerals include fluorite and the molybdenum minerals ilsemannite and jordisite.[25] Colorado Main article: Uranium mining in Colorado The first uranium identified in the US was pitchblende from the Wood gold mine at Central City, Colorado in 1871. Uranium mining in southwest Colorado goes back to 1898. The Uravan district of Colorado and Utah supplied about half the world's radium from 1910 to 1922, and vanadium and uranium were byproducts. The last producing uranium mine in the state, the Topaz Mine, part of the Sunday Complex near Uravan, Colorado, was closed down on March 18, 2009, by then owner Denison Mines due to depressed uranium prices. On July 6, 2021 Western Uranium & Vanadium Corp announced the resumption of mining activities at the Sunday Mine Complex. On February 14, 2022 Western Uranium & Vanadium Corp announced 2,000 tons of new production was moved into four separate underground stockpiles. [26] [27][28] Florida The Central Florida (Bone Valley) phosphorite deposits are considered to contain the largest known uranium resource (one million metric tons of uranium oxide) in North America (but note that resources are not the same as ore reserves). Uranium has been produced as a byproduct of phosphate mining and the production of phosphoric acid fertilizer. The uranium is contained in the phosphate minerals francolite, crandallite, millisite, wavellite, and vivianite, found in Miocene and Pliocene sediments of the Bone Valley Formation. The average uranium content is 0.009%, which is considered to be low grade. Concentrations of uranium in this type of deposit typically grade to 0.01–0.015% U3O8.[29] Recovery process costs are estimated at $22 to $54 per pound of U3O8; higher than the market price of uranium during the 25-year period spanning the 1980s through the early first decade of the 21st century. Consequently, uranium recovery from Florida phosphate ceased in 1998.[30] Idaho From 1955 to 1960, uranium was extracted from placer black sand deposits derived from the Idaho Batholith in southwest Idaho. The deposits were mined for uranium, thorium, and rare earths. Uranium and thorium were in the monazite grains; rare earths were in columbite and euxenite. Production was 365,000 pounds (165 metric tons) of U3O8.[31] Uranium was mined at the Stanley district in Custer County, Idaho from 1957 to 1962. Deposits occur as veins in granite of the Cretaceous Idaho Batholith, and in strataform deposits in possibly Paleocene arkosic conglomerates and sandstones between the underlying Idaho Batholith and overlying Challis Volcanic Group (Eocene). The USGS has estimated production to be less than 170,000 pounds (78 metric tons) of U3O8.[32] Nebraska Ion exchange resin beads The only operating uranium mine in Nebraska is the Crow Butte mine, operated by Cameco. The mine is five miles (8.0 km) southeast of Crawford in Dawes County, western Nebraska.[33] The roll-front deposit in the Oligocene Chadron formation was discovered in 1980 by Wyoming Fuel Co.[34] Commercial operation began in 1991.[35] Uranium is mined by in-situ leaching which involves the extraction by boreholes of uranium-bearing (U3O8) water, which is then filtered through resin beads. Through an ion exchange process, the resin beads attract uranium from the solution. Uranium loaded resins are then transported to a processing plant, where U3O8 is separated from the resin beads and yellowcake is produced. The resin beads are returned to the ion exchange facility where they are reused.[36][37] Nevada There is no current uranium production from Nevada. The largest past-producer was the Apex mine (also called Rundberg or Early Day mine), three miles south of Austin, in Lander County. Discovered in September 1953, it was first mined as a silver deposit and produced 45 metric tons of U3O8 (80% of Nevada's historical production) from 1954 until 1966, from a small open pit and from underground. Ore was shipped to Utah and to Lakeview, Oregon for processing.[38][39] Uranium occurs as the secondary minerals autunite and meta-autunite after uraninite and coffinite in fractured Cambrian metamorphosed shales and quartzite, at or near the contact with Jurassic porphyritic quartz monzonite.[40][41][42] The Apex-Lowboy deposit has an inferred resource of 615,000 metric tons at a grade of 0.07% U3O8.[43] The McDermitt Caldera in Humboldt County was the site of intensive uranium exploration in the late 1970s. In 2006 and 2007, Western Uranium Corporation drilled exploratory boreholes in the Kings Valley area.[44] New Jersey A uranium exploration project in northern New Jersey was halted in 1980 when the local government passed an ordinance preventing uranium mining after protests in Jefferson Township.[45] New Mexico Main article: Uranium mining in New Mexico New Mexico was a significant uranium producer since the discovery of uranium by Navajo sheepherder Paddy Martinez in 1950. Uranium in New Mexico is almost all in the Grants mineral belt, along the south margin of the San Juan Basin in McKinley and Cibola counties, in the northwest part of the state.[46] No mining has been done since 2002, even though the state has second-largest known uranium ore reserves in the US.[47] North Dakota Some lignite coal in southwest North Dakota contains economic quantities of uranium. From 1965 to 1967 Union Carbide operated a mill near Belfield in Stark County to burn uraniferous lignite and extract uranium from the ash. The plant produced about 150 metric tons of U3O8 before shutting down.[48] Oklahoma A small amount of uranium ore was mined in the mid-1950s from a surface exposure at Cement in Caddo County. The uranium occurred as carnotite and tyuyamunite in fracture fillings in the Rush Springs Sandstone over the Cement anticline, where the sandstone is bleached.[49] The mined area was 150 feet (46 m) long, 3 to 5 feet (0.9 to 1.5 m) wide, and extended 3 to 5 feet (0.9 to 1.5 m) below ground surface.[50] Oregon Uranium was discovered in Oregon in 1955, 20 miles northwest of Lakeview in Lake County. The White King mine and the Lucky Lass mine shipped uranium from 1955 until 1965. At the White King mine, uranium was mined by both underground and open-pit methods from a low-temperature hydrothermal deposit in Pliocene volcanic rocks, associated with opal, realgar, stibnite, cinnabar, and pyrite. At the Lucky Lass mine ore was mined from an open pit. Uranium occurs in uraninite and autunite in lenses near or in a fault zone in tuffs. The mines fed the Lakeview Mining Company uranium mill.[51][52] A minor amount of uranium was mined in 1960 from a deposit at Bear Creek Butte in Crook County. The uranium was present as autunite at the contact between a rhyolite dike and tuffs of the Oligocene-Miocene John Day Formation.[52] The McDermitt Caldera in Malheur County was the site of intense uranium exploration in the late 1970s. In 2012, Portland-based Oregon Energy was planning development of the Aurora deposit, near McDermitt.[53] In December 2013, Oregon Energy notified the NRC that the project was "on ice" because of the Sage Grouse issue and uranium pricing.[54] Pennsylvania The uranium mineral autunite was reported in 1874 near the town of Mauch Chunk (present-day Jim Thorpe) in Carbon County, eastern Pennsylvania.[55] A small amount of test mining was done in 1953 at the Mount Pisgah deposit near Jim Thorpe. The uranium at the Mount Pisgah deposit is primarily in an unidentified black mineral in pods and rolls in the basal conglomerate of the Mauch Chunk Formation (Mississippian). Also present are the secondary uranium and uranium-vanadium minerals carnotite, tyuyamunite, liebigite, uranophane, and betauranophane.[56] Uranium has been located in only a small portion of the county near the Lehigh River valley and all of the deposits have been named. Mount Pisgah, Mauch Chunk Ridge, Butcher Hollow, and Penn Haven Junction are all within 6 miles of the town. First recognized in 1874, the land that these uranium deposits were found on was partially owned by Lehigh Coal and Navigation Company.[57] The land came to be owned by this company because the founders of the town, Josiah White and Erskine Hazard, were also founders of the company. Mauch Chunk was primarily a company town. Carbon County, as of 2010, has a population that consists of 98.4% white people. The test mining that was done in Carbon County has raised concerns because of higher chances of polluted water and release of radioactive material. With Jim Thorpe, PA being located right on the Lehigh River, any release of radioactive materials in that area could cause significant environmental damage there and further downstream in the Delaware River. The core drilling test mining occurred in 1953 at the Mauch Chunk Ridge deposit but has seen no further development due to the low uranium content in the rock of about .011 to .013%.[57] South Dakota Uranium was discovered near Edgemont, South Dakota in 1951, quickly followed by mining. The uranium occurs in Cretaceous sandstones of the Inyan Kara group, where it outcrops along the southern edge of the Black Hills in Fall River County, South Dakota. Minerals in unoxidized sandstone are uraninite and coffinite; minerals in oxidized zones include carnotite and tyuyamunite.[58] An airborne gamma radiation survey flown by the US Atomic Energy Commission in 1954 discovered high radiation readings over the Cave Hills area in Harding County, in the northwest corner of the state.[59] High winds blew the reconnaissance flight off their planned survey route over the Slim Buttes twenty miles southeast of the North Cave Hills. Claims were immediately staked over uranium-bearing lignite beds in the area. The lignite was strip-mined, probably starting that same year, and continuing until the mines closed in 1964.[60] No uranium is currently mined in South Dakota.[citation needed] In January 2007[61] Powertech Uranium Corporation received a state permit to drill boreholes to evaluate their Dewey-Burdock project, in Custer and Fall River counties northwest of Edgemont.[62] Previous work at the property in the early 1980s defined a resource of 10 million pounds (4500 metric tons) of uranium, of which 5 million pounds (2300 metric tons) were estimated recoverable by conventional underground mining.[63] Powertech hoped to bring the property into production as an in-situ leaching mine in 2009.[64] A campaign has been underway to halt any effort to mine uranium in the Black Hills because of its effect on Native American and wildlife populations, as well as the effects of mining on the water table and local ranchers.[65][66] Indigenous leaders and anti-nuclear activists began organizing around this issue in the 1970s and there are still efforts underway to prevent mining on native lands.[67][68] Texas South Texas uranium province – USGS. The uranium district of south Texas was discovered by accident in 1954 by an airborne gamma radiation survey looking for petroleum deposits. The coastal plain had previously been regarded as highly unfavorable for uranium deposits.[69] The uranium occurs in roll-front type deposits in sandstones of Eocene, Oligocene and Miocene age.[70] The deposits are distributed along about 200 miles (320 km) of coastal plain, from Panna Maria in the north, south into Mexico. Uranium production began in 1958, from open-pit and in situ leach mines. Uranium production stopped in 1999, but restarted in 2004.[71] By 2006, three mines were active: Kingsville Dome in Kleberg County, the Vasquez mine in Duval County, and the Alta Mesa mine in Brooks County. 2007 production was 1.34 million pounds (607 metric tons) of U3O8. All have since closed.[72] Uranium Energy Corp. (UEC) began in-situ leach mining at its Palangana deposit (grading .135% U3O8) in Duval County in 2010. Uranium loaded resins from that ion exchange facility are processed into yellowcake at the company's Hobson processing plant. In late 2012, UEC completed the permitting and approval process for the Goliad ISR mining and ion exchange facility in Goliad County.[73] Utah Main article: Uranium mining in Utah Mi Vida uranium mine near Moab, Utah Mining of uranium-vanadium ore in southeast Utah goes back to the late 19th century. All of Utah's numerous uranium mines had closed by 1991 because of low prices. In late 2006, Denison Mines reopened the Pandora mine in the La Sal mining district, Utah's first producing uranium mine since 1991.[74] In 2009 White Canyon Uranium opened the Daneros underground mine, 40 miles (64 km) west of Blanding, trucking ore to Denison's White Mesa Mill. In 2011 Denison took over White Canyon Uranium.[75] In 2012 Energy Fuels Inc. acquired Denison's US assets, including the White Mesa Mill. In October 2012 the only operating uranium mines in Utah, the Pandora, Beaver and Daneros mines, were all placed on standby, care and maintenance due to the depressed uranium price.[76][77][78][79] The White Mesa Mill, 7 miles (11 km) miles south of Blanding, Utah, is the only operating conventional uranium (and vanadium) mill in the United States.[79][80] Virginia The largest deposit of uranium in the US is in Virginia at Coles Hill; however, the state's generous rainfall and occasional flooding (in contrast with typical American uranium mines in the dry and isolated desert southwest) have led to citizen concern about commercial-scale mining.[81] Lawmakers in the state enacted a de facto ban on uranium mining in 1982. A 2015 federal court case involving the owners of Coles Hill upheld the ban. Marline Uranium Corp. announced in July 1982 that it had discovered 110 million pounds (50,000 metric tons) of uranium in the Swanson/Coles Hill deposit, on land that it had leased near Chatham in Pittsylvania County. During the 1982 legislative session, the state of Virginia adopted laws to govern exploration for uranium in the Commonwealth. At the same time, the legislature imposed a moratorium on uranium mining in the state until such time that regulations to govern uranium mining could be enacted into law.[82] In 1981, the Virginia General Assembly approved House Joint Resolution No. 324, which directed the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission to evaluate the effects of uranium development on the Commonwealth and its citizens. The Virginia Coal and Energy Commission is a permanent legislative commission composed of five Senators, eight Delegates, and seven citizens appointed by the Governor. The Commission completed its evaluation of uranium mining in October 1984 and concluded that the moratorium regarding uranium development could be lifted on the condition that certain specific recommendations derived from its work would be enacted into law. Union Carbide was the joint venture partner on the project with Marline until early 1984 when it dropped its option on the property due to declining uranium prices. Marline kept the project on care and maintenance until 1990, when it dropped its remaining mineral leases and closed its local exploration office.[83] The deposits occur as breccia-fill and veins in gneiss bordering the Triassic Danville Basin.[84] Ore minerals are coffinite, uraninite, and uranium-bearing apatite.[85] In October 2007, Walter Coles, who owns the land over the Coles Hill deposit, announced that he and some other landowners had formed Virginia Uranium Inc. to mine the deposit themselves, if it can be done safely.[86][87] In November 2007, the state issued an exploration permit to Virginia Uranium, to allow drilling test holes into the deposit. Drilling began in mid-December. The state-imposed moratorium on uranium mining is still in effect. A bill proposed in the state General Assembly in January 2008 would have created a Virginia Uranium Mining Commission to determine if uranium mining could be done in a manner protective of human health and the environment, and to recommend regulatory controls.[88] The bill passed the Democratic controlled state Senate by a vote of 36–4. However, opponents of uranium mining succeeded in stopping the bill on March 3, 2008, when Rules Committee of the Republican controlled House of Delegates delayed consideration of the bill until 2009.[89] In November 2008, the Virginia Coal and Energy Commission voted unanimously to once again create a subcommittee to study the issue of uranium mining.[90] In May 2009 the subcommittee approved a study of potential uranium mining and its safety and pollution issues. The study is expected to take about 18 months to complete.[91] In February 2010, the Commonwealth of Virginia contracted the National Research Council and Virginia Polytechnic Institute to oversee a National Research Council study of potential environmental and economic effects of uranium mining in Virginia. The National Research Council study, funded indirectly by a $1.4 million grant from Virginia Uranium to the Commonwealth, resulted in a report released in December 2011.[92] The report identified a range of health and environmental issues and related risks that could result from uranium mining in the Commonwealth of Virginia. The report found that although there are internationally accepted best practices to mitigate some risks, Virginia faces "steep hurdles" if it is to undertake uranium mining and processing within a regulatory setting that appropriately protects workers, the public, and the environment.[93] Uranium mining and processing carries with it a range of potential health risks to the people who work in or live near uranium mining and processing facilities. Some of these health risks apply to any type of hard rock mining or other large-scale industrial activity, but others are linked to exposure to radioactive materials. In addition, uranium mining has the potential to impact water, soil, and air quality, with the degree of impact depending on site-specific conditions, how early a contaminant release is detected by monitoring systems, and the effectiveness of mitigation steps.[94] Some of the worker and public health risks could be mitigated or better controlled through modern internationally accepted best practices, the report says. In addition, if uranium mining, processing, and reclamation were designed, constructed, operated, and monitored according to best practices, near-to-moderate-term environmental effects should be substantially reduced, the report found.[95] However, the report noted that Virginia's high water table and heavy rainfall differed from other parts of the United States—typically dry, Western states—where uranium mining has taken place. Consequently, federal agencies have little experience developing and applying laws and regulations in locations with abundant rainfall and groundwater, such as Virginia. Because of Virginia's moratorium on uranium mining, it has not been necessary for the Commonwealth's agencies to develop a regulatory program that is applicable to uranium mining, processing, and reclamation. The report also noted the long-term environmental risks of uranium tailings, the solid waste left after processing. Tailings disposal sites represent potential sources of contamination for thousands of years. While it is likely that tailings impoundment sites would be safe for at least 200 years if designed and built according to modern best practices, the long-term risks of radioactive contaminant release are unknown. The report's authoring committee was not asked to recommend whether uranium mining should be permitted, or to consider the potential benefits to the state were uranium mining to be pursued. It also was not asked to compare the relative risks of uranium mining to the mining of other fuels such as coal. In October 2015, it went before a federal judge whether the 33-year-old ban on large-scale uranium mining in Virginia would be lifted. [96] In June 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that, in the absence of federal law establishing otherwise, "...[states retain] authority over the regulation of mining activities on private lands within their borders,�[97] and therefore the state ban on uranium mining remains in place.[98] Washington Uranium was discovered at the Midnite Mine deposit on the Spokane Indian Reservation, Stevens County, north-east Washington in 1954. The deposit was mined from an open pit 1956–1962 and 1969–1982.[99] Production through 1975 was 8 million pounds (3,600 metric tons) of U3O8. The uranium is contained in autunite, uraninite, and coffinite, with gangue minerals pyrite and marcasite. The ore occurs as disseminations, replacements, and stockworks in Precambrian metamorphic rocks of the Togo formation, in a roof pendant in Cretaceous porphyritic quartz monzonite.[100] Western Nuclear discovered the Spokane Mountain uranium deposit in 1975, two miles (3.2 km) northeast of the Midnite Mine, and in a similar geologic setting.[101] Other major Washington state uranium mines included the Sherwood mine, located five miles south of the Midnite mine, and the Daybreak mine, located six miles southeast of Elk, Washington. The Daybreak mine is recognized as the source of the finest museum-quality specimens of autunite and meta-autunite yet found. Sherwood had a co-located uranium mill, while Midnite and Daybreak ores were processed at the Dawn uranium mill, at Ford, Washington.[102] A drum of yellowcake Wyoming Main article: Uranium mining in Wyoming Wyoming once had many operating uranium mines, and once had the largest known uranium ore reserves of any state in the U.S. The Wyoming uranium mining industry was hard-hit in the 1980s by the drop in the price of uranium. The uranium-mining boom town of Jeffrey City lost 95% of its population in three years. By 2020, the only active uranium mine in Wyoming was the Smith Ranch-Highland in-situ leaching operation in the Powder River Basin, owned by Cameco.[103] The mine has produced 23 million pounds of uranium since it opened in 1975. Wellfield development was suspended during 2016. The Measured and Indicated Resource is 24.9 million pounds of U3O8 at a grade of 0.06%.[104][105] Health and environmental issues See also: Health effects of radon and Uranium mining and the Navajo people The radiation hazards of uranium mining and milling were not appreciated in the early years, resulting in workers being exposed to high levels of radiation. Inhalation of radon gas caused sharp increases in lung cancers among underground uranium miners employed in the 1940s and 1950s.[16][17][18] Risks related to the inhalation of radon gas and the deposition of radon daughter products in the lung were discussed publicly as early as 1951 in American newspapers. The hazard was considered to be generally greater in deeper underground workings, where providing adequate ventilation and suppressing dust was more difficult. Concerns for American miners' health were based on the observation of elevated lung cancer incidence among miners who mine uranium-bearing ore underground in Czechoslovakia and Germany.[106] Conventional uranium ore treatment mills create radioactive waste in the form of tailings, which contain uranium, radium, and polonium. Consequently, uranium mining results in "the unavoidable radioactive contamination of the environment by solid, liquid and gaseous wastes".[107] In the 1940s and 1950s, uranium mill tailings were released with impunity into water sources, and the radium leached from these tailings contaminated thousands of miles of the Colorado River system. Between 1966 and 1971, thousands of homes and commercial buildings in the Colorado Plateau region were "found to contain anomalously high concentrations of radon, after being built on uranium tailings taken from piles under the authority of the Atomic Energy Commission".[108] In 1950, the US Public Health service began a comprehensive study of uranium miners, leading to the first publication of a statistical correlation between cancer and uranium mining, released in 1962.[19] The federal government eventually regulated the standard amount of radon in mines, setting the level at 0.3 WL on January 1, 1969.[20] Out of 50 present and former uranium milling sites in 12 states, 24 have been abandoned, and are the responsibility of the US Department of Energy.[109] Accidental releases from uranium mills include the 1979 Church Rock uranium mill spill in New Mexico, called the largest accident of nuclear-related waste in US history, and the 1986 Sequoyah Corporation Fuels Release in Oklahoma.[110] In 1990, Congress passed the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA), granting reparations for those affected by mining, with amendments passed in 2000 to address criticisms with the original act.[19] The Navajo people have had a long history of dealing with the physical effects and environmental burden from uranium mining on their lands. This not only includes those who have worked in the mines but those who have never stepped foot in one and have to deal with the radioactivity in the surrounding areas. This has led to higher developments of different types of cancer and respiratory and kidney conditions. While the Lukachukai Mountain site was still functioning, there were slow and fast forms of radiation exposure. Because uranium and its health concerns were unknown to the Navajo people at the time, workers would come home covered in dust from the mines that had traces of uranium and other radioactive materials. This would cause more sudden forms of radiation exposure, but the contamination of land and water sources would happen slowly over time and leech into Navajo households. Reporter Noel Lyn Smith has earned her master’s degree in investigative journalism and is focusing on all aspects of the Navajo Nation with specific interest in the government, who has gotten involved and declared the Lukachukai Mountains Mining District a superfund site which means that a door has been opened for federal funding to help clean up the “more than 800,000 cubic yards of mine waste in piles scattered throughout the site.�[111] Uranium mining, milling and the American Southwest Shiprock, New Mexico uranium mill aerial photo Moab uranium mill tailings pile In the post-war period mine workers in the Four Corners area were exposed to and brought home large amounts of radiation in the form of dust on their clothing and skin. Epidemiologic studies of the families of these workers have shown increased incidents of radiation-induced cancers, miscarriages, cleft palates and other birth defects.[112][113][114] The extent of these genetic effects on indigenous populations and the extent of DNA damage remains to be resolved.[115][116][117][118][119][120] All over the American Southwest, Uranium mines are seeing a revival. There are multiple plans to reopen closed mines in Texas, Utah, Wyoming, and Arizona. While all of this is happening, this country is still dealing with the same environmental injustices that these mining practices have caused. After the Fukushima disaster, many uranium mines closed because uranium prices dropped so much it wasn’t an economically good choice to keep mining. Now, after last year's United Nations Climate Conference in Dubai, climate change and spiking uranium prices has put a spark back in the idea of nuclear power.[121] This is a big positive for those who are rooting for a nuclear future, but others have concerns about the environmental damages that this could cause in the future along with the environmental injustices that have already taken place in indigenous communities. Native tribes have already started a push to shut down new mining operation plans and are highlighting the need for approval of those in the community unlike previous instances where the current system of colonialism has been the primary way of thinking. One of these previous instances has been the Church Rock Mine in New Mexico, owned by United Nuclear Corporation. The dam that was holding 94 million gallons of radioactive waste broke, made its way onto Navajo lands, and now contaminates the land that their animals graze on to this day.[121] As America heads towards a green energy future, the increase in critical mineral extraction cannot lead towards a future of green colonialism. Tribal Nations must have a more meaningful stake in the future of critical mineral mining if the United States wants to decrease dependency on foreign nations for critical minerals. The Government must develop a policy that ensures we don’t repeat history. Colonialism won’t cut it anymore. Mark Trahant, a former editor for Indian Country Today, says “This time it’s different, perhaps, because tribal nations can either be essential producers or legal obstacles and irritants.�[122] Uranium mining, milling and the Navajo people Main article: Uranium mining and the Navajo people After the end of World War II, large uranium deposits were found on and near the Navajo Reservation in the Southwest, and private companies hired many Navajo employees to work the mines. Disregarding the known health risks imposed by exposure to uranium, the private companies and the United States Atomic Energy Commission failed to inform the Navajo workers about the dangers and to regulate the mining to minimize contamination. As more data was collected, they were slow to take appropriate action for the workers.[19] Studies provided data to show that the Navajo mine workers and numerous families on the reservation have suffered high rates of disease from environmental contamination, but for decades, industry and the government failed to regulate or improve conditions, or inform workers of the dangers. As high rates of illness began to occur, workers were often unsuccessful in court cases seeking compensation, and the states at first did not officially recognize radon illness.[19] Lands that have been subject to permanent environmental damages for the collective good are referred to as “national sacrifice zones.� These zones have been commonly caused by polluting industries such as uranium mining sites and United States Military bases. Polluting industries like these leave hazardous chemicals in their wake for the surrounding residents and threaten the economics, cultures and welfare of the tribes living in or near these sacrifice zones.[123] Environmental Justice Scholar Kyle Keeler states that sacrifice zones are “for the betterment of colonial society�[124] Throughout the 20th century, the Navajo nation has been subject to these sacrifice zones due to exploitation from the country’s nuclear goals. As Scholar Traci Brynne Voyles has mentioned in her book, “Diné land hosts upward of 2,000 now-abandoned uranium mines, mills, and tailings piles, in which over 3,000 Navajo miners wrenched and blasted raw uranium ore from the ground and then processed it into yellowcake.�[125] “Wastelanding� is a term that was coined by Traci Brynne Voyles in her book, and she describes it as a place “from which resources are increasingly extracted and where (often toxic) waste is increasingly dumped.�[125] It is used to describe the environmental and social impacts of uranium mining. The people that live on these wastelands are subject to disproportionate amounts of exposure to environmental harms, like groundwater contamination and the effects from PCBs being in their system. The Manhattan project is one of the main reasons the Navajo reservation has so many abandoned mines on it today. Being located in Los Alamos, the United States government was in very close proximity to the uranium mines found on Navajo lands. They took advantage of this and started the rush towards a nuclear weapons future. Princeton University’s Nuclear Program has released an article that talks about how “Tribal nations were displaced from their homelands for the construction of these facilities and were often denied access to their homelands both throughout the project and to the present day.�[126] In 1990 the US Congress passed the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act, to settle such cases and provide needed compensation.[127][19] In 2008 the US Congress authorized a five-year, multi-agency cleanup of uranium contamination on the Navajo Nation reservation; identification and treatment of contaminated water and structures has been the first priority. Certain water sources have been closed, and numerous contaminated buildings have been taken down.[128] By the summer of 2011, EPA had nearly completed the first major project of removal of 20,000 cubic yards of contaminated earth from the Skyline Mine area. Uranium mining has disturbed the balance in Navajo culture. They must stay and fight for their land but are dealing with so many adverse health and environmental effects because of it.[129] The Holy People in Navajo culture have set the boundaries of their land, and the earth people must do whatever they can to try to heal and protect that land.[130] Trying to seek justice for the effects of uranium mining have been continuous, with groups like Eastern Navajo Diné Against Uranium Mining playing a critical role. ENDAUM was created in 1994 to combat plans to open uranium mines that were presented by HydroResources Inc.[131] They have been fighting the same overall cause for three decades now. Workers had not been informed of the dangers uranium mining would inflict on their land.[132] This is only a little part of a much larger issue, with economic issues being a top priority in our country and shutting out the rights and well-being of indigenous people. See also Anti-nuclear movement in the United States Botanical prospecting for uranium List of uranium projects Nuclear labor issues Nuclear power in the United States The Return of Navajo Boy, a 2000 documentary film about Navajo struggling with the legacy of uranium mining on their lands Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act Virginia Uranium, Inc. v. Warren References "Domestic Uranium Production Report - First-Quarter 2020" (PDF). Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information Administration. 3 May 2020. Retrieved 11 June 2020. "Table 8.2 Uranium Overview" (PDF). Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information Administration. April 2020. Retrieved 11 June 2020. "2019 Domestic Uranium Production Report" (PDF). Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information Administration. 3 May 2020. p. 2. Retrieved 11 June 2020. Finch, Warren I.; Butler, Arthur P.; Armstrong, Frank C.; Weissenborn, Albert E.; Mortimer, H. Staatz (1973). "Nuclear fuels" (PDF). United States Mineral Resources. Geological Survey Professional paper 820. U.S. Department of the Interior: 457. Retrieved 5 March 2017. "World Uranium Mining 2011". World-nuclear.org. Archived from the original on 2009-06-18. Retrieved 2012-10-16. U.S. Energy Information Administration: U.S. uranium mine production and number of mines and sources, accessed 6 March 2009. Department of Energy's Energy Information Administration data, official energy statistics from the U.S. Government US Energy Information Administration, Where our uranium comes from, 2 July 2012. "Over 90% of uranium purchased by U.S. commercial nuclear reactors is from outside the U.S." Today in Energy. Washington, DC: U.S. Energy Information Administration. 11 July 2011. Retrieved 7 October 2016. Warren I Finch (2003) Uranium-fuel for nuclear energy 2002, US Geological Survey, Bulletin 2179-A. See S&TR: September 2005, How One Equation Changed the World, which discusses the progress of the HEU Purchase Agreement made between the Russian Federation and the United States in 1993. "Currently, Russian plants are processing about 30 metric tons of HEU per year into about 875 metric tons of LEU. This amount meets half the annual fuel requirement for U.S. nuclear power plants and provides the fuel to generate 10 percent of the electricity used in the U.S." US Energy Information Administration, U.S. uranium reserves estimates, July 2010. WISE Uranium Project: New uranium mining projects – USA, accessed 25 March 2009. Moran, Susan; Raup, Anne (28 March 2007). "Uranium Ignites 'Gold Rush' in the West". The New York Times. J. Keller and others, Colorado, Mining Engineering, May 2006, p. 76. Roscoe, R. J.; K. Steenland; W. E. Halperin; J. J. Beaumont; R. J. Waxweiler (1989-08-04). "Lung cancer mortality among nonsmoking uranium miners exposed to radon daughters". JAMA. 262 (5): 629–633. doi:10.1001/jama.1989.03430050045024. PMID 2746814. Roscoe, R. J.; J. A. Deddens; A. Salvan; T. M. Schnorr (1995). "Mortality among Navajo uranium miners". American Journal of Public Health. 85 (4): 535–540. doi:10.2105/AJPH.85.4.535. PMC 1615135. PMID 7702118. "Uranium Miners' Cancer". Time Magazine. 1960-12-26. ISSN 0040-781X. Archived from the original on January 15, 2009. Retrieved 2007-08-09. Dawson, Susan E, and Gary E Madsen. "Uranium Mine Workers, Atomic Downwinders, and the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act." In Half Lives & Half-Truths: Confronting the Radioactive Legacies of the Cold War, 117–143. Santa Fe: School For Advanced Research, 2007) Brugge, Doug, Timothy Benally, and Esther Yazzie-Lewis. The Navajo People and Uranium Mining. Albuquerque : University of New Mexico Press, 2006. "Nuclear Decommissioning Title 1 Uranium Mills Summary Table". Archived from the original on 2010-12-16. Retrieved 2011-01-26. E.M. MacKevett Jr. (1963) Geology and Ore Deposits of the Bokan Mountain Uranium-Thorium Area, Southeastern Alaska, US Geological Survey, Bulletin 1154. "Project Highlights". Vancouver, BC: Ucore Uranium. Archived from the original on 5 July 2008. Retrieved 9 October 2021. Allison, Lee (2 July 2012). "Development of northern Arizona uranium mine planned by year-end". Arizona Geology. E.M. MacKevett Jr. (1960) Geology and Ore Deposits of the Kern River Uranium Area, California, US Geological Survey, Bulletin 1087-F. "News | Western Uranium & Vanadium Corporation". www.western-uranium.com. Retrieved 2022-03-09. J. Burnell and others, Colorado, Mining Engineering, May 2007, p. 77. Energy Fuels. "Sunday Complex". Archived from the original on 19 October 2013. Retrieved 18 October 2013. Warren I. Finch (1996) Uranium provinces of North America-their definition, distribution, and models, US Geological Survey, Bulletin 2141. Energy Information Administration (12 Feb. 2008): 4th Quarter 2007 uranium production was 1.2 million pounds Energy Information Administration: Lowman mill and disposal site Bradley S. Van Gosen and others (2005) A Reconnaissance Geochemical and Mineralogical Study of the Stanley Uranium District, Custer County, Central Idaho, US Geological Survey, Scientific Investigations Report 2005-5264. R.M. Lyman, Wyoming, Mining Engineering, May 2005 p. 130. "Wma-minelife.com". www.wma-minelife.com. Bergin, Nicholas (14 January 2016). "Company looking to expand depleted Panhandle uranium mine". Lincoln Journal Star. Retrieved 5 November 2017. "Mining – Crow Butte – Extraction Process". Cameco. 2010-04-23. Archived from the original on 2012-05-12. Retrieved 2012-10-16. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (13 Feb. 1998): Crow Butte resources Inc., Final finding of no significant impact Castor, Stephen B.; Ferdock, Gregory C. (2004). Minerals of Nevada. Reno, NV: Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology. p. 30. ISBN 9780874175400. Retrieved 14 November 2017. Mason, Ralph S. (January 1960). "Oregon's mineral industry in 1959" (PDF). The Ore.-Bin. 22 (1). Portland, OR: 7. Retrieved 14 November 2017. Plut, Frederick W. (1979). Newman, Gary W.; Goode, Harry D. (eds.). "Geology of the Apex Uranium Mine near Austin, Nevada". Basin and Range Symposium and Great Basin Field Conference. Denver CO: Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists: 413–420. Retrieved 14 November 2017. Garside, Larry J. (1973). Bulletin 81: Radioactive Mineral Occurrences in Nevada. Reno, NV: Nevada Bureau of Mines & Geology. p. 62. Retrieved 13 November 2017. Nye, Thomas Spencer (1958). Geology of the Apex Uranium Mine, Lander County, Nevada. Berkeley, CA: University of California. p. 29. Mineral Assessment Report – BMDO Planning Area (PDF). Battle Mountain, NV: Bureau of Land Management. January 2012. pp. 3–17. Retrieved 14 November 2017. "Kings Valley, Nevada, USA". Vancouver, Canada: Western Uranium Corporation. 2010. Archived from the original on 2010-03-30. Retrieved 10 November 2017. Time (13 Oct. 1980):"In New Jersey: a uranium boom goes bust", accessed 25 March 2009. Douglas G. Brookins (1977) Uranium deposits of the Grants mineral belt: geochemical constraints on origin, in Exploration Frontiers of the Central and Southern Rockies, Denver: Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists, pp. 337–352. Gospodarczyk, Marta M. (July 2010). "U.S. Uranium Reserves Estimates" (PDF). Energy Information Administration, Department of Energy. Retrieved 29 July 2020. US Energy Information Administration, Belfield Ashing facility site, accessed 25 March 2009. North Dakota Geological Survey: Uranium Archived 2007-06-30 at the Wayback Machine Roy F. Allen and Richard G. Thomas, The uranium potential of diagenetically altered sandstones of the Permian Rush Springs Formation, Cement district, southwest Oklahoma, Economic Geology, Mar.–Apr. 1984, pp. 284–296. Uranium in the Southern United States (1969) US Atomic Energy Commission, WASH1128, p. 52. Peterson, Norman V. (February 1959). "Preliminary geology of the Lakeview uranium area, Oregon" (PDF). The Ore.-Bin. 21 (2): 11–16. Retrieved 18 Oct 2013. Petersen, Norman V. (1969). "Uranium". Mineral and Water Resources of Oregon. Vol. Bulletin 64. Portland, OR: Department of Geology and Mineral Industries. pp. 180–184. Cockle, Richard (January 8, 2012). "Malheur County targeted for gold, uranium mines". The Oregonian. Retrieved 18 Oct 2013. "oregon energy- aurora project" (PDF). Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 12 December 2013. Retrieved 9 June 2019. Harry Klemic and R.C. Baker (1954) Occurrences of Uranium in Carbon County, Pennsylvania, U.S. Geological Survey, Circular 350. Harry Klemic, James C. Warren, and Alfred R. Taylor (1963) Geology and Uranium Occurrences of the Northern Half of the Leighton Pennsylvania Quadrangle and Adjoining Areas, US Geological Survey, Bulletin 1138. Klemic, Harry; Baker, R.C. "Occurrences of Uranium in Carbon County, Pennsylvania" (PDF). Retrieved May 2, 2024. Hart, Olin M. (1968). "Uranium in the Black Hills". Ore Deposits in the United States, 1933–1967. New York: American Institute of Mining Engineers. pp. 832–837. [dead link]http://jurassic2.sdgs.usd.edu/pubs/pdf/RI-079.pdf Archived 2006-01-12 at the Wayback Machine [dead link] http://www.deq.state.mt.us/abandonedmines/NAAMLP/AML/NAAMLP%20Papers/2006%2028th%20Annual%20NAAMLP%20Papers/Paper%205%20--%20Stone-South%20Dakota.pdf[permanent dead link] "Powertech Uranium Corporation". Archived from the original on 2007-07-23. Retrieved 2007-07-27. [dead link]RSJ, 2007 Archived 2012-09-07 at archive.today RSJ, 2007 "PTech, 2006" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-09-27. Retrieved 2007-07-27. "StockInterview.com". Archived from the original on 2007-08-10. Retrieved 2007-07-26. Jones, Peter M. "Uranium mining in the Black Hills of South Dakota." July 19, 2007. Indigenous People's Issues Today [dead link]White Face, Charmaine. "Black Hills – Powertech Exploratory Drilling." Archived 2009-02-08 at the Wayback Machine Aligning for Responsible Mining White Face, Charmaine. "Stop Black Hills Uranium Mining." January 12, 2009. Republic of Lakotah website: [dead link]South Dakota Department of Environment & Natural Resources: In Situ Leach Mine Regulations Archived 2008-03-08 at the Wayback Machine Southern Interstate Nuclear Board (1969) Uranium in the Southern United States, United States Atomic Energy Commission, p. 97. William E. Galloway (2007) Geology of Texas uranium, in Geology of the Karnes Uranium District, Texas, Austin Geological Society Field Guidebook, pp. 9–19. S.J. Clift and J.R. Kyle, Texas, Mining Engineering, May 2006, p. 114. S.J. Clift and J.R. Kyle, "Texas," Mining Engineering, May 2008, p. 121. * "Uranium production begins," Mining Engineering, December 2010. Handbook of Texas Online: Uranium Mining Bon, Roger L.; Krahule, Ken (2010). "Uranium". 2009 Summary of Mineral Activity in Utah (Circular 111 ed.). Salt Lake City: Utah Geological Survey. p. 13. Peters, Douglas C. (2 March 2018). "Updated Report On The Daneros Mine Project, San Juan County, Utah, U.S.A." (PDF). Denver, CO: Energy Fuels Inc. Retrieved 16 May 2019. "Energy Fuels Inc., 2012 Annual Information Form" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-10-19. Retrieved 2013-01-28. "Energy Fuels to Focus on Lower Cost Uranium Production". Reuters. 17 October 2012. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 3 July 2017. Pistilli, Melissa. "Uranium Outlook 2013: Rebound on the Horizon". Uranium Investing News. Associated, Press. "Energy Fuels to buy Utah's White Mesa uranium mill". The Denver Post. "US Uranium Mining and Exploration". London: World Nuclear Association. October 2016. Retrieved 16 October 2016. Ward, Terry. "Uranium Mining Might Start in Virginia Soon". WHSV.com. Gray Digital Media. Archived from the original on 2016-01-20. Retrieved 2015-10-12. [1][dead link] "Problem while searching in Ecology and Natural Resources". Digicoll.library.wisc.edu. Retrieved 2012-10-16. IAEA Conference, June 2009, Uranium potential and socio-political environment for uranium mining in the Eastern United States with emphasis on the Coles Hill uranium deposit, IAEA-CN-175/91, PDF file, downloaded 24 July 2009. "Geology, Mineralogy and Geochemistry of the Coles Hill Uranium Deposit, Virginia: An Example of a Structurally Controlled, Hydrothermal Apatite-Coffinite-Uraninite Orebody". Archived from the original on 2008-01-29. Retrieved 2007-12-15. [2][dead link] http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2007/11/28/chatham/news/news30.txt[permanent dead link] http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2008/01/16/chatham/news/news31.txt[permanent dead link] [3][dead link] Virginia Commission on Coal and Energy (6 November 2008): Meeting summary Archived 15 January 2009 at the Wayback Machine, PDF file, retrieved 5 March 2009. Rex Springston, Richmond Times-Dispatch (22 May 2009): Va. uranium mining study approved Archived 2012-09-12 at archive.today, accessed 29 May 2009. National Research Council, http://dels.nas.edu/Report/Uranium-Mining-Virginia-Scientific-Technical/13266 Non-Technical Summary, http://dels.nas.edu/Report/Uranium-Mining-Virginia-Scientific-Technical/13266 "Division on Earth and Life Studies". Dels.nas.edu. Retrieved 2012-10-16. "Newsroom". National-Academies.org. 2011-12-19. Retrieved 2012-10-16. * WHSV-TV (10 Oct. 2015) Uranium Mining Might Start in Virginia Soon Archived 2016-01-20 at the Wayback Machine Time (23 February 2009): In Virginia, the appeal of uranium mining Virginia Uranium Inc. website Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals, and Energy: Uranium Exploration Permit Approved Archived 2008-02-11 at the Wayback Machine MinDat.Org: Location maps – Swanson uranium project (Cole property), Pittsylvania Co., Virginia, retrieved 6 January 2009. Non-technical summary of the National Research Council report Uranium Mining in Virginia, retrieved 20 December 2011. Marimow, Ann; Barnes, Robert (2019-06-17). "Supreme Court upholds Virginia's decades-old ban on uranium mining". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on 2019-06-17. Retrieved 2019-06-20. " "Congress conspicuously chose to leave untouched the States' historic authority over the regulation of mining activities on private lands within their borders," wrote Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, who was joined by Justices Clarence Thomas and Brett M. Kavanaugh. ...In her concurring opinion, Ginsburg rejected the company's warning of dire consequences if all 50 states enact such a ban. The federal government, she wrote, can still develop uranium on public land and acquire private deposits. " Mirengoff, Paul (17 June 2019). "Conservative Justices divide in case upholding Virginia's ban on uranium mining". Power Line. S.S. Sumioka (1991) Quality of Water in an Inactive Uranium Mine and its Effects on the Quality of Water in Blue Creek, Stevens County, Washington, 1984–1985, US Geological Survey, Water-resources Investigations Report 89-4110. J. Thomas Nash and Norman J. Lehman (1975) Geology of the Midnite Uranium Mine, Stevens County, Washington – a Preliminary Report, US Geological Survey, Open-File Report 75-402. David A. Robbins, Applied geology in the discovery of the Spokane Mountain uranium deposit, Washington, Economic Geology, Dec. 1978, pp. 1523–1538. Ream, Lanny R. (1991), "Two Autunite Localities in Northeastern Washington," Rocks & Minerals Vol. 66, No. 4, pp. 294–297 "2019 Annual Report" (PDF). Saskatoon, Saskatchewan: Cameco Corp. 7 February 2020. p. 72. Retrieved 12 June 2020. "Smith Ranch-Highland". Saskatoon, Saskatchewan: Cameco Corp. Retrieved 12 June 2020. W.M. Sutherland, Wyoming, Mining Engineering, May 2007, p. 126. "Clipping from Greeley Daily Tribune on Newspapers.com". Newspapers.com. Retrieved 2016-04-03. Benjamin K. Sovacool (2011). Contesting the Future of Nuclear Power: A Critical Global Assessment of Atomic Energy, World Scientific, p. 137. Benjamin K. Sovacool (2011). Contesting the Future of Nuclear Power: A Critical Global Assessment of Atomic Energy, World Scientific, p. 138. "Decommissioning of U.S. Uranium Production Facilities" (PDF). Doug Brugge, et al, "The Sequoyah Corporation Fuels Release and the Church Rock Spill", American Journal of Public Health, September 2007, Vol., 97, No. 9, pp. 1595–1600. Smith, Noel (March 26, 2024). "This Month's Superfund Listing of Abandoned Uranium Mines in the Navajo Nation's Lukachukai Mountains Is a First Step Toward Cleaning Them Up". Inside Climate News. Shields, L. M.; Wiese, W. H.; Skipper, B. J.; Charley, B.; Benally, L. (November 1992). "Navajo birth outcomes in the Shiprock uranium mining area". Health Physics. 63 (5): 542–51. doi:10.1097/00004032-199211000-00005. PMID 1399640. Shuey, Chris. "URANIUM EXPOSURE AND PUBLIC HEALTH IN NEW MEXICO AND THE NAVAJO NATION: A LITERATURE SUMMARY" (PDF). Southwest Research and Information Center. Retrieved 29 July 2020. Dawson, Susan (December 1992). "Navajo Uranium Workers and the Effects of Occupational Illnesses: A Case Study" (PDF). Human Organization. 51 (4): 389–397. doi:10.17730/humo.51.4.e02484g513501t35. Retrieved 29 July 2020. Frosh, Dan (July 26, 2009). "Uranium Contamination Haunts Navajo Country". The New York Times. Retrieved 31 March 2014. Johnston, Barbara Rose; Holly M. Barker; Marie I. Boutte; Susan Dawson; Paula Garb; Hugh Gusterson; Joshua Levin; Edward Liebow; Gary E. Madsen; David H. Price; Kathleen Purvis-Roberts; Theresa Satterfield; Edith Turner; Cynthia Werner (2007). Half Lives & Half Truths: Confronting the Radioactive Legacies of the Cold War. Santa Fe, NM: School for Advanced Research Press. ISBN 978-1930618824. Brugge, Doug; Timothy Benally, Esther Yazzie-Lewis (2007). The Navajo People and Uranium Mining. Albuquerque, NM: University of New Mexico Press. ISBN 978-0826337795. Brugge, Doug; Timothy Benally, Ester Yazzie Lewis (9 April 2010). "Uranium Mining on Navajo Indian Land". Partnering with Indigenous Peoples to Defend their Lands, Languages and Cultures. Cultural Survival.org. Retrieved 31 March 2014. Jung, Carrie. "Navajo Nation Opposes Uranium Mine on Sacred Site in New Mexico". Al Jazerra. Retrieved 31 March 2014. Laramee, Eve Andree. "Tracking Our Nuclear Legacy: Now we are all sons of bitches". 2012. WEAD: Women Environmental Artist Directory. Retrieved 31 March 2014. "A Nuclear Power Revival Is Sparking a Surge in Uranium Mining". Yale E360. Retrieved 2024-05-02. Trahant, Mark (2023-06-21). "This time it's different? The rush to mine Indigenous lands". ICT News. Retrieved 2024-05-02. Hooks, Gregory; Smith, Chad L. (2004). "The Treadmill of Destruction: National Sacrifice Areas and Native Americans". American Sociological Review. 69 (4): 558–575. doi:10.1177/000312240406900405. ISSN 0003-1224. JSTOR 3593065. Keeler, Kyle (2024). "Nuclear Injustice: Why a Nuclear Renaissance is the Same Old Colonial Story". Cleveland Review of Books. 2 (1): 176. Voyles, Traci Brynne (2015). Wastelanding: Legacies of Uranium Mining in Navajo Country. University of Minnesota Press. ISBN 978-0-8166-9267-5. JSTOR 10.5749/j.ctt155jmrg. "Impacts on Indigenous Communities". Nuclear Princeton. Retrieved 2024-05-02. U.S. Government Printing Office, Senate Hearing 108-883. "An Overview of the Radiation Exposure Compensation Program". www.gpo.gov. United States Senate and the U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved 28 July 2020. "Navajo Nation: Cleaning Up Abandoned Uranium Mines, Federal Plans to Address Impacts of Uranium Contamination". U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 22 June 2016. Retrieved 29 July 2020. Fettus, Geoffry; Mckinzie, Matthew (March 2012). "Nuclear Fuel's Dirty Beginnings" (PDF). "Navajo Cultural History and Legends". web.archive.org. 2016-04-18. Retrieved 2024-05-02. Morgan, Leona (October 27, 2011). "ENDAUM Statement to the NM Indian Affairs Committee" (PDF). Dawson, Susan; Madsen, Gary (2007). In Half Lives & Half-Truths: Confronting the Radioactive Legacies of the Cold War. Santa Fe: School For Advanced Research. pp. 117–143. External links Uranium Mining from the Handbook of Texas Online The Return of Navajo Boy Webisodes, EPA Clean-up of uranium contamination at Navajo Reservation vte Uranium mining By country Australia Kakadu National Park Canada Bancroft Elliot Lake Kazakhstan Namibia United States Arizona Colorado Navajo Nation New Mexico Utah Wyoming Lists List of uranium projects List of countries by uranium production List of countries by uranium reserves List of inquiries into uranium mining in Australia Opposition Thomas Banyacya Kevin Buzzacott Katsumi Furitsu Jim Green Jacqui Katona Scott Ludlam Yvonne Margarula JoAnn Tall Sun Xiaodi Floyd Red Crow Westerman List of Nuclear-Free Future Award recipients World Uranium Hearing Other articles Uranium in the environment Uranium market Uranium mining debate Peak uranium Botanical prospecting for uranium Nuclear power in the United States Church Rock uranium mill spill Sequoyah Fuels Corporation Anti-nuclear movement in the United States Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act The Return of Navajo Boy Nuclear labor issues International Uranium Film Festival History of the anti-nuclear movement The Navajo People and Uranium Mining Hibakusha 1974 Elliot Lake miners strike Yellowcake boomtown Public Domain This article incorporates public domain material from websites or documents of the United States Geological Survey. Public Domain This article incorporates public domain material from websites or documents of the United States Department of Energy. Category: Uranium mining in the United States Uranium mining and the Navajo people began in 1944 in northeastern Arizona, northwestern New Mexico, and southeastern Utah. In the 1950s, the Navajo Nation was situated directly in the uranium mining belt that experienced a boom in production, and many residents found work in the mines. Prior to 1962, the risks of lung cancer due to uranium mining were unknown to the workers, and the lack of a word for radiation in the Navajo language left the miners unaware of the associated health hazards.[1] The cultural significance of water for the Navajo people and the environmental damage to both the land and livestock inhibits the ability of the Navajo people to practice their culture.[2] The Navajo Nation was affected by the United States' largest radioactive accident during the Church Rock uranium mill spill in 1979 when a tailings pond upstream from Navajo County breached its dam and sent radioactive waste down the Puerco River, injuring people and killing livestock.[3] In the Navajo Nation, approximately 15% of people do not have access to running water.[4] Navajo Nation residents are often forced to resort to unregulated water sources that are susceptible to bacteria, fecal matter, and uranium. Extensive uranium mining in the region during the mid-20th century is a contemporary concern because of contamination of these commonly used sources, in addition to the lingering health effects of exposure from mining. Water in the Navajo Nation currently has an average of 90 micrograms per liter of uranium, with some areas reaching upwards of 700 micrograms per liter.[5] In contrast, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) considers 30 micrograms per liter the safe amount of uranium to have in water sources.[6] Health impacts of uranium consumption include kidney damage and failure, as kidneys are unable to filter uranium out of the bloodstream.[7] There is an average rate of End Stage Renal Disease of 0.63% in the Navajo Nation, a rate significantly higher than the national average of 0.19%.[8] The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been cleaning up uranium mines in the Navajo Nation since as part of settlements through the Superfund since 1994. The Abandoned Mine Land program and Contaminated Structures Program have facilitated the cleanup of mines and demolition of structures built with radioactive materials.[9] Criticisms of unfair, inefficient treatment have been made repeatedly of EPA by Navajos and journalists.[10][11][12] In October 2021, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights agreed to hear a case filed by the Eastern Navajo Diné Against Uranium Mining, which accused the United States government of violating the human rights of Navajo Nation members.[13] Environmental journalist Cody Nelson explains further that: "the US government and its Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) have violated their human rights by licensing uranium mines in their communities" (Nelson, "Ignored for 70 Years': Human Rights Group to Investigate Uranium Contamination on Navajo Nation"). Nelson also describes that "There is no moral value in having an international human rights body lay bare the absues of the nuclear industry and the US government's complicity in those abuses."[14] Shiprock, New Mexico uranium mill aerial photo History For the book published in 2006, see The Navajo People and Uranium Mining. In 1944, uranium mi

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ A probing documentary that delves into the complex role of media in wartime scenarios. Inspired by Phillip Knightley's seminal work on war correspondents, the film traverses historical conflicts from the Crimea to the Falklands. It navigates the shifting landscape of war reporting, questioning whether the media's purpose is merely to chronicle events or to dissect them through the lenses of various stakeholders - be it the military, politicians, or the victims themselves. Drawing parallels from conflicts across time, the documentary contrasts the candid and revealing reports of past eras, such as William Howard Russell's Crimea coverage exposing British missteps, with the controlled narratives and censorship prevalent in more contemporary conflicts like the Falklands War. The film sheds light on the challenges faced by journalists diverging from official government narratives, recounting instances where reporters were restricted, their accounts delayed, or even subjected to censorship. The film highlights how governments have historically manipulated information, drawing on tactics from concealing truths during the First World War to the use of sophisticated methods in Vietnam, where subtle disinformation strategies were employed to control media perspectives. Moreover, it underscores the impact of media manipulation on public perception, revealing how selective reporting and censorship can shape the public's view of war, downplaying civilian casualties and portraying conflicts as more sanitized than reality. The documentary serves as a cautionary tale, emphasizing the importance of independent journalism and the dangers of controlled media narratives in perpetuating misconceptions about the true nature and cost of war. Propaganda is communication that is primarily used to influence or persuade an audience to further an agenda, which may not be objective and may be selectively presenting facts to encourage a particular synthesis or perception, or using loaded language to produce an emotional rather than a rational response to the information that is being presented.[1] Propaganda can be found in a wide variety of different contexts.[2] In the 20th century, the English term propaganda was often associated with a manipulative approach, but historically, propaganda has been a neutral descriptive term of any material that promotes certain opinions or ideologies.[1][3] Equivalent non-English terms have also largely retained the original neutral connotation.[citation needed] A wide range of materials and media are used for conveying propaganda messages, which changed as new technologies were invented, including paintings, cartoons, posters, pamphlets, films, radio shows, TV shows, and websites. More recently, the digital age has given rise to new ways of disseminating propaganda, for example, bots and algorithms are currently being used to create computational propaganda and fake or biased news and spread it on social media. Etymology Main article: Propaganda Fide Propaganda is a modern Latin word, the neuter plural gerundive form of propagare, meaning 'to spread' or 'to propagate', thus propaganda means the things which are to be propagated.[4] Originally this word derived from a new administrative body (congregation) of the Catholic Church created in 1622 as part of the Counter-Reformation, called the Congregatio de Propaganda Fide (Congregation for Propagating the Faith), or informally simply Propaganda.[3][5] Its activity was aimed at "propagating" the Catholic faith in non-Catholic countries.[3] From the 1790s, the term began being used also to refer to propaganda in secular activities.[3] The term began taking a pejorative or negative connotation in the mid-19th century, when it was used in the political sphere.[3] Definitions Propaganda was conceptualized as a form of influence designed to build social consensus. In the 20th century, the term propaganda emerged along with the rise of mass media, including newspapers and radio. As researchers began studying the effects of media, they used suggestion theory to explain how people could be influenced by emotionally-resonant persuasive messages. Harold Lasswell provided a broad definition of the term propaganda, writing it as: "the expression of opinions or actions carried out deliberately by individuals or groups with a view to influencing the opinions or actions of other individuals or groups for predetermined ends and through psychological manipulations."[6] Garth Jowett and Victoria O'Donnell theorize that propaganda and persuasion are linked as humans use communication as a form of soft power through the development and cultivation of propaganda materials.[7] In a 1929 literary debate with Edward Bernays, Everett Dean Martin argues that, "Propaganda is making puppets of us. We are moved by hidden strings which the propagandist manipulates."[8] In the 1920s and 1930s, propaganda was sometimes described as all-powerful. For example, Bernays acknowledged in his book Propaganda that "The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of."[9] NATO's 2011 guidance for military public affairs defines propaganda as "information, ideas, doctrines, or special appeals disseminated to influence the opinion, emotions, attitudes, or behaviour of any specified group in order to benefit the sponsor, either directly or indirectly".[10] History Main article: History of propaganda Primitive forms of propaganda have been a human activity as far back as reliable recorded evidence exists. The Behistun Inscription (c. 515 BCE) detailing the rise of Darius I to the Persian throne is viewed by most historians as an early example of propaganda.[11] Another striking example of propaganda during ancient history is the last Roman civil wars (44–30 BCE) during which Octavian and Mark Antony blamed each other for obscure and degrading origins, cruelty, cowardice, oratorical and literary incompetence, debaucheries, luxury, drunkenness and other slanders.[12] This defamation took the form of uituperatio (Roman rhetorical genre of the invective) which was decisive for shaping the Roman public opinion at this time. Another early example of propaganda was from Genghis Khan. The emperor would send some of his men ahead of his army to spread rumors to the enemy. In many cases, his army was actually smaller than his opponents'.[13] Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I was the first ruler to utilize the power of the printing press for propaganda – in order to build his image, stir up patriotic feelings in the population of his empire (he was the first ruler who utilized one-sided battle reports – the early predecessors of modern newspapers or neue zeitungen – targeting the mass.[14][15]) and influence the population of his enemies.[16][17][18] Propaganda during the Reformation, helped by the spread of the printing press throughout Europe, and in particular within Germany, caused new ideas, thoughts, and doctrine to be made available to the public in ways that had never been seen before the 16th century. During the era of the American Revolution, the American colonies had a flourishing network of newspapers and printers who specialized in the topic on behalf of the Patriots (and to a lesser extent on behalf of the Loyalists).[19] Academic Barbara Diggs-Brown conceives that the negative connotations of the term "propaganda" are associated with the earlier social and political transformations that occurred during the French Revolutionary period movement of 1789 to 1799 between the start and the middle portion of the 19th century, in a time where the word started to be used in a nonclerical and political context.[20] A 1918 Finnish propaganda leaflet signed by General Mannerheim circulated by the Whites urging the Reds to surrender during the Finnish Civil War. [To the residents and troops of Tampere! Resistance is hopeless. Raise the white flag and surrender. The blood of the citizen has been shed enough. We will not kill like the Reds kill their prisoners. Send your representative with a white flag.] The first large-scale and organised propagation of government propaganda was occasioned by the outbreak of the First World War in 1914. After the defeat of Germany, military officials such as General Erich Ludendorff suggested that British propaganda had been instrumental in their defeat. Adolf Hitler came to echo this view, believing that it had been a primary cause of the collapse of morale and revolts in the German home front and Navy in 1918 (see also: Dolchstoßlegende). In Mein Kampf (1925) Hitler expounded his theory of propaganda, which provided a powerful base for his rise to power in 1933. Historian Robert Ensor explains that "Hitler...puts no limit on what can be done by propaganda; people will believe anything, provided they are told it often enough and emphatically enough, and that contradicters are either silenced or smothered in calumny."[21] This was to be true in Germany and backed up with their army making it difficult to allow other propaganda to flow in.[22] Most propaganda in Nazi Germany was produced by the Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda under Joseph Goebbels. Goebbels mentions propaganda as a way to see through the masses. Symbols are used towards propaganda such as justice, liberty and one's devotion to one's country.[23] World War II saw continued use of propaganda as a weapon of war, building on the experience of WWI, by Goebbels and the British Political Warfare Executive, as well as the United States Office of War Information.[24] In the early 20th century, the invention of motion pictures (as in movies, diafilms) gave propaganda-creators a powerful tool for advancing political and military interests when it came to reaching a broad segment of the population and creating consent or encouraging rejection of the real or imagined enemy. In the years following the October Revolution of 1917, the Soviet government sponsored the Russian film industry with the purpose of making propaganda films (e.g., the 1925 film The Battleship Potemkin glorifies Communist ideals). In WWII, Nazi filmmakers produced highly emotional films to create popular support for occupying the Sudetenland and attacking Poland. The 1930s and 1940s, which saw the rise of totalitarian states and the Second World War, are arguably the "Golden Age of Propaganda". Leni Riefenstahl, a filmmaker working in Nazi Germany, created one of the best-known propaganda movies, Triumph of the Will. In 1942, the propaganda song Niet Molotoff was made in Finland during the Continuation War, making fun of the Red Army's failure in the Winter War, referring the song's name to the Soviet's Minister of Foreign Affairs, Vyacheslav Molotov.[25] In the US, animation became popular, especially for winning over youthful audiences and aiding the U.S. war effort, e.g., Der Fuehrer's Face (1942), which ridicules Hitler and advocates the value of freedom. Some American war films in the early 1940s were designed to create a patriotic mindset and convince viewers that sacrifices needed to be made to defeat the Axis Powers.[26] Others were intended to help Americans understand their Allies in general, as in films like Know Your Ally: Britain and Our Greek Allies. Apart from its war films, Hollywood did its part to boost American morale in a film intended to show how stars of stage and screen who remained on the home front were doing their part not just in their labors, but also in their understanding that a variety of peoples worked together against the Axis menace: Stage Door Canteen (1943) features one segment meant to dispel Americans' mistrust of the Soviets, and another to dispel their bigotry against the Chinese. Polish filmmakers in Great Britain created the anti-Nazi color film Calling Mr. Smith[27][28] (1943) about Nazi crimes in German-occupied Europe and about lies of Nazi propaganda.[29] The West and the Soviet Union both used propaganda extensively during the Cold War. Both sides used film, television, and radio programming to influence their own citizens, each other, and Third World nations. Through a front organization called the Bedford Publishing Company, the CIA through a covert department called the Office of Policy Coordination disseminated over one million books to Soviet readers over the span of 15 years, including novels by George Orwell, Albert Camus, Vladimir Nabakov, James Joyce, and Pasternak in an attempt to promote anti-communist sentiment and sympathy of Western values.[30] George Orwell's contemporaneous novels Animal Farm and Nineteen Eighty-Four portray the use of propaganda in fictional dystopian societies. During the Cuban Revolution, Fidel Castro stressed the importance of propaganda.[31][better source needed] Propaganda was used extensively by Communist forces in the Vietnam War as means of controlling people's opinions.[32] During the Yugoslav wars, propaganda was used as a military strategy by governments of Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and Croatia. Propaganda was used to create fear and hatred, and particularly to incite the Serb population against the other ethnicities (Bosniaks, Croats, Albanians and other non-Serbs). Serb media made a great effort in justifying, revising or denying mass war crimes committed by Serb forces during these wars.[33] Public perceptions In the early 20th century the term propaganda was used by the founders of the nascent public relations industry to refer to their people. Literally translated from the Latin gerundive as "things that must be disseminated", in some cultures the term is neutral or even positive, while in others the term has acquired a strong negative connotation. The connotations of the term "propaganda" can also vary over time. For example, in Portuguese and some Spanish language speaking countries, particularly in the Southern Cone, the word "propaganda" usually refers to the most common manipulative media in business terms – "advertising".[34] Poster of the 19th-century Scandinavist movement In English, propaganda was originally a neutral term for the dissemination of information in favor of any given cause. During the 20th century, however, the term acquired a thoroughly negative meaning in western countries, representing the intentional dissemination of often false, but certainly "compelling" claims to support or justify political actions or ideologies. According to Harold Lasswell, the term began to fall out of favor due to growing public suspicion of propaganda in the wake of its use during World War I by the Creel Committee in the United States and the Ministry of Information in Britain: Writing in 1928, Lasswell observed, "In democratic countries the official propaganda bureau was looked upon with genuine alarm, for fear that it might be suborned to party and personal ends. The outcry in the United States against Mr. Creel's famous Bureau of Public Information (or 'Inflammation') helped to din into the public mind the fact that propaganda existed. ... The public's discovery of propaganda has led to a great of lamentation over it. Propaganda has become an epithet of contempt and hate, and the propagandists have sought protective coloration in such names as 'public relations council,' 'specialist in public education,' 'public relations adviser.' "[35] In 1949, political science professor Dayton David McKean wrote, "After World War I the word came to be applied to 'what you don't like of the other fellow's publicity,' as Edward L. Bernays said...."[36] Contestation The term is essentially contested and some have argued for a neutral definition,[37][38] arguing that ethics depend on intent and context,[39] while others define it as necessarily unethical and negative.[40] Emma Briant defines it as "the deliberate manipulation of representations (including text, pictures, video, speech etc.) with the intention of producing any effect in the audience (e.g. action or inaction; reinforcement or transformation of feelings, ideas, attitudes or behaviours) that is desired by the propagandist."[38] The same author explains the importance of consistent terminology across history, particularly as contemporary euphemistic synonyms are used in governments' continual efforts to rebrand their operations such as 'information support' and strategic communication.[38] Other scholars also see benefits to acknowledging that propaganda can be interpreted as beneficial or harmful, depending on the message sender, target audience, message, and context.[2] David Goodman argues that the 1936 League of Nations "Convention on the Use of Broadcasting in the Cause of Peace" tried to create the standards for a liberal international public sphere. The Convention encouraged empathetic and neighborly radio broadcasts to other nations. It called for League prohibitions on international broadcast containing hostile speech and false claims. It tried to define the line between liberal and illiberal policies in communications, and emphasized the dangers of nationalist chauvinism. With Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia active on the radio, its liberal goals were ignored, while free speech advocates warned that the code represented restraints on free speech.[41] Types Poster in a North Korean primary school targeting the United States military. The Korean text reads: "Are you playing the game of catching these guys?" Identifying propaganda has always been a problem.[42] The main difficulties have involved differentiating propaganda from other types of persuasion, and avoiding a biased approach. Richard Alan Nelson provides a definition of the term: "Propaganda is neutrally defined as a systematic form of purposeful persuasion that attempts to influence the emotions, attitudes, opinions, and actions of specified target audiences for ideological, political or commercial purposes[43] through the controlled transmission of one-sided messages (which may or may not be factual) via mass and direct media channels."[44] The definition focuses on the communicative process involved – or more precisely, on the purpose of the process, and allow "propaganda" to be interpreted as positive or negative behavior depending on the perspective of the viewer or listener. Propaganda can often be recognized by the rhetorical strategies used in its design. In the 1930s, the Institute for Propaganda Analysis identified a variety of propaganda techniques that were commonly used in newspapers and on the radio, which were the mass media of the time period. Propaganda techniques include "name calling" (using derogatory labels), "bandwagon" (expressing the social appeal of a message), or "glittering generalities" (using positive but imprecise language).[45] With the rise of the internet and social media, Renee Hobbs identified four characteristic design features of many forms of contemporary propaganda: (1) it activates strong emotions; (2) it simplifies information; (3) it appeals to the hopes, fears, and dreams of a targeted audience; and (4) it attacks opponents.[46] Propaganda is sometimes evaluated based on the intention and goals of the individual or institution who created it. According to historian Zbyněk Zeman, propaganda is defined as either white, grey or black. White propaganda openly discloses its source and intent. Grey propaganda has an ambiguous or non-disclosed source or intent. Black propaganda purports to be published by the enemy or some organization besides its actual origins[47] (compare with black operation, a type of clandestine operation in which the identity of the sponsoring government is hidden). In scale, these different types of propaganda can also be defined by the potential of true and correct information to compete with the propaganda. For example, opposition to white propaganda is often readily found and may slightly discredit the propaganda source. Opposition to grey propaganda, when revealed (often by an inside source), may create some level of public outcry. Opposition to black propaganda is often unavailable and may be dangerous to reveal, because public cognizance of black propaganda tactics and sources would undermine or backfire the very campaign the black propagandist supported. The propagandist seeks to change the way people understand an issue or situation for the purpose of changing their actions and expectations in ways that are desirable to the interest group. Propaganda, in this sense, serves as a corollary to censorship in which the same purpose is achieved, not by filling people's minds with approved information, but by preventing people from being confronted with opposing points of view. What sets propaganda apart from other forms of advocacy is the willingness of the propagandist to change people's understanding through deception and confusion rather than persuasion and understanding. The leaders of an organization know the information to be one sided or untrue, but this may not be true for the rank and file members who help to disseminate the propaganda. Woodcuts (1545) known as the Papstspotbilder or Depictions of the Papacy in English,[48] by Lucas Cranach, commissioned by Martin Luther.[49] Title: Kissing the Pope's Feet.[50] German peasants respond to a papal bull of Pope Paul III. Caption reads: "Don't frighten us Pope, with your ban, and don't be such a furious man. Otherwise we shall turn around and show you our rears."[51][52] Religious Propaganda was often used to influence opinions and beliefs on religious issues, particularly during the split between the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant churches or during the Crusades.[53] The sociologist Jeffrey K. Hadden has argued that members of the anti-cult movement and Christian counter-cult movement accuse the leaders of what they consider cults of using propaganda extensively to recruit followers and keep them. Hadden argued that ex-members of cults and the anti-cult movement are committed to making these movements look bad.[54] Propaganda against other religions in the same community or propaganda intended to keep political power in the hands of a religious elite can incite religious hate on a global or national scale. It could make use of many propaganda mediums. War, terrorism, riots, and other violent acts can result from it. It can also conceal injustices, inequities, exploitation, and atrocities, leading to ignorance-based indifference and alienation.[55] Wartime This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (April 2021) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) A famous example of propaganda, this poster made by Paul Revere portrays the Boston Massacre in a way that he hoped would make Americans angry and support the Revolutionary War. In the Peloponnesian War, the Athenians exploited the figures from stories about Troy as well as other mythical images to incite feelings against Sparta. For example, Helen of Troy was even portrayed as an Athenian, whose mother Nemesis would avenge Troy.[56][57] During the Punic Wars, extensive campaigns of propaganda were carried out by both sides. To dissolve the Roman system of socii and the Greek poleis, Hannibal released without conditions Latin prisoners that he had treated generously to their native cities, where they helped to disseminate his propaganda.[58] The Romans on the other hand tried to portray Hannibal as a person devoid of humanity and would soon lose the favour of gods. At the same time, led by Q.Fabius Maximus, they organized elaborate religious rituals to protect Roman morale.[59][58] In the early sixteenth century, Maximilian I invented one kind of psychological warfare targeting the enemies. During his war against Venice, he attached pamphlets to balloons that his archers would shoot down. The content spoke of freedom and equality and provoked the populace to rebel against the tyrants (their Signoria).[60] Post–World War II usage of the word "propaganda" more typically refers to political or nationalist uses of these techniques or to the promotion of a set of ideas. Propaganda poster shows a terrifying gorilla with a helmet labeled "militarism" holding a bloody club labeled "kultur" and a half-naked woman as he stomps onto the shore of America. Destroy this Mad Brute: Enlist— propaganda poster encouraging men in the United States to enlist and fight Germany as part of WWI, by Harry R. Hopps, c. 1917 Soviet "Ne Boltai" poster. Translates to "Don't Chatter". Similar to American "Loose Lips Sink Ships" posters, this iconic piece of propaganda tries to warn citizens against giving out secrets. Propaganda is a powerful weapon in war; in certain cases, it is used to dehumanize and create hatred toward a supposed enemy, either internal or external, by creating a false image in the mind of soldiers and citizens. This can be done by using derogatory or racist terms (e.g., the racist terms "Jap" and "gook" used during World War II and the Vietnam War, respectively), avoiding some words or language or by making allegations of enemy atrocities. The goal of this was to demoralize the opponent into thinking what was being projected was actually true.[61] Most propaganda efforts in wartime require the home population to feel the enemy has inflicted an injustice, which may be fictitious or may be based on facts (e.g., the sinking of the passenger ship RMS Lusitania by the German Navy in World War I). The home population must also believe that the cause of their nation in the war is just. In these efforts it was difficult to determine the accuracy of how propaganda truly impacted the war.[62] In NATO doctrine, propaganda is defined as "Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote a political cause or point of view."[63] Within this perspective, the information provided does not need to be necessarily false but must be instead relevant to specific goals of the "actor" or "system" that performs it. Propaganda is also one of the methods used in psychological warfare, which may also involve false flag operations in which the identity of the operatives is depicted as those of an enemy nation (e.g., The Bay of Pigs Invasion used CIA planes painted in Cuban Air Force markings). The term propaganda may also refer to false information meant to reinforce the mindsets of people who already believe as the propagandist wishes (e.g., During the First World War, the main purpose of British propaganda was to encourage men to join the army, and women to work in the country's industry. Propaganda posters were used because regular general radio broadcasting was yet to commence and TV technology was still under development).[64] The assumption is that, if people believe something false, they will constantly be assailed by doubts. Since these doubts are unpleasant (see cognitive dissonance), people will be eager to have them extinguished, and are therefore receptive to the reassurances of those in power. For this reason, propaganda is often addressed to people who are already sympathetic to the agenda or views being presented. This process of reinforcement uses an individual's predisposition to self-select "agreeable" information sources as a mechanism for maintaining control over populations. Serbian propaganda from the Bosnian War (1992–95) presented as an actual photograph from the scene of, as stated in report below the image, a "Serbian boy whose whole family was killed by Bosnian Muslims". The image is derived from an 1879 "Orphan on mother's grave" painting by Uroš Predić (alongside).[65] Propaganda may be administered in insidious ways. For instance, disparaging disinformation about the history of certain groups or foreign countries may be encouraged or tolerated in the educational system. Since few people actually double-check what they learn at school, such disinformation will be repeated by journalists as well as parents, thus reinforcing the idea that the disinformation item is really a "well-known fact", even though no one repeating the myth is able to point to an authoritative source. The disinformation is then recycled in the media and in the educational system, without the need for direct governmental intervention on the media. Such permeating propaganda may be used for political goals: by giving citizens a false impression of the quality or policies of their country, they may be incited to reject certain proposals or certain remarks or ignore the experience of others. Britannia arm-in-arm with Uncle Sam symbolizes the British-American alliance in World War I. Poster depicting Winston Churchill as a "British Bulldog" In the Soviet Union during the Second World War, the propaganda designed to encourage civilians was controlled by Stalin, who insisted on a heavy-handed style that educated audiences easily saw was inauthentic. On the other hand, the unofficial rumors about German atrocities were well founded and convincing.[66] Stalin was a Georgian who spoke Russian with a heavy accent. That would not do for a national hero so starting in the 1930s all new visual portraits of Stalin were retouched to erase his Georgian facial characteristics[clarify][67] and make him a more generalized Soviet hero. Only his eyes and famous moustache remained unaltered. Zhores Medvedev and Roy Medvedev say his "majestic new image was devised appropriately to depict the leader of all times and of all peoples."[68] Article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights prohibits any propaganda for war as well as any advocacy of national or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence by law.[69] Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship. The people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country. — Hermann Göring[70] Simply enough the covenant specifically is not defining the content of propaganda. In simplest terms, an act of propaganda if used in a reply to a wartime act is not prohibited.[71] Advertising Propaganda shares techniques with advertising and public relations, each of which can be thought of as propaganda that promotes a commercial product or shapes the perception of an organization, person, or brand. For example, after claiming victory in the 2006 Lebanon War, Hezbollah campaigned for broader popularity among Arabs by organizing mass rallies where Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah combined elements of the local dialect with classical Arabic to reach audiences outside Lebanon. Banners and billboards were commissioned in commemoration of the war, along with various merchandise items with Hezbollah's logo, flag color (yellow), and images of Nasrallah. T-shirts, baseball caps and other war memorabilia were marketed for all ages. The uniformity of messaging helped define Hezbollah's brand.[72] Journalistic theory generally holds that news items should be objective, giving the reader an accurate background and analysis of the subject at hand. On the other hand, advertisements evolved from the traditional commercial advertisements to include also a new type in the form of paid articles or broadcasts disguised as news. These generally present an issue in a very subjective and often misleading light, primarily meant to persuade rather than inform. Normally they use only subtle propaganda techniques and not the more obvious ones used in traditional commercial advertisements. If the reader believes that a paid advertisement is in fact a news item, the message the advertiser is trying to communicate will be more easily "believed" or "internalized". Such advertisements are considered obvious examples of "covert" propaganda because they take on the appearance of objective information rather than the appearance of propaganda, which is misleading. Federal law[where?] specifically mandates that any advertisement appearing in the format of a news item must state that the item is in fact a paid advertisement. Edmund McGarry illustrates that advertising is more than selling to an audience but a type of propaganda that is trying to persuade the public and not to be balanced in judgement.[73] Politics Propaganda and manipulation can be found in television, and in news programs that influence mass audiences. An example was the Dziennik (Journal) news cast, which criticised capitalism in the then-communist Polish People's Republic using emotive and loaded language. Propaganda has become more common in political contexts, in particular, to refer to certain efforts sponsored by governments, political groups, but also often covert interests. In the early 20th century, propaganda was exemplified in the form of party slogans. Propaganda also has much in common with public information campaigns by governments, which are intended to encourage or discourage certain forms of behavior (such as wearing seat belts, not smoking, not littering, and so forth). Again, the emphasis is more political in propaganda. Propaganda can take the form of leaflets, posters, TV, and radio broadcasts and can also extend to any other medium. In the case of the United States, there is also an important legal (imposed by law) distinction between advertising (a type of overt propaganda) and what the Government Accountability Office (GAO), an arm of the United States Congress, refers to as "covert propaganda." Propaganda is divided into two in political situations, they are preparation, meaning to create a new frame of mind or view of things, and operational, meaning they instigate actions.[74] Roderick Hindery argues[75][76] that propaganda exists on the political left, and right, and in mainstream centrist parties. Hindery further argues that debates about most social issues can be productively revisited in the context of asking "what is or is not propaganda?" Not to be overlooked is the link between propaganda, indoctrination, and terrorism/counterterrorism. He argues that threats to destroy are often as socially disruptive as physical devastation itself. Since 9/11 and the appearance of greater media fluidity, propaganda institutions, practices and legal frameworks have been evolving in the US and Britain. Briant shows how this included expansion and integration of the apparatus cross-government and details attempts to coordinate the forms of propaganda for foreign and domestic audiences, with new efforts in strategic communication.[77] These were subject to contestation within the US Government, resisted by Pentagon Public Affairs and critiqued by some scholars.[39] The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (section 1078 (a)) amended the US Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 (popularly referred to as the Smith-Mundt Act) and the Foreign Relations Authorization Act of 1987, allowing for materials produced by the State Department and the Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) to be released within U.S. borders for the Archivist of the United States. The Smith-Mundt Act, as amended, provided that "the Secretary and the Broadcasting Board of Governors shall make available to the Archivist of the United States, for domestic distribution, motion pictures, films, videotapes, and other material 12 years after the initial dissemination of the material abroad (...) Nothing in this section shall be construed to prohibit the Department of State or the Broadcasting Board of Governors from engaging in any medium or form of communication, either directly or indirectly, because a United States domestic audience is or may be thereby exposed to program material, or based on a presumption of such exposure." Public concerns were raised upon passage due to the relaxation of prohibitions of domestic propaganda in the United States.[78] In the wake of this, the internet has become a prolific method of distributing political propaganda, benefiting from an evolution in coding called bots. Software agents or bots can be used for many things, including populating social media with automated messages and posts with a range of sophistication. During the 2016 U.S. election a cyber-strategy was implemented using bots to direct US voters to Russian political news and information sources, and to spread politically motivated rumors and false news stories. At this point it is considered commonplace contemporary political strategy around the world to implement bots in achieving political goals.[79] Techniques Further information: Propaganda techniques Anti-capitalist propaganda (1911 Industrial Workers of the World poster) Common media for transmitting propaganda messages include news reports, government reports, historical revision, junk science, books, leaflets, movies, radio, television, and posters. Some propaganda campaigns follow a strategic transmission pattern to indoctrinate the target group. This may begin with a simple transmission, such as a leaflet or advertisement dropped from a plane or an advertisement. Generally, these messages will contain directions on how to obtain more information, via a website, hotline, radio program, etc. (as it is seen also for selling purposes among other goals). The strategy intends to initiate the individual from information recipient to information seeker through reinforcement, and then from information seeker to opinion leader through indoctrination.[80] A number of techniques based in social psychological research are used to generate propaganda. Many of these same techniques can be found under logical fallacies, since propagandists use arguments that, while sometimes convincing, are not necessarily valid. Some time has been spent analyzing the means by which the propaganda messages are transmitted. That work is important but it is clear that information dissemination strategies become propaganda strategies only when coupled with propagandistic messages. Identifying these messages is a necessary prerequisite to study the methods by which those messages are spread. Propaganda can also be turned on its makers. For example, postage stamps have frequently been tools for government advertising, such as North Korea's extensive issues.[81] The presence of Stalin on numerous Soviet stamps is another example.[82] In Nazi Germany, Hitler frequently appeared on postage stamps in Germany and some of the occupied nations. A British program to parody these, and other Nazi-inspired stamps, involved airdropping them into Germany on letters containing anti-Nazi literature.[83][84] In 2018 a scandal broke in which the journalist Carole Cadwalladr, several whistleblowers and the academic Emma Briant revealed advances in digital propaganda techniques showing that online human intelligence techniques used in psychological warfare had been coupled with psychological profiling using illegally obtained social media data for political campaigns in the United States in 2016 to aid Donald Trump by the firm Cambridge Analytica.[85][86][87] The company initially denied breaking laws[88] but later admitted breaking UK law, the scandal provoking a worldwide debate on acceptable use of data for propaganda and influence.[89] Models Persuasion in social psychology Public reading of the anti-Semitic newspaper Der Stürmer, Worms, Germany, 1935 The field of social psychology includes the study of persuasion. Social psychologists can be sociologists or psychologists. The field includes many theories and approaches to understanding persuasion. For example, communication theory points out that people can be persuaded by the communicator's credibility, expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. The elaboration likelihood model, as well as heuristic models of persuasion, suggest that a number of factors (e.g., the degree of interest of the recipient of the communication), influence the degree to which people allow superficial factors to persuade them. Nobel Prize–winning psychologist Herbert A. Simon won the Nobel prize for his theory that people are cognitive misers. That is, in a society of mass information, people are forced to make decisions quickly and often superficially, as opposed to logically. According to William W. Biddle's 1931 article "A psychological definition of propaganda", "[t]he four principles followed in propaganda are: (1) rely on emotions, never argue; (2) cast propaganda into the pattern of "we" versus an "enemy"; (3) reach groups as well as individuals; (4) hide the propagandist as much as possible."[90] More recently, studies from behavioral science have become significant in understanding and planning propaganda campaigns, these include for example nudge theory which was used by the Obama Campaign in 2008 then adopted by the UK Government Behavioural Insights Team.[91] Behavioural methodologies then became subject to great controversy in 2016 after the company Cambridge Analytica was revealed to have applied them with millions of people's breached Facebook data to encourage them to vote for Donald Trump.[92] Haifeng Huang argues that propaganda is not always necessarily about convincing a populace of its message (and may actually fail to do this) but instead can also function as a means of intimidating the citizenry and signalling the regime's strength and ability to maintain its control and power over society; by investing significant resources into propaganda, the regime can forewarn its citizens of its strength and deterring them from attempting to challenge it.[93] Propaganda theory and education During the 1930s, educators in the United States and around the world became concerned about the rise of anti-Semitism and other forms of violent extremism. The Institute for Propaganda Analysis was formed to introduce methods of instruction for high school and college students, helping learners to recognize and desist propaganda by identifying persuasive techniques. This work built upon classical rhetoric and it was informed by suggestion theory and social scientific studies of propaganda and persuasion.[94] In the 1950s, propaganda theory and education examined the rise of American consumer culture, and this work was popularized by Vance Packard in his 1957 book, The Hidden Persuaders. European theologian Jacques Ellul's landmark work, Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes framed propaganda in relation to larger themes about the relationship between humans and technology. Media messages did not serve to enlighten or inspire, he argued. They merely overwhelm by arousing emotions and oversimplifying ideas, limiting human reasoning and judgement. In the 1980s, academics recognized that news and journalism could function as propaganda when business and government interests were amplified by mass media. The propaganda model is a theory advanced by Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky which argues systemic biases exist in mass media that are shaped by structural economic causes. It argues that the way in which commercial media institutions are structured and operate (e.g. through advertising revenue, concentration of media ownership, or access to sources) creates an inherent conflict of interest that make them act as propaganda for powerful political and commercial interests: The 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against democracy.[95][96] First presented in their book Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (1988), the propaganda model analyses commercial mass media as businesses that sell a product – access to readers and audiences – to other businesses (advertisers) and that benefit from access to information from government and corporate sources to produce their content. The theory postulates five general classes of "filters" that shape the content that is presented in news media: ownership of the medium, reliance on advertising revenue, access to news sources, threat of litigation and commercial backlash (flak), and anti-communism and "fear ideology". The first three (ownership, funding, and sourcing) are generally regarded by the authors as being the most important. Although the model was based mainly on the characterization of United States media, Chomsky and Herman believe the theory is equally applicable to any country that shares the basic political economic structure, and the model has subsequently been applied by other scholars to study media bias in other countries.[97] By the 1990s, the topic of propaganda was no longer a part of public education, having been relegated to a specialist subject. Secondary English educators grew fearful of the study of propaganda genres, choosing to focus on argumentation and reasoning instead of the highly emotional forms of propaganda found in advertising and political campaigns.[98] In 2015, the European Commission funded Mind Over Media, a digital learning platform for teaching and learning about contemporary propaganda. The study of contemporary propaganda is growing in secondary education, where it is seen as a part of language arts and social studies education.[99] Self-propaganda Self-propaganda is a form of propaganda that refers to the act of an individual convincing themself of something, no matter how irrational that idea may be.[100] Self propaganda makes it easier for individuals to justify their own actions as well as the actions of others. Self-propaganda works oftentimes to lessen the cognitive dissonance felt by individuals when their personal actions or the actions of their government do not line up with their moral beliefs.[101] Self-propaganda is a type of self deception.[102] Self-propaganda can have a negative impact on those who perpetuate the beliefs created by using self-propaganda.[102] Children This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (January 2009) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) A 1938 propaganda of the Estado Novo (New State) regime depicting Brazilian president Getúlio Vargas flanked by children. The text reads: "Children! Learning, at home and in school, the cult of the Fatherland, you will bring all chances of success to life. Only love builds and, strongly loving Brazil, you will lead it to the greatest of destinies among Nations, fulfilling the desires of exaltation nestled in every Brazilian heart." Of all the potential targets for propaganda, children are the most vulnerable because they are the least prepared with the critical reasoning and contextual comprehension they need to determine whether a message is a propaganda or not. The attention children give their environment during development, due to the process of developing their understanding of the world, causes them to absorb propaganda indiscriminately. Also, children are highly imitative: studies by Albert Bandura, Dorothea Ross and Sheila A. Ross in the 1960s indicated that, to a degree, socialization, formal education and standardized television programming can be seen as using propaganda for the purpose of indoctrination. The use of propaganda in schools was highly prevalent during the 1930s and 1940s in Germany in the form of the Hitler Youth. Anti-Semitic propaganda for children In Nazi Germany, the education system was thoroughly co-opted to indoctrinate the German youth with anti-Semitic ideology. From the 1920s on, the Nazi Party targeted German youth as one of their special audience for its propaganda messages.[103] Schools and texts mirrored what the Nazis aimed of instilling in German youth through the use and promotion of racial theory. Julius Streicher, the editor of Der Sturmer, headed a publishing house that disseminated anti-Semitic propaganda picture books in schools during the Nazi dictatorship. This was accomplished through the National Socialist Teachers League, of which 97% of all German teachers were members in 1937.[104] The League encouraged the teaching of racial theory. Picture books for children such as Trust No Fox on his Green Heath and No Jew on his Oath, Der Giftpilz (translated into English as The Poisonous Mushroom) and The Poodle-Pug-Dachshund-Pinscher were widely circulated (over 100,000 copies of Trust No Fox... were circulated during the late 1930s) and contained depictions of Jews as devils, child molesters and other morally charged figures. Slogans such as "Judas the Jew betrayed Jesus the German to the Jews" were recited in class. During the Nuremberg Trial, Trust No Fox on his Green Heath and No Jew on his Oath, and Der Giftpilz were received as documents in evidence because they document the practices of the Nazis[105] The following is an example of a propagandistic math problem recommended by the National Socialist Essence of Education: "The Jews are aliens in Germany—in 1933 there were 66,606,000 inhabitants in the German Reich, of whom 499,682 (.75%) were Jews."[106] Comparisons with disinformation This section is an excerpt from Disinformation § Comparisons with propaganda.[edit] Whether and to what degree disinformation and propaganda overlap is subject to debate. Some (like U.S. Department of State) define propaganda as the use of non-rational arguments to either advance or undermine a political ideal, and use disinformation as an alternative name for undermining propaganda.[107] While others consider them to be separate concepts altogether.[108] One popular distinction holds that disinformation also describes politically motivated messaging designed explicitly to engender public cynicism, uncertainty, apathy, distrust, and paranoia, all of which disincentivize citizen engagement and mobilization for social or political change.[109] See also Agitprop Big lie Cartographic propaganda Fake news Firehose of falsehood Hate media Incitement Internet troll Mind control Misinformation Music and political warfare Overview of 21st century propaganda Political warfare Propaganda (book) by Edward L. Bernays Psychological warfare (aka Psyops) Category:Propaganda by country Propaganda model Public diplomacy Sharp power Smear campaign Spin (propaganda) References Smith, Bruce L. (17 February 2016). "Propaganda". Encyclopædia Britannica, Inc. Retrieved 23 April 2016. Hobbs, Renee (2020). Mind Over Media: Propaganda Education for a Digital Age. New York: W.W. Norton. Diggs-Brown, Barbara (2011) Strategic Public Relations: Audience Focused Practice p. 48 "propaganda, n." Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press. December 2020. Retrieved 20 April 2021. "Online Etymology Dictionary". Retrieved 6 March 2015. Ellul, Jacques (1965). Introduction by Konrad Kellen in Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes, pp. xi–xii. Trans. Konrad Kellen & Jean Lerner from original 1962 French edition Propagandes. Knopf, New York. ISBN 978-0-394-71874-3 (1973 edition by Vintage Books, New York). Jowett, Garth; O'Donnell, Victoria (2012). Propaganda and Persuasion (5th ed.). Sage Publications Inc. ISBN 978-1412977821.[page needed] Martin, Everett Dean (March 1929). Leach, Henry Goddard (ed.). "Are We Victims of Propaganda, Our Invisible Masters: A Debate with Edward Bernays" (PDF). The Forum. Forum Publishing Company. 81: 142–150. Retrieved 22 February 2020. Bernays L, Edward (1928). Propaganda. Liveright: Horace. p. 9. Kuehl, Dan (10 March 2014). "Chapter 1: Propaganda in the Digital Age". In Snow, Nancy (ed.). Propaganda and American Democracy. Louisiana State University Press. p. 12. ISBN 978-0-8071-5416-8. Nagle, D. Brendan; Stanley M Burstein (2009). The Ancient World: Readings in Social and Cultural History. Pearson Education. p. 133. ISBN 978-0-205-69187-6. Borgies, Loïc (2016). Le conflit propagandiste entre Octavien et Marc Antoine. De l'usage politique de la uituperatio entre 44 et 30 a. C. n. ISBN 978-90-429-3459-7. Davison, W. Phillips (1971). "Some Trends in International Propaganda". The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 398: 1–13. doi:10.1177/000271627139800102. ISSN 0002-7162. JSTOR 1038915. S2CID 145332403. Kunczic, Michael (9 August 2016). "Public Relations in Kriegzeiten – Die Notwendigkeit von Lüge und Zensur". In Preußer, Heinz-Peter (ed.). Krieg in den Medien (in German). BRILL. p. 242. ISBN 978-94-012-0230-5. Retrieved 7 February 2022. Kunczik, Michael (6 May 2016). Images of Nations and International Public Relations. Routledge. p. 158. ISBN 978-1-136-68902-4. Retrieved 7 February 2022. Museum, Cincinnati Art; Becker, David P. (1993). Six Centuries of Master Prints: Treasures from the Herbert Greer French Collection. Cincinnati Art Museum. p. 68. ISBN 978-0-931537-15-8. Retrieved 7 February 2022. Silver, Larry (2008). Marketing Maximilian: The Visual Ideology of a Holy Roman Emperor. Princeton University Press. p. 235. ISBN 978-0-691-13019-4. Retrieved 7 February 2022. Füssel, Stephan (29 January 2020). Gutenberg and the Impact of Printing. Routledge. pp. 10–12. ISBN 978-1-351-93187-8. Retrieved 7 February 2022. Cole, Richard G. (1975). "The Reformation in Print: German Pamphlets and Propaganda". Archive for Reformation History. 66: 93–102. doi:10.14315/arg-1975-jg07. S2CID 163518886. Diggs-Brown, Barbara (2011). Cengage Advantage Books: Strategic Public Relations: An Audience-Focused Approach. Cengage Learning. p. 48. ISBN 978-0-534-63706-4. Robert Ensor in David Thomson, ed., The New Cambridge Modern History: volume XII The Era of Violence 1890–1945 (1st edition 1960), p 84. Yourman, Julius (November 1939). "Propaganda Techniques Within Nazi Germany". Journal of Educational Sociology. 13 (3): 148–163. doi:10.2307/2262307. JSTOR 2262307. Cantril, Hadley (1938). "Propaganda Analysis". The English Journal. 27 (3): 217–221. doi:10.2307/806063. JSTOR 806063. Fox, J. C., 2007, "Film propaganda in Britain and Nazi Germany : World War II cinema.", Oxford:Berg. "Fono.fi – Äänitetietokanta". www.fono.fi (in Finnish). Retrieved 13 March 2020. Philip M. Taylor, 1990, "Munitions of the mind: A history of propaganda", Pg. 170. "Calling Mr. Smith – LUX". Archived from the original on 25 April 2018. Retrieved 30 January 2018. "Calling Mr Smith". Centre Pompidou. "Franciszka and Stefan Themerson: Calling Mr. Smith (1943) – artincinema". 21 June 2015. Nick Romeo (17 June 2014). "Is Literature 'the Most Important Weapon of Propaganda'?". The Atlantic. Retrieved 28 February 2022. prudentiapolitica (20 May 2014). "Prudentia Politica". Retrieved 6 March 2015. Sophana Srichampa (30 August 2007). "Vietnamese propaganda reflections from 1945 to 2000" (PDF). Mon-Khmer Studies. Thailand: Mahidol University. 37: 87–116. "Serbian Propaganda: A Closer Look". 12 April 1999. Archived from the original on 4 June 2013. Retrieved 21 December 2007. "NOAH ADAMS: The European Center for War, Peace and the News Media, based in London, has received word from Belgrade that no pictures of mass Albanian refugees have been shown at all, and that the Kosovo humanitarian catastrophe is only referred to as the one made up or over-emphasised by Western propaganda." "English translation of Portuguese 'propaganda'". collinsdictionary.com. Retrieved 2 January 2024. Lasswell, Harold D. (1928). "The Function of the Propagandist". International Journal of Ethics. 38 (3): 258–268. doi:10.1086/intejethi.38.3.2378152. JSTOR 2378152. S2CID 145021449. pp. 260–261 p. 113, Party and Pressure Politics, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1949. Taylor, Philip M. (2002). "Strategic Communications or Democratic Propaganda?". Journalism Studies. 3 (3): 437–441. doi:10.1080/14616700220145641. S2CID 144546254. Briant, Emma Louise (2015). Propaganda and Counter-terrorism. Manchester: Manchester University Press. p. 9. ISBN 9780719091056. JSTOR j.ctt18mvn1n. Briant, Emma Louise (2015). Propaganda and Counter-terrorism. Manchester: Manchester University Press. ISBN 9780719091056. JSTOR j.ctt18mvn1n. Doob, L.W. (1949), Public Opinion and Propaganda, London: Cresset Press p 240 David Goodman, "Liberal and Illiberal Internationalism in the Making of the League of Nations Convention on Broadcasting in the Cause of Peace." Journal of World History 31.1 (2020): 165-193. excerpt Daniel J Schwindt, The Case Against the Modern World: A Crash Course in Traditionalist Thought, 2016, pp. 202–204. McNearney, Allison (29 August 2018). "This WWII Cartoon Taught Soldiers How to Avoid Certain Death". HISTORY. Retrieved 29 March 2020. Richard Alan Nelson, A Chronology and Glossary of Propaganda in the United States (1996) pp. 232–233 Hobbs, Renee (9 November 2014). "Teaching about Propaganda: An Examination of the Historical Roots of Media Literacy". Journal of Media Literacy Education. 6 (2): 56–67. doi:10.23860/jmle-2016-06-02-5. ISSN 2167-8715. Hobbs, Renee (2020). Mind Over Media. Norton. Zeman, Zbynek (1978). Selling the War. Orbis Publishing. ISBN 978-0-85613-312-1. Oberman, Heiko Augustinus (1 January 1994). The Impact of the Reformation: Essays. Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing. ISBN 9780802807328 – via Google Books. Luther's Last Battles: Politics And Polemics 1531-46 By Mark U. Edwards, Jr. Fortress Press, 2004. ISBN 978-0-8006-3735-4 In Latin, the title reads "Hic oscula pedibus papae figuntur" "Nicht Bapst: nicht schreck uns mit deim ban, Und sey nicht so zorniger man. Wir thun sonst ein gegen wehre, Und zeigen dirs Bel vedere" Edwards, Mark U. (2004). Luther's Last Battles: Politics and Polemics 1531–46. Fortress Press. p. 199. ISBN 9781451413984 – via Google Books. Fisher, Lane (7 July 2022). "Trouvère Poets: Reflectors of Societal Zeal". Truvere. Truvere. Retrieved 13 September 2022. "The Religious Movements Page: Conceptualizing "Cult" and "Sect"". Archived from the original on 7 February 2006. Retrieved 4 December 2005. "Religious propaganda". Encyclopedia.uia.org. Union of International Associations. Retrieved 9 November 2023. Magill, Frank Northen (23 January 2003). Dictionary of World Biography. Taylor & Francis. p. 422. ISBN 978-1-57958-040-7. Retrieved 7 February 2022. Rutter, Keith (31 March 2020). Word And Image In Ancient Greece. Edinburgh University Press. p. 68. ISBN 978-0-7486-7985-0. Retrieved 7 February 2022. Stepper, R. (2006). "Politische parolen und propaganda im Hannibalkrieg". Klio. 88 (2): 397–407. doi:10.1524/klio.2006.88.2.397. S2CID 190002621. Retrieved 7 February 2022. Hoyos, Dexter (26 May 2015). A Companion to the Punic Wars. John Wiley & Sons. p. 275. ISBN 978-1-119-02550-4. Retrieved 7 February 2022. Füssel, 2020 & 10–12. Williamson, Samuel R.; Balfour, Michael (Winter 1980). "Propaganda in War, 1939–1945: Organisations, Policies and Publics in Britain and Germany". Political Science Quarterly. 95 (4): 715. doi:10.2307/2150639. JSTOR 2150639. Eksteins, Modris; Balfour, Michael (October 1980). "Propaganda in War, 1939–1945: Organisations, Policies and Publics in Britain and Germany". The American Historical Review. 85 (4): 876. doi:10.2307/1868905. JSTOR 1868905. North Atlantic Treaty Organization, NATO Standardization Agency AAP-6 – Glossary of terms and definitions, 2-P-9. Callanan, James D. The Evolution of The CIA's Covert Action Mission, 1947–1963. Durham University. 1999. "Pravda za Uroša Predića!". e-novine.com. Retrieved 5 May 2015. Karel C. Berkhoff, Motherland in Danger: Soviet Propaganda during World War II (2012) excerpt and text search Smithfield, Brad (30 July 2015). "10 Facts You Didn't Know About Stalin". The Vintage News. Timera Media. Retrieved 23 April 2021. "had his likeness softened on propaganda posters to reduce his Georgian facial characteristics." Zhores A. Medvedev and (2003). The Unknown Stalin. I.B. Tauris. p. 248. ISBN 9781860647680. "International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights". United Nations Human Rights: Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. United Nations. Retrieved 2 September 2015. Gustave Gilbert's Nuremberg Diary(1947). In an interview with Gilbert in Göring's jail cell during the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials (18 April 1946) Snow, Nacny. "US PROPAGANDA". American Thought and Culture in the 21st Century: 97–98 – via JSTOR. Khatib, Lina (2014). The Hizbullah Phenomenon:Politics and Communication. Oxford University Press. p. 84. McGarry, Edmund D. (1958). "The Propaganda Function in Marketing". Journal of Marketing. 23 (2): 131–132. doi:10.2307/1247829. JSTOR 1247829. How to Be a Spy: The World War II SOE Training Manual. Toronto: Dundurn Press. 2004. p. 192. ISBN 978-1-55002-505-7. "About Roderick Hindery". Propaganda and Critical Thought Blog. Hindery, Roderick (2001). Indoctrination and self-deception or free and critical thought. Lewiston, New York: Edwin Mellen Press. ISBN 0-7734-7407-2. OCLC 45784333. Briant, Emma Louise (April 2015). "Allies and Audiences Evolving Strategies in Defense and Intelligence Propaganda". The International Journal of Press/Politics. 20 (2): 145–165. doi:10.1177/1940161214552031. S2CID 145697213. "Smith-Mundt Act". 'Anti-Propaganda' Ban Repealed, Freeing State Dept. To Direct Its Broadcasting Arm at American Citizens. Techdirt. 15 July 2013. Retrieved 1 June 2016. Howard, Philip N.; Woolley, Samuel; Calo, Ryan (3 April 2018). "Algorithms, bots, and political communication in the US 2016 election: The challenge of automated political communication for election law and administration". Journal of Information Technology & Politics. 15 (2): 81–93. doi:10.1080/19331681.2018.1448735. ISSN 1933-1681. Garth S. Jowett and Victoria J.: O'Donnell, Propaganda & Persuasion (5th ed. 2011) Quito, Anne (30 June 2017). "North Korea's America-hating postage stamps are mini-masterpieces of anti-imperialist propaganda". Quartz. Kolchinsky, Alexander (2013). "Stalin on Stamps and other Philatelic Materials: Design, Propaganda, Politics". The Carl Beck Papers in Russian and East European Studies (2301). doi:10.5195/cbp.2013.184. Friedman, Herbert A. "Propaganda & Espionage Philately – Part I". PsyWar.Org. Archived from the original on 7 February 2020. Retrieved 1 July 2019. "10 WWII Stamp Forgeries Used as Psychological Warfare". Best Masters in Psychology. Carole Cadwalladr, as told to Lee Glendinning (29 September 2018). "Exposing Cambridge Analytica: 'It's been exhausting, exhilarating, and slightly terrifying'". The Guardian. Briant, Emma (16 April 2018). "Research on Leave.EU and Cambridge Analytica strategy published". UK Parliamentary Committee on Digital, Culture Media and Sport. Merelli, Annalisa (17 March 2018). "Facebook knew Cambridge Analytica was misusing users' data three years ago and only banned the company this week". Quartz. Musil, Steven (9 April 2018). "Cambridge Analytica denies breaking any laws in Facebook data scandal". CNET. Lomas, Natasha (9 January 2019). &qu

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ From the 1960s to the 1990s, South Africa pursued research into weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear,[2] biological, and chemical weapons under the apartheid government. South Africa’s nuclear weapons doctrine was designed for political leverage rather than actual battlefield use, specifically to induce the United States of America to intervene in any regional conflicts between South Africa and the Soviet Union or its proxies.[3][4] To achieve a minimum credible deterrence, a total of six nuclear weapons were covertly assembled by the late 1980s.[5] Before the anticipated changeover to a majority-elected African National Congress–led government in the 1990s, the South African government dismantled all of its nuclear weapons, the first state in the world which voluntarily gave up all nuclear arms it had developed itself. The country has been a signatory of the Biological Weapons Convention since 1975, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons since 1991, and the Chemical Weapons Convention since 1995. In February 2019, South Africa ratified the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons, becoming the first country to have had nuclear weapons, disarmed them and gone on to sign the treaty.[citation needed] Nuclear weapons Nuclear weapons Photograph of a mock-up of the Little Boy nuclear weapon dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, in August 1945. Background Nuclear explosion History Warfare Design Testing Delivery Yield Effects Winter Workers Ethics Arsenals Arms race Espionage Proliferation Disarmament Terrorism Opposition Nuclear-armed states NPT recognized United States Russia United Kingdom France China Others India Israel (undeclared) Pakistan North Korea Former South Africa Belarus Kazakhstan Ukraine vte Further information: Nuclear programme of South Africa The Republic of South Africa's ambitions to develop nuclear weapons began in 1948 after giving commission to South African Atomic Energy Corporation (SAAEC), the forerunner corporation to oversee the nation's uranium mining and industrial trade.[1] In 1957, South Africa reached an understanding with the United States after signing a 50-year collaboration under the U.S.-sanctioned programme, Atoms for Peace.[1] The treaty concluded the South African acquisition of a single nuclear research reactor and an accompanying supply of highly enriched uranium (HEU) fuel, located in Pelindaba.[1] Research programs In 1965, the U.S. subsidiary, the Allis-Chalmers Corporation, delivered the 20 MW research nuclear reactor, SAFARI-1, along with ~90% HEU fuel to South African nuclear authority.[1] In 1967, South Africa decided to pursue plutonium capability and constructed its own reactor, SAFARI-2 reactor also at Pelindaba, that went critical using 606 kg of 2% enriched uranium fuel, and 5.4 tonnes of heavy water, both supplied by the United States.[1] The SAFARI-2 reactor was intended to be moderated by heavy water, fuelled by natural uranium while the reactor's cooling system used molten sodium.[1] In 1969, the project was abandoned by the South African government because the reactor was draining resources from the uranium enrichment program that had begun in 1967.[1] South Africa began to focus on the success of its uranium enrichment programme which was seen by its scientists as easier compared to plutonium.[1] South Africa was able to mine uranium ore domestically, and used aerodynamic nozzle enrichment techniques to produce weapons-grade material. In 1969, a pair of senior South African scientists met with Sultan Bashiruddin Mahmood, a nuclear engineer from Pakistan based at the University of Birmingham, to conduct studies, research and independent experiments on uranium enrichment.[6] The South African and Pakistani scientists studied the use of aerodynamic-jet nozzle process to enrich the fuel at the University of Birmingham, later building their national programs in the 1970s.[6] South Africa gained sufficient experience with nuclear technology to capitalise on the promotion of the U.S. government's Peaceful Nuclear Explosions (PNE) program.[1] Finally in 1971, South African minister of mines Carl de Wet gave approval of the country's own PNE programme with the publicly stated objective of using PNEs in the mining industry. The date when the South African PNE programme transformed into a weapons program is a matter of some dispute.[1] The possibility of South Africa collaborating with France[7] and Israel in the development of nuclear weapons was the subject of speculation during the 1970s.[8] Nuclear Weapons strategy Unlike many other countries' nuclear weapons doctrine, South Africa’s strategy envisioned no actual battlefield use of nuclear weapons. Although it was designed to be a bluff, South Africa had to be perceived as having the means and resolve to use nuclear weapons militarily. The goal was to deter aggression, not to be involved in a nuclear war that South Africa could not survive. South Africa’s doctrine for the use of nuclear weapons was not based on war-fighting, but rather was intended as a political strategy designed to force Western powers (primarily the United States of America) to assist South Africa against an overwhelming military threat to its territory, such as Soviet-backed forces overrunning South African Defence Forces in Angola and then invading South Africa itself. If political and military instability in southern Africa became unmanageable, the South African government believed a demonstration of its nuclear capability, such as an underground nuclear weapons test in the Kalahari desert, would provoke the Soviet Union to threaten the United States with a dangerously escalating military confrontation unless South Africa was constrained, which in turn would motivate the United States to intervene and seek an end to the conflict in Angola.[9][4] In 1978, the South African Defense Force chief of staff for planning, Army Brigadier John Huyser, produced a confidential memorandum outlining the potential elements of a nuclear strategy:[10] Five to six nuclear weapons would be developed and kept "on the shelf" Should the South African Defence Forces find itself in a situation where its conventional forces were facing a catastrophic defeat, the existence of the South Africa's nuclear weapons would be conveyed to Western countries (primarily the United States) in a covert manner If this does not alleviate the problem, an underground test will be performed to demonstrate the South Africa's nuclear capability, and finally, an above-ground test, if the threat persists In November 1986, a secret “Kramat Capability� document was approved by the South African Minister of Defense Magnus Malan, which set out an official nuclear strategy for the first time.[11] The escalating, three phase deterrent strategy provided a roadmap for identifying the requirements for progressing through successive phases: Phase 1: Strategic Uncertainty - during this phase the existence of the capability will be denied Phase 2: Covert Condition - during this phase the nuclear capability will be covertly revealed as a means of inducement, persuasion, and coercion Phase 3: Overt Deterrent - during this phase the following actions will be considered: Overt announcement Display of force Demonstration (underground or atmospheric test explosion) Threatened use Battlefield application as deterrent against conventional assault forces The document also stated: "In order to carry out this strategy with credibility, the following weapon systems are required:" Air-launched weapon for atmospheric demonstration test and use in battle Explosive device for underground demonstration test Long-range ballistic missile for threat of strategic use The "Strategic Uncertainty" phase would include a policy of deliberate ambiguity, with the South African nuclear capability neither being acknowledged nor denied. South African politicians would also leak information to create uncertainty and worry amongst South Africa's rivals. The "Covert Condition" phase would occur if South African territorial integrity was threatened by the Soviet Union or Soviet-backed forces, where the government would covertly inform leading Western governments (particularly the United States and Britain) about the existence of its nuclear arsenal and request their assistance to eliminate the military threat it faced. Finally, the "Overt Deterrent" phase included a series of escalatory successive steps intended to force the intervention of the United States and other leading Western countries on behalf of South Africa to stop whatever war it was involved in. Starting with a public announcement of the existence of a nuclear arsenal, and inviting foreign experts to inspect the warheads and their delivery systems to confirm they were viable for battlefield use, an underground nuclear test would be followed by an atmospheric test from an air launched weapon hundreds of miles from the coast of South Africa, before finally carrying out a nuclear strike on enemy forces marshaling for a conventional military attack on South Africa itself.[12] Nuclear Weapons production The South African covert nuclear weapons production line and high security storage vaults were located in the Kentron Circle building on the Gerotek vehicle testing facility owned by Armscor on the outskirts of Pretoria. At its secret opening ceremony on 4 May 1981, Prime Minister P.W. Botha described the nuclear deterrent as a "political weapons system" rather than a military one, as it would primary be used for leverage in international negotiations.[13] "The time has come when the South African “Plowshare� must be forged into a sword, for the battle that awaits ... a weapon of inducement, persuasion, and compulsion in the hands of the leaders of the world. This political weapon opens a new possibility, the option for the Republic of South Africa to stipulate its birthright at the negotiating table of the Greats, with nuclear deterrence strategy as its foundation."[14] Prime Minister P.W. Botha speech at the opening of the Kentron Circle covert nuclear weapons facility in May 1981 South Africa developed a small finite deterrence arsenal of gun-type fission weapons in the 1980s. Six were constructed and another was under construction at the time the program ended.[15] As the final production model contained a relatively large amount of highly enriched uranium (HEU), much effort was expended to ensure the physical safety of the nuclear warheads, with Armscor technicians creating many safety features. The cornerstone control feature was for each nuclear device to be divided into two subsections, a Front End and a Back End, with the HEU split between the two. This enabled strict security procedures to be enforced, such as storing each subsection in separate vaults with different codes for each door, which were intended to help prevent anyone from having easy access to an entire weapon system.[16] nuclear weapon storage vaults in the Kentron Circle building The fully assembled gun-type devices had enough HEU that they were near critical mass after final assembly. A major safety concern was the Back End propellant could prematurely fire, sending the projectile into the Front End and causing an accidental nuclear explosion. Another potential danger was the projectile accidentally sliding down the barrel, which at a minimum would cause a criticality accident and contaminate the immediate area. To prevent this, only after the device was armed and ready for use would the barrel rotate to line up the openings correctly. The barrel also contained holes to dissipate the pressure of the propellant firing, thus reducing the speed of the projectile, that were only closed after the weapon was armed and ready for use.[17] South Africa only produced an operational weapon after Armscor took over production. In 1982, Armscor built the first operational weapon, code-named Hobo and later called Cabot. This device reportedly had a yield of 6 kilotons of TNT. It was eventually disassembled and the warhead reused in a production model bomb.[18] Armscor then built a series of pre-production and production models under the code-name Hamerkop (a bird). While Hobo/Cabot were not functional, the Hamerkop series were smart television-guided glide bombs.[18] Bomb casings at South Africa's abandoned Circle nuclear bomb production facility near Pretoria. These most likely would have accommodated a gun-type nuclear package for air delivery Testing the first device The South African Atomic Energy Board (AEB) selected a test site in the Kalahari Desert at the Vastrap weapons range north of Upington. Two test shafts were completed in 1976 and 1977. One shaft was 385 metres deep, the other, 216 metres. In 1977, the AEB established its own high-security weapons research and development facilities at Pelindaba, and during that year the program was transferred from Somchem to Pelindaba. In mid-1977, the AEB produced a gun-type device—without a highly enriched uranium (HEU) core. Although the Y-Plant was operating, it had not yet produced enough weapons-grade uranium for a device. As has happened in programmes in other nations, the development of the devices had outpaced the production of the fissile material. Atomic Energy Commission officials say that a "cold test" (a test without uranium-235) was planned for August 1977. An Armscor official who was not involved at the time said that the test would have been a fully instrumented underground test, with a dummy core. Its major purpose was to test the logistical plans for an actual detonation. How that test was cancelled has been well publicised. Soviet intelligence detected test preparations and in early August alerted the United States; US intelligence confirmed the existence of the test site with an overflight of a Lockheed SR-71 spy plane.[19] On 28 August, The Washington Post quoted a US official: "I'd say we were 99 percent certain that the construction was preparation for an atomic test."[20] The Soviet and Western governments were convinced that South Africa was preparing for a full-scale nuclear test. During the next two weeks in August, the Western nations pressed South Africa not to test. The French foreign minister warned on 22 August of "grave consequences" for French-South African relations.[21] Although he did not elaborate, his statement implied that France was willing to cancel its contract to provide South Africa with the Koeberg nuclear power reactors. In 1993, Wynand de Villiers said that when the test site was exposed, he ordered its immediate shutdown. The site was abandoned and the holes sealed. One of the shafts was temporarily reopened in 1988 in preparation for another test, which did not take place; the move was intended to strengthen South Africa's bargaining position during negotiations to end the war with Angola and Cuba.[22] Viable delivery A SAAF Canberra T.4 Main article: Jericho (missile) § South African RSA Series A RSA-3 3 stage LEO rocket The warheads were originally configured to be delivered from one of several aircraft types then in service with the South African Air Force (SAAF), including the Canberra B12 and the Hawker Siddeley Buccaneer. Concerns about the vulnerability of the ageing aircraft to the Cuban anti-aircraft defence network in Angola subsequently led the SADF to investigate missile-based delivery systems.[23] The missiles were to be based on the RSA-3 and RSA-4 launchers that had already been built and tested for the South African space programme. According to Al J Venter, author of How South Africa Built Six Atom Bombs, these missiles were incompatible with the available large South African nuclear warheads. Venter claims that the RSA series, being designed for a 340 kg payload, would suggest a warhead of some 200 kg, "well beyond SA's best efforts of the late 1980s." Venter's analysis is that the RSA series was intended to display a credible delivery system combined with a separate nuclear test in a final diplomatic appeal to the world powers in an emergency even though they were never intended to be used in a weaponized system together.[24] Three rockets had already been launched into suborbital trajectories in the late 1980s in support of development of the RSA-3 launched Greensat Orbital Management System (for commercial satellite applications of vehicle tracking and regional planning). Following the decision in 1989 to cancel the nuclear weapons program, the missile programs were allowed to continue until 1992, when military funding ended, and all ballistic missile work was stopped by mid-1993. In order to join the Missile Technology Control Regime, the government had to allow American supervision of the destruction of key facilities applicable to both the long-range missile and the space launch programmes.[25] Collaboration with Israel See also: Israel–South Africa Agreement David Albright and Chris McGreal reported that South African projects to develop nuclear weapons during the 1970s and 1980s were undertaken with long-term cooperation from Israel.[26][27][28] The United Nations Security Council Resolution 418 of 4 November 1977 introduced a mandatory arms embargo against South Africa, also requiring all states to refrain from "any co-operation with South Africa in the manufacture and development of nuclear weapons".[29] According to the Nuclear Threat Initiative, in 1977 Israel traded 30 grams of tritium for 50 tonnes of South African uranium, and in the mid-1980s assisted with the development of the RSA-3 and RSA-4 ballistic missiles, which are similar to the Israeli Shavit and Jericho missiles.[30] Also in 1977, according to foreign press reports, it was suspected that South Africa signed a pact with Israel that included the transfer of military technology and the manufacture of at least six nuclear bombs.[31] In September 1979, a US Vela satellite detected a double flash over the Indian Ocean that was suspected, but never confirmed, to be a nuclear test, despite extensive air sampling by WC-135 aircraft of the United States Air Force. If the Vela incident was a nuclear test, South Africa is virtually the only possible country, potentially in collaboration with Israel, which could have carried it out. No official confirmation of its being a nuclear test has been made by South Africa. In 1997, South African Deputy Foreign Minister Aziz Pahad stated that South Africa had conducted a test, but later retracted his statement as being a report of rumours.[32] In February 1994, Commodore Dieter Gerhardt, former commander of South Africa's Simon's Town naval base who was later convicted of spying for the USSR, was reported to have said: Although I was not directly involved in planning or carrying out the operation, I learned unofficially that the flash was produced by an Israeli-South African test code-named Operation Phoenix. The explosion was clean and was not supposed to be detected. But they were not as smart as they thought, and the weather changed – so the Americans were able to pick it up.[33][34] In 2000, Gerhardt said that Israel agreed in 1974 to arm eight Jericho II missiles with "special warheads" for South Africa.[35] In 2010, The Guardian released South African government documents that confirmed the existence of Israel's nuclear arsenal. According to The Guardian, the documents were associated with an Israeli offer to sell South Africa nuclear weapons in 1975.[36][37] Israel categorically denied these allegations and claimed the documents do not indicate any offer for a sale of nuclear weapons. Israeli President Shimon Peres claimed that The Guardian article was based on "selective interpretation... and not on concrete facts."[38] Avner Cohen, author of Israel and the Bomb and The Worst-Kept Secret: Israel's Bargain with the Bomb, said "Nothing in the documents suggests there was an actual offer by Israel to sell nuclear weapons to the regime in Pretoria."[39] Collaboration with Taiwan According to David Albright and Andrea Strickner, South Africa also engaged in close, long-term cooperation with Taiwan, which at the time was controlled by the autocratic KMT regime, sometimes along with the Israelis. Taiwan bought 100 tons of uranium metal from South Africa which was delivered between 1973 and 1974. In 1980 the Taiwanese contracted for 4,000 tons of uranium metal although it is not known how much of this order was ever delivered. In 1983 Taiwan and South Africa agreed to cooperate on laser enrichment, chemical enrichment, and building a small reactor. The South African reactor program was slowed down in 1985 due to budget cuts and was cancelled completely half a decade later. The enrichment programs also likely ended around this time.[40] Dismantling South African forces feared the threat of a "domino effect" in favour of communism, represented in southern Africa by Cuban forces in Angola, aiding Angolan Marxist-Leninist revolutionary groups against rivals supported by South African forces, and threatening Namibia. In 1988, South Africa signed the Tripartite Accord with Cuba and Angola, which led to the withdrawal of South African and Cuban troops from Angola and independence for Namibia. The pre-emptive elimination of nuclear weapons was expected to make a significant contribution toward regional stability and peace, and also to help restore South Africa's credibility in regional and international politics. F.W. de Klerk saw the presence of nuclear weapons in South Africa as a problem. F. W. de Klerk disclosed the information about his weapons to the United States in an effort to get the weapons removed.[41] South Africa ended its nuclear weapons programme in 1989. All the bombs (six constructed and one under construction) were dismantled and South Africa acceded to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in 1991. On 19 August 1994, after completing its inspection, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed that one partially completed and six fully completed nuclear weapons had been dismantled. As a result, the IAEA was satisfied that South Africa's nuclear programme had been converted to peaceful applications. Following this, South Africa joined the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG) as a full member on 5 April 1995. South Africa played a leading role in the establishment of the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty (also referred to as the Treaty of Pelindaba) in 1996, becoming one of the first members in 1997. South Africa also signed the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty in 1996 and ratified it in 1999. In 1993, Bill Keller of The New York Times reported that popular suspicion in Southern African nations held that the timing of disarmament indicated a desire to prevent a nuclear arsenal from falling into the hands of a native African and Coloured government with the collapse of the Apartheid system controlled by European settlers.[4] De Klerk denied such a motivation when asked about this in a 2017 interview.[41] The African National Congress political party, which took power in South Africa after Apartheid, approved of nuclear disarmament.[4] The Treaty of Pelindaba came into effect on 15 July 2009 once it had been ratified by 28 countries.[42] This treaty requires that parties will not engage in the research, development, manufacture, stockpiling acquisition, testing, possession, control or stationing of nuclear explosive devices in the territory of parties to the treaty and the dumping of radioactive wastes in the African zone by treaty parties. The African Commission on Nuclear Energy, in order to verify compliance with the treaty, has been established and will be headquartered in South Africa.[43] South Africa signed the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons on 20 September 2017, and ratified it on 25 February 2019.[44] Weapons grade uranium stores As of 2015, South Africa still possessed most of the weapons grade uranium extracted from its nuclear weapons, and had used some of it to produce medical isotopes.[45] There had been three security breaches at Pelindaba since the end of Apartheid, with a 2007 breach described by a former US official as being "horrifying", although the South African government dismissed the 2007 breach as a "routine burglary".[46] Timeline of South African nuclear weapons programme[47] Year Activity 1950s and 1960s Scientific work on the feasibility of peaceful nuclear explosives and support to nuclear power production efforts 1969 Atomic Energy Board forms group to evaluate technical and economic aspects of nuclear explosives 1970 Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) releases report identifying uses for nuclear explosives 1971 R&D approval granted for "peaceful use of nuclear explosives" 1973 AEC prioritises work on a gun-type design 1974 Work on a nuclear device and the Vastrap test site are authorised 1977 AEC completes bomb assembly for "cold" test 1978 First HEU produced; Armscor assumes control of weapons programme 1979 Vela incident; First bomb with HEU core produced by AEC 1982 First deliverable bomb built; work on weapons safety 1985 Three-phase nuclear strategy reviewed 1987 First production bomb built; seven produced, with an eighth under construction 1988 Armscor prepares Vastrap for a nuclear test 1989 Nuclear weapons dismantled 1991 Accedes to NPT Biological and chemical weapons Main article: Project Coast In October 1998, the report of the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission publicly revealed Project Coast, a clandestine government chemical and biological warfare program conducted during the 1980s and 1990s. Project Coast was initiated in 1981 and initially, defensive aspects were the prime objective but as time progressed, offensive programmes became more pervasive and more important.[48] It became the sole programme for the creation of a range of chemical and biological agents for offensive and defensive use within South Africa as well as neighbouring territories.[49] Two categories of offensive products were developed: weapons for mass destruction; here the research focused mostly on biological development processes, especially for run-of-the-mill bacteria including anthrax, tetanus, cholera and especially food poisoning agents such as salmonella bacteria.[50] secondly, researching and developing weapons in the “dirty tricks" program, where products could be supplied for individual assassinations. These consisted of toxins in chemical, plant and in biological nature.[50] On the defensive side, Project Coast oversaw research into the development of agents to protect troops in battle and VIPs[48] against chemical or biological attack.[51] The project was also tasked with developing CS and CR gas agents for crowd control,[52] developing defensive training programs for troops and developing protective clothing.[49] The program reported to the South African Defence Force Surgeon General (Maj. Gen. N. J. Nieuwoudt (1980-1988) and Maj. Gen. D.P. Knobel (1988–1998)).[49] Nieuwoudt recruited South African cardiologist and army officer Brig. Wouter Basson (1981–1992) as Project Officer and ultimately Nieuwoudt and Basson recruited a large contingent of medical professionals, scientists and weapons specialists to research and develop these weapons and associated antidotes. Basson was replaced by Col. Ben Steyn in 1992 (1992–1995).[49] Several front companies were created, including Delta G Scientific Company, Protechnik and Roodeplaat Research Laboratories to facilitate the research and development of chemical and biological weapons.[53] After Basson's arrest in 1997, documents found in his possession revealed that the "dirty-tricks" products included anthrax-laced cigarettes, household items contaminated with organophosphates[54] and paraoxon-laced gin and whisky.[49] Other unverified claims include that a so-called infertility toxin[clarification needed] was introduced into black townships, and that cholera was deliberately introduced into the water sources of some South African villages. It was also claimed that South Africa supplied anthrax and cholera to government troops in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), which it is alleged were used against guerrillas there.[55][56] In January 1992, the government of Mozambique alleged that either South Africa, or South African backed Renamo forces deployed an artillery-delivered airburst chemical weapon during a battle at a rebel base in Tete province. Five soldiers were said to have died, and many more were injured.[57] South African military and civilian doctors collected samples from the Mozambican government, and denied any involvement in the matter. The programme operated until 1993.[58][59][60] See also History of biological warfare Helikon vortex separation process Military history of South Africa Nuclear weapons and Israel Denel Overberg Test Range Cold War Notes Executive release. "South African nuclear bomb". Nuclear Threat Initiatives. Nuclear Threat Initiatives, South Africa (NTI South Africa). Archived from the original on 28 September 2012. Retrieved 13 March 2012. Von Wielligh, N. & von Wielligh-Steyn, L. (2015). The Bomb: South Africa’s Nuclear Weapons Programme. Pretoria: Litera. Albright, David; Stricker, Andrea (2016). Revisiting South Africa's Nuclear Weapons Program (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Institute for Science and International Security. ISBN 978-1536845655. LCCN 2018910946. Keller, Bill (25 March 1993). "South Africa Says It Built 6 Atom Bombs". The New York Times. p. A1. Archived from the original on 29 October 2017. Retrieved 25 April 2021. John Pike. "Nuclear Weapons Program – South Africa". Globalsecurity.org. Archived from the original on 25 May 2011. Retrieved 15 May 2011. Chaudhry, PhD (Political science), M.A. "Separating Myth from Reality§ The Uranium Enrichment programme: Building Kahuta Research Laboratories (KRL)". M.A. Chaudhry's article published at The Nation, 1999. Archived from the original on 8 July 2011. Retrieved 5 March 2012. "Carl Rowan: South Africa emulates Nazi Germany (1977)". The Sedalia Democrat. 26 October 1977. p. 19. Archived from the original on 31 August 2017. Retrieved 31 August 2017. "Scenarios Always See Confrontation (Israel, South Africa, nuclear weapons) (1977)". Colorado Springs Gazette-Telegraph. 24 November 1977. p. 137. Archived from the original on 31 August 2017. Retrieved 31 August 2017. Albright, David; Stricker, Andrea (2016). Revisiting South Africa's Nuclear Weapons Program (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Institute for Science and International Security. ISBN 978-1536845655. LCCN 2018910946. Albright, David; Stricker, Andrea (2016). Revisiting South Africa's Nuclear Weapons Program (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Institute for Science and International Security. ISBN 978-1536845655. LCCN 2018910946. Albright, David; Stricker, Andrea (2016). Revisiting South Africa's Nuclear Weapons Program (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Institute for Science and International Security. ISBN 978-1536845655. LCCN 2018910946. Albright, David; Stricker, Andrea (2016). Revisiting South Africa's Nuclear Weapons Program (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Institute for Science and International Security. ISBN 978-1536845655. LCCN 2018910946. Albright, David; Stricker, Andrea (2016). Revisiting South Africa's Nuclear Weapons Program (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Institute for Science and International Security. ISBN 978-1536845655. LCCN 2018910946. Albright, David; Stricker, Andrea (2016). Revisiting South Africa's Nuclear Weapons Program (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Institute for Science and International Security. ISBN 978-1536845655. LCCN 2018910946. "South Africa: Nuclear Case Closed?" (PDF). National Security Archive. 19 December 1993. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 August 2008. Retrieved 26 August 2008. Albright, David; Stricker, Andrea (2016). Revisiting South Africa's Nuclear Weapons Program (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Institute for Science and International Security. ISBN 978-1536845655. LCCN 2018910946. Albright, David; Stricker, Andrea (2016). Revisiting South Africa's Nuclear Weapons Program (PDF). Washington, D.C.: Institute for Science and International Security. ISBN 978-1536845655. LCCN 2018910946. Lewis, Jeffrey (3 December 2015). "Revisiting South Africa's Bomb". Arms Control Wonk. Leading Voices on Arms Control, Disarmament and Non-Proliferation. Archived from the original on 6 December 2015. Retrieved 6 December 2015. U.S. Military Involvement in Southern Africa. South End Press. 1978. ISBN 978-0-89608-041-6. Albright, David (July 1994). "South Africa and the Affordable Bomb". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Jul 1994 (4): 41. Bibcode:1994BuAtS..50d..37A. doi:10.1080/00963402.1994.11456538. "South Africa is about to test atomic bomb, France claims (1977)". Valley News. 23 August 1977. p. 3. Archived from the original on 31 August 2017. Retrieved 31 August 2017. Frank V. Pabian. "South Africa's Nuclear Weapon Program: Lessons For U.S. Non Proliferation Policy" (PDF). James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies. p. 8. Archived (PDF) from the original on 7 April 2010. Retrieved 8 December 2008. Horton, Roy E. (6 May 2018). Out of (South) Africa: Pretorias Nuclear Weapons Experience. DIANE Publishing. ISBN 9781428994843. Retrieved 6 May 2018 – via Google Books. Engelbrecht, Leon. "Book Review: How SA built six atom bombs - defenceWeb". www.defenceweb.co.za. Archived from the original on 26 August 2014. Retrieved 6 May 2018. "Jericho". 29 May 2010. Archived from the original on 29 May 2010. Retrieved 6 May 2018. Chris McGreal (7 February 2006). "Brothers in arms — Israel's secret pact with Pretoria". The Guardian. London. Archived from the original on 25 July 2008. Albright D (August 1994). "South Africa and the Affordable Bomb". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 50 (4): 37–47. Bibcode:1994BuAtS..50d..37A. doi:10.1080/00963402.1994.11456538. "RSA Nuclear Weapons Program". Federation of American Scientists. Archived from the original on 7 October 2006. "UNSCR 418 of 4 November 1977: States should refrain from "any co-operation with South Africa in the manufacture and development of nuclear weapons"". United Nations. Archived from the original on 17 August 2011. Retrieved 15 May 2011. "South Africa: Missile". Nuclear Threat Initiative. November 2011. Archived from the original on 13 May 2013. "P.W. Botha felt Israel had betrayed him". Jerusalem Post. 2 November 2006. Archived from the original on 6 July 2013. Retrieved 2 November 2006. "Aziz Pahad's statement and retraction discussed here". Archived from the original on 24 February 2011. Retrieved 15 May 2011. South Africa and the affordable bomb, David Albright, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Archived 28 January 2018 at the Wayback Machine Jul 1994, pp 37. Proliferation: A flash from the past David Albright, The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Archived 28 January 2018 at the Wayback Machine Nov 1997, pp. 15 "Tracking Nuclear Proliferation". PBS Newshour. 2 May 2005. Archived from the original on 11 December 2013. McGreal, Chris (24 May 2010). "Revealed: how Israel offered to sell South Africa nuclear weapons". The Guardian. UK. Archived from the original on 25 May 2010. Retrieved 24 May 2010. McGreal, Chris (24 May 2010). "The memos and minutes that confirm Israel's nuclear stockpile". The Guardian. UK. Archived from the original on 25 May 2010. Retrieved 24 May 2010. Kershner, Isabel (24 May 2010). "Israel Denies It Offered South Africa Warheads". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 30 June 2017. "Avner Cohen: Yitzhak Rabin would have opposed sale of nuclear weapons". The Independent. London. 25 May 2010. Archived from the original on 19 September 2011. Strickner, Andrea; Albright, David. "Taiwan's Former Nuclear Weapons Program" (PDF). isis-online.org. ISIS. Retrieved 9 June 2021. Friedman, Uri (9 September 2017). "Why One President Gave Up His Country's Nukes". The Atlantic. Archived from the original on 22 September 2017. Retrieved 20 June 2018. disarmament.un.org - Pelindaba Treaty - View chronological order by deposit "African Nuclear Weapons Free Zone Treaty". Department of Foreign Affairs, Republic of South Africa. Archived from the original on 21 August 2006. Retrieved 28 July 2006. "UNODA Treaties". treaties.unoda.org. "U.S. Frets over South African vault with enough fuel for 6 nuclear bombs". The Washington Post. "How armed intruders stormed their way into a South African nuclear plant". The Washington Post. Roy E. Horton, USAF Institute for National Security Studies (1999). Out of (South) Africa: Pretoria's Nuclear Weapons Experience. Dianne Publishing. p. 17. ISBN 9781428994843. Stiff, Peter (2001). Warfare by other means: South Africa in the 1980s and 1990s. Galago Press. pp. 96–97. ISBN 1-919854-01-0. Gould, Chandré; Folb, Peter. "Project Coast: Apartheid's Chemical and Biological Warfare Programme" (PDF). United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research. Archived from the original (PDF) on 13 September 2012. "Frontline: Interview with Dr. Daan Goosen: Former Managing Director: Roodeplaat Research Laboratories". PBS & WGBH educational foundation. "Frontline: Interview with Ronnie Kasrils: Deputy Defence Minister, South Africa". PBS & WGBH educational foundation. "Special Hearings: Chemical and Biological Warfare Hearings". Truth Commission Special Report. 1998. Helen E. Purkitt; Stephen Franklin Burgess (2005). South Africa's Weapons of Mass Destruction. Indiana University Press. pp. 94–98. ISBN 978-0-253-21730-1. Archived from the original on 6 May 2018. "The South Africa Chamical and Biological Weapons Program: An Overview" (PDF). The Nonproliferation Review. 2000. p. 13. "What Happened In South Africa? - Plague War - FRONTLINE," PBS, October 29, 1998, https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/plague/sa/ "The History of the Use of Bacteriological and Chemical Agents during Zimbabwe's Liberation War of 1965-80 by Rhodesian Forces," Third World Quarterly Vol. 23, No. 6 (Dec., 2002), pp. 1159-1179 "South Africa Chemical Overview". Nuclear Threat Initiaitve. "South Africa - Countries". NTI. 29 October 1998. Archived from the original on 24 February 2018. Retrieved 23 February 2018. "What Happened In South Africa? - Plague War". FRONTLINE. PBS. 18 November 2015. Archived from the original on 24 February 2018. Retrieved 23 February 2018. Singh, Jerome Amir (1 March 2008). "Project Coast: eugenics in apartheid South Africa". Endeavour. 32 (1): 5–9. doi:10.1016/j.endeavour.2008.01.005. ISSN 0160-9327. PMID 18316125. References Joseph Cirincione, Jon B. Wolfsthal, Miriam Rajkumar. Deadly Arsenals: Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Threats. Washington D.C.: Carnegie Endowment For International Peace, 2005. Further reading Burgess, Stephen F. and Helen E. Purkitt. The Rollback of South Africa's Chemical and Biological Warfare Program, USAF Counterproliferation Center. April 2001. Online. Archived 15 February 2017 at the Wayback Machine Cross, Glenn. Dirty War: Rhodesia and Chemical Biological Warfare, 1975–1980, Helion & Company, 2017. Möser, Robin E. (2024). Disarming Apartheid: The End of South Africa's Nuclear Weapons Programme and Accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, 1968–1991. Cambridge University Press. Polakow-Suransky, Sasha (2010). The Unspoken Alliance: Israel's Secret Relationship with Apartheid South Africa. New York: Pantheon Books. ISBN 978-0375425462. External links Wikimedia Commons has media related to Nuclear weapons program of South Africa. Birth and Death of the South African Nuclear Weapons Programme, Waldo Stumpf, Atomic Energy Corporation of South Africa, October 1995 South Africa and the nuclear option, Marcus Duvenhage, 1998 Out of South Africa: Pretoria’s Nuclear Weapons Experience (in pdf), Lt. Col. Roy E. Horton, ACDIS Occasional Paper, Program in Arms Control, Disarmament, and International Security, University of Illinois, August 2000 Out of (South) Africa: Pretoria’s Nuclear Weapons Experience, Roy E. Horton, USAF Institute for National Security Studies, August 1999 Nuclear Files.org guide to proliferation – South Africa The Nuclear Weapon Archive account of South Africa Israel conducted nuclear experiment in 1979 South Africa's Nuclear Autopsy: The Risk Report, Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control, 1996 Nuclear verification in South Africa Archived 10 March 2016 at the Wayback Machine, Adolf von Baeckmann, Gary Dillon and Demetrius Perricos, IAEA Bulletin Volume 37 Number 1 Annotated bibliography for the South African Nuclear Program from the Alsos Digital Library for Nuclear Issues Archived 3 November 2013 at the Wayback Machine South Africa's Nuclear Weapons Storage Vault Israel and the South African Bomb The Woodrow Wilson Center's Nuclear Proliferation International History Project The Wilson Center's Nuclear Proliferation International History Project contains primary source material on South Africa's nuclear weapons program. vte South Africa Foreign relations of South Africa Bilateral relations Africa Algeria Angola Botswana Republic of the Congo Egypt Eswatini Ethiopia Ghana Kenya Lesotho Libya Madagascar Malawi Mauritius Mozambique Namibia Nigeria Rwanda Sahrawi Republic Tanzania Zambia Zimbabwe Americas Argentina Bolivia Brazil Canada Cuba Mexico Peru Trinidad and Tobago United States Uruguay Asia Azerbaijan Bangladesh China Hong Kong India Indonesia Iran Israel Japan Malaysia North Korea Pakistan Palestine Philippines Qatar Saudi Arabia Singapore Sri Lanka Taiwan Turkey United Arab Emirates Europe Bulgaria Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Netherlands Poland Portugal Russia Serbia Spain Sweden Switzerland Ukraine United Kingdom Oceania Australia New Zealand Multilateral relations European Union Commonwealth of Nations BRICS G8+5 G20 IBSA SACU Africa–India Forum Summit African Union Diplomacy Diplomatic missions of South Africa Diplomatic missions in South Africa Department of International Relations and Cooperation UNSC reform South African National Antarctic Programme vte Political history of South Africa Defunct polities Kingdom of Mapungubwe (c. 1075–c. 1220) Dutch Cape Colony (1652–1806) Mthethwa Paramountcy (c. 1780–1817) Ndwandwe Kingdom (c. 1780–1819) Cape Colony (1795–1910) Zulu Kingdom (1816–1897) Natalia Republic (1839–1843) Natal Colony (1843–1910) Orange Free State (1854–1902) South African Republic (1856–1902) Griqualand East (1861–1879) Griqualand West (1870–1873) Goshen (1882–1883) Stellaland (1882–1885) Nieuwe Republiek (1884–1888) Upingtonia (1885–1887) Klein Vrystaat (1886–1891) Orange River Colony (1902–1910) Transvaal Colony (1902–1910) Union of South Africa (1910–1961) Transkei (1976–1994) Bophuthatswana (1977–1994) Venda (1979–1994) Ciskei (1981–1994) Events Pre-colonial Bantu migrations Battle of Salt River 1652–1815 Dutch settlement French Huguenot settlement Khoikhoi–Dutch Wars Xhosa Wars Battle of Muizenberg Battle of Blaauwberg Anglo-Dutch Treaty of 1814 1815–1910 Mfecane 1820 Settlers Great Trek Boer Republics Transvaal Civil War Mineral Revolution Witwatersrand Gold Rush South African Wars South Africa Act 1909 (National Convention) 1910–1948 South West Africa campaign Maritz rebellion Rand Rebellion Great Depression 1946 African Mine Workers' Union strike Bantustans Apartheid 1948 general election Apartheid legislation Pass laws Internal resistance Coloured-vote constitutional crisis Defiance Campaign Congress of the People Freedom Charter Women's March 1956 1957 Alexandra bus boycott Sharpeville massacre 1960 republic referendum International isolation UN Resolution 1761 UNSC Resolution 591 Academic boycott Disinvestment Constructive engagement Tar Baby Option Sporting boycott Olympics Rugby union Rivonia Trial Durban Moment Border War Israeli alliance Israel–South Africa Agreement Mafeje affair Soweto Uprising Weapons of mass destruction Project Coast Church Street bombing 1983 constitutional referendum Langa massacre Rubicon speech Operation Vula Dakar Conference Transkei coup d'état Ciskei coup d'état Venda coup d'état Third Force CODESA Storming of the Kempton Park World Trade Centre Bisho massacre 1992 apartheid referendum Saint James Church massacre Bophuthatswana crisis Shell House massacre Post- apartheid 1994 general election Government of National Unity Reconstruction and Development Programme Truth and Reconciliation Commission Arms Deal Floor crossing Soweto bombings African Renaissance Travelgate Xenophobia Attack on Kennedy Road Blikkiesdorp Marikana massacre 2012 Western Cape farm workers' strike Nkandlagate Racism 2014 platinum strike #RhodesMustFall protests #FeesMustFall student protests Tshwane riots 2019 service delivery protests 2019 Johannesburg riots COVID-19 pandemic 2020 Phala Phala Robbery 2021 unrest Lady R incident Political culture African nationalism Afrikaner Calvinism Afrikaner nationalism Anarchism Azania Baasskap Boerehaat Black Consciousness Movement Cape Independence Day of the Vow Greater South Africa Honorary whites Rooi gevaar Slavery Swart gevaar Uitlander Volkstaat Defunct organisations Civic and political organisations Afrikaner Bond Afrikaner Broederbond Afrikaner Party AITUP APO AVF BPC Black Sash Boerestaat Party CDA CNIP CTEG COD Congress Alliance COSG CP DLF Dominion Party DP (1973–1977) DP (1989–2000) DPP DSM ECC FA FD Genootskap van Regte Afrikaners GNP Het Volk HNP (Herenigde) HNP (Herstigte) IDASA ID IP ISL Jeugkrag Johannesburg Reform Committee Labour Party (1910–1958) Labour Party (1969–1994) Liberal Party (1953–1968) NA NCP Natal Indian Congress NLP NNP NP NPP NRP NUSAS Occupy Orangia Unie Oranjewerkers Orde Boerevolk PAVN PFP Progressive Party (Cape Colony) Progressive Party PRP Radio Freedom Reform Party SABP SADECO SAIC SASO SAYCO SAYRCO South African Party (Cape Colony) South African Party (1911–1934) South African Party (1977–1980) TNIP Torch Commando UFP United Party Unionist Party Volksparty Workers Party WOSA Trade unions and social movements APF BCM BLATU CNETU CTSWU FCWU FNETU FOSATU ICU IWW MUSA NEUM NURHS PAWE SAAPAWU SACTU SAIF SARHU SATUC Die Spoorbund UDF Umkosi Wezintaba Paramilitary and terrorist organisations APLA ARM AWB BBB Boeremag Greyshirts MK Ossewabrandwag Orde van die Dood PAGAD SANF Histories of political parties African National Congress Democratic Alliance Pan Africanist Congress of Azania Category vte South Africa articles History Timeline Years Early history Kingdom of Mapungubwe Kingdom of Mutapa Kaditshwene Dutch Cape Colony Mthethwa Paramountcy Ndwandwe Cape Colony Zulu Kingdom Orange Free State Transvaal Republic First Boer War Second Boer War Great Depression World War II Apartheid Border War Democratic South Africa By topic Economy Military Geography Biodiversity Climate Climate change Districts Earthquakes Estuaries Forests Islands Lakes Mountain ranges Municipalities National parks Populated places Provinces Rivers Wildlife Politics Constitution Courts Corruption Elections Foreign relations Government Human rights Law Law enforcement Military Parliament Political parties President timeline State security Economy Agriculture Banking Companies Communications Economic history Energy Foreign trade Income inequality Mining industry Rand (currency) State-owned enterprises Stock exchange Taxation Tourism Trade unions Transport Water and sanitation Wealth inequality Society Cannabis Crime Disability Education Feminism Health Healthcare Immigration Intersex Land invasion Languages LGBT Life expectancy Poverty Racism Religion Sexual violence Slum clearance Smoking Social issues Social movements Women Xenophobia Culture Architecture Art Cinema Cuisine (wine) HIV/AIDS Homelessness Literature Media Music National symbols Public holidays Sports World Heritage Sites heritage sites Demographics South African Bantu-speaking peoples Ndebele Pedi Sotho Swazi Tsonga Tswana Venda Xhosa Zulu Khoisan Khoekhoe San people Whites Afrikaners British Coloureds Cape Coloureds Cape Malays Griquas Indians Chinese OutlineIndex Category Portal Portal: Nuclear technology Categories: South Africa and weapons of mass destructionWeapons of mass destruction by countryMilitary of South AfricaNuclear weapons programsForeign relations of South AfricaNuclear weapons of South AfricaIsrael–South Africa relationsAbandoned military projects of South Africa

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Death of a Princess is a British 1980 drama-documentary produced by ATV in cooperation with WGBH in the United States. The drama is based on the true story of Princess Mishaal, a young Saudi Arabian princess and her lover who had been publicly executed for adultery. Its depiction of the customs of Saudi Arabia led some Middle Eastern governments to oppose its broadcast under threat of damaging trade relations. Form The film was based on numerous interviews by journalist Antony Thomas, who, upon first hearing the story, grew passionately curious about its veracity, soon drawing upon contacts in the Arab world for their insights and opinions. Because of the candid and sometimes critical nature of the interviews, Thomas and ATV executives decided not to make the film as a straight documentary but instead to dramatise it with actors. Thomas was played by Paul Freeman under the name "Christopher Ryder". The identities of the interviewees were obscured, and the actors chosen to replace them were based only loosely on their subjects. The character of Elsa Gruber, played by Judy Parfitt, was based on Rosemarie Buschow, a German woman who had worked for the Saudi Royal Family as a nanny.[1] There was only one exception, an Arab family who played themselves. The fictitious nation in which the drama was set was called "Arabia", which some viewers took to mean Saudi Arabia. The name of the princess was never said. Death of a Princess depicts Thomas' focus on "the Princess", as her story became his vehicle through which important facets of Islamic culture in Saudi Arabia were revealed, including traditions and customs as well as gender roles and sexuality. Thomas later explained that he had only reconstructed scenes where he was confident that they did happen, although he included film of interviewees telling him information which he did not believe.[citation needed] Controversy A critically acclaimed film shown on ITV in the United Kingdom on 9 April 1980, it provoked an angry response from the Saudi government.[2] While resisting pressure not to show the film, ATV agreed to include an introductory comment that said: The programme you are about to see is a dramatized reconstruction of certain events which took place in the Arab world between 1976 and 1978. We have been asked to point out that equality for all before the law is regarded as paramount in the Moslem world.[3][4] The British ambassador to Riyadh, James Craig, was asked to leave the country, while restrictions were placed on the issuing of visas to British businessmen.[5] Saudi Arabia, along with Lebanon, banned British Airways' Concorde from its airspace, making its flights between London and Singapore unprofitable.[6] While the Saudi response had initially driven a UK press reaction against the attempted censorship, when export orders began to be cancelled, the press began to question whether it had been right to show the film. British Foreign Secretary Lord Carrington found the film "deeply offensive", he "wished it had never been shown", but "to ban a film because we do not like it or even because it hurts our friends" was not an option for the country's government.[3] Similarly, the US government received enormous political pressure from Saudi Arabia to censor its broadcast. On 8 May 1980, Mobil Oil placed an advertisement in The New York Times and other newspapers condemning the film, which it described as "a new fairy tale".[7] It quoted a letter to the New Statesman by Penelope Mortimer, who had worked with Thomas on the film: With the exception of Barry Millner, who had already sold his story to the Daily Express, Rosemary [sic] Buschow, and the Palestinian family in Beirut, every interview and every character in the film is fabricated. The "revelation" of the domestic lives of the Saudi princesses—man-hunting in the desert, rendezvous in boutiques—was taken entirely on the evidence of an expatriate divorcée, as was the story of the princess first seeing her lover on Saudi television. No real effort was made to check up on such information. Rumour and opinion somehow came to be presented as fact... the audience, foolishly believing it to be authentic, is conned. While Buschow had advised Thomas on the making of the film, she later told the Associated Press that it should not have been made, adding that "it achieved nothing but discord... every family has a black sheep, and this is a large family of around 5,000 people".[8] After some stalling, it was eventually broadcast by the PBS programme World in most of the US on 12 May 1980, with only 16 out of 200 PBS stations choosing not do so.[9] In one example, South Carolina Educational Television canceled the broadcast of the film across its network, a decision influenced by fact that the then-U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, John C. West, had formerly been the state's Governor.[10] Among the other PBS stations chose not to air the film were KUHT in Houston, Texas, KLCS in Los Angeles, California, & Alabama Public Television Network Protests against the film outside NOS in Hilversum, Netherlands. In the Netherlands, NOS showed the programme, with the broadcaster claiming that there had been "no controversy about it here" and that it had not been contacted by the Saudi Government.[5] This was despite an earlier demonstration by Muslims outside the NOS building in Hilversum.[11] However, in Sweden, the rights were bought, at a premium, by a video company, Scanvideo, which decided that the economy "would suffer great harm if it were shown, and decided that it must not be shown".[12] By contrast, the film was shown in neighbouring Norway by public broadcaster NRK.[13] In Australia, the programme was shown on the Seven Network, although the acting Prime Minister, Doug Anthony, asked the channel not to show it, as it might jeopardise trade deals with Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern countries.[14] He denounced the film as "grossly offensive to the Saudi Arabian Royal Family and government".[12] The Cattlemen's Union of Australia also campaigned against the film being shown, with its executive director arguing that it was "stupid to risk future trade relations, job opportunities and export income for a brief period of sick entertainment".[15] After the screening of the programme, Australian businesses reported delays in obtaining visas for Saudi Arabia as a result.[16] As a result of playing the role of the Princess, Egyptian actress Suzanne Abou Taleb, according to People magazine, "was put on a blacklist by Egyptian TV, film and theatre producers, who are dependent on Saudi petrodollars".[17] The measure had exactly the opposite of its intended effect, increasing her public prominence and she became one of the most popular actresses in Egypt, under the name Sawsan Badr. Paul Freeman's performance as Christopher Ryder was seen by Steven Spielberg, who noted his piercing eyes; this observation led to his casting as René Belloq in Raiders of the Lost Ark.[18] In a retrospective interview for the Frontline rebroadcast, Thomas described his reasons for making the film: I set off to investigate this story with the idea of doing it as a drama, and gradually I realized that something completely different was developing. Where I traveled through the Arab world, the story was celebrated. Everyone had their own version of that story, all very, very different. ... Whoever I spoke to—whether they were Palestinians, whether they were conservative Saudis, whether they were radicals—they attached themselves to this princess. She'd become a myth. And they identified with her, and they kind of co-opted her to their cause. People were discussing things with me about their private lives, about their sexual feelings, about their political frustrations, that they'd never discussed with me before. ...Somehow this princess was sort of like a catalyst. And after thinking about it seriously, I thought, my gosh, this is perhaps an even more interesting story to tell.[19] In Edward Said's book Covering Islam, he discusses the release of Death of Princess and the Saudi response. He argues that although the Saudis opposed the showing of the film and used their money to try and coerce PBS from televising it, they lacked the cultural capital that the West had over representation of Muslims in the media. The Saudis opposed it for its implications of Saudi royal family corruption, but also because it only reinforced images of Sharia law that Westerners understand; punishment.[20] The film has never been broadcast again in the UK, although there was a private screening at the British Academy of Film and Television Arts in 2009.[21] It was re-broadcast in the US by Frontline in April 2005, for its 25th anniversary.[22] This was under limited terms described in its original contract, meaning that because of copyright and issues with royalties, it is not available for Internet viewing through PBS. In popular culture Not the Nine O'Clock News made a spoof apology to the Saudis on their television series which was the first track on their eponymous 1980 album.[23] The BBC comedy The Young Ones referred to the diplomatic crisis when a character dressed as an Arab sheikh told an aide that he wished to see the British ambassador. The aide replied "Certainly your Highness. Which piece would you like to see first?".[citation needed] A 1982 Yes Minister episode ("The Moral Dimension") refers to a diplomatic incident as "the greatest crisis since Death of a Princess".[citation needed] See also Portals: flag Saudi Arabia flag United Kingdom Film icon 1980s The Crown (season 6) References Emily Hahn "A Nanny in Arabia", The New York Times, 8 February 1981 Mat Nashed (15 May 2019). "The Mysterious Murder of a Saudi Princess and Her Lover". OZY. Archived from the original on 13 October 2020. Retrieved 13 August 2020. David Brockman "Behind the Screens: Death of a Princess", Transdiffusion, 7 February 2005 Continuity Announcement Into 'Death of a Princess' 1980 'Crawling' storm over Saudis, The Glasgow Herald, 11 April 1980 Concorde: fast and beautiful -- but costing a bundle, The Christian Science Monitor, 21 May 1980 frontline: death of a princess: mobil oil ad | PBS Princess knew the risks for her and lover, Nashua Telegraph, 10 April 1980 The TV Arab, Jack G. Shaheen, Popular Press, 1984, page 76 "South Carolina public TV cancels 'Death of Princess'"[permanent dead link], Wilmington Morning Star, 4 May 1980 Moslims demonstreren voor het gebouw van de NOS tegen eventueel uitzenden van de film "De dood van een Prinses", 15 April 1980 The "Death of a Princess' Controversy" by Thomas White and Gladys Ganley, Harvard University, 1983 Ville presse NRK og Norge til å stoppe film, NRK, 23 January 2015 Death of a Princess - our right to know, The Sydney Morning Herald, 24 April 1980 Farmers step up bid to stop Princess film, The Sydney Morning Herald, 27 May 1980 Death of a Princess, The Sydney Morning Herald, 11 June 1980 Egyptian Actress Suzanne Taleb Plays An Executed Saudi Princess—and Pays a Price of Her Own, People, 12 May 1980 "The People Who Were Almost Cast". Empire Online. 22 April 2008. Archived from the original on 28 August 2008. Retrieved 22 April 2008. A Talk With Antony Thomas | Death Of A Princess Covering Islam: How the Media and the Experts Determine How We See the Rest of the World, Edward Said, Random House, 1996, pp. 69–79 Antony Thomas Presents – Death of a Princess, 22 May 2009 Saudi princess's death still a mystery, 25 years later, The Globe and Mail, 19 April 2005 BBC Records "Not the Nine O'Clock News" "Death of a Princess (An Apology)" 1980 External links Wikimedia Commons has media related to Death of a Princess. PBS Frontline site Full transcript "The 'Death of a Princess' Controversy" by Thomas White and Gladys Ganley, Harvard University, 1983 Death of a Princess at IMDb Edit this at Wikidata Sawsan Badr at IMDb CJR: 'The Reagans': What CBS Should Have Done ScreenOnline - Death of a Princess (1980) BBC World Service - Witness, The 'Death of a Princess' film Categories: 1980 in British television1980 television specialsBritish docudrama filmsCensorship in Saudi ArabiaCensored worksBritish English-language television showsFilms shot in EgyptFilms shot in LebanonFilms shot in LondonFrontline (American TV program)Human rights abuses in Saudi ArabiaITV documentariesITV television dramasSaudi Arabia–United Kingdom relationsTelevision censorshipTelevision controversies in Saudi ArabiaTelevision series by ITV StudiosTelevision shows produced by Associated Television (ATV)Violence against women in Saudi ArabiaWomen's rights in Saudi ArabiaWorks about Saudi ArabiaWorks banned in the United KingdomApril 1980 events in the United Kingdom

Read more on the CIA & Watergate: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/p/anything-can-come-back-to-haunt-us On October 15, 1975, a debate took place in Williamsburg, Virginia, between Seymour M. Hersh, a renowned investigative journalist from The New York Times, and William E. Colby, the Director of Central Intelligence. The debate occurred during a panel discussion at the 42nd annual meeting of the Associated Press Managing Editors and revolved around the role of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in the Watergate scandal and its broader implications. During the discussion, Seymour Hersh accused the CIA of failing to act promptly and transparently regarding its knowledge of the Watergate affair. He contended that the agency could have "blown the whistle at any time" about the illegal activities associated with the break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in June 1972. Hersh's allegations were based on his extensive reporting on illegal domestic spying by the CIA and its involvement in covert operations. William Colby conceded that the CIA did not immediately report its knowledge to law enforcement authorities. He acknowledged, "we didn't fall all over ourselves rushing to the policemen," effectively agreeing with Hersh's assertion. Colby justified this delay by explaining that the agency's concern at the time was to avoid sensationalizing its tangential involvement in the Watergate incident. The debate further highlighted internal CIA discussions held two days after the break-in. According to Hersh, top CIA officials were aware that John D. Ehrlichman, then a White House aide, had requested covert assistance from the CIA for E. Howard Hunt Jr. This assistance, which included providing disguises and other materials, was initially linked to the break-in at the office of Daniel Ellsberg's former psychiatrist in 1971. Hersh pointed out that the CIA officials knew of Hunt's involvement in the Watergate break-in during these discussions, long before his indictment three months later. Colby also reflected on his position as Director of Central Intelligence, stating that he served at the pleasure of the President and would be willing to resign if he felt he could no longer be effective. He suggested that a new leadership might herald a new phase in the history of U.S. intelligence activities. The debate between Hersh and Colby underscored the tensions between journalistic investigations and governmental accountability. Hersh's probing questions and Colby's admissions brought to light the complexities and challenges faced by the CIA during the Watergate scandal, highlighting issues of transparency, accountability, and the intricate relationship between intelligence agencies and political power. Seymour Myron "Sy" Hersh (born April 8, 1937) is an American investigative journalist and political writer. He gained recognition in 1969 for exposing the My Lai massacre and its cover-up during the Vietnam War, for which he received the 1970 Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting. During the 1970s, Hersh covered the Watergate scandal for The New York Times, also reporting on the secret U.S. bombing of Cambodia and the Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) program of domestic spying. In 2004, he detailed the U.S. military's torture and abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq for The New Yorker. Hersh has won a record five George Polk Awards, and two National Magazine Awards. He is the author of 11 books, including The Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House (1983), an account of the career of Henry Kissinger which won the National Book Critics Circle Award. In 2013, Hersh's reporting alleged that Syrian rebel forces, rather than the government, had attacked civilians with sarin gas at Ghouta during the Syrian Civil War, and in 2015, he presented an alternative account of the U.S. special forces raid in Pakistan which killed Osama bin Laden, both times attracting controversy and criticism. In 2023, Hersh alleged that the U.S. and Norway had sabotaged the Nord Stream pipelines, again stirring controversy. He is known for his use of anonymous sources, for which his later stories in particular have been criticized. Early life and education Hersh was born in Chicago, Illinois, on April 8, 1937, to Isador and Dorothy Hersh (née Margolis), Yiddish-speaking Jews who had immigrated to the U.S. in the 1920s from Lithuania and Poland, respectively. Isador's original surname was Hershowitz, which he had changed upon becoming a citizen in 1930.[1][2] As a teenager, Seymour helped run the family's dry cleaning shop on the South Side. Hersh graduated from Hyde Park High School in 1954, then attended the University of Illinois Chicago and later the University of Chicago, where he graduated with a history degree in 1958. He worked as a Xerox salesman before being admitted to the University of Chicago Law School in 1959, but was expelled during his first year due to poor grades.[3] Newspaper career After briefly working at a Walgreens drug store, Hersh began his career in 1959 with a seven-month stint at the City News Bureau of Chicago, first as a copyboy and later as a crime reporter.[3] In 1960, he enlisted as an Army reservist, and spent three months in basic training at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas.[4] After returning to Chicago, in 1961 Hersh launched the Evergreen Dispatch, a short-lived weekly newspaper for the suburb of Evergreen Park. He moved to Pierre, South Dakota, in 1962 to work as a correspondent for United Press International (UPI), reporting on the state legislature and writing a series of articles on the Oglala Sioux.[5] In 1963, Hersh moved back to Chicago to work for the Associated Press (AP), and in 1965 he was transferred to its Washington, D.C., bureau to report on the Pentagon.[1] While in Washington, he befriended famed investigative journalist I. F. Stone, whose muckraking newsletter I. F. Stone's Weekly served as an inspiration. Hersh began to develop his investigative methods, often walking out of regimented press briefings at the Pentagon to interview high-ranking officers in their lunch halls.[1] In 1966, Hersh reported on the intensifying U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War, writing series of articles on draft reform, the shortage of qualified pilots, and on the U.S. bombing of civilian targets in North Vietnam, revealed by New York Times correspondent Harrison Salisbury.[6] In 1967, Hersh became part of the AP's first special investigative unit.[1] After his editors diminished a piece he wrote on the U.S.'s secretive chemical and biological weapons programs, he quit and became a freelancer. Hersh wrote six articles in national magazines in 1967 (two for The New Republic, two for Ramparts, and two for The New York Times Magazine) in which he detailed the government's growing stockpiles of the weapons and its co-operation with universities and corporations, as well as the secret adoption of a first-use policy.[7] The research formed the basis for his first book, Chemical and Biological Warfare: America's Hidden Arsenal (1968), and the topic was highlighted that year by the Dugway sheep incident, in which an aerial test of VX nerve agent at the U.S. Army's Dugway Proving Ground in Utah inadvertently killed more than 6,000 sheep owned by local ranchers.[7] The event and Hersh's reporting led to public hearings and international pressure, contributing to the Nixon administration's decision to end the U.S. biological weapons program in 1969.[8] In the first three months of 1968, Hersh served as the press secretary for anti–Vietnam War candidate Senator Eugene McCarthy in his campaign in the 1968 Democratic Party presidential primaries. After resigning before the Wisconsin primary, he returned to journalism as a freelance reporter on Vietnam.[9] My Lai massacre Dead civilians after the massacre in a photo by Ronald L. Haeberle In 1969, Hersh's freelance reporting exposed the My Lai massacre, the murder of between 347 and 504 unarmed Vietnamese civilians (almost all women, children, and elderly men) by U.S. soldiers in a village on March 16, 1968. On October 22, 1969, Hersh received a tip from Geoffrey Cowan, a columnist for The Village Voice with a military source, about a soldier being held at Fort Benning in Georgia for a court-martial for allegedly killing 75 civilians in South Vietnam. After speaking with a Pentagon contact and Fort Benning's public relations office, Hersh found an AP story from September 7 that identified the soldier as Lieutenant William Calley. He next found Calley's lawyer, George W. Latimer, who met with him in Salt Lake City, Utah, and showed him a document which revealed Calley was charged with killing 109 people.[10] Hersh traveled to Fort Benning on November 11, where he quickly gained the confidence of Calley's roommates and eventually Calley himself, whom he interviewed that night. Hersh's first article on the massacre, a cautious and conservative piece which was approved with Latimer, was initially rejected by Life and Look magazines. Hersh next approached the anti-war Dispatch News Service run by his friend David Obst, which sold the story to 35 national papers. On November 13, the story appeared in The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, the Miami Herald, the Chicago Sun-Times, The Seattle Times, and Newsday, among others. Initial reaction was muted, with the press focusing on a massive anti-war demonstration in Washington on November 15.[11] Follow-up articles by other reporters revealed that the Army's investigation had been prompted by a letter on March 29 from Ronald Ridenhour, a Vietnam veteran who had interviewed soldiers who knew of the killings. After traveling to California and visiting Ridenhour, who gave him their personal information, Hersh traveled across the country to interview the soldiers. This revealed that eyewitnesses had been told not to talk to anyone, and that the actual death count was in the hundreds. On November 20, Dispatch syndicated Hersh's second article, which was internationally published. On the same day, photos of the massacre by Army photographer Ronald L. Haeberle were published in the Cleveland Plain Dealer, causing outrage among members of Congress and the public. The reporting was now being followed by The New York Times and the Post, and was covered on the CBS and NBC national nightly news.[12] Hersh next interviewed Paul Meadlo, a soldier who admitted that he had killed dozens of civilians on the orders of Calley. Meadlo's mother told Hersh that she "sent them a good boy and they made him a murderer". Hersh's third article was syndicated by Dispatch on November 25, and that night an interview with Meadlo by Mike Wallace on the CBS News program 60 Minutes was broadcast on national television. The White House acknowledged the massacre for the first time the next day, and the Army appointed General William R. Peers to head an official commission investigating it.[13] Hersh proceeded to visit 50 witnesses over the next three months, 35 of whom agreed to talk. His fourth article, syndicated on December 2, revealed random killings of civilians in the days before the massacre; a fifth article was published weeks later. Ten pages of Haeberle's photos were printed in Life magazine on December 5.[14] Hersh's reporting garnered him national fame, and encouraged the growing opposition to the war in the U.S.[15] However, he was also attacked by some in the press and government, who questioned his work and motivations. An op-ed column in the Times by James Reston asked: "Whatever happened in the massacre, should it be reported by press, radio and television, since clearly reporting the murder of civilians by American soldiers helps the enemy, divides the people of this country, and damages the ideal of America in the world?" South Carolina Republican Representative Albert Watson said, "this is no time to cast aspersions on our fighting men, the President and ourselves for that matter, as some members of the national news media and a few demagogues are doing".[16] The reveal of the massacre changed American media coverage of the war, which was restrained and had limited independence from official sources in its reporting before 1967; after the exposure of the My Lai massacre, major newspapers began reporting on other U.S. atrocities in Vietnam.[15] For his coverage, Hersh won the 1970 Pulitzer Prize for International Reporting and numerous other awards, including his first George Polk Award.[15] He later wrote in a note to Robert Loomis, the editor of his 1970 book-length account of the massacre, My Lai 4: A Report on the Massacre and Its Aftermath: Some will claim that I have attempted to exploit some dumb, out of service, overly talkative G.I.s. But few men are exposed to charges of murder ... it is not a "naming names and telling all affair". In fact, one of the strengths is that discriminating readers will know how much more I know—and did not tell. I'm convinced that to give the name and hometown of a G.I. who committed rape and murder that day, or one who beheaded an infant, would not further the aim of the book. It is an exposé, but not of the men of Charlie Company. Something much more significant is being put to light. ... Both the killer and the killed are victims in Vietnam; the peasant who is shot down for no reason and the G.I. who is taught, or comes to believe, that a Vietnamese life somehow has less meaning than his wife's, or his sister's, or his mother's.[17] On March 14, 1970, the Peers Commission submitted to the Army its secret report on the massacre, containing more than 20,000 pages of testimony from 400 witnesses. One of Hersh's sources leaked the testimony to him over the course of a year; it revealed that at least 347 civilians were killed, over twice as many as the Army had publicly conceded. The leak formed the basis for two articles by Hersh for The New Yorker magazine in 1972, which alleged that officers had destroyed documents on the massacre, as well as his 1972 book Cover-Up: The Army's Secret Investigation of the Massacre at My Lai 4.[18] The New York Times In April 1972, Hersh was hired by The New York Times as an investigative journalist at the paper's Washington bureau.[19] After the June 17 break-in at the Democratic National Committee headquarters in Washington and the emergence of the Watergate scandal, the Times sought to catch up with the reporting of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein at The Washington Post, who broke several stories in 1972 linking the break-in to the Nixon campaign. Together with Walter Rugaber, Hersh produced extensive reporting for the Times on the unfolding scandal; a key article by him published on January 14, 1973, revealed that hush money payments were still being made to the burglars, which shifted the press's focus from the break-in itself to its cover-up. During 1973, Hersh wrote more than 40 articles on Watergate, most printed on page one; his reveals included the FBI's failure to investigate political operative Donald Segretti, despite knowing of his activities, and leaks from the grand jury testimonies of former Attorney General John Mitchell and burglar James McCord, the latter of which revealed that the Committee to Re-Elect the President had made the payments. John Dean, Nixon's counsel, later said that while it had been the Post's articles in 1972 that had encouraged prosecutors, "the most devastating pieces that strike awfully close to home" were Hersh's in 1973 and 1974.[20] Hersh contributed to the revelations around Operation Menu, the secret U.S. bombing of neutral Cambodia in 1969–1970. On June 11, 1972, an article by Hersh alleged that General John D. Lavelle, who had recently been relieved as commander of the Air Force in Southeast Asia, was ousted because he had ordered repeated, unauthorized bombings of North Vietnam. The ensuing "Lavelle affair" led to Senate Armed Services Committee hearings in September 1972.[21] After reading Hersh's articles on the affair, Major Hal Knight, who had supervised radar crews in Vietnam, realized that the Senate "was unaware of what had taken place while I was out there", and in early 1973 wrote a letter to the committee that confessed his role in the cover-up of Operation Menu, in which he recorded fake bombing coordinates and burned his orders. Hersh learned of Knight's letter after exposing a different scandal on May 17, 1973, in which Nixon and National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger had authorized wiretaps of employees of the National Security Council after early bombings of Cambodia were exposed in the Times in May 1969. Hersh interviewed Knight and detailed the cover-up of Menu in an article on July 15, 1973, one day before the start of Knight's public testimony. On July 16, Secretary of Defense James R. Schlesinger admitted that the Air Force had flown 3,630 raids over Cambodia in 14 months, dropping more than 100,000 tons of bombs.[22] Hersh continued to investigate who had ordered the cover-up; in a rare telephone interview, Kissinger stated Nixon had "neither ordered nor was aware of any falsification". On July 31, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Earle Wheeler admitted that Nixon had ordered him to falsify records. Nixon's impeachment on this basis was proposed that day by Representative Robert Drinan, and it was considered as an article alongside the Watergate cover-up during the House debate on Nixon's articles of impeachment in July 1974.[23] In early 1974, Hersh planned to publish a story on "Project Jennifer" (later revealed to be codenamed Project Azorian), a covert CIA operation that partially recovered the sunken Soviet submarine K-129 from the floor of the Pacific Ocean with a purpose-built vessel, the Glomar Explorer. The ship, which was falsely presented as a underwater mineral mining vessel, was built by a company owned by magnate Howard Hughes. After a discussion with CIA director William Colby, Hersh promised not to publish the story while the operation was still active, in order to avoid triggering a potential international incident. The Times eventually published Hersh's article on March 19, 1975, with an added five-paragraph explanation of the publishing history and one-year delay.[24] On September 8, 1974, an article by Hersh revealed that the CIA, with the approval of Kissinger, had spent $8 million to influence unions, political parties, and media in Chile in order to destabilize the government of socialist Salvador Allende, who was overthrown in the September 11, 1973, coup d'état that brought to power a military dictatorship under General Augusto Pinochet. Hersh followed up the story over the next two months, with 27 articles in total.[25][26] On December 22, 1974, Hersh exposed Operation CHAOS, a massive CIA program of domestic wiretapping and infiltration of anti-war groups during the Nixon administration, which was conducted in direct violation of the agency's charter. Hersh reported that dossiers had been compiled on at least 10,000 American citizens, including congressmen; the government eventually conceded the figure was closer to 300,000. He wrote 34 more articles on the story over the next months; they prompted the formation of the Rockefeller Commission and Church Committee, which investigated covert CIA operations and led to reforms of the agency.[27] Hersh's exposure of CHAOS was the earliest reporting to reveal contents of the CIA's "Family Jewels" list of its own illegal activities.[28] Hersh soon felt "double-crossed" after learning of a January 16, 1975, meeting between the paper's top editors (including executive editor A. M. Rosenthal) and President Gerald Ford, in which the president mentioned CIA political assassinations—a comment which he subsequently asked to be struck from the record; the editors later agreed not to tell Hersh about the disclosure. Hersh thereafter decided to move away from reporting on the CIA.[29] On May 25, 1975, Hersh revealed that the U.S. Navy was using submarines to collect intelligence inside the three-mile protected coastal zone of the Soviet Union in a spy program codenamed "Holystone", which had continued for at least 15 years. It was later revealed that Dick Cheney, one of Ford's top aides and later George W. Bush's vice president, proposed that the FBI search the home of Hersh and his sources in order to halt his reporting on the subject.[30] In 1976, Hersh moved with his family to New York, where his wife was to attend medical school. He began working on larger projects; the first was a four-part investigation produced with Jeff Gerth, initially appearing on June 27, 1976, into the activities of Sidney Korshak, a lawyer and "fixer" for the Chicago Mafia, union leaders, and Hollywood.[31] On July 24, 1977, the Times published the first entry in a three-part investigation by Hersh and Gerth into financial impropriety at Gulf and Western Industries, one of the country's largest conglomerates; it was followed by two civil lawsuits by the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Times management was ambivalent about Hersh's new focus (he later stated that the paper "wasn't nearly as happy when we went after business wrongdoing as when we were kicking around some slob in government"), and he left the job in 1979 to start writing a book on Henry Kissinger.[32] In 1981, an article by Hersh in The New York Times Magazine described how former CIA agents Edwin Wilson and Frank Terpil had worked with Colonel Muammar Gaddafi, the leader of Libya, to illegally export explosives and train his troops for terrorism. Hersh reported that the CIA had given the pair tacit approval to oversee the sale of American technology. The story was followed up by Gerth at the Times through 1982, prompting reforms at the agency.[33] Investigative books: 1980s and 1990s Hersh's 1983 book The Price of Power: Kissinger in the Nixon White House, which involved four years of exhaustive work and more than 1,000 interviews, was a best-seller and won him the National Book Critics Circle Award for Nonfiction.[1] The 698-page book contained 41 chapters, including 13 devoted to Kissinger's role in Vietnam and the bombing of Cambodia;[34] other topics included his role in the Chilean coup, the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, domestic wiretapping, and the White House Plumbers, as well as Hersh's criticism of his former Times colleagues, such as Max Frankel and James Reston, for their proximity to him.[1] One much-discussed allegation was that Kissinger, originally an advisor to Nelson Rockefeller in the 1968 Republican Party presidential primaries before his defeat to Nixon, had offered Democratic candidate Hubert Humphrey damaging material on Nixon before going to the Nixon campaign with secret information he had gathered from the Vietnam War's Paris peace negotiations. The book also alleges that Kissinger alerted Nixon to President Johnson's October 31, 1968, bombing halt 12 hours in advance, securing his position in the administration. The book is noted for its density of information and prosecutorial tone,[34] and it has been credited with preventing Kissinger from returning to a government position during the Reagan administration.[35] While writing the book, Hersh revisited his previous reporting on Edward M. Korry, the U.S. ambassador to Chile from 1967 to 1971. In 1974, Hersh had reported in the Times that Korry had known of the CIA's efforts to foment a coup. Korry, who had reacted to the claim with furious denial, demanded a front-page retraction in exchange for documents Hersh wanted for his book. The retraction, which Time called the "longest correction ever published", appeared on February 9, 1981. Peter Kornbluh, Chile expert at the National Security Archive, later judged based on declassified documents that Korry was unaware of CIA involvement.[1] Also in the book was the claim that former Indian Prime Minister Morarji Desai had been paid $20,000 per year by the CIA during the Johnson and Nixon administrations. Desai filed a $50 million libel lawsuit against Hersh; when it went to trial in 1989, Desai, then 93, was too ill to attend, but Kissinger appeared and testified that Desai had not worked in any capacity for the CIA. A Chicago jury ruled in favor of Hersh, finding it had not been proved that Hersh had intended to write falsehoods or that he had shown reckless disregard for the truth, either of which must be proven in a libel suit.[36] In August 1983, a 17,500-word article by Hersh in The Atlantic magazine alleged that former President Gerald Ford, whom he interviewed in the story, had struck a secret deal prior to Nixon's resignation, brokered by Nixon's chief of staff General Alexander Haig, which gave him the presidency in exchange for his subsequent pardon of Nixon.[37] Hersh worked on and narrated the 1985 PBS Frontline documentary "Buying the Bomb", which reported on a Pakistani businessman who had attempted to smuggle krytron devices which could be used as nuclear bomb triggers out of the U.S.[37] On June 12, 1986, an article by Hersh in the Times revealed that U.S.-backed dictator of Panama Manuel Noriega was a key figure in weapons and narcotics trafficking. The article was the first in a "political landslide" of allegations against Noriega; in 1989, the U.S. invaded Panama and captured him, taking him to the U.S. to stand trial.[38] Hersh spent much of the decade writing two critically acclaimed but commercially unsuccessful books.[1] In his 1986 title The Target Is Destroyed, Hersh examined the 1983 shootdown of Korean Air Lines Flight 007 by the Soviet Union. He reported that the U.S. Air Force knew almost immediately that the Soviets believed that they had shot down a military plane, and that the U.S. misrepresented the situation to portray the Soviets as deliberate murderers of civilians.[39] In The Samson Option (1991), Hersh chronicled the history of Israel's nuclear weapon program, arguing that a nuclear capability was sought from the state's founding, and that it was achieved under a U.S. policy of feigned ignorance and indirect assistance. Hersh also wrote that Israel received aid from the U.S. in the 1973 Yom Kippur War through "nuclear blackmail" (Israel's threat to use the weapons against its Arab enemies).[40] Another major allegation was that the intelligence passed to Israel by convicted American spy Jonathan Pollard had been shared with the Soviet Union by former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, who denied the charge. Another allegation was that British media magnate Robert Maxwell was an informant for Mossad, Israel's national intelligence agency; Maxwell filed a defamation lawsuit against Hersh, but died in a drowning incident two weeks after the book was published.[41] Hersh's 1997 best-seller The Dark Side of Camelot, about the political career of John F. Kennedy, was controversial and heavily criticized. Shortly before publication, it emerged in the press that Hersh had removed claims at the last minute which were based on forged documents provided to him by fraudster Lex Cusack, including a fake hush money contract between Kennedy and Marilyn Monroe. An article about the controversy in The Washington Post said: "The strange and twisted saga of the JFK file is part cautionary tale, part slapstick farce, a story of deception and self-delusion in the service of commerce and journalism". Hersh and a one-time co-author had received a $800,000 advance for the project.[1] Other aspects of the book also came under criticism, including its prying into Kennedy's alleged sexual escapades based on interviews with his Secret Service guards, and its claim that Kennedy used Judith Exner as a courier to deliver cash to mobster Sam Giancana, made by a source who later recanted it before the Assassination Records Review Board.[1] In 1998, Hersh published Against All Enemies: Gulf War Syndrome: The War Between America's Ailing Veterans and Their Government, about Gulf War syndrome. He estimated that 15 percent of returning American troops were afflicted with the chronic and multi-symptomatic disorder, and challenged the government claim that they were suffering from war fatigue, as opposed to the effects of a chemical or biological weapon. He suggested the smoke from the destruction of a weapon depot that stored nerve gas at Khamisiyah in Iraq, to which more than 100,000 soldiers were exposed, as a possible cause.[42] Later investigations Hersh in Cairo in 2007 Starting in 1993, Hersh became a regular contributor to The New Yorker magazine, edited by Tina Brown until 1998 and David Remnick thereafter. A piece by him in 1993 alleged that Pakistan had developed nuclear weapons with the consent of the Reagan and Bush administrations, using restricted, high-tech materials purchased in the U.S.[1] In May 2000, a 25,000-word article by Hersh titled "Overwhelming Force", the longest piece in the magazine since 1993, detailed the Battle of Rumaila, an alleged massacre of retreating and surrendering Iraqi troops by soldiers under General Barry McCaffrey on the "Highway of Death" in the final days of the 1990–1991 Gulf War. He had received tips on the incident, which had been investigated and dismissed by the U.S. Army, from other officers while investigating McCaffrey's role in the Colombian drug war. Hersh performed six months of research for the article, and interviewed 300 people, including soldiers who had witnessed the killings; he alleged that McCaffrey had deceived his superiors and disregarded cease-fire orders.[43] In July 2001, the magazine published Hersh's investigation of Mobil's illegal multibillion-dollar oil swap deal between Kazakhstan and Iran in the 1990s.[44] Following the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Hersh turned his focus to U.S. policy in the Middle East and the Bush administration's "war on terror". In The New Yorker, he reported on U.S. intelligence failures surrounding 9/11; on the corruption of the Saudi royal family and its alleged financial support for Osama bin Laden; and on the potential instability of the Pakistani nuclear arsenal, including an article alleging that the Pentagon was planning a covert operation inside Pakistan to disarm the weapons.[1] President Bush told Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf that Hersh was "a liar".[45] During the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, Hersh reported that a Predator drone had followed a convoy carrying Taliban leader Mullah Omar, but that delayed approval for a missile strike had allowed him to escape; that a failed Army Delta Force raid on Omar's compound in Kandahar had led to an escape in which 12 soldiers were injured; and that a U.S.-backed airlift of Pakistani officers from Kunduz in Afghanistan had inadvertently carried Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters. Hersh later reported on the government's flawed prosecution of Zacarias Moussaoui, on the U.S.'s aggressive assassination efforts against al-Qaeda members, and on business conflicts of interest held by Richard Perle, chairman of the Pentagon's advisory Defense Policy Board, which led to his resignation.[1][46] Iraq and Abu Ghraib The infamous photo of a hooded Iraqi prisoner from Hersh's first article on the abuse, "Torture at Abu Ghraib" Following the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, Hersh disputed the Bush administration's erroneous claims about Saddam Hussein's alleged stockpile of weapons of mass destruction and ties to terrorism, which had been used to justify the invasion. He reported that the claim that Iraq had received nuclear materials from Niger was based on forged documents, that the Pentagon's Office of Special Plans had provided dubious intelligence to the White House on Iraq's weapons capacity, and that the Bush administration had pressured the intelligence community to violate its "stovepiping" rule, which allowed only vetted and confirmed information to rise up the chain of command.[1][46] On April 30, 2004, Hersh published the first of three articles in The New Yorker which detailed the U.S. military's torture and abuse of detainees at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad. The story, titled "Torture at Abu Ghraib", was accompanied by a now-infamous photo of an Iraqi prisoner standing on a box and wearing a black pointed hood, his hands spread out and attached to electrodes. A short piece with the photo and others had appeared two days earlier on the CBS News program 60 Minutes II, in anticipation of Hersh's article.[47] He described these photos: In one, Private [Lynndie] England, a cigarette dangling from her mouth, is giving a jaunty thumbs-up sign and pointing at the genitals of a young Iraqi, who is naked except for a sandbag over his head, as he masturbates. Three other hooded and naked Iraqi prisoners are shown, hands reflexively crossed over their genitals. ... In another, England stands arm in arm with Specialist [Charles] Graner; both are grinning and giving the thumbs-up behind a cluster of perhaps seven naked Iraqis, knees bent, piled clumsily on top of each other in a pyramid. ... Yet another photograph shows a kneeling, naked, unhooded male prisoner ... posed to make it appear that he is performing oral sex on another male prisoner, who is naked and hooded.[48] Hersh had obtained a secret 53-page report from an internal Army investigation headed by General Antonio Taguba, which had been submitted on March 3. It detailed more of the abuses, including pouring cold water and liquid from broken chemical lights on naked detainees, beatings with a broom stick and a chair, threatening males with rape, allowing guards to stitch wounds from a beating, sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and a broom stick, and using military dogs to intimidate.[47] The article also alleged that military intelligence teams, which included CIA officers and "interrogation specialists" from private contractors, had directed the abuse at the prison.[49] In two articles in May 2004, "Chain of Command" and "The Gray Zone", Hersh alleged that the abuse stemmed from a top-secret special access program (SAP) authorized by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld during the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, which provided blanket approval for killings, kidnappings, and interrogations (at Guantanamo Bay and CIA black sites) of "high-value" targets. He alleged that the SAP was extended to Iraq's military prisons in 2003 to gather intelligence on the growing insurgency, with Rumsfeld and Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Stephen Cambone also extending its methods of physical coercion and sexual humiliation, under the name "Copper Green".[50] In a rare statement responding directly to the allegations, Pentagon spokesman Lawrence Di Rita said that they were "outlandish, conspiratorial, and filled with error and anonymous conjecture", and that they reflected "the fevered insights of those with little, if any, connection to the activities in the Department of Defense"; he added that: "With these false claims, the Magazine and the reporter have made themselves part of the story."[51] As the scandal grew and calls for Rumsfeld to resign mounted, he privately offered to step down, which Bush rejected. Later stories by other reporters revealed the Torture Memos, in which the Department of Justice had advised the Pentagon and the CIA on the legality of "enhanced interrogation techniques". As after Hersh's reporting on the My Lai massacre, he garnered national and international attention and won multiple awards, including his fifth George Polk Award. A book compiling and building upon his post-9/11 reporting for The New Yorker, titled Chain of Command: The Road from 9/11 to Abu Ghraib, was published later in 2004.[52] In July 2005, an article by Hersh alleged that the U.S. had covertly intervened in favor of Ayad Allawi in the January 2005 Iraqi parliamentary election, in an "off the books" campaign conducted by retired CIA officers and non-government personnel, and with funds "not necessarily" appropriated by Congress.[53] Iran In a January 2005 article for The New Yorker titled "The Coming Wars", Hersh wrote that the next U.S. target in the Middle East was Iran, and alleged that covert U.S. reconnaissance missions, including a commando task force, had infiltrated the country to gather intelligence on nuclear, chemical, and missile sites since mid-2004.[54] In April 2006, an article by Hersh titled "The Iran Plans" alleged that the Bush administration was accelerating military planning for an attack on Iran, and that the Pentagon had presented the White House the option of using bunker-buster nuclear weapons on the country's underground uranium enrichment sites; he further alleged that the Joint Chiefs of Staff later sought to drop this option, which had been resisted by White House officials. The article also alleged that U.S. troops were infiltrating Iran to establish contact with anti-government minority groups, and that carrier-based aircraft were flying simulated nuclear bombing runs.[55] Hersh wrote several more pieces on this alleged plan in the next two years, including a July 2006 article on how senior commanders were challenging Bush's plan for a major bombing campaign, articles in November 2006 and March 2007 on the plan's re-focusing on targets in Iran aiding Iraqi militants, and an October 2007 article on planned "surgical" strikes on Iranian Quds Force training camps and supply depots.[53] In an August 2006 article, Hersh alleged that the U.S. was involved in the planning of Israel's attacks on Hezbollah in the 2006 Lebanon War as a "prelude" to the U.S. bombing of Iran.[56] In his March 2007 article, titled "The Redirection", he alleged that the U.S. and Saudi Arabia were covertly supporting Sunni extremist groups to combat the influence of Shiite Iran and Syria, and that the Lebanese government of Fouad Siniora was using its U.S. backing to supply weapons to Osbat al-Ansar and Fatah al-Islam, militant groups in Palestinian refugee camps, to develop a counter-balance to Shiite-backed Hezbollah. In May 2007, Lebanon launched an attack on Fatah al-Islam, which it accused of having ties to the Syrian government, starting a severe domestic conflict.[53] In a June 2008 article titled "Preparing the Battlefield", Hersh alleged that Congress had secretly appropriated $400 million for a major escalation of covert operations against Iran in late 2007, following a request from President Bush. The request allegedly "focused on undermining Iran's nuclear ambitions and trying to undermine the government through regime change", and included new activities such as the funding of opposition groups in the south and east of the country.[57] The article also alleged that Vice President Dick Cheney, after a January 2008 incident in the Strait of Hormuz in which a U.S. warship had nearly fired on Iranian boats, had held a meeting on how to create a casus belli for a war; Hersh later said in an interview that one of the options discussed and rejected was a false flag operation involving Navy SEALs, who would pose as Iranian patrols and start a firefight with U.S. ships.[58] Hersh later began writing a book on Cheney in 2011, on which he spent four years before dropping amid a crackdown on leaks, instead writing his 2018 memoir Reporter.[59] Hersh alleged in a May 2011 article titled "Iran And the Bomb" that the U.S. lacked conclusive evidence that Iran was developing nuclear weapons, citing a still-classified National Intelligence Estimate produced by the National Intelligence Council earlier that year. The summary of the 2007 estimate, which had been released publicly, had found "with high confidence" that Iran had halted its weapons program in late 2003 after the invasion of Iraq; Hersh alleged that the 2011 estimate found that this program had been aimed at Iraq (which Iran had believed to be developing a nuclear weapon), not Israel or the U.S., and that no new evidence had changed the 2007 assessment, despite expanded covert surveillance.[60] In a November 2011 article after the release of a report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) on possible military dimensions of Iran's nuclear program, Hersh disputed that the findings were new or transformative, arguing that there remained "no definitive evidence" of a weapons program, and calling the report a "political document" in an interview.[53] In an April 2012 article, Hersh alleged that the U.S. trained members of the Iranian dissident group Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MEK), listed as a "foreign terrorist organization" by the State Department, at a site in Nevada from 2005 to 2007, and had provided intelligence for its assassinations of nuclear scientists.[61] Syria and chemical attacks In the early weeks of the Iraq War in 2003, Hersh traveled to Damascus in Syria and interviewed President Bashar al-Assad, whom he interviewed several more times in following years, the latest in early 2010; he also interviewed Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah.[62][53] In February 2008, an article by Hersh questioned the Israeli and American claims that a Syrian facility bombed by Israel in September 2007 was an under-construction nuclear reactor;[53] a later report by the IAEA in 2011 found it was "very likely" that it was a secret reactor.[63] An article by Hersh in April 2009, citing his email correspondence with Assad, suggested that Syria was eager for peace with Israel over the Golan Heights, as well as negotiations with the U.S. over its withdrawal from Iraq and Syria's support for Hamas and Hezbollah. Hersh concluded that the Obama administration had a chance for diplomacy with Syria and perhaps Iran.[53] On December 8, 2013, an article by Hersh titled "Whose sarin?", published in the London Review of Books (LRB), alleged that the Obama administration had "cherry-picked intelligence" on the August 21, 2013, sarin attack at Ghouta during the Syrian Civil War, which had killed hundreds of civilians, in order to attribute the attack to Assad's government and justify a military strike.[64] The article, which had been rejected by The New Yorker and The Washington Post,[65] alleged that U.S. intelligence had found by June 2013 that al-Nusra, a branch of al-Qaeda and part of the Syrian opposition, was also capable of producing and deploying sarin gas.[66] The article cited munitions expert Theodore Postol, who judged that the rockets used in the attack were improvised, and that their estimated range of 2 kilometers (1.2 mi) was inconsistent with a proposed flight path from a Syrian Army base 9 kilometers (5.6 mi) away.[66] In a second article published in the LRB in April 2014, titled "The Red Line and the Rat Line", Hersh alleged that the attack was conducted by al-Nusra with the aid of the Turkish government of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in a false flag operation aimed at drawing the U.S. into the war against Assad. It described an alleged supply chain operation, organized by the CIA and the United Kingdom's MI6 with funding from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, which transported weapons to the Syrian rebels from Libya via southern Turkey between early 2012 and the September 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate and CIA annex at Benghazi. Hersh alleged that Turkey's National Intelligence Organization and Gendarmerie had proceeded to instruct al-Nusra on producing and deploying sarin, and that the planned U.S. strike was averted after British intelligence found that samples of sarin from Ghouta did not match batches from Syria's arsenal.[67][68] A report from an investigation by the United Nations (UN) concluded that sarin had been used at Ghouta, but did not assign responsibility for the attack.[69] Blogger Eliot Higgins and chemical weapons expert Dan Kaszeta disputed some of the claims in the articles with open-source intelligence, writing that the "improvised" rockets had been used by the Syrian Army as early as November 2012, and that the front lines on the day of the attack were just 2 kilometers (1.2 mi) from the impact sites, within Postol's estimated range. They also criticized the claim of al-Nusra responsibility, citing the high difficulty and expense of producing sarin, and the presence of hexamine in the Ghouta samples, an additive which Syria later declared part of its chemical weapons program.[70] In a December 2015 article in the LRB titled "Military to Military", Hersh alleged that the Joint Chiefs of Staff, after discovering by mid-2013 that Turkey was aiding al-Nusra and the Islamic State (ISIS) and that the moderate rebels were no longer viable, had sabotaged Obama's support for the rebels by sending U.S. intelligence to the militaries of Germany, Russia, and Israel, on the understanding it would be forwarded to Assad. In exchange for this support, aimed at defeating ISIS, Hersh alleged that the Joint Chiefs had required that Assad "restrain" Hezbollah from attacking Israel, restart negotiations with Israel over the Golan Heights, agree to accept Russian advisers, and hold elections after the war. This alleged alliance ended in September 2015 upon the retirement of its architect, chairman General Martin Dempsey. Max Fisher of Vox criticized the narrative, citing reporting that Syria and Russia were primarily bombing anti-ISIS rebels instead of ISIS, and Dempsey's prominent public support for sending more arms to the rebels, over which he had clashed with Obama.[71] On June 25, 2017, the German newspaper Die Welt published Hersh's article "Trump's Red Line", which had been rejected by the LRB.[62] It alleged that the Syrian Air Force's April 4, 2017, attack at Khan Shaykhun was not a sarin attack, but a conventional bombing conducted with Russian intelligence that struck a regional headquarters building with "fertilisers, disinfectants and other goods" in its basement, which created "effects similar to those of sarin".[62] The article further alleged that the April 7 missile strike on Shayrat Airbase, ordered by President Trump, was conducted despite U.S. intelligence affirming a conventional bombing.[72] Higgins again criticized Hersh's claims, writing for Bellingcat that they were inconsistent with Syrian and Russian descriptions of the target and satellite images of the impact sites, as well as findings of sarin and hexamine in samples retrieved by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).[73] A later investigation by a joint UN–OPCW panel found that the attack was a sarin bombing by the Syrian Air Force.[74] Killing of Osama bin Laden See also: Killing of Osama bin Laden § Alternative accounts In a September 2013 interview, Hersh commented that the U.S.'s account of the May 2, 2011, raid in Abbottabad, Pakistan, which killed Osama bin Laden was "one big lie, not one word of it is true". He stated that both the Obama administration and Pakistan had lied about the event, and that American media outlets were reluctant to challenge the administration, saying: "It's pathetic, they are more than obsequious, they are afraid to pick on this guy [Obama]".[75] Hersh later said that his sources told him that the official story was false days after the raid, but that The New Yorker had rejected his article pitches.[76][77] On May 10, 2015, a 10,000-word article by Hersh detailing an alternative account of the raid, titled "The Killing of Osama bin Laden", was published in the London Review of Books. The official account was that bin Laden had been located through interrogation of detainees and surveillance of his courier, that Pakistan was unaware of the operation, and that he was killed only when he did not surrender; Hersh reported that bin Laden had been captured and held as a prisoner of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) since 2006, that his location was revealed to the CIA by a former Pakistani intelligence officer in 2010, that top Pakistani military officials knew about the operation, and that bin Laden had been assassinated.[78][79] The article alleged Pakistan had kept bin Laden, with financial support from Saudi Arabia, as leverage against al-Qaeda, and that it agreed to give him up in exchange for increased U.S. military aid and a "freer hand in Afghanistan".[80] Further allegations were that bin Laden's DNA had been collected by a Pakistani Army doctor, not by Shakil Afridi in a fake vaccination drive by the CIA; that the Navy SEALs met no resistance at the compound, and were escorted by an ISI officer; that bin Laden's body was torn apart by rifle fire; and that pieces of his corpse were tossed out over the Hindu Kush mountains on the flight back to Jalalabad, rather than being buried at sea.[80][81] A book compiling the article and Hersh's pieces on Syria for the magazine, The Killing of Osama bin Laden, was published in 2016.[82] Hersh's article was heavily criticized by other reporters.[78][83] The narrative was similar to a little-known August 2011 post by national security blogger R.J. Hillhouse, who called Hersh's article "either plagiarism or unoriginal", though she speculated they used different sources;[84][85] Hersh denied having read her work.[83] Max Fisher of Vox accused Hersh's story of "internal contradictions" and "troubling inconsistencies" in a long article, questioning among other claims that the U.S. and Pakistan had struck a secret deal, as U.S. military aid had fallen and relations had deteriorated in following years.[80] Peter Bergen of CNN, who visited the compound after the raid, disputed that the only shots fired were those that killed bin Laden, writing that he had seen evidence of an extended firefight.[81] Both journalists, as well as Jack Shafer at Politico[86] and James Kirchick at Slate,[87] criticized Hersh's sources: an unnamed "retired senior [U.S.] intelligence official", "two longtime consultants to the Special Operations Command", and retired Pakistani General Asad Durrani, who headed the ISI from 1990 to 1992, with Fisher writing that this was "worryingly little evidence for a story that accuses hundreds of people across three governments of staging a massive international hoax that has gone on for years".[80] Fisher also questioned that Pakistan had insisted on an elaborate raid over simpler and lower-risk methods, asking why bin Laden was not killed and his body handed over, or killed in a staged U.S. drone strike.[80] Hersh's article stated that a drone strike was the raid's original cover story before one of the Black Hawk helicopters crashed and was demolished, which was impossible to hide.[88] Some details in Hersh's article were corroborated by Carlotta Gall of The New York Times, who reported that she had previously been told by a "high-level member" of the ISI that Pakistan had been hiding bin Laden and that an ISI brigadier had informed the CIA of his location;[89] NBC News also corroborated the claim of a retired ISI officer who had tipped off the CIA.[90] Pakistani news outlets alleged the tipster was Brigadier Usman Khalid, who died in 2014.[91] In an article in the Columbia Journalism Review, Trevor Timm, executive director of the Freedom of the Press Foundation, praised an article by Ali Watkins of The Huffington Post[91] as one of the few that identified the tipster development as discrediting the CIA's claim that its torture of detainees had revealed the identity of bin Laden's courier, which had previously been challenged by the December 2014 report on torture by the Senate Intelligence Committee.[92] Nord Stream pipeline and Ukraine On February 8, 2023, in a Substack article titled "How America Took Out The Nord Stream Pipeline", Hersh alleged that the September 26, 2022, sabotage of the Nord Stream 1 and 2 pipelines, which had carried natural gas from Russia to Germany through the Baltic Sea, was carried out by the U.S. in a top-secret CIA operation ordered by President Joe Biden, with collaboration from Norway. The self-published post, which relied on one anonymous source "with direct knowledge of the operational planning", alleged that U.S. Navy divers operating from a Norwegian ship, using NATO's BALTOPS 22 exercise in June 2022 as cover, had planted C-4 mines which were later remotely detonated by a sonar buoy dropped from a Norwegian plane. The alleged motive was reducing Russian economic influence in Europe and cutting off a major source of state revenue; Nord Stream 2 was not yet operational, but would have doubled the gas supply of Nord Stream 1. Hersh cited statements against the pipeline made by Biden and his foreign policy team as support, including Biden's warning in February 2022, before the Russian invasion of Ukraine, that: "If Russia invades ... there will no longer be a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it."[93] The party responsible for the attack, which rendered three of the four pipelines inoperable, was not widely known at the time of Hersh's report. Western countries had not formally accused Russia, though some officials suggested it was responsible;[93] Germany, Denmark, and Sweden had each opened investigations into the attack. Russia had accused the United Kingdom's Royal Navy and later the U.S., and disputed the idea it would destroy the pipelines, which it owned a large stake in through Gazprom.[94] Kelly Vlahos, a senior advisor at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, described the U.S. mainstream media response to Hersh's post as a "total blackout", and wrote that his reporting "should have opened the floodgates of journalistic inquiry".[95] The post received widespread attention in independent media and European mainstream media, including in Germany; the Bundestag held its first debate on the bombing on February 10, in which members from Alternative for Germany (AfD) and Die Linke cited Hersh and called on the executive branch to release the results of its investigation, which it had said would be kept secret.[96] In Russia, Hersh's report was picked up by the state-owned media agencies RT and TASS.[97] At a UN Security Council meeting on February 21, Russia's representative Vasily Nebenzya cited Hersh and called for an independent UN investigation.[98] Some of the post's claims were criticized by writers using open-source intelligence.[99] In a Substack post, blogger Oliver Alexander disputed the claim that the U.S. divers operated from a Norwegian Alta-class minesweeper, as no ships of the class had taken part in BALTOPS 22; he noted the participation of the Hinnøy, a member of the similar Oksøy mine hunter class, but wrote that AIS data from the ship showed that it had passed several kilometers from the sites at its closest, without slowing down. He wrote that ADS-B records did not show the alleged "seemingly routine flight" by a Norwegian P-8 Poseidon in the hours before the explosions, and questioned the claim that NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg had co-operated with U.S. intelligence since the Vietnam War, as Stoltenberg was 16 years old in 1975.[100][101] Hersh replied that the open-source location data could have been manipulated by spoofing or disabling transponders.[102] Alexander later wrote that satellite images showed the Hinnøy sailing in formation at six locations, matching AIS data.[100][103] In March 2023, the New York Times reported that new intelligence suggested a "pro-Ukrainian group" was responsible for the attack,[104] and the German newspaper Die Zeit reported that German police found it was carried out by six people of unclear nationality diving from a yacht rented from a Ukrainian-owned Polish company.[102] In a second post, Hersh alleged that this account was a false flag fabrication created by the CIA and fed to U.S. and German outlets.[98] In an April 2023 article on Substack, Hersh alleged that figures in the Ukrainian government of Volodymyr Zelensky had embezzled at least $400 million of U.S. aid to the country, intended for the purchase of diesel fuel, by buying discount diesel from Russia, citing an alleged analysis produced by the CIA.[105] Other statements Speeches Hersh speaking at the Institute for Policy Studies in 2004 In a 2005 interview with New York magazine, Hersh made a distinction between the strict standards of accuracy observed in his print reporting and the leeway he allowed himself in speeches, in which he spoke informally about stories still being worked on, or changed information to protect his sources: "Sometimes I change events, dates, and places in a certain way to protect people. ... I can't fudge what I write. But I can certainly fudge what I say."[106] In a July 2004 speech to the American Civil Liberties Union, at the height of the Abu Ghraib scandal, Hersh alleged that there existed video tapes of young boys being sexually assaulted at the prison, in which their "shrieking" could be heard.[106] In his book Chain of Command, however, he clarified that a lawyer in the case had told him about a prisoner witness statement which described the alleged rape of a boy by a foreign contract employee who worked as an interpreter, as a woman was taking pictures. Hersh later stated: "I actually didn't quite say what I wanted to say correctly. ... It wasn't that inaccurate, but it was misstated. The next thing I know, it was all over the blogs."[106] In a March 2009 speech at the University of Minnesota, Hersh alleged that the Bush administration had authorized the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) to locate and kill targets in a program which reported only to Vice President Cheney, outside of the chain of command, in what Hersh described as an "executive assassination ring".[107] In a January 2011 speech in Doha, Qatar, Hersh alleged that General Stanley A. McChrystal, head of the JSOC from 2003 to 2008, and his successor Admiral William H. McRaven were "members, or at least supporters" of the Knights of Malta, a Catholic lay religious order, and that many JSOC officers were members of the Catholic institution Opus Dei; McChrystal denied the allegation. Hersh further alleged that some military leaders viewed the U.S. wars in the Middle East as a "crusade", in which they were protecting Christians from Muslims "[as] in the 13th century".[108][109] Murder of Seth Rich In a January 2017 phone conversation about the 2016 murder of Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich, Hersh told Fox News commentator Ed Butowsky that he had heard about an FBI report which found that Rich had tried to sell emails to WikiLeaks prior to his death. Although cautioned by Hersh that the information may not be true, Butowsky forwarded the taped call to the Rich family, who were encouraged to hire a private investigator quoted in a later-retracted Fox News article on the alleged FBI report.[110] Hersh later said that he had relayed "gossip", and that he was fishing for information.[111][112] Pat Nixon abuse In his 2018 autobiography Reporter, Hersh wrote that he had heard in 1974 that Pat Nixon, wife of former president Richard Nixon, had been treated in an emergency room in California after her husband had hit her, and that former Nixon aide John Ehrlichman told him of two previous incidents in which Nixon struck her. Hersh chose not to report on the alleged abuse because he considered it part of Nixon's private life, a decision which he later regretted.[113][114] Use of anonymous sources Hersh's reporting is well-known for its use of anonymous sources, which his biographer Robert Miraldi described as his "trademark".[115] While working as a Pentagon correspondent for the AP, he developed many anonymous top- and mid-level military sources, leading Pentagon officials to deride the fact that he "broke every rule of bureaucratic journalism".[116] His AP colleague Richard Pyle later observed that "people were somewhat annoyed that he had no or few names in so many of his stories".[117] Hersh's articles on the Watergate scandal, like that of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, made extensive use of unnamed sources, including deep inside the White House, Justice Department, and Congress. Hersh's New York Times editor A. M. Rosenthal warned him to halt his practice of "ascribing long, colorful pejorative comments in direct quotes to anonymous officials".[118] After Hersh's articles on CIA involvement in the Chilean coup, largely based on unnamed CIA sources, Rosenthal praised his work but again warned about sources: "It's our obligation to be extremely careful, restrained and judicious. Using them puzzles the reader at the best, and raises questions about the credibility of the story at the worst."[119] Hersh's conservative critics frequently accused him of a left-wing bias in his reporting on the My Lai massacre and later stories.[120] Hersh responded that: "I don't go around getting my stories from nice old Lefties or the Weathermen ... I get them from good old-fashioned constitutionalists. I learned a long time ago that you can't go around making judgments on the basis of people's politics. The essential thing is: Do they have integrity or not?"[1] Henry Kissinger, in response to Hersh's 1983 book The Price of Power, accused him of including "inference piled on assumption, third-hand hearsay accepted as fact, the self-serving accounts of disgruntled adversaries elevated to gospel, the 'impressions' of people several times removed from the scene."[121] Hersh's 1986 book The Target Is Destroyed was especially noted for its anonymous sources, with Hersh admitting that: "This is a book whose key allegations hinge on unnamed sources ... mysterious 'government officials' and 'intelligence analysts'.",[122] and his 1991 book The Samson Option was similar, with journalist Steven Emerson writing in a review that it relied on Hersh's mere reputation: "If anyone else wrote this book, it would have never seen the light of day".[123] Hersh's 1997 book The Dark Side of Camelot used very few unnamed sources, but its document hoax controversy and dubious claims drew the criticism of many in the media, with Kennedy biographer Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. calling him "the most gullible investigative reporter perhaps in American history".[124] Hersh's articles for The New Yorker, like his previous articles at the Times under Rosenthal, were reviewed by an active editor (David Remnick) and a team of fact-checkers.[125] In a 2003 interview with the Columbia Journalism Review, Remnick stated that he knew the identity of all of Hersh's sources: "I know every single source that is in his pieces ... Every 'retired intelligence officer', every general with reason to know, and all those phrases that one has to use, alas, by necessity, I say, 'Who is it? What's his interest?' We talk it through."[1] Hersh's reporting on the Middle East after 9/11 drew renewed criticism of his unnamed sources; journalist Amir Taheri wrote in a review of Hersh's 2004 book Chain of Command that: "Hersh uses the method of medieval scholastics: first choose your belief, then seek proofs. ... By my count Hersh has anonymous sources inside 30 foreign governments and virtually every department of the U.S. government."[126] Remnick defended Hersh, arguing that unnamed sources were needed in intelligence reporting due to the risk taken by sources, who faced dismissal or prosecution. Hersh said of his reporting of the "war on terror" that: "[T]he only way you measure my stories in any reasonable way is to say that I've been writing an alternative history of the war. And the question is: Is it basically right? And I think overwhelmingly it's right."[127] Journalist William Arkin, who worked with Hersh in the 1990s, responded to critics of Hersh's errors that: "He can get

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ William Moses Kunstler (July 7, 1919 – September 4, 1995) was an American attorney and civil rights activist, known for defending the Chicago Seven.[1] Kunstler was an active member of the National Lawyers Guild, a board member of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the co-founder of the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), the "leading gathering place for radical lawyers in the country."[2] Kunstler's defense of the Chicago Seven from 1969 to 1970 led The New York Times to label him "the country's most controversial and, perhaps, its best-known lawyer".[2] Kunstler is also well known for defending members of the Revolutionary Communist Party, Catonsville Nine, Black Panther Party, Weather Underground Organization, the Attica Prison rioters, Meir Kahane assassin El Sayyid Nosair, and the American Indian Movement.[2] He also won a de facto segregation case regarding the District of Columbia's public schools and "disinterred, singlehandedly" the concept of federal criminal removal jurisdiction in the 1960s.[2] Kunstler refused to defend right-wing groups, such as the Minutemen, on the grounds that "I only defend those whose goals I share. I'm not a lawyer for hire. I only defend those I love."[2] He was a polarizing figure; many on the right wished to see him disbarred, while many on the left admired him as a "symbol of a certain kind of radical lawyer."[2] Even some other civil rights lawyers regarded Kunstler as a "publicity hound and a hit-and-run lawyer" who "brings cases on Page 1 and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund wins them on Page 68."[2] Legal writer Sidney Zion quipped that Kunstler was "one of the few lawyers in town who knows how to talk to the press. His stories always check out and he's not afraid to talk to you, and he's got credibility—although you've got to ask sometimes, 'Bill, is it really true?'"[2] Early life Kunstler was born to a Jewish family in New York City, the son of Frances Mandelbaum and Monroe Bradford Kunstler, a physician.[3] He attended DeWitt Clinton High School.[4] After high school, he attended Yale University, where he majored in French and graduated Phi Beta Kappa in 1941.[5] He then went on to attend Columbia Law School from which he graduated in 1948. While at Yale, Kunstler was an avid poet and represented Yale in the Glascock Prize competition at Mount Holyoke College. Rejected twice by the United States Navy, Kunstler served in the U.S. Army during World War II in the Pacific theater. He volunteered for cryptography and served in New Guinea.[6] He rose to the rank of major and received the Bronze Star. While in the army, he was noted for his theatric portrayals in the Fort Monmouth Dramatic Association.[5] After his discharge from the Army, he attended law school, was admitted to the bar in New York in 1948 and began practicing law. Kunstler went through R.H. Macy's executive training program in the late 1940s and practiced family and small-business law in the 1950s, before entering civil-rights litigation in the 1960s.[2] He was an associate professor of law at New York Law School (1950–1951). Kunstler won honorable mention for the National Legal Aid Association's press award in 1957 for his series of radio broadcasts on WNEW, The Law on Trial.[7] At WNEW, Kunstler also conducted interviews on controversial topics, such as the Alger Hiss case, on a program called Counterpoint.[8] Civil rights career Rise to prominence (1957–1964) Kunstler represented the first Title IX federal removal cases under the Civil Rights Act of 1964: protesters at the 1964 New York World's Fair. Kunstler first made headlines in 1957 when he unsuccessfully defended William Worthy, a correspondent for the Baltimore Afro-American, who was one of 42 Americans who had their passports seized after violating the State Department's travel ban on Communist China (after attending a Communist youth conference in Moscow).[9] Kunstler refused a State Department compromise, which would have returned Worthy's passport if he agreed to cease visiting Communist countries, a condition Worthy considered unconstitutional.[10] Kunstler played an important role as a civil-rights lawyer in the 1960s, traveling to many of the segregated battlegrounds to work to free those who had been jailed. Working on behalf of the ACLU, Kunstler defended the Freedom Riders in Mississippi in 1961.[11] Kunstler filed for a writ of habeas corpus with Sidney Mize, a federal judge in Biloxi, and appealed to the Fifth Circuit; he also filed similar pleas in state courts.[11] Judge Leon Hendrick in Hinds County refused Kunstler's motion to cancel the mass appearance (involving hundreds of miles of travel) of all 187 convicted riders.[12] The riders were convicted in a bench trial in Jackson and appealed to a county jury trial, where Kunstler argued that the county systematically discriminated against African-American jurors.[13] In 1962, Kunstler took part in efforts to integrate public parks and libraries in Albany, Georgia.[14] Later that year, he published The Case for Courage (modeled on President Kennedy's Profiles in Courage) highlighting the efforts of other lawyers who risked their careers for controversial clients, as well as similar acts by public servants.[15] At the time of the publication, Kunstler was already well known for his work with the Freedom Riders, his book on the Caryl Chessman case, and his radio coverage of trials.[15] Kunstler also joined a group of lawyers criticizing the application of Alabama's civil libel laws and spoke at a rally against HUAC.[16][17] In 1963, for the Gandhi Society of New York, Kunstler filed to remove the cases of more than 100 arrested African-American demonstrators from the Danville Corporation Court to the Charlottesville District Court, under a Reconstruction Era statute.[18] Although the district judge remanded the cases to city court, he dissolved the city's injunction against demonstrations.[18] In doing so, Judge Thomas J. Michie rejected a Justice Department amicus curiae brief urging the removal to create a test case for the statute.[18] Kunstler appealed to the Fourth Circuit.[18] That year, Kunstler also sued public-housing authorities in Westchester County.[19] In 1964, Kunstler defended a group of four accused of kidnapping a white couple, and succeeded in getting the alleged weapons thrown out as evidence, as they could not be positively identified as those used.[20] That year, he also challenged Mississippi's unpledged elector law and racial segregation in primary elections; he also defended three members of the Blood Brothers, a Harlem gang, charged with murder.[21][22] Kunstler went to St. Augustine, Florida, in 1964 during the demonstrations led by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Dr. Robert B. Hayling, which put added pressure on Congress to pass the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964. Kunstler brought the first federal case under Title IX of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which allowed the removal of cases from county court to be appealed; the defendants were protestors at the 1964 New York World's Fair.[23] ACLU director (1964–1972) He was a director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) from 1964 to 1972, when he became a member of the ACLU National Council. In 1966, he co-founded the Center for Constitutional Rights. Kunstler also worked with the National Lawyers Guild. In 1965, Kunstler's firm - Kunstler, Kunstler, and Kinoy - was asked to defend Jack Ruby by his brother Earl, but dropped the case because they "did not wish to be in a situation where we have to fight to get into the case".[24][25] Ruby was eventually permitted to replace his original defense team with Kunstler,[26][27] who got him a new trial.[28] In 1966, he also defended an arsonist who burned down a Jewish Community Center, killing 12, because he was not provided a lawyer before he signed a confession.[29] Kunstler's other notable clients include: Salvador Agron, H. Rap Brown,[30][31][32][33] Lenny Bruce,[34] Stokely Carmichael,[2] the Catonsville Nine,[35] Angela Davis, Larry Davis, Gregory Lee Johnson, Martin Luther King Jr.,[2] Gary McGivern, Adam Clayton Powell Jr.,[36] Filiberto Ojeda Rios, Assata Shakur, Lemuel Smith,[37] Morton Sobell,[38] Wayne Williams, and Michael X. Chicago Seven (1969–1972) While defending the Chicago Seven, he put the war in Vietnam on trial – asking Judy Collins to sing "Where Have All The Flowers Gone" from the witness stand, placing a Viet Cong flag on the defense table, and wearing a black armband to commemorate the war dead. — Ron Kuby, in his 1995 eulogy of Kunstler.[39] Kunstler gained national renown for defending the Chicago Seven (originally Chicago Eight), in a five-month trial in 1969–1970, against charges of conspiring to incite riots in Chicago during the 1968 Democratic National Convention.[40] Under cross-examination, Kunstler got a key police witness to contradict his previous testimony and admit that he had not witnessed Jerry Rubin, but had rather been given his name two weeks later by the FBI.[41] Another prosecution witness, photographer Louis Salzberg, admitted under Kunstler's cross-examination that he was still on the payroll of the FBI.[42] The trial was marked by frequent clashes between Kunstler and U.S. Attorney Thomas Foran, with Kunstler taking the opportunity to accuse the government of failing to "realize the extent of antiwar sentiment".[43] Kunstler also sparred with Judge Julius Hoffman, on one occasion remarking (with respect to the number of federal marshals): "this courtroom has the appearance of an armed camp. I would note that the Supreme Court has ruled that the appearance of an armed camp is a reversible error".[44] During one heated exchange, Kunstler informed Hoffman that his entry in Who's Who was three times longer than the judge's, to which the judge replied: "I hope you get a better obituary."[37] Kunstler and co-defense attorneys Leonard Weinglass, Michael Kennedy, Gerald Lefcourt, Dennis Roberts and Michael Tigar were cited for contempt (the convictions were later overturned unanimously by the Seventh Circuit).[40] If Hoffman's contempt conviction had been allowed to stand, Kunstler would have been imprisoned for an unprecedented four years.[2][45] Kunstler at a rally in Los Angeles, March 1970 The progress of the trial—which had many aspects of guerrilla theater—was covered on the nightly news and made Kunstler the best-known lawyer in the country, and something of a folk hero.[2] After much deadlock, the jury acquitted all seven on the conspiracy charge, but convicted five of violating the anti-riot provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1968.[46] The Seventh Circuit overturned all the convictions on November 21, 1972, due to Hoffman's refusal to let defense lawyers question the prospective jurors on racial and cultural biases; the Justice Department did not retry the case. Shortly after the 1968 Democratic Convention, Tom Hayden, Rennie Davis, Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, Dave Dellinger, and Robert Greenblatt received subpoenas to appear before the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC). Kunstler and co-counsel, Michael Kennedy, were among the group's six defense attorneys. On the opening day of the HUAC hearings, the subpoenaed men and their lawyers, including Kunstler and Kennedy, staged a “stand-in� to protest the investigations. “The Constitution is being raped and we as lawyers are being emasculated in an armed camp,� Kennedy shouted at the hearing. American Indian Movement (1973–1976) Kunstler arrived in Pine Ridge, South Dakota, on March 4, 1973, to draw up the demands of the American Indian Movement (AIM) members involved in the Wounded Knee incident.[47] Kunstler, who headed the defense, called the trial "the most important Indian trial of the 20th century", attempting to center the defense on the Treaty of Fort Laramie (1868).[48] Kunstler's team represented Russell Means and Dennis Banks, two of the leaders of the occupation.[49] Kunstler objected to the heavy trial security on the grounds that it could prejudice the jury and Judge Fred J. Nichol agreed to ease measures.[49] The trial was moved to Minnesota.[50] Two authors and three Sioux were called as defense witnesses, mostly focusing on the historical (and more recent) injustice against the Sioux on the part of the U.S. government, shocking the prosecution.[51] In 1975, Kunstler again defended AIM members in the slaying of two FBI agents at Pine Ridge Indian Reservation, not far from the site of the Wounded Knee incident.[52] At the trial in 1976, Kunstler subpoenaed prominent government officials to testify about the existence of a Counter-Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO) against Native American activists.[53] District Judge Edward J. McManus approved Kunstler's attempt to subpoena FBI director Clarence M. Kelley.[54] Kunstler also defended a Native American woman who refused to send her daughter with muscular dystrophy to school.[55] Attica (1974–1976) In 1974–1975, Kunstler defended a prisoner charged with killing a guard during the Attica Prison riot.[56] Under cross-examination, Kunstler forced Correction Officer Donald Melven to retract his sworn identification of John Hill, Kunstler's client, and Charles Pernasilice (defended by Richard Miller), admitting he still retained "slight" doubts that he confessed to investigators at the time of the incident.[57] Kunstler focused on pointing out that all the other prosecution witnesses were testifying under reduced-sentencing agreements and called five prison inmates as defense witnesses (Miller called none), who testified that other prisoners hit the guard.[58] Despite Justice King's repeated warnings to Kunstler to "be careful, sir", Kunstler quickly became "the star of the trial, the man the jurors watch most attentively, and the lawyer whose voice carries most forcefully".[59] Although the prosecution was careful to avoid personal confrontation with Kunstler, who frequently charmed the jury with jokes, on one occasion, Kunstler provoked a shouting match with the lead prosecutor, allegedly to wake up a sleeping jury member.[59] The jury convicted Hill of murder and Pernasilice of attempted assault.[58] When Kunstler protested that the defendants would risk being murdered due to the judges remanding them, King threatened to send Kunstler with them.[58] New York Governor Hugh Carey granted executive clemency to Hill and the other inmates in 1976, even though Hill's name was not on the recommended list of pardons delivered to the governor and his appeals were still pending.[60] In June, Kunstler and Barbara Handshu, representing another inmate at Attica, Mariano Gonzales, asked for a new hearing on the role of FBI informant Mary Jo Cook.[61] Assata Shakur (1977) Kunstler joined the defense staff of Assata Shakur in 1977, charged in New Jersey with a variety of felonies in connection with a 1973 shootout with New Jersey State Troopers.[62] Shakur, sentenced to life imprisonment, in early 1979 escaped from prison. In 1984, Shakur was granted asylum in Cuba by Fidel Castro, who called the charges “an infamous lie". William Kunstler told reporters in 1979 that Shakur's health had declined in prison; he said: “I was very happy that she escaped because I thought she was unfairly tried".[63] Collaboration with Ron Kuby (1983–1995) At the time of Kunstler's death, he was defending Omar Abdel-Rahman ("the Blind Sheik") for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. From 1983 until Kunstler's death in 1995, Ron Kuby was his partner. The two took on controversial civil-rights and criminal cases, including cases where they represented Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, head of the Egyptian-based terrorist group Gama'a al-Islamiyah, responsible for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing; Colin Ferguson, the man responsible for the 1993 Long Island Rail Road shooting, who would later reject Kuby and Kunstler's legal counsel and choose to represent himself at trial; Qubilah Shabazz, the daughter of Malcolm X, accused of plotting to murder Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam; Glenn Harris, a New York City public-school teacher who absconded with a 15-year-old girl for two months; Nico Minardos, a flamboyant actor indicted by Rudy Giuliani for conspiracy to ship arms to Iran; Darrell Cabey, one of the persons shot by Bernard Goetz; and associates of the Gambino crime family. Kunstler's defense of the three clerics made him "more visible, more venerated, more vilified than ever".[34] During the first Gulf War, they represented dozens of American soldiers who refused to fight and claimed conscientious objector status. They also won acquittal for El-Sayyid Nosair, the accused assassin of extreme Zionist leader Meir Kahane, who later admitted to the killing. Representation of mobsters Kunstler represented a number of convicted mafiosi during his career, claiming "they were victims of government persecution",[64] and said to have "never made a nickel on an OC [organized crime] case".[65] The more notorious of Kunstler's mobster clients included Joe Bonanno, Raymond L.S. Patriarca, Nicholas L. Bianco,[66] John Gotti, and Louis Ferrante, who claimed in his memoir, Unlocked: the Life and Crimes of a Mafia Insider, that Kunstler "took a hundred grand off me."[67] Other work Kunstler represented Larry Layton, one of the accused killers, at the behest of People's Temple (PT) founder Jim Jones, of Congressman Leo Ryan, who in November 1978 had ventured to Jonestown, the PT settlement in Guyana, South America, to investigate the allegations by family members and dissidents that the PT (which had built its reputation on deceptive alliances with populist Christian, anti-racist and then left-wing and universalist causes) was a cult riven with torture, sexual abuse, corruption and mass suicide drills. Layton disguised himself as a defector and initiated the gunfire on November 18 against Ryan and his secretary and accompanying journalists, following which Jim Jones ordered and then enforced the deaths of more than 900 people, almost one-third of them children, as a purported act of revolution. This was the vast majority of followers in Jonestown. Layton was a cult member whose sister, Deborah Layton, was one of those whose fleeing triggered the leader's increasing paranoia, and in her memoir describes the brainwashed and totalist (psychiatrist Robert Lifton) environment of the PT. Kuntsler's defense was premised on the idea that Layton was not personally responsible. In 1979, Kunstler represented Marvin Barnes, an ABA and NBA basketball player, with past legal troubles and league discipline problems.[68] In 1989–1990, Kunstler twice argued successfully in defense of flag burning, before the Supreme Court. In Texas v. Johnson and United States v. Eichman, the Court held the act to be protected speech under the First Amendment, striking down Texas state and Federal statutes on "flag desecration". Kunstler appeared as a lawyer in the movie The Doors in 1991, as a judge in the movie Malcolm X in 1992, and as himself in several television documentaries.[69] In 1993 Kunstler represented Yusuf Saalam of the Central Park 5 during his appeal, a move which alienated several friends. After Kunstler's death Saalam would be proven innocent when Matias Reyes confessed and DNA proved that Reyes was the sole attacker. During the 1994–95 television season, Kunstler starred as himself in an episode of Law & Order titled "White Rabbit", defending a woman charged with complicity in the 1971 murder of a policeman during the robbery of an armored car; the plot was based on the real-life story of Katherine Ann Power, who turned herself in to authorities in 1993. Death and legacy In late 1995, Kunstler died in New York City of heart failure at the age of 76. In his last major public appearance, at the commencement ceremonies for the University at Buffalo's School of Architecture and Planning, Kunstler lambasted the death penalty, saying: "We have become the charnel house of the Western world with reference to executions; the next closest to us is the Republic of South Africa." Ron Kuby, in his eulogy of Kunstler, said: "While defending the Chicago Seven, [Kunstler] put the war in Vietnam on trial, asking Judy Collins to sing 'Where Have All The Flowers Gone?' from the witness stand, placing a Viet Cong flag on the defense table, and wearing a black armband to commemorate the war dead."[70] William Kunstler was survived by his wife Margaret Ratner Kunstler (who was previously married to Kunstler's close friend Michael Ratner) and his four daughters Karin Kunstler Goldman, Jane Drazek, Sarah Kunstler and Emily Kunstler, and several grandchildren. Emily Kunstler and Sarah Kunstler produced a documentary about their father entitled William Kunstler: Disturbing the Universe, which had a screening as part of the Documentary Competition of the 2009 Sundance Film Festival. Publications Our Pleasant Vices (1941) The Law of Accidents (1954) First Degree (1960) Beyond a Reasonable Doubt? The Original Trial of Caryl Chessman (1961) The Case for Courage: The Stories of Ten Famous American Attorneys Who Risked Their Careers in the Cause of Justice. New York: Morrow (1962) And Justice For All (1963) The Minister and the Choir Singer: The Hall-Mills Murder Case (1964) Deep in My Heart. New York: Morrow (1966) Trials and Tribulations (1985) My Life as a Radical Lawyer (1994) Hints & Allegation: The World (In Poetry and Prose) (1994) Politics on Trial: Five Famous Trials of the 20th Century (2002) The Emerging Police State: Resisting Illegitimate Authority (2004) Pop culture references Kunstler was listed as Sister Mary Stigmata's attorney in Blues Brothers: Private in 1980. Robert Loggia portrayed Kunstler in the 1987 film Conspiracy: The Trial of the Chicago 8. Kunstler appeared as a lawyer for Jim Morrison in The Doors in 1991. Kunstler appeared as a judge in Malcolm X in 1992. Kunstler appeared as himself in the fifth season of Law & Order episode "White Rabbit" in 1994. Kunstler was portrayed by David Ackroyd in the 1994 television film Against the Wall. In the 1998 film The Big Lebowski, Jeff "The Dude" Lebowski demands representation by Kunstler or Ron Kuby during the Malibu Police Station scene. Kunstler was voiced by Liev Schreiber in the 2007 animated documentary Chicago 10. According to Lionel Shriver, the character of Joel Litvinoff in Zoë Heller's 2008 novel The Believers may be modeled on Kunstler.[71] Gary Cole portrayed Kunstler in the 2010 film The Chicago 8. In Bryce Zabel's alternate history novel Surrounded By Enemies: What If Kennedy Survived Dallas?, Kunstler is initially Lee Harvey Oswald's defense attorney before resigning and being replaced by F. Lee Bailey. Kunstler was portrayed by Sir Mark Rylance in Aaron Sorkin's 2020 film The Trial of the Chicago 7. References Rea, Steven (December 11, 2009). "Onetime counterculture hero reexamined by his daughters". The Philadelphia Inquirer. Archived from the original on 3 November 2012. Navasky, Victor S. (1970-04-19). "Right On! With Lawyer William Kunstler". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2023-02-22. Newsmakers 96: The People Behind Today's Headlines. Gale Research. 1996. ISBN 978-0810393219. Langum, David J. "William M. Kunstler: the most hated lawyer in America", p. 25. New York University Press, 1999. ISBN 0814751504. "Kunstler attended DeWitt Clinton High School at its annex on West End Avenue." Brooks Atkinson. 1941, December 21. "Acting on the Camp Grounds". The New York Times. p. X1. Langum, David J. William M. Kunstler: The Most Hated Lawyer in America, pp. 4–5, NYU Press, 2002 Warren Weaver. 1957. "Public Defender in State Opposed". The New York Times. p. 53. Jack Gould. July 15, 1957. "TV-Radio: 2 New Comics". The New York Times. p. 41. Dana Adams Schmidt. 1957, September 19. "U.S. Youths in China Will Lose Passports." The New York Times. p. 1. The New York Times. 1957, December 30. "Reporter Rejects Passport Condition". p. 35. The New York Times. 1961, July 22. "New Challenges Made." p. 46. The New York Times. 1961, August 11. "Riders Lose Appeal." p. 45. The New York Times. 1961, August 23. "Jury List Scored in Trial of Rider". p. 31. Hendrick Smith. 1962, August 12. "Albany, Ga., Closes and Parks and Libraries To Balk Integration". The New York Times. p. 1. Alan F. Westin. 1961, October 14. "Counsel for the Defense Was on Trial Too". The New York Times. p. 283. Leonard E. Ryan. 1964, October 14. "Suits in Alabama Stir New Protest". The New York Times. p. 74. The New York Times. 1962, October 24. "Display Ad 61 – No Title". p. 9. Ben A. Franklin. 1963, July 12. "Dr. King Steps Up Danville Protest". The New York Times. p. 8. The New York Times. 1963, October 26. "'Westchester Suit' Scores Rent Aid". p. 41. The New York Times. 1964, February 27. "State Rests Case in Kidnapping Trial". p. 20. Claude Sittons. 1964, June 20. "U.S. Official Warns Mississippi-Bound Students". The New York Times. p. 12. The New York Times. 1964, July 2. "Writ Denied 3 Boys Indicted in Murder". p. 26. Alfred E. Clark. 1964, August 27. "U.S. Judge to Hear Rights Case Here". The New York Times. p. 37. Alfred E. Clark. 1965, February 13. "Law Firm Here Steps Out of Ruby Case". The New York Times. p. 50. The New York Times. 1965, February 18. "Ruby Family Bid Ignored by Texas Appeals Court". p. 26. The New York Times. 1966, February 27. "Jack Ruby Draws and Colors to While Away Time in Jail". p. 72. Waldron, Martin. 1966, June 14. "Ruby Ruled Sane by a Texas Jury". The New York Times. p. 27. The New York Times. 1967, April 30. "Tennessee Teacher Wins Support in Evolution Case". p. 68. The New York Times. 1966, February 20. "Youth Held For Grand Jury in Yonkers Center Fire". p. 47. The New York Times. 1967, August 26. "Judge Lets Brown Leave Jurisdiction to Make Speeches". p. 23. New York Times. 1967, September 17. "A Hearing is Set on Bond for Brown". p. 60. The New York Times. 1967, October 5. "Brown Asks Appeals Court to Ease Curbs on Travel". p. 30. The New York Times. 1971, March 20. "Rap Brown Case to be Reviewed". p. 23. David Margolick. 1993, July 6. "Still Radical After All These Years". The New York Times. p. B1. Sidney E. Zion. 1968, October 13. "Law". The New York Times. p. E8. Homer Bigart. 1967, July 22. "Powell Remains in Island Exile". The New York Times. p. 10. David Stout (September 5, 1995). "William Kunstler, 76, Dies; Lawyer for Social Outcasts". The New York Times. p. A1. Sidney E. Zion. 1966, September 13. "Handwriting Expert Casts Doubt on Evidence Used Against Sobell. The New York Times. p. 31. Tobias, Ted. "In Tribute", p. 84 The New York Times. 1972, May 14. "A Judge Judged". p. E5. Seth S. Kings. "'Chicago 8' Man Accused of Urging Attack on Police. The New York Times. p. 27. John Kifner. 1969, October 24. "F.B.I. Paid 'Friend' of the 'Chicago 8'". The New York Times. p. 28. Seth Kings. 1969, October 15. "'Chicago 8' Denied Moratorium Day". The New York Times. p. 15. Seth S. Kings. 1969, October 17. "Chicago 8 Lawyer Sees A Conviction". The New York Times. p. 25. February 22, 1970. "Judge Hoffman and the Contempt Weapon". The New York Times. p. E2. John Kifner. 1970, December 4. "Hoffman Recalls 2 Jury Messages". The New York Times. p. 35. The New York Times. 1973, March 5. "Indians Get Offer on Ending Seizure". p. 26. Martin Waldron. 1974, January 8. "Judge Defers Ruling on Treaty for First Wounded Knee Trial". The New York Times. p. 11. Martin Waldrons. 1974, January 27. "Security Eased At Indians' Trial". The New York Times. p. 47. Martin Waldrons. 1974, January 27. "Kunstler Works; Disbarment Effort Fails". The New York Times. p. 32. Martin Waldrons. 1974, August 17. "2 Indians Summon Only 5 Witnesses". The New York Times. p. 50. Grace Lichtenstein. 1975, June 28. "16 Sioux Sought by F.B.I. in Slaying of 2 Agents". The New York Times. p. 59. The New York Times. 1976, June 9. "Two Indians Go on Trial in Deaths of F.B.I. Agents". p. 16. Paul Delaney. 1976, June 7. "U.S. Judge Orders F.B.I. Chief to Testify at Trial of Two Indians". The New York Times. p. 26. Kevin R. Reilly, 1975, December 14. "Indian is Fighting School Over Rights". The New York Times. p. BQLI149. Tom Wicker. 1974, October 1. "Hindsight on Attica Won't Wash". The New York Times. p. 41. Mary Breasted. February 28, 1975. "Attica Witness Has Some Doubts". The New York Times. p. 38. Michael T. Kaufman. April 6, 1975. "Attica Jury Convicts One of Murder, 2d of Assault". The New York Times. p. 1. Mary Breasted. 1975, March 4. "Attica Drama Unfolds in Back Rows and Halls as well as on Stand". The New York Times. p. 66. Tom Goldstein. 1976, December 31. "Governor Pardons 7 to 'Close the Book' on Attica Episode". The New York Times. p. 31. Mary Breasted. 1975, June 10. "Attica Witness Tells of Slaying". The New York Times. p. 80. Walter H. Waggoner. 1977, February 4. "Mrs. Chesimards' Defense Seeks to Change Site of Murder Trial". The New York Times. p. 39. FBI places Assata Shakur on 'Most Wanted Terrorist' list Langum, David J. William M. Kunstler: the most hated lawyer in America, p. 275. New York University Press, 1999. ISBN 0-8147-5150-4. Hamill, Denis. 1988, July 27. "A road map to the trial." Newsday. p. 7. "Kunstler to sue government for bugging lawyers office". UPI. June 6, 1981. Retrieved September 14, 2016. Ferrante, Louis. "Unlocked: the life and crimes of a mafia insider," p. 161. HarperCollins Publishers, 2009. ISBN 978-0-06-113386-2. Gross, Jane (June 8, 1979). "Barnes is Kunstler's New Cause". The New York Times. p. A22. "William Kunstler". IMDb. Tobias, Ted. "In Tribute", p. 84. Shriver, Lionel (26 September 2008). "Review: The Believers by Zoë Heller". The Daily Telegraph. Further reading Langum, David J. (Sr.). William M. Kunstler: The Most Hated Lawyer in America. New York: New York University Press (1999). ISBN 978-0814751503. External links Wikiquote has quotations related to William Kunstler. Biography at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute, Stanford University A Remembrance of William Kunstler, esquilax.com Center for Constitutional Rights, ccrjustice.org William Kunstler at IMDb William Moses Kunstler Fund for Racial Justice, kunstler.org New Documentary Examines Life, Legacy of Famed Radical Attorney – video report by Democracy Now!, democracynow.org vte Chicago Seven Defendants Rennie Davis David Dellinger John Froines Tom Hayden Abbie Hoffman Jerry Rubin Bobby Seale Lee Weiner Lawyers/Judge William Kunstler (defense lawyer) Leonard Weinglass Julius Hoffman (judge) Tom Foran (prosecutor) Richard Schultz Supporters Center for Constitutional Rights Stew Albert Noam Chomsky Judy Collins Bernardine Dohrn Allen Ginsberg Judy Gumbo Anita Hoffman Paul Krassner Nancy Kurshan Timothy Leary Norman Mailer Country Joe McDonald Graham Nash Phil Ochs Pigasus Ed Sanders Context Youth International Party (Yippies) 1968 Democratic National Convention protests "The whole world is watching" Counterculture of the 1960s National Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam Mayor Richard J. Daley Vietnam War opposition Miami and the Siege of Chicago (1968 book) Weather Underground Media "Chicago" (1970 song) Conspiracy: The Trial of the Chicago 8 (1987 film) Steal This Movie! (2000 film) Chicago 10 (2007 film) William Kunstler: Disturbing the Universe (2009 documentary) The Chicago 8 (2011 film) The Trial of the Chicago 7 (2020 film) Authority control databases Edit this at Wikidata International FAST ISNI VIAF National Germany Israel Belgium United States Korea Netherlands Artists MusicBrainz People Trove Other SNAC IdRef Categories: 1919 births1995 deaths20th-century American lawyersActivists for African-American civil rightsAmerican civil rights lawyersAmerican legal scholarsChicago SevenColumbia Law School alumniAmerican criminal defense lawyersDeWitt Clinton High School alumniJewish American writersLawyers from New York CityMilitary personnel from New York CityRatner familyUnited States Army officersUnited States Army personnel of World War IIYale College alumni

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Martha Ellis Gellhorn (8 November 1908 – 15 February 1998) was an American novelist, travel writer, and journalist who is considered one of the great war correspondents of the 20th century. Gellhorn reported on virtually every major world conflict that took place during her 60-year career. She was also the third wife of American novelist Ernest Hemingway, from 1940 to 1945. She died in 1998 by apparent suicide at the age of 89, ill and almost completely blind.[4] The Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism is named after her. Early life Gellhorn was born on 8 November 1908, in St. Louis, Missouri, the daughter of Edna Fischel Gellhorn, a suffragist, and George Gellhorn, a German-born gynecologist.[5][6] Her father and maternal grandfather were Jewish, and her maternal grandmother came from a Protestant family.[5] Her brother Walter became a noted law professor at Columbia University,[7] and her younger brother Alfred was an oncologist and dean of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.[8] The Golden Lane At age 7, Gellhorn participated in "The Golden Lane," a rally for women's suffrage at the Democratic Party's 1916 national convention in St. Louis. Women carrying yellow parasols and wearing yellow sashes lined both sides of a main street leading to the St. Louis Coliseum. A tableau of the states was in front of the Art Museum; states that had not enfranchised women were draped in black. Gellhorn and another girl, Mary Taussig, stood in front of the line, representing future voters.[9] In 1926, Gellhorn graduated from John Burroughs School in St. Louis, and enrolled in Bryn Mawr College, several miles outside Philadelphia. The following year, she left without having graduated to pursue a career as a journalist. Her first published articles appeared in The New Republic. In 1930, determined to become a foreign correspondent, she went to France for two years, where she worked at the United Press bureau in Paris, but was fired after she reported sexual harassment by a man connected with the agency. She spent years traveling Europe, writing for newspapers in Paris and St. Louis and covering fashion for Vogue.[10] She became active in the pacifist movement, and wrote about her experiences in her 1934 book What Mad Pursuit. Returning to the United States in 1932,[11] Gellhorn was hired by Harry Hopkins, whom she had met through her friendship with First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt.[12] The Roosevelts invited Gellhorn to live at the White House, and she spent evenings there helping Eleanor Roosevelt write correspondence and the first lady’s “My Day� column in Women's Home Companion.[13] She was hired as a field investigator for the Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA), created by Franklin D. Roosevelt to help end the Great Depression. Gellhorn traveled around the United States for FERA to report on how the Depression was affecting the country. She first went to Gastonia, North Carolina. Later, she worked with Dorothea Lange, a photographer, to document the everyday lives of the hungry and homeless. Their reports became part of the official government files for the Great Depression. They were able to investigate topics that were not usually open to women of the 1930s.[14] She drew on her research to write a collection of short stories, The Trouble I've Seen (1936).[12] In Idaho doing FERA work, Gellhorn convinced a group of workers to break the windows of the FERA office to draw attention to their crooked boss. Although this worked, she was fired from FERA.[10] War in Europe and marriage to Hemingway Gellhorn and Ernest Hemingway with General Yu Hanmou, Chongqing, China, 1941 Gellhorn met Ernest Hemingway during a 1936 Christmas family trip to Key West, Florida. Gellhorn had been hired to report for Collier's Weekly on the Spanish Civil War, and the pair decided to travel to Spain together. They celebrated Christmas of 1937 in Barcelona.[12] In Germany, she reported on the rise of Adolf Hitler; in the spring of 1938, months before the Munich Agreement, she was in Czechoslovakia. After the outbreak of World War II, she described these events in the novel A Stricken Field (1940). She later reported the war from Finland, Hong Kong, Burma, Singapore, and England.[12] In June 1944, Gellhorn applied to the British government for press accreditation to report on the Normandy landings; her application, like those of all female journalists, was denied. Lacking official press credentials, she posed as a nurse and was allowed onto a hospital ship where she promptly locked herself in a bathroom. Upon landing two days later she saw the many wounded and became a stretcher-bearer.[15] Later she recalled, "I followed the war wherever I could reach it." She was the only woman to land at Normandy on D-Day on 6 June 1944.[16] She was among the first journalists to report from Dachau concentration camp after it was liberated by U.S. troops on 29 April 1945.[17][18] Gellhorn and Hemingway lived together off and on for four years, before marrying in November 1940.[12] (Hemingway had ostensibly lived with his second wife, Pauline Pfeiffer, until 1939). Increasingly resentful of Gellhorn's long absences during her reporting assignments, Hemingway wrote to her when she left their Finca Vigía estate near Havana in 1943 to cover the Italian Front: "Are you a war correspondent, or wife in my bed?" Hemingway, however, would later go to the front just before the Normandy landings, and Gellhorn also went, with Hemingway trying to block her travel. When she arrived by means of a dangerous ocean voyage in war-torn London (he had landed there eleven days before her, via an RAF flight on which she had arranged a seat for him), she told him she had had enough.[12] She had found, as had his other wives, that, as described by Bernice Kert in The Hemingway Women: "Hemingway could never sustain a long-lived, wholly satisfying relationship with any one of his four wives. Married domesticity may have seemed to him the desirable culmination of romantic love, but sooner or later he became bored and restless, critical and bullying."[12] After four contentious years of marriage, they divorced in 1945.[12] The 2012 film Hemingway & Gellhorn is based on these years. The 2011 documentary film No Job for a Woman: The Women Who Fought to Report WWII features Gellhorn and how she changed war reporting.[19] Later career After the war, Gellhorn worked for the Atlantic Monthly, covering the Vietnam War and the Arab-Israel conflicts in the 1960s and 70s. She passed her 70th birthday in 1979 but continued working in the following decade, covering the civil wars in Central America. As she approached 80, Gellhorn began to slow down physically, although she still managed to cover the U.S. invasion of Panama in 1989. In 1990, she went door to door in the slum areas of Panama City to report on civilian casualties resulting from the U.S. invasion.[20] She finally retired from journalism as the 1990s began. An operation for cataracts was unsuccessful and left her with permanently impaired vision. Gellhorn announced that she was "too old" to cover the Balkan conflicts in the 1990s.[21] She did manage one last overseas trip to Brazil in 1995 to report on poverty in that country, which was published in the literary journal Granta. This last feat was accomplished with great difficulty as Gellhorn's eyesight was failing, and she could not read her own manuscripts.[4] Gellhorn's books include a collection of articles on war, The Face of War (1959); The Lowest Trees Have Tops (1967), a novel about McCarthyism; an account of her travels (including one trip with Hemingway), Travels with Myself and Another (1978); and a collection of her peacetime journalism, The View from the Ground (1988).[4] Peripatetic by nature, Gellhorn reckoned that in a 40-year span of her life, she had created homes in 19 locales.[4] Personal life Gellhorn's first major affair was with the French economist Bertrand de Jouvenel. It began in 1930, when she was 22 years old, and lasted until 1934. She would have married de Jouvenel if his wife had consented to a divorce.[4] She met Ernest Hemingway in Key West, Florida, in 1936. They married in 1940. Gellhorn resented her reflected fame as Hemingway's third wife, remarking that she had no intention of "being a footnote in someone else's life." As a condition for granting interviews, she was known to insist that Hemingway's name not be mentioned.[22] As she put it once, "I've been a writer for over 40 years. I was a writer before I met him and I was a writer after I left him. Why should I be merely a footnote in his life?" While married to Hemingway, Gellhorn had an affair with U.S. paratrooper Major General James M. Gavin, commanding general of the 82nd Airborne Division. Gavin was the youngest divisional commander in the U.S. Army in World War II.[23] Between marriages after divorcing Hemingway in 1945, Gellhorn had romantic liaisons with "L," Laurance Rockefeller, an American businessman (1945); journalist William Walton (1947) (no relation to the British composer); and medical doctor David Gurewitsch (1950). In 1954, she married the former managing editor of Time Magazine, T. S. Matthews. She and Matthews divorced in 1963.[24] She stayed in London for some time before moving to Kenya and then to Kilgwrrwg near Devauden in Gwent, South Wales,[25] She was very taken by the niceness of the Welsh people and lived there from 1980 to 1994 before finally returning to London because of her ill-health.[26] In 1949, Gellhorn adopted a boy, Sandro, from an Italian orphanage. He was formally renamed George Alexander Gellhorn, and widely called Sandy. Gellhorn was reportedly a devoted mother for a time but was not by nature maternal. She left Sandy in the care of relatives in Englewood, New Jersey, for long periods as she travelled, and he eventually attended boarding school. Their relationship was said to have become embittered.[4] Gellhorn and the writer Sybille Bedford met in Rome in 1949 and developed a strong platonic friendship. It long survived volatility on both sides and entailed much moral, creative and financial support for her friend on Gellhorn's part until she ended the friendship in the early 1980s.[27] Regarding sex, in 1972 Gellhorn wrote: If I practised sex out of moral conviction, that was one thing; but to enjoy it ... seemed a defeat. I accompanied men and was accompanied in action, in the extrovert part of life; I plunged into that ... but not sex; that seemed to be their delight, and all I got was a pleasure of being wanted, I suppose, and the tenderness (not nearly enough) that a man gives when he is satisfied. I daresay I was the worst bed partner in five continents.[4] On her relationship with Hemingway, she said "My whole memory of sex with Ernest is the invention of excuses, and failing that, the hope that it would soon be over."[28][29] However, the legacy of Gellhorn's personal life remains shrouded in controversy. Supporters of Gellhorn say her unauthorized biographer, Carl Rollyson, is guilty of "sexual scandal-mongering and cod psychology." Several of her prominent close friends (among them the actress Betsy Drake, journalist John Pilger, writer James Fox, and Martha's younger brother Alfred) have dismissed the characterizations of her as sexually manipulative and maternally deficient. Her supporters include her stepson, Sandy Matthews, who describes Gellhorn as "very conscientious" in her role as stepmother;[30] and Jack Hemingway once said that Gellhorn, his father's third wife, was his "favorite other mother."[31] Death and legacy Martha Gellhorn has been commemorated with an English Heritage Trust blue plaque at 72 Cadogan Square, Knightsbridge, London, SW1X 0EA In her last years, Gellhorn was in frail health, nearly blind and suffering from ovarian cancer that had spread to her liver. On 15 February 1998, she died from suicide in London apparently by swallowing a cyanide capsule.[32] The Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism was established in 1999 in her honor.[33] In 2019, a blue English Heritage plaque was unveiled at Gellhorn's former London home, the first to feature the dedication of "war correspondent".[34] In 2021 a Purple Plaque was placed on the cottage she lived in near Kilgwrrwg,[26] north-west of Chepstow, as part of a national effort to commemorate remarkable women.[35] In popular culture On 5 October 2007, the United States Postal Service announced that it would honor five 20th-century journalists with first-class rate postage stamps, to be issued on 22 April 2008: Martha Gellhorn; John Hersey; George Polk; Ruben Salazar; and Eric Sevareid. Postmaster General Jack Potter announced the stamp series at the Associated Press Managing Editors Meeting in Washington, D.C.[36] In 2011, Gellhorn was the subject of an hour-long episode of the World Media Rights series Extraordinary Women, which airs on the BBC, and periodically in the United States on PBS.[37] In 2012, Gellhorn was played by Nicole Kidman in Philip Kaufman's film, Hemingway & Gellhorn. Martha Gellhorn's relationship with Ernest Hemingway is the subject of Paula McLain's 2018 novel, Love and Ruin.[38] In April 2021, Hemingway, a three-episode, six-hour documentary recapitulation of Hemingway's life, labors, and loves, debuted on the Public Broadcasting System. It was co-produced and directed by Ken Burns and Lynn Novick. It contains considerable footage and photographs of Gellhorn, who is voiced by Meryl Streep, and recollections of those who knew her and her life with Hemingway first-hand.[39] Bibliography This list is incomplete; you can help by adding missing items. (January 2022) Gellhorn, Martha (1934). What mad pursuit : a novel. New York: Frederick A. Stokes Company. The Trouble I've Seen (1936, new edition by Eland, 2012) Depression-era set of short stories; A Stricken Field (1940) novel set in Czechoslovakia at the outbreak of war; The Heart of Another (1941); Liana (1944); The Undefeated (1945); Love Goes to Press: A Comedy in Three Acts (1947) (with Virginia Cowles); The Wine of Astonishment (1948) World War II novel, republished in 1989 as Point of No Return; Gellhorn, Martha (1953). "About Shorty". In Birmingham, Frederic A. (ed.). The girls from Esquire. London: Arthur Barker. pp. 47–56. The Honeyed Peace: Stories (1953); Two by Two (1958); The Face of War (1959) collection of war journalism, updated in 1993; His Own Man (1961); Pretty Tales for Tired People (1965); Vietnam: A New Kind of War (1966); The Lowest Trees Have Tops (1967) a novel; Travels with Myself and Another: A Memoir (1978, new edition by Eland, 2002); The Weather in Africa (1978, new edition by Eland, 2006); The View From the Ground (1989; new edition by Eland, 2016), a collection of peacetime journalism; The Short Novels of Martha Gellhorn (1991); US edition being The Novellas of Martha Gellhorn (1993) Selected Letters of Martha Gellhorn (2006), edited by Caroline Moorehead; Yours, for Probably Always: Martha Gellhorn's Letters of Love and War 1930–1949 (2019), edited by Janet Somerville.[40] Books about Gellhorn Somerville, Janet (2019) Yours, for Probably Always: Martha Gellhorn's Letters of Love and WarAmazon link Clayton, Meg Waite (2018) Beautiful Exiles: A Novel Hardy Dorman, Angelia (2012). Martha Gellhorn: Myth, Motif and Remembrance.[41] Mackrell, Judith (2021). Going with the Boys: Six Extraordinary Women Writing from the Front Line (also: The Correspondents: Six Women Writers on the Front Lines of World War II - in USA & Canada). McLain, Paula (2018). Love and Ruin: A novel. Ballantyne. p. 374. ASIN B076Z127Y2. McLoughlin, Kate (2007). Martha Gellhorn: The War Writer in the Field and in the Text. Moorehead, Caroline (2003). Martha Gellhorn: A Life. (a.k.a. Gellhorn: A Twentieth-Century Life) Moreira, Peter (2007). Hemingway on the China Front: His WWII Spy Mission with Martha Gellhorn. Rollyson, Carl (2000). Nothing Ever Happens to the Brave: The Story of Martha Gellhorn. Rollyson, Carl E. (2007). Beautiful Exile: The Life of Martha Gellhorn. Vaill, Amanda (2014). Hotel Florida: Truth, Love, and Death in the Spanish Civil War. Picador. ASIN B00FCR3JHW. References Notes "Martha Ellis Gellhorn", Encyclopædia Britannica, Retrieved 1 November 2019 "Martha Gellhorn: War Reporter, D-Day Stowaway", American Forces Press Service. Retrieved 2 June 2011 "Iraqi journalist wins Martha Gellhorn prize", The Guardian, 11 April 2006. Retrieved 2 June 2011 Moorehead, Caroline (2003). Martha Gellhorn: A Life. London: Chatto & Windus. ISBN 0-7011-6951-6. Ware, Susan; Stacy Lorraine Braukman (2004). Notable American Women: A Biographical Dictionary Completing the Twentieth Century. Harvard University Press. p. 230. ISBN 0-674-01488-X. Review by Kirkus (UK) of Caroline Muirhead: Martha Gellhorn (2003) Thomas Jr., Robert McG. (11 December 1995). "Walter Gellhorn, Law Scholar And Professor, Dies at 89". The New York Times. Retrieved 3 February 2018. Kee, Cynthia (22 April 2008). "Alfred Gellhorn". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 12 May 2010. "The Golden Lane, suffragettes at the 1916 convention". Archived from the original on 20 January 2018. Retrieved 4 August 2017. "The Female War Correspondent Who Sneaked into D-Day | The Saturday Evening Post". www.saturdayeveningpost.com. 8 November 2018. Retrieved 3 December 2019. Knight, Sam (18 September 2019). "A Memorial for the Remarkable Martha Gellhorn". The New Yorker. ISSN 0028-792X. Retrieved 18 September 2019. Kert, Bernice – The Hemingway Women: Those Who Loved Him – the Wives and Others, W.W. Norton & Co., New York, 1983. "My Twelve Years in the White House", Upstairs at the Roosevelts', Potomac Books, 2017, pp. 1–4, doi:10.2307/j.ctt1pv89hw.4, ISBN 978-1-61234-942-8 Gourley 2007, p. [page needed]. "After Lovers Hemingway and Gellhorn Faced off on D-Day, They Filed for Divorce". 12 August 2016. "D-Day: 150,000 Men – and One Woman". The Huffington Post. 5 June 2014. Walker, Amy (3 September 2019). "Blue plaque for US war correspondent Martha Gellhorn". The Guardian. Retrieved 1 November 2023. Gellhorn, Martha (23 June 1945). "Dachau: Experimental Murder". Collier's. Documentary No Job for a Woman website "A Memorial for the Remarkable Martha Gellhorn". The New Yorker. 18 September 2019. Retrieved 5 January 2023. Lyman, Rick (17 February 1998). "Martha Gellhorn, Daring Writer, Dies at 89". The New York Times. Retrieved 3 February 2018. Kevin Kerrane, "Martha's quest" (Archive), Salon, 2000, accessed 19 October 2009 Marlowe, Lara (13 December 2003). "In times of love and war". The Irish Times. Retrieved 18 September 2019. "I didn't like sex at all". Salon. 12 August 2006. Retrieved 23 February 2012. "History beyond garden gate", South Wales Argus, 6 August 2004. Retrieved 19 September 2020 Cavill, Nancy (3 July 2021). "The war reporter and her 'retreat' in Wales; Nancy Cavill uncovers the little-known links between an American war correspondent and novelist and Wales - as a Purple Plaque is unveiled in her memory at her former home in Monmouthshire... pages 12 - 14". The Western Mail. Selina Hastings, Sybille Bedford: An Appetite for Life, Vintage, 2020 "Martha Gellhorn: the person and the journalist". Cliomuse.com. Retrieved 18 September 2019. Moorehead, Caroline (2003). Gellhorn: a Twentieth Century Life. New York: Henry Holt and Co. pp. 135-136. ISBN 978-0-8050-6553-4. "The War for Martha's Memory", The Telegraph, 15 March 2001 Baker, Allie, "Luck, Pluck, and Serendipity: Bumby's Wartime Experience" (with Hadley audio), The Hemingway Project, 13 February 2014. Accessed 28 December 2015 Sturges, India (10 July 2016). "John Simpson on his plan to commit suicide – and why he refuses to be an old bore". The Daily Telegraph. Archived from the original on 2 April 2017. Retrieved 2 April 2017. "Letter: Martha Gellhorn prize of pounds 5,000". Independent. 26 September 1999. Retrieved 18 September 2019. Walker, Amy (3 September 2019). "Blue plaque for US war correspondent Martha Gellhorn". The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 3 December 2019. "Reporter Martha Gellhorn honoured with purple plaque". BBC News. 2 July 2021. Retrieved 2 July 2021. "Stamps honor distinguished journalists", USA Today "Episode 7 : Martha Gellhorn" Archived 8 December 2014 at the Wayback Machine, Extraordinary Women "Love and Ruin - Paula McLain". Paula McLain. Retrieved 16 November 2018. https://www.newsobserver.com/entertainment/tv/warm-tv-blog/article250418076.html What to Watch on Monday: The start of Ken Burns' 'Hemingway' documentary, News & Observer, Brooke Cain, 5 April 2021. Retrieved 8 April 2021. Doucet, Lyse (1 December 2019). "Yours, for Probably Always: Martha Gellhorn's Letters of Love and War 1930–1949 - review". The Guardian. Retrieved 15 June 2020. Dorman, Angelia Hardy (16 November 2015). Martha Gellhorn: Myth, Motif and Remembrance eBook. Kindle Store. Sources Gourley, Catherine (2007). War, Women and the News: How Female Journalists Won the Battle to Cover World War 2. New York: Atheneum Books for Young Readers. ISBN 978-0-689-87752-0. Moorehead, Caroline (2003). Martha Gellhorn: A Life. London: Chatto & Windus. ISBN 0-7011-6951-6. (re-published as Gellhorn: A 20th-Century Life, Henry Holt & Co., New York (2003) ISBN 0-8050-6553-9) Further reading Moorehead, Caroline (2006). The Letters of Martha Gellhorn. London: Chatto & Windus. ISBN 0-7011-6952-4. O'Toole, Fintan, "A Moral Witness" (review of Janet Somerville, ed., Yours, for Probably Always: Martha Gellhorn's Letters of Love and War, 1930–1949, Firefly, 528 pp.), The New York Review of Books, vol. LXVII, no. 15 (8 October 2020), pp. 29–31. Fintan O'Toole writes (p. 31): "Her [war] dispatches were not first drafts of history; they were letters from eternity. [...] To see history – at least the history of war – in terms of people is to see it not as a linear process but as a series of terrible repetitions [...]. It is her ability to capture [...] the terrible futility of this sameness that makes Gellhorn's reportage so genuinely timeless. [W]e are [...] drawn [...] into the undertow of her distraught awareness that this moment, in its essence, has happened before and will happen again." External links Wikimedia Commons has media related to Martha Gellhorn. Wikiquote has quotations related to Martha Gellhorn. "Is There a New Germany?", Martha Gellhorn, The Atlantic Monthly, February 1964 "The Arabs of Palestine", from Martha Gellhorn "The Outsiders: Martha Gellhorn" a 1983 interview by John Pilger Martha Gellhorn at IMDb Electric Sky – "Martha Gellhorn – On The Record" Martha Gellhorn talks about the Spanish Civil War (from a BBC Radio 4 live stream). Official website Petri Liukkonen. "Martha Gellhorn". Books and Writers. Review of "Martha Gellhorn: A Life" (The Age) vte Vietnam War correspondents Print journalists R. W. Apple Peter Arnett Elizabeth Becker Homer Bigart Michael Birch Peter Braestrup Malcolm Browne Wilfred Burchett Dickey Chapelle Richard Dudman Robert Elegant Gloria Emerson Bernard Fall James Fenton Frances FitzGerald Sylvana Foa Joseph Galloway Martha Gellhorn H.D.S. Greenway Al Gore David Halberstam Michael Herr Marguerite Higgins Ward Just Takeshi Kaik� Peter Kann Stanley Karnow Donald Kirk Steve Kroft John Pilger Gareth Porter Robert Reguly John Sack Murray Sayle Jonathan Schell Sydney Schanberg Neil Sheehan Alexander Shimkin John Steinbeck IV Matthew V. Storin Jon Swain Richard Tregaskis Kate Webb Perry Deane Young Photo- journalists Eddie Adams David Burnett Larry Burrows Robert Capa Gilles Caron Dickey Chapelle Charles Chellapah Neil Davis David Douglas Duncan Charles Eggleston Horst Faas Sean Flynn Chas Gerretsen Barbara Gluck Philip Jones Griffiths Dirck Halstead Henri Huet David Hume Kennerly Catherine Leroy Don McCullin Co Rentmeester Tim Page Al Rockoff Toshio Sakai Kyoichi Sawada Dick Swanson Dana Stone Francois Sully Shigeru Tamura Neal Ulevich Nick Ut Nik Wheeler Broadcast journalists Martin Bell Ed Bradley Charles Collingwood Walter Cronkite Murray Fromson Jeff Gralnick Max Hastings Bernard Kalb Peter Kalischer Douglas Kiker Jim Kincaid Steve Kroft Charles Kuralt John Laurence George Lewis Ike Pappas Julian Pettifer Bill Plante Dan Rather Harry Reasoner Clete Roberts Morley Safer Joe Schlesinger Pierre Schoendoerffer Bob Simon Richard Threlkeld vte Ernest Hemingway Bibliography Novels The Torrents of Spring (1926) The Sun Also Rises (1926) A Farewell to Arms (1929) To Have and Have Not (1937) For Whom the Bell Tolls (1940) Across the River and into the Trees (1950) The Old Man and the Sea (1952) Nonfiction Death in the Afternoon (1932) Green Hills of Africa (1935) Posthumous A Moveable Feast (1964) Islands in the Stream (1970) The Dangerous Summer (1985) The Garden of Eden (1986) True at First Light (1999) Under Kilimanjaro (2005) Short stories "Up In Michigan" (1921) "Indian Camp" (1924) "The Doctor and the Doctor's Wife" (1925) "The End of Something" (1925) "The Three-Day Blow" (1925) "The Battler" (1925) "A Very Short Story" (1925) "Soldier's Home" (1925) "The Revolutionist" (1925) "Mr. and Mrs. Elliot" (1925) "Cat in the Rain" (1925) "Out of Season" (1925) "Cross Country Snow" (1925) "My Old Man" (1925) "Big Two-Hearted River" (1925) "Banal Story" (1926) "Today is Friday" (1926) "A Canary for One" (1927) "Fifty Grand" (1927) "Hills Like White Elephants" (1927) "The Killers" (1927) "The Undefeated" (1927) "Che Ti Dice La Patria?" (1927) "In Another Country" (1927) "Now I Lay Me" (1927) "A Simple Enquiry" (1927) "Ten Indians" (1927) "An Alpine Idyll" (1927) "A Pursuit Race" (1927) "On the Quai at Smyrna" (1930) "Fathers and Sons" (1932) "A Natural History of the Dead" (1932) "A Clean, Well-Lighted Place" (1933) "A Day's Wait" (1933) "The Gambler, the Nun, and the Radio" (1933) "A Way You'll Never Be" (1933) "The Snows of Kilimanjaro" (1936) "The Capital of the World" (1936) "The Short Happy Life of Francis Macomber" (1936) "Old Man at the Bridge" (1938) Short story collections Three Stories and Ten Poems (1923) In Our Time (1925) Men Without Women (1927) Winner Take Nothing (1933) The Fifth Column and the First Forty-Nine Stories (1938) The Snows of Kilimanjaro (1961) The Fifth Column and Four Stories of the Spanish Civil War (1969) The Nick Adams Stories (1972) The Complete Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway (1987) Ernest Hemingway: The Collected Stories (1995) Story fragments "On Writing" Poetry 88 Poems (1979) Complete Poems Plays Today is Friday (1926) The Fifth Column (1938) Screenplays The Spanish Earth (1937 film) Letters and journalism By-Line: Ernest Hemingway (1967) Ernest Hemingway: Selected Letters, 1917–1961 (1981) Dateline: Toronto (1985) The Cambridge Edition of the Letters of Ernest Hemingway (2011) Adaptations The Sun Also Rises 1957 film 1984 film Opera The Select (The Sun Also Rises) Ballet "The Killers" 1946 film 1956 film 1964 film Bukowski short story A Farewell to Arms 1932 film 1957 film 1966 TV series To Have and Have Not 1944 film The Breaking Point (1950) The Gun Runners (1958) Captain Khorshid (1987) For Whom the Bell Tolls 1943 film 1959 TV play 1965 TV series 1984 song The Old Man and the Sea 1958 film 1990 film 1999 animated film Other film adaptations The Macomber Affair (1947) Under My Skin (1950) The Snows of Kilimanjaro (1952) Hemingway's Adventures of a Young Man (1962) Islands in the Stream (1977) Soldier's Home (1977) My Old Man (1979) After the Storm (2001) The Garden of Eden (2008) Across the River and into the Trees (2022) Homes Birthplace and boyhood home Michigan cottage Hemingway-Pfeiffer House Key West home Hotel Ambos Mundos, Havana home Finca Vigía, Cuba home Idaho home Depictions Bacall to Arms (1946 cartoon) Hemingway: On the Edge (1987 play) In Love and War (1996 film) Midnight in Paris (2011 film) Hemingway & Gellhorn (2012 film) Cooper & Hemingway: The True Gen (2013 documentary) Papa: Hemingway in Cuba (2015 film) Genius (2016 film) Hemingway (2021 documentary series) Related Nick Adams Floridita Pilar (boat) Iceberg theory Ernest Hemingway International Billfishing Tournament International Imitation Hemingway Competition Maxwell Perkins Adriana Ivancich Hemingway Foundation/PEN Award Premio Hemingway Hello Hemingway (1990 film) Hemingway: A Portrait (1999 documentary) Michael Palin's Hemingway Adventure (1999 documentary) Hemingway crater Kennedy Library Hemingway collection Family Elizabeth Hadley Richardson (first wife) Jack Hemingway (son) Pauline Pfeiffer (second wife) Patrick Hemingway (son) Gloria Hemingway (daughter) Martha Gellhorn (third wife) Mary Welsh Hemingway (fourth wife) Lorian Hemingway (granddaughter) Margaux Hemingway (granddaughter) John Hemingway (grandson) Mariel Hemingway (granddaughter) Grace Hall Hemingway (mother) Leicester Hemingway (brother) Authority control databases Edit this at Wikidata International FAST ISNI VIAF National Norway Chile Spain France BnF data Catalonia Germany Italy Israel United States Sweden Czech Republic Australia Netherlands Poland Portugal Vatican Academics CiNii People Deutsche Biographie Trove Other NARA SNAC IdRef Categories: 1908 births1998 suicides1998 deaths20th-century American non-fiction writers20th-century American novelists20th-century American women writersAmerican expatriates in FranceAmerican expatriates in EnglandAmerican expatriates in SpainAmerican people of German-Jewish descentAmerican women civilians in World War IIAmerican women journalistsAmerican women novelistsAmerican women war correspondentsDrug-related suicides in EnglandEsquire (magazine) peopleHemingway familyNovelists from MissouriO. Henry Award winnersWomen in war 1900–1945Women in war in SpainWriters from St. LouisJohn Burroughs School alumni

More CIA stories from John Stockwell: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ The documentary "THE CIA, CONGRESS AND THE PRESS" delves into the intricate relationship between the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), mass media, and public opinion manipulation. Former CIA insiders and authors intimately familiar with the agency reveal the pervasive infiltration of the media by the CIA, shedding light on how it's utilized to shape and control public sentiment. Whistleblowers like John Stockwell share firsthand experiences of covert operations conducted worldwide, unraveling the intricate web of tactics employed to sway narratives and disseminate misinformation. As the film progresses, viewers are confronted with specific instances of disinformation, juxtaposed against broader governmental practices. The focus intensifies on the Reagan Administration, exposing a pattern of deceit, information distortion, and systematic manipulation of the press. Throughout its 59 minutes and 25 seconds runtime, the documentary presents a stark portrayal of how governmental bodies, specifically the CIA, wielded their influence within media channels, underscoring the concerning implications for public trust and the authenticity of information disseminated to the masses. Recorded on June 10, 1987, it remains a compelling insight into the complexities of media manipulation and government misinformation tactics. Media manipulation is a series of related techniques in which partisans create an image or argument that favors their particular interests.[1] Such tactics may include the use of logical fallacies, manipulation, outright deception (disinformation), rhetorical and propaganda techniques, and often involve the suppression of information or points of view by crowding them out, by inducing other people or groups of people to stop listening to certain arguments, or by simply diverting attention elsewhere. In Propaganda: The Formation of Men's Attitudes, Jacques Ellul writes that public opinion can only express itself through channels which are provided by the mass media of communication – without which there could be no propaganda.[2] It is used within public relations, propaganda, marketing, etc. While the objective for each context is quite different, the broad techniques are often similar. As illustrated below, many of the more modern mass media manipulation methods are types of distraction, on the assumption that the public has a limited attention span. Contexts Activism Main article: Activism Activism is the practice or doctrine that has an emphasis on direct vigorous action especially supporting or opposing one side of a controversial matter.[3] It is quite simply starting a movement to affect or change social views. It is frequently started by influential individuals but is done collectively through social movements with large masses.[4] These social movements can be done through public rallies, strikes, street marches and even rants on social media. Advertising Duration: 1 minute and 1 second.1:01Subtitles available.CC "Daisy", a TV commercial for the re-election of U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson. It aired only once, in September 1964, and is considered both one of the most controversial and one of the most effective political ads in U.S. history. Main article: Advertising Advertising is a form of promotion that seeks to persuade a certain audience to purchase a good or service. One of the first types of marketing, it aims to persuade its target market to either buy, sell, or carry out a particular action.[5] This tends to be done by businesses who wish to sell their product by paying media outlets to show their products or services on television breaks, banners on websites and mobile applications. These advertisements are not only done by businesses but can also be done by certain groups. Non-commercial advertisers are those who spend money on advertising in a hope to raise awareness for a cause or promote specific ideas.[6] These include groups such as interest groups, political parties, government organizations and religious movements. Most of these organizations intend to spread a message or sway public opinion instead of trying to sell products or services. Advertising can not only be found on social media, but it is also evident on billboards, newspapers, magazines and even word of mouth. Hoaxing Main article: Hoax A hoax is something intended to deceive or defraud. Misleading public stunts, scientific frauds, false bomb threats and business scams are examples of hoaxes.[7] Propagandizing Main article: Propaganda Propagandizing is a form of communication that is aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position by presenting only one side of an argument. Propaganda is commonly created by governments, but some forms of mass communication created by other powerful organizations can be considered propaganda as well. As opposed to impartially providing information, propaganda, in its most basic sense, presents information primarily to influence an audience. Propaganda is usually repeated and dispersed over a wide variety of media in order to create the chosen result in audience attitudes. While the term propaganda has justifiably acquired a strongly negative connotation by association with its most manipulative and jingoistic examples (e.g. Nazi propaganda used to justify the Holocaust), propaganda in its original sense was neutral, and could refer to uses that were generally benign or innocuous, such as public health recommendations, signs encouraging citizens to participate in a census or election, or messages encouraging persons to report crimes to the police, among others. Propaganda uses societal norms and myths that people hear and believe. Because people respond to, understand and remember more simple ideas this is what is used to influence people's beliefs, attitudes and values.[8] Psychological warfare Main article: Psychological warfare Psychological warfare is sometimes considered synonymous with propaganda. The principal distinction being that propaganda normally occurs within a nation, whereas psychological warfare normally takes place between nations, often during war or cold war. Various techniques are used to influence a target's values, beliefs, emotions, motives, reasoning, or behavior. Target audiences can be governments, organizations, groups, and individuals. This tactic has been used in multiple wars throughout history. During World War II, the western Allies, expected that the Soviet Union would drop leaflets on the US and England. During the conflict with Iraq, American and English forces dropped leaflets, with many of the leaflets telling the people how to surrender. In the Korean War both sides would use loud speakers from the front lines.[9] In 2009 people in Israel in the Gaza war received text messages on their cell phones threatening them with rocket attacks. The Palestinian people were getting phone calls and leaflets warning them that they were going to drop rockets on them. These phone calls and leaflets were not always accurate.[10] Public relations Main article: Public relations Public relations (PR) is the management of the flow of information between an individual or an organization and the public. Public relations may include an organization or individual gaining exposure to their audiences using topics of public interest and news items that do not require direct payment. PR is generally created by specialized individuals or firms at the behest of already public individuals or organizations, as a way of managing their public profile. Techniques Internet manipulation Main article: Internet manipulation Astroturfing Main article: Astroturfing Astroturfing is when there is an intent and attempt to create the illusion of support for a particular cause, person, or stance. While this is mainly connected to and seen on the internet, it has also happened in newspapers during times of political elections.[11] Corporations and political parties try to imitate grassroots movements in order to sway the public to believing something that isn't true.[12] Clickbait Main article: Clickbait Clickbait refers to headlines of online news articles that are sensationalized or sometimes completely fake. It uses people's natural curiosity to get people to click. In some cases clickbait is simply used to generate income, more clicks means more money made with advertisers.[13] But these headlines and articles can also be used to influence a group of people on social media. They are constructed to appeal to the interest group's pre-existing biases and thus to be shared within filter bubbles.[14] Propaganda laundering Main article: Propaganda Propaganda laundering is a method of using a less trusted or less popular platform to publish a story of dubious origin or veracity for the purposes of reporting on that report, rather than the story itself. This technique serves to insulate the secondary more established media from having to issue a retraction if the report is false. Generally secondary reports will report that the original report is reporting without verifying or making the report themselves.[citation needed] Search engine marketing Main article: Search engine marketing In search engine marketing websites use market research, from past searches and other sources, to increase their visibility in search engine results pages. This allows them to guide search results along the lines they desire, and thereby influence searchers.[15][16] Business have many tactics to lure customers into their websites and to generate revenue such as banner ads, search engine optimization and pay-per-click marketing tools. They all serve a different purpose and use different tools that appeal to multiple types of users. Banner ads appear on sites that then redirect to other sites that are similar. Search engine optimization is changing a page to seem more reliable or applicable than other similar pages. Pay-per-click involves certain words being highlighted because they were bought by advertisers to then redirect to a page containing information or selling whatever that word pertained to. By using the internet, users are susceptible to these type of advertisements without a clear advertising campaign being viewed. Distraction Distraction by major events Commonly known as "smoke screen", this technique consists of making the public focus its attention on a topic that is more convenient for the propagandist. This particular type of media manipulation has been referenced many times in popular culture. Some examples are: The movie Wag the Dog (1997), which illustrates the public being deceitfully distracted from an important topic by presenting another that whose only quality is that of being more attractive. In the U.S. TV series House of Cards, when protagonist Frank Underwood finds himself trapped in a media rampage, he addresses the viewer and says: "From the lion's den or a pack of wolves. When you're fresh meat, kill and throw them something fresher". Politicians distract the public by showing them "shiny object" issues through the use of TV and other media. Sometimes they can be as simple as a politician with a reality show, like Sarah Palin had for a short time back in 2009, which aired on TLC.[17] Distracting the public This is a mere variation of the traditional arguments known, in logic, as ad hominem and ad populum but applied to countries instead of individuals. This technique consists on refuting arguments by appealing to nationalism or by inspiring fear and hate towards a foreign country or to all the foreigners. It has the potential of being important since it gives the propagandists the power to discredit any information coming from other countries. Some examples are: Q: "What do you think about Khokara's politic on X matter?" A: "I think they've been wrong about everything for the last 20 years or so..." Q: "Your idea is quite similar to the one proposed in Falala." A: "Are you suggesting Falala is a better country than ours?" Straw man fallacy Main article: Straw man An informal fallacy. The "straw man" consists of appearing to refute the opponent's argument while actually attacking another topic. For it to work properly the topic that was actually refuted and the one that should have been refuted need to be similar. Distraction by scapegoat Main article: Scapegoating This is a combination of the straw man fallacy and the ad hominem argument. It is often used to incriminate someone in order to argument the innocence of someone else. Audio manipulation Main article: Sound bite Photo manipulation Main article: Photo manipulation Visual media can be transformed through photo manipulation, commonly called "photoshopping." This can make a product, person, or idea seem more appealing. This is done by highlighting certain features on the product and using certain editing tools to enlarge the photo, to attract and persuade the public. Video manipulation Main article: video manipulation Video manipulation is a new variant of media manipulation that targets digital video using a combination of traditional video processing and video editing techniques and auxiliary methods from artificial intelligence like face recognition. In typical video manipulation, the facial structure, body movements, and voice of the subject are replicated in order to create a fabricated recording of the subject. The applications of these methods range from educational videos to videos aimed at (mass) manipulation and propaganda, a straightforward extension of the long-standing possibilities of photo manipulation. This form of computer-generated misinformation has contributed to fake news, and there have been instances when this technology was used during political campaigns.[citation needed] Compliance professionals A compliance professional is an expert that utilizes and perfects means of gaining media influence. Though the means of gaining influence are common, their aims vary from political, economic, to personal. Thus the label of compliance professional applies to diverse groups of people, including propagandists, marketers, pollsters, salespeople and political advocates. Techniques Means of influence include, but are not limited to, the methods outlined in Influence: Science and Practice:[18] Authority Commitment and consistency Reciprocation Scarcity Social proof Additionally, techniques like framing and less formal means of effective obfuscation, such as the use of logical fallacies, are used to gain compliance. See also iconMedia portal Related topics Agnotology Concentration of media ownership Consumer confusion Consumer psychology Consumer science Crowd manipulation Deception Disinformation Demagogy Front organization Gatekeeping (communication) Gotcha journalism Guerrilla marketing Outline of public relations Ideocracy Ideology Indoctrination Internet manipulation McCarthyism Media regulation Media transparency Meme News management Pallywood Promotion (marketing) Sensationalism Spin (public relations) The True Believer Under color of authority Viral marketing Notable compliance experts Edward Bernays Ryan Holiday Ivy Lee Frank Luntz Notable media manipulation theorists Noam Chomsky Edward S. Herman Michael Moore Michael Parenti

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Civil liberties in the United States are certain unalienable rights retained by (as opposed to privileges granted to) citizens of the United States under the Constitution of the United States, as interpreted and clarified by the Supreme Court of the United States and lower federal courts.[1] Civil liberties are simply defined as individual legal and constitutional protections from entities more powerful than an individual, for example, parts of the government, other individuals, or corporations. The explicitly defined liberties make up the Bill of Rights, including freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, and the right to privacy.[2] There are also many liberties of people not defined in the Constitution, as stated in the Ninth Amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. The extent of civil liberties and the percentage of the population of the United States who had access to these liberties has expanded over time. For example, the Constitution did not originally define who was eligible to vote, allowing each state to determine who was eligible. In the early history of the U.S., most states allowed only white male adult property owners to vote (about 6% of the population).[3][4][5] The 'Three-Fifths Compromise' allowed the southern slaveholders to consolidate power and maintain slavery in America for eighty years after the ratification of the Constitution.[6] And the Bill of Rights had little impact on judgements by the courts for the first 130 years after ratification.[7] United States Constitution Freedom of religion Main article: Freedom of religion in the United States Main article: Free Exercise Clause The text of Amendment I to the United States Constitution, ratified December 15, 1791, states that: "Congress shall make no law... prohibiting the free exercise thereof;"[8] — United States Constitution, Amendment I Freedom of expression Main article: Freedom of speech in the United States Free Speech Clause Main article: Free Speech Clause The text of Amendment I to the United States Constitution, ratified December 15, 1791, states that: "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech,"[8] — United States Constitution, Amendment I Free Press Clause The text of Amendment I to the United States Constitution, ratified December 15, 1791, states that: "Congress shall make no law... abridging... the press,"[8] — United States Constitution, Amendment I Free Assembly Clause The text of Amendment I to the United States Constitution, ratified December 15, 1791, states that: "Congress shall make no law... abridging... the right of the people peaceably to assemble,"[8] — United States Constitution, Amendment I Petition Clause Main article: Petition Clause The text of Amendment I to the United States Constitution, ratified December 15, 1791, states that: "Congress shall make no law... abridging... the right of the people... to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."[8] — United States Constitution, Amendment I Free speech exceptions Main article: United States free speech exceptions The following types of speech are not protected constitutionally: defamation or false statements, child pornography, obscenity, damaging the national security interests, verbal acts, and fighting words. Because these categories fall outside of the First Amendment privileges, the courts can legally restrict or criminalize any expressive act within them. Other expressions, including threat of bodily harm or publicizing illegal activity, may also be ruled illegal.[9] Right to keep and bear arms Main article: Right to keep and bear arms in the United States The text of Amendment II to the United States Constitution, ratified December 15, 1791, states that: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."[8] — United States Constitution, Amendment II Sexual freedom The concept of sexual freedom includes a broad range of different rights that are not mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. The idea of sexual freedom has sprung more from the popular opinion of society in more recent years, and has had very little Constitutional backing. The following liberties are included under sexual freedom: sexual expression, sexual choices, sexual education, reproductive justice, and sexual health.[10] Sexual freedom in general is considered an implied procedure, and is not mentioned in the Constitution. Sexual freedoms include the freedom to have consensual sex with whomever a person chooses, at any time, for any reason, provided the person is of the age of majority. Marriage is not required, nor are there any requirements as to the gender or number of people you have sex with. Sexual freedom includes the freedom to have private consensual homosexual sex (Lawrence v. Texas). Equal protection Main article: Equal Protection Clause Equal protection prevents the government from creating laws that are discriminatory in application or effect. Right to vote The text of Amendment XIV to the United States Constitution, ratified July 9, 1868, states that: "when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one (eighteen) years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one (eighteen) years of age in such State."[8] — United States Constitution, Article XIV The text of Amendment XV to the United States Constitution, ratified February 3, 1870, states that: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."[8] — United States Constitution, Article XV The text of Amendment XIX to the United States Constitution, ratified August 18, 1919, states that: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex."[8] — United States Constitution, Amendment XIX The text of Amendment XXIV to the United States Constitution, ratified January 23, 1964, states that: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax."[8] — United States Constitution, Amendment XXIII The text of Amendment XXVI to the United States Constitution, ratified July 1, 1971, states that: "The right of citizens of the United States, who are 18 years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any state on account of age."[8] — United States Constitution, Amendment XXVI Right to parent one's children The right to parent one's own children also includes the right for a parent to teach their children as they see fit, and not have others govern over what their children are taught. Right to privacy This section is an excerpt from Right to privacy § United States.[edit] The Constitution of the United States and United States Bill of Rights do not explicitly include a right to privacy.[11] Currently no federal law takes a holistic approach to privacy regulation. In the US, privacy and expectations of privacy have been determined via court cases. Those protections have been established through court decisions provide a reasonable expectations of privacy. The Supreme Court in Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) found that the Constitution guarantees a right to privacy against governmental intrusion via penumbras located in the founding text.[12] In 1890, Warren and Brandeis drafted an article published in the Harvard Law Review titled "The Right To Privacy" that is often cited as the first implicit finding of a U.S. stance on the right to privacy.[13] Right to privacy has been the justification for decisions involving a wide range of civil liberties cases, including Pierce v. Society of Sisters, which invalidated a successful 1922 Oregon initiative requiring compulsory public education; Roe v. Wade, which struck down an abortion law from Texas, and thus restricted state powers to enforce laws against abortion; and Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down a Texas sodomy law, and thus eliminated state powers to enforce laws against sodomy. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization later overruled Roe v. Wade, in part due to the Supreme Court finding that the right to privacy was not mentioned in the constitution,[14] leaving the future validity of these decisions uncertain.[15] Legally, the right of privacy is a basic law[16] which includes: The right of persons to be free from unwarranted publicity Unwarranted appropriation of one's personality Publicizing one's private affairs without a legitimate public concern Wrongful intrusion into one's private activities For the health care sector where medical records are part of an individual's privacy, The Privacy Rule of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act was passed in 1996. This act safeguards medical data of the patient which also includes giving individuals rights over their health information, like getting a copy of their records and seeking correction.[17] Medical anthropologist Khiara Bridges has argued that the US Medicare system requires so much personal disclosure from pregnant women that they effectively do not have privacy rights.[18] CCPA [19] In 2018, California set out to create a policy promoting data protection, the first state in the United States to pursue such protection. The resulting effort is the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), reviewed as a critical juncture where the legal definition of what privacy entails from California lawmakers' perspective. The California Consumer Protection Act is a privacy law protecting the residents of California and their Personal identifying information. The law enacts regulation over all companies regardless of operational geography protecting the six Intentional Acts included in the law. The intentions included in the Act provide California residents with the right to: Know what personal data is being collected about them. Know whether their personal data is sold or disclosed and to whom. Say no to the sale of personal data. Access their personal data. Request a business to delete any personal information about a consumer collected from that consumer. Not be discriminated against for exercising their privacy rights. Right to marriage The 1967 United States Supreme Court ruling in the case Loving v. Virginia found a fundamental right to marriage, regardless of race. The 2015 United States Supreme Court ruling in the case Obergefell v. Hodges found a fundamental right to marriage, regardless of gender. Rights of self-defense [icon] This section is empty. You can help by adding to it. (December 2021) See also American Civil Liberties Union Civil liberties in the United Kingdom Civil rights in the United States Constitution of the United States References "AskMe: Civil liberties vs. Civil rights". Civil Rights vs. Civil Liberties "Expansion of Rights and Liberties - The Right of Suffrage". Online Exhibit: The Charters of Freedom. National Archives. Archived from the original on July 6, 2016. Retrieved April 21, 2015. Murrin, John M.; Johnson, Paul E.; McPherson, James M.; Fahs, Alice; Gerstle, Gary (2012). Liberty, Equality, Power: A History of the American People (6th ed.). Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. p. 296. ISBN 9780495904991. Janda, Kenneth; Berry, Jeffrey M.; Goldman, Jerry (2008). The challenge of democracy: government in America (9. ed., update ed.). Houghton Mifflin. p. 207. ISBN 9780618990948. "We Hold These Truths to be Self-evident;" An Interdisciplinary Analysis of the Roots of Racism & slavery in America Kenneth N. Addison; Introduction P. xxii "The Bill Of Rights: A Brief History". ACLU. Retrieved 21 April 2015. United States Constitution Basic Information About the First Amendment & Censorship "State of Sexual Freedom in the United States, 2010 Report" (PDF). Woodhull Freedom Foundation. 2010. "The Right of Privacy The Issue: Does the Constitution protect the right of privacy? If so, what aspects of privacy receive protection?". University of Missouri – Kansas City School of Law. Retrieved 29 September 2020. R.H. Clark (1974). "Constitutional Sources of the Penumbral Right to Privacy". Villanova Law Review. Retrieved 29 September 2020. Warren, Samuel; Brandeis, Louis D. (1890). "The Right to Privacy". Harvard Law Review. 4 (5): 193–220. doi:10.2307/1321160. JSTOR 1321160. Archived from the original on 23 October 2008. Retrieved 3 May 2022. "Supreme Court overturns Roe v. Wade, ending right to abortion upheld for decades". NPR.org. Retrieved 2022-06-25. Frias, Lauren. "What is Griswold v. Connecticut? How access to contraception and other privacy rights could be at risk after SCOTUS overturned Roe v. Wade". Business Insider. Retrieved 2022-06-25. "The Legal Right to Privacy | Stimmel Law". www.stimmel-law.com. Retrieved 25 June 2021. "Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 | CMS". www.cms.gov. Retrieved 2022-09-21. Bridges, Khiara M. (2017). The poverty of privacy rights. Stanford, California. ISBN 978-0-8047-9545-6. "California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)". State of California - Department of Justice - Office of the Attorney General. 2018-10-15. Retrieved 2022-09-24. Further reading Abbott, Lewis F. Defending Liberty: The Case for a New Bill of Rights ISR Publications 2019. Alexander, Keith L. Lawsuit Seeks Right to Carry Concealed Weapons in the District. Www.washingtonpost.com. The Washington Post, 8 Aug. 2009. Web. 29 Sept. 2009. American Civil Liberties Union. ACLU.org. n.d. Web. 27 Sept. 2009. FindLaw. First Amendment - Religion and Expression. FindLaw for Legal Professionals. FindLaw, 2009. Web. 29 Sept. 2009. Gordon, Jesse. Civil Liberties vs. Civil Rights. OnTheIssues.org. Ed. Jesse Gordon. Jesse Gordon, 3 Aug. 2000. Web. 29 Sept. 2009. Scalia, Antonin. District of Columbia v. Heller. Oyez.org. The US Supreme Court Media, June 2008. Web. 29 Sept. 2009. vte United States articles History By period 1776–1789 1789–1815 1815–1849 1849–1865 1865–1917 1917–1945 1945–1964 1964–1980 1980–1991 1991–2008 2008–present By event Pre-colonial era Colonial era Stamp Act Congress Thirteen Colonies Continental Congress Continental Association United Colonies military history Founding Fathers Halifax Resolves Lee Resolution Declaration of Independence American Revolution War Treaty of Paris Articles of Confederation Perpetual Union Confederation period American frontier Constitution drafting and ratification Bill of Rights Federalist Era War of 1812 Territorial evolution Mexican–American War Civil War Reconstruction era Indian Wars Native genocide Gilded Age Progressive Era Women's suffrage Civil rights movement 1865–1896 1896–1954 1954–1968 Spanish–American War Imperialism World War I Roaring Twenties Great Depression World War II home front American Century Cold War Korean War Space Race Feminist Movement LGBT Movement Vietnam War Post-Cold War (1991–2008) September 11 attacks War on Terror War in Afghanistan Iraq War Great Recession COVID-19 pandemic By topic Outline of U.S. history Demographic Discoveries Economic debt ceiling Inventions before 1890 1890–1945 after 1991 Military Postal Technological and industrial Geography Territory Contiguous United States counties federal district federal enclaves Indian reservations insular zones minor outlying islands populated places states Earthquakes Extreme points Islands Mountains peaks ranges Appalachian Rocky Sierra Nevada National Park Service National Parks Regions East Coast West Coast Great Plains Gulf Mid-Atlantic Midwestern New England Pacific Central Eastern Northern Northeastern Northwestern Southern Southeastern Southwestern Western Longest rivers Arkansas Colorado Columbia Mississippi Missouri Red (South) Rio Grande Yukon Time Water supply and sanitation World Heritage Sites Politics Federal Executive President of the United States powers Executive Office Vice President Cabinet Executive departments Independent agencies Intelligence Community Director of National Intelligence Central Intelligence Agency National Security Agency National Reconnaissance Office Law enforcement ATF CBP Diplomatic Security DEA FBI ICE Marshals Secret Service TSA Inspector generals Civil service Public policy Legislative House of Representatives current members Speaker Sergeant at Arms Senate current members President pro tempore President Sergeant at Arms Capitol Police Library of Congress Congressional Budget Office Government Accountability Office Government Publishing Office Judicial Supreme Court Chief Justice Associate Justices list Marshal Police Courts of appeals list of judges District courts/Territorial courts list of courts list of judges Other tribunals U.S. attorney Law Bill of Rights civil liberties Code of Federal Regulations Constitution federalism preemption separation of powers civil rights Federal Reporter United States Code United States Reports Uniformed Armed Forces Army Marine Corps Navy Air Force Space Force Coast Guard National Guard NOAA Corps Public Health Service Corps State, Federal District, and Territorial Executive Governor list Lieutenant governor list Secretary of state Attorney general Treasurer Auditor/Comptroller Agriculture commissioner Insurance commissioner Public utilities commission State police list Legislative List of legislatures List of legislators Judicial Supreme courts Chief justices District attorney list Law State constitutions Statutory codes Uniform act Comparison of governments Tribal Tribal sovereignty Native American recognition in the United States Federally recognized tribes Federally recognized Alaska Native tribes State-recognized tribes Indian reservation list Hawaiian home land Local County List of counties and county equivalents County executive Sheriff Clerk Cities Consolidated city-county Independent city Coterminous municipality Charter Mayor–council government Council–manager government City commission government Mayor City manager City council Minor divisions Township Town meeting Special district School district list Corruption Elections Electoral College Red states and blue states Foreign relations foreign policy Imperial presidency Ideologies Anti-Americanism exceptionalism nationalism Parties Democratic Republican Third parties Scandals Economy By sector Agriculture Banking Communications Companies Energy Insurance Manufacturing Mining Science and technology Tourism Trade by state Currency Exports Federal budget Greenhouse gas emissions by the United States Federal Reserve System Financial position Labor unions Public debt Social welfare programs Taxation Unemployment Wall Street Transport Aviation Driving Public transportation Rail transportation Transportation policy Transportation safety Trucking industry Society Culture Americana Architecture Cinema Crime Cuisine Dance Death care Women Demographics Economic issues affluence eviction homeownership household income income inequality middle class personal income poverty standard of living wealth working class Education attainment literacy Family Fashion Flag Folklore Great American Novel Holidays Homelessness Housing Human rights Languages American English Indigenous languages ASL Black American Sign Language HSL Plains Sign Talk Arabic Chinese French German Italian Russian Spanish Literature Media journalism internet newspapers radio television Music Names National symbols Columbia Mount Rushmore Statue of Liberty Uncle Sam People Philosophy Political ideologies Race Religion Sexuality adolescent Social class Society Sports Theater Transportation Video games Visual art Social class Affluence American Dream Educational attainment Homelessness Homeownership Household income Income inequality Middle class Personal income Poverty Standard of living Health Healthcare Abortion Birth control Prenatal care Hospice care Immigrant health care Rationing Health care finance Health insurance costs Health care prices Prescription drug prices Disability Health insurance Food safety Physician shortage Poverty and health Race and health Race and maternal health Medical racism Obesity Medical deserts Women's reproductive health Maternal mortality Life expectancy Issues Ages of consent Capital punishment Crime incarceration Criticism of government Discrimination affirmative action antisemitism hair texture intersex rights Islamophobia LGBT rights racism Native American African American same-sex marriage Drug policy Energy policy Environmental issues Environmental movement Climate change Environmental education Gun politics Mass shootings hunger obesity smoking Human rights Immigration illegal International rankings National security Mass surveillance Terrorism Separation of church and state Xenophobia OutlineIndex Category Portal Categories: Civil liberties in the United States Rights United States constitutional law

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ The city of Nagasaki had been one of the largest seaports in southern Japan, and was of great wartime importance because of its wide-ranging industrial activity, including the production of ordnance, ships, military equipment, and other war materials. The four largest companies in the city were Mitsubishi Shipyards, Electrical Shipyards, Arms Plant, and Steel and Arms Works, which employed about 90 percent of the city's labor force, and accounted for 90 percent of the city's industry.[186] Although an important industrial city, Nagasaki had been spared from firebombing because its geography made it difficult to locate at night with AN/APQ-13 radar.[120] Unlike the other target cities, Nagasaki had not been placed off limits to bombers by the Joint Chiefs of Staff's 3 July directive,[120][187] and was bombed on a small scale five times. During one of these raids on 1 August, a number of conventional high-explosive bombs were dropped on the city. A few hit the shipyards and dock areas in the southwest portion of the city, and several hit the Mitsubishi Steel and Arms Works.[186] By early August, the city was defended by the 134th Anti-Aircraft Regiment of the 4th Anti-Aircraft Division with four batteries of 7 cm (2.8 in) anti-aircraft guns and two searchlight batteries.[115] A photo of the harbor at Nagasaki in August 1945 before the city was hit with the atomic bomb The harbor at Nagasaki in August 1945 before the city was hit with the atomic bomb In contrast to Hiroshima, almost all of the buildings were of old-fashioned Japanese construction, consisting of timber or timber-framed buildings with timber walls (with or without plaster) and tile roofs. Many of the smaller industries and business establishments were also situated in buildings of timber or other materials not designed to withstand explosions. Nagasaki had been permitted to grow for many years without conforming to any definite city zoning plan; residences were erected adjacent to factory buildings and to each other almost as closely as possible throughout the entire industrial valley. On the day of the bombing, an estimated 263,000 people were in Nagasaki, including 240,000 Japanese residents, 10,000 Korean residents, 2,500 conscripted Korean workers, 9,000 Japanese soldiers, 600 conscripted Chinese workers, and 400 Allied prisoners of war in a camp to the north of Nagasaki.[188] Bombing of Nagasaki The Bockscar B-29 and a post war Mk III nuclear weapon painted to resemble the Fat Man bomb, at the National Museum of the United States Air Force, Dayton, Ohio Responsibility for the timing of the second bombing was delegated to Tibbets. Scheduled for 11 August, the raid was moved earlier by two days to avoid a five-day period of bad weather forecast to begin on 10 August.[189] Three bomb pre-assemblies had been transported to Tinian, labeled F-31, F-32, and F-33 on their exteriors. On 8 August, a dress rehearsal was conducted off Tinian by Sweeney using Bockscar as the drop airplane. Assembly F-33 was expended testing the components and F-31 was designated for the 9 August mission.[190] Special Mission 16, secondary target Nagasaki, 9 August 1945[191] Aircraft Pilot Call sign Mission role Enola Gay Captain George W. Marquardt Dimples 82 Weather reconnaissance (Kokura) Laggin' Dragon Captain Charles F. McKnight Dimples 95 Weather reconnaissance (Nagasaki) Bockscar Major Charles W. Sweeney Dimples 77 Weapon delivery The Great Artiste Captain Frederick C. Bock Dimples 89 Blast measurement instrumentation Big Stink Major James I. Hopkins, Jr. Dimples 90 Strike observation and photography Full House Major Ralph R. Taylor Dimples 83 Strike spare – did not complete mission At 03:47 Tinian time (GMT+10), 02:47 Japanese time,[192] on the morning of 9 August 1945, Bockscar, flown by Sweeney's crew, lifted off from Tinian island with the Fat Man, with Kokura as the primary target and Nagasaki the secondary target. The mission plan for the second attack was nearly identical to that of the Hiroshima mission, with two B-29s flying an hour ahead as weather scouts and two additional B-29s in Sweeney's flight for instrumentation and photographic support of the mission. Sweeney took off with his weapon already armed but with the electrical safety plugs still engaged.[193] During pre-flight inspection of Bockscar, the flight engineer notified Sweeney that an inoperative fuel transfer pump made it impossible to use 2,400 liters (640 U.S. gal) of fuel carried in a reserve tank. This fuel would still have to be carried all the way to Japan and back, consuming still more fuel. Replacing the pump would take hours; moving the Fat Man to another aircraft might take just as long and was dangerous as well, as the bomb was live. Tibbets and Sweeney therefore elected to have Bockscar continue the mission.[194][195] The before image looks like a city. In the after image, everything has been obliterated and it is recognisable as the same area only by the rivers running through it, which form an island in the centre of the photographs. Nagasaki before and after the bombing, after the fires had burned out This time Penney and Cheshire were allowed to accompany the mission, flying as observers on the third plane, Big Stink, flown by the group's operations officer, Major James I. Hopkins, Jr. Observers aboard the weather planes reported both targets clear. When Sweeney's aircraft arrived at the assembly point for his flight off the coast of Japan, Big Stink failed to make the rendezvous.[193] According to Cheshire, Hopkins was at varying heights including 2,700 meters (9,000 ft) higher than he should have been, and was not flying tight circles over Yakushima as previously agreed with Sweeney and Captain Frederick C. Bock, who was piloting the support B-29 The Great Artiste. Instead, Hopkins was flying 64-kilometer (40 mi) dogleg patterns.[196] Though ordered not to circle longer than fifteen minutes, Sweeney continued to wait for Big Stink for forty minutes. Before leaving the rendezvous point, Sweeney consulted Ashworth, who was in charge of the bomb. As commander of the aircraft, Sweeney made the decision to proceed to the primary, the city of Kokura.[197] After exceeding the original departure time limit by nearly a half-hour, Bockscar, accompanied by The Great Artiste, proceeded to Kokura, thirty minutes away. The delay at the rendezvous had resulted in clouds and drifting smoke over Kokura from fires started by a major firebombing raid by 224 B-29s on nearby Yahata the previous day.[198] Additionally, the Yahata Steel Works intentionally burned coal tar, to produce black smoke.[199] The clouds and smoke resulted in 70 percent of the area over Kokura being covered, obscuring the aiming point. Three bomb runs were made over the next 50 minutes, burning fuel and exposing the aircraft repeatedly to the heavy defenses around Kokura, but the bombardier was unable to drop visually. By the time of the third bomb run, Japanese anti-aircraft fire was getting close, and Second Lieutenant Jacob Beser, who was monitoring Japanese communications, reported activity on the Japanese fighter direction radio bands.[200] With fuel running low because of the failed fuel pump, Bockscar and The Great Artiste headed for their secondary target, Nagasaki.[193] Fuel consumption calculations made en route indicated that Bockscar had insufficient fuel to reach Iwo Jima and would be forced to divert to Okinawa, which had become entirely Allied-occupied territory only six weeks earlier. After initially deciding that if Nagasaki were obscured on their arrival the crew would carry the bomb to Okinawa and dispose of it in the ocean if necessary, Ashworth agreed with Sweeney's suggestion that a radar approach would be used if the target was obscured.[201][202] At about 07:50 Japanese time, an air raid alert was sounded in Nagasaki, but the "all clear" signal was given at 08:30. When only two B-29 Superfortresses were sighted at 10:53 Japanese Time (GMT+9), the Japanese apparently assumed that the planes were only on reconnaissance and no further alarm was given.[203] A few minutes later at 11:00 Japanese Time, The Great Artiste dropped instruments attached to three parachutes. These instruments also contained an unsigned letter to Professor Ryokichi Sagane, a physicist at the University of Tokyo who studied with three of the scientists responsible for the atomic bomb at the University of California, Berkeley, urging him to tell the public about the danger involved with these weapons of mass destruction. The messages were found by military authorities but not turned over to Sagane until a month later.[204] In 1949, one of the authors of the letter, Luis Alvarez, met with Sagane and signed the letter.[205] At 11:01 Japanese Time, a last-minute break in the clouds over Nagasaki allowed Bockscar's bombardier, Captain Kermit Beahan, to visually sight the target as ordered. The Fat Man weapon, containing a core of about 5 kg (11 lb) of plutonium, was dropped over the city's industrial valley. It exploded 47 seconds later at 11:02 Japanese Time[192] at 503 ± 10 m (1,650 ± 33 ft), above a tennis court,[206] halfway between the Mitsubishi Steel and Arms Works in the south and the Nagasaki Arsenal in the north. This was nearly 3 km (1.9 mi) northwest of the planned hypocenter; the blast was confined to the Urakami Valley and a major portion of the city was protected by the intervening hills.[207] The resulting explosion released the equivalent energy of 21 ± 2 kt (87.9 ± 8.4 TJ).[138] Big Stink spotted the explosion from 160 kilometers (100 mi) away, and flew over to observe.[208] The bomb destroyed the Roman Catholic Urakami Tenshudo Church Bockscar flew on to Okinawa, arriving with only sufficient fuel for a single approach. Sweeney tried repeatedly to contact the control tower for landing clearance, but received no answer. He could see heavy air traffic landing and taking off from Yontan Airfield. Firing off every flare on board to alert the field to his emergency landing, the Bockscar came in fast, landing at 230 km/h (140 mph) instead of the normal 190 kilometers per hour (120 mph). The number two engine died from fuel starvation as he began the final approach. Touching down on only three engines midway down the landing strip, Bockscar bounced up into the air again for about 7.6 meters (25 ft) before slamming back down hard. The heavy B-29 slewed left and towards a row of parked B-24 bombers before the pilots managed to regain control. Its reversible propellers were insufficient to slow the aircraft adequately, and with both pilots standing on the brakes, Bockscar made a swerving 90-degree turn at the end of the runway to avoid running off it. A second engine died from fuel exhaustion before the plane came to a stop.[209] Following the mission, there was confusion over the identification of the plane. The first eyewitness account by war correspondent William L. Laurence of The New York Times, who accompanied the mission aboard the aircraft piloted by Bock, reported that Sweeney was leading the mission in The Great Artiste. He also noted its "Victor" number as 77, which was that of Bockscar.[210] Laurence had interviewed Sweeney and his crew, and was aware that they referred to their airplane as The Great Artiste. Except for Enola Gay, none of the 393d's B-29s had yet had names painted on the noses, a fact which Laurence himself noted in his account. Unaware of the switch in aircraft, Laurence assumed Victor 77 was The Great Artiste,[211] which was in fact, Victor 89.[212] Events on the ground Although the bomb was more powerful than the one used on Hiroshima, its effects were confined by hillsides to the narrow Urakami Valley.[213] Of 7,500 Japanese employees who worked inside the Mitsubishi Munitions plant, including "mobilized" students and regular workers, 6,200 were killed. Some 17,000–22,000 others who worked in other war plants and factories in the city died as well.[214] Casualty estimates for immediate deaths vary widely, ranging from 22,000 to 75,000.[214] At least 35,000–40,000 people were killed and 60,000 others injured.[215][216] In the days and months following the explosion, more people died from their injuries. Because of the presence of undocumented foreign workers, and a number of military personnel in transit, there are great discrepancies in the estimates of total deaths by the end of 1945; a range of 60,000 to 80,000 can be found in various studies.[121] Y�suke Yamahata photographed this child incinerated in Nagasaki. American forces censored such images in Japan until 1952.[217][218] Unlike Hiroshima's military death toll, only 150 Japanese soldiers were killed instantly, including 36 from the 134th AAA Regiment of the 4th AAA Division.[115] At least eight Allied prisoners of war (POWs) died from the bombing, and as many as thirteen may have died. The eight confirmed deaths included a British POW, Royal Air Force Corporal Ronald Shaw,[219] and seven Dutch POWs.[220] One American POW, Joe Kieyoomia, was in Nagasaki at the time of the bombing but survived, reportedly having been shielded from the effects of the bomb by the concrete walls of his cell.[221] There were 24 Australian POWs in Nagasaki, all of whom survived.[222] The radius of total destruction was about 1.6 km (1 mi), followed by fires across the northern portion of the city to 3.2 km (2 mi) south of the bomb.[143][223] About 58 percent of the Mitsubishi Arms Plant was damaged, and about 78 percent of the Mitsubishi Steel Works. The Mitsubishi Electric Works suffered only 10 percent structural damage as it was on the border of the main destruction zone. The Nagasaki Arsenal was destroyed in the blast.[224] Although many fires likewise burnt following the bombing, in contrast to Hiroshima where sufficient fuel density was available, no firestorm developed in Nagasaki as the damaged areas did not furnish enough fuel to generate the phenomenon. Instead, ambient wind pushed the fire spread along the valley.[225] Had the bomb been dropped more precisely at the intended aiming point, which was downtown Nagasaki at the heart of the historic district, the destruction to medical and administrative infrastructure would have been even greater.[64] As in Hiroshima, the bombing badly dislocated the city's medical facilities. A makeshift hospital was established at the Shinkozen Primary School, which served as the main medical center. The trains were still running, and evacuated many victims to hospitals in nearby towns. A medical team from a naval hospital reached the city in the evening, and fire-fighting brigades from the neighboring towns assisted in fighting the fires.[226] Takashi Nagai was a doctor working in the radiology department of Nagasaki Medical College Hospital. He received a serious injury that severed his right temporal artery, but joined the rest of the surviving medical staff in treating bombing victims.[227] Plans for more atomic attacks on Japan Main article: Third Shot Memorandum from Leslie Groves to George C. Marshall regarding the third bomb, with Marshall's hand-written caveat that the third bomb not be used without express presidential instruction There were plans for further attacks on Japan following Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Groves expected to have another "Fat Man" atomic bomb ready for use on 19 August, with three more in September and a further three in October.[87] A second Little Boy bomb (using U-235) would not be available until December 1945.[228][229] On 10 August, he sent a memorandum to Marshall in which he wrote that "the next bomb ... should be ready for delivery on the first suitable weather after 17 or 18 August." The memo today contains hand-written comment written by Marshall: "It is not to be released over Japan without express authority from the President."[87] At the cabinet meeting that morning, Truman discussed these actions. James Forrestal paraphrased Truman as saying "there will be further dropping of the atomic bomb," while Henry A. Wallace recorded in his diary that: "Truman said he had given orders to stop atomic bombing. He said the thought of wiping out another 100,000 people was too horrific. He didn't like the idea of killing, as he said, 'all those kids.'"[230] The previous order that the target cities were to be attacked with atomic bombs "as made ready" was thus modified.[231] There was already discussion in the War Department about conserving the bombs then in production for Operation Downfall, and Marshall suggested to Stimson that the remaining cities on the target list be spared attack with atomic bombs.[232] Two more Fat Man assemblies were readied, and scheduled to leave Kirtland Field for Tinian on 11 and 14 August,[233] and Tibbets was ordered by LeMay to return to Albuquerque, New Mexico, to collect them.[234] At Los Alamos, technicians worked 24 hours straight to cast another plutonium core.[235] Although cast, it still needed to be pressed and coated, which would take until 16 August.[236] Therefore, it could have been ready for use on 19 August. Unable to reach Marshall, Groves ordered on his own authority on 13 August that the core should not be shipped.[231] Surrender of Japan and subsequent occupation Main articles: Surrender of Japan and Occupation of Japan Until 9 August, Japan's war council still insisted on its four conditions for surrender. The full cabinet met at 14:30 on 9 August, and spent most of the day debating surrender. Anami conceded that victory was unlikely, but argued in favor of continuing the war. The meeting ended at 17:30, with no decision having been reached. Suzuki went to the palace to report on the outcome of the meeting, where he met with K�ichi Kido, the Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal of Japan. Kido informed him that the emperor had agreed to hold an imperial conference, and gave a strong indication that the emperor would consent to surrender on condition that kokutai be preserved. A second cabinet meeting was held at 18:00. Only four ministers supported Anami's position of adhering to the four conditions, but since cabinet decisions had to be unanimous, no decision was reached before it ended at 22:00.[237] Calling an imperial conference required the signatures of the prime minister and the two service chiefs, but the Chief Cabinet Secretary Hisatsune Sakomizu had already obtained signatures from Toyoda and General Yoshijir� Umezu in advance, and he reneged on his promise to inform them if a meeting was to be held. The meeting commenced at 23:50. No consensus had emerged by 02:00 on 10 August, but the emperor gave his "sacred decision",[238] authorizing the Foreign Minister, Shigenori T�g�, to notify the Allies that Japan would accept their terms on one condition, that the declaration "does not comprise any demand which prejudices the prerogatives of His Majesty as a Sovereign ruler."[239] On 12 August, the Emperor informed the imperial family of his decision to surrender. One of his uncles, Prince Asaka, asked whether the war would be continued if the kokutai could not be preserved. Hirohito simply replied, "Of course."[240] As the Allied terms seemed to leave intact the principle of the preservation of the Throne, Hirohito recorded on 14 August his capitulation announcement which was broadcast to the Japanese nation the next day despite an attempted military coup d'état by militarists opposed to the surrender.[241] In his declaration's fifth paragraph, Hirohito solely mentions the duration of the conflict; and did not explicitly mention the Soviets as a factor for surrender: But now the war has lasted for nearly four years. Despite the best that has been done by every one—the gallant fighting of military and naval forces, the diligence and assiduity of Our servants of the State and the devoted service of Our one hundred million people, the war situation has developed not necessarily to Japan's advantage, while the general trends of the world have all turned against her interest. The sixth paragraph by Hirohito specifically mentions the use of nuclear ordnance devices, from the aspect of the unprecedented damage they caused: Moreover, the enemy has begun to employ a new and most cruel bomb, the power of which to do damage is, indeed, incalculable, taking the toll of many innocent lives. Should we continue to fight, not only would it result in an ultimate collapse and obliteration of the Japanese nation, but also it would lead to the total extinction of human civilization. The seventh paragraph gives the reason for the ending of hostilities against the Allies: Such being the case, how are we to save the millions of our subjects, or to atone ourselves before the hallowed spirits of our imperial ancestors? This is the reason why we have ordered the acceptance of the provisions of the joint declaration of the powers.[242] In his "Rescript to the Soldiers and Sailors" delivered on 17 August, Hirohito did not refer to the atomic bombs or possible human extinction, and instead described the Soviet declaration of war as "endangering the very foundation of the Empire's existence."[243] Reportage See also: Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in popular culture The front page of Chicago Daily Tribune dated 8 August 1945. The cartoon refers back to the Japanese Pearl Harbor Attack to rationalize the American atomic bombing. The Hiroshima ruins in March and April 1946, by Daniel A. McGovern and Harry Mimura On 10 August 1945, the day after the Nagasaki bombing, military photographer Y�suke Yamahata, correspondent Higashi, and artist Yamada arrived in the city with instructions to record the destruction for propaganda purposes. Yamahata took scores of photographs, and on 21 August, they appeared in Mainichi Shimbun, a popular Japanese newspaper. After Japan's surrender and the arrival of American forces, copies of his photographs were seized amid the ensuing censorship, but some records have survived.[244] Leslie Nakashima, a former United Press (UP) journalist, filed the first personal account of the scene to appear in American newspapers. He observed that large numbers of survivors continued to die from what later became recognized as radiation poisoning.[245] On 31 August, The New York Times published an abbreviated version of his 27 August UP article. Nearly all references to uranium poisoning were omitted. An editor's note was added to say that, according to American scientists, "the atomic bomb will not have any lingering after-effects."[246][245] A telegram sent by Fritz Bilfinger, delegate of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), on 30 August 1945 from Hiroshima Wilfred Burchett was also one of the first Western journalists to visit Hiroshima after the bombing. He arrived alone by train from Tokyo on 2 September, defying the traveling ban put in place on Western correspondents.[247] Burchett's dispatch, "The Atomic Plague", was printed by the Daily Express newspaper in London on 5 September 1945. The reports from Nakashima and Burchett informed the public for the first time of the gruesome effects of radiation and nuclear fallout—radiation burns and radiation poisoning, sometimes lasting more than thirty days after the blast.[248][249] Burchett especially noted that people were dying "horribly" after bleeding from orifices, and their flesh would rot away from the injection holes where vitamin A was administered, to no avail.[247] The New York Times then apparently reversed course and ran a front-page story by Bill Lawrence confirming the existence of a terrifying affliction in Hiroshima, where many had symptoms such as hair loss and vomiting blood before dying.[247] Lawrence had gained access to the city as part of a press junket promoting the U.S. Army Air Force. Some reporters were horrified by the scene, however, referring to what they saw as a "death laboratory" littered with "human guinea pigs". General MacArthur found the reporting to have turned from good PR into bad PR and threatened to court martial the entire group. He withdrew Burchett's press accreditation and expelled the journalist from the occupation zones.[250] The authorities also accused him of being under the sway of Japanese propaganda and later suppressed another story, on the Nagasaki bombing, by George Weller of the Chicago Daily News. Less than a week after his New York Times story was published, Lawrence also backtracked and dismissed the reports on radiation sickness as Japanese efforts to undermine American morale.[251][247] A member of the United States Strategic Bombing Survey, Lieutenant Daniel A. McGovern, arrived in September 1945 to document the effects of the bombing of Japan.[252] He used a film crew to document the effects of the bombings in early 1946. The film crew shot 27,000 m (90,000 ft) of film, resulting in a three-hour documentary titled The Effects of the Atomic Bombs Against Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The documentary included images from hospitals, burned-out buildings and cars, and rows of skulls and bones on the ground. It was classified "secret" for the next 22 years.[253][254] Motion picture company Nippon Eigasha started sending cameramen to Nagasaki and Hiroshima in September 1945. On 24 October 1945, a U.S. military policeman stopped a Nippon Eigasha cameraman from continuing to film in Nagasaki. All Nippon Eigasha's reels were confiscated by the American authorities, but they were requested by the Japanese government, and declassified.[254] The public release of film footage of the city post-attack, and some research about the effects of the attack, was restricted during the occupation of Japan,[255] but the Hiroshima-based magazine, Chugoku Bunka, in its first issue published on 10 March 1946, devoted itself to detailing the damage from the bombing.[256] The book Hiroshima, written by Pulitzer Prize winner John Hersey and originally published in article form in The New Yorker,[257] is reported to have reached Tokyo in English by January 1947, and the translated version was released in Japan in 1949.[258][259][260] It narrated the stories of the lives of six bomb survivors from immediately prior to, and months after, the dropping of the Little Boy bomb.[257] Beginning in 1974, a compilation of drawings and artwork made by the survivors of the bombings began to be compiled, with completion in 1977, and under both book and exhibition format, it was titled The Unforgettable Fire.[261] Life among the rubble in Hiroshima in March and April 1946. Film footage taken by Lieutenant Daniel A. McGovern (director) and Harry Mimura (cameraman) for a United States Strategic Bombing Survey project. The bombing amazed Otto Hahn and other German atomic scientists, whom the British held at Farm Hall in Operation Epsilon. Hahn stated that he had not believed an atomic weapon "would be possible for another twenty years"; Werner Heisenberg did not believe the news at first. Carl Friedrich von Weizsäcker said "I think it's dreadful of the Americans to have done it. I think it is madness on their part", but Heisenberg replied, "One could equally well say 'That's the quickest way of ending the war'". Hahn was grateful that the German project had not succeeded in developing "such an inhumane weapon"; Karl Wirtz observed that even if it had, "we would have obliterated London but would still not have conquered the world, and then they would have dropped them on us".[262] Hahn told the others, "Once I wanted to suggest that all uranium should be sunk to the bottom of the ocean".[262] The Vatican agreed; L'Osservatore Romano expressed regret that the bomb's inventors did not destroy the weapon for the benefit of humanity.[263] Rev. Cuthbert Thicknesse, the dean of St Albans, prohibited using St Albans Abbey for a thanksgiving service for the war's end, calling the use of atomic weapons "an act of wholesale, indiscriminate massacre".[264] Nonetheless, news of the atomic bombing was greeted enthusiastically in the U.S.; a poll in Fortune magazine in late 1945 showed a significant minority of Americans (23 percent) wishing that more atomic bombs could have been dropped on Japan.[265][266] The initial positive response was supported by the imagery presented to the public (mainly the powerful images of the mushroom cloud).[265] During this time in America, it was a common practice for editors to keep graphic images of death out of films, magazines, and newspapers.[267] Post-attack casualties See also: Epidemiology data for low-linear energy transfer radiation, Acute radiation syndrome § History, Radiobiology, Hiroshima (book), and Terufumi Sasaki Silent film footage taken in Hiroshima in March 1946 showing survivors with severe burns and keloid scars. Survivors were asked to stand in the orientation they were in at the time of the flash, to document and convey the line-of-sight nature of flash burns, and to show that, much like a sunburn, thick clothing and fabric offered protection in many cases. The sometimes extensive burn scar contracture is not unusual, being common to all second- and third-degree burns when they cover a large area of skin. An estimated 90,000 to 140,000 people in Hiroshima (up to 39 percent of the population) and 60,000 to 80,000 people in Nagasaki (up to 32 percent of the population) died in 1945,[121] though the number which died immediately as a result of exposure to the blast, heat, or due to radiation, is unknown. One Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission report discusses 6,882 people examined in Hiroshima and 6,621 people examined in Nagasaki, who were largely within 2,000 meters (6,600 ft) of the hypocenter, who suffered injuries from the blast and heat but died from complications frequently compounded by acute radiation syndrome (ARS), all within about 20 to 30 days.[268][269] Many people not injured by the blast eventually died within that timeframe as well after suffering from ARS. At the time, the doctors had no idea what the cause was and were unable to effectively treat the condition.[247] Midori Naka was the first death officially certified to be the result of radiation poisoning or, as it was referred to by many, the "atomic bomb disease". She was some 650 meters (2,130 ft) from the hypocenter at Hiroshima and would die on 24 August 1945 after traveling to Tokyo. It was unappreciated at the time but the average radiation dose that would kill approximately 50 percent of adults (the LD50) was approximately halved; that is, smaller doses were made more lethal when the individual experienced concurrent blast or burn polytraumatic injuries.[270] Conventional skin injuries that cover a large area frequently result in bacterial infection; the risk of sepsis and death is increased when a usually non-lethal radiation dose moderately suppresses the white blood cell count.[271] In the spring of 1948, the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission (ABCC) was established in accordance with a presidential directive from Truman to the National Academy of Sciences–National Research Council to conduct investigations of the late effects of radiation among the survivors in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.[272] In 1956, the ABCC published The Effect of Exposure to the Atomic Bombs on Pregnancy Termination in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.[273] The ABCC became the Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF) on 1 April 1975. A binational organization run by both the United States and Japan, the RERF is still in operation today.[274] Cancer increases Cancers do not immediately emerge after exposure to radiation; instead, radiation-induced cancer has a minimum latency period of some five years and above, and leukemia some two years and above, peaking around six to eight years later.[275] Jarrett Foley published the first major reports on the significant increased incidence of the latter among survivors. Almost all cases of leukemia over the following 50 years were in people exposed to more than 1Gy.[276] In a strictly dependent manner dependent on their distance from the hypocenter, in the 1987 Life Span Study, conducted by the Radiation Effects Research Foundation, a statistical excess of 507 cancers, of undefined lethality, were observed in 79,972 hibakusha who had still been living between 1958 and 1987 and who took part in the study.[277] As the epidemiology study continues with time, the RERF estimates that, from 1950 to 2000, 46 percent of leukemia deaths which may include Sadako Sasaki and 11 percent of solid cancers of unspecified lethality were likely due to radiation from the bombs or some other post-attack city effects, with the statistical excess being 200 leukemia deaths and 1,700 solid cancers of undeclared lethality. Both of these statistics being derived from the observation of approximately half of the total survivors, strictly those who took part in the study.[278] A meta-analysis from 2016 found that radiation exposure increases cancer risk, but also that the average lifespan of survivors was reduced by only a few months compared to those not exposed to radiation.[279] Birth defect investigations While during the preimplantation period, that is one to ten days following conception, intrauterine radiation exposure of "at least 0.2 Gy" can cause complications of implantation and death of the human embryo.[280] The number of miscarriages caused by the radiation from the bombings, during this radiosensitive period, is not known. One of the early studies conducted by the ABCC was on the outcome of pregnancies occurring in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and in a control city, Kure, located 29 km (18 mi) south of Hiroshima, to discern the conditions and outcomes related to radiation exposure.[281] James V. Neel led the study which found that the overall number of birth defects was not significantly higher among the children of survivors who were pregnant at the time of the bombings.[282] He also studied the longevity of the children who survived the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, reporting that between 90 and 95 percent were still living 50 years later.[283] While the National Academy of Sciences raised the possibility that Neel's procedure did not filter the Kure population for possible radiation exposure which could bias the results,[284] overall, a statistically insignificant increase in birth defects occurred directly after the bombings of Nagasaki and Hiroshima when the cities were taken as wholes, in terms of distance from the hypocenters. However, Neel and others noted that in approximately 50 humans who were of an early gestational age at the time of the bombing and who were all within about 1 kilometer (0.62 mi) of the hypocenter, an increase in microencephaly and anencephaly was observed upon birth, with the incidence of these two particular malformations being nearly 3 times what was to be expected when compared to the control group in Kure.[285] In 1985, Johns Hopkins University geneticist James F. Crow examined Neel's research and confirmed that the number of birth defects was not significantly higher in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.[286] Many members of the ABCC and its successor Radiation Effects Research Foundation (RERF) were still looking for possible birth defects among the survivors decades later, but found no evidence that they were significantly common among the survivors or inherited in the children of survivors.[283][287] Investigations into brain development See also: Radiation-induced cognitive decline Despite the small sample size of 1,600 to 1,800 persons who came forth as prenatally exposed at the time of the bombings, that were both within a close proximity to the two hypocenters, to survive the in utero absorption of a substantial dose of radiation and then the malnourished post-attack environment, data from this cohort do support the increased risk of severe mental retardation (SMR), that was observed in some 30 individuals, with SMR being a common outcome of the aforementioned microencephaly. While a lack of statistical data, with just 30 individuals out of 1,800, prevents a definitive determination of a threshold point, the data collected suggests a threshold intrauterine or fetal dose for SMR, at the most radiosensitive period of cognitive development, when there is the largest number of undifferentiated neural cells (8 to 15 weeks post-conception) to begin at a threshold dose of approximately "0.09" to "0.15" Gy, with the risk then linearly increasing to a 43-percent rate of SMR when exposed to a fetal dose of 1 Gy at any point during these weeks of rapid neurogenesis.[288][289] However either side of this radiosensitive age, none of the prenatally exposed to the bombings at an age less than 8 weeks, that is prior to synaptogenesis or at a gestational age more than 26 weeks "were observed to be mentally retarded", with the condition therefore being isolated to those solely of 8–26 weeks of age and who absorbed more than approximately "0.09" to "0.15" Gy of prompt radiation energy.[288][290] Examination of the prenatally exposed in terms of IQ performance and school records, determined the beginning of a statistically significant reduction in both, when exposed to greater than 0.1 to 0.5 gray, during the same gestational period of 8–25 weeks. However outside this period, at less than 8 weeks and greater than 26 after conception, "there is no evidence of a radiation-related effect on scholastic performance."[288] The reporting of doses in terms of absorbed energy in units of grays and rads – rather than the biologically significant, biologically weighted sievert in both the SMR and cognitive performance data – is typical.[290] The reported threshold dose variance between the two cities is suggested to be a manifestation of the difference between X-ray and neutron absorption, with Little Boy emitting substantially more neutron flux, whereas the Baratol that surrounded the core of Fat Man filtered or shifted the absorbed neutron-radiation profile, so that the dose of radiation energy received in Nagasaki was mostly that from exposure to X-rays/gamma rays. Contrast this to the environment within 1500 meters of the hypocenter at Hiroshima, where the in-utero dose depended more on the absorption of neutrons which have a higher biological effect per unit of energy absorbed.[291] From the radiation dose reconstruction work, the estimated dosimetry at Hiroshima still has the largest uncertainty as the Little Boy bomb design was never tested before deployment or afterward, therefore the estimated radiation profile absorbed by individuals at Hiroshima had required greater reliance on calculations than the Japanese soil, concrete and roof-tile measurements which began to reach accurate levels and thereby inform researchers, in the 1990s.[292][293][294] Many other investigations into cognitive outcomes, such as schizophrenia as a result of prenatal exposure, have been conducted with "no statistically significant linear relationship seen". There is a suggestion that in the most extremely exposed, those who survived within a kilometer or so of the hypocenters, a trend emerges akin to that seen in SMR, though the sample size is too small to determine with any significance.[295] Hibakusha Main article: Hibakusha Torii, Nagasaki, Japan. One-legged torii in the background The survivors of the bombings are called hibakusha (被爆者, pronounced [çibaꜜkɯ̥ɕa] or [çibakɯ̥ꜜɕa]), a Japanese word that translates to "explosion-affected people". The Japanese government has recognized about 650,000 people as hibakusha. As of March 31, 2023, 113,649 were still alive, mostly in Japan.[296] The government of Japan recognizes about one percent of these as having illnesses caused by radiation.[297][better source needed] The memorials in Hiroshima and Nagasaki contain lists of the names of the hibakusha who are known to have died since the bombings. Updated annually on the anniversaries of the bombings, as of August 2023, the memorials record the names of 535,000 hibakusha; 339,227 in Hiroshima[298] and 195,607 in Nagasaki.[299] If they discuss their background, hibakusha and their children were (and still are) victims of fear-based discrimination and exclusion for marriage or work[300] due to public ignorance; much of the public persist with the belief that the hibakusha carry some hereditary or even contagious disease.[301] This is despite the fact that no statistically demonstrable increase of birth defects/congenital malformations was found among the later conceived children born to survivors of the nuclear weapons used at Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or has been found in the later conceived children of cancer survivors who had previously received radiotherapy.[302][303][304] The surviving women of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, that could conceive, who were exposed to substantial amounts of radiation, had children with no higher incidence of abnormalities/birth defects than the rate which is observed in the Japanese average.[305][306][307] A study of the long-term psychological effects of the bombings on the survivors found that even 17–20 years after the bombings had occurred survivors showed a higher prevalence of anxiety and somatization symptoms.[308] Double survivors Perhaps as many as 200 people from Hiroshima sought refuge in Nagasaki. The 2006 documentary Twice Survived: The Doubly Atomic Bombed of Hiroshima and Nagasaki documented 165 nijū hibakusha (lit. double explosion-affected people), nine of whom claimed to be in the blast zone in both cities.[309] On 24 March 2009, the Japanese government officially recognized Tsutomu Yamaguchi as a double hibakusha. He was confirmed to be 3 km (1.9 mi) from ground zero in Hiroshima on a business trip when the bomb was detonated. He was seriously burnt on his left side and spent the night in Hiroshima. He arrived at his home city of Nagasaki on 8 August, the day before the bombing, and he was exposed to residual radiation while searching for his relatives. He was the first officially recognized survivor of both bombings.[310] He died in 2010 of stomach cancer.[311] Korean survivors See also: Anti-Korean sentiment § Japan During the war, Japan brought as many as 670,000 Korean conscripts to Japan to work as forced labor.[312] About 5,000–8,000 Koreans were killed in Hiroshima and 1,500–2,000 in Nagasaki.[313] Korean survivors had a difficult time fighting for the same recognition as Hibakusha as afforded to all Japanese survivors, a situation which resulted in the denial of free health benefits to them in Japan. Most issues were eventually addressed in 2008 through lawsuits.[314] Memorials Hiroshima Hiroshima was subsequently struck by Typhoon Ida on 17 September 1945. More than half the bridges were destroyed, and the roads and railroads were damaged, further devastating the city.[315] The population increased from 83,000 soon after the bombing to 146,000 in February 1946.[316] The city was rebuilt after the war, with help from the national government through the Hiroshima Peace Memorial City Construction Law passed in 1949. It provided financial assistance for reconstruction, along with land donated that was previously owned by the national government and used for military purposes.[317] In 1949, a design was selected for the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park. Hiroshima Prefectural Industrial Promotion Hall, the closest surviving building to the location of the bomb's detonation, was designated the Hiroshima Peace Memorial. The Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum was opened in 1955 in the Peace Park.[318] Hiroshima also contains a Peace Pagoda, built in 1966 by Nipponzan-My�h�ji.[319] On January 27, 1981, the Atomic Bombing Relic Selecting Committee of Hiroshima announced to build commemorative plaques at nine historical sites related to the bombing in the year. Genbaku Dome, Shima Hospital (hypocenter), Motoyasu Bridge [ja] all unveiled plaques with historical photographs and descriptions. The rest sites planned including Hond� Shopping Street, Motomachi No.2 Army Hospital site, Hiroshima Red Cross Hospital [ja], Fukuromachi Elementary School [ja], Hiroshima City Hall [ja] and Hiroshima Station. The committee also planned to establish 30 commemorative plaques in three years.[320] Panoramic view of Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park. The Genbaku Dome can be seen in the center left of the image, the Motoyasu Bridge can be seen in the right of the image. The original target for the bomb was the T-shaped Aioi Bridge seen in the left of the image. Nagasaki Nagasaki was rebuilt in dramatically changed form after the war. The pace of reconstruction was initially slow, and the first simple emergency dwellings were not provided until 1946. The focus on redevelopment was the replacement of war industries with foreign trade, shipbuilding and fishing. This was formally declared when the Nagasaki International Culture City Reconstruction Law was passed in May 1949.[316] New temples were built, as well as new churches owing to an increase in the presence of Christianity. Some of the rubble was left as a memorial, such as a torii at Sann� Shrine, and an arch near ground zero. New structures were also raised as memorials, such as the Nagasaki Atomic Bomb Museum, which was opened in the mid-1990s.[321] A rectangular column rises above a dark stone base with Japanese writing on it. It sits atop a grass mound which is surrounded by alternating circles of stone path and grass. There is a wall around the whole monument, and bushes beyond. Panoramic view of the monument marking the hypocenter, or ground zero, of the atomic bomb explosion over Nagasaki Debate over bombings Main article: Debate over the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki The role of the bombings in Japan's surrender, and the ethical, legal, and military controversies surrounding the United States' justification for them have been the subject of scholarly and popular debate.[322] On one hand, it has been argued that the bombings caused the Japanese surrender, thereby preventing casualties that an invasion of Japan would have involved.[7][323] Stimson talked of saving one million casualties.[324] The naval blockade might have starved the Japanese into submission without an invasion, but this would also have resulted in many more Japanese deaths.[325] However, critics of the bombings have asserted that atomic weapons are fundamentally immoral, that the bombings were war crimes, and that they constituted state terrorism.[326] The Japanese may have surrendered without the bombings, but only an unconditional surrender would satisfy the Allies.[327] Others, such as historian Tsuyoshi Hasegawa, argued that the entry of the Soviet Union into the war against Japan "played a much greater role than the atomic bombs in inducing Japan to surrender because it dashed any hope that Japan could terminate the war through Moscow's mediation".[328] A view among critics of the bombings, popularized by American historian Gar Alperovitz in 1965, is that the United States used nuclear weapons to intimidate the Soviet Union in the early stages of the Cold War. James Orr wrote that this idea became the accepted position in Japan and that it may have played some part in the decision-making of the US government.[329] Legal considerations Main article: Aerial bombardment and international law The Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, which address the codes of wartime conduct on land and at sea, were adopted before the rise of air power. Despite repeated diplomatic attempts to update international humanitarian law to include aerial warfare, it was not updated before World War II. The absence of specific international humanitarian law did not mean aerial warfare was not covered under the laws of war, but rather that there was no general agreement of how to interpret those laws.[330] This means that aerial bombardment of civilian areas in enemy territory by all major belligerents during World War II was not prohibited by positive or specific customary international humanitarian law.[331] In 1963 the bombings were subjected to judicial review in Ryuichi Shimoda v. The State. The District Court of Tokyo ruled the use of nuclear weapons in warfare was not illegal,[332][333] but held in its obiter dictum[333] that the atomic bombings of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were illegal under international law of that time, as an indiscriminate bombardment of undefended cities. The court denied the appellants compensation on the grounds that the Japanese government had waived the right for reparations from the U.S. government under the Treaty of San Francisco.[334] Legacy Main article: Nuclear warfare By 30 June 1946, there were components for nine atomic bombs in the US arsenal, all Fat Man devices identical to the one used at Nagasaki.[335] The nuclear weapons were handmade devices, and a great deal of work remained to improve their ease of assembly, safety, reliability and storage before they were ready for production. There were also many improvements to their performance that had been suggested or recommended, but that had not been possible under the pressure of wartime development.[336] The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, decried the use of the atomic bombs as adopting "an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages",[337] but in October 1947 he reported a military requirement for 400 bombs.[338] The American monopoly on nuclear weapons lasted four years before the Soviet Union detonated an atomic bomb in September 1949.[338] The United States responded with the development of the hydrogen bomb, a thousand times as powerful as the bombs that devastated Hiroshima and Nagasaki.[339] Such ordinary fission bombs would henceforth be regarded as small tactical nuclear weapons. By 1986, the United States had 23,317 nuclear weapons and the Soviet Union had 40,159. In early 2019, more than 90% of the world's 13,865 nuclear weapons were owned by the United States and Russia.[340][341] By 2020, nine nations had nuclear weapons,[342] but Japan was not one of them.[343] Japan reluctantly signed the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons in February 1970,[344] but is still sheltered under the American nuclear umbrella. American nuclear weapons were stored on Okinawa, and sometimes in Japan itself, albeit in contravention of agreements between the two nations.[345] Lacking the resources to fight the Soviet Union using conventional forces, NATO came to depend on the use of nuclear weapons to defend itself during the Cold War, a policy that became known in the 1950s as the New Look.[346] In the decades after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the United States would threaten many times to use its nuclear weapons.[347] On 7 July 2017, more than 120 countries voted to adopt the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. Elayne Whyte Gómez, President of the UN negotiations, said, "the world has been waiting for this legal norm for 70 years".[348] As of 2023, Japan has not signed the treaty.[349][350][351] Notes Asada, Sadao (June 2007). Culture Shock and Japanese-American Relations: Historical Essays. University of Missouri Press. p. 228. ISBN 978-0-8262-6569-2. Retrieved 25 July 2023. Giangreco 2009, pp. 2–3, 49–51. Williams 1960, p. 307. Williams 1960, p. 532. Williams 1960, p. 527. Long 1963, pp. 48–49. Brooks & Stanley 2007, pp. 41–44. Appleman et al. 1948, pp. 462–467. Coox 1969, pp. 2540–2544. Giangreco 2009, pp. 32–34. Giangreco 2009, pp. 125–130. Giangreco 2009, pp. 169–171. Giangreco 2009, pp. 45–48. Giangreco 2009, pp. 121–124. Drea 1992, pp. 202–225. "The Final Months of the War With Japan". Central Intelligence Agency. Part III (note 24). Archived from the original on 12 June 2007. Retrieved 17 December 2013. Carroll 2007, p. 48. Giangreco 2009, pp. 98–99. Frank 1999, p. 340. "Minutes of Meeting held at the White House, June 18, 1945". Harry S. Truman Library and Museum. Retrieved 1 January 2024. Giangreco 2009, p. 112. Schaffer 1985, pp. 164–165. Craven & Cate 1953, p. 4. Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 22–24. Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 169–175. Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 29–31. Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 507–509. Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 514–521. Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 548–551. Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 558–560. Craven & Cate 1953, p. 566. Sandler 2001, pp. 24–26. Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 574–576. Long, Tony (9 March 2011). "March 9, 1945: Burning the Heart Out of the Enemy". Wired. Retrieved 8 August 2011. Laurence M. Vance (14 August 2009). "Bombings Worse than Nagasaki and Hiroshima". The Future of Freedom Foundation. Archived from the original on 13 November 2012. Retrieved 8 August 2011. Joseph Coleman (10 March 2005). "1945 Tokyo Firebombing Left Legacy of Terror, Pain". CommonDreams.org. Archived from the original on 27 August 2011. Retrieved 8 August 2011. Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 608–610. Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 568–570. Edwards 1996, p. 83. Werrell 1996, p. 250. Craven & Cate 1953, p. 750. Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 614–617. Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 642–643. Kerr 1991, p. 207. Tanaka & Young 2009, pp. 5, 84–85, 117. Coox 1994, pp. 412–414. Coox 1994, p. 422. Zaloga & Noon 2010, p. 54. Zaloga & Noon 2010, pp. 58–59. Giangreco 2009, pp. 79–80. Coox 1994, p. 429. Jones 1985, p. 7. Jones 1985, p. 12. Gowing 1964, pp. 40–43, 76–79. Jones 1985, p. 89. Johnston, Louis; Williamson, Samuel H. (2023). "What Was the U.S. GDP Then?". MeasuringWorth. Retrieved 30 November 2023. United States Gross Domestic Product deflator figures follow the MeasuringWorth series. Jones 1985, pp. 82–84. Jones 1985, pp. 511–516, 522. Grunden 1998, pp. 50–52. "Factsheets: 509th Operational Group". Air Force Historical Studies Office. Archived from the original on 24 February 2013. Retrieved 25 December 2011. "History of 509th Composite Group – 313th Bombardment Wing – Twentieth Air Force – Activation to August 15, 1945" (PDF). 509th Composite Group. 1945. pp. 8–9. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 January 2012. Retrieved 1 February 2012. Tibbets 1998, pp. 163, 167–168. "Minutes of 3rd Target Committee Meeting 28 May 1945" (PDF). National Archives. Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 August 2006. Retrieved 9 August 2006. "The Nagasaki atomic bomb damage records, Part 2 Section 1 Chapter 1: Period leading up to the atomic bombing". Nagasaki National Peace Memorial Hall for the Atomic Bomb Victims. Retrieved 29 March 2023. Alex, Wellerstein. "The Luck of Kokura". Restricted Data. Retrieved 30 April 2019. Campbell 2005, p. 25. Craven & Cate 1953, p. 706. Campbell 2005, pp. 14–15. "History of 509th Composite Group – 313th Bombardment Wing – Twentieth Air Force – Activation to 15 August 1945" (PDF). Air Force Historical Research Agency. Tinian. 1945. pp. 17–22. Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 January 2012. Retrieved 1 February 2012. Campbell 2005, p. 100. Christman 1998, p. 176. Jones 1985, pp. 528–529. "Atomic Bomb: Decision – Target Committee, May 10–11, 1945". Archived from the original on 8 August 2005. Retrieved 6 August 2005. Reischauer 1986, p. 101. Kelly 2012, pp. 183–203. Wellerstein 2020, pp. 319–321. Wellerstein, Alex. "Henry Stimson didn't go to Kyoto on his honeymoon". Restricted Data: The Nuclear Secrecy Blog. Retrieved 25 July 2023. Jones 1985, p. 529. Hasegawa 2006, pp. 67–68. Hasegawa 2006, pp. 149–150. Jones 1985, p. 530. Frank 1999, pp. 255–256. Compton 1956, p. 240. Compton 1956, pp. 238–239. Frank 1999, pp. 255–260. Newman 1995, p. 86. "The Atomic Bomb and the End of World War II, A Collection of Primary Sources" (PDF). National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 162. George Washington University. 13 August 1945. Williams, Josette H. "The Information War in the Pacific, 1945 Paths to Peace". Central Intelligence Agency. Archived from the original on 13 June 2007. Retrieved 5 December 2016.) Craven & Cate 1953, p. 656. Frank 1999, p. 153. McNelly 2000, p. 138. Lifton 1991, p. 17. 空襲予告ビラ�高山市民��管 市内�展示 [Air Raid Notice] (in Japanese). �阜新�社 (Gifu Shinbunsha (Open Library)). Archived from the original on 12 October 2013. Retrieved 31 January 2013. Bungei 1981, p. 215. Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 372–373. Gowing 1964, p. 372. "Minutes of a Meeting of the Combined Policy Committee". Washington, DC: United States Department of State. 4 July 1945. Retrieved 18 September 2017. Craven & Cate 1953, pp. 712–713. Letter received from General Thomas Handy to General Carl Spaatz authorizing the dropping of the first atomic bomb. Series: Black and White Photographs of U.S. Air Force and Predecessors' Activities, Facilities, and Personnel, Domestic and Foreign, 1900–2003. National Archives and Records Administration. 25 July 1945. Retrieved 26 January 2018. Harry S. Truman, Diary, July 25, 1945. File Unit: Ross, Mr. And MRS. Charles G. [Truman's Potsdam diary], 1945–1953. Harry S. Truman Presidential Library and Museum. 25 July 1945. Retrieved 23 October 2020. Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 389–390. Hewlett & Anderson 1962, pp. 395–396. Frank 1999, pp. 233–234. The meaning of mokusatsu can fall anywhere in the range of "ignore" to "treat with contempt". Bix 1996, p. 290. Asada 1996, p. 39. Thomas & Morgan-Witts 1977, pp. 326, 356, 370. Hoddeson et al. 1993, p. 262. Hoddeson et al. 1993, p. 265. Coster-Mullen 2012, p. 30. Coster-Mullen 2012, p. 45. Campbell 2005, pp. 38–40. Giangreco 2009, pp. 64–65, 163. Goldstein, Dillon & Wenger 1995, p. 41. Giangreco 2009, pp. 70, 163. Zaloga & Noon 2010, p. 59. United States Strategic Bombing Survey (June 1946). "U. S. Strategic Bombing Survey: The Effects of the Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki". Nuclear Age Peace Foundation. Archived from the original on 11 October 2004. Retrieved 26 July 2009. Thomas & Morgan-Witts 1977, pp. 224–225. Thomas & Morgan-Witts 1977, p. 38. Groves 1962, p. 316. Frank 1999, p. 263. "Frequently Asked Questions #1". Radiation Effects Research Foundation (Formerly known as the Atomic Bomb Casualty Commission (ABCC)). Archived from the original on 19 September 2007. Retrieved 18 September 2007. Bodden 2007, p. 20. Preston 2005, p. 262. Fiévé & Waley 2003, p. 330. Rotter 2008, p. 267. Nathan, Richard (6 August 2021). "Literary Fallout: The legacies of Hiroshima and Nagasaki". Red Circle Authors. Archived from the original on 6 August 2021. "509th Timeline: Inception to Hiroshima". The Atomic Heritage Foundation. Archived from the original on 20 December 2007. Retrieved 5 May 2007. "Timeline #2 – the 509th; The Hiroshima Mission". The Atomic Heritage Foundation. Archived from the original on 20 June 2013. Retrieved 4 May 2007. Dietz & Van Kirk 2012, p. 462. Dietz & Van Kirk 2012, p. 467. Lewis & Tolzer 1957, p. 72. "Timeline #2- the 509th; The Hiroshima Mission". The Atomic Heritage Foundation. Archived from the original on 1 May 2013. Retrieved 5 May 2007. Rosen, Rebecca J. "Rare Photo of the Mushroom Cloud Over Hiroshima Discovered in a Former Japanese Elementary School". The Atlantic. Retrieved 4 December 2016. Thomas & Morgan-Witts 1977, pp. 391–392. Thomas & Morgan-Witts 1977, p. 414. Thomas & Morgan-Witts 1977, p. 415. Allen 1969, p. 2566. Kerr et al 2005, pp. 42–43. Malik, John (September 1985). "The Yields of the Hiroshima and Nagasaki Explosions" (PDF). Los Alamos National Laboratory. Retrieved 9 March 2014. describes how various values were recorded for the B-29's altitude at the moment of bomb release over Hiroshima. The strike report said 9,200 meters (30,200 ft), the official history said 9,600 meters (31,600 ft), Parson's log entry was 10,000 meters (32,700 ft), and the navigator's log was 9,470 meters (31,060 ft)—the latter possibly an error transposing two digits. A later calculation using the indicated atmospheric pressure arrived at the figure of 9,800 meters (32,200 ft). Similarly, several values have been reported as the altitude of the Little Boy bomb at the moment of detonation. Published sources vary in the range of 550 to 610 m (1,800 to 2,000 ft) above the city. The device was set to explode at 575 m (1,885 ft), but this was approximate. Malik uses the figure of 580 m (1,903 ft) plus or minus 15 m (50 ft), determined after data review by Hubbell et al 1969. Radar returns from the tops of multistory buildings near the hypocenter may have triggered the detonation at a somewhat higher altitude than planned. Kerr et al. (2005) found that a detonation altitude of 600 m (1,968.5 ft), plus or minus 20 m (65.6 ft), gave the best fit for all the measurement discrepancies. "The Atomic Bombing of Hiroshima, Aug 6, 1945". United States Department of Energy. Archived from the original on 24 June 2010. Retrieved 25 June 2010. Thomas & Morgan-Witts 1977, pp. 423. 427. "The Bomb-"Little Boy"". The Atomic Heritage Foundation. Archived from the original on 17 April 2021. Retrieved 5 May 2007. W. McRaney; J. McGahan (6 August 1980). Radiation Dose Reconstruction U.S. Occupation Forces in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan, 1945–1946 (DNA 5512F) (PDF). Defense Nuclear Agency. Archived from the original (PDF) on 24 June 2006. Retrieved 9 June 2006 – via Defense Threat Reduction Agency. "Super-fortress crew tell their story". The Guardian. 8 August 1945. Retrieved 17 July 2016. Frank 1999, pp. 264–265. Hersey, John (1946). Hiroshima. Knopf. Japan Broadcasting Corporation, ed. (1977). Unforgettable fire: Pictures drawn by atomic bomb survivors. Pantheon Books. Del Tredici, Robert (1987). At Work in the Fields of the Bomb. Harper and Row. pp. 187–189. "The Bomb Explodes". www.atomicarchive.com. Wellerstein, Alex (4 August 2020). "Counting the dead at Hiroshima and Nagasaki". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. "U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey: The Effects of the Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, June 19, 1946. President's Secretary's File, Truman Papers". Harry S. Truman Library & Museum. p. 9. Archived from the original on 1 February 2016. Retrieved 23 January 2016. "Statements by China and the United States of America during the Inscription of the Hiroshima Peace Memorial (Genbaku Dome)". UNESCO. Archived from the original on 29 August 2005. Retrieved 6 August 2005. "A Photo-Essay on the Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki". University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Retrieved 4 December 2016. Broad, William J. (23 May 2016). "The Hiroshima Mushroom Cloud That Wasn't". The New York Times. Retrieved 4 December 2016. Toon et al. 2007, p. 1994. Hiroshima Peace Culture Foundation 2003, p. 14. "Special Exhibit 3". Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum. Archived from the original on 19 April 2018. Retrieved 30 August 2010. Kato, Toru (4 June 1999). "A Short-Sighted Parrot". Geocities.jp. Archived from the original on 9 March 2009. Retrieved 25 March 2009. Slavick, Elin O'Hara (27 July 2009). "Hiroshima: A Visual Record". Asia-Pacific Journal. 7 (3). Retrieved 21 April 2013. "Testimony of Akiko Takakura". transcript from the video Hiroshima Witness produced by the Hiroshima Peace Cultural Center and NHK. Atomic Archive. Archived from the original on 16 April 2007. Retrieved 30 April 2007. "U. S. Strategic Bombing Survey: The Effects of the Atomic Bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, June 19, 1946. President's Secretary's File, Truman Papers". Harry S. Truman Presidential Library and Museum. p. 7. Archived from the original on 1 February 2016. Retrieved 23 January 2016. Ham 2011, p. 330. Ham 2011, pp. 330–331. Blume, Lesley M. M. (2020). Fallout: the Hiroshima cover-up and the reporter who revealed it to the world. New York: First Simon & Schuster. p. 5. ISBN 978-1-982128-51-7. Ham 2011, p. 325. "Memories of Hiroshima and Nagasaki". The Asahi Shimbun. 6 August 2005. Retrieved 18 March 2014. Thomas & Morgan-Witts 1977, pp. 443–444. "Heart of Hiroshima Wiped Out as by Giant Bulldozer". Advocate (Burnie, Tas. : 1890–1954). Burnie, Tasmania: National Library of Australia. 9 August 1945. p. 1. Retrieved 17 September 2013. Ham 2011,

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Herbert Warren Kalmbach (October 19, 1921 – September 15, 2017) was an American attorney and banker. He served as the personal attorney to United States President Richard Nixon (1968–1973). He became embroiled in the Watergate scandal due to his fundraising activities in the early 1970s, some of which supported undercover operatives directed by senior White House figures under Nixon. Kalmbach was convicted and served 191 days in jail for his part in the scandal, and lost his license to practice law for a time, although he was later reinstated.[1] Education, early career Kalmbach was born on October 19, 1921, in Port Huron, Michigan.[1] He earned both his undergraduate and law degrees at the University of Southern California, and was admitted to the bar in 1952. He was a real estate lawyer and founding partner of Kalmbach, DeMarco, Knapp & Chillingworth.[2][3] Meets Nixon, political fundraiser Kalmbach was introduced to Richard Nixon, then vice-president, by H. R. Haldeman in the 1950s.[4] He raised money for Richard Nixon's candidacy in the 1960 United States presidential election and again in the 1968 United States presidential election. Banker, becomes Nixon's attorney Kalmbach declined Nixon's offer to appoint him Under Secretary of Commerce, choosing instead to remain in California and build up his law practice, becoming the former Vice President's private lawyer. His law firm prospered during this period; it employed two lawyers in 1968, 14 in 1970, and 24 by 1973. The presidential connection drew United Airlines, Dart Industries, Marriott Corporation, and MCA Inc. as clients. During this period Kalmbach founded the Bank of Newport, in Newport Beach, California. The firm performed routine legal chores for the President. It was a shrewd choice. Kalmbach's solid but unspectacular career as a real estate lawyer was quickly touched with gold. Suddenly major clients from all over the nation were eager to sign up with the attorney who represented the President: United Air Lines, Dart Industries Inc., the Marriott Corp., MCA Inc. (the dominant producer of prime-time TV shows). National companies traditionally seek out lawyers who have friends and clients in high places in Washington, and Kalmbach's were very high indeed.[3][5] Arranges private polling Kalmbach was involved in a secret Nixon polling operation hidden from all but his closest senior advisors. Nixon used the poll results to shape policy and campaign strategy and manipulate popular opinion. On December 21, 1971, Kalmbach set up a Delaware shell corporation with private funding, to hide Administration sponsorship of polls.[6] Joins 1972 re-election campaign Kalmbach was also the Deputy Finance Chairman for the Committee to Re-elect the President. In this capacity he was eventually implicated in a fund-raising scandal involving re-election campaign contributions by Associated Milk Producers, Inc. (AMPI) and two other major dairy-farm cooperatives in connection with Nixon's support of an increase in price supports for milk in 1971.[7] Testimony by AMPI general manager George L. Mehrens in 1973 identified Kalmbach as a major solicitor of these contributions.[7] Articles on Charles Colson's involvement in the AMPI scandal indicated that $2 million in contributions had been expected, but that the actual donations were nearer to $400,000, of which some $197,500 had been given by AMPI.[7] Manages finances for undercover operations Kalmbach handled a secret $500,000 fund to finance the sabotage and espionage operations of Donald Segretti.[8][9] Convicted, imprisoned Kalmbach was associate finance chairman of the 1968 Nixon for President campaign and was an unofficial fund-raiser for the Committee for the Re-election of the President, controlling several secret funds. Kalmbach served six months in jail and was fined $10,000 for operating an illegal campaign committee and for offering an ambassadorship in return for political support. He also handled a secret $500,000 fund to finance sabotage and espionage operations in the salary of Donald H. Segretti, a lawyer, whose job it was to discredit the Democrats. including $30,000 to $40,000 in 1972 alone for spying on Democrats.[10] Segretti was paid from re-election funds gathered before the April 7, 1972, cutoff point after which a new law required full disclosure of contributors;[11] Kalmbach told investigators in early 1973 that he had destroyed the contribution records prior to the April 7 date, violating the Federal Corrupt Practices Act, which required the records be maintained for two years and which expired only as of the new law's going into effect.[12] Kalmbach claimed in a later FBI interview that he had not known who was supervising Segretti nor what activities he was being paid to perform.[11][13] Kalmbach also raised $220,000 in "hush money" to pay off the Watergate burglars. He claimed that he was told the money was for lawyer's fees; a claim he accepted because he felt the burglars wrongly believed that they were acting on authority.[14][15] But it was his raising of $3.9 million for a secret Republican congressional campaign committee[16] and promising an ambassador a better post in exchange for $100,000 that led to his conviction and imprisonment for 191 days and a $10,000 fine.[17] Kalmbach pleaded guilty on February 25, 1974, on one count of violation of the Federal Corrupt Practices Act and on one count of promising federal employment as a reward for political activity and support of a candidate. He was sentenced to serve 6 to 18 months in prison for the first count and 6 months in prison on the second count. He executed both sentences concurrently and was released from prison on January 5, 1975.[18] Kalmbach lost his license to practice law, although he was reinstated in 1977.[15][19] Later life Although he retired in the late 1980s, he remained of counsel to Baker Hostetler.[3][9] He died on September 15, 2017, in Newport Beach, California.[1] Notes "Herbert Kalmbach, Who Figured in Watergate Payoffs, Dies at 95". New York Times. September 29, 2017. "Herbert Warren Kalmbach." Almanac of Famous People, 9th ed. Thomson Gale, 2007. Reproduced in Biography Resource Center. Farmington Hills, Michigan: Gale, 2009. http://galenet.galegroup.com/servlet/BioRC. Fee via Fairfax County Public Library, accessed 2009-04-24. "Baker Hostetler - Find Lawyers - Herbert W. Kalmbach". Costa Mesa, California: Baker Hostetler (law firm). Archived from the original on 2011-03-13. Retrieved 2009-04-24. "Herbert W. Kalmbach is Of Counsel to the firm. He has been involved in consulting assignments for a wide variety of clients." All the President's Men, by Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward, New York, 1974, Simon & Schuster "The Rise and Fall of Herb Kalmbach". Time. March 11, 1974. "Discreet and studiously low-key, Herbert W. Kalmbach, 52, was the ideal lawyer to handle Richard Nixon's personal affairs. Like the President, he was a self-made and extraordinarily diligent man, both traits that Nixon admired in an aide. Above all else, Kalmbach was an unswerving and unquestioning loyalist." Mike Mokrzycki. "Nixon Aides Ran A Covert Polling Operation," Los Angeles Times (AP), August 13, 1995; summarizing The Rise of Presidential Polling: The Nixon White House in Historical Perspective, Lawrence R. Jacobs and Robert Y. Shapiro, The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 59, No. 2 (Summer, 1995), pp. 163-195 (article consists of 33 pages), Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2749700 New York Times News Service. "Nixon's lawyer listed as solicitor," The Dallas Morning News, January 11, 1973, page 5A. United Press International. "A Watergate chronology," The Dallas Morning News, April 29, 1973, page 44A. de Witt, Karen (June 15, 1992). "Watergate, Then And Now. Who Was Who in the Cover-Up and Uncovering of Watergate". New York Times. Retrieved 2009-04-24. "Herbert W. Kalmbach Nixon lawyer" United Press International. "Payment reported," The Dallas Morning News, March 8, 1973, page 2A. United Press International. "Chapin, Segretti face grand jury," The Dallas Morning News, April 12, 1973, page 10A. Seymour M. Hersh, New York Times News Service. "Donor list reported destroyed," The Dallas Morning News, May 4, 1973, page 1A. New York Times Press Service. "Watergate jogs memory: Democrats recall strange election incidents," The Dallas Morning News, May 13, 1973, page 14A. Larry Eichel. "The 'duality' that made the man: Richard Milhous Nixon, 1913-1994," Philadelphia Inquirer, April 24, 1994. "Watergate figures! Where are they? What do they say?", Associated Press, June 14, 1982. James R. Polk. "Top money manager: unpublicized fund-raiser may hold key for Nixon," originally in Washington Star, reprinted in The Dallas Morning News, February 3, 1972, page 2A. Miller and Morris, "Donations flood a loophole," Los Angeles Times, October 11, 1992. Stanley Kutler (ed.), Watergate: the fall of Richard Nixon, (Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, 2010), pp. 215-216 "The lives they lead now," Washington Post, June 13, 1982. Further reading Biography Index. A cumulative index to biographical material in books and magazines. Volume 10: September, 1973-August, 1976. New York: H. W. Wilson Co., 1977. Biography Index. A cumulative index to biographical material in books and magazines. Volume 12: September, 1979-August, 1982. New York: H. W. Wilson Co., 1983. Who's Who in America. 38th edition, 1974–1975. Wilmette: Marquis Who's Who, 1974. Who's Who in America. 39th edition, 1976–1977. Wilmette: Marquis Who's Who, 1976. Who's Who in the West. 14th edition, 1974–1975. Wilmette: Marquis Who's Who, 1974. Select Committee on Presidential Campaign Activities (AKA Senate Watergate Hearings), 1973. Testimony given to the committee and cross-examination by senators and counsel. Can be found on YouTube. Authority control databases Edit this at Wikidata NARA Categories: 1921 births2017 deathsAmerican male criminalsCalifornia lawyersCalifornia RepublicansLawyers disbarred in the Watergate scandalMembers of the Committee for the Re-Election of the PresidentPeople associated with BakerHostetlerPeople convicted in the Watergate scandalPeople from Port Huron, MichiganUSC Gould School of Law alumniUniversity of Southern California alumni The 1972 United States presidential election was the 47th quadrennial presidential election held on Tuesday, November 7, 1972. Incumbent Republican president Richard Nixon defeated Democratic U.S. senator George McGovern in a historic-level landslide. Nixon swept aside challenges from two Republican representatives in the Republican primaries to win renomination. McGovern, who had played a significant role in changing the Democratic nomination system after the 1968 presidential election, mobilized the anti-Vietnam War movement and other liberal supporters to win his party's nomination. Among the candidates he defeated were early front-runner Edmund Muskie, 1968 nominee Hubert Humphrey, governor George Wallace, and representative Shirley Chisholm. Nixon emphasized the strong economy and his success in foreign affairs, while McGovern ran on a platform calling for an immediate end to the Vietnam War and the institution of a guaranteed minimum income. Nixon maintained a large lead in polling. Separately, Nixon's reelection committee broke into the Watergate complex to wiretap the Democratic National Committee's headquarters as part of the Watergate scandal. McGovern's general election campaign was damaged early on by the revelation of his running mate Thomas Eagleton, as well as the perception that McGovern's platform was radical. Eagleton had undergone electroconvulsive therapy as a treatment for depression, and he was replaced by Sargent Shriver after only nineteen days on the ticket. Nixon won the election in a landslide victory, taking 60.7% of the popular vote and carrying 49 states and becoming the first Republican to sweep the South, whereas McGovern took just 37.5% of the popular vote. Meanwhile, this marked the last time the Republican nominee carried Minnesota in a presidential election. The 1972 election was the first since the ratification of the 26th Amendment, which lowered the voting age from 21 to 18, further expanding the electorate. Both Nixon and his vice president Spiro Agnew would resign from office within two years of the election. The latter resigned due to a bribery scandal in October 1973, and the former resigned in the face of likely impeachment and conviction as a result of the Watergate scandal in August 1974. Republican House Minority Leader Gerald Ford replaced Agnew as vice president in December 1973, and thus, replaced Nixon as president in August 1974. Ford remains the only person in American history to become president without winning an election for president or vice president. Despite this election delivering Nixon's greatest electoral triumph, Nixon later wrote in his memoirs that "it was one of the most frustrating and in many ways the least satisfying of all".[2] Republican nomination Main article: 1972 Republican Party presidential primaries Republican candidates: Richard Nixon, President of the United States from California Pete McCloskey, Representative from California John M. Ashbrook, Representative from Ohio This article is part of a series about Richard Nixon Birthplace Electoral history Depictions Pre-vice presidency 36th Vice President of the United States Post-vice presidency 37th President of the United States Presidency Timeline Transition Inaugurations first second Judicial appointments Appointed federal judges Supreme Court candidates Appointment controversies Policies Economic Nixon shock Foreign Nixon Doctrine Vietnamization Environmental EPA Clean Water NOAA Legacy of Parks Cannabis war on drugs Native American First term End of the draft Visit to China Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty War on cancer Philadelphia Plan Minority Business Enterprise OSHA Apollo program Second term Paris Peace Accords decent interval 1973 Chilean coup d'état Yom Kippur War airlift Mideast Peace Process Marine Mammal Protection Act Endangered Species Act Impeachment process Watergate scandal timeline Tapes United States v. Nixon Resignation speech Pardon Post-presidency Presidential campaigns Vice presidential campaigns Richard Nixon's signature Seal of the President of the United States vte Republican Party (United States) 1972 Republican Party ticket Richard Nixon Spiro Agnew for President for Vice President 37th President of the United States (1969–1974) 39th Vice President of the United States (1969–1973) Campaign Primaries Nixon was a popular incumbent president in 1972, as he was credited with opening the People's Republic of China as a result of his visit that year, and achieving détente with the Soviet Union. Polls showed that Nixon held a strong lead in the Republican primaries. He was challenged by two candidates: liberal Pete McCloskey from California, and conservative John Ashbrook from Ohio. McCloskey ran as an anti-war candidate, while Ashbrook opposed Nixon's détente policies towards China and the Soviet Union. In the New Hampshire primary, McCloskey garnered 19.8% of the vote to Nixon's 67.6%, with Ashbrook receiving 9.7%.[3] Nixon won 1323 of the 1324 delegates to the Republican convention, with McCloskey receiving the vote of one delegate from New Mexico. Vice President Spiro Agnew was re-nominated by acclamation; while both the party's moderate wing and Nixon himself had wanted to replace him with a new running-mate (the moderates favoring Nelson Rockefeller, and Nixon favoring John Connally), it was ultimately concluded that such action would incur too great a risk of losing Agnew's base of conservative supporters. Primary results 1972 Republican Party presidential primaries[4] Candidate Votes % Richard M. Nixon (incumbent) 5,378,704 86.9 Unpledged delegates 317,048 5.1 John M. Ashbrook 311,543 5.0 Paul N. McCloskey 132,731 2.1 George C. Wallace 20,472 0.3 "None of the names shown" 5,350 0.1 Others 22,433 0.4 Total votes 6,188,281 100 Convention Seven members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War were brought on federal charges for conspiring to disrupt the Republican convention.[5] They were acquitted by a federal jury in Gainesville, Florida.[5] Democratic nomination Main article: 1972 Democratic Party presidential primaries Overall, fifteen people declared their candidacy for the Democratic Party nomination. They were:[6][7] George McGovern, senator from South Dakota Hubert Humphrey, senator from Minnesota, former vice president, and presidential nominee in 1968 George Wallace, Governor of Alabama Edmund Muskie, senator from Maine, vice presidential nominee in 1968 Eugene J. McCarthy, former senator from Minnesota Henry M. Jackson, senator from Washington Shirley Chisholm, Representative of New York's 12th congressional district Terry Sanford, former governor of North Carolina John Lindsay, Mayor of New York City Wilbur Mills, representative of Arkansas's 2nd congressional district Vance Hartke, senator from Indiana Fred Harris, senator from Oklahoma Sam Yorty, Mayor of Los Angeles Patsy Mink, representative of Hawaii's 2nd congressional district Walter Fauntroy, Delegate from Washington, D. C. Democratic Party (United States) 1972 Democratic Party ticket George McGovern Sargent Shriver for President for Vice President U.S. Senator from South Dakota (1963–1981) 21st U.S. Ambassador to France (1968–1970) Campaign Primaries Senate Majority Whip Ted Kennedy, the youngest brother of late President John F. Kennedy and late United States Senator Robert F. Kennedy, was the favorite to win the 1972 nomination, but he announced he would not be a candidate.[8] The favorite for the Democratic nomination then became Maine Senator Ed Muskie,[9] the 1968 vice-presidential nominee.[10] Muskie's momentum collapsed just prior to the New Hampshire primary, when the so-called "Canuck letter" was published in the Manchester Union-Leader. The letter, actually a forgery from Nixon's "dirty tricks" unit, claimed that Muskie had made disparaging remarks about French-Canadians – a remark likely to injure Muskie's support among the French-American population in northern New England.[11] Subsequently, the paper published an attack on the character of Muskie's wife Jane, reporting that she drank and used off-color language during the campaign. Muskie made an emotional defense of his wife in a speech outside the newspaper's offices during a snowstorm. Though Muskie later stated that what had appeared to the press as tears were actually melted snowflakes, the press reported that Muskie broke down and cried, shattering the candidate's image as calm and reasoned.[11][12] Nearly two years before the election, South Dakota Senator George McGovern entered the race as an anti-war, progressive candidate.[13] McGovern was able to pull together support from the anti-war movement and other grassroots support to win the nomination in a primary system he had played a significant part in designing. On January 25, 1972, New York Representative Shirley Chisholm announced she would run, and became the first African-American woman to run for a major-party presidential nomination. Hawaii Representative Patsy Mink also announced she would run, and became the first Asian American person to run for the Democratic presidential nomination.[14] On April 25, George McGovern won the Massachusetts primary. Two days later, journalist Robert Novak quoted a "Democratic senator", later revealed to be Thomas Eagleton, as saying: "The people don't know McGovern is for amnesty, abortion, and legalization of pot. Once middle America – Catholic middle America, in particular – finds this out, he's dead." The label stuck, and McGovern became known as the candidate of "amnesty, abortion, and acid". It became Humphrey's battle cry to stop McGovern—especially in the Nebraska primary.[15][16] Alabama Governor George Wallace, an infamous segregationist who ran on a third-party ticket in 1968, did well in the South (winning nearly every county in the Florida primary) and among alienated and dissatisfied voters in the North.[17] What might have become a forceful campaign was cut short when Wallace was shot in an assassination attempt by Arthur Bremer on May 15. Wallace was struck by five bullets and left paralyzed from the waist down. The day after the assassination attempt, Wallace won the Michigan and Maryland primaries, but the shooting effectively ended his campaign, and he pulled out in July. In the end, McGovern won the nomination by winning primaries through grassroots support, in spite of establishment opposition. McGovern had led a commission to re-design the Democratic nomination system after the divisive nomination struggle and convention of 1968. However, the new rules angered many prominent Democrats whose influence was marginalized, and those politicians refused to support McGovern's campaign (some even supporting Nixon instead), leaving the McGovern campaign at a significant disadvantage in funding, compared to Nixon. Some of the principles of the McGovern Commission have lasted throughout every subsequent nomination contest, but the Hunt Commission instituted the selection of Superdelegates a decade later, in order to reduce the nomination chances of outsiders like McGovern and Carter. Primary results Statewide contest by winner No primary held Shirley Chisholm Hubert Humphrey Henry M. Jackson George McGovern Wilbur Mills Edmund Muskie 1972 Democratic Party presidential primaries[4] Candidate Votes % Hubert H. Humphrey 4,121,372 25.8 George S. McGovern 4,053,451 25.3 George C. Wallace 3,755,424 23.5 Edmund S. Muskie 1,840,217 11.5 Eugene J. McCarthy 553,955 3.5 Henry M. Jackson 505,198 3.2 Shirley A. Chisholm 430,703 2.7 James T. Sanford 331,415 2.1 John V. Lindsay 196,406 1.2 Sam W. Yorty 79,446 0.5 Wilbur D. Mills 37,401 0.2 Walter E. Fauntroy 21,217 0.1 Unpledged delegates 19,533 0.1 Edward M. Kennedy 16,693 0.1 Rupert V. Hartke 11,798 0.1 Patsy M. Mink 8,286 0.1 "None of the names shown" 6,269 0 Others 5,181 0 Total votes 15,993,965 100 Notable endorsements Edmund Muskie Former Governor of and Secretary of Commerce W. Averell Harriman from New York[18] Senator Harold Hughes from Iowa[19] Senator Birch Bayh from Indiana[20] Senator Adlai Stevenson III from Illinois[21] Senator Mike Gravel of Alaska[22] Former Senator Stephen M. Young from Ohio[23] Governor Milton Shapp of Pennsylvania[24] Former Governor Michael DiSalle of Ohio[23] Ohio State Treasurer Gertrude W. Donahey[25] Astronaut John Glenn from Ohio[23] George McGovern Senator Frank Church from Idaho[26] George Wallace Former Governor Lester Maddox of Georgia[27] Shirley Chisholm Representative Ron Dellums from California[28] Feminist leader and author Betty Friedan[29] Feminist leader, journalist, and DNC official Gloria Steinem[30] Terry Sanford Former President Lyndon B. Johnson from Texas[31] Henry M. Jackson Governor Jimmy Carter of Georgia[32] 1972 Democratic National Convention Duration: 1 minute and 28 seconds.1:28 Video from the Florida conventions Main article: 1972 Democratic National Convention Results: George McGovern – 1864.95 Henry M. Jackson – 525 George Wallace – 381.7 Shirley Chisholm – 151.95 Terry Sanford – 77.5 Hubert Humphrey – 66.7 Wilbur Mills – 33.8 Edmund Muskie – 24.3 Ted Kennedy – 12.7 Sam Yorty – 10 Wayne Hays – 5 John Lindsay – 5 Fred Harris – 2 Eugene McCarthy – 2 Walter Mondale – 2 Ramsey Clark – 1 Walter Fauntroy – 1 Vance Hartke – 1 Harold Hughes – 1 Patsy Mink – 1 Vice presidential vote Most polls showed McGovern running well behind incumbent President Richard Nixon, except when McGovern was paired with Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy. McGovern and his campaign brain trust lobbied Kennedy heavily to accept the bid to be McGovern's running mate, but he continually refused their advances, and instead suggested U.S. Representative (and House Ways and Means Committee chairman) Wilbur Mills of Arkansas and Boston Mayor Kevin White.[33] Offers were then made to Hubert Humphrey, Connecticut Senator Abraham Ribicoff, and Minnesota Senator Walter Mondale, all of whom turned it down. Finally, the vice presidential slot was offered to Senator Thomas Eagleton of Missouri, who accepted the offer.[33] With hundreds of delegates displeased with McGovern, the vote to ratify Eagleton's candidacy was chaotic, with at least three other candidates having their names put into nomination and votes scattered over 70 candidates.[34] A grassroots attempt to displace Eagleton in favor of Texas state representative Frances Farenthold gained significant traction, though was ultimately unable to change the outcome of the vote.[35] The vice-presidential balloting went on so long that McGovern and Eagleton were forced to begin making their acceptance speeches at around 2 am, local time. After the convention ended, it was discovered that Eagleton had undergone psychiatric electroshock therapy for depression and had concealed this information from McGovern. A Time magazine poll taken at the time found that 77 percent of the respondents said, "Eagleton's medical record would not affect their vote." Nonetheless, the press made frequent references to his "shock therapy", and McGovern feared that this would detract from his campaign platform.[36] McGovern subsequently consulted confidentially with pre-eminent psychiatrists, including Eagleton's own doctors, who advised him that a recurrence of Eagleton's depression was possible and could endanger the country, should Eagleton become president.[37][38][39][40][41] McGovern had initially claimed that he would back Eagleton "1000 percent",[42] only to ask Eagleton to withdraw three days later. This perceived lack of conviction in sticking with his running mate was disastrous for the McGovern campaign. McGovern later approached six prominent Democrats to run for vice president: Ted Kennedy, Edmund Muskie, Hubert Humphrey, Abraham Ribicoff, Larry O'Brien, and Reubin Askew. All six declined. Sargent Shriver, brother-in-law to John, Robert, and Ted Kennedy, former Ambassador to France, and former Director of the Peace Corps, later accepted.[43] He was officially nominated by a special session of the Democratic National Committee. By this time, McGovern's poll ratings had plunged from 41 to 24 percent. Third parties 1972 American Independent Party ticket John G. Schmitz Thomas J. Anderson for President for Vice President U.S. Representative from California's 35th district (1970–1973) Magazine publisher; conservative speaker Campaign Other Candidates Lester Maddox Thomas J. Anderson George Wallace Lieutenant Governor of Georgia (1971–1975) Governor of Georgia (1967–1971) Magazine publisher; conservative speaker Governor of Alabama (1963–1967), (1971–1979) 1968 AIP Presidential Nominee Campaign Campaign Campaign 56 votes 24 votes 8 votes The only major third party candidate in the 1972 election was conservative Republican Representative John G. Schmitz, who ran on the American Independent Party ticket (the party on whose ballot George Wallace ran in 1968). He was on the ballot in 32 states and received 1,099,482 votes. Unlike Wallace, however, he did not win a majority of votes cast in any state, and received no electoral votes, although he did finish ahead of McGovern in four of the most conservative Idaho counties.[44] Schmitz's performance in archconservative Jefferson County was the best by a third-party Presidential candidate in any free or postbellum state county since 1936 when William Lemke reached over twenty-eight percent of the vote in the North Dakota counties of Burke, Sheridan and Hettinger.[45] Schmitz was endorsed by fellow John Birch Society member Walter Brennan, who also served as finance chairman for his campaign.[46] John Hospers and Tonie Nathan of the newly formed Libertarian Party were on the ballot only in Colorado and Washington, but were official write-in candidates in four others, and received 3,674 votes, winning no states. However, they did receive one Electoral College vote from Virginia from a Republican faithless elector (see below). The Libertarian vice-presidential nominee Theodora "Tonie" Nathan became the first Jew and the first woman in U.S. history to receive an Electoral College vote.[47] Linda Jenness was nominated by the Socialist Workers Party, with Andrew Pulley as her running-mate. Benjamin Spock and Julius Hobson were nominated for president and vice-president, respectively, by the People's Party. General election Campaign Richard Nixon during an August 1972 campaign stop George McGovern speaking at an October 1972 campaign rally McGovern ran on a platform of immediately ending the Vietnam War and instituting a radical guaranteed minimum incomes for the nation's poor. His campaign was harmed by his views during the primaries (which alienated many powerful Democrats), the perception that his foreign policy was too extreme, and the Eagleton debacle. With McGovern's campaign weakened by these factors, with the Republicans portraying McGovern as a radical left-wing extremist, Nixon led in the polls by large margins throughout the entire campaign. With an enormous fundraising advantage and a comfortable lead in the polls, Nixon concentrated on large rallies and focused speeches to closed, select audiences, leaving much of the retail campaigning to surrogates like Vice President Agnew. Nixon did not, by design, try to extend his coattails to Republican congressional or gubernatorial candidates, preferring to pad his own margin of victory. Results Election results by county. Richard Nixon George McGovern Results by congressional district. Nixon's percentage of the popular vote was only marginally less than Lyndon Johnson's record in the 1964 election, and his margin of victory was slightly larger. Nixon won a majority vote in 49 states, including McGovern's home state of South Dakota. Only Massachusetts and the District of Columbia voted for the challenger, resulting in an even more lopsided Electoral College tally. McGovern garnered only 37.5 percent of the national popular vote, the lowest share received by a Democratic Party nominee since John W. Davis won only 28.8 percent of the vote in the 1924 election. The only major party candidate since 1972 to receive less than 40 percent of the vote was Republican incumbent President George H. W. Bush who won 37.4 percent of the vote in the 1992 election, a race that (as in 1924) was complicated by a strong non-major-party vote.[48] Nixon received the highest share of the popular vote for a Republican in history. Although the McGovern campaign believed that its candidate had a better chance of defeating Nixon because of the new Twenty-sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution that lowered the national voting age to 18 from 21, most of the youth vote went to Nixon.[49] This was the first election in American history in which a Republican candidate carried every single Southern state, continuing the region's transformation from a Democratic bastion into a Republican stronghold as Arkansas was carried by a Republican presidential candidate for the first time in a century. By this time, all the Southern states, except Arkansas and Texas, had been carried by a Republican in either the previous election or the one in 1964 (although Republican candidates carried Texas in 1928, 1952 and 1956). As a result of this election, Massachusetts became the only state that Nixon did not carry in any of the three presidential elections in which he was a candidate. Notably, Nixon became the first Republican to ever win two terms in the White House without carrying Massachusetts at least once. This presidential election was the first since 1808 in which New York did not have the largest number of electors in the Electoral College, having fallen to 41 electors vs. California's 45. Additionally, through 2020 it remains the last one in which Minnesota was carried by the Republican candidate.[50] McGovern won a mere 130 counties, plus the District of Columbia and four county-equivalents in Alaska,[b] easily the fewest counties won by any major-party presidential nominee since the advent of popular presidential elections.[51] In nineteen states, McGovern failed to carry a single county;[c] he carried a mere one county-equivalent in a further nine states,[d] and just two counties in a further seven.[e] In contrast to Walter Mondale's narrow 1984 win in Minnesota, McGovern comfortably did win Massachusetts, but lost every other state by no less than five percentage points, as well as 45 states by more than ten percentage points – the exceptions being Massachusetts, Minnesota, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and his home state of South Dakota. This election also made Nixon the second former vice president in American history to serve two terms back-to-back, after Thomas Jefferson in 1800 and 1804. As well as the only two-term Vice President to be elected President twice. Since McGovern carried only one state, bumper stickers reading "Nixon 49 America 1",[52] "Don't Blame Me, I'm From Massachusetts", and "Massachusetts: The One And Only" were popular for a short time in Massachusetts.[53] Nixon managed to win 18% of the African American vote (Gerald Ford would get 16% in 1976).[54] He also remains the only Republican in modern times to threaten the oldest extant Democratic stronghold of South Texas: this is the last election when the Republicans have won Hidalgo or Dimmit counties, the only time Republicans have won La Salle County between William McKinley in 1900 and Donald Trump in 2020, and one of only two occasions since Theodore Roosevelt in 1904[f] that Republicans have gained a majority in Presidio County.[50] More significantly, the 1972 election was the most recent time several highly populous urban counties – including Cook in Illinois, Orleans in Louisiana, Hennepin in Minnesota, Cuyahoga in Ohio, Durham in North Carolina, Queens in New York, and Prince George's in Maryland – have voted Republican.[50] The Wallace vote had also been crucial to Nixon being able to sweep the states that had narrowly held out against him in 1968 (Texas, Maryland, and West Virginia), as well as the states Wallace won himself (Arkansas, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, and Georgia). The pro-Wallace group of voters had only given AIP nominee John Schmitz a depressing 2.4% of its support, while 19.1% backed McGovern, and the majority 78.5% broke for Nixon. Nixon, who became term-limited under the provisions of the Twenty-second Amendment as a result of his victory, became the first (and, as of 2023, only) presidential candidate to win a significant number of electoral votes in three presidential elections since the ratification of that Amendment. As of 2023, Nixon was the seventh of seven presidential nominees to win a significant number of electoral votes in at least three elections, the others being Thomas Jefferson, Henry Clay, Andrew Jackson, Grover Cleveland, William Jennings Bryan, and Franklin D. Roosevelt. He is the only Republican ever to do so. The 520 electoral votes received by Nixon, added to the 301 electoral votes he received in 1968, and the 219 electoral votes he received in 1960, gave him the most total electoral votes received by any candidate who had been previously Vice President to become president (1,040) and the second largest number of electoral votes received by any candidate who was elected to the office of president behind Franklin D. Roosevelt's 1,876 total electoral votes. Electoral results Presidential candidate Party Home state Popular vote[55] Electoral vote[56] Running mate Count Percentage Vice-presidential candidate Home state Electoral vote[56] Richard Milhous Nixon (Incumbent) Republican California 47,168,710 60.67% 520 Spiro Theodore Agnew Maryland 520 George Stanley McGovern Democratic South Dakota 29,173,222 37.52% 17 Robert Sargent Shriver Maryland 17 John G. Schmitz American Independent California 1,100,896 1.42% 0 Thomas J. Anderson Tennessee 0 Linda Jenness Socialist Workers Georgia 83,380[g] 0.11% 0 Andrew Pulley Illinois 0 Benjamin Spock People's California 78,759 0.10% 0 Julius Hobson District of Columbia 0 Louis Fisher Socialist Labor Illinois 53,814 0.07% 0 Genevieve Gunderson Minnesota 0 John G. Hospers Libertarian California 3,674 0.00% 1[h][47] Theodora Nathan Oregon 1[h][47] Other 81,575 0.10% — Other — Total 77,744,030 100% 538 538 Needed to win 270 270 John Hospers received one faithless electoral vote from Virginia. Popular vote Nixon   60.67% McGovern   37.52% Schmitz   1.42% Others   0.39% Electoral vote Nixon   96.65% McGovern   3.16% Hospers   0.19% Results by county, shaded according to winning candidate's percentage of the vote Results by county, shaded according to winning candidate's percentage of the vote Results by state Legend Legend States/districts won by Nixon/Agnew States/districts won by McGovern/Shriver † At-large results (Maine used the Congressional District Method) Outcomes of the 1972 United States presidential election by state[58] Richard Nixon Republican George McGovern Democratic John Schmitz American Independent John Hospers Libertarian Margin State Total State electoral votes # % electoral votes # % electoral votes # % electoral votes # % electoral votes # % # Alabama 9 728,701 72.43 9 256,923 25.54 11,918 1.18 471,778 46.89 1,006,093 AL Alaska 3 55,349 58.13 3 32,967 34.62 6,903 7.25 22,382 23.51 95,219 AK Arizona 6 402,812 61.64 6 198,540 30.38 21,208 3.25 204,272 31.26 653,505 AZ Arkansas 6 445,751 68.82 6 198,899 30.71 3,016 0.47 246,852 38.11 647,666 AR California 45 4,602,096 55.00 45 3,475,847 41.54 232,554 2.78 980 0.01 1,126,249 13.46 8,367,862 CA Colorado 7 597,189 62.61 7 329,980 34.59 17,269 1.81 1,111 0.12 267,209 28.01 953,884 CO Connecticut 8 810,763 58.57 8 555,498 40.13 17,239 1.25 255,265 18.44 1,384,277 CT Delaware 3 140,357 59.60 3 92,283 39.18 2,638 1.12 48,074 20.41 235,516 DE D.C. 3 35,226 21.56 127,627 78.10 3 −92,401 −56.54 163,421 DC Florida 17 1,857,759 71.91 17 718,117 27.80 1,139,642 44.12 2,583,283 FL Georgia 12 881,496 75.04 12 289,529 24.65 812 0.07 591,967 50.39 1,174,772 GA Hawaii 4 168,865 62.48 4 101,409 37.52 67,456 24.96 270,274 HI Idaho 4 199,384 64.24 4 80,826 26.04 28,869 9.30 118,558 38.20 310,379 ID Illinois 26 2,788,179 59.03 26 1,913,472 40.51 2,471 0.05 874,707 18.52 4,723,236 IL Indiana 13 1,405,154 66.11 13 708,568 33.34 696,586 32.77 2,125,529 IN Iowa 8 706,207 57.61 8 496,206 40.48 22,056 1.80 210,001 17.13 1,225,944 IA Kansas 7 619,812 67.66 7 270,287 29.50 21,808 2.38 349,525 38.15 916,095 KS Kentucky 9 676,446 63.37 9 371,159 34.77 17,627 1.65 305,287 28.60 1,067,499 KY Louisiana 10 686,852 65.32 10 298,142 28.35 52,099 4.95 388,710 36.97 1,051,491 LA Maine † 2 256,458 61.46 2 160,584 38.48 117 0.03 1 0.00 95,874 22.98 417,271 ME Maine-1 1 135,388 61.42 1 85,028 38.58 Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown 50,360 22.85 220,416 ME1 Maine-2 1 121,120 61.58 1 75,556 38.42 Unknown Unknown Unknown Unknown 45,564 23.17 196,676 ME2 Maryland 10 829,305 61.26 10 505,781 37.36 18,726 1.38 323,524 23.90 1,353,812 MD Massachusetts 14 1,112,078 45.23 1,332,540 54.20 14 2,877 0.12 43 0.00 −220,462 −8.97 2,458,756 MA Michigan 21 1,961,721 56.20 21 1,459,435 41.81 63,321 1.81 502,286 14.39 3,490,325 MI Minnesota 10 898,269 51.58 10 802,346 46.07 31,407 1.80 95,923 5.51 1,741,652 MN Mississippi 7 505,125 78.20 7 126,782 19.63 11,598 1.80 378,343 58.57 645,963 MS Missouri 12 1,154,058 62.29 12 698,531 37.71 455,527 24.59 1,852,589 MO Montana 4 183,976 57.93 4 120,197 37.85 13,430 4.23 63,779 20.08 317,603 MT Nebraska 5 406,298 70.50 5 169,991 29.50 236,307 41.00 576,289 NE Nevada 3 115,750 63.68 3 66,016 36.32 49,734 27.36 181,766 NV New Hampshire 4 213,724 63.98 4 116,435 34.86 3,386 1.01 97,289 29.12 334,055 NH New Jersey 17 1,845,502 61.57 17 1,102,211 36.77 34,378 1.15 743,291 24.80 2,997,229 NJ New Mexico 4 235,606 61.05 4 141,084 36.56 8,767 2.27 94,522 24.49 385,931 NM New York 41 4,192,778 58.54 41 2,951,084 41.21 1,241,694 17.34 7,161,830 NY North Carolina 13 1,054,889 69.46 13 438,705 28.89 25,018 1.65 616,184 40.58 1,518,612 NC North Dakota 3 174,109 62.07 3 100,384 35.79 5,646 2.01 73,725 26.28 280,514 ND Ohio 25 2,441,827 59.63 25 1,558,889 38.07 80,067 1.96 882,938 21.56 4,094,787 OH Oklahoma 8 759,025 73.70 8 247,147 24.00 23,728 2.30 511,878 49.70 1,029,900 OK Oregon 6 486,686 52.45 6 392,760 42.33 46,211 4.98 93,926 10.12 927,946 OR Pennsylvania 27 2,714,521 59.11 27 1,796,951 39.13 70,593 1.54 917,570 19.98 4,592,105 PA Rhode Island 4 220,383 53.00 4 194,645 46.81 25 0.01 2 0.00 25,738 6.19 415,808 RI South Carolina 8 478,427 70.58 8 189,270 27.92 10,166 1.50 289,157 42.66 677,880 SC South Dakota 4 166,476 54.15 4 139,945 45.52 26,531 8.63 307,415 SD Tennessee 10 813,147 67.70 10 357,293 29.75 30,373 2.53 455,854 37.95 1,201,182 TN Texas 26 2,298,896 66.20 26 1,154,291 33.24 7,098 0.20 1,144,605 32.96 3,472,714 TX Utah 4 323,643 67.64 4 126,284 26.39 28,549 5.97 197,359 41.25 478,476 UT Vermont 3 117,149 62.66 3 68,174 36.47 48,975 26.20 186,947 VT Virginia 12 988,493 67.84 11 438,887 30.12 19,721 1.35 1 549,606 37.72 1,457,019 VA Washington 9 837,135 56.92 9 568,334 38.64 58,906 4.00 1,537 0.10 268,801 18.28 1,470,847 WA West Virginia 6 484,964 63.61 6 277,435 36.39 207,529 27.22 762,399 WV Wisconsin 11 989,430 53.40 11 810,174 43.72 47,525 2.56 179,256 9.67 1,852,890 WI Wyoming 3 100,464 69.01 3 44,358 30.47 748 0.51 56,106 38.54 145,570 WY TOTALS: 538 47,168,710 60.67 520 29,173,222 37.52 17 1,100,868 1.42 0 3,674 0.00 1 17,995,488 23.15 77,744,027 US For the first time since 1828 Maine allowed its electoral votes to be split between candidates. Two electoral votes were awarded to the winner of the statewide race and one electoral vote to the winner of each congressional district. This was the first time the Congressional District Method had been used since Michigan used it in 1892. Nixon won all four votes.[59] Close states States where margin of victory was more than 5 percentage points, but less than 10 percentage points (43 electoral votes): Minnesota, 5.51% (95,923 votes) Rhode Island, 6.19% (25,738 votes) South Dakota, 8.63% (26,531 votes) Massachusetts, 8.97% (220,462 votes) Wisconsin, 9.67% (179,256 votes) Tipping point states: Ohio, 21.56% (882,938 votes) (tipping point for a Nixon victory) Maine-1, 22.85% (50,360 votes) (tipping point for a McGovern victory)[60] Statistics [58] Counties with highest percentage of the vote (Republican) Dade County, Georgia 93.45% Glascock County, Georgia 93.38% George County, Mississippi 92.90% Holmes County, Florida 92.51% Smith County, Mississippi 92.35% Counties with highest percentage of the vote (Democratic) Duval County, Texas 85.68% Washington, D. C. 78.10% Shannon County, South Dakota 77.34% Greene County, Alabama 68.32% Charles City County, Virginia 67.84% Counties with highest percentage of the vote (Other) Jefferson County, Idaho 27.51% Lemhi County, Idaho 19.77% Fremont County, Idaho 19.32% Bonneville County, Idaho 18.97% Madison County, Idaho 17.04% Voter demographics Nixon won 36 percent of the Democratic vote, according to an exit poll conducted for CBS News by George Fine Research, Inc.[61] This represents more than twice the percentage of voters who typically defect from their party in presidential elections. Nixon also became the first Republican presidential candidate in American history to win the Roman Catholic vote (53–46), and the first in recent history to win the blue-collar vote, which he won by a 5-to-4 margin. McGovern narrowly won the union vote (50–48), though this difference was within the survey's margin of error of 2 percentage points. McGovern also narrowly won the youth vote (i. e., those aged 18 to 24) 52–46, a narrower margin than many of his strategists had predicted. Early on, the McGovern campaign also significantly over-estimated the number of young people who would vote in the election: They predicted that 18 million would have voted in total, but exit polls indicate that the actual number was about 12 million. McGovern did win comfortably among both African-American and Jewish voters, but by somewhat smaller margins than usual for a Democratic candidate.[61] McGovern won the African American vote by 87% to Nixon's 13%.[62] Aftermath Main article: Watergate scandal On June 17, 1972, five months before election day, five men broke into the Democratic National Committee headquarters at the Watergate hotel in Washington, D. C.; the resulting investigation led to the revelation of attempted cover-ups of the break-in within the Nixon administration. What became known as the Watergate scandal eroded President Nixon's public and political support in his second term, and he resigned on August 9, 1974, in the face of probable impeachment by the House of Representatives and removal from office by the Senate. As part of the continuing Watergate investigation in 1974–1975, federal prosecutors offered companies that had given illegal campaign contributions to President Nixon's re-election campaign lenient sentences if they came forward.[63] Many companies complied, including Northrop Grumman, 3M, American Airlines, and Braniff Airlines.[63] By 1976, prosecutors had convicted 18 American corporations of contributing illegally to Nixon's campaign.[63] Despite this election delivering Nixon's greatest electoral triumph, Nixon later wrote in his memoirs that "it was one of the most frustrating and in many ways the least satisfying of all".[64] See also 1972 United States House of Representatives elections 1972 United States Senate elections 1972 United States gubernatorial elections George McGovern 1972 presidential campaign Second inauguration of Richard Nixon Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail '72, a collection of articles by Hunter S. Thompson on the subject of the election, focusing on the McGovern campaign. Explanatory notes A faithless Republican elector voted for the Libertarian ticket: Hospers–Nathan These were North Slope Borough, plus Bethel, Kusilvak and Hoonah-Angoon Census Areas McGovern failed to carry a single county in Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Utah, Vermont or Wyoming McGovern carried only one county-equivalent in Arizona (Greenlee), Illinois (Jackson), Louisiana (West Feliciana Parish), Maine (Androscoggin), Maryland (Baltimore), North Dakota (Rolette), Pennsylvania (Philadelphia), Virginia (Charles City), and West Virginia (Logan) McGovern carried just two counties in Colorado, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio and Washington State Dwight D. Eisenhower in 1952 also obtained a plurality in Presidio County In Arizona, Pima and Yavapai counties had an unusually formatted ballot that led voters to believe they could vote for a major party presidential candidate and simultaneously vote the six individual Socialist Workers Party presidential electors. Technically, these were overvotes, and should not have counted for either the major party candidates or the Socialist Workers Party electors. Within two days of the election, the Attorney General and Pima County Attorney had agreed that all votes should count. The Socialist Workers Party had not qualified as a party, and thus did not have a presidential candidate. In the official state canvass, votes for Nixon, McGovern, or Schmitz, are shown as being for the presidential candidate, the party, and the elector slate of the party; while those for the Socialist Worker Party elector candidates were for those candidates only. In the view of the Secretary of State, the votes were not for Linda Jenness. Some tabulations count the votes for Jenness. Historically, presidential candidate names did not appear on ballots, and voters voted directly for the electors. Nonetheless, votes for the electors are attributed to the presidential candidate. Counting the votes in Arizona for Jenness is consistent with this practice. Because of the confusing ballots, Socialist Workers Party electors received votes on about 21 percent and 8 percent of ballots in Pima and Yavapai, respectively. 30,579 of the party's 30,945 Arizona votes are from those two counties.[57] A Virginia faithless elector, Roger MacBride, though pledged to vote for Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew, instead voted for Libertarian candidates John Hospers and Theodora "Tonie" Nathan. Citations "National General Election VEP Turnout Rates, 1789-Present". United States Election Project. CQ Press. Archived from the original on July 25, 2014. Retrieved February 21, 2023. Emig, David (November 7, 2009). "My Morris Moment »". Archived from the original on April 18, 2023. Retrieved March 29, 2021. "New Hampshire Primary historical past election results. 2008 Democrat & Republican past results. John McCain, Hillary Clinton winners". Primarynewhampshire.com. Archived from the original on July 15, 2011. Retrieved August 17, 2014. Kalb, Deborah, ed. (2010). Guide to U.S. Elections (6th ed.). Washington, DC: CQ Press. p. 415. ISBN 9781604265361. Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The '70s. New York, New York: Basic Books. p. 52. ISBN 0-465-04195-7. "CQ Almanac Online Edition". Library.cqpress.com. Archived from the original on June 8, 2020. Retrieved August 17, 2016. "Hawai'i, nation lose "a powerful voice" | The Honolulu Advertiser | Hawaii's Newspaper". The Honolulu Advertiser. Archived from the original on December 19, 2019. Retrieved August 17, 2016. Jack Anderson (June 4, 1971). "Don't count out Ted Kennedy". The Free Lance–Star. Archived from the original on February 5, 2021. Retrieved March 16, 2012. Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The '70s. New York, New York: Basic Books. p. 298. ISBN 0-465-04195-7. "Muskie, Edmund Sixtus, (1914–1996)". United States Congress. Archived from the original on December 5, 2010. Retrieved March 16, 2012. Mitchell, Robert (February 9, 2020). "The Democrat who cried (maybe) in New Hampshire and lost the presidential nomination". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on March 29, 2020. Retrieved March 3, 2020. "Remembering Ed Muskie Archived April 27, 1999, at the Wayback Machine", Online NewsHour, PBS, March 26, 1996.[dead link] R. W. Apple, Jr. (January 18, 1971). "McGovern Enters '72 Race, Pledging Troop Withdrawal" (fee required). The New York Times. p. 1. Archived from the original on June 8, 2020. Retrieved March 16, 2012. Jo Freeman (February 2005). "Shirley Chisholm's 1972 Presidential Campaign". University of Illinois at Chicago Women's History Project. Archived from the original on January 26, 2015. Robert D. Novak (2008). The Prince of Darkness: 50 Years Reporting in Washington. Random House Digital, Inc. p. 225. ISBN 9781400052004. Archived from the original on April 18, 2023. Retrieved November 20, 2015. Nancy L. Cohen (2012). Delirium: The Politics of Sex in America. Counterpoint Press. pp. 37–38. ISBN 9781619020689. The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica. "United States presidential election of 1972". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on June 5, 2020. Retrieved December 3, 2019. Byrd, Lee (April 28, 1972). "Bland, Crybaby Roles Cost Muskie His Lead". Lansing State Journal. p. 1. Archived from the original on May 13, 2022. Retrieved May 13, 2022. "But of likely greater impediment was the sheer number of those involved, the many "senior advisors" like Clark Clifford and W. Averell Harriman and Luther B. Hodges, and the 19 senators, 34 congressmen and nine governors who had publicly enorsed Muskie." Risser, James (June 9, 1972). "Hughes Stands By Muskie". The Des Moines Register. p. 5. Archived from the original on May 13, 2022. Retrieved May 13, 2022. "Hughes has spent much of this week helping Muskie, whom Hughes endorsed early this year as the candidate most likely to unify the party and defeat President Nixon in November." "Bayh Endorses Sen. Muskie". The Logansport Press. UPI. March 17, 1972. p. 7. Archived from the original on May 13, 2022. Retrieved May 13, 2022. "Adlai Stevenson III Endorses Sen. Muskie". Tampa Bay Times. UPI. January 11, 1972. p. 17. Archived from the original on May 13, 2022. Retrieved May 13, 2022. "More Muskie Support". New York Times. January 15, 1972. Retrieved September 27, 2008. "Sticking by Muskie, Gilligan declares". The Cincinnati Post. April 27, 1972. p. 24. Archived from the original on May 13, 2022. Retrieved May 13, 2022. "News Capsule: In the nation". The Baltimore Sun. January 26, 1972. p. 2. Archived from the original on May 13, 2022. Retrieved May 13, 2022. "Gov. Milton Shapp of Pennsylvania endorsed Senator Edmund S. Muskie, dealing a sharp blow to Senator Hubert H. Humphrey's presidential ambitions." "Muskie, HHH calling in Ohio". The Journal Herald. Associated Press. January 12, 1972. p. 12. Archived from the original on May 13, 2022. Retrieved May 13, 2022. "McGovern Picking Second V.P. Candidate Same Way He Picked First". Ironwood Daily Globe. August 3, 1972. p. 11. Archived from the original on May 13, 2022. Retrieved May 13, 2022. "Maddox Against Demo Nominees". The Knoxville News-Sentinel. July 14, 1972. p. 10. Archived from the original on May 13, 2022. Retrieved May 13, 2022. "Maddox, a booster of fellow Democrat Alabama Gov. George Wallace, said Thursday it may be best to turn the present party "over to the promoters of anarchy, Socialism and Communism" and form what he called a New Democratic Party of the People." ""Catalyst for Change": The 1972 Presidential Campaign of Representative Shirley Chisholm". History, Art & Archives of the United States House of Representatives. September 14, 2020. Archived from the original on May 13, 2022. Retrieved May 13, 2022. Friedan, Betty (August 1, 2006). Life So Far: A Memoir – Google Books. Simon and Schuster. ISBN 978-0-7432-9986-2. Archived from the original on April 18, 2023. Retrieved May 28, 2010. "POV – Chisholm '72 . Video: Gloria Steinem reflects on Chisholm's legacy". PBS. Archived from the original on June 16, 2010. Retrieved May 28, 2010. Covington, Howard E.; Ellis, Marion A. (1999). Terry Sanford: politics, progress ... – Google Books. Duke University Press. ISBN 978-0-8223-2356-3. Archived from the original on April 18, 2023. Retrieved May 28, 2010. "Convention Briefs: Endorses Jackson". Wisconsin State Journal. July 12, 1972. p. 40. Archived from the original on May 13, 2022. Retrieved May 13, 2022. "Georgia Gov. Jimmy Carter endorsed Sen. Henry Jackson of Washington for the Democratic presidential nomination Tuesday and said he would nominate Jackson at the convention tonight." "Introducing... the McGovern Machine". Time Magazine. July 24, 1972. Archived from the original on August 9, 2014. Retrieved September 7, 2008. "All The Votes...Really". All Politics. CNN. Archived from the original on April 24, 2009. Retrieved May 28, 2010. "A Guide to the Frances Tarlton Farenthold Papers, 1913–2013". Texas Archival Resources Online. Dolph Briscoe Center for American History, The University of Texas at Austin. Archived from the original on December 31, 2016. Garofoli, Joe (March 26, 2008). "Obama bounces back – speech seemed to help". SFGATE. Archived from the original on May 25, 2011. Retrieved May 28, 2010. McGovern, George S., Grassroots: The Autobiography of George McGovern, New York: Random House, 1977, pp. 214–215 McGovern, George S., Terry: My Daughter's Life-and-Death Struggle with Alcoholism, New York: Random House, 1996, pp. 97 Marano, Richard Michael, Vote Your Conscience: The Last Campaign of George McGovern, Praeger Publishers, 2003, pp. 7 The Washington Post, "George McGovern & the Coldest Plunge", Paul Hendrickson, September 28, 1983 The New York Times, "'Trashing' Candidates" (op-ed), George McGovern, May 11, 1983 "'I'm Behind Him 1000%'". Observer.com. July 21, 2016. Liebovich, Louis (2003). Richard Nixon, Watergate, and the Press: A Historical Retrospective. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 53. ISBN 9780275979157. Menendez, Albert J.; The Geography of Presidential Elections in the United States, 1868–2004, p. 100 ISBN 0786422173 Scammon, Richard M. (compiler); America at the Polls: A Handbook of Presidential Election Statistics 1920–1964; pp. 339, 343 ISBN 0405077114 Actor to Aid Schmitz; The New York Times, August 9, 1972 "Libertarians trying to escape obscurity". Eugene Register-Guard. Associated Press. December 30, 1973. Archived from the original on August 26, 2021. Retrieved July 30, 2012. Feinman, Ronald (September 2, 2016). "Donald Trump Could Be On Way To Worst Major Party Candidate Popular Vote Percentage Since William Howard Taft In 1912 And John W. Davis In 1924!". The Progressive Professor. Archived from the original on December 20, 2019. Retrieved November 7, 2019. Jesse Walker (July 2008). "The Age of Nixon: Rick Perlstein on the left, the right, the '60s, and the illusion of consensus". Reason. Archived from the original on July 18, 2013. Retrieved July 27, 2013. Sullivan, Robert David; 'How the Red and Blue Map Evolved Over the Past Century' Archived November 16, 2016, at the Wayback Machine; America Magazine in The National Catholic Review; June 29, 2016 Menendez, Albert J.; The Geography of Presidential Elections in the United States, 1868–2004, p. 98 ISBN 0786422173 "New York Intelligencer". New York. Vol. 6, no. 35. New York Media, LLC. August 27, 1973. p. 57. Archived from the original on April 18, 2023. Retrieved March 16, 2019. Lukas, J. Anthony (January 14, 1973). "As Massachusetts went—". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on May 17, 2019. Retrieved March 16, 2019. "Exit Polls – Election Results 2008". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 23, 2020. Retrieved May 11, 2020. Leip, David. "1972 Presidential Election Results". Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. Retrieved August 7, 2005. "Electoral College Box Scores 1789–1996". National Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved August 7, 2005. Seeley, John (November 22, 2000). "Early and Often". LA Weekly. Retrieved April 10, 2021. "1972 Presidential General Election Data — National". Archived from the original on February 1, 2020. Retrieved March 18, 2013. Barone, Michael; Matthews, Douglas; Ujifusa, Grant (1973). The Almanac of American Politics, 1974. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help) Leip, David "How close were U.S. Presidential Elections?", Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Presidential Elections. Retrieved: January 24, 2013. Rosenthal, Jack (November 9, 1972). "Desertion Rate Doubles". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on December 29, 2019. Retrieved December 1, 2019. "Survey Reports McGovern Got 87% of the Black Vote". The New York Times. November 12, 1972. Archived from the original on February 8, 2023. Retrieved February 8, 2023. Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The '70s. New York, New York: Basic Books. p. 31. ISBN 0-465-04195-7. Emig, David (November 7, 2009). "My Morris Moment »". Archived from the original on April 18, 2023. Retrieved March 29, 2021. Bibliography and further reading Alexander, Herbert E. Financing the 1972 Election (1976) online Giglio, James N. (2009). "The Eagleton Affair: Thomas Eagleton, George McGovern, and the 1972 Vice Presidential Nomination". Presidential Studies Quarterly. 39 (4): 647–676. doi:10.1111/j.1741-5705.2009.03731.x. Graebner, Norman A. (1973). "Presidential Politics in a Divided America: 1972". Australian Journal of Politics and History. 19 (1): 28–47. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8497.1973.tb00722.x. Hofstetter, C. Richard; Zukin, Cliff (1979). "TV Network News and Advertising in the Nixon and McGovern Campaigns". Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 56 (1): 106–152. doi:10.1177/107769907905600117. S2CID 144048423. Hofstetter, C. Richard. Bias in the news: Network television coverage of the 1972 election campaign (Ohio State University Press, 1976) online Johnstone, Andrew, and Andrew Priest, eds. US Presidential Elections and Foreign Policy: Candidates, Campaigns, and Global Politics from FDR to Bill Clinton (2017) pp 203–228. online Miller, Arthur H., et al. "A majority party in disarray: Policy polarization in the 1972 election." American Political Science Review 70.3 (1976): 753-778; widely cited; online Nicholas, H. G. (1973). "The 1972 Elections". Journal of American Studies. 7 (1): 1–15. doi:10.1017/S0021875800012585. S2CID 145606732. Perry, James M. Us & them: how the press covered the 1972 election (1973) online Simons, Herbert W., James W. Chesebro, and C. Jack Orr. "A movement perspective on the 1972 presidential election." Quarterly Journal of Speech 59.2 (1973): 168-179. online Archived September 23, 2022, at the Wayback Machine Trent, Judith S., and Jimmie D. Trent. "The rhetoric of the challenger: George Stanley McGovern." Communication Studies 25.1 (1974): 11-18. White, Theodore H. (1973). The Making of the President, 1972. New York: Atheneum. ISBN 0-689-10553-3. Primary sources Chester, Edward W. (1977). A guide to political platforms. Porter, Kirk H. and Donald Bruce Johnson, eds. National party platforms, 1840â€

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ A multinational corporation (MNC) – also called a multinational enterprise (MNE), transnational enterprise (TNE), transnational corporation (TNC), international corporation, or stateless corporation,[1] with subtle but contrasting senses – is a corporate organization that owns and controls the production of goods or services in at least one country other than its home country.[2][3] Control is considered an important aspect of an MNC to distinguish it from international portfolio investment organizations, such as some international mutual funds that invest in corporations abroad simply to diversify financial risks. Black's Law Dictionary suggests that a company or group should be considered a multinational corporation "if it derives 25% or more of its revenue from out-of-home-country operations".[4] Most of the largest and most influential companies of the modern age are publicly traded multinational corporations, including Forbes Global 2000 companies. History Colonialism See also: Charter company and Neocolonialism The history of multinational corporations began with the history of colonialism. The first multinational corporations were founded to set up colonial "factories" or port cities.[5] In addition to carrying on trade between the mother country and the colonies, the British East India Company became a quasi-government in its own right, with local government officials and its own army in India .[6][7] The two main examples were the British East India Company founded in 1600 and the Dutch East India Company (VOC) founded in 1602. Others included the Swedish Africa Company founded in 1649, and the Hudson's Bay Company founded in 1670.[8] These early corporations engaged in international trade and exploration, and set up trading posts.[9] The Dutch government took over the VOC in 1799, and during the 19th century, other governments increasingly took over the private companies, most notable in British India.[10] During the process of decolonization, the European colonial charter companies were disbanded, with the final colonial corporation, the Mozambique Company, dissolving in 1972.[9] Mining Mining of gold, silver, copper, and oil was a major activity early on and remains so today. International mining companies became prominent in Britain in the 19th century, such as the Rio Tinto company founded in 1873, which started with the purchase of sulfur and copper mines from the Spanish government. Rio Tinto, now based in London and Melbourne, Australia, has made many acquisitions and expanded globally to mine aluminum, iron ore, copper, uranium, and diamonds.[11] European mines in South Africa began opening in the late 19th century, producing gold and other minerals for the world market, jobs for locals, and business and profits for companies.[12] Cecil Rhodes (1853–1902) was one of the few businessmen in the era who became Prime Minister (of South Africa 1890–1896). His mining enterprises included the British South Africa Company and De Beers. The latter company practically controlled the global diamond market from its base in southern Africa.[13] Oil Further information: Seven Sisters (oil companies) and Anglo-Persian Oil Company In 1945, the United States was the world's largest oil producer. However, their reserves were declining due to high demand; therefore, the United States turned to foreign oil sources, which had a significant impact on the recovery of the West after World War II. Most of the world's oil was found in Latin America and the Middle East (particularly in the Arab states of the Persian Gulf). This increase in non-American production was enabled by multinational corporations known as the "Seven Sisters".[14][15] The "Seven Sisters" was a common term for the seven multinational companies that dominated the global petroleum industry from the mid-1940s to the mid-1970s.[16] Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (originally Anglo-Persian; now BP) Royal Dutch Shell Standard Oil Company of California (SoCal, later Chevron) Gulf Oil (merged into Chevron) Texaco (merged into Chevron) Standard Oil Company of New Jersey (Esso, later Exxon, part of ExxonMobil) Standard Oil Company of New York (Socony, later Mobil, part of ExxonMobil) The nationalization of the Iranian oil industry in 1951 by Iranian Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh and the subsequent boycott of Iranian oil by all companies had dramatic consequences for Iran and the international oil market. Iran was unable to sell any of its oil. In August 1953, the then prime minister was replaced by a pro-American dictatorship led by the Shah, and in October 1954, the Iranian industry was denationalized. Worldwide oil consumption increased rapidly between 1949 and 1970, a period known as the "golden age of oil". This increase in consumption was caused not only by the growth of production by multinational oil companies but also by the strong influence of the United States on the global oil market.[17] In 1959, companies lowered the price of oil due to a surplus in the market. This reduction dealt a significant blow to the finances of producers. Saudi oil minister Abdullah Tariki and Venezuela’s Juan Perez Alfonso entered into a secret agreement (the Mahdi Pact), promising that if the price of oil was lowered a second time, they would take collective action against the companies. This occurred in 1960.[18] Prior to the 1973 oil crisis, the Seven Sisters controlled around 85 percent of the world's petroleum reserves. In the 1970s, most countries with large reserves nationalized their reserves that had been owned by major oil companies. Since then, industry dominance has shifted to the OPEC cartel and state-owned oil and gas companies, such as Saudi Aramco, Gazprom (Russia), China National Petroleum Corporation, National Iranian Oil Company, PDVSA (Venezuela), Petrobras (Brazil), and Petronas (Malaysia). Dealing with OPEC (1973 - 1991) Unilateral increase in oil prices was labeled as "the largest nonviolent transfer of wealth in human history." The OPEC sought immediate discussions regarding participation in national oil industries. Companies were not inclined to object as the price hike benefited both them and OPEC members. In 1980, the Seven Sisters were entirely displaced and replaced by national oil companies (NOCs). The rise in oil prices burdened developing countries with balance of payments deficits, leading to an energy crisis. OPEC members had to abandon their plan of redistributing wealth from the West to the post-colonial South and invest either in foreign expenditures or ostentatious economic development projects. After 1974, most of the money from OPEC members ceased as payments for goods and services or investments in Western industry. In February 1974, the first Washington Energy Conference was convened. The most significant contribution of this conference was the establishment of the International Energy Agency (IEA), enabling states to coordinate policy, gather data, and monitor global oil reserves. In the 1970s, OPEC gradually nationalized the Seven Sisters. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, as the only largest world oil producer, could leverage this. However, Saudi Arabia opted for the correct approach and maintained consistent oil prices throughout the 1970s. In 1979, the "second oil shock" came from the collapse of the Shah's regime in Iran. Iran became a regional power due to oil money and American weapons. The Shah eventually abdicated and fled the country. This prompted a strike by thousands of Iranian oil workers, significantly reducing oil production in Iran. Saudi Arabia tried to cope with the crisis by increasing production, but oil prices still soared, leading to the "second oil shock." Saudi Arabia significantly reduced oil production, losing most of its revenues. In 1986, Riyadh changed course, and oil production in Saudi Arabia sharply increased, flooding the market with cheap oil. This caused a worldwide drop in oil prices, hence the "third oil shock" or "counter-shock." However, this shock represented something much bigger—the end of OPEC's dominance and its control over oil prices. Iraqi President Saddam Hussein decided to attack Kuwait. The invasion sparked a crisis in the Middle East, prompting Saudi Arabia to request assistance from the United States. The United States sent a million troops to help, and by February 1991, Iraqi forces were expelled from Kuwait. Due to the oil boycott from Kuwait and Iran, oil prices rose and quickly recovered. Saudi Arabia once again led OPEC, and thanks to assistance in defending Kuwait, new relations emerged between the USA and OPEC. Operation "Desert Storm" brought mutual dependence among the main oil producers. OPEC continued to influence global oil prices but recognized the United States as the largest consumer and guarantor of the existing oil security order.[15] The new normal (1991-2018) Since the Iraq war, OPEC has only a minor influence on oil prices, but it has expanded to 11 members, accounting for about 40 percent of total global oil production, although this is a decline from nearly 50 percent in 1974. Oil has practically become a common commodity, leading to much more volatile prices. Most OPEC members are wealthy, and most remain dependent on oil revenues, which has serious consequences, such as when OPEC members were pressured by the price collapse in 1998–1999. The United States still maintains close relations with Saudi Arabia. In 2003, U.S. forces invaded Iraq with the aim of removing the dictatorship and gaining access to Iraqi oil reserves, giving the United States greater strategic importance from 2000 to 2008. During this period, there was a constant shortage of oil, but its consumption continued to rise, maintaining high prices and leading to concerns about "peak oil". From 2005 to 2012, there were advances in oil and gas extraction, leading to increased production in the United States from 2010. The USA became the leading oil producer, creating tension with OPEC. In 2014, Saudi Arabia increased production to push new American producers out of the market, leading to lower prices. OPEC then reduced production in 2016 to raise prices, further worsening relations with the United States.[15] By 2012, only 7% of the world's known oil reserves were in countries that allowed private international companies free rein; 65% were in the hands of state-owned companies that operated in one country and sold oil to multinationals such as BP, Shell, ExxonMobil and Chevron.[19] Manufacturing Down through the 1930s, about 80% of the international investments by the multinational corporations were concentrated in the primary sector, especially mining (especially oil) and agriculture (rubber, tobacco, sugar, palm oil, coffee, cocoa, tropical fruits). Most went to the Third World colonies. That changed dramatically after 1945 as investors turned to industrialized countries and invested in manufacturing (especially high-tech electronics, chemicals, drugs and vehicles) as well as trade.[20] Sweden's leading manufacturing concern was SKF, a leading maker of bearings for machinery. In order to expand its international business, it decided in 1966 it needed to use the English language. Senior officials, although mostly still Swedish, all learned English and all major internal documents were in English, the lingua franca of multinational corporations.[21] After World War II After the war, the number of businesses having at least one foreign country operation rose drastically from a few thousand to 78,411 in 2007. Meanwhile, 74% of parent companies are located in economically advanced countries. Developing and former communist countries such as China, India, and Brazil being the largest recipients. However, 70% of foreign direct investment went into developed countries in the form of stocks and cash flows. The rise of the number of multinational companies could be due to a stable political environment that encourages cooperation, advances in technology that enables management of faraway regions, and favorable organizational development that encourages business expansion into other countries.[22] Current status Toyota is one of the world's largest multinational corporation(s) with its headquarters in Toyota City, Japan. Toyota is one of the world's largest multinational corporations with its headquarters in Toyota City, Japan. A multinational corporation (MNC) is usually a large corporation incorporated in one country which produces or sells goods or services in various countries.[23] Two common characteristics shared by MNCs are their large size and centrally controlled worldwide activities.[24] Importing and exporting goods and services Making significant investments in a foreign country Buying and selling licenses in foreign markets Engaging in contract manufacturing — permitting a local manufacturer in a foreign country to produce its products Opening manufacturing facilities or assembly operations in foreign countries MNCs may gain from their global presence in a variety of ways. First of all, MNCs can benefit from the economy of scale by spreading R&D expenditures and advertising costs over their global sales, pooling global purchasing power over suppliers, and utilizing their technological and managerial experience globally with minimal additional costs. Furthermore, MNCs can use their global presence to take advantage of underpriced labor services available in certain developing countries, and gain access to special R&D capabilities residing in advanced foreign countries.[25] The problem of moral and legal constraints upon the behavior of multinational corporations, given that they are effectively "stateless" actors, is one of several urgent global socioeconomic problems that has emerged during the late twentieth century.[26] Potentially, the best concept for analyzing society's governance limitations over modern corporations is the concept of "stateless corporations". Coined at least as early as 1991 in Business Week, the conception was theoretically clarified in 1993: that an empirical strategy for defining a stateless corporation is with analytical tools at the intersection between demographic analysis and transportation research. This intersection is known as logistics management, and it describes the importance of rapidly increasing global mobility of resources. In a long history of analysis of multinational corporations, we are some quarter-century into an era of stateless corporations - corporations that meet the realities of the needs of source materials on a worldwide basis and to produce and customize products for individual countries.[27] One of the first multinational business organizations, the East India Company, was established in 1601.[28] After the East India Company, came the Dutch East India Company, founded on March 20, 1603, which would become the largest company in the world for nearly 200 years. The main characteristics of multinational companies are: In general, there is a national strength of large companies as the main body, in the way of foreign direct investment or acquiring local enterprises, established subsidiaries or branches in many countries; It usually has a complete decision-making system and the highest decision-making center, each subsidiary or branch has its own decision-making body, according to its different features and operations to make decisions, but its decision must be subordinated to the highest decision-making centre; MNCs seek markets in worldwide and rational production layout, professional fixed-point production, and fixed-point sales products, in order to achieve maximum profit; Due to strong economic and technical strength, with fast information transmission, as well as funding for rapid cross-border transfers, the multinational has stronger competitiveness in the world; Many large multinational companies have varying degrees of monopoly in some area, due to economic and technical strength or production advantages. Foreign direct investment Main article: Foreign direct investment When a corporation invests in a country which it is not domiciled, it is called foreign direct investment (FDI).[29] Countries may place restrictions on direct investment; for example, China has historically required partnerships with local firms or special approval for certain types of investments by foreigners,[30] although some of these restrictions were eased in 2019.[31] Similarly, the United States Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States scrutinizes foreign investments. In addition, corporations may be prohibited from various business transactions by international sanctions or domestic laws. For example, Chinese domestic corporations or citizens have limitations on their ability to make foreign investments outside China, in part to reduce capital outflow.[32] Countries can impose extraterritorial sanctions on foreign corporations even for doing business with other foreign corporations, which occurred in 2019 with the United States sanctions against Iran; European companies faced with the possibility of losing access to the U.S. market by trading with Iran.[33] International investment agreements also facilitate direct investment between two countries, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement and most favored nation status. Legal domicile Raymond Vernon reported in 1977 that of the largest multinationals focused on manufacturing, 250 were headquartered in the United States, 115 in Western Europe, 70 in Japan, and 20 in the rest of the world. The multinationals in banking numbered 20 headquartered in the United States, 13 in Europe, nine in Japan and three in Canada.[34] Today multinationals can select from a variety of jurisdictions for various subsidiaries, but the ultimate parent company can select a single legal domicile; The Economist suggests that the Netherlands has become a popular choice, as its company laws have fewer requirements for meetings, compensation, and audit committees,[35] and Great Britain had advantages due to laws on withholding dividends and a double-taxation treaty with the United States.[35] Corporations can legally engage in tax avoidance through their choice of jurisdiction, but must be careful to avoid illegal tax evasion. Stateless or transnational Main article: Transnational corporation Corporations that are broadly active across the world without a concentration in one area have been called stateless or "transnational" (although "transnational corporation" is also used synonymously with "multinational corporation"[36]), but as of 1992, a corporation must be legally domiciled in a particular country and engage in other countries through foreign direct investment and the creation of foreign subsidiaries.[37]: 115  Geographic diversification can be measured across various domains, including ownership and control, workforce, sales, and regulation and taxation.[37] Regulation and taxation Further information: International taxation and Extraterritorial jurisdiction Multinational corporations may be subject to the laws and regulations of both their domicile and the additional jurisdictions where they are engaged in business.[38] In some cases, the jurisdiction can help to avoid burdensome laws, but regulatory statutes often target the "enterprise" with statutory language around "control".[38] As of 1992, the United States and most OECD countries have the legal authority to tax a domiciled parent corporation on its worldwide revenue, including subsidiaries.[37]: 117  As of 2019, the U.S. applies its corporate taxation "extraterritorially",[39] which has motivated tax inversions to change the home state. By 2019, most OECD nations, with the notable exception of the U.S., had moved to territorial tax in which only revenue inside the border was taxed; however, these nations typically scrutinize foreign income with controlled foreign corporation (CFC) rules to avoid base erosion and profit shifting.[39] In practice, even under an extraterritorial system, taxes may be deferred until remittance, with possible repatriation tax holidays, and subject to foreign tax credits.[37]: 117  Countries generally cannot tax the worldwide revenue of a foreign subsidiary, and taxation is complicated by transfer pricing arrangements with parent corporations.[37]: 117  Alternatives and arrangements For small corporations, registering a foreign subsidiary can be expensive and complex, involving fees, signatures, and forms;[40] a professional employer organization (PEO) is sometimes advertised as a cheaper and simpler alternative,[40] but not all jurisdictions have laws accepting these types of arrangements.[41] Dispute resolution and arbitration Further information: International legal system Disputes between corporations in different nations is often handled through international arbitration. Theoretical background The actions of multinational corporations are strongly supported by economic liberalism and free market system in a globalized international society. According to the economic realist view, individuals act in rational ways to maximize their self-interest and therefore, when individuals act rationally, markets are created and they function best in a free market system where there is little government interference. As a result, international wealth is maximized with free exchange of goods and services.[42] To many economic liberals, multinational corporations are the vanguard of the liberal order.[43] They are the embodiment par excellence of the liberal ideal of an interdependent world economy. They have taken the integration of national economies beyond trade and money to the internationalization of production. For the first time in history, production, marketing, and investment are being organized on a global scale rather than in terms of isolated national economies.[44] International business is also a specialist field of academic research. Economic theories of the multinational corporation include internalization theory and the eclectic paradigm. The latter is also known as the OLI framework. The other theoretical dimension of the role of multinational corporations concerns the relationship between the globalization of economic engagement and the culture of national and local responses. This has a history of self-conscious cultural management going back at least to the 60s. For example: Ernest Dichter, architect, of Exxon's international campaign, writing in the Harvard Business Review in 1963, was fully aware that the means to overcoming cultural resistance depended on an "understanding" of the countries in which a corporation operated. He observed that companies with "foresight to capitalize on international opportunities" must recognize that "cultural anthropology will be an important tool for competitive marketing". However, the projected outcome of this was not the assimilation of international firms into national cultures, but the creation of a "world customer". The idea of a global corporate village entailed the management and reconstitution of parochial attachments to one's nation. It involved not a denial of the naturalness of national attachments, but an internationalization of the way a nation defines itself.[45] Multinational enterprise "Multinational enterprise" (MNE) is the term used by international economist and similarly defined with the multinational corporation (MNC) as an enterprise that controls and manages production establishments, known as plants located in at least two countries.[46] The multinational enterprise (MNE) will engage in foreign direct investment (FDI) as the firm makes direct investments in host country plants for equity ownership and managerial control to avoid some transaction costs.[47] Criticism Main articles: Anti-globalization movement and Anti-corporate activism Sanjaya Lall in 1974 proposed a spectrum of scholarly analysis of multinational corporations, from the political right to the left. He put the business school how-to-do-it writers at the extreme right, followed by the liberal laissez-faire economists, and the neoliberals (they remain right of center but do allow for occasional mistakes of the marketplace such as externalities). Moving to the left side of the line are nationalists, who prioritize national interests over corporate profits, then the "dependencia" school in Latin America that focuses on the evils of imperialism, and on the far left the Marxists. The range is so broad that scholarly consensus is hard to discern.[48] Anti-corporate advocates criticize multinational corporations for being without a basis in a national ethos, being ultimate without a specific nationhood, and that this lack of an ethos appears in their ways of operating as they enter into contracts with countries that have low human rights or environmental standards.[49] In the world economy facilitated by multinational corporations, capital will increasingly be able to play workers, communities, and nations off against one another as they demand tax, regulation and wage concessions while threatening to move. In other words, increased mobility of multinational corporations benefits capital while workers and communities lose. Some negative outcomes generated by multinational corporations include increased inequality, unemployment, and wage stagnation.[50] For the debate from a neo-liberal perspective see Raymond Vernon, Storm over the Multinationals (1977).</ref> The aggressive use of tax avoidance schemes, and multinational tax havens, allows multinational corporations to gain competitive advantages over small and medium-sized enterprises.[51] Organizations such as the Tax Justice Network criticize governments for allowing multinational organizations to escape tax, particularly by using base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) tax tools, since less money can be spent for public services.[52] See also iconBusiness portalWorld portal Financial risk management § Corporate finance Globalization Global workforce List of multinational corporations Transnational Corporations Observatory World economy Multinational tax haven References Roy D. Voorhees; Emerson L. Seim; John I. Coppett (Winter 1992). "Global Logistics and Stateless Corporations". Transportation Practitioners Journal. 59 (2): 144–151. Pitelis, Christos; Roger Sugden (2000). The nature of the transnational firm. Routledge. p. H72. ISBN 0-415-16787-6. "Multinational Corporations". "MULTINATIONAL CORPORATION (MNC) Definition & Meaning". Black's Law Dictionary. 19 October 2012. Retrieved 18 August 2018. Gelderblom, Oscar; Jong, Abe de; Jonker, Joost (December 2013). "The Formative Years of the Modern Corporation: The Dutch East India Company VOC, 1602–1623". The Journal of Economic History. 73 (4): 1050–1076. doi:10.1017/S0022050713000879. hdl:1765/32952. ISSN 0022-0507. S2CID 154592596. Alex Jeffrey, and Joe Painter, "Imperialism and Post colonialism". in Political Geography: An Introduction to Space and Power (London: SAGE, 2009) pp. 174–75. Nick Robins, This Imperious Company: The Corporation That Changed the World How the East India Company Shaped the Modern Multinational (London: Pluto, 2006) pp. 24–25. Stephen A. Royle, Company, Crown and Colony: The Hudson's Bay Company and Territorial Endeavor in Western Canada (London: I.B. Tauris, 2011). Micklethwait, John, and Adrian Wooldridge, The company: A short history of a revolutionary idea (New York: Modern Library, 2003). Nick Robins, Nick. The Corporation That Changed the World How the East India Company Shaped the Modern Multinational. London: Pluto, 2006. 145. Charles E. Harvey, The Rio Tinto Company: an economic history of a leading international mining concern, 1873-1954. (Alison Hodge, 1981). Francis Wilson, "Minerals and migrants: how the mining industry has shaped South Africa." Daedalus 130.1 (2001): 99–121 online. Robert I. Rotberg, The Founder: Cecil Rhodes and the Pursuit of Power. (Oxford University Press, 1988). Brew, Gregory (23 May 2019). "OPEC, International Oil, and the United States". OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS. Brew, Gregory (2019-05-23), "OPEC, International Oil, and the United States", Oxford Research Encyclopedia of American History, doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.001.0001/acrefore-9780199329175-e-719, ISBN 978-0-19-932917-5, retrieved 2024-04-24 Anthony Sampson, The Seven Sisters: The Great Oil Companies and the World They Shaped (1975) online Brew, Gregory (2019-05-23), "OPEC, International Oil, and the United States", Oxford Research Encyclopedia of American History, doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.001.0001/acrefore-9780199329175-e-719, ISBN 978-0-19-932917-5, retrieved 2024-04-24 Brew, Gregory (2019-05-23), "OPEC, International Oil, and the United States", Oxford Research Encyclopedia of American History, doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.001.0001/acrefore-9780199329175-e-719, ISBN 978-0-19-932917-5, retrieved 2024-04-24 Allen, David (26 April 2012). "Why Should Bahamas Be In 7% Oil Minority?". The Tribune. Retrieved 23 April 2017. John H. Dunning and Sarianna M. Lundan, Multinational Enterprises and the Global Economy (2nd ed. 2008) pp 37–39. Christopher Tugendhat, The Multinationals (1973) p 147. Fagan, GH; Munck, R (2009). "Chapter 22: Transnational Corporation". Globalization and Security: An Encyclopedia. ABC-CLIO. pp. 410–428. ISBN 978-0-275-99693-2. Doob, Christopher M. (2014). Social Inequality and Social Stratification in US Society. Pearson Education Inc. "Role of Multinational Corporations". T. Romana College. Archived from the original on 27 November 2016. Retrieved 3 January 2019. Eun, Cheol S.; Resnick, Bruce G. (2014). International Financial Management,6th Edition. Beijing Chengxin Weiye Printing Inc. Koenig-Archibugi, Mathias. "Transnational Corporations and Public Accountability" (PDF). Gary 2004: 106. Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 February 2016. Retrieved 2 February 2016. Krugman, Paul (20 March 1998). "In Praise of Cheap Labor: Bad Jobs at Bad Wages Are Better than No Jobs at All". Slate. Retrieved 2 February 2016.[permanent dead link] Holstein, William J. et al., "The Stateless Corporation", Business Week (May 14, 1991), p. 98. Roy D. Voorhees, Emerson L. Seim, and John I. Coppett, "Global Logistics and Stateless Corporations", Transportation Practitioners Journal 59, 2 (Winter 1993): 144–51. "GlobalInc. An Atlas of The Multinational Corporation" Medard Gabel & Henry Bruner, New York: The New Press, 2004. ISBN 1-56584-727-X". Archived from the original on 2003-12-22. Chen, James. "Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)". Investopedia. Retrieved 2019-05-12. "Investment rules in China". Asialink Business. Retrieved 2019-05-12. Huang, Yukon. "China's Foreign Investment Law and US-China Trade Friction". Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Retrieved 2019-05-12. "Chinese Restrictions on Foreign Investments – How Will It Impact The US?". Lawyer Monthly | Legal News Magazine. 6 June 2018. Retrieved 2019-05-12. "Trump's Iran sanctions: an explainer on their impact for Europe". ECFR. 12 September 2018. Retrieved 2019-05-12. Raymond Vernon, Storm over the Multinationals (1977) p. 12. "Here, there and everywhere: Why some businesses choose multiple corporate citizenships". The Economist. Retrieved 2018-11-25. Iriye, Akira; Saunier, Pierre-Yves, eds. (2009). "Transnational". The Palgrave Dictionary of Transnational History. Palgrave Macmillan Transnational History Series. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK. p. 1047. doi:10.1007/978-1-349-74030-7. ISBN 978-1-349-74032-1. Hu, Yao-Su (1992-01-01). "Global or Stateless Corporations are National Firms with International Operations". California Management Review. 34 (2): 107–126. doi:10.2307/41166696. ISSN 0008-1256. JSTOR 41166696. S2CID 155113053. Blumberg, Phillip I. (1990). "The Corporate Entity in an Era of Multinational Corporations". Delaware Journal of Corporate Law. 15 (2): 283–375. ISSN 0364-9490. "Designing a Territorial Tax System: A Review of OECD Systems". Tax Foundation. 2017-08-01. Retrieved 2019-06-22. "10 Reasons You Should Not Create a Foreign Subsidiary". Velocity Global. 2015-07-17. Archived from the original on 2018-11-25. Retrieved 2018-11-25. "Outsourcing Options for FDI into China - China Briefing News". China Briefing News. 2017-07-12. Archived from the original on 2018-11-25. Retrieved 2018-11-25. Mingst, Karen A. (2014). Essentials of international relations. W. W. Norton & Company. p. 310. ISBN 978-0-393-92195-3. Mingst, Karen A. (2015). Essentials of international relations. W. W. Norton & Company. p. 311. ISBN 978-0-393-92195-3. Gilpin, Robert (1975). Three models of the future. International Organization. p. 39. James, Paul (1984). "Australia in the Corporate Image: A New Nationalism". Arena (63): 68. See also, Richard Barnet and Ronald Muller, Global Reach: The Power of Multinational Corporations, New York, Simon and Schuster, 1975, p. 30. On page 21 Barnet and Muller quote the Chairman of the Unilever Corporation as saying: "The Nation-State will not wither away. A positive role will have to be found for it." Caves, Richard E. (2007). Multinational enterprise and economic analysis. Cambridge University Press. p. 1. ISBN 978-0-521-67753-0. OCLC 272997700. Caves, Richard E. (2007). Multinational enterprise and economic analysis. Cambridge University Press. p. 69. ISBN 978-0-521-67753-0. OCLC 272997700. Charles P. Kindleberger, "Reviews". Business History Review (Dec. 1977). Marc 'Globalization, Power, and Survival: an Anthropological Perspective', pg 484–486. Anthropological Quarterly Vol.79, No. 3. Institute for Ethnographic Research, 2006 Crotty, Epstein & Kelly (1998). Multinational corps in neo-liberal regime. Cambridge University Press. p. 2. Library of the European Parliament Corporate tax avoidance by multinational firms "Taxing corporations: the Politics and Ideology of the Arm's Length Principle". Tax Justice Network. 8 March 2016. Retrieved 23 June 2018. Further reading Cameron, Rondo, V. I. Bovykin, et al. eds. International banking, 1870–1914 (1991) Chandler, Alfred D. and Bruce Mazlish, eds. Leviathans: Multinational Corporations and the New Global History (2005). Chandler, Alfred D. et al. eds. Big Business and the Wealth of Nations (Cambridge University Press, 1999) excerpt Chernow, Ron. The House of Morgan: An American Banking Dynasty and the Rise of Modern Finance (2010) excerpt Davenport-Hines, R. P. T., and Geoffrey Jones, eds. British Business in Asia since 1860 (2003) excerpt Dunning. John H. and Sarianna M. Lundan. Multinational Enterprises and the Global Economy (2nd ed. 2008), major textbook 1993 edition online Habib-Mintz, Nazia. "Multinational corporations' role in improving labour standards in developing countries". Journal of International Business and Economy 10.2 (2009): 1–20. online[dead link] Hunt, Michael H. "Americans in the China Market: Economic Opportunities and Economic Nationalism, 1890s–1931". Business History Review 51.3 (1977): 277–307. JSTOR 3113634. Jones, Geoffrey. Multinationals and Global Capitalism: From the Nineteenth to the Twenty-first Century (2005) Jones, Geoffrey. Merchants to multinationals : British trading companies in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (2000). Jones, Geoffrey, and Jonathan Zeitlin, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Business History (2008) Jones, Geoffrey, et al. The History of the British Bank of the Middle East: Vol. 2, Banking and Oil (1987) Jones, Geoffrey. The Evolution of International Business (1995). Lumby, Anthony. "Economic history and theories of the multinational corporation". South African journal of economic history 3.2 (1988): 104–124. Martin, Lisa, ed. The Oxford Handbook of the Political Economy of International Trade (2015) excerpt Munjal, Surender, Pawan Budhwar, and Vijay Pereira. "A perspective on multinational enterprise's national identity dilemma". Social Identities 24.5 (2018): 548–563. Stopford, John M. "The origins of British-based multinational manufacturing enterprises". Business History Review 48.3 (1974): 303–335. Tugendhat, Christopher. The multinationals (Penguin, 1973). Vernon, Raymond. Storm over the Multinationals: The Real Issues (Harvard UP, 1977). Wells, Louis T. Third world multinationals: The rise of foreign investments from developing countries (MIT Press, 1983) on companies based in Third World Wilkins, Mira. "The history of multinational enterprise". in The Oxford handbook of international business vol 2 (2009). Wilkins, Mira. The Emergence of Multinational Enterprise: American Business Abroad from the Colonial Era to 1914 (1970) Wilkins, Mira. Maturing of Multinational Enterprise : American Business Abroad from 1914 to 1970 (1974) Wilkins, Mira. American business abroad: Ford on six continents (1964). Corporate histories Further information: Anglo American plc Ciafone, Amanda. Counter-Cola: A Multinational History of the Global Corporation (U of California Press, 2019) on Coca-Cola. Fritz, Martin and Karlsson, Birgit. SKF: A Global Story, 1907–2007 (2006). ISBN 978-91-7736-576-1. Scheiber, Harry N. "World War I as Entrepreneurial Opportunity: Willard Straight and the American International Corporation". Political Science Quarterly 84.3 (1969): 486–511. JSTOR 2147271. Historiography Hernes, Helga. The Multinational Corporation: A Guide to Information Sources (Gale, 1977). online External links Wikiquote has quotations related to Multinational corporation. Data on transnational corporations UNCTAD publications on multinational corporations vte Globalization Journals Outline Studies Aspects Alter-globalization Anti-globalization movement Cultural globalization Deglobalization Democratic globalization Economic globalization Environmental globalization Global citizenship education Global financial system Global governance Global health Global politics Global workforce Globality History of archaic early modern Military globalization Political globalization Trade globalization Issues Global Climate change Climate justice Disease COVID-19 pandemic Digital divide Labor arbitrage Multilingualism Population Tax havens Offshore financial centres Tax inversions Water crisis Other Brain drain reverse Care drain Development aid Economic inequality Endangered languages Fair trade Forced displacement Human rights Illicit financial flows Imperialism academic cultural linguistic media scientific social Invasive species Investor-state disputes McDonaldization New international division of labour North–South divide Offshoring Race to the bottom pollution havens Transnational crime Westernization World war Theories Capital accumulation Dependency Development Earth system Fiscal localism Modernization ecological history of Primitive accumulation Social change World history World-systems Notable scholars Economics David Autor Richard Baldwin Ravi Batra Jagdish Bhagwati Robert Brenner Jayati Ghosh Michael Hudson Branko Milanović Kevin O'Rourke Thomas Piketty Dani Rodrik Jeffrey Sachs Amartya Sen Joseph Stiglitz Political economy Samir Amin Giovanni Arrighi Robert W. Cox Andre Gunder Frank Stephen Gill Peter Gowan David Harvey Ronen Palan Susan Strange Robert Wade Politics / sociology Arjun Appadurai Daniele Archibugi K. Anthony Appiah Ulrich Beck Walden Bello Jean Baudrillard Zygmunt Bauman Manuel Castells Christopher Chase-Dunn Alfred Crosby Nancy Fraser Susan George Anthony Giddens Michael Hardt David Held Paul Hirst L. H. M. Ling Antonio Negri George Ritzer Saskia Sassen John Urry Immanuel Wallerstein Non–academic Noam Chomsky Thomas Friedman Naomi Klein John R. Saul Vandana Shiva Category icon Business portal Authority control databases Edit this at Wikidata National Spain France BnF data Germany Israel United States Japan Czech Republic Other Historical Dictionary of Switzerland Categories: International business Multinational companies Transnationalism Economic globalization

https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Fredrick "Chairman Fred" Allen Hampton Sr. (August 30, 1948 – December 4, 1969) was an American activist. He came to prominence in his late teens and very early 20s in Chicago as deputy chairman of the national Black Panther Party and chair of the Illinois chapter. As a progressive African American, he founded the anti-racist, anti-classist Rainbow Coalition,[4] a prominent multicultural political organization that initially included the Black Panthers, Young Patriots (which organized poor whites), and the Young Lords (which organized Hispanics), and an alliance among major Chicago street gangs to help them end infighting and work for social change. A Marxist–Leninist,[5] Hampton considered fascism the greatest threat, saying "nothing is more important than stopping fascism, because fascism will stop us all."[6] In 1967, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) identified Hampton as a radical threat. It tried to subvert his activities in Chicago, sowing disinformation among black progressive groups and placing a counterintelligence operative in the local Panthers organization. In December 1969, Hampton was drugged,[7][8] then shot and killed in his bed during a predawn raid at his Chicago apartment by a tactical unit of the Cook County State's Attorney's Office, who received aid from the Chicago Police Department and the FBI leading up to the attack. Law enforcement sprayed more than 100 gunshots throughout the apartment; the occupants fired once.[9] During the raid, Panther Mark Clark was also killed and several others were seriously wounded. In January 1970, the Cook County Coroner held an inquest; the coroner's jury concluded that Hampton's and Clark's deaths were justifiable homicides.[10][11][12][13] A civil lawsuit was later filed on behalf of the survivors and the relatives of Hampton and Clark.[14] It was resolved in 1982 by a settlement of $1.85 million (equivalent to $5.84 million in 2023); the U.S. federal government, Cook County, and the City of Chicago each paid one-third to a group of nine plaintiffs. Given revelations about the illegal COINTELPRO program and documents associated with the killings, many scholars now consider Hampton's death, at age 21, a deliberate murder or an assassination at the FBI's initiative.[1][2][3][15][16] Biography Early life and youth Hampton in a 1966 yearbook Hampton was born on August 30, 1948, in present-day Summit Argo, Illinois (generally shortened to Summit), and moved with his parents to another Chicago suburb, Maywood, at age 10.[17] His parents had come from Louisiana as part of the Great Migration of African Americans in the early 20th century out of the South. They both worked at the Argo Starch Company, a corn starch processor. As a youth, Hampton was gifted both in the classroom and athletically, and hoped to play center field for the New York Yankees.[18] At 10 years old, he started hosting weekend breakfasts for other children from the neighborhood, cooking the meals himself in what could be described as a precursor to the Panthers' free breakfast program.[19] In high school, he led walkouts protesting black students' exclusion from the competition for homecoming queen and calling on officials to hire more black teachers and administrators.[19] Hampton graduated from Proviso East High School with honors and varsity letters, and a Junior Achievement Award, in 1966.[20] In 1966, Fred Hampton turned 18.[21] At that time, he started identifying with the Third World socialist struggles, as well as reading communist revolutionaries Che Guevara, Ho Chi Minh, and Mao Zedong.[21] Shortly after, Hampton urged not only peace in the Vietnam War, but also North Vietnam's victory.[21] Hampton became active in the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and assumed leadership of its West Suburban Branch's Youth Council. In his capacity as an NAACP youth organizer, he demonstrated natural leadership abilities: from a community of 27,000, he was able to muster a youth group of 500 members strong. He worked to get more and better recreational facilities established in the neighborhoods and to improve educational resources for Maywood's impoverished black community. Activity in Chicago We got to face some facts. That the masses are poor, that the masses belong to what you call the lower class, and when I talk about the masses, I'm talking about the white masses, I'm talking about the black masses, and the brown masses, and the yellow masses, too. We've got to face the fact that some people say you fight fire best with fire, but we say you put fire out best with water. We say you don't fight racism with racism. We're gonna fight racism with solidarity. We say you don't fight capitalism with no black capitalism; you fight capitalism with socialism. —Fred Hampton on solidarity.[22] In 1968, Hampton was accused of assaulting an ice cream truck driver, stealing $71 worth of ice cream bars, and giving them to kids in the street. He was convicted in May 1969 and served time in prison.[7] In a memoir, Frank B. Wilderson III places this incident in the context of COINTELPRO efforts to disrupt the Black Panthers of Chicago by the "leveling of trumped-up charges".[16] In 1969, Hampton, now deputy chairman of the BPP Illinois chapter, conducted a meeting condemning sexism.[23] After 1969, the party considered sexism counter-revolutionary.[24] In 1970, about 40–70% of party members were women.[25] Over the next year, Hampton and his friends and associates achieved many successes in Chicago. Perhaps the most important was a nonaggression pact among Chicago's most powerful street gangs. Emphasizing that racial and ethnic conflict among gangs would only keep its members entrenched in poverty, Hampton strove to forge an anti-racist, class-conscious, multiracial alliance among the BPP, the Young Patriots Organization, and the Young Lords under the leadership of Jose Cha Cha Jimenez, leading to the Rainbow Coalition.[26] Hampton met the Young Lords in Chicago's Lincoln Park neighborhood the day after they were in the news for occupying a police community workshop at the Chicago 18th District Police Station. He was arrested twice with Jimenez at the Wicker Park Welfare Office, and both were charged with "mob action" at a peaceful picket of the office. Later, the Rainbow Coalition was joined nationwide by Students for a Democratic Society (SDS), the Brown Berets, AIM, and the Red Guard Party.[27][28] In May 1969, Hampton called a press conference to announce that the coalition had formed. What the coalition groups would do was based on common action. Some of their joint issues were poverty, anti-racism, corruption, police brutality, and substandard housing.[29][30] If there was a protest or a demonstration, the groups would attend the event and support each other.[30][31] Jeffrey Haas, who was Hampton's lawyer, has praised some of Hampton's politics and his success in unifying movements.[32] But Haas criticizes the way Hampton and the BPP organized in a pyramidal/vertical structure, contrasting this with the horizontal structure of Black Lives Matter: "They may also have picked up on the vulnerability of a hierarchical movement where you have one leader, which makes the movement very vulnerable if that leader is imprisoned, killed, or otherwise compromised. I think the fact that Black Lives Matter says 'We're leaderfull, not leaderless' perhaps makes them less vulnerable to this kind of government assault."[32] Hampton and Benjamin Spock (right) at a protest rally outside the Everett McKinley Dirksen U.S. Courthouse in Chicago, October 1969 Hampton rose quickly in the Black Panthers based on his organizing skills, oratorical gifts, and charisma. Once he became leader of the Chicago chapter, he organized weekly rallies, participated in strikes, worked closely with the BPP's local People's Clinic, taught political education classes every morning at 6 am, and launched a project for community supervision of the police. Hampton was also instrumental in the BPP's Free Breakfast Program. When Bob Brown left the party with Kwame Ture, in the FBI-fomented SNCC/Panther split, Hampton assumed chairmanship of the Illinois state BPP. This automatically made him a national BPP deputy chairman. As the FBI's COINTELPRO began to decimate the nationwide Panther leadership, Hampton's prominence in the national hierarchy increased rapidly and dramatically. Eventually, he was in line to be appointed to the party's Central Committee Chief of Staff. He would have achieved this position had he not been killed.[27][28] FBI investigation The FBI believed that Hampton's leadership and talent for communication made him a major threat among Black Panther leaders. It began keeping close tabs on his activities. Investigations have shown that FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover was determined to prevent the formation of a cohesive Black movement in the United States. Hoover believed the Panthers, Young Patriots, Young Lords, and similar radical coalitions that Hampton forged in Chicago were a stepping stone to the rise of a revolution that could cause a radical change in the U.S. government.[33] The FBI opened a file on Hampton in 1967. It tapped Hampton's mother's phone in February 1968 and by May placed Hampton on the bureau's "Agitator Index" as a "key militant leader".[27] In late 1968, the Racial Matters squad of the FBI's Chicago field office recruited William O'Neal to work with it; he had recently been arrested twice for interstate car theft and impersonating a federal officer. In exchange for having his felony charges dropped and receiving a monthly stipend, O'Neal agreed to infiltrate the BPP as a counterintelligence operative.[34] O'Neal joined the party and quickly rose in the organization, becoming Director of Chapter Security and Hampton's bodyguard. In 1969, the FBI Special Agent in Charge (SAC) in San Francisco wrote Hoover that the agent's investigation had found that, in his city at least, the Panthers were primarily feeding breakfast to children. Hoover responded with a memo implying that the agent's career prospects depended on his supplying evidence to support Hoover's view that the BPP was "a violence-prone organization seeking to overthrow the Government by revolutionary means".[35] Using anonymous letters, the FBI sowed distrust and eventually instigated a split between the Panthers and the Blackstone Rangers. O'Neal instigated an armed clash between them on April 2, 1969. The Panthers became effectively isolated from their power base in the Chicago ghetto, so the FBI worked to undermine its ties with other radical organizations. O'Neal was instructed to "create a rift" between the party and Students for a Democratic Society, whose Chicago headquarters was near that of the Panthers. The FBI released a batch of racist cartoons in the Panthers' name,[36] aimed at alienating white activists. It also launched a disinformation program to forestall the formation of the Rainbow Coalition, but the BPP did make an alliance with the Young Patriots and Young Lords. In repeated directives, Hoover demanded that COINTELPRO personnel investigate the Rainbow Coalition, "destroy what the [BPP] stands for", and "eradicate its 'serve the people' programs".[37] Documents secured by Senate investigators in the early 1970s revealed that the FBI actively encouraged violence between the Panthers and other radical groups; this provoked multiple murders in cities throughout the country.[38] On July 16, 1969, an armed confrontation between party members and the Chicago Police Department resulted in one BPP member being mortally wounded, and six others arrested on serious charges. In early October, Hampton and his girlfriend Deborah Johnson (now known as Akua Njeri), who was pregnant with their child (Fred Hampton Jr.), rented a four-and-a-half-room apartment at 2337 West Monroe Street to be closer to BPP headquarters. O'Neal reported to his superiors that much of the Panthers' "provocative" arms stockpile was stored there. He drew them a map of the apartment. In early November, Hampton traveled to California on a speaking engagement with the UCLA Law Students Association. He met with the remaining BPP national hierarchy, who appointed him to the party's central committee. He was soon to take the position of chief of staff and major spokesman.[39] Assassination Prelude On the night of November 13, 1969, while Hampton was in California, Chicago police officers John J. Gilhooly and Frank G. Rappaport were killed in a gun battle with Panthers; one died the next day.[40] A total of nine police officers were shot. Spurgeon Winter Jr, a 19-year-old Panther, was killed by police. Another Panther, Lawrence S. Bell, was charged with murder. In an unsigned editorial headlined "No Quarter for Wild Beasts", the Chicago Tribune urged that Chicago police officers approaching suspected Panthers "should be ordered to be ready to shoot."[41] As part of the larger COINTELPRO operation, the FBI was determined to prevent any improvement in the effectiveness of the BPP leadership.[42] The FBI orchestrated an armed raid with the Chicago police and Cook County State's Attorney on Hampton's Chicago apartment. They had obtained detailed information about the apartment, including a layout of furniture, from O'Neal. An augmented, 14-man team of the SAO (state Special Prosecutions Unit) was organized for a predawn raid; they were armed with a search warrant for illegal weapons.[27][28] On the evening of December 3, Hampton taught a political education course at a local church, which was attended by most Panther members. Afterward, as was typical, he was accompanied to his Monroe Street apartment by Johnson and several Panthers: Blair Anderson, James Grady, Ronald "Doc" Satchell, Harold Bell, Verlina Brewer, Louis Truelock, Brenda Harris and Mark Clark. O'Neal was already there, having prepared a late dinner, which the group ate around midnight. O'Neal had slipped the secobarbital into a drink that Hampton consumed during the dinner to sedate Hampton so he would not awaken during the subsequent raid. O'Neal left after dinner. At about 1:30 am, December 4, Hampton fell asleep mid-sentence while talking to his mother on the telephone.[43][44][45][46] Although Hampton was not known to take drugs, Cook County chemist Eleanor Berman later reported that she had run two tests, each showing evidence of barbiturates in Hampton's blood. An FBI chemist failed to find similar traces, but Berman stood by her findings.[47] Raid Site of Black Panther Party Raid, Fred Hampton's Death The bed and room where Hampton was fatally shot during the raid, showing a large amount of blood on his side of the mattress and numerous bullet holes in the walls. The office of Cook County State's Attorney Edward Hanrahan organized the raid, using officers attached to his office.[48] Hampton had recently strongly criticized Hanrahan, saying that Hanrahan's talk about a "war on gangs" was really rhetoric used to enable him to carry out a "war on black youth".[49] At 4 am, the heavily armed police team arrived at the site, divided into two teams, eight for the front of the building and six for the rear. At 4:45 am, they stormed the apartment. Mark Clark, sitting in the front room of the apartment with a shotgun in his lap, was on security duty. The police shot him in the chest, killing him instantly.[50] An alternative account said that Clark answered the door and police immediately shot him. Either way, Clark's gun discharged once into the ceiling.[51] This single round was fired when he suffered a reflexive death-convulsion after being shot.[52] This was the only shot fired by the Panthers.[28][53][54][39] Hampton, drugged by barbiturates, was sleeping on a mattress in the bedroom with Johnson, who was nine months pregnant with their child.[50][39] Police officers removed her from the room while Hampton lay unconscious in bed.[55] Then the raiding team fired at the head of the south bedroom. Hampton was wounded in the shoulder by the shooting.[39] According to the National Archives and Records Administration, "upon that discovery, an officer shot him twice in his head and killed him".[39] Fellow Black Panther Harold Bell said that he heard the following exchange:[56] "That's Fred Hampton." "Is he dead?... Bring him out." "He's barely alive." "He'll make it." The injured Panthers said they heard two shots. According to Hampton's supporters, the shots were fired point-blank at Hampton's head.[57] According to Johnson, an officer then said: "He's good and dead now."[56] Chicago police removing Hampton's body Hampton's body was dragged into the bedroom doorway and left in a pool of blood. The officers directed their gunfire at the remaining Panthers who had been sleeping in the north bedroom (Satchel, Anderson, Brewer, and Harris).[50] Brewer, Satchel, Anderson, and Harris were seriously wounded,[50] then beaten and dragged into the street. They were arrested on charges of aggravated assault and attempted murder of the officers. They were each held on $100,000 bail.[51] In the early 1990s, Jose "Cha Cha" Jimenez, a former president and co-founder of the Young Lords who had developed close ties to Hampton and the Chicago Black Panther Party during the late 1960s, interviewed Johnson about the raid. She said: I believe Fred Hampton was drugged. The reason why is because when he woke up when the person [Truelock] said, "Chairman, chairman," he was shaking Fred's arm, you know, Fred's arm was folded across the head of the bed. And Fred—he just raised his head up real slow. It was like watching a slow motion. He raised. His eyes were open. He raised his head up real slow, you know, with his eyes toward the entranceway, toward the bedroom and laid his head back down. That was the only movement he made [...][55] The seven Panthers who survived the raid were indicted by a grand jury on charges of attempted murder, armed violence, and other weapons charges. These charges were subsequently dropped. During the trial, the Chicago Police Department claimed that the Panthers were the first to fire shots, but a later investigation found that the Chicago police fired between 90 and 99 shots, while the only Panthers shot was from Clark's dropped shotgun.[51][58] After the raid, the apartment was left unguarded. The Panthers sent some members to investigate, accompanied by videographer Mike Gray and stills photographer Norris McNamara to document the scene. This footage was instrumental in proving the raid was an assassination. The footage was later released as part of the 1971 documentary The Murder of Fred Hampton. After a break-in at an FBI office in Pennsylvania, the existence of COINTELPRO, an illegal counter-intelligence program, was revealed and reported. With this program revealed, many activists and others began to suspect that the police raid and Hampton's killing were conducted under this program. One of the documents released after the break-in was a floor plan of Hampton's apartment. Another document outlined a deal that the FBI brokered with US deputy attorney general Richard Kleindienst to conceal the FBI's role in Hampton's death and the existence of COINTELPRO.[58] Aftermath Mourners passing the bier of Hampton. His funeral in December was attended by over 5,000 people. At a press conference the next day, the police announced the arrest team had been attacked by the "violent" and "extremely vicious" Panthers and defended themselves accordingly.[59] In a second press conference on December 8, the police leadership praised the assault team for their "remarkable restraint", "bravery", and "professional discipline" in not killing all the Panthers present. Photographic evidence was presented of "bullet holes" allegedly made by shots fired by the Panthers, but reporters soon challenged this claim.[60] An internal investigation was undertaken, and the police claimed that their colleagues on the assault team were exonerated of any wrongdoing, concluding that they "used lawful means to overcome the assault".[61] Five thousand people attended Hampton's funeral. He was eulogized by black leaders, including Jesse Jackson and Ralph Abernathy, Martin Luther King Jr.'s successor as head of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. In his eulogy, Jackson said that "when Fred was shot in Chicago, black people in particular, and decent people in general, bled everywhere."[62] On December 6, members of the Weather Underground destroyed numerous police vehicles in a retaliatory bombing spree at 3600 N. Halsted Street, Chicago.[63] The police called their raid on Hampton's apartment a "shootout". The Black Panthers called it a "shoot-in", because so many shots were fired by police.[64][65] On December 11 and 12, the two competing daily newspapers, the Chicago Tribune and the Chicago Sun-Times, published vivid accounts of the events but drew different conclusions. The Tribune has long been considered the politically conservative newspaper, and the Sun-Times the liberal paper.[66] On December 11, the Tribune published a page 1 article titled, "Exclusive – Hanrahan, Police Tell Panther Story." The article included photographs supplied by Hanrahan's office that depicted bullet holes in a thin white curtain and door jamb as evidence that the Panthers fired multiple bullets at the police.[67][68] Jack Challem, editor of the Wright College News, the student newspaper at Wright Junior College in Chicago, had visited the apartment on December 6, when it was still unsecured. He took numerous photographs of the crime scenes. A member of the Black Panthers was allowing visitors to tour the apartment. Challem's photographs did not show the bullet holes reported by the Tribune. On the morning of December 12, after the Tribune article had appeared with the Hanrahan-supplied photos, Challem contacted a reporter at the Sun-Times, showed him his own photographs, and encouraged the other reporter to visit the apartment. That evening, the Sun-Times published a page 1 article with the headline: "Those 'bullet holes' aren't." According to the article, the alleged bullet holes (supposedly the result of the Panthers shooting in the direction of the police) were nail heads.[69] Four weeks after witnessing Hampton's death at the hands of the police, Johnson gave birth to their son, Fred Hampton Jr.[70] Civil rights activists Roy Wilkins and Ramsey Clark, styled as "The Commission of Inquiry into the Black Panthers and the Police", alleged that the Chicago police had killed Hampton without justification or provocation and had violated the Panthers' constitutional rights against unreasonable search and seizure.[71] "The Commission" further alleged that the Chicago Police Department had imposed a summary punishment on the Panthers.[72] A federal grand jury did not return any indictment against any of the individuals involved with the planning or execution of the raid, including the officers involved in killing Hampton.[73] O'Neal, who had given the FBI the floor plan of the apartment and drugged Hampton, later admitted his involvement in setting up the raid.[74] He committed suicide on January 15, 1990.[47][75] Inquest Shortly after the raid, Cook County Coroner Andrew Toman began forming a special six-member coroner's jury to hold an inquest into the deaths of Hampton and Clark.[76] On December 23, Toman announced four additions to the jury, who included two African-American men: physician Theodore K. Lawless and attorney Julian B. Wilkins, the son of J. Ernest Wilkins Sr.[76] He said the four were selected from a group of candidates submitted to his office by groups and individuals representing both Chicago's black and white communities.[76] Civil rights leaders and spokesmen for the black community were reportedly disappointed with the selection.[77] An official with the Chicago Urban League said, "I would have had more confidence in the jury if one of them had been a black man who has a rapport with the young and the grass roots in the community."[77] Gus Savage said that such a man to whom the community could relate need not be black.[77] The jury eventually included a third black man, who had been a member of the first coroner's jury sworn in on December 4.[11] The blue-ribbon panel convened for the inquest on January 6, 1970. On January 21, they ruled the deaths of Hampton and Clark to be justifiable homicides.[11][10][12][13] The jury qualified their verdict on Hampton's death as "based solely and exclusively on the evidence presented to this inquisition";[11] police and expert witnesses provided the only testimony during the inquest.[78] Jury foreman James T. Hicks stated that they could not consider the charges made by surviving Black Panthers who had been in the apartment; they had told reporters that the police had entered the apartment shooting. The survivors were reported to have refused to testify during the inquest because they faced criminal charges of attempted murder and aggravated assault during the raid.[78] Attorneys for the Hampton and Clark families did not introduce any witnesses during the proceedings but called the inquest "a well-rehearsed theatrical performance designed to vindicate the police officers".[11] Hanrahan said the verdict was recognition "of the truthfulness of our police officers' account of the events".[11] Federal grand jury Released on May 15, 1970, the reports of a federal grand jury criticized the actions of the police, the surviving Black Panthers, and the Chicago news media.[79][80] The grand jury called the police department's raid "ill conceived" and said many errors were committed during the post-raid investigation and reconstruction of the events. It said that the surviving Black Panthers' refusal to cooperate hampered the investigation, and that the press "improperly and grossly exaggerated stories".[79][80] 1970 civil rights lawsuit In 1970, the survivors and relatives of Hampton and Clark filed a civil suit, stating that the civil rights of the Black Panther members were violated by the joint police/FBI raid and seeking $47.7 million in damages.[81] Twenty-eight defendants were named, including Hanrahan as well as the City of Chicago, Cook County, and federal governments.[81] It took years for the case to get to trial, which lasted 18 months. It was reported to have been the longest federal trial up to that time.[81] After its conclusion in 1977, Judge Joseph Sam Perry of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois dismissed the suit against 21 of the defendants before jury deliberations.[81] After jurors deadlocked on a verdict, Perry dismissed the suit against the remaining defendants.[81] The plaintiffs appealed. In 1979, the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago found that the government had withheld relevant documents, thereby obstructing the judicial process.[81] Reinstating the case against 24 of the defendants, the Court of Appeals ordered a new trial.[81] The Supreme Court of the United States heard an appeal by defendants but voted 5–3 in 1980 to remand the case to the District Court for a new trial.[81] In 1982, the City of Chicago, Cook County, and the federal government agreed to a settlement in which each would pay $616,333 (equivalent to $1.95 million per payee in 2023) to a group of nine plaintiffs, including the mothers of Hampton and Clark.[81] The $1.85 million settlement (equivalent to $5.84 million in 2023) was believed to be the largest ever in a civil rights case.[81] G. Flint Taylor, one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs, said, "The settlement is an admission of the conspiracy that existed between the FBI and Hanrahan's men to murder Fred Hampton."[82] Assistant United States Attorney Robert Gruenberg said the settlement was intended to avoid another costly trial and was not an admission of guilt or responsibility by any of the defendants.[82] Controversy Ten days afterward, Bobby Rush, the then deputy minister of defense for the Illinois Black Panther Party, called the raiding party an "execution squad".[83] As is typical in settlements, the three government defendants did not acknowledge claims of responsibility for plaintiffs' allegations. Michael Newton is among the writers who have concluded that Hampton was assassinated.[84] In his 2016 book Unsolved Civil Rights Murder Cases, 1934–1970, Newton writes that Hampton "was murdered in his sleep by Chicago police with FBI collusion."[85] This view is also presented in Jakobi Williams's book From the Bullet to the Ballot: The Illinois Chapter of the Black Panther Party and Racial Coalition Politics in Chicago.[86] Personal life Hampton was very close with Chicago Black Catholic priest George Clements, who served as his mentor and as a chaplain for the local Panther chapter. Hampton and the Panthers also used Clements's parish, Holy Angels Catholic Church in Chicago (now the parish of Our Lady of Africa[87]), as a refuge in times of particular surveillance or pursuit from the police. They also provided security for several of Clements's "Black Unity Masses", part of his revolutionary activities during the Black Catholic Movement. Clements spoke at Hampton's funeral, and also said a Requiem Mass for him at Holy Angels.[88][89][90] Legacy Legal and political effects According to a 2007 Chicago Tribune report, "The raid ended the promising political career of Cook County State's Atty. Edward V. Hanrahan, who was indicted but cleared with 13 other law-enforcement agents on charges of obstructing justice. Bernard Carey, a Republican, defeated him in the next election, in part because of the support of outraged black voters."[91] The families of Hampton and Clark filed a $47.7 million civil suit against the city, state, and federal governments. The case went to trial before Federal Judge J. Sam Perry. After more than 18 months of testimony and at the close of the plaintiff's case, Perry dismissed the case. The plaintiffs appealed, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit reversed, ordering the case to be retried. More than a decade after the case had been filed, the suit was finally settled for $1.85 million.[73] The two families each shared in the settlement.[92] Jeffrey Haas, with his law partners G. Flint Taylor and Dennis Cunningham and attorney James D. Montgomery, were the attorneys for the plaintiffs in the federal suit Hampton v. Hanrahan, conducted additional research and wrote a book about these events. It was published in 2009. He said that Chicago was worse off without Hampton: Of course, there's also the legacy that, without a young leader, I think the West Side of Chicago degenerated a lot into drugs. And without leaders like Fred Hampton, I think the gangs and the drugs became much more prevalent on the West Side. He was an alternative to that. He talked about serving the community, talked about breakfast programs, educating the people, community control of police. So I think that that's unfortunately another legacy of Fred's murder.[65] In 1990, the Chicago City Council unanimously passed a resolution, introduced by then-Alderman Madeline Haithcock, commemorating December 4, 2004, as Fred Hampton Day in Chicago. The resolution read in part: "Fred Hampton, who was only 21 years old, made his mark in Chicago history not so much by his death as by the heroic efforts of his life and by his goals of empowering the most oppressed sector of Chicago's Black community, bringing people into political life through participation in their own freedom fighting organization."[93] Monuments and streets A public pool was named in his honor in his hometown of Maywood, Illinois.[94] On September 7, 2007, a bust of Hampton by sculptor Preston Jackson was erected outside the Fred Hampton Family Aquatic Center in Maywood.[95] In March 2006, supporters of Hampton's charity work proposed the naming of a Chicago street in his honor. Chicago's chapter of the Fraternal Order of Police opposed this effort.[96] On April 19, 2022 the Village Board of Maywood designated Hampton's childhood home as a historical landmark.[97] Weather Underground reaction Two days after the killings of Hampton and Clark, on December 6, 1969, members of the Weathermen destroyed numerous police vehicles in a retaliatory bombing spree at 3600 N. Halsted Street in Chicago.[98] After that, the group became more radical. On May 21, 1970, the group issued a "Declaration of War" against the U.S. government and, for the first time, used its new name, the "Weather Underground Organization". They adopted fake identities and decided to pursue covert activities only. These initially included preparations to bomb a U.S. military non-commissioned officers' dance at Fort Dix, New Jersey, in what Brian Flanagan later said was intended to be "the most horrific hit the United States government had ever suffered on its territory".[99] "We've known that our job is to lead white kids into armed revolution... Kids know the lines are drawn: revolution is touching all of our lives. Tens of thousands have learned that protest and marches don't do it. Revolutionary violence is the only way." —Bernardine Dohrn[100] Media and popular culture In film A 27-minute documentary, Death of a Black Panther: The Fred Hampton Story,[101] was used as evidence in the civil suit.[102] The 2002 documentary The Weather Underground shows in detail how that group was deeply influenced by Hampton and his death—as well as showing that Hampton kept his distance from them for being what he called "adventuristic, masochistic and Custeristic".[103] Much of the first half of Eyes on the Prize episode 12, "A Nation of Law?", chronicles Hampton's leadership and extrajudicial killing. The events of his rise to prominence, Hoover's targeting of him, and Hampton's subsequent death are also recounted with footage in the 2015 documentary The Black Panthers: Vanguard of the Revolution. The Murder of Fred Hampton is a documentary shot from within the movement, released in 1971. It has no narration, relying solely on footage shot from within the Black Panther organization and portraying Hampton and his colleagues on their own terms. In the 1999 TV miniseries The 60s, Hampton appears serving free breakfast with the BPP. David Alan Grier plays Hampton.[104] The Trial of the Chicago 7 (2020) features Kelvin Harrison Jr. as Hampton, in which he advises Bobby Seale as he was denied counsel, with the Chicago Seven.[105][106][107] Judas and the Black Messiah is a 2021 film about O'Neal's betrayal of Hampton. The film stars Daniel Kaluuya as Hampton and was directed by Shaka King. It premiered at the Sundance Film Festival on February 1, 2021. For his performance, Kaluuya won the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor.[108][109] In literature Jeffrey Haas wrote an account of Hampton's death, The Assassination of Fred Hampton: How the FBI and the Chicago Police Murdered a Black Panther (2009).[110] Stephen King refers to Hampton in the novel 11/22/63 (2012), in which a character discusses the ripple effect of traveling back in time to prevent John F. Kennedy's assassination. He postulates that other events would follow that could have prevented Hampton's assassination as well.[111] In music In his song Murder to Excellence, American rapper and entrepreneur Jay-Z referred to being born on the same day Hampton was murdered.[112] Hampton's son condemned Jay-Z for doing so.[113] American rock band Rage Against the Machine referenced Hampton in its 1996 song Down Rodeo, saying, "They ain't gonna send us campin' like they did my man Fred Hampton."[114] Kendrick Lamar refers to Hampton in his song HiiiPoWeR, which also contains references to black civil rights activists Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, and Huey Newton.[115] Artists SEIITH and Kiko King referenced Hampton in their 2020 song "Ghost of Fred Hampton".[116] See also List of homicides in Illinois Notes Stubblefield, Anna (May 31, 2018). Ethics Along the Color Line. Cornell University Press. pp. 60–61. ISBN 9781501717703. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved July 4, 2019. Burrough, Bryan (2016). Days of Rage: America's Radical Underground, the FBI, and the Forgotten Age of Revolutionary Violence. Penguin Publishing Group. pp. 84–85. ISBN 9780143107972. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved November 11, 2020. Lee, William (December 3, 2019). "In 1969, Charismatic Black Panthers Leader Fred Hampton Was Killed in a Hail of Gunfire. 50 Years Later, the Fight Against Police Brutality Continues". Chicago Tribune. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved December 3, 2019. "From the Bullet to the Ballot | Jakobi Williams". University of North Carolina Press. Haas 2009, p. 4. "Fred Hampton on Revolution – Bay Area Television Archive". Ali, Rasha (February 13, 2021). "Fact-checking 'Judas and the Black Messiah': Was Fred Hampton drugged or arrested over ice cream?". USA Today. Archived from the original on March 22, 2021. Thamm, Natalie (April 7, 2019). "Murder or "Justifiable Homicide"?: The Death of the Revolutionary Fred Hampton". STMU History Media. Archived from the original on March 22, 2021. Retrieved March 22, 2021. Lee, William (December 3, 2019). "In 1969, charismatic Black Panthers leader Fred Hampton was killed in a hail of gunfire. 50 years later, the fight against police brutality continues". Chicago Tribune. Archived from the original on March 22, 2021. Retrieved March 22, 2021. Haas 2009, p. 111. Dolan, Thomas J. (January 22, 1970). "Panther Inquest Backs Police" (PDF). Chicago Sun-Times. Chicago. p. 3. Archived from the original on May 14, 2016. Retrieved October 15, 2015. Rutberg, Susan (December 6, 2017). "Nothing but a Northern Lynching: The Death of Fred Hampton Revisited". Huffpost. Archived from the original on April 3, 2019. Retrieved October 19, 2019. Thamm, Natalie (April 7, 2019). "Murder or 'Justifiable Homicide'?: The Death of the Revolutionary Fred Hampton". STMU History Media. Archived from the original on October 20, 2019. Retrieved October 19, 2019. Morris, Rose (2019). Chronicle of the Seventh Son Black Panther Mark Clark. United States: Rose Morris. pp. 203–214. ISBN 978-1733581714. Williams, Jakobi (2013). "Law Enforcement Repression and the Assassination of Chairman Fred Hampton". From the Bullet to the Ballot: The Illinois Chapter of the Black Panther Party and Racial Coalition Politics in Chicago. University of North Carolina Press. pp. 167–190. ISBN 978-0-8078-3816-7. JSTOR 10.5149/9781469608167_williams.10. Wilderson 2015, p. 304. Haas 2009, pp. 15–16. Hannah, Rosa (April 18, 2017). "Fred Hampton: American Activist". University North Carolina. ISSN 0261-3077. Archived from the original on December 9, 2020. Retrieved April 10, 2020. Solly, Meilan. "The True History Behind 'Judas and the Black Messiah'". Smithsonian Magazine. Archived from the original on February 14, 2021. Retrieved February 14, 2021. Gottlieb, Jeff; Cohen, Jeff (December 26, 1976). "Was Fred Hampton Executed?". The Nation. ISSN 0027-8378. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved November 14, 2020. Haas 2009, p. 27. Jones, Cornelius (October 23, 2013). Don't Call Me Black, Call Me American. Lulu.com. ISBN 9781105520020. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved June 16, 2020. Lumsden, Linda (2009). "Good Mothers With Guns: Framing Black Womanhood in the Black Panther, 1968–1980". Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 86 (4): 900–922. doi:10.1177/107769900908600411. S2CID 145098294. Lumsden, Linda (2009). "Good Mothers With Guns: Framing Black Womanhood in the Black Panther, 1968–1980". Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 86 (4): 900–922. doi:10.1177/107769900908600411. S2CID 145098294. Lumsden, Linda (2009). "Good Mothers With Guns: Framing Black Womanhood in the Black Panther, 1968–1980". Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly. 86 (4): 900–922. doi:10.1177/107769900908600411. S2CID 145098294. "A Latino Young Lord remembers Black Panthers leader Fred Hampton: He united the oppressed". NBC News. February 12, 2021. Ward Churchill; Jim Vander Wall (1988). Agents of Repression: The FBI's Secret Wars Against the Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement. South End Press. p. 66. ISBN 0-89608-293-8. Rod Bush (2000). We Are Not What We Seem: Black Nationalism and Class Struggle in the American Century. NYU Press. p. 216. ISBN 978-0-8147-1318-1. "50 Years After His Death, Fred Hampton's Legacy Looms Large In Chicago". NPR.org. December 5, 2019. Archived from the original on November 10, 2020. Retrieved April 10, 2020. "The Panthers and the Patriots". www.jacobinmag.com. May 25, 2017. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved April 10, 2020. "Fifty Years of Fred Hampton's Rainbow Coalition". southsideweekly.com. August 25, 2016. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved April 10, 2020. "Who Was Fred Hampton – True Story of Black Panther Fred Hampton's Death". Archived from the original on February 14, 2021. Retrieved March 10, 2021. Gipson, Therlee (2018). "Black Panther Party True History". books.google.com. ISBN 9780359039913. ISSN 0261-3077. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved April 10, 2020. Iberia HAMPTON et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Edward V. HANRAHAN et al., Defendants-Appellees, United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, September 12, 1979, page 1, paragraph 13 Archived January 9, 2021, at the Wayback Machine, Law Resource FBI document, May 27, 1969, "Director FBI to SAC San Francisco", available at the FBI reading room. Feldman, Jay (2012). Manufacturing Hysteria: A History of Scapegoating, Surveillance, and Secrecy in Modern America. New York: Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. pp. 275–276. ISBN 9780307388230. Ward Churchill, "To Disrupt, Discredit and Destroy", in Kathleen Cleaver and George Katsiaficas (eds), Liberation, Imagination and the Black Panther Party, p.84 Archived January 31, 2017, at the Wayback Machine and p. 87. Archived January 31, 2017, at the Wayback Machine Michael Newton. Famous Assassinations in World History: An Encyclopedia Archived January 31, 2017, at the Wayback Machine. ABC-CLIO, p. 206. ISBN 1610692853 NARA. "Second Cop in Gun Battle Dies, Wounded Describe Nightmare", Chicago Tribune, November 14, 1969, p. 1. "No Quarter for Wild Beasts", Chicago Tribune, November 15, 1969, p. 10. Democracy Now!, 01 Feb. 2021 "The Assassination of Fred Hampton: New Documents Reveal Involvement of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover" Archived February 3, 2021, at the Wayback Machine Bush, Rod (2000). We Are Not What We Seem: Black Nationalism and Class Struggle in the American Century. NYU Press. p. 216. ISBN 978-0-8147-1318-1. Archived from the original on January 31, 2017. Retrieved February 21, 2016. Berger, Dan (2006). Outlaws of America: the Weather Underground and the politics of solidarity. AK Press. p. 66. ISBN 978-1-904859-41-3. Archived from the original on January 31, 2017. Retrieved February 21, 2016. Ward Churchill; Jim Vander Wall (2002). The COINTELPRO Papers: Documents from the FBI's Secret Wars Against Dissent. South End Press. p. 358. ISBN 0-89608-648-8. Archived from the original on January 31, 2017. Retrieved February 21, 2016. Peter Dale Scott (1996). Deep Politics and the Death of JFK. Univ. of California Press. p. 308. ISBN 978-0-520-20519-2. Archived from the original on January 31, 2017. Retrieved February 21, 2016. Haas 2009, pp. 92, 299, 353. Napoliatno, Jo. "Edward Hanrahan, Prosecutor Tied to '69 Panthers Raid, Dies at 88" Archived September 21, 2020, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times, June 11, 2009. Retrieved June 13, 2009. Haas 2009, p. 74. "Hampton v. City Of Chicago, et al". IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS. January 4, 1978. Archived from the original on August 10, 2007. Retrieved July 19, 2007. Nelson, Stuart Jr. (January 23, 2015). The Black Panthers: Vanguard of the Revolution (Documentary). Mosley, Dwight (2020). "Towards the De-Miseducation of the African-American". books.google.com. ISBN 9781645444435. ISSN 0261-3077. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved January 5, 2020. Haas 2009, p. 92. Berger, Dan (2006), Outlaws of America: The Weather Underground and the Politics of Solidarity, AK Press, ISBN 978-1-904859-41-3, pp. 132–133. Interview by Jose "Cha-Cha" Jimenez, c. 1990, File Folder 10, Box 4, The Collection on the Young Lords, DePaul University Special Collections and Archives. Archived January 9, 2021, at the Wayback Machine Ward Churchill; Jim Vander Wall (1988). Agents of Repression: The FBI's Secret Wars Against the Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement. South End Press. pp. 71-73. ISBN 0-89608-293-8. Churchill and Vander Wall cited court transcripts of Iberia Hampton, et al. vs. Plaintiffs-Appellants, v Edward V. Hanrahan, et al., Defendants-Appellees (Nos. 77–1968, 77–1210 and 77–1370) as the primary source for their account of the police raid. Witnesses Harold Bell and Deborah Johnson testified to the comments by police. Williams, Jakobi (2013). From the Bullet to the Ballot: The Illinois Chapter of the Black Panther Party and Racial Coalition Politics in Chicago. UNC Press Books. p. 185. ISBN 9780807838167. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved July 4, 2019. Bennett, Hans (2010). "The Black Panthers and the Assassination of Fred Hampton". Journal of Pan African Studies. 3 (6). Alm, David. "'The Murder Of Fred Hampton' Still Has Much To Teach, Watch It Here". Forbes. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved November 14, 2020. Mitchell, Robert (December 4, 2019). "The police raid that killed two Black Panthers, shook Chicago and changed the nation". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Archived from the original on March 26, 2021. Retrieved June 2, 2021. "Justice Dept. plans probe Into shooting of Panthers". Google News. The Bryan Times. December 22, 1969. Retrieved June 2, 2021. Mantler, Gordon Keith (2013). Power to the Poor: Black-Brown Coalition and the Fight for Economic Justice, 1960–1974. UNC Press Books. ISBN 9780807838518. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved November 11, 2020. Weather Underground Anon. Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism. UK, Red Dragon Print Collective, c. 1970. Barbara Reynolds, "Five years later Hampton alive" Archived March 4, 2016, at the Wayback Machine, Chicago Tribune, December 8, 1974. "The Assassination of Fred Hampton: How the FBI and the Chicago Police Murdered a Black Panther" Archived December 8, 2009, at the Wayback Machine. Interview with Jeffrey Haas, Democracy Now! December 9, 2009. The Editorial Board (May 27, 2021). "Editorial: When the Tribune and Sun-Times agree on policy ..." chicagotribune.com. Chicago Tribune. Archived from the original on June 1, 2021. Retrieved June 2, 2021.(subscription required) ""Exclusive – Hanrahan, Police Tell Panther Story" Archived December 4, 2014, at the Wayback Machine, Chicago Tribune, December 11, 1969. "Panther Battle Scene" Archived February 23, 2016, at the Wayback Machine, Chicago Tribune, December 11, 1969. Joseph Reilly, "At Hampton Apartment" Archived January 9, 2021, at the Wayback Machine, Chicago Sun-Times, December 12, 1969. ""Fred Hampton Jr. Speaks About the Assassination of His Father"". Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved September 29, 2010. Ryan, Yvonne (November 19, 2013). Roy Wilkins: The Quiet Revolutionary and the NAACP. University Press of Kentucky. ISBN 9780813143804. Archived from the original on February 28, 2023. Retrieved February 28, 2023. Wilkins, Roy; Clark, Ramsey (1973). Search and Destroy: A Report by the Commission of Inquiry into the Black Panthers and the Police (PDF). Metropolitan Applied Research Center. p. 249. Archived (PDF) from the original on January 30, 2013. Retrieved February 28, 2023. "The Black Panthers and the Assassination of Fred Hampton". Archived from the original on June 13, 2010. Retrieved September 29, 2010. "Interview with William O'Neal". digital.wustl.edu. Washington University in St. Louis. April 13, 1989. Archived from the original on March 29, 2021. Retrieved June 2, 2021. Michael Ervin (January 25, 1990). "The Last Hours of William O'Neal". Chicago Reader. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved February 4, 2014. O'Brien, John (December 24, 1969). "For More Selected for Jury to Probe Panther Raid Deaths". Chicago Tribune. Chicago. section 1, p. 4. Archived from the original on December 21, 2016. Retrieved October 15, 2015. Siddon, Arthur (December 24, 1969). "Panther Inquest Jury Selections Questioned". Chicago Tribune. Chicago. section 1, p. 4. Archived from the original on March 7, 2016. Retrieved October 15, 2015. "Illinois jury rules Black Panther deaths 'justifiable homicide'". The Bulletin. Bend, Oregon. United Press International. January 22, 1970. p. 12. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved October 15, 2015. Grossman, Ron (December 4, 2014). "Fatal Black Panther raid in Chicago set off sizable aftershocks". Chicago Tribune. Archived from the original on September 16, 2017. Retrieved September 15, 2017. Graham, Fred P. (May 16, 1970). "US Jury Assails Police in Chicago on Panther Raid". The New York Times. p. 1. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved September 15, 2017. Franklin, Tim; Crawford, William B Jr. (November 2, 1982). "County OKs Panther Death Settlements". Chicago Tribune. Archived from the original on March 4, 2016. Retrieved July 27, 2015. Sheppard, Nathaniel Jr. (November 14, 1982). "Plaintiffs in Panther Suite 'Knew We Were Right'". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved September 15, 2017. Koziol, Ronald (December 14, 1969). "Panther Slayings Split the City Into 'Name Calling' Factions". Chicago Tribune. section 1, p. 7. Archived from the original on March 7, 2016. Retrieved September 23, 2015. Michael Newton. Famous Assassinations in World History: An Encyclopedia Archived January 13, 2017, at the Wayback Machine. ABC-CLIO, p. 205. ISBN 1610692853 Newton, Michael (2016). Unsolved Civil Rights Murder Cases 1934–1970. McFarland & Company. p. 249. ISBN 978-0786498956. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved November 11, 2020. Williams, Jakobi (February 28, 2013). From the Bullet to the Ballot: The Illinois Chapter of the Black Panther Party and Racial Coalition Politics in Chicago. UNC Press Books. p. 10. ISBN 9781469608167. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved November 11, 2020. "History of Holy Angels". Our Lady of Africa. Retrieved July 20, 2023. "The priest who channeled Black Power into the Catholic Church". Religion News Service. December 2, 2019. Retrieved August 16, 2021. "Chicago Negro Parish Marks Panther Death". The Catholic News Archive. Religion News Service. December 19, 1969. Retrieved August 16, 2021. "Trailblazing Father George Clements Marks 60 Years As A Priest". May 2, 2017. Retrieved August 16, 2021. "The Black Panther Raid and the death of Fred Hampton". Chicago Tribune. December 19, 2007. Archived from the original on February 21, 2014. Retrieved February 4, 2014. Sheppard, Nathaniel Jr. (November 14, 1982). "Plaintiffs in Panther Suit 'Knew We Were Right'". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on May 5, 2021. Retrieved June 2, 2021. Monica Moorehead (December 16, 2004). "Chicago: 'Fred Hampton Day' declared". Workers World. Archived from the original on February 21, 2014. Retrieved February 4, 2014. "Village of Maywood Parks and Recreation". Archived from the original on October 5, 2010. Retrieved December 21, 2019. "Maywood street statue honor slain Panther leader Hampton". Itsabouttimebpp.com. September 9, 2007. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved April 12, 2014. "Group Wants Street Named After Black Panther Fred Hampton-Protesters filled City Hall Today – Susan Murphy-Milano". Movingoutmovingon.bloghi.com. Archived from the original on October 4, 2013. Retrieved April 12, 2014. "Fred Hampton childhood home gets historical landmark status". apnews.com. April 20, 2022. Retrieved October 1, 2023. Anonymous (Weather Underground). Prairie Fire: The Politics of Revolutionary Anti-Imperialism. UK, Red Dragon Print Collective, 1970. "Ex-Weather Underground Member Kathy Boudin Granted Parole" Archived November 14, 2007, at the Wayback Machine, Democracy Now! August 21, 2003. Weather Underground Declaration of a State of War "Death of a Black Panther: The Fred Hampton Story" – via Internet Archive. "The Death of a Black Panther – The Fred Hampton Story, 1969–70" Archived January 9, 2021, at the Wayback Machine, Inteldocu, July 31, 2011. "The Seeds of Terror". The New York Times. November 22, 1981. p. 4. Archived from the original on January 9, 2021. Retrieved February 8, 2017. The '60s (TV Mini-Series 1999) – IMDb, archived from the original on January 9, 2021, retrieved July 8, 2020 Gross, Terry (November 18, 2020). "Author Says The Chicago 7 Trial Reflected 'All The Conflicts In America'". NPR. Archived from the original on January 11, 2021. Retrieved January 9, 2021. McNary, Dave (December 17, 2020). "'Trial of the Chicago 7' Honored With Inaugural Ensemble Tribute at Gotham Awards". Variety. Archived from the original on December 18, 2020. Retrieved January 9, 2021. Allen, Nick (October 16, 2020). "Who's Who in The Trial of the Chicago 7: A Character Guide". Vulture. Archived from the original on February 13, 2021. Retrieved January 9, 2021. Rubin, Rebecca (December 22, 2020). "'Judas and the Black Messiah' Rescheduled for Early 2021". Variety. Archived from the original on January 16, 2021. Retrieved January 9, 2021. Rubin, Rebecca (January 12, 2021). "Judas and the Black Messiah' to Premiere at Sundance Film Festival". Variety. Archived from the original on January 12, 2021. Retrieved January 12, 2021. Haas 2009. King 2012:62. Harris, LaTesha (March 24, 2021). "Nobody's Savior – Jay-Z Cannot Deliver Us into an Era of Racial Equity". Bitch Media. Archived from the original on June 24, 2021. Retrieved June 21, 2021. "Fred Hampton Jr. Upset About Jay-Z Lyrics On 'Murder To Excellence'". MTV. Retrieved September 24, 2023. "Down Rodeo Lyrics". Genius.com. "Fred Hampton on your campus, you can't resist his / HiiiPoWeR". Genius. Retrieved October 12, 2022. GHOST OF FRED HAMPTON feat. KIKO KING, retrieved April 20, 2023 References Haas, Jeffrey (2009). The Assassination of Fred Hampton: How the FBI and the Chicago Police Murdered a Black Panther. Chicago Review Press. ISBN 9781569763650. Wilderson, Frank (2015). Incognegro — A Memoir of Exile and Apartheid. Duke University Press. ISBN 978-0-8223-5993-7. "Fred Hampton (August 30, 1948 - December 4, 1969)". National Archives and Records Administration. August 25, 2016. Archived from the original on February 11, 2021. External links Wikiquote has quotations related to Fred Hampton. The Marxists Internet Archive: Fred Hampton Archive Transcribed speeches and collected works. "The Assassination of Fred Hampton: How the FBI and the Chicago Police Murdered a Black Panther" – video report by Democracy Now! December 4, 2009. The Murder of Fred Hampton at IMDb Edit this at Wikidata (A 1971 documentary film directed by Howard Alk) FBI files on Fred Hampton From COINTELPRO to the Shadow Government: As Fred Hampton Jr. Is Released From 9 Years of Prison, a Look Back at the Assassination of Fred Hampton Archived April 28, 2005, at the Wayback Machine. 36:48 real audio. Tape: Fred Hampton, Deborah Johnson. Guests: Fred Hampton Jr., Mutulu Olugabala, Rosa Clemente. Interviewer: Amy Goodman. Democracy Now!. Tuesday, March 5, 2002. Retrieved May 12, 2005. "Power Anywhere Where There's People" A Speech By Fred Hampton National Young Lords Archived October 25, 2012, at the Wayback Machine Brief notes on Young Lords origins The short film Death of a Black Panther: The Fred Hampton Story is available for free viewing and download at the Internet Archive. Grand Valley State University Oral History Collection Why the US government murdered Fred Hampton on YouTube Archived 2023-11-23 at the Wayback Machine vte Black Panther Party Founders Huey P. Newton Bobby Seale Leadership Elaine Brown Eldridge Cleaver Kathleen Cleaver Donald Cox Fred Hampton David Hilliard Members West Coast based Richard Aoki Charles Barron William Lee Brent Ed Bullins Bunchy Carter Mark Comfort Aaron Dixon Emory Douglas B. Kwaku Duren Barbara Easley-Cox Kent Ford Reggie Forte Raymond "Masai" Hewitt Elbert "Big Man" Howard John Huggins Ericka Huggins Bobby Hutton George Jackson Joan Tarika Lewis Jalil Muntaqim (Anthony Bottom) Pat Parker Geronimo Pratt Robert Trivers Michael Zinzun East Coast based Mumia Abu-Jamal Sundiata Acoli Ashanti Alston Kuwasi Balagoon Dhoruba bin Wahad Veronza Bowers Jr. Safiya Bukhari W. Paul Coates Marshall "Eddie" Conway Jamal Joseph Chaka Khan Warren Kimbro Abdul Majid Lonnie McLucas Denise Oliver-Velez Larry Pinkney Alex Rackley Nile Rodgers George W. Sams Jr. Afeni Shakur Assata Shakur Russell Maroon Shoatz Michael "Cetewayo" Tabor James Dixon York Southern based H. Rap Brown Lorenzo Kom'boa Ervin Mark Essex James Forman Robert Hillary King Pete O'Neal Malik Rahim Herman Wallace Albert Woodfox Chicago based Mark Clark William O'Neal Bobby Rush Marion Stamps Akua Njeri (Deborah Johnson) Others Stokely Carmichael Connie Matthews Influences Black power Deacons for Defense and Justice W. E. B. Du Bois Frantz Fanon Harry Haywood Lowndes County Freedom Organization Malcolm X Robert F. Williams Programs and projects Ten-Point Program Free Breakfast for Children The Black Panther (newspaper) Rainbow Coalition United Front Against Fascism Inspired groups Contemporary American Indian Movement Black Guerrilla Family Black Liberation Army Black Liberators Black Panthers (Israel) British Black Panthers Dalit Panthers George Jackson Brigade Gray Panthers I Wor Kuen Ng� Tamatoa Polynesian Panthers Red Guard Party The Pink Panthers Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi White Panther Party Young Lords Subsequent Assata's Daughters Black Panther Militia Black Riders Liberation Party Black Women's Defense League Huey P. Newton Gun Club New Afrikan Black Panther Party New Black Panther Party New Panther Vanguard Movement Revolutionary Black Panther Party Films and television Black Power, We're Goin' Survive America (1968) Black Panthers: A Report (1968) Black Panthers (1968) Mayday (1969) Interview with Bobby Seale (1969) Eldridge Cleaver, Black Panther (1969) Finally Got the News (1970) The Murder of Fred Hampton (1971) Teach Our Children (1973) In the Event Anyone Disappears (1974) Charles Garry: Streetfighter in the Courtroom (1992) Panther (1995) All Power to the People (1996) Public Enemy (1999) A Huey P. Newton Story (2001) Night Catches Us (2010) The Black Panthers: Vanguard of the Revolution (2015) Judas and the Black Messiah (2021) The Big Cigar (2024) Books Soul on Ice (1968) Seize the Time (1970) Blood in My Eye (1972) Revolutionary Suicide (1973) A Taste of Power (1992) Black Against Empire (2013) Related articles 1968 Olympics Black Power salute COINTELPRO Intercommunalism Murder of Betty Van Patter New Haven Black Panther trials Panther 21 Rice–Poindexter case Robert Templeton Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song (1971) "Panther Power" (2000) Black power movement Revolutionary People's Constitutional Convention Category|Black Panther Party Authority control databases Edit this at Wikidata International FAST ISNI VIAF WorldCat National Norway France BnF data Israel United States Poland Russia Other NARA SNAC IdRef Categories: 1948 births1969 deathsActivists from ChicagoAfrican-American activistsAfrican-American communistsAmerican anti-capitalistsAmerican MaoistsAmerican MarxistsAmerican revolutionariesAmerican anti-poverty advocatesAnti-revisionistsAssassinated American civil rights activistsAssassinated revolutionariesAfrican-American MarxistsAfrican Americans shot dead by law enforcement officers in the United StatesLeft-wing populism in the United StatesCOINTELPRO targetsDeaths by firearm in IllinoisExtrajudicial killingsJustifiable homicideMembers of the Black Panther PartyPeople from Maywood, IllinoisPeople from Summit, IllinoisPeople murdered in IllinoisPeople murdered by law enforcement officers in the United States

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Surveillance is the monitoring of behavior, many activities, or information for the purpose of information gathering, influencing, managing or directing.[1][2] This can include observation from a distance by means of electronic equipment, such as closed-circuit television (CCTV), or interception of electronically transmitted information like Internet traffic. It can also include simple technical methods, such as human intelligence gathering and postal interception. Surveillance is used by citizens, for instance for protecting their neighborhoods. It is widely used by governments for intelligence gathering, including espionage, prevention of crime, the protection of a process, person, group or object, or the investigation of crime. It is also used by criminal organizations to plan and commit crimes, and by businesses to gather intelligence on criminals, their competitors, suppliers or customers. Religious organizations charged with detecting heresy and heterodoxy may also carry out surveillance.[3] Auditors carry out a form of surveillance.[4] A byproduct of surveillance is that it can unjustifiably violate people's privacy and is often criticized by civil liberties activists.[5] Democracies may have laws that seek to restrict governmental and private use of surveillance, whereas authoritarian governments seldom have any domestic restrictions. Espionage is by definition covert and typically illegal according to the rules of the observed party, whereas most types of surveillance are overt and are considered legal or legitimate by state authorities. International espionage seems to be common among all types of countries.[6][7] Methods Computer Official seal of the Information Awareness Office – a U.S. agency which developed technologies for mass surveillance Main article: Computer surveillance The vast majority of computer surveillance involves the monitoring of data and traffic on the Internet.[8] In the United States for example, under the Communications Assistance For Law Enforcement Act, all phone calls and broadband Internet traffic (emails, web traffic, instant messaging, etc.) are required to be available for unimpeded real-time monitoring by federal law enforcement agencies.[9][10][11] There is far too much data on the Internet for human investigators to manually search through all of it. Therefore, automated Internet surveillance computers sift through the vast amount of intercepted Internet traffic to identify and report to human investigators the traffic that is considered interesting or suspicious. This process is regulated by targeting certain "trigger" words or phrases, visiting certain types of web sites, or communicating via email or online chat with suspicious individuals or groups.[12] Billions of dollars per year are spent by agencies, such as the NSA, the FBI and the now-defunct Information Awareness Office, to develop, purchase, implement, and operate systems such as Carnivore, NarusInsight, and ECHELON to intercept and analyze all of this data to extract only the information which is useful to law enforcement and intelligence agencies.[13] Computers can be a surveillance target because of the personal data stored on them. If someone is able to install software, such as the FBI's Magic Lantern and CIPAV, on a computer system, they can easily gain unauthorized access to this data. Such software could be installed physically or remotely.[14] Another form of computer surveillance, known as van Eck phreaking, involves reading electromagnetic emanations from computing devices in order to extract data from them at distances of hundreds of meters.[15][16] The NSA runs a database known as "Pinwale", which stores and indexes large numbers of emails of both American citizens and foreigners.[17][18] Additionally, the NSA runs a program known as PRISM, which is a data mining system that gives the United States government direct access to information from technology companies. Through accessing this information, the government is able to obtain search history, emails, stored information, live chats, file transfers, and more. This program generated huge controversies in regards to surveillance and privacy, especially from U.S. citizens.[19][20] Telephones Main articles: Phone surveillance and Lawful interception The official and unofficial tapping of telephone lines is widespread. In the United States for instance, the Communications Assistance For Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) requires that all telephone and VoIP communications be available for real-time wiretapping by Federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies.[9][10][11] Two major telecommunications companies in the U.S.—AT&T Inc. and Verizon—have contracts with the FBI, requiring them to keep their phone call records easily searchable and accessible for Federal agencies, in return for $1.8 million per year.[21] Between 2003 and 2005, the FBI sent out more than 140,000 "National Security Letters" ordering phone companies to hand over information about their customers' calling and Internet histories. About half of these letters requested information on U.S. citizens.[22] Human agents are not required to monitor most calls. Speech-to-text software creates machine-readable text from intercepted audio, which is then processed by automated call-analysis programs, such as those developed by agencies such as the Information Awareness Office, or companies such as Verint, and Narus, which search for certain words or phrases, to decide whether to dedicate a human agent to the call.[23] Law enforcement and intelligence services in the United Kingdom and the United States possess technology to activate the microphones in cell phones remotely, by accessing phones' diagnostic or maintenance features in order to listen to conversations that take place near the person who holds the phone.[24][25][26][27][28][29] The StingRay tracker is an example of one of these tools used to monitor cell phone usage in the United States and the United Kingdom. Originally developed for counterterrorism purposes by the military, they work by broadcasting powerful signals that cause nearby cell phones to transmit their IMSI number, just as they would to normal cell phone towers. Once the phone is connected to the device, there is no way for the user to know that they are being tracked. The operator of the stingray is able to extract information such as location, phone calls, and text messages, but it is widely believed that the capabilities of the StingRay extend much further. A lot of controversy surrounds the StingRay because of its powerful capabilities and the secrecy that surrounds it.[30] Mobile phones are also commonly used to collect location data. The geographical location of a mobile phone (and thus the person carrying it) can be determined easily even when the phone is not being used, using a technique known as multilateration to calculate the differences in time for a signal to travel from the cell phone to each of several cell towers near the owner of the phone.[31][32] The legality of such techniques has been questioned in the United States, in particular whether a court warrant is required.[33] Records for one carrier alone (Sprint), showed that in a given year federal law enforcement agencies requested customer location data 8 million times.[34] The headquarters of UK intelligence activities is Government Communications Headquarters, Cheltenham, England (2017) In response to customers' privacy concerns in the post Edward Snowden era,[35] Apple's iPhone 6 has been designed to disrupt investigative wiretapping efforts. The phone encrypts e-mails, contacts, and photos with a code generated by a complex mathematical algorithm that is unique to an individual phone, and is inaccessible to Apple.[36] The encryption feature on the iPhone 6 has drawn criticism from FBI director James B. Comey and other law enforcement officials since even lawful requests to access user content on the iPhone 6 will result in Apple supplying "gibberish" data that requires law enforcement personnel to either break the code themselves or to get the code from the phone's owner.[36] Because the Snowden leaks demonstrated that American agencies can access phones anywhere in the world, privacy concerns in countries with growing markets for smart phones have intensified, providing a strong incentive for companies like Apple to address those concerns in order to secure their position in the global market.[36] Apple has made several moves to emphasize their concern for privacy, in order to appeal to more consumers. In 2011, Apple stopped the use of permanent device identifiers, and in 2019, they banned the ability of third parties to track on children’s apps.[37] Although the CALEA requires telecommunication companies to build into their systems the ability to carry out a lawful wiretap, the law has not been updated to address the issue of smart phones and requests for access to e-mails and metadata.[38] The Snowden leaks show that the NSA has been taking advantage of this ambiguity in the law by collecting metadata on "at least hundreds of millions" of "incidental" targets from around the world.[38] The NSA uses an analytic tool known as CO-TRAVELER in order to track people whose movements intersect and to find any hidden connections with persons of interest.[38] The Snowden leaks have also revealed that the British Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) can access information collected by the NSA on American citizens. Once the data has been collected, the GCHQ can hold on to it for up to two years. The deadline can be extended with the permission of a "senior UK official".[39][40] Cameras Main article: Closed-circuit television A surveillance camera in Cairns, Queensland Surveillance cameras such as these are installed by the millions in many countries, and are nowadays monitored by automated computer programs instead of humans. Surveillance cameras, or security cameras, are video cameras used for the purpose of observing an area. They are often connected to a recording device or IP network, and may be watched by a security guard or law enforcement officer. Cameras and recording equipment used to be relatively expensive and required human personnel to monitor camera footage, but analysis of footage has been made easier by automated software that organizes digital video footage into a searchable database, and by video analysis software (such as VIRAT and HumanID). The amount of footage is also drastically reduced by motion sensors which record only when motion is detected. With cheaper production techniques, surveillance cameras are simple and inexpensive enough to be used in home security systems, and for everyday surveillance. Video cameras are one of the most common methods of surveillance.[41] As of 2016, there are about 350 million surveillance cameras worldwide. About 65% of these cameras are installed in Asia. The growth of CCTV has been slowing in recent years.[42] In 2018, China was reported to have a huge surveillance network of over 170 million CCTV cameras with 400 million new cameras expected to be installed in the next three years, many of which use facial recognition technology.[43] In the United States, the Department of Homeland Security awards billions of dollars per year in Homeland Security grants for local, state, and federal agencies to install modern video surveillance equipment. For example, the city of Chicago, Illinois, recently used a $5.1 million Homeland Security grant to install an additional 250 surveillance cameras, and connect them to a centralized monitoring center, along with its preexisting network of over 2000 cameras, in a program known as Operation Virtual Shield. Speaking in 2009, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley announced that Chicago would have a surveillance camera on every street corner by 2016.[44][45] New York City received a $350 million grant towards the development of the Domain Awareness System,[46] which is an interconnected system of sensors including 18,000 CCTV cameras used for continual surveillance of the city[47] by both police officers and artificial intelligence systems.[46] In the United Kingdom, the vast majority of video surveillance cameras are not operated by government bodies, but by private individuals or companies, especially to monitor the interiors of shops and businesses. According to 2011 Freedom of Information Act requests, the total number of local government operated CCTV cameras was around 52,000 over the entirety of the UK.[48] The prevalence of video surveillance in the UK is often overstated due to unreliable estimates being requoted;[49][50] for example one report in 2002 extrapolated from a very small sample to estimate the number of cameras in the UK at 4.2 million (of which 500,000 were in Greater London).[51] More reliable estimates put the number of private and local government operated cameras in the United Kingdom at around 1.85 million in 2011.[52] In the Netherlands, one example city where there are cameras is The Hague. There, cameras are placed in city districts in which the most illegal activity is concentrated. Examples are the red-light districts and the train stations.[53] As part of China's Golden Shield Project, several U.S. corporations, including IBM, General Electric, and Honeywell, have been working closely with the Chinese government to install millions of surveillance cameras throughout China, along with advanced video analytics and facial recognition software, which will identify and track individuals everywhere they go. They will be connected to a centralized database and monitoring station, which will, upon completion of the project, contain a picture of the face of every person in China: over 1.3 billion people.[54] Lin Jiang Huai, the head of China's "Information Security Technology" office (which is in charge of the project), credits the surveillance systems in the United States and the U.K. as the inspiration for what he is doing with the Golden Shield Project.[54] A payload surveillance camera manufactured by Controp and distributed to the U.S. government by ADI Technologies The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is funding a research project called Combat Zones That See that will link up cameras across a city to a centralized monitoring station, identify and track individuals and vehicles as they move through the city, and report "suspicious" activity (such as waving arms, looking side-to-side, standing in a group, etc.).[55] At Super Bowl XXXV in January 2001, police in Tampa, Florida, used Identix's facial recognition software, FaceIt, to scan the crowd for potential criminals and terrorists in attendance at the event[56] (it found 19 people with pending arrest warrants).[57] Governments often initially claim that cameras are meant to be used for traffic control, but many of them end up using them for general surveillance.[citation needed] For example, Washington, D.C. had 5,000 "traffic" cameras installed under this premise, and then after they were all in place, networked them all together and then granted access to the Metropolitan Police Department, so they could perform "day-to-day monitoring".[58] The development of centralized networks of CCTV cameras watching public areas – linked to computer databases of people's pictures and identity (biometric data), able to track people's movements throughout the city, and identify whom they have been with – has been argued by some to present a risk to civil liberties.[59] Trapwire is an example of such a network.[60] Social network analysis A graph of the relationships between users on the social networking site Facebook. Social network analysis enables governments to gather detailed information about peoples' friends, family, and other contacts. Since much of this information is voluntarily made public by the users themselves, it is often considered to be a form of open-source intelligence One common form of surveillance is to create maps of social networks based on data from social networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace, Twitter as well as from traffic analysis information from phone call records such as those in the NSA call database,[61] and others. These social network "maps" are then data mined to extract useful information such as personal interests, friendships & affiliations, wants, beliefs, thoughts, and activities.[62][63][64] Many U.S. government agencies such as the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the National Security Agency (NSA), and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) are investing heavily in research involving social network analysis.[65][66] The intelligence community believes that the biggest threat to U.S. power comes from decentralized, leaderless, geographically dispersed groups of terrorists, subversives, extremists, and dissidents. These types of threats are most easily countered by finding important nodes in the network, and removing them. To do this requires a detailed map of the network.[67][68][69] Jason Ethier of Northeastern University, in his study of modern social network analysis, said the following of the Scalable Social Network Analysis Program developed by the Information Awareness Office: The purpose of the SSNA algorithms program is to extend techniques of social network analysis to assist with distinguishing potential terrorist cells from legitimate groups of people.... In order to be successful SSNA will require information on the social interactions of the majority of people around the globe. Since the Defense Department cannot easily distinguish between peaceful citizens and terrorists, it will be necessary for them to gather data on innocent civilians as well as on potential terrorists. — Jason Ethier[64] AT&T developed a programming language called "Hancock", which is able to sift through enormous databases of phone call and Internet traffic records, such as the NSA call database, and extract "communities of interest"—groups of people who call each other regularly, or groups that regularly visit certain sites on the Internet. AT&T originally built the system to develop "marketing leads",[70] but the FBI has regularly requested such information from phone companies such as AT&T without a warrant,[70] and, after using the data, stores all information received in its own databases, regardless of whether or not the information was ever useful in an investigation.[71] Some people believe that the use of social networking sites is a form of "participatory surveillance", where users of these sites are essentially performing surveillance on themselves, putting detailed personal information on public websites where it can be viewed by corporations and governments.[62] In 2008, about 20% of employers reported using social networking sites to collect personal data on prospective or current employees.[72] Biometric Fingerprints being scanned as part of the US-VISIT program Main article: Biometrics Biometric surveillance is a technology that measures and analyzes human physical and/or behavioral characteristics for authentication, identification, or screening purposes.[73] Examples of physical characteristics include fingerprints, DNA, and facial patterns. Examples of mostly behavioral characteristics include gait (a person's manner of walking) or voice. Facial recognition is the use of the unique configuration of a person's facial features to accurately identify them, usually from surveillance video. Both the Department of Homeland Security and DARPA are heavily funding research into facial recognition systems.[74] The Information Processing Technology Office ran a program known as Human Identification at a Distance which developed technologies that are capable of identifying a person at up to 500 ft (150 m) by their facial features. Another form of behavioral biometrics, based on affective computing, involves computers recognizing a person's emotional state based on an analysis of their facial expressions, how fast they are talking, the tone and pitch of their voice, their posture, and other behavioral traits. This might be used for instance to see if a person's behavior is suspect (looking around furtively, "tense" or "angry" facial expressions, waving arms, etc.).[75] A more recent development is DNA profiling, which looks at some of the major markers in the body's DNA to produce a match. The FBI is spending $1 billion to build a new biometric database, which will store DNA, facial recognition data, iris/retina (eye) data, fingerprints, palm prints, and other biometric data of people living in the United States. The computers running the database are contained in an underground facility about the size of two American football fields.[76][77][78] The Los Angeles Police Department is installing automated facial recognition and license plate recognition devices in its squad cars, and providing handheld face scanners, which officers will use to identify people while on patrol.[79][80][81] Facial thermographs are in development, which allow machines to identify certain emotions in people such as fear or stress, by measuring the temperature generated by blood flow to different parts of the face.[82] Law enforcement officers believe that this has potential for them to identify when a suspect is nervous, which might indicate that they are hiding something, lying, or worried about something.[82] In his paper in Ethics and Information Technology, Avi Marciano maps the harms caused by biometric surveillance, traces their theoretical origins, and brings these harms together in one integrative framework to elucidate their cumulative power. Marciano proposes four types of harms: Unauthorized use of bodily information, denial or limitation of access to physical spaces, bodily social sorting, and symbolic ineligibility through construction of marginality and otherness. Biometrics' social power, according to Marciano, derives from three main features: their complexity as "enigmatic technologies", their objective-scientific image, and their increasing agency, particularly in the context of automatic decision-making. Aerial Further information: Surveillance aircraft and Wide-area motion imagery Micro Air Vehicle with attached surveillance camera Aerial surveillance is the gathering of surveillance, usually visual imagery or video, from an airborne vehicle—such as an unmanned aerial vehicle, helicopter, or spy plane. Military surveillance aircraft use a range of sensors (e.g. radar) to monitor the battlefield. Digital imaging technology, miniaturized computers, and numerous other technological advances over the past decade have contributed to rapid advances in aerial surveillance hardware such as micro-aerial vehicles, forward-looking infrared, and high-resolution imagery capable of identifying objects at extremely long distances. For instance, the MQ-9 Reaper,[83] a U.S. drone plane used for domestic operations by the Department of Homeland Security, carries cameras that are capable of identifying an object the size of a milk carton from altitudes of 30,000 feet (9.1 km), and has forward-looking infrared devices that can detect the heat from a human body at distances of up to 60 kilometers (37 mi).[84] In an earlier instance of commercial aerial surveillance, the Killington Mountain ski resort hired 'eye in the sky' aerial photography of its competitors' parking lots to judge the success of its marketing initiatives as it developed starting in the 1950s.[85] HART program concept drawing from official IPTO (DARPA) official website The United States Department of Homeland Security is in the process of testing UAVs to patrol the skies over the United States for the purposes of critical infrastructure protection, border patrol, "transit monitoring", and general surveillance of the U.S. population.[86] Miami-Dade police department ran tests with a vertical take-off and landing UAV from Honeywell, which is planned to be used in SWAT operations.[87] Houston's police department has been testing fixed-wing UAVs for use in "traffic control".[87] The United Kingdom, as well, is working on plans to build up a fleet of surveillance UAVs ranging from micro-aerial vehicles to full-size drones, to be used by police forces throughout the U.K.[88] In addition to their surveillance capabilities, MAVs are capable of carrying tasers for "crowd control", or weapons for killing enemy combatants.[89] Programs such as the Heterogeneous Aerial Reconnaissance Team program developed by DARPA have automated much of the aerial surveillance process. They have developed systems consisting of large teams drone planes that pilot themselves, automatically decide who is "suspicious" and how to go about monitoring them, coordinate their activities with other drones nearby, and notify human operators if something suspicious is occurring. This greatly increases the amount of area that can be continuously monitored, while reducing the number of human operators required. Thus a swarm of automated, self-directing drones can automatically patrol a city and track suspicious individuals, reporting their activities back to a centralized monitoring station.[90][91][92] In addition, researchers also investigate possibilities of autonomous surveillance by large groups of micro aerial vehicles stabilized by decentralized bio-inspired swarming rules.[93][94] Corporate Main article: Corporate surveillance Corporate surveillance is the monitoring of a person or group's behavior by a corporation. The data collected is most often used for marketing purposes or sold to other corporations, but is also regularly shared with government agencies. It can be used as a form of business intelligence, which enables the corporation to better tailor their products and/or services to be desirable by their customers. Although there is a common belief that monitoring can increase productivity, it can also create consequences such as increasing chances of deviant behavior and creating punishments that are not equitable to their actions. Additionally, monitoring can cause resistance and backlash because it insinuates an employer's suspicion and lack of trust.[95] Data mining and profiling Data mining is the application of statistical techniques and programmatic algorithms to discover previously unnoticed relationships within the data. Data profiling in this context is the process of assembling information about a particular individual or group in order to generate a profile — that is, a picture of their patterns and behavior. Data profiling can be an extremely powerful tool for psychological and social network analysis. A skilled analyst can discover facts about a person that they might not even be consciously aware of themselves.[96] Economic (such as credit card purchases) and social (such as telephone calls and emails) transactions in modern society create large amounts of stored data and records. In the past, this data was documented in paper records, leaving a "paper trail", or was simply not documented at all. Correlation of paper-based records was a laborious process—it required human intelligence operators to manually dig through documents, which was time-consuming and incomplete, at best. But today many of these records are electronic, resulting in an "electronic trail". Every use of a bank machine, payment by credit card, use of a phone card, call from home, checked out library book, rented video, or otherwise complete recorded transaction generates an electronic record. Public records—such as birth, court, tax and other records—are increasingly being digitized and made available online. In addition, due to laws like CALEA, web traffic and online purchases are also available for profiling. Electronic record-keeping makes data easily collectable, storable, and accessible—so that high-volume, efficient aggregation and analysis is possible at significantly lower costs. Information relating to many of these individual transactions is often easily available because it is generally not guarded in isolation, since the information, such as the title of a movie a person has rented, might not seem sensitive. However, when many such transactions are aggregated they can be used to assemble a detailed profile revealing the actions, habits, beliefs, locations frequented, social connections, and preferences of the individual. This profile is then used, by programs such as ADVISE[97] and TALON, to determine whether the person is a military, criminal, or political threat. In addition to its own aggregation and profiling tools, the government is able to access information from third parties — for example, banks, credit companies or employers, etc. — by requesting access informally, by compelling access through the use of subpoenas or other procedures,[98] or by purchasing data from commercial data aggregators or data brokers. The United States has spent $370 million on its 43 planned fusion centers, which are national network of surveillance centers that are located in over 30 states. The centers will collect and analyze vast amounts of data on U.S. citizens. It will get this data by consolidating personal information from sources such as state driver's licensing agencies, hospital records, criminal records, school records, credit bureaus, banks, etc. – and placing this information in a centralized database that can be accessed from all of the centers, as well as other federal law enforcement and intelligence agencies.[99] Under United States v. Miller (1976), data held by third parties is generally not subject to Fourth Amendment warrant requirements. Human operatives A tail may surreptitiously track and report on the movements and contacts of a person of interest. Such following by one or more people may provide useful in formation in relatively densely populated urban environments.[100] Organizations that have enemies who wish to gather information about the groups' members or activities face the issue of potential infiltration.[101] In addition to operatives' infiltrating an organization, the surveilling party may exert pressure on certain members of the target organization to act as informants (i.e., to disclose the information they hold on the organization and its members).[102][103] Fielding operatives is very expensive, and governments with wide-reaching electronic surveillance tools at their disposal, rather than gathering the sort of information which operatives can provide, may use less problematic forms of surveillance - such as those mentioned above. Nevertheless, the use of human infiltrators remains common. For instance, in 2007 documents surfaced showing that the FBI planned to field a total of 15,000 undercover agents and informants in response to an anti-terrorism directive (issued by President George W. Bush in 2004) that ordered intelligence and law-enforcement agencies to increase their HUMINT capabilities.[104] Satellite imagery Main article: Reconnaissance satellite On May 25, 2007, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell authorized the National Applications Office (NAO) of the Department of Homeland Security to allow local, state, and domestic Federal agencies to access imagery from military intelligence Reconnaissance satellites and Reconnaissance aircraft sensors which can now be used to observe the activities of U.S. citizens. The satellites and aircraft sensors will be able to penetrate cloud cover, detect chemical traces, and identify objects in buildings and "underground bunkers", and will provide real-time video at much higher resolutions than the still-images produced by programs such as Google Earth.[105][106][107][108][109][110] Identification and credentials A card containing an identification number One of the simplest forms of identification is the carrying of credentials. Some nations have an identity card system to aid identification, whilst others are considering it but face public opposition. Other documents, such as passports, driver's licenses, library cards, banking or credit cards are also used to verify identity. If the form of the identity card is "machine-readable", usually using an encoded magnetic stripe or identification number (such as a Social Security number), it corroborates the subject's identifying data. In this case it may create an electronic trail when it is checked and scanned, which can be used in profiling, as mentioned above. Wireless Tracking This section refers to methods that involve the monitoring of tracking devices through the aid of wireless signals. Mobile phones Mobile carrier antennas are also commonly used to collect geolocation data on mobile phones. The geographical location of a powered mobile phone (and thus the person carrying it) can be determined easily (whether it is being used or not), using a technique known as multilateration to calculate the differences in time for a signal to travel from the cell phone to each of several cell towers near the owner of the phone.[31][32] Dr. Victor Kappeler[111] of Eastern Kentucky University indicates that police surveillance is a strong concern, stating the following statistics from 2013: Of the 321,545 law enforcement requests made to Verizon, 54,200 of these requests were for "content" or "location" information—not just cell phone numbers or IP addresses. Content information included the actual text of messages, emails and the wiretapping of voice or messaging content in real-time. A comparatively new off-the-shelf surveillance device is an IMSI-catcher, a telephone eavesdropping device used to intercept mobile phone traffic and track the movement of mobile phone users. Essentially a "fake" mobile tower acting between the target mobile phone and the service provider's real towers, it is considered a man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack. IMSI-catchers are used in some countries by law enforcement and intelligence agencies, but their use has raised significant civil liberty and privacy concerns and is strictly regulated in some countries.[112] In March 2020, British daily The Guardian, based on the claims of a whistleblower, accused the government of Saudi Arabia of exploiting global mobile telecom network weaknesses to spy on its citizens traveling around the United States.[113] The data shared by the whistleblower in support of the claims, showed that a systematic spying campaign was being run by the kingdom exploiting the flaws of SS7, a global messaging system. The data showed that millions of secret tracking commands originated from Saudi in a duration of four-months, starting from November 2019.[114] RFID tagging RFID chip pulled from a new credit card Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) tagging is the use of very small electronic devices (called "RFID tags") which are applied to or incorporated into a product, animal, or person for the purpose of identification and tracking using radio waves. The tags can be read from several meters away. They are extremely inexpensive, costing a few cents per piece, so they can be inserted into many types of everyday products without significantly increasing the price, and can be used to track and identify these objects for a variety of purposes. Some companies appear to be "tagging" their workers by incorporating RFID tags in employee ID badges. Workers in U.K. considered strike action in protest of having themselves tagged; they felt that it was dehumanizing to have all of their movements tracked with RFID chips.[115][vague] Some critics have expressed fears that people will soon be tracked and scanned everywhere they go.[116] On the other hand, RFID tags in newborn baby ID bracelets put on by hospitals have foiled kidnappings.[115] In a 2003 editorial, CNET News.com's chief political correspondent, Declan McCullagh, speculated that, soon, every object that is purchased, and perhaps ID cards, will have RFID devices in them, which would respond with information about people as they walk past scanners (what type of phone they have, what type of shoes they have on, which books they are carrying, what credit cards or membership cards they have, etc.). This information could be used for identification, tracking, or targeted marketing. As of 2021, this has largely not come to pass.[117] RFID tagging on humans Main article: Microchip implant (human) Hand with planned insertion point for Verichip device A human microchip implant is an identifying integrated circuit device or RFID transponder encased in silicate glass and implanted in the body of a human being. A subdermal implant typically contains a unique ID number that can be linked to information contained in an external database, such as personal identification, medical history, medications, allergies, and contact information. Several types of microchips have been developed in order to control and monitor certain types of people, such as criminals, political figures and spies,[clarification needed] a "killer" tracking chip patent was filed at the German Patent and Trademark Office (DPMA) around May 2009. Verichip is an RFID device produced by a company called Applied Digital Solutions (ADS). Verichip is slightly larger than a grain of rice, and is injected under the skin. The injection reportedly feels similar to receiving a shot. The chip is encased in glass, and stores a "VeriChip Subscriber Number" which the scanner uses to access their personal information, via the Internet, from Verichip Inc.'s database, the "Global VeriChip Subscriber Registry". Thousands of people have already had them inserted.[116] In Mexico, for example, 160 workers at the Attorney General's office were required to have the chip injected for identity verification and access control purposes.[118][119] Implantable microchips have also been used in healthcare settings, but ethnographic researchers have identified a number of ethical problems with such uses; these problems include unequal treatment, diminished trust, and possible endangerment of patients.[120] Radar This section is an excerpt from Perimeter surveillance radar.[edit] Perimeter surveillance radar (PSR) is a class of radar sensors that monitor activity surrounding or on critical infrastructure areas such as airports,[121] seaports, military installations, national borders, refineries and other critical industry and the like. Such radars are characterized by their ability to detect movement at ground level of targets such as an individual walking or crawling towards a facility. Such radars typically have ranges of several hundred metres to over 10 kilometres.[122] Alternate technologies include laser-based systems. These have the potential for very high target position accuracy, however they are less effective in the presence of fog and other obscurants. Geolocation devices Global Positioning System Diagram of GPS satellites orbiting Earth See also: GPS tracking In the U.S., police have planted hidden GPS tracking devices in people's vehicles to monitor their movements,[123] without a warrant.[124] In early 2009, they were arguing in court that they have the right to do this.[125] Several cities are running pilot projects to require parolees to wear GPS devices to track their movements when they get out of prison.[126] Devices See also: United States v. Spy Factory, Inc. Covert listening devices and video devices, or "bugs", are hidden electronic devices which are used to capture, record, and/or transmit data to a receiving party such as a law enforcement agency. The U.S. has run numerous domestic intelligence operations, such as COINTELPRO, which have bugged the homes, offices, and vehicles of thousands of U.S. citizens, usually political activists, subversives, and criminals.[127] Law enforcement and intelligence services in the U.K. and the United States possess technology to remotely activate the microphones in cell phones, by accessing the phone's diagnostic/maintenance features, in order to listen to conversations that take place nearby the person who holds the phone.[25][26][27] Postal services As more people use faxes and e-mail the significance of surveilling the postal system is decreasing, in favor of Internet and telephone surveillance. But interception of post is still an available option for law enforcement and intelligence agencies, in certain circumstances.[128] This is not a common practice, however, and entities like the US Army require high levels of approval to conduct.[129] The U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation have performed twelve separate mail-opening campaigns targeted towards U.S. citizens. In one of these programs, more than 215,000 communications were intercepted, opened, and photographed.[130][131] Stakeout "Stakeout" redirects here. For other uses, see Stakeout (disambiguation). A stakeout is the coordinated surveillance of a location or person. Stakeouts are generally performed covertly and for the purpose of gathering evidence related to criminal activity. The term derives from the practice by land surveyors of using survey stakes to measure out an area before the main building project begins. Internet of things The Internet of Things (IoT) is a term that refers to the future of technology in which data can be collected without human and computer interaction. IoTs can be used for identification, monitoring, location tracking, and health tracking.[132] While IoTs have the benefit of being a time-saving tool that makes activities simpler, they raise the concern of government surveillance and privacy regarding how data will be used.[132] Controversy Graffiti expressing concern about the proliferation of video surveillance Support Supporters of surveillance systems believe that these tools can help protect society from terrorists and criminals. They argue that surveillance can reduce crime by three means: by deterrence, by observation, and by reconstruction. Surveillance can deter by increasing the chance of being caught, and by revealing the modus operandi. This requires a minimal level of invasiveness.[133] Another method on how surveillance can be used to fight criminal activity is by linking the information stream obtained from them to a recognition system (for instance, a camera system that has its feed run through a facial recognition system). This can for instance auto-recognize fugitives and direct police to their location. A distinction here has to be made however on the type of surveillance employed. Some people that support video surveillance in city streets may not support indiscriminate telephone taps and vice versa. Besides the types, the way in which this surveillance is done also matters a lot; i.e. indiscriminate telephone taps are supported by much fewer people than say telephone taps done only to people suspected of engaging in illegal activities. Surveillance can also be used to give human operatives a tactical advantage through improved situational awareness, or through the use of automated processes, i.e. video analytics. Surveillance can help reconstruct an incident and prove guilt through the availability of footage for forensics experts. Surveillance can also influence subjective security if surveillance resources are visible or if the consequences of surveillance can be felt. Some of the surveillance systems (such as the camera system that has its feed run through a facial recognition system mentioned above) can also have other uses besides countering criminal activity. For instance, it can help in retrieving runaway children, abducted or missing adults and mentally disabled people. Other supporters simply believe that there is nothing that can be done about the loss of privacy, and that people must become accustomed to having no privacy. As Sun Microsystems CEO Scott McNealy said: "You have zero privacy anyway. Get over it."[134][135] Another common argument is: "If you aren't doing something wrong then you don't have anything to fear." That is, one does not have a right to privacy regarding illegal activities, while those following the law suffer no harm from surveillance and so have no standing to object to it. Beyond the heroically self-serving identification of what is wrong with what is illegal, the ethical fly in this ointment is the tacit premise that the individual has no duty to preserve the health of the state--the antithesis of the principle that only the consent of the governed can adequately serve as the moral foundation of a (just) state and warrant the vast gulf between its power (and agency) and that of the individual. [136] Opposition Surveillance lamppost brought down in Hong Kong by citizens fearing state surveillance An elaborate graffito in Columbus, Ohio, depicting state surveillance of telecommunications With the advent of programs such as the Total Information Awareness program and ADVISE, technologies such as high speed surveillance computers and biometrics software, and laws such as the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, governments now possess an unprecedented ability to monitor the activities of their subjects.[137] Many civil rights and privacy groups, such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation and American Civil Liberties Union, have expressed concern that by allowing continual increases in government surveillance of citizens we will end up in a mass surveillance society, with extremely limited, or non-existent political and/or personal freedoms. Fears such as this have led to numerous lawsuits such as Hepting v. AT&T.[137][138] Some critics state that the claim made by supporters should be modified to read: "As long as we do what we're told, we have nothing to fear.". For instance, a person who is part of a political group which opposes the policies of the national government, might not want the government to know their names and what they have been reading, so that the government cannot easily subvert their organization, arrest, or kill them. Other critics state that while a person might not have anything to hide right now, the government might later implement policies that they do wish to oppose, and that opposition might then be impossible due to mass surveillance enabling the government to identify and remove political threats. Further, other critics point to the fact that most people do have things to hide. For example, if a person is looking for a new job, they might not want their current employer to know this. Also if an employer wishes total privacy to watch over their own employee and secure their financial information it may become impossible, and they may not wish to hire those under surveillance. In December 2017, the Government of China took steps to oppose widespread surveillance by security-company cameras, webcams, and IP cameras after tens-of-thousands were made accessible for internet viewing by IT company Qihoo[139] Totalitarianism A traffic camera atop a high pole oversees a road in the Canadian city of Toronto Programs such as the Total Information Awareness program, and laws such as the Communications Assistance For Law Enforcement Act have led many groups to fear that society is moving towards a state of mass surveillance with severely limited personal, social, political freedoms, where dissenting individuals or groups will be strategically removed in COINTELPRO-like purges.[137][138] Kate Martin, of the Center For National Security Studies said of the use of military spy satellites being used to monitor the activities of U.S. citizens: "They are laying the bricks one at a time for a police state."[109] Some point to the blurring of lines between public and private places, and the privatization of places traditionally seen as public (such as shopping malls and industrial parks) as illustrating the increasing legality of collecting personal information.[140] Traveling through many public places such as government offices is hardly optional for most people, yet consumers have little choice but to submit to companies' surveillance practices.[141] Surveillance techniques are not created equal; among the many biometric identification technologies, for instance, face recognition requires the least cooperation. Unlike automatic fingerprint reading, which requires an individual to press a finger against a machine, this technique is subtle and requires little to no consent.[141] Psychological/social effects See also: Hawthorne effect Some critics, such as Michel Foucault, believe that in addition to its obvious function of identifying and capturing individuals who are committing undesirable acts, surveillance also functions to create in everyone a feeling of always being watched, so that they become self-policing. This allows the State to control the populace without having to resort to physical force, which is expensive and otherwise problematic.[142] With the development of digital technology, individuals have become increasingly perceptible to one another, as surveillance becomes virtual. Online surveillance is the utilization of the internet to observe one's activity.[143] Corporations, citizens, and governments participate in tracking others' behaviours for motivations that arise out of business relations, to curiosity, to legality. In her book Superconnected, Mary Chayko differentiates between two types of surveillance: vertical and horizontal.[143] Vertical surveillance occurs when there is a dominant force, such as the government that is attempting to control or regulate the actions of a given society. Such powerful authorities often justify their incursions as a means to protect society from threats of violence or terrorism. Some individuals question when this becomes an infringement on civil rights.[143] Horizontal diverges from vertical surveillance as the tracking shifts from an authoritative source to an everyday figure, such as a friend, coworker, or stranger that is interested in one's mundane activities.[143] Individuals leave traces of information when they are online that reveal their interests and desires of which others observe. While this can allow people to become interconnected and develop social connections online, it can also increase potential risk to harm, such as cyberbullying or censoring/stalking by strangers, reducing privacy.[143] In addition, Simone Browne argues that surveillance wields an immense racializing quality such that it operates as "racializing surveillance." Browne uses racializing surveillance to refer to moments when enactments of surveillance are used to reify boundaries, borders, and bodies along racial lines and where the outcome is discriminatory treatment of those who are negatively racialized by such surveillance. Browne argues racializing surveillance pertains to policing what is "in or out of place."[144][145] Privacy Numerous civil rights groups and privacy groups oppose surveillance as a violation of people's right to privacy. Such groups include: Electronic Privacy Information Center, Electronic Frontier Foundation, American Civil Liberties Union and Privacy International. There have been several lawsuits such as Hepting v. AT&T and EPIC v. Department of Justice by groups or individuals, opposing certain surveillance activities. Legislative proceedings such as those that took place during the Church Committee, which investigated domestic intelligence programs such as COINTELPRO, have also weighed the pros and cons of surveillance. Court cases People vs. Diaz (2011) was a court case in the realm of cell phone privacy, even though the decision was later overturned. In this case, Gregory Diaz was arrested during a sting operation for attempting to sell ecstasy. During his arrest, police searched Diaz's phone and found more incriminating evidence including SMS text messages and photographs depicting illicit activities. During his trial, Diaz attempted to have the information from his cell phone removed from evidence, but the courts deemed it as lawful and Diaz's appeal was denied on the California State Court level and, later, the Supreme Court level. Just three short years after, this decision was overturned in the case Riley vs. California (2014).[146] Riley vs. California (2014) was a U.S. Supreme Court case in which a man was arrested for his involvement in a drive-by shooting. A few days after the shooting the police made an arrest of the suspect (Riley), and, during the arrest, the police searched him. However, this search was not only of Riley's person, but also the police opened and searched his cell phone, finding pictures of other weapons, drugs, and of Riley showing gang signs. In court, the question arose whether searching the phone was lawful or if the search was protected by the 4th amendment of the constitution. The decision held that the search of Riley's cell phone during the arrest was illegal, and that it was protected by the 4th Amendment.[147] Countersurveillance, inverse surveillance, sousveillance Countersurveillance is the practice of avoiding surveillance or making surveillance difficult. Developments in the late twentieth century have caused counter surveillance to dramatically grow in both scope and complexity, such as the Internet, increasing prevalence of electronic security systems, high-altitude (and possibly armed) UAVs, and large corporate and government computer databases.[148] Other examples include encrypted messenger apps such as Signal[149][150] and privacy cryptocurrencies such as Monero[151][152] and ZCash.[153] Inverse surveillance is the practice of the reversal of surveillance on other individuals or groups (e.g., citizens photographing police). Well-known examples include George Holliday's recording of the Rodney King beating and the organization Copwatch, which attempts to monitor police officers to prevent police brutality. Counter-surveillance can be also used in applications to prevent corporate spying, or to track other criminals by certain criminal entities. It can also be used to deter stalking methods used by various entities and organizations. Sousveillance is inverse surveillance, involving the recording by private individuals, rather than government or corporate entities.[154] Popular culture In literature George Orwell's novel Nineteen Eighty-Four portrays a fictional totalitarian surveillance society with a very simple mass surveillance system consisting of human operatives, informants, and two-way "telescreens" in people's homes. Because of the impact of this book, mass-surveillance technologies are commonly called "Orwellian" when they are considered problematic. The novel mistrust highlights the negative effects from the overuse of surveillance at Reflection House. The central character Kerryn installs secret cameras to monitor her housemates – see also Paranoia. The book The Handmaid's Tale, as well as a film and TV series based on it, portray a totalitarian Christian theocracy where all citizens are kept under constant surveillance. In the book The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Lisbeth Salander uses computers to get information on people, as well as other common surveillance methods, as a freelancer. V for Vendetta, a British graphic novel written by Alan Moore David Egger's novel The Circle exhibits a world where a single company called "The Circle" produces all of the latest and highest quality technologies from computers and smartphones, to surveillance cameras known as "See-Change cameras". This company becomes associated with politics when starting a movement where politicians go "transparent" by wearing See-Change cameras on their body to prevent keeping secrets from the public about their daily work activity. In this society, it becomes mandatory to share personal information and experiences because it is The Circle's belief that everyone should have access to all information freely. However, as Eggers illustrates, this takes a toll on the individuals and creates a disruption of power between the governments and the private company. The Circle presents extreme ideologies surrounding mandatory surveillance. Eamon Bailey, one of the Wise Men, or founders of The Circle, believes that possessing the tools to access information about anything or anyone, should be a human right given to all of the world's citizens.[155] By eliminating all secrets, any behaviour that has been deemed shameful will either become normalized or no longer considered shocking. Negative actions will eventually be eradicated from society altogether, through the fear of being exposed to other citizens[155] This would be achieved in part by everyone going transparent, something that Bailey highly supports, although it is notable that none of the Wise Men ever became transparent themselves. One major goal of The Circle is to have all of the world's information filtered through The Circle, a process they call "Completion".[155] A single, private company would then have full access and control over all information and privacy of individuals and governments. Ty Gospodinov, the first founder of The Circle, has major concerns about the completion of the circle. He warns that this step would give The Circle too much power and control, and would quickly lead to totalitarianism. In music The Dead Kennedys' song "I Am The Owl" is about government surveillance and social engineering of political groups. The Vienna Teng song "Hymn of Acxiom" is about corporate data collection and surveillance. Onscreen Main article: List of films featuring surveillance The film Gattaca portrays a society that uses biometric surveillance to distinguish between people who are genetically engineered "superior" humans and genetically natural "inferior" humans. In the movie Minority Report, the police and government intelligence agencies use micro aerial vehicles in SWAT operations and for surveillance purposes. HBO's crime-drama series The Sopranos regularly portrays the FBI's surveillance of the DiMeo Crime Family. Audio devices they use include "bugs" placed in strategic locations (e.g., in "I Dream of Jeannie Cusamano" and "Mr. Ruggerio's Neighborhood") and hidden microphones worn by operatives (e.g., in "Rat Pack") and informants (e.g., in "Funhouse", "Proshai, Livushka" and "Members Only"). Visual devices include hidden still cameras (e.g., in "Pax Soprana") and video cameras (e.g., in "Long Term Parking"). The movie THX-1138 portrays a society wherein people are drugged with sedatives and antidepressants, and have surveillance cameras watching them everywhere they go. The movie The Lives of Others portrays the monitoring of East Berlin by agents of the Stasi, the GDR's secret police. The movie The Conversation portrays many methods of audio surveillance. The movie V for Vendetta, a 2005 dystopian political thriller film directed by James McTeigue and written by the Wachowskis, is about British government trying to brainwash people by media, obtain their support by fearmongering, monitor them by mass surveillance devices, and suppress or kill any political or social objection. The movie Enemy of the State a 1998 American action-thriller film directed by Tony Scott is about using U.S. citizens' data to search their background and surveillance devices to capture everyone that is identified as "enemy". The British TV series The Capture explores the potential for video surveillance to be manipulated in order to support a conviction to pursue a political agenda. See also Computer and network surveillance Mass surveillance Sousveillance Surveillance art Surveillance capitalism Surveillance system monitor Trapwire Participatory surveillance PRISM (surveillance program) The Age of Surveillance Capitalism Vulkan files leak Surveillance in New Zealand Surveillance in the Ottoman Empire References Lyon, David (2001). Surveillance Society: Monitoring in Everyday Life. Philadelphia: Open University Press. ISBN 978-0-335-20546-2. Monahan, Torin; Murakami Wood, David (2018). Surveillance Studies: A Reader. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780190297824. Greenleaf, Richard E. (2018). "Historiography of the Mexican Inquisition: Evolution of Interpretations and Methodologies". In Perry, Mary Elizabeth; Cruz, Anne J. (eds.). Cultural Encounters: The Impact of the Inquisition in Spain and the New World. Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, UCLA. Vol. 24. Berleley: University of California Press. p. 260. ISBN 9780520301245. Retrieved March 14, 2020. "Studies [...] are based partially on Inquisition surveillance of foreigners and Protestants." Cardwell, Harvey (2005). Principles of Audit Surveillance. R.T. Edwards, Inc. p. 102. ISBN 9781930217133. Retrieved March 14, 2020. "[...] accounts and inventories alike are generally within the area of surveillance of the auditor [...]." Stallman, Richard M. (October 14, 2013). "Stallman: How Much Surveillance Can Democracy Withstand?". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved April 15, 2020. "The Psychology of Espionage" (PDF). The Psychology of Espionage. Archived (PDF) from the original on November 9, 2020. Retrieved October 1, 2022. Radsan, A. John (Spring 2007). "The Unresolved Equation of Espionage and International Law". Michigan Journal of International Law. 28 (3): 595–623. Diffie, Whitfield; Susan Landau (August 2008). "Internet Eavesdropping: A Brave New World of Wiretapping". Scientific American. Retrieved March 13, 2009. "CALEA Archive – Electronic Frontier Foundation". Electronic Frontier Foundation (website). Archived from the original on May 3, 2009. Retrieved March 14, 2009. "CALEA: The Perils of Wiretapping the Internet". Electronic Frontier Foundation (website). Retrieved March 14, 2009. "CALEA: Frequently Asked Questions". Electronic Frontier Foundation (website). September 20, 2007. Retrieved March 14, 2009. Hill, Michael (October 11, 2004). "Government funds chat room surveillance research". USA Today. Associated Press. Retrieved March 19, 2009. McCullagh, Declan (January 30, 2007). "FBI turns to broad new wiretap method". ZDNet News. Retrieved September 26, 2014. "FBI's Secret Spyware Tracks Down Teen Who Made Bomb Threats". Wired Magazine. July 18, 2007. Van Eck, Wim (1985). "Electromagnetic Radiation from Video Display Units: An Eavesdropping Risk?" (PDF). Computers & Security. 4 (4): 269–286. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.35.1695. doi:10.1016/0167-4048(85)90046-X. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022. Kuhn, M.G. (2004). "Electromagnetic Eavesdropping Risks of Flat-Panel Displays" (PDF). 4th Workshop on Privacy Enhancing Technologies: 23–25. Risen, James; Lichtblau, Eric (June 16, 2009). "E-Mail Surveillance Renews Concerns in Congress". The New York Times. pp. A1. Retrieved June 30, 2009. Ambinder, Marc (June 16, 2009). "Pinwale And The New NSA Revelations". The Atlantic. Retrieved June 30, 2009. Greenwald; Ewen, Glen; MacAskill (June 6, 2013). "NSA Prism program taps in to user data of Apple, Google and others" (PDF). The Guardian. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022. Retrieved February 1, 2017. Sottek, T.C.; Kopfstein, Janus (July 17, 2013). "Everything you need to know about PRISM". The Verge. Retrieved February 13, 2017. Singel, Ryan (September 10, 2007). "Rogue FBI Letters Hint at Phone Companies' Own Data Mining Programs – Updated". Threat Level. Wired. Retrieved March 19, 2009. Roland, Neil (March 20, 2007). "Mueller Orders Audit of 56 FBI Offices for Secret Subpoenas". Bloomberg News. Retrieved March 19, 2009. Piller, Charles; Eric Lichtblau (July 29, 2002). "FBI Plans to Fight Terror With High-Tech Arsenal". LA Times. Retrieved March 14, 2009. Schneier, Bruce (December 5, 2006). "Remotely Eavesdropping on Cell Phone Microphones". Schneier On Security. Retrieved December 13, 2009. McCullagh, Declan; Anne Broache (December 1, 2006). "FBI taps cell phone mic as eavesdropping tool". CNet News. Archived from the original on November 10, 2013. Retrieved March 14, 2009. Odell, Mark (August 1, 2005). "Use of mob

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has repeatedly intervened in the internal affairs of Iran, from the Mosaddegh coup of 1953 to the present day. The CIA is said to have collaborated with the last Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Its personnel may have been involved in the Iran-Contra affair of the 1980s. More recently in 2007-8 CIA operatives were claimed to be supporting the Sunni terrorist group Jundallah against Iran, but these claims were refuted by a later investigation. Mosaddegh coup Main article: 1953 Iranian coup d'état Background In the early 1900s, Iran's Imperial Leader awarded British businesses exclusive property rights to what would eventually become one of the world's greatest oil reserves. British investment established the Anglo-Persian Oil Company, known today as British Petroleum (BP), and in 1913, the British government purchased a majority of the stake in the partnership. By 1920, approximately 1.5 million tons of oil extracted by the Anglo-Persian oil firm yielded tremendous profits for the British, but Iran earned only 16% in royalty fees.[1] For Mohammed Mosaddegh and many Iranian likes, the control of Iran’s oil wealth was becoming intolerable. This was grounded in the sentiment of foreign exploitation of her domestic resources and wealth. In the 1940s, Mossadegh had won the support to champion the course of Iranian “Self Determination.�[2] Soon he was elected to parliament to drive the interest of the Iranian course in 1943. By 1950, 40% of U.S. and 75% of European oil was produced in Iran. In 1951, the drive for control of Iranian Oil wealth intensified with the election of Mosaddegh as the Prime Minister. As a leader of the House, he supervised and participated in the Parliamentary vote that nationalize the Oil industry of Iran to have a reasonable stake in its affairs. This move was inspired by similar oil-producing countries like Venezuela and Saudi Arabia who earned 50% from their relatively Oil profit.[1] To the West and the CIA in particular, such development was mainly driven form Mosaddeq’s quest for personal power, governed with irresponsible emotional policies: in a manner that had weakened the Shah and the Iranian Army.[3] By the end of the year 1952, it had become clear that the Mosaddeqh government threatened the interest of the Western Countries while gradually lining towards the Soviets. Britain protested Mosaddegh's actions in the UN court but lost their case. To make matters worse for the Mosaddegh regime, the British government imposed heavy economic sanctions and embargoes on Iranian oil while also succeeded in halting trading of Iran with neighboring countries like Saudi Arabia. Despite these hardships, Mosaddegh refused to abandon his stance. So the British turned to the US for help. In 1952, Britain constructed a plan for a Coup and pressed the U.S. to mount a joint operation to remove the democratically elected government of Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddegh[4] and install the Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi to rule Iran autocratically. Representatives of British Intelligence met with CIA representatives in Washington in November and December 1952 to discuss a joint war and stay-behind plans in Iran. Although it was not on the previously agreed upon agenda of the meeting, British Intelligence representatives brought up the proposition of a joint political action to remove Prime Minister Mosaddegh. However with Truman as the United States president, it was clear his administration was neither ready to start a conflict nor join the British Intelligence Secrete Services (ISS) to facilitate the removal of Mosaddeqh from office: believing at the time that the democratic Mosaddegh was the best deterrent to communist influence in Iran.[1] With Eisenhower becoming president in January 1953, fearing a possible alliance between Iran and the Soviet Union, such a joint operation between the CIA and ISS seems possible.[5] Plan Y, was an operation that would have consisted of a three-part attack. These three parts would involve an assault on land, air, and sea. Britain attempted to seek aid from the United States under the Truman administration, but the U.S. declined since any armed military aggression could lead to an open conflict with the Soviet Union. In March 1953, the CIA began to draft a plan to overthrow Mosaddegh, called Operation AJAX which later became the TRAJAX. Plotting The Coup On April 4, 1953, the CIA had an approved budget of $1,000,000 to use on the operation. The CIA was instructed to use that money in any way to bring down Mosaddegh.[6] On April 16, 1953, a comprehensive study entitled: "Factors Involved in the Overthrow of Mosaddegh" was completed. The study indicated that an alliance between the Shah and General Zahedi, supported by local CIA assets and financial backing, would have a good chance of overthrowing Mosaddegh because of the possible large mobs and possible garrison refusal to carry out orders from Mosaddegh.[6] It was also partially due to this report, and partially due to the fear of Communist overthrow and spreading in the region due to the increasing influence of the Communist Tudeh party and the Soviet Union.[7] The US also decided to become involved to gain control of a larger share of Iranian oil supplies. The US agreed to the operation dreamed up by the British [8] Brigadier General Norman Schwarzkopf, Sr. , and CIA guru Kermit Roosevelt, Jr. were ordered to begin a covert operation to overthrow Mosaddegh. The resulting operation was inspired by Plan Y and was renamed Operation Ajax. On June 22, CIA Officials George Carroll and Donald Wilber were tasked with leading the two groups that contributed to the operational preparations. Caroll was to organize a study for the military aspect, while Wilber focused on the psychological warfare tactics.[9] Operation Ajax was granted authorization by the Department of State and the British Foreign Office in mid-July 1953.[10] Operation Ajax was conceived and executed by the US Embassy in Tehran. The same location where the 1979 Hostage Crisis would take place years later. Operation Ajax, also known as TPAJAX was aimed to cause the fall of the Mosaddegh government. It also aimed to reestablish the power of the Shah, and replace the Mosaddegh government with one that could govern Iran according to "constructive policies."[11] Operation Ajax had four main parts: First, a massive propaganda campaign to ruin Mosaddegh's name and accuse him of communist affiliations (though he was famously democratic). Second, encourage disturbances within Iran. Third, pressure the Shah into selecting a new prime minister to replace Mosaddegh. Fourth, support Zahedi as a replacement for Mosaddegh.[12] Operation Ajax or the Tudeh party as the front of the CIA operation continued its propaganda so well that the acting director of the CIA Frank G Wisner pushed for accommodations for the radio operators.[13] To gain cooperation with the Shah, CIA and British operatives coordinated with his twin sister Princess Ashraf to "induce the Shah to play his role."[9] This plan was broken up into three stages: First, a British representative would visit the Shah and assure him that he receives both U.S. and U.K.'s support in opposing Mossadeq. Second, General Schwarzkopf would also make a visit and be introduced as a U.S.special representative. In the visit, Schwarzkopf was to communicate how both goverments are "determined to help the Iranians to help themselves to keep their country from falling into the Soviet hands."[9] He needed to stress the financial issues Iran might face without his cooperation and threaten Iran would no longer receive financial aid from the U.S. as long as Mossadeq was in power, as well as how the Shah would be "solely responsible for the collapse of the country and its loss of independence."[9] There also needed to be a mutual agreement that Zahedi is an effective candidate to succeed Mossadeq. Soon after this visit, a British representative was to make an identical trip to reinforce these statements. Lastly, Princess Ashraf needed to visit her brother to acquire his signature on documents that named Zahedi as Chief of Staff and ensured all ranks of officers and military were to "carry out faithfully the orders of the Chief of Staff whom the Shah has named."[9] CIA propaganda in Iran - "Mosaddegh's Spy Service" CIA propaganda in Iran: "Our National Character" The CIA prepared and released propaganda to undermine Mosaddegh's political position. One of these, called "Mosaddeq’s Spy Service", claimed that Mosaddegh had built up an extensive spy service of his own to bolster himself as dictator.[14] Another piece, titled "Our National Character," claimed that Mosaddegh's alliance with the Tudeh Party was "corrupting the character of the Iranian people."[15] Furthermore, an internal CIA memo entitled "Campaign to Install Pro-Western Government In Iran" specifies that one of the CIA's main goals in Iran was to "disenchant the Iranian population with the myth of Mossadeq's patriotism, by exposing his collaboration with the Communists and his manipulation of constitutional authority to serve his own personal ambitions for power."[16] Operation Ajax was put into motion the following year in June, starting with the arrival of key figures, such as Norman Schwarzkopf and Kermit Roosevelt, into Iran. This was a covert operation with the goal of removing Mosaddegh, and then reinstating Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. In the leadup to the operation's execution, officials such as Kermit Roosevelt met with the Shah to discuss the plan and prepare propaganda.[17] However, the operation was initially unsuccessful after the soldiers sent to dismiss Mosaddegh on August 15, 1953, were stopped before the operation could move forward. According to Donald Wilber, one of the CIA operatives who planned the coup and wrote the CIA history on the operation, there were conflicting reports on what occurred that day and how the operation was unable to be completed. The statement released by Mosaddegh's group claimed that the soldiers had been arrested by his personal guards.[4] Kermit Roosevelt, the grandson of former President Theodore Roosevelt, and head of CIA operations in the Middle East;[18] with the cooperation of the Department of State, had articles planted in the United States but when reproduced in Iran, it had psychological effects in Iran and contributed to the coup. With Mosaddegh resisting British pressure, the United States entered the conflict, lured by the prospect of controlling a greater portion of Iran's oil supplies. Mosaddegh's reputation was damaged by propaganda campaigns that incorrectly associated him with communism and denigrated the Iranian people. An attempt to overthrow the democratically elected leader was set in motion.[19] A notable, effective cause for public unease with Mosaddegh's leadership was the letter that President Eisenhower sent him in response to his call to the U.S. for economic aid, due to not agreeing to the British oil deal. Eisenhower writes "The failure of Iran and of the United Kingdom to reach an agreement with regard to compensation has handicapped the Government of the United States in its efforts to help Iran."[20] According to CIA reports, this succeeded in weakening Mosaddegh's position and turned the media, the Parliament, and the populace against him.[21] The CIA also increased their propaganda campaign to link Mosaddegh to communists, with Kermit Roosevelt paying a group of people to act as a mob supporting the Tudeh party and Mosaddegh, rioting in Tehran. This was done after the first failed coup attempt and used the rising tensions following the aftermath to create unrest to support the second attempt. In an attempt at a second coup, the CIA began to bribe the army and police officials.[22][23] For Zahedi to receive the financial assistance he badly needed, the CIA made 5 million dollars available within two days of Zahedi's assumption of power. After several attempts and over 7 million dollars were spent, operations to overthrow Mosaddegh were completed Zahedi immediately implemented martial law and began executing nationalist leaders. Zahedi had accomplished this by coming out of hiding from the U.S. Embassy[24] and immediately drove to the nearest radio station to publicly announce his takeover. This ensued with the Imperial Guards launching the assault on Mosaddegh's house with tanks, artillery, and bazookas.[24] Mosaddegh again had fled over the back wall of his house, escaping death again.[24] Mosaddegh was spared from execution by serving 3 years in solitary confinement and after he remained on house arrest until his death.[22][25] The Coup in Iran was the CIA's first successful coup operation.[26] Mosaddegh was removed from power and Iran's oil shares were split amongst the British, French, and United States for a 25-year agreement in which Iran would earn 50% of the oil profits.[27] Britain earned 40% of the oil shares, the Dutch Oil Company, Shell received 14%, French CFP received 6%, and the United States received the remaining 40%. Quickly following the removal of Mosaddegh in 1953, the U.S. installed a pro-U.S. dictator, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. Over the next decades, the Shah increased the economic strength of Iran but he also repressed political dissent. He accomplished this through the use of a secret police force known as the SAVAK, which was created with the support of the CIA and Mossad. The Shah was accused by many of trying to get rid of Islam, even though the country's population was over 90% Muslim.[26] This eventually led to the rise of political Islam in Iran.[28][29] In a speech on March 17, 2000, before the American Iranian Council on the relaxation of U.S. sanctions against Iran, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright said: "In 1953, the United States played a significant role in orchestrating the overthrow of Iran's popular prime minister, Mohammed Mosaddegh. As the CIA's first successful coup, Operation Ajax left Iran with a resentment for the U.S. that would lead directly to conflicts such as the Iran hostage crisis. The aftershocks of these events continue to influence Iran's political and cultural landscape today. Overthrow of Premier Mosaddegh of Iran (Memo) Further proof of the United States' involvement was announced on March 19, 2013, the 60th anniversary of the overthrow, when the National Security Service posted recently declassified documents that the CIA had on the coup.[30] Although previous to this the CIA claimed that all the documents about 1953 were destroyed or lost in the 1960s because of lack of storage space.[30] A 200-page report written by Donald Wilbur for the CIA goes into detail regarding the planning, execution, and result of the coup.[4][30] Wilbur's report Overthrow of Premier Mossadeq of Iran: November 1952 - August 1953 attempts to outline the need for proper representation of the coup and the necessity to expose the CIA operations in Iran. Released by the New York Times on April 16, 2000, the newspaper utilized Wilbur's writing and reported the facts behind the reason for a coup.[1] He argues that due to the emotional instability of Mosaddegh the Iranian government, military, and Shah were at risk of Soviet takeover and the possibility of communist influence.[2] Thus beginning the aim to crush the communist parties and prevent the 'Reds' from infiltrating the British and American stronghold in Iran. SAVAK In 1973 the CIA moved its Headquarters overseeing the Middle East from Cyprus to Tehran, with the appointment of Richard Helms as U.S. Ambassador to Iran. They also trained over 400 SAVAK officers a year near Mclean, Virginia. They were taught surveillance and intel collection techniques according to John Ghazvinian.[31] Reconnaissance of USSR Through the Cold War in the 1960s and 1970s, the CIA used its alliance with the government of Iran to acquire an advantage over their Soviet counterparts with the Iranian airfields, airspace, and Air Force assets for aggressive, airborne reconnaissance missions along the edge of the Soviet territories and Warsaw Pact countries in Project Dark Gene.[32] The advantage gained over their Soviet counterparts was crucial to the almost daily sorties that were flown near the borders of the USSR and Warsaw Pact countries. Below there is a map of the USSR highlighted in green. You can see the Middle Eastern States that border the far southern Soviet States, which helps us to identify the motives for the U.S. and the American intelligence community's obsession over states such as Iran. By allowing American military and spy forces to stage in northern Iran, it would ensure less likely suicide missions and more friendly airspace. This helped to keep the number of pilots and personnel killed in action to a minimum. During the 1970s, Iran maintained a good relationship with the United States, which allowed the U.S. to install long-range radar technology and establish listening posts enabling the U.S. to monitor activities in the Soviet Union.[32] Information of the KGB USSR to the International Department of the CC CPSU, October 10, 1979. "The Leadership of Iran About the External Security of the Country" "According to KGB information, in August in Teheran a secret meeting was held with the participation of representatives of the Prime Minister, the Ministries of Foreign and Internal Affairs, the Intelligence and Operational Administrations of the General Staff, Gendarme and Police Administrations of the General Staff and the Staff of the "Corps of Defenders of the Revolution," with the goal of studying issues which touch on the security of Iran. It was noted that the USSR and the US, which have their own interests in this region, are worried about the victory of the Islamic revolution in Iran.~ presumed that the USA might resort to a direct military threat and realization of a blockade. But if Iran will not take sharp steps which hurt the US, and will obstruct the penetration of the Soviets, this will ease the position of the USA. Evaluating the policy of the USSR in relation to the Iranian regime, the participants in the meeting concluded that insofar as strengthening the Islamic republic will lead to a weakening of the position of the regime in Afghanistan, exert a certain influence on the Muslim republics in the USSR and will be "a brake in the path of penetration of Communism in the region," the Soviet Union "will not turn away from the ideological struggle and efforts to put into power in Iran a leftist government." It was stressed that with the aim of weakening the Islamic regime the USSR might organize "provocative" activity among Iranian Kurds, Azeris, Turkmen, Baluchis, support leftist forces, create economic difficulties, resort to a military threat based on the agreement of 1921. It was noted that Afghanistan is not in any condition to undertake military actions against Iran. However, border conflicts are not excluded. In addition, Afghanistan needs economic assistance from Iran, which might soften its position. The positions of Iraq, Turkey, Pakistan, and Saudi Arabia were also analyzed."[33] Based on research notes taken at the Center for the Preservation of Contemporary Documentation (Moscow), Fond 5, Opis 76, File 1355, Pages 17-20. Identification of leftists Following the Iranian Revolution of 1979, which overthrew the Pahlavi dynasty and installed the theocratic regime of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the CIA maintained its interest in the remnants of the Tudeh Party. A 1981 CIA report warned that "since the collapse of the Pahlavi monarchy, the pro-Soviet, Communist Tudeh Party has emerged from years of repression and exile to become a small but influential political force in Iran."[34] According to that same report, the CIA was aware that the hardline Islamist policies of the new Iranian government were likely to alienate the population, thus broadening the appeal of the Tudeh Party, while also noting that the party "also benefits from the continuing decay of the Iranian economy, which alienates more and more Iranians from the mullahs' mismanagement."[34] Anticipating that the Tudeh would "bide its time and prepare for the day—perhaps Khomeini's death—when a challenge to the regime could have some chance of success," the CIA opted to aid the Khomeini government in its suppression of leftists.[34] In 1983, the CIA passed an extensive list of Iranian communists and other leftists secretly working in the Iranian government to Khomeini's administration.[35] A Tower Commission report later observed that the list was utilized to take "measures, including mass executions, that virtually eliminated the pro-Soviet infrastructure in Iran."[35][36] Iran-Contra affair Beginning in August 1984, senior Reagan administration officials, in the Iran-Contra affair, arranged for the indirect transfer of arms to Iran, to circumvent the Boland Amendments. These amendments were intended to prevent the expenditure of US funds to support the Nicaraguan Contras. Since the arms-for-hostages deal struck by the Reagan Administration channeled money to the Contras, the legal interpretation of the time was that the CIA, as an organization, could not participate in Iran-Contra. The relationships, first to avoid the Boland Amendment restriction, but also for operational security, did not directly give or sell U.S. weapons to Iran. Instead, the Reagan Administration authorized Israel to sell munitions to Iran, using contracted Iranian arms broker Manucher Ghorbanifar.[37] The Reagan administration circumvented the law by using Israel and South Africa to send weapons to Iran. To finance the Contras, the United States used the money from the weaponry sales and sent it to the Contras.[38] The proceeds from the sales, less the 41% markup charged by Ghorbanifar and originally at a price not acceptable to Iran, went directly to the Contras. Those proceeds were not interpreted as U.S. funds. The Administration resupplied Israel, which was not illegal, with munitions that replaced those transferred to Iran. While Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) William Casey was deeply involved in Iran-Contra, Casey, a World War II Office of Strategic Services (OSS) clandestine operations officer, ran the Iran operation with people outside the CIA, such as White House/National Security Council employees such as John Poindexter and Oliver North, as well as retired special operations personnel such as John K. Singlaub and Richard Secord.[39] The scandal was ultimately compounded by a failure of the US to hide its delivery of weapons to the Iranians.The principal objective of North's clandestine mission was to deliver eight hundred antiquated missiles on an EL Al 747 to Lisbon, where they would then be transferred to a Nicaraguan plane secured by General Richard Secord. Secord's role in the mission was to then take the missiles to Tehran. CIA officials, most notably Duane Clarridge, worked around the clock to secure a better way of delivery. In late November 1985, a CIA 707 was secured from Frankfurt to deliver eighteen HAWK missiles to the Iranians on Monday, November 25. The plan required proof of presidential backing, which, due to the timing of the events, required a retroactive signature authorizing, "the provision of assistance by the Central Intelligence Agency to private parties in their attempt to obtain the release of Americans held hostage in the Middle East."[40] The document was signed by Reagan on December 5, 1985. The United States was convicted of violating international law by the International Court of Justice in the 1986 case of Nicaragua v. United States. The US had been caught illegal funding the Contras, contributing to Nicaraguan Contras, supporting a campaign of international force, or "state-sponsored international terrorism."[41] The US ignored the ruling and refused to participate or pay the reparations that had been ordered by the court.[42] Intelligence Analysis The Islamic Republic of Iran, or more commonly known by its shorthand name Iran, was described as a problem area in the February 2005 report by Porter Goss, then CIA Director, to the Senate Intelligence Committee.[43] "In early February, the spokesman of Iran's Supreme Council for National Security publicly announced that Iran would never scrap its nuclear program. This came amid negotiations with EU-3 members (Britain, Germany, and France) seeking objective guarantees from Tehran that it will not use nuclear technology for nuclear weapons. This is unsurprising given the political instability that has gripped the nation since the US and British intervention in 1953, and the shaky economic conditions that have gripped the nation for decades. Iran's economy is almost completely dependent on foreign oil exports, and its government is racked with blatant and open corruption.[44] "Previous comments by Iranian officials, including Iran's Supreme Leader and its Foreign Minister, indicated that Iran would not give up its ability to enrich uranium. Certainly, they can use it to produce fuel for power reactors. We are more concerned about the dual-use nature of the technology that could also be used to achieve a nuclear weapon. "In parallel, Iran continues its pursuit of long-range ballistic missiles, such as an improved version of its 1,300 km range Shahab-3 medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM), to add to the hundreds of short-range SCUD missiles it already has. "Even since 9/11, Tehran continues to support terrorist groups in the region, such as Hizballah, and could encourage increased attacks in Israel and the Palestinian Territories to derail progress toward peace. Iran reportedly is supporting some anti-Coalition activities in Iraq and seeking to influence the future character of the Iraqi state. Iran continues to retain in secret important members of Al-Qai'ida-the Management Council—causing further uncertainty about Iran's commitment to bring them to justice. "Conservatives are likely to consolidate their power in Iran's June 2005 presidential elections, further marginalizing the reform movement last year." Alleged support for terrorist groups During 2007–2008, there were allegations that the CIA was supporting the Sunni terrorist group Jundallah, but these claims were debunked by a subsequent investigation showing that the CIA "had barred even the most incidental contact with Jundallah." The rumors originated in an Israeli Mossad "false flag" operation; Mossad agents posing as CIA officers met with and recruited members of Jundullah in cities such as London to carry out attacks against Iran. President George W. Bush "went absolutely ballistic" when he learned of Israel's actions, but the situation was not resolved until President Barack Obama's administration "drastically scaled back joint U.S.-Israel intelligence programs targeting Iran" and ultimately designated Jundallah a terrorist organization in November 2010.[45] Although the CIA cut all ties with Jundallah after the 2007 Zahedan bombings, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and United States Department of Defense continued to gather intelligence on Jundallah through assets cultivated by "FBI counterterrorism task force officer" Thomas McHale; the CIA co-authorized a 2008 trip McHale made to meet his informants in Afghanistan. According to The New York Times: "Current and former officials say the American government never directed or approved any Jundallah operations. And they say there was never a case when the United States was told the timing and target of a terrorist attack yet took no action to prevent it."[46] Operation Merlin Operation Merlin was a United States covert operation under the Clinton Administration to provide Iran with a flawed design for a component of a nuclear weapon ostensibly in order to delay the alleged Iranian nuclear weapons program or to frame Iran.[47] In his book State of War, author and intelligence correspondent for The New York Times James Risen relates that the CIA chose a defected Russian nuclear scientist to provide deliberately flawed nuclear warhead blueprints to Iranian officials in February 2000.[48] Risen wrote in his book that President Clinton had approved the operation and that the Bush administration later endorsed the plan.[48][49] Earlier publication of details on Operation Merlin by the New York Times in 2003 was prevented by the intervention of National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice with the NYT's Executive Editor Howell Raines.[50] Operation Merlin backfired when the CIA's Russian contact/messenger noticed flaws in the schematics and told the Iranian nuclear scientists.[51] Instead of crippling Iran's nuclear program, the book alleges, Operation Merlin may have accelerated it by providing useful information: once the flaws were identified, the plans could be compared with other sources, such as those presumed to have been provided to the Iranians by A. Q. Khan.[51] Sabotage of Iran's nuclear program Operation Olympic Games Operation Olympic Games was a covert and still unacknowledged campaign of sabotage by means of cyber disruption, directed at Iranian nuclear facilities by the United States and likely Israel. As reported, it is one of the first known uses of offensive cyber weapons.[52] Starting under the administration of George W. Bush in 2006, the Olympic Games were accelerated under President Obama, who heeded Bush's advice to continue cyber attacks on the Iranian nuclear facility at Natanz.[52] Bush believed that the strategy was the only way to prevent an Israeli conventional strike on Iranian nuclear facilities.[52] During Bush's second term, General James Cartwright along with other intelligence officials presented Bush with a sophisticated code that would act as an offensive cyber weapon. "The goal was to gain access to the Natanz plant's industrial computer controls ... the computer code would invade the specialized computers that command the centrifuges."[52] Collaboration happened with Israel's SIGINT intelligence service, Unit 8200. Israel's involvement was important to the Americans because the former had "deep intelligence about operations at Natanz that would be vital to making the cyber attack a success."[52] Additionally, American officials wanted to "dissuade the Israelis from carrying out their own preemptive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities."[52] To prevent a conventional strike, Israel had to be deeply involved in Operation Olympic Games. The computer virus created by the two countries became known as "the bug," and Stuxnet by the IT community once it became public. The malicious software temporarily halted approximately 1,000 of the 5,000 centrifuges from spinning at Natanz. A programming error in "the bug" caused it to spread to computers outside of Natanz. When an engineer "left Natanz and connected [his] computer to the Internet, the American- and Israeli-made bug failed to recognize that its environment had changed."[52] The code replicated on the Internet and was subsequently exposed for public dissemination. IT security firms Symantec and Kaspersky Lab have since examined Stuxnet. It is unclear whether the Americans or Israelis introduced the programming error. According to the Atlantic Monthly, Operation Olympic Games is "probably the most significant covert manipulation of the electromagnetic spectrum since World War II.[53] The New Yorker claims Operation Olympic Games is "the first formal offensive act of pure cyber sabotage by the United States against another country if you do not count electronic penetrations that have preceded conventional military attacks, such as that of Iraq's military computers before the invasion of 2003."[54] The Washington Post reported that Flame malware was also part of the Olympic Games.[55] Leak investigation In June 2013, it was reported that Cartwright was the target of a year-long investigation by the US Department of Justice into the leak of classified information about the operation to the US media.[56] In March 2015, it was reported that the investigation had stalled amid concerns that necessary evidence for prosecution was too sensitive to reveal in court.[57] Stuxnet Main article: Stuxnet Stuxnet is a malicious computer worm believed to be a jointly built American-Israeli cyber weapon.[58] Although neither state has confirmed this openly,[59] anonymous US officials speaking to The Washington Post claimed the worm was developed during the Obama administration to sabotage Iran’s nuclear program with what would seem like a long series of unfortunate accidents.[60] Stuxnet is typically introduced to the target environment via an infected USB flash drive. The worm then propagates across the network, scanning for Siemens Step7 software on computers controlling a PLC. In the absence of either criterion, Stuxnet becomes dormant inside the computer. If both conditions are fulfilled, Stuxnet introduces the infected rootkit onto the PLC and Step7 software, modifying the codes and giving unexpected commands to the PLC while returning a loop of normal operations system values feedback to the users.[61][62] The worm initially spreads indiscriminately but includes a highly specialized malware payload that is designed to target only Siemens supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) systems that are configured to control and monitor specific industrial processes.[63][64] Stuxnet infects PLCs by subverting the Step-7 software application that is used to reprogram these devices.[65][66] Different variants of Stuxnet targeted five Iranian organizations,[67] with the probable target widely suspected to be uranium enrichment infrastructure in Iran;[66][68][69] Symantec noted in August 2010 that 60% of the infected computers worldwide were in Iran.[70] Siemens stated that the worm has not caused any damage to its customers,[71] but the Iran nuclear program, which uses embargoed Siemens equipment procured secretly, has been damaged by Stuxnet.[72][73] Kaspersky Lab concluded that the sophisticated attack could only have been conducted "with nation-state support".[74] This was further supported by the F-Secure's chief researcher Mikko Hyppönen who commented in a Stuxnet FAQ, "That's what it would look like, yes".[75] On 1 June 2012, an article in The New York Times said that Stuxnet is part of a US and Israeli intelligence operation called "Operation Olympic Games", started under President George W. Bush and expanded under President Barack Obama.[76] On 24 July 2012, an article by Chris Matyszczyk from CNET[77] reported how the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran e-mailed F-Secure's chief research officer Mikko Hyppönen to report a new instance of malware. On 25 December 2012, an Iranian semi-official news agency announced there was a cyberattack by Stuxnet, this time on the industries in the southern area of the country. The virus targeted a power plant and some other industries in Hormozgan province in recent months.[78] A study of the spread of Stuxnet by Symantec showed that the main affected countries in the early days of the infection were Iran, Indonesia and India:[79] Country Share of infected computers Iran 58.85% Indonesia 18.22% India 8.31% Azerbaijan 2.57% United States 1.56% Pakistan 1.28% Other countries 9.2% Iran was reported to have "beefed up" its cyber-war capabilities following the Stuxnet attack and has been suspected of retaliatory attacks against US banks.[80] In a March 2012 interview with CBS News' "60 Minutes", retired USAF General Michael Hayden – who served as director of both the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Agency – while denying knowledge of who created Stuxnet said that he believed it had been "a good idea" but that it carried a downside in that it had legitimized the use of sophisticated cyberweapons designed to cause physical damage. Hayden said, "There are those out there who can take a look at this... and maybe even attempt to turn it to their own purposes". In the same report, Sean McGurk, a former cybersecurity official at the Department of Homeland Security noted that the Stuxnet source code could now be downloaded online and modified to be directed at new target systems. Speaking of the Stuxnet creators, he said, "They opened the box. They demonstrated the capability... It's not something that can be put back."[81] A Wired magazine article about US General Keith B. Alexander stated: "And he and his cyberwarriors have already launched their first attack. The cyberweapon that came to be known as Stuxnet was created and built by the NSA in partnership with the CIA and Israeli intelligence in the mid-2000s."[82] Duqu Main article: Duqu On 1 September 2011, a new worm was found, thought to be related to Stuxnet. The Laboratory of Cryptography and System Security (CrySyS) of the Budapest University of Technology and Economics analyzed the malware, naming the threat "Duqu".[83][84] Symantec, based on this report, continued the analysis of the threat, calling it "nearly identical to Stuxnet, but with a completely different purpose", and published a detailed technical paper.[85] The main component used in Duqu is designed to capture information[86] such as keystrokes and system information. The exfiltrated data may be used to enable a future Stuxnet-like attack. On 28 December 2011, Kaspersky Lab's director of global research and analysis spoke to Reuters about recent research results showing that the platforms Stuxnet and Duqu both originated in 2007, and are being referred to as Tilded due to the ~d at the beginning of the file names. Also uncovered in this research was the possibility of three more variants based on the Tilded platform.[87] Flam Main article: Flame (malware) In May 2012, the new malware "Flame" was found, thought to be related to Stuxnet.[88] Researchers named the program "Flame" after the name of one of its modules.[88] After analyzing the code of Flame, Kaspersky Lab said that there is a strong relationship between Flame and Stuxnet. An early version of Stuxnet contained code to propagate infections via USB drives that are nearly identical to a Flame module that exploits the same vulnerability.[89] Stars Main article: Stars virus The Stars virus is a computer virus that infects computers running Microsoft Windows. It was named and discovered by Iranian authorities in April 2011. Iran claimed it was used as a tool to commit espionage.[90][91] Western researchers came to believe it is probably the same thing as the Duqu virus, part of the Stuxnet attack on Iran. Abandoned spies In September 2022, Reuters reported that the United States had employed websites disguised as fan pages focused on subjects such as Iranian soccer (Iraniangoals.com) or Johnny Carson to communicate with spies.[92] These sites used fake search bars, which upon the entry of a password, would convert to a page upon which the spy could communicate with the CIA.[92] These sites were poorly built, and their secretive functions were not well-disguised.[92] Reuters reported that this led to the imprisonment of spies such as Gholamreza Hosseini, an engineer.[92] Hosseini was jailed for almost a decade, and did not hear from the CIA after release.[92] See also Manufactured Crisis: The Untold Story of the Iran Nuclear Scare The CIA Insider's Guide to the Iran Crisis References Operation Ajax | TAKEN HOSTAGE | AMERICAN EXPERIENCE | PBS, retrieved 2024-01-20 "Operation Ajax | TAKEN HOSTAGE | AMERICAN EXPERIENCE | PBS". Retrieved 2024-01-20. "CIA Confirms Role in 1953 Iran Coup". nsarchive2.gwu.edu. Retrieved 2024-01-20. Wilber, Donald N.; Emmanuel Andrew Maldonado (April 16, 2000). Overthrow of Premier Mossadeq of Iran (PDF). The New York Times. Johnson, Anthony. "Operation Ajax: Iran and the CIA Coup in 1953 Pt. 1/2". Youtube. Retrieved 2016-06-17. PDF "Anti-Tudeh Activities of Zahedi Government" (PDF). Retrieved 17 June 2016. CIA. "CAMPAIGN TO INSTALL PRO-WESTERN GOVERNMENT IN IRAN" (PDF). Retrieved 17 June 2016. Wilber, Dr. Donald (March 1954). "CIA, Clandestine Services History, Overthrow of Premier Mossadeq of Iran: November 1952-August 1953" (PDF). CIA Records – via The National Security Archive. "Summary" (PDF). nsarchive.gwu.edu. Retrieved 17 June 2016. Summary Johnson, Anthony. "Operation Ajax: Iran and the CIA Coup in 1953". YouTube. Retrieved 17 June 2016. 20communicators "CIA Propaganda in Iran - Mossadeq's Spy Service". Abrahamian, Ervand (2021). Oil Crisis in Iran: From Nationalism to Coup d'Etat. Cambridge University Press. p. 129. ISBN 9781108837491. "Campaign to Install Pro-Western Government In Iran" (PDF). National Security Archive. 1954. Archived from the original (PDF) on May 4, 2023. Retrieved January 19, 2024. History of U.S. Intervention in Iran - 1953 Until Present, retrieved 2024-01-20 Roosevelt, Kermit. "Memo" (PDF). History of U.S. Intervention in Iran - 1953 Until Present, retrieved 2024-01-20 "Exchange of Messages Between the President and Prime Minister Mossadegh on the Oil Situation and the Problem of Aid to Iran July 9, 1953". Archived from the original on November 14, 2021. Retrieved June 17, 2016. http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB435/docs/Doc%205%20-%201953-07-14%20Re%20impact%20Eisenhower%20letter.pdf [bare URL PDF] Capuchin (21 September 2008). "U.S. and Them: Operation Ajax - Iran and the CIA coup (2/2)". Retrieved 18 September 2016 – via YouTube. "Summary" (PDF). U.S. and Them: Operation Ajax - Iran and the CIA coup (2/2), retrieved 2024-01-19 "Prepared statement for after coup" (PDF). US Government. "History of U.S. Intervention in Iran - 1953 Until Present". Youtube. Retrieved 17 June 2016. Johnson, Anthony. "U.S. and Them: Operation Ajax - Iran and the CIA coup". Youtube. Retrieved 17 June 2016. The Crisis of Secular Politics and the Rise of Political Islam in Iran by Ali Mirsepassi-Ashtiani Social Text No. 38 (Spring, 1994), pp. 51-84 Published by: Duke University Press "Religion and Politics in Iran". Archived from the original on 2021-11-14. Retrieved 2016-06-17. "CIA Confirms Role in 1953 Iran Coup". Retrieved 18 September 2016. Ghazvinian, J. H. (2021). The Final Emperor. In America and Iran: A history, 1720 to the present. essay, Vintage Books, a division of Penguin Random House LLC. pp. 258–258. "Project Ibex and Project Dark Gene". www.spyflight.co.uk. Retrieved 2016-06-17. "The Leadership of Iran About the External Security of the Country" (PDF). nsarchive. Archived from the original (PDF) on November 14, 2021. Retrieved June 6, 2016. "Iran: The Tudeh Party Since the Revolution--An Intelligence Assessment" (PDF). CIA.gov. January 9, 1981. Archived (PDF) from the original on 20 January 2024. Retrieved 20 January 2024. Beinin, Joel & Joe Stork (1997). "On the Modernity, Historical Specificity, and International Context of Political Islam". In Joel Beinin & Joe Stork (Eds.), Political Islam: Essays from the Middle East Report. Berkeley: University of California Press. p. 11. ISBN 978-0-520-20448-5. cf. Tower, John; Muskie, Edmund; Scowcroft, Brent (1987). Report of the President's Special Review Board. Bantam Books. p. 104. ISBN 9780553269680. "In 1983, the U.S. helped bring to the attention of Tehran the threat inherent in the extensive infiltration of the government by the communist Tudeh Party and Soviet or pro-Soviet cadres in the country. Using this information, the Khomeini government took measures, including mass executions, that virtually eliminated the pro-Soviet infrastructure in Iran." Available online here. Walsh, Lawrence (1993-08-04). "Vol. I: Investigations and prosecutions". Final report of the independent counsel for Iran/Contra matters. Independent Counsel appointed by the United States Department of Justice. History of U.S. Intervention in Iran - 1953 Until Present, retrieved 2024-01-21 Woodward, Bob (1987). VEIL: The Secret Wars of the CIA 1981-1987. New York: Simon and Schuster. Weiner, Tim (2008). Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA. New York: Anchor Books. pages 466-467. History of U.S. Intervention in Iran - 1953 Until Present, retrieved 2024-01-21 "International Court of Justice". Archived from the original on 2015-03-01. Retrieved 2016-06-17. Goss, Porter (16 February 2005). "Global Intelligence Challenges 2005". Archived from the original on 2 December 2008. Retrieved 28 April 2008. "Iran". The World Fact Book. US State Department. Archived from the original on 30 May 2016. Retrieved 17 June 2016. Perry, Mark (2012-01-13). "False Flag". Foreign Policy. Retrieved 2016-10-16. Risen, James; Apuzzo, Matt (2014-11-08). "Getting Close to Terror, but Not to Stop It". The New York Times. Retrieved 2016-10-16. "USA v. Sterling 10 CIA Exhibits on Merlin Ruse" (PDF). Central Intelligence Agency. 2015-01-14. Retrieved 2015-01-17. Risen, James (2006-01-03). State of War : The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration. Free Press. ISBN 978-0-7432-7066-3. Borger, Julian (2006-01-05). "US blunder aided Iran's atomic aims, book claims". London: Guardian Unlimited. Archived from the original on 2012-10-25. Retrieved 2010-05-20. Harlow, William R. (2015-01-16). "USA v. Sterling Exhibits 105-108 Risen-CIA Logs" (PDF). Central Intelligence Agency. Retrieved 2015-01-17. Risen, James (2006-01-05). "George Bush insists that Iran must not be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. So why, six years ago, did the CIA give the Iranians blueprints to build a bomb?". London: Guardian Unlimited. Archived from the original on 2014-04-01. Retrieved 2010-05-20. Sanger, David (1 June 2012). "Obama Order Sped Up Wave of Cyberattacks Against Iran". The New York Times. Retrieved 19 October 2012. President Barack Obama “secretly ordered increasingly sophisticated attacks on the computer systems that run Iran's main nuclear enrichment facilities, significantly expanding America's first sustained use of cyber weapons� Ambinder, Marc (5 June 2012). "Did America's Cyber Attack on Iran Make Us More Vulnerable". The Atlantic. Retrieved 19 October 2012. Coll, Steve (7 June 2012). "The Rewards (and Risks) of Cyber War". The New Yorker. Retrieved 19 October 2012. Nakashima, Ellen (June 19, 2012). "U.S., Israel developed Flame computer virus to slow Iranian nuclear efforts, officials say". The Washington Post. Retrieved June 20, 2012. Pete Yost (June 28, 2013). "Reports: Retired general target of leaks probe". Associated Press. Archived from the original on February 16, 2015. Retrieved June 28, 2013. Ellen Nakashima and Adam Goldman (March 10, 2015). "Leak investigation stalls amid fears of confirming U.S.-Israel operation". Associated Press. Retrieved April 21, 2016. "Confirmed: US and Israel created Stuxnet, lost control of it". Ars Technica. June 2012. Razvan, Bogdan. "Win32.Worm.Stuxnet.A". Retrieved 28 March 2014. Ellen Nakashima (2 June 2012). "Stuxnet was work of U.S. and Israeli experts, officials say". The Washington Post. "A Declaration of Cyber-War". Vanity Fair. April 2011. "Exploring Stuxnet's PLC Infection Process". Symantec. 23 Jan 2014. Nicolas Falliere (6 August 2010). "Stuxnet Introduces the First Known Rootkit for Industrial Control Systems". Symantec. Archived from the original on August 20, 2010. "Iran's Nuclear Agency Trying to Stop Computer Worm". Tehran. Associated Press. 25 September 2010. Archived from the original on 25 September 2010. Retrieved 25 September 2010. Gregg Keizer (16 September 2010). "Is Stuxnet the 'best' malware ever?". InfoWorld. Retrieved 16 September 2010. Steven Cherry; with Ralph Langner (13 October 2010). "How Stuxnet Is Rewriting the Cyberterrorism Playbook". IEEE Spectrum. "Stuxnet Virus Targets and Spread Revealed". BBC News. 15 February 2011. Retrieved 17 February 2011. "Iran Country Profile". BBC News. 16 August 2011. Retrieved 8 August 2012. Beaumont, Claudine (23 September 2010). "Stuxnet virus: worm 'could be aimed at high-profile Iranian targets'". London: The Daily Telegraph. Retrieved 28 September 2010. MacLean, William (24 September 2010). "UPDATE 2-Cyber attack appears to target Iran-tech firms". Reuters. ComputerWorld (14 September 2010). "Siemens: Stuxnet worm hit industrial systems". Computerworld. Retrieved 3 October 2010. "Iran Confirms Stuxnet Worm Halted Centrifuges". CBS News. 29 November 2010. Ethan Bronner; William J. Broad (29 September 2010). "In a Computer Worm, a Possible Biblical Clue". The New York Times. Retrieved 2 October 2010."Software smart bomb fired at Iranian nuclear plant: Experts". Economictimes.indiatimes.com. 24 September 2010. Retrieved 28 September 2010. "Kaspersky Lab provides its insights on Stuxnet worm". Kaspersky. Russia. 24 September 2010. "Stuxnet Questions and Answers – F-Secure Weblog". F-Secure. Finland. 1 October 2010. Sanger, David E. (1 June 2012). "Obama Order Sped Up Wave of Cyberattacks Against Iran". The New York Times. Retrieved 1 June 2012. Matyszczyk, Chris (24 July 2012). "Thunderstruck! A tale of malware, AC/DC, and Iran's nukes". CNET. Retrieved 8 July 2013. "Iran 'fends off new Stuxnet cyber attack'". BBC News. 25 December 2012. Retrieved 28 May 2015. "W32.Stuxnet". Symantec. 17 September 2010. Archived from the original on August 21, 2010. Retrieved 2 March 2011. "Iran denies hacking into American banks Archived 2015-09-24 at the Wayback Machine" Reuters, 23 September 2012 Kroft, Steve (4 March 2012). "Stuxnet: Computer worm opens new era of warfare". 60 Minutes (CBS News). Retrieved 9 March 2012. James Balford (12 June 2013). "THE SECRET WAR". Wired. Retrieved 2 June 2014. "Duqu: A Stuxnet-like malware found in the wild, technical report" (PDF). Laboratory of Cryptography of Systems Security (CrySyS). 14 October 2011. "Statement on Duqu's initial analysis". Laboratory of Cryptography of Systems Security (CrySyS). 21 October 2011. Archived from the original on 4 October 2012. Retrieved 25 October 2011. "W32.Duqu – The precursor to the next Stuxnet (Version 1.2)" (PDF). Symantec. 20 October 2011. Archived from the original (PDF) on December 13, 2011. Retrieved 25 October 2011. Steven Cherry; with Larry Constantine (14 December 2011). "Sons of Stuxnet". IEEE Spectrum. Jim Finkle (28 December 2011). "Stuxnet weapon has at least 4 cousins: researchers". Reuters. Archived from the original on 24 September 2015. Retrieved 28 June 2016. Zetter, Kim (28 May 2012). "Meet 'Flame,' The Massive Spy Malware Infiltrating Iranian Computers". Wired. Archived from the original on 30 May 2012. Retrieved 29 May 2012. "Resource 207: Kaspersky Lab Research Proves that Stuxnet and Flame Developers are Connected". Kaspersky Lab. 11 June 2012. Military.com. "Military Daily News - Military.com". Retrieved 18 September 2016. Iran target of new cyber attack Schectman, Joel; Sharafedin, Bozorgmehr (29 September 2022). "How the CIA failed Iranian spies in its secret war with Tehran". Reuters. Retrieved 30 September 2022. vte CIA activities in Asia Afghanistan Cambodia China India Indonesia Iran Iraq Japan Laos Myanmar North Korea Pakistan Philippines Syria Turkey Vietnam Yemen vte Central Intelligence Agency United States Intelligence Community (CIA Headquarters: George Bush Center for Intelligence, Langley, Virginia) Organization History Directorate of Analysis Directorate of Science & Technology Directorate of Operations (Special Activities Center, National Resources Division) Directorate of Support Operations Support Branch Geographic activities Americas Russia and Europe Africa Asia Transnational activities Alleged drug trafficking (Involvement in Contra cocaine trafficking) Arms control, WMD, and proliferation Black sites Controversies Counterterrorism Crime and illicit drug trade Health and economy Human rights violations Influence on public opinion Directors William J. Donovan (OSS) Sidney Souers Hoyt Vandenberg Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter Walter Bedell Smith Allen Dulles John A. McCone William Raborn Richard Helms James R. Schlesinger William Colby George H. W. Bush Stansfield Turner William J. Casey William H. Webster Robert Gates R. James Woolsey Jr. John M. Deutch George Tenet Porter Goss Michael Hayden Leon Panetta David Petraeus John Brennan Mike Pompeo Gina Haspel William J. Burns Major international operations Operation Ajax Operation PBSuccess Secret War 1960 U-2 incident Congo Crisis Bay of Pigs Invasion Operation Mongoose Phoenix Program Operation Rubicon United States intervention in Chile Operation Cyclone Iran–Contra affair Drone strikes in Pakistan Operation Neptune Spear Timber Sycamore Notable works The Invisible Government (1964) All the Shah's Men (2003) Ghost Wars (2004) Overthrow (2006) Legacy of Ashes (2007) The Unexpected Spy (2019) CIA activities by country Afghanistan Angola Brazil Cambodia Canada Chad Chile China Colombia Cuba DRC France Guatemala Honduras Hungary India Indonesia Iran Iraq Italy Japan Laos Libya Myanmar Nicaragua North Korea Pakistan Peru Philippines Somalia Soviet Union Sudan Syria Turkey United Kingdom USA Vietnam Yemen Official reports by the U.S. Government on the CIA Project MKUltra vte Iran Iran–United States relations United States Diplomatic posts Embassy of Iran, Washington, D.C. Ambassadors of Iran to the United States Embassy of the United States, Tehran Ambassadors of the United States to Iran Interests Section of Iran in the United States Consulate-General of the United States, Tabriz Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs Iran–United States Claims Tribunal Iranian Directorate Iran Syria Policy and Operations Group Diplomacy Persian Corridor Persian Gulf Command Nationalization of the Iranian oil industry 1953 Iranian coup d'état Abadan Crisis Timeline Treaty of Amity, Economic Relations and Consular Rights Exercise Delawar Project Dark Gene Safari Club Island of Stability Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's letter to George W. Bush Correspondence between Barack Obama and Ali Khamenei Phone conversation between Barack Obama and Hassan Rouhani Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action Negotiations Joint Plan of Action Framework Reactions Criticism Aftermath U.S. withdrawal Conflicts Iran–Iraq War United States support for Iraq Bridgeton incident Iran Air Flight 655 Iran Ajr Iran–Contra affair Operation Staunch Operation Eager Glacier Operation Earnest Will Operation Prime Chance Operation Nimble Archer Operation Praying Mantis Syrian civil war Yemeni Civil War Arab–Israeli alliance against Iran Abraham Accords February 2019 Warsaw Conference Iran–Israel proxy conflict Iran–Saudi Arabia proxy conflict Russia–Syria–Iran–Iraq coalition International Maritime Security Construct Assassination of Qasem Soleimani reactions Thirteen revenge scenarios Donald Trump's threat for the destruction of Iranian cultural sites Operation Martyr Soleimani 2020 Camp Taji attacks Incidents after 1979 Assassination of Paul R. Shaffer and John H. Turner Iranian Revolution Iran hostage crisis Timeline Guadeloupe Conference Operation Credible Sport Operation Eagle Claw Canadian Caper Jimmy Carter's engagement with Ruhollah Khomeini 1980 October Surprise theory Negotiations Algiers Accords America can't do a damn thing against us Beirut barracks bombings Khobar Towers bombing Lawrence Franklin espionage scandal Disappearance of Robert Levinson United States kill or capture strategy in Iraq United States raid on the Iranian Liaison Office in Erbil Kidnapping of Jalal Sharafi 2008 Naval dispute Filipino Monkey Project Cassandra Detention of American hikers United States diplomatic cables leak 2011 alleged Iran assassination plot Strait of Hormuz dispute RQ-170 incident MV Maersk Tigris 2016 Naval incident Nuclear program of Iran Timeline P5+1 Operation Merlin Charming Kitten Stuxnet Kidnapping of Hossein Alikhani Arrest of Meng Wanzhou Deportation of Iranian students at US airports May 2019 Gulf of Oman incident June 2019 Gulf of Oman incident 2019 Iranian shoot-down of American drone 2019 K-1 Air Base attack December 2019 United States airstrikes in Iraq and Syria Attack on the United States embassy in Baghdad 2020 Iran explosions 2021 Erbil rocket attacks 2021 Natanz incident February 2021 United States airstrike in Syria Leaked Mohammad Javad Zarif audiotape June 2021 United States airstrike in Syria July 2021 Gulf of Oman incident August 2021 Gulf of Oman incident 2021 U.S.–Iran naval incident 2022 Erbil missile attacks 2023 Northeastern Syria clashes Seizure of Suez Rajan and St Nikolas Attacks on U.S. bases in Iraq, Jordan, and Syria (2023–present) 2024 Erbil attack Tower 22 drone attack Legislation United States sanctions against Iran Maximum pressure campaign Executive Order 12170 Executive Order 12172 Executive Order 13769 reactions Trump travel ban Executive Order 13780 Executive Order 13876 Iran and Libya Sanctions Act Iran Nonproliferation Act Iran, North Korea, Syria Nonproliferation Act Iran Freedom and Support Act Iran Sanctions Enhancement Act Kyl–Lieberman Amendment Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act Iran Freedom and Counter-Proliferation Act Public Law 113-100 Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act Dames & Moore v. Regan United States Diplomatic and Consular Staff in Tehran Oil Platforms case United States v. Banki Bank Markazi v. Peterson Certain Iranian Assets Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran Alleged violations of Treaty of Amity Groups and individuals Iran Action Group Iran–America Society Iranian Students Association in the United States National Iranian American Council Organization of Iranian American Communities Public Affairs Alliance of Iranian Americans United Against Nuclear Iran Farashgard Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Jundallah Kingdom Assembly of Iran National Council of Iran National Council of Resistance of Iran People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran Elliott Abrams Howard Baskerville William J. Fallon Brian Hook Joseph Macmanus Robert Malley Stephen D. Mull Jon Pattis Erwin David Rabhan Jason Rezaian Scott Ritter Craig Wadsworth Michael R. White Roxana Saberi Saeed Abedini Saeid Aboutaleb Shahram Amiri Sirous Asgari Mahmoud Reza Banki Haleh Esfandiari Amir Mirza Hekmati Ezedin Abdel Aziz Khalil Shahrzad Mirgholikhan Mohammad Hosseini Esha Momeni Mohammad Mosaddegh Baquer Namazi Siamak Namazi Sahar Nowrouzzadeh Reza Pahlavi, Crown Prince of Iran Noor Pahlavi Trita Parsi Maryam Rajavi Abdolreza Shahlaei Ali Shakeri Masoud Soleimani Morad Tahbaz Kian Tajbakhsh Karan Vafadari Xiyue Wang Nizar Zakka Iranian Guantanamo Bay detainees Abdul Majid Muhammed Related 1998 FIFA World Cup match Academic relations between Iran and the United States American Islam Anti-American sentiment in Iran Axis of evil CIA activities in Iran Copyright relations Death to America Dual containment Great Satan International Conference on Hollywoodism Iran and state-sponsored terrorism Iranian frozen assets Opposition to military action against Iran State Sponsor of Terrorism United States involvement in regime change United States and state-sponsored terrorism 650 Fifth Avenue Alavi Foundation Alborz High School American Institute of Iranian Studies American School of Isfahan Community School, Tehran Damavand College Iran Bethel School Iranzamin School Saint Peter Church, Tehran Tehran American School "Bomb Iran" Overthrow Not for the Faint of Heart Category Categories: Iranian Revolution Politics of Iran CIA activities in Iran Iran–United States relations SAVAK Ministry of Intelligence (Iran)

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ John Henry Faulk (August 21, 1913 – April 9, 1990) was an American storyteller and radio show host. His successful lawsuit against the entertainment industry helped to bring an end to the Hollywood blacklist. Early life John Henry Faulk was born in Austin, Texas, to Methodist parents Henry Faulk and his wife Martha Miner Faulk. John Henry had four siblings.[1][2] Faulk spent his childhood years in Austin in the noted Victorian house Green Pastures. A journalist acquaintance from Austin has written that the two of them came from "extremely similar family backgrounds – the old Southern wealth with rich heritage and families dedicated to civil rights long before it was hip to fight racism."[3] Education and military service Faulk enrolled at the University of Texas in Austin in 1932. He became a protégé of J. Frank Dobie, Walter Prescott Webb, Roy Bedichek, and Mody C. Boatright, enabling Faulk to hone his skills as a folklorist. He earned a master's degree in folklore with his thesis "Ten Negro Sermons". He further began to craft his oratory style as a part-time English teacher at the university 1940–1942, relating Texas folk tales peppered with his gift of character impersonations.[2][4] He was initially unfit for service with the United States Army because of an eye problem. Instead, Faulk joined the Merchant Marine in 1942 for a one-year stint,[3] spending 1943 in Cairo, Egypt, serving the American Red Cross. World War II had caused the United States Army to relax its enlistment standards, and Faulk finally enlisted in 1944. He served as a medic at Camp Swift, Texas.[2] During this period, Faulk also joined the American Civil Liberties Union.[4] Career While a soldier at Camp Swift, Faulk began writing his own radio scripts. An acquaintance facilitated an interview for him at WCBS in New York City. The network executives were sufficiently impressed to offer him his own radio show. Upon his 1946 discharge from the Army, Faulk began his Johnny's Front Porch radio show for WCBS. The show featured Faulk's characterizations that he had been developing since his university years.[4][5] Faulk eventually went to another radio station, but returned to WCBS for a four-hour morning talk show. The John Henry Faulk Show ran for six years.[6] His radio successes provided opportunity for him to appear as himself on television, in shows including the 1951 Mark Goodson and William Todman game show It's News to Me, hosted by John Charles Daly.[7][8] He also appeared on Leave It to the Girls in 1953 and The Name's the Same in 1955.[9] Cactus Pryor met Faulk in the studios of KLBJ (then KTBC) where Faulk stopped by to thank Pryor for letting his mother hear his New York show. Pryor had been "accidentally" broadcasting Faulk's radio show in Texas where Faulk was not otherwise heard. Although the broadcast happened repeatedly, Pryor always claimed he just hit the wrong button in the studio. Pryor visited Faulk at a Manhattan apartment he shared with Alan Lomax and became introduced to the movers and shakers of the East Coast celebrity scene of that era. When Pryor stood by Faulk during the blacklisting and tried to find him work, Pryor's children were harassed, a prominent Austin physician circulated a letter questioning Pryor's patriotism, and an Austin attorney tried to convince Lyndon B. Johnson to discharge Pryor from the airwaves. The Pryor family and the Faulk family remained close and supportive of each other for the rest of Faulk's life.[10][11] In December 1955, Faulk was elected second vice president of the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA). Orson Bean was the first vice president and Charles Collingwood was the president of the union.[12] Collingwood, Bean, and Faulk were part of a middle-of-the-road slate of non-communist, anti-AWARE organization candidates that Faulk had helped draft. Twenty-seven of thirty-five vacant seats on the board went to the middle-of-the-road slate.[13] Faulk's public position during the campaign had been that the union should be focused on jobs and security, not blacklisting of members.[3][14] In the 1970s in Austin, he was also befriended by the young co-editor of the Texas Observer, Molly Ivins, and became an early supporter of hers.[15] Blacklist controversy Faulk's radio career at CBS[3] ended in 1957, a victim of the Cold War and the blacklisting of the 1950s. AWARE, Inc., a for-profit corporation inspired by Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy, offered a "clearance" service to major media advertisers and radio and television networks; for a fee, AWARE would investigate the backgrounds of entertainers for signs of Communist sympathy or affiliation. In 1955, Faulk earned the ill will of the blacklisting organization when other members and he wrested control of their union, the AFTRA, from officers backed by AWARE. In reprisal, AWARE labeled Faulk a communist.[16] When he discovered that AWARE was actively keeping radio stations from offering him employment, Faulk sought compensation. Several prominent radio personalities along with CBS News vice president Edward R. Murrow supported Faulk's attempt to put an end to blacklisting. With financial backing from Murrow, Faulk engaged New York attorney Louis Nizer. Attorneys for AWARE, including McCarthy-committee counsel Roy Cohn, managed to stall the suit, originally filed in 1957, for five years. When the trial finally concluded in a New York courtroom, the jury had determined that Faulk should receive more compensation than he sought in his original petition. On June 28, 1962, the jury awarded him the largest libel judgment in history to that date — $3.5 million.[16] An appeals court lowered the amount to $500,000. Legal fees and accumulated debts erased most of the balance of the award.[16] He netted some $75,000.[17] Faulk's book, Fear on Trial, published in 1963, tells the story of the experience. The book was remade into an Emmy Award-winning TV movie in 1975 by CBS Television with William Devane portraying Faulk and George C. Scott playing Faulk's lawyer, Louis Nizer. Other supporters in the blacklist struggle included radio pioneer and Wimberley, Texas, native Parks Johnson, and reporter and CBS television news anchor Walter Cronkite.[3] Personal life and death In 1940, John Henry Faulk and Harriet Elizabeth ("Hally") Wood, a music student at the University of Texas Fine Arts School, were married, six weeks after they met.[4] The marriage ended in divorce in 1947; the couple had one daughter, Cynthia Tannehill. In 1948, Faulk and New Yorker Lynne Smith were married some six weeks after they met. That marriage also ended in divorce because of fallout from the blacklisting upheaval. Faulk and Smith had two daughters, Johanna and Evelyn, and one son, Frank Dobie Faulk.[18] In 1965, Faulk and Elizabeth Peake were married; they had one son, John Henry Faulk III.[2] John Henry Faulk died in Austin of cancer on April 9, 1990, and is interred there at Oakwood Cemetery. Austin restaurateur Mary Faulk Koock (1910–1996) was Faulk's sister.[19] Awards and tributes (1980) "The Ballad of John Henry Faulk", by artist Phil Ochs, is on his album The Broadside Tapes 1, Folkways Records.[20] (1983) Faulk was the recipient of a Paul Robeson Award, which recognizes exemplification of principles by which Paul Robeson lived his life.[21] (1995) John Henry Faulk Public Library, the main branch of the Austin Public Library, originally named Central Library when constructed in 1979, was renamed to honor Faulk.[22] The John Henry Faulk Award, Tejas Storytelling Association, is presented annually in Denton, Texas, to the individual who has made a significant contribution to the art of storytelling in the Southwest.[23] Film and television credits Film All the Way Home (1963) – Walter Starr The Best Man (1964) – Governor T.T. Claypoole Lovin' Molly (1974) – Mr. Grinsom The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974) – Storyteller Leadbelly (1976) – Governor Neff Trespasses (1986) – Doctor Silver (final film role) Television It's News to Me (1951–1954) – Self Leave It to the Girls (Oct 3, 1953) – Self The Name's the Same (Feb 21, 1955) – Self For the People (1965) – Reynolds Fear on Trial (1975) – Writer, biographical film of John Henry Faulk Hee Haw (1975–1982) – Self Adam (1983) – Strom Thurmond Cronkite Remembers (1997) – Uncredited archive footage Discography John Henry Faulk, recordings of Negro religious services. Part 1 [sound recording] (July 1941) 47 sound discs : analog, 33 1/3 and 78 rpm; 12 in. John Henry Faulk recordings of Negro religious services. Part 2 [sound recording] (Aug–Sept 1941) 42 sound discs : analog, 33 1/3 rpm; 12 in. John Henry Faulk Texas recordings collection [sound recording] (Oct–Nov 1941) 33 sound discs : analog, 33 1/3 rpm; 12 in. John Henry Faulk collection of Texas prison songs [sound recording] (1942) 10 sound discs : analog, 78 rpm; 12 in. + documentation. John Henry Faulk and others, "Man-on-the-Street" interviews collection [sound recording] (1941) 6 sound discs : analog; 16 in.; 15 sound discs : analog; 12 in. American people speak on the war [sound recording] (1941) 1 sound disc (ca. 15 min.) : analog, 33 1/3 rpm; 16 in. The people speak to the president, or, Dear, Mr. President [sound recording] (1942) 1 sound disc : analog, 33 1/3 rpm; 16 in. CBS news with Stuart Metz.[sound recording]. (May 13, 1957) 1 sound tape reel (5 min.) : analog, 7 1/2 ips, full track, mono.; 7 in John Henry Faulk show (May 13, 1957) 1 sound tape reel (25 min.) : analog, 7 1/2 ips, full track, mono.; 7 in Blacklist: a failure in political imagination [Sound recording] (1960) reel. 7 in. 3 3/4 ips. 1/2 track. cassette. 2 1/2 × 4 in Help unsell the war. American report [sound recording] (1972) 1 sound disc : analog, 33 1/3 rpm; 12 in Selected radio programs from The Larry King show [sound recording] (1982–1985) 116 sound cassettes : analog African-American Slave Audio Recordings (2008) Radio appearances and speeches Faulk recorded his "Christmas Story" in 1974 for the NPR program Voices in the Wind. Faulk made speeches on the First Amendment and civil rights for many colleges and universities. Bibliography Faulk, John Henry (1940). Quickened by De Spurit; Ten Negro Sermons. Faulk, John Henry (1983) [1964]. Fear on Trial. Reprint. University of Texas Press. ISBN 978-0-292-72442-6. Faulk, John Henry (1983). The Uncensored John Henry Faulk. Texas Monthly Press. ISBN 978-0-87719-013-4. Faulk, John Henry (1987). To Secure the Blessings of Liberty. Univ of Texas Press. ISBN 978-0-292-78095-8. Plays Deep in the Heart (one-man play) Pear Orchard, Texas (one-man play) Further reading "John Henry Faulk Papers". Dolph Briscoe Center for American History, The University of Texas at Austin. Retrieved October 30, 2013. Gerard, Jeremy (April 10, 1990). "John Henry Faulk, 76, Dies; Humorist Who Challenged Blacklist". The New York Times. Retrieved February 1, 2011. Nizer, Louis (1966). The Jury Returns. Doubleday & Company Inc. Burton, Michael C. John Henry Faulk: The Making of a Liberated Mind: A Biography. Austin: Eakin Press, 1993. ISBN 0-89015-923-8 Moyers, Bill (1990). A World of Ideas II. Main Street Books. ISBN 978-0-385-41665-8. Drake, Chris (2007). You Gotta Stand Up: The Life and High Times of John Henry Faulk. Cambridge Scholars Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84718-164-0. Biography portalRadio portaliconTelevision portaliconComedy portalflagTexas portal References "Texana Faulk Conn". 4 Hearing Loss. Archived from the original on July 7, 2011. Retrieved January 31, 2011. Foshee, Page S. "John Henry Faulk". Handbook of Texas Online. Texas State Historical Association. Retrieved January 31, 2011. "As Faulk learned, Cronkite was giving behind the scenes" by Charles McClure, Lake Travis [TX] View, July 29, 2009. Retrieved December 26, 2009. McClure writes that his own father shared the same professors with Faulk at UT. Lief, Caldwell (2004) p.122 Lief, Caldwell (2004) p.109 Lief, Caldwell (2004) p.123 McDermott, Mark. "Mark Goodson and Bill Todman". The Museum of Broadcast Communications. Archived from the original on May 14, 2013. Retrieved February 1, 2011. Grace, Roger M (February 23, 2003). "TV Anchors Host Game Shows". Metropolitan News Company. Retrieved February 1, 2011. Timberg, Erler (2002) p.232 Pryor, Cactus (March 1992). "He Called Me Puddin'". Texas Monthly: 101, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137. Biffle (1993) p.227 Sterling (2003) p.270 Foerstel (1997) p.77 Smith, Ostroff, Wright (1998) p.60 "Troublemaker" Book review by Lloyd Grove, The New York Times Book Review, December 24, 2009 (December 27, 2009, p. BR17 of NY ed.). Book reviewed: Molly Ivins: A Rebel Life by Bill Minutaglio and W. Michael Smith, illustrated, 335 pp. PublicAffairs. Ivins, Molly (July–August 1990). "Johnny's Fight". Mother Jones: 8, 9. "Humorist will address United Way volunteers", Minden Press-Herald, Minden, Louisiana, September 19, 1984, p. 2B Gerard, Jeremy (April 10, 1990). "John Henry Faulk, 76, Dies; Humorist Who Challenged Blacklist". The New York Times. Retrieved February 1, 2011. Koock, Mary Faulk (2001). The Texas Cookbook: From Barbecue to Banquet-an Informal View of Dining and Entertaining the Texas Way. University of North Texas Press. p. Back cover. ISBN 978-1-57441-136-2. "The Broadside Tapes 1". Phil Ochs discography. Discogs. Retrieved January 31, 2011. "Paul Robeson Award". Actor's Equity Association. Archived from the original on December 12, 2010. Retrieved January 31, 2011. "John Henry Faulk Public Library". City of Austin. Archived from the original on April 24, 2011. Retrieved January 31, 2011. "Tejas-John Henry Faulk Award". Tejas Storytelling Association. Archived from the original on March 16, 2011. Retrieved February 2, 2011. Additional sourcing Berman, Phillip L (1993). The Search for Meaning: Americans Talk About What They Believe and Why. Ballantine Books. ISBN 978-0-345-37777-7. Biffle, Kent (1993). A Month of Sundays. University of North Texas Press. ISBN 978-0-929398-56-3. Foerstel, Herbert N (1997). Free Expression and Censorship in America: An Encyclopedia. Greenwood. ISBN 978-0-313-29231-6. Smith, F. Leslie; Ostroff, David H; Wright, John W II (1998). Perspectives on Radio and Television: Telecommunication in the United States. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-8058-2092-8. Timberg, Bernard; Erler, Bob (2002). Television Talk: A History of the TV Talk Show. University of Texas Press. ISBN 978-0-292-78176-4. Sterling, Christopher H (2003). Encyclopedia of Radio. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-57958-249-4. Lief, Michael S; Caldwell, Harry M (2004). And the Walls Came Tumbling Down: Greatest Closing Arguments Protecting Civil Liberties. Scribner. ISBN 978-0-7432-4666-8. External links John Henry Faulk: The Making of a Liberated Mind, Eakin Press NPR John Henry Faulk's 'Christmas Story' John Henry Faulk at IMDb The Ballad of John Henry Faulk – lyrics by Phil Ochs Tejas Story Telling John Henry Faulk Award Archived March 16, 2011, at the Wayback Machine Authority control databases Edit this at Wikidata International FAST ISNI VIAF National Germany Israel United States Netherlands Other SNAC IdRef Categories: 1913 births1990 deaths20th-century American male actorsFree speech activistsHollywood blacklistWriters from Austin, TexasBurials at Oakwood Cemetery (Austin, Texas) McCarthyism, also known as the Second Red Scare, was the political repression and persecution of left-wing individuals and a campaign spreading fear of alleged communist and Soviet influence on American institutions and of Soviet espionage in the United States during the late 1940s through the 1950s.[1] After the mid-1950s, U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy, who had spearheaded the campaign, gradually lost his public popularity and credibility after several of his accusations were found to be false.[2][3] The U.S. Supreme Court under Chief Justice Earl Warren made a series of rulings on civil and political rights that overturned several key laws and legislative directives, and helped bring an end to the Second Red Scare.[4][5][6] Historians have suggested since the 1980s that as McCarthy's involvement was less central than that of others, a different and more accurate term should be used instead that more accurately conveys the breadth of the phenomenon, and that the term McCarthyism is, in the modern day, outdated. Ellen Schrecker has suggested that Hooverism, after FBI Head J. Edgar Hoover, is more appropriate.[7] What became known as the McCarthy era began before McCarthy's rise to national fame. Following the breakdown of the wartime East-West alliance with the Soviet Union, and with many remembering the First Red Scare, President Harry S. Truman signed an executive order in 1947 to screen federal employees for possible association with organizations deemed "totalitarian, fascist, communist, or subversive", or advocating "to alter the form of Government of the United States by unconstitutional means." The following year, the Czechoslovak coup by the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia heightened concern in the West about Communist parties seizing power and the possibility of subversion. In 1949, a high-level State Department official was convicted of perjury in a case of espionage, and the Soviet Union tested a nuclear bomb. The Korean War started the next year, significantly raising tensions and fears of impending communist upheavals in the United States. In a speech in February 1950, McCarthy claimed to have a list of members of the Communist Party USA working in the State Department, which attracted substantial press attention, and the term McCarthyism was published for the first time in late March of that year in The Christian Science Monitor, along with a political cartoon by Herblock in The Washington Post. The term has since taken on a broader meaning, describing the excesses of similar efforts to crack down on alleged "subversive" elements. In the early 21st century, the term is used more generally to describe reckless and unsubstantiated accusations of treason and far-left extremism, along with demagogic personal attacks on the character and patriotism of political adversaries. The primary targets for persecution were government employees, prominent figures in the entertainment industry, academics, left-wing politicians, and labor union activists. Suspicions were often given credence despite inconclusive and questionable evidence, and the level of threat posed by a person's real or supposed leftist associations and beliefs were often exaggerated. Many people suffered loss of employment and the destruction of their careers and livelihoods as a result of the crackdowns on suspected communists, and some were outright imprisoned. Most of these reprisals were initiated by trial verdicts that were later overturned,[8] laws that were later struck down as unconstitutional,[9] dismissals for reasons later declared illegal[10] or actionable,[11] and extra-judiciary procedures, such as informal blacklists by employers and public institutions, that would come into general disrepute, though by then many lives had been ruined. The most notable examples of McCarthyism include the investigations of alleged communists that were conducted by Senator McCarthy, and the hearings conducted by the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC). Following the end of the Cold War, unearthed documents revealed substantial Soviet spy activity in the United States, though many of the agents were never properly identified by Senator McCarthy.[12] Origins See also: US Strike wave of 1945–1946 One of the earliest uses of the term McCarthyism was in a cartoon by Herbert Block ("Herblock"), published in The Washington Post, March 29, 1950. President Harry S. Truman's Executive Order 9835 of March 21, 1947, required that all federal civil-service employees be screened for "loyalty". The order said that one basis for determining disloyalty would be a finding of "membership in, affiliation with or sympathetic association" with any organization determined by the attorney general to be "totalitarian, fascist, communist or subversive" or advocating or approving the forceful denial of constitutional rights to other persons or seeking "to alter the form of Government of the United States by unconstitutional means".[13] The historical period that came to be known as the McCarthy era began well before Joseph McCarthy's own involvement in it. Many factors contributed to McCarthyism, some of them with roots in the First Red Scare (1917–20), inspired by communism's emergence as a recognized political force and widespread social disruption in the United States related to unionizing and anarchist activities. Owing in part to its success in organizing labor unions and its early opposition to fascism, and offering an alternative to the ills of capitalism during the Great Depression, the Communist Party of the United States increased its membership through the 1930s, reaching a peak of about 75,000 members in 1940–41.[14] While the United States was engaged in World War II and allied with the Soviet Union, the issue of anti-communism was largely muted. With the end of World War II, the Cold War began almost immediately, as the Soviet Union installed communist puppet régimes in areas it had occupied across Central and Eastern Europe. In a March 1947 address to Congress, Truman enunciated a new foreign policy doctrine that committed the United States to opposing Soviet geopolitical expansion. This doctrine came to be known as the Truman Doctrine, and it guided United States support for anti-communist forces in Greece and later in China and elsewhere.[15] Although the Igor Gouzenko and Elizabeth Bentley affairs had raised the issue of Soviet espionage in 1945, events in 1949 and 1950 sharply increased the sense of threat in the United States related to communism. The Soviet Union tested an atomic bomb in 1949, earlier than many analysts had expected, raising the stakes in the Cold War. That same year, Mao Zedong's communist army gained control of mainland China despite heavy American financial support of the opposing Kuomintang. In 1950, the Korean War began, pitting U.S., U.N., and South Korean forces against communists from North Korea and China. During the following year, evidence of increased sophistication in Soviet Cold War espionage activities was found in the West. In January 1950, Alger Hiss, a high-level State Department official, was convicted of perjury. Hiss was in effect found guilty of espionage; the statute of limitations had run out for that crime, but he was convicted of having perjured himself when he denied that charge in earlier testimony before the HUAC. In Britain, Klaus Fuchs confessed to committing espionage on behalf of the Soviet Union while working on the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos National Laboratory during the War. Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were arrested in 1950 in the United States on charges of stealing atomic-bomb secrets for the Soviets, and were executed in 1953. Other forces encouraged the rise of McCarthyism. The more conservative politicians in the United States had historically referred to progressive reforms, such as child labor laws and women's suffrage, as "communist" or "Red plots", trying to raise fears against such changes.[16] They used similar terms during the 1930s and the Great Depression when opposing the New Deal policies of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. Many conservatives equated the New Deal with socialism or Communism, and thought the policies were evidence of too much influence by allegedly communist policy makers in the Roosevelt administration.[17] In general, the vaguely defined danger of "Communist influence" was a more common theme in the rhetoric of anti-communist politicians than was espionage or any other specific activity. Senator Joseph McCarthy McCarthy's involvement in these issues began publicly with a speech he made on Lincoln Day, February 9, 1950, to the Republican Women's Club of Wheeling, West Virginia. He brandished a piece of paper, which he claimed contained a list of known communists working for the State Department. McCarthy is usually quoted as saying: "I have here in my hand a list of 205—a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department."[18] This speech resulted in a flood of press attention to McCarthy and helped establish his path to becoming one of the most recognized politicians in the United States. The first recorded use of the term "McCarthyism" was in the Christian Science Monitor on March 28, 1950 ("Their little spree with McCarthyism is no aid to consultation").[19] The paper became one of the earliest and most consistent critics of the Senator.[20] The next recorded use happened on the following day, in a political cartoon by Washington Post editorial cartoonist Herbert Block (Herblock). The cartoon depicts four leading Republicans trying to push an elephant (the traditional symbol of the Republican Party) to stand on a platform atop a teetering stack of ten tar buckets, the topmost of which is labeled "McCarthyism". Block later wrote: "Nothing [was] particularly ingenious about the term, which is simply used to represent a national affliction that can hardly be described in any other way. If anyone has a prior claim on it, he's welcome to the word and to the junior senator from Wisconsin along with it. I will also throw in a set of free dishes and a case of soap."[21] Institutions A number of anti-communist committees, panels, and "loyalty review boards" in federal, state, and local governments, as well as many private agencies, carried out investigations for small and large companies concerned about possible Communists in their work forces. In Congress, the primary bodies that investigated Communist activities were the HUAC, the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, and the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations. Between 1949 and 1954, a total of 109 investigations were carried out by these and other committees of Congress.[22] On December 2, 1954, the United States Senate voted 67 to 22[23] to condemn McCarthy for "conduct that tends to bring the Senate into dishonor and disrepute". Executive branch Loyalty-security reviews Executive Order 9835, signed by President Truman in 1947 In the federal government, President Truman's Executive Order 9835 initiated a program of loyalty reviews for federal employees in 1947. It called for dismissal if there were "reasonable grounds ... for belief that the person involved is disloyal to the Government of the United States."[24] Truman, a Democrat, was probably reacting in part to the Republican sweep in the 1946 Congressional election and felt a need to counter growing criticism from conservatives and anti-communists.[25] When President Dwight Eisenhower took office in 1953, he strengthened and extended Truman's loyalty review program, while decreasing the avenues of appeal available to dismissed employees. Hiram Bingham, chairman of the Civil Service Commission Loyalty Review Board, referred to the new rules he was obliged to enforce as "just not the American way of doing things."[26] The following year, J. Robert Oppenheimer, scientific director of the Manhattan Project that built the first atomic bomb, then working as a consultant to the Atomic Energy Commission, was stripped of his security clearance after a four-week hearing. Oppenheimer had received a top-secret clearance in 1947, but was denied clearance in the harsher climate of 1954. Similar loyalty reviews were established in many state and local government offices and some private industries across the nation. In 1958, an estimated one of every five employees in the United States was required to pass some sort of loyalty review.[27] Once a person lost a job due to an unfavorable loyalty review, finding other employment could be very difficult. "A man is ruined everywhere and forever," in the words of the chairman of President Truman's Loyalty Review Board. "No responsible employer would be likely to take a chance in giving him a job."[28] The Department of Justice started keeping a list of organizations that it deemed subversive beginning in 1942. This list was first made public in 1948, when it included 78 groups. At its longest, it comprised 154 organizations, 110 of them identified as Communist. In the context of a loyalty review, membership in a listed organization was meant to raise a question, but not to be considered proof of disloyalty. One of the most common causes of suspicion was membership in the Washington Bookshop Association, a left-leaning organization that offered lectures on literature, classical music concerts, and discounts on books.[29] J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI J. Edgar Hoover in 1961 FBI director J. Edgar Hoover designed President Truman's loyalty-security program, and its background investigations of employees were carried out by FBI agents. This was a major assignment that led to the number of agents in the bureau being increased from 3,559 in 1946 to 7,029 in 1952. Hoover's sense of the communist threat and the standards of evidence applied by his bureau resulted in thousands of government workers losing their jobs. Due to Hoover's insistence upon keeping the identity of his informers secret, most subjects of loyalty-security reviews were not allowed to cross-examine or know the identities of those who accused them. In many cases, they were not even told of what they were accused.[30] Hoover's influence extended beyond federal government employees and beyond the loyalty-security programs. The records of loyalty review hearings and investigations were supposed to be confidential, but Hoover routinely gave evidence from them to congressional committees such as HUAC.[31] From 1951 to 1955, the FBI operated a secret "Responsibilities Program" that distributed anonymous documents with evidence from FBI files of communist affiliations on the part of teachers, lawyers, and others. Many people accused in these "blind memoranda" were fired without any further process.[32] The FBI engaged in a number of illegal practices in its pursuit of information on communists, including burglaries, opening mail, and illegal wiretaps.[33] The members of the left-wing National Lawyers Guild (NLG) were among the few attorneys who were willing to defend clients in communist-related cases, and this made the NLG a particular target of Hoover's; the office of the NLG was burgled by the FBI at least 14 times between 1947 and 1951.[34] Among other purposes, the FBI used its illegally obtained information to alert prosecuting attorneys about the planned legal strategies of NLG defense lawyers.[35][36] The FBI also used illegal undercover operations to disrupt communist and other dissident political groups. In 1956, Hoover was becoming increasingly frustrated by Supreme Court decisions that limited the Justice Department's ability to prosecute communists. At this time, he formalized a covert "dirty tricks" program under the name COINTELPRO.[33] COINTELPRO actions included planting forged documents to create the suspicion that a key person was an FBI informer, spreading rumors through anonymous letters, leaking information to the press, calling for IRS audits, and the like. The COINTELPRO program remained in operation until 1971. Historian Ellen Schrecker calls the FBI "the single most important component of the anti-communist crusade" and writes: "Had observers known in the 1950s what they have learned since the 1970s, when the Freedom of Information Act opened the Bureau's files, 'McCarthyism' would probably be called 'Hooverism'."[37] Allen Dulles and the CIA In March 1950, McCarthy had initiated a series of investigations into potential infiltration of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) by communist agents and came up with a list of security risks that matched one previously compiled by the Agency itself. At the request of CIA director Allen Dulles, President Eisenhower demanded that McCarthy discontinue issuing subpoenas against the CIA. Documents made public in 2004 revealed that the CIA, under Dulles' orders, had broken into McCarthy's Senate office and fed disinformation to him in order to discredit him and stop his investigation from proceeding any further.[38] Congress House Committee on Un-American Activities Main article: House Un-American Activities Committee The House Committee on Un-American Activities (commonly referred to as the HUAC) was the most prominent and active government committee involved in anti-communist investigations. Formed in 1938 and known as the Dies Committee, named for Rep. Martin Dies, who chaired it until 1944, HUAC investigated a variety of "activities", including those of German-American Nazis during World War II. The committee soon focused on communism, beginning with an investigation into communists in the Federal Theatre Project in 1938. A significant step for HUAC was its investigation of the charges of espionage brought against Alger Hiss in 1948. This investigation ultimately resulted in Hiss's trial and conviction for perjury, and convinced many of the usefulness of congressional committees for uncovering communist subversion. HUAC achieved its greatest fame and notoriety with its investigation into the Hollywood film industry. In October 1947, the committee began to subpoena screenwriters, directors, and other movie-industry professionals to testify about their known or suspected membership in the Communist Party, association with its members, or support of its beliefs. At these testimonies, this question was asked: "Are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party of the United States?"[39][40][better source needed] Among the first film industry witnesses subpoenaed by the committee were ten who decided not to cooperate. These men, who became known as the "Hollywood Ten", cited the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech and free assembly, which they believed legally protected them from being required to answer the committee's questions. This tactic failed, and the ten were sentenced to prison for contempt of Congress. Two of them were sentenced to six months, the rest to a year. In the future, witnesses (in the entertainment industries and otherwise) who were determined not to cooperate with the committee would claim their Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination. William Grooper and Rockwell Kent, the only two visual artists to be questioned by McCarthy, both took this approach, and emerged relatively unscathed by the experience.[41] However, while this usually protected witnesses from a contempt-of-Congress citation, it was considered grounds for dismissal by many government and private-industry employers. The legal requirements for Fifth Amendment protection were such that a person could not testify about his own association with the Communist Party and then refuse to "name names" of colleagues with communist affiliations.[42] Thus, many faced a choice between "crawl[ing] through the mud to be an informer," as actor Larry Parks put it, or becoming known as a "Fifth Amendment Communist"—an epithet often used by Senator McCarthy.[43] Senate committees In the Senate, the primary committee for investigating communists was the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (SISS), formed in 1950 and charged with ensuring the enforcement of laws relating to "espionage, sabotage, and the protection of the internal security of the United States". The SISS was headed by Democrat Pat McCarran and gained a reputation for careful and extensive investigations. This committee spent a year investigating Owen Lattimore and other members of the Institute of Pacific Relations. As had been done numerous times before, the collection of scholars and diplomats associated with Lattimore (the so-called China Hands) were accused of "losing China", and while some evidence of pro-communist attitudes was found, nothing supported McCarran's accusation that Lattimore was "a conscious and articulate instrument of the Soviet conspiracy". Lattimore was charged with perjuring himself before the SISS in 1952. After many of the charges were rejected by a federal judge and one of the witnesses confessed to perjury, the case was dropped in 1955.[44] McCarthy headed the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations in 1953 and 1954, and during that time, used it for a number of his communist-hunting investigations. McCarthy first examined allegations of communist influence in the Voice of America, and then turned to the overseas library program of the State Department. Card catalogs of these libraries were searched for works by authors McCarthy deemed inappropriate. McCarthy then recited the list of supposedly pro-communist authors before his subcommittee and the press. Yielding to the pressure, the State Department ordered its overseas librarians to remove from their shelves "material by any controversial persons, Communists, fellow travelers, etc." Some libraries actually burned the newly forbidden books.[45] Though he did not block the State Department from carrying out this order, President Eisenhower publicly criticized the initiative as well, telling the graduating class of Dartmouth College President in 1953: "Don't join the book burners! … Don't be afraid to go to the library and read every book so long as that document does not offend our own ideas of decency—that should be the only censorship."[46] The president then settled for a compromise by retaining the ban on Communist books written by Communists, while also allowing the libraries to keep books on Communism written by anti-Communists.[47] McCarthy's committee then began an investigation into the United States Army. This began at the Army Signal Corps laboratory at Fort Monmouth. McCarthy garnered some headlines with stories of a dangerous spy ring among the Army researchers, but ultimately nothing came of this investigation.[48] McCarthy next turned his attention to the case of a U.S. Army dentist who had been promoted to the rank of major despite having refused to answer questions on an Army loyalty review form. McCarthy's handling of this investigation, including a series of insults directed at a brigadier general, led to the Army–McCarthy hearings, with the Army and McCarthy trading charges and counter-charges for 36 days before a nationwide television audience. While the official outcome of the hearings was inconclusive, this exposure of McCarthy to the American public resulted in a sharp decline in his popularity.[49] In less than a year, McCarthy was censured by the Senate, and his position as a prominent force in anti-communism was essentially ended.[50] Blacklists Main article: Hollywood blacklist On November 25, 1947, the day after the House of Representatives approved citations of contempt for the Hollywood Ten, Eric Johnston, president of the Motion Picture Association of America, issued a press release on behalf of the heads of the major studios that came to be referred to as the Waldorf Statement. This statement announced the firing of the Hollywood Ten and stated: "We will not knowingly employ a Communist or a member of any party or group which advocates the overthrow of the government of the United States..." This marked the beginning of the Hollywood blacklist. In spite of the fact that hundreds were denied employment, the studios, producers, and other employers did not publicly admit that a blacklist existed. At this time, private loyalty review boards and anti-communist investigators began to appear to fill a growing demand among certain industries to certify that their employees were above reproach. Companies that were concerned about the sensitivity of their business, or which, like the entertainment industry, felt particularly vulnerable to public opinion, made use of these private services. For a fee, these teams investigated employees and questioned them about their politics and affiliations. At such hearings, the subject usually did not have a right to the presence of an attorney, and as with HUAC, the interviewee might be asked to defend himself against accusations without being allowed to cross-examine the accuser. These agencies kept cross-referenced lists of leftist organizations, publications, rallies, charities, and the like, as well as lists of individuals who were known or suspected communists. Books such as Red Channels and newsletters such as Counterattack and Confidential Information were published to keep track of communist and leftist organizations and individuals.[51] Insofar as the various blacklists of McCarthyism were actual physical lists, they were created and maintained by these private organizations.[citation needed][further explanation needed] Laws and arrests See also: Smith Act trials of communist party leaders Efforts to protect the United States from the perceived threat of communist subversion were particularly enabled by several federal laws. The Hatch Act of 1939 banned membership in subversive organizations, which was interpreted as being anti-labor legislation.[52] The Hatch Act would allow for the reduction of influence of the Workers' Alliance, which was claimed to have been created by the Soviet Union based on a model of their unemployed councils.[52] The Alien Registration Act or Smith Act of 1940 made the act of "knowingly or willfully advocate, abet, advise or teach the ... desirability or propriety of overthrowing the Government of the United States or of any State by force or violence, or for anyone to organize any association which teaches, advises or encourages such an overthrow, or for anyone to become a member of or to affiliate with any such association" a criminal offense. Hundreds of communists and others were prosecuted under this law between 1941 and 1957. Eleven leaders of the Communist Party were convicted under the Smith Act in 1949 in the Foley Square trial. Ten defendants were given sentences of five years and the eleventh was sentenced to three years. The defense attorneys were cited for contempt of court and given prison sentences.[53] In 1951, 23 other leaders of the party were indicted, including Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, a founding member of the American Civil Liberties Union. Many were convicted on the basis of testimony that was later admitted to be false.[54] By 1957, 140 leaders and members of the Communist Party had been charged under the law, of whom 93 were convicted.[55] The McCarran Internal Security Act, which became law in 1950, has been described by scholar Ellen Schrecker as "the McCarthy era's only important piece of legislation"[56] (the Smith Act technically antedated McCarthyism). However, the McCarran Act had no real effect beyond legal harassment. It required the registration of Communist organizations with the U.S. Attorney General and established the Subversive Activities Control Board to investigate possible communist-action and communist-front organizations so they could be required to register. Due to numerous hearings, delays, and appeals, the act was never enforced, even with regard to the Communist Party of the United States itself, and the major provisions of the act were found to be unconstitutional in 1965 and 1967.[57] In 1952, the Immigration and Nationality, or McCarran–Walter, Act was passed. This law allowed the government to deport immigrants or naturalized citizens engaged in subversive activities and also to bar suspected subversives from entering the country. The Communist Control Act of 1954 was passed with overwhelming support in both houses of Congress after very little debate. Jointly drafted by Republican John Marshall Butler and Democrat Hubert Humphrey, the law was an extension of the Internal Security Act of 1950, and sought to outlaw the Communist Party by declaring that the party, as well as "Communist-Infiltrated Organizations" were "not entitled to any of the rights, privileges, and immunities attendant upon legal bodies." While the Communist Control Act had an odd mix of liberals and conservatives among its supporters, it never had any significant effect. The act was successfully applied only twice. In 1954 it was used to prevent Communist Party members from appearing on the New Jersey state ballot, and in 1960, it was cited to deny the CPUSA recognition as an employer under New York state's unemployment compensation system. The New York Post called the act "a monstrosity", "a wretched repudiation of democratic principles," while The Nation accused Democratic liberals of a "neurotic, election-year anxiety to escape the charge of being 'soft on Communism' even at the expense of sacrificing constitutional rights."[58] Repression in the individual states In addition to the federal laws and responding to the worries of the local opinion, several states enacted anti-communist statutes. By 1952, several states had enacted statutes against criminal anarchy, criminal syndicalism, and sedition; banned communists and "subversives" from public employment, or even from receiving public aid; demanded on loyalty oaths from public servants; and severely restricted or banned the Communist Party. In addition, six states had equivalents to the HUAC.[59] The California Senate Factfinding Subcommittee on Un-American Activities[60] and the Florida Legislative Investigation Committee were established by their respective legislatures. Some of these states had very severe, or even extreme, laws against communism. In 1950, Michigan enacted life imprisonment for subversive propaganda; the following year, Tennessee enacted the death penalty for advocating the violent overthrow of the government.[59] The death penalty for membership in the Communist Party was discussed in Texas by Governor Allan Shivers, who described it as "worse than murder."[61][62] Municipalities and counties also enacted anti-communist ordinances: Los Angeles banned any communist or "Muscovite model of police-state dictatorship" from owning arms, while Birmingham, Alabama and Jacksonville, Florida banned any communist from being within the city's limits.[59] Popular support Flier issued in May 1955 by the Keep America Committee urging readers to "fight communistic world government" by opposing public health programs McCarthyism was supported by a variety of groups, including the American Legion and various other anti-communist organizations. One core element of support was a variety of militantly anti-communist women's groups such as the American Public Relations Forum and the Minute Women of the U.S.A. These organized tens of thousands of housewives into study groups, letter-writing networks, and patriotic clubs that coordinated efforts to identify and eradicate what they saw as subversion.[63] Although right-wing radicals were the bedrock of support for McCarthyism, they were not alone. A broad "coalition of the aggrieved" found McCarthyism attractive, or at least politically useful. Common themes uniting the coalition were opposition to internationalism, particularly the United Nations; opposition to social welfare provisions, particularly the various programs established by the New Deal; and opposition to efforts to reduce inequalities in the social structure of the United States.[64] One focus of popular McCarthyism concerned the provision of public health services, particularly vaccination, mental health care services, and fluoridation, all of which were denounced by some to be communist plots to poison or brainwash the American people. Such viewpoints led to collisions between McCarthyite radicals and supporters of public-health programs, most notably in the case of the Alaska Mental Health Bill controversy of 1956.[65] William F. Buckley Jr., the founder of the influential conservative political magazine National Review, wrote a defense of McCarthy, McCarthy and his Enemies, in which he asserted that "McCarthyism ... is a movement around which men of good will and stern morality can close ranks."[66] In addition, as Richard Rovere points out, many ordinary Americans became convinced that there must be "no smoke without fire" and lent their support to McCarthyism. The Gallup poll found that at his peak in January 1954, 50% of the American public supported McCarthy, while 29% had an unfavorable opinion. His support fell to 34% in June 1954.[67] Republicans tended to like what McCarthy was doing and Democrats did not, though McCarthy had significant support from traditional Democratic ethnic groups, especially Catholics, as well as many unskilled workers and small-business owners. (McCarthy himself was a Catholic.) He had very little support among union members and Jews.[68] Portrayals of communists Those who sought to justify McCarthyism did so largely through their characterization of communism, and American communists in particular. Proponents of McCarthyism claimed that the CPUSA was so completely under Moscow's control that any American communist was a puppet of the Soviet intelligence services. This view, if restricted to the Communist Party's leadership[69] is supported by recent documentation from the archives of the KGB[70] as well as post-war decodes of wartime Soviet radio traffic from the Venona project,[71] showing that Moscow provided financial support to the CPUSA and had significant influence on CPUSA policies. J. Edgar Hoover commented in a 1950 speech, "Communist members, body and soul, are the property of the Party." According to historian Richard G. Powers, McCarthy added "bogus specificity" to "sweeping accusation[s]", gaining support among "countersubversive anticommunists" on one hand, who sought to find and punish perceived communists. On the other hand, "liberal anticommunists" believed that the Communist Party was "despicable and annoying" but ultimately politically irrelevant.[72] President Harry Truman, who pursued the anti-Soviet Truman Doctrine, called McCarthy "the greatest asset the Kremlin has" by "torpedo[ing] the bipartisan foreign policy of the United States."[73] Historian Landon R. Y. Storrs writes that the CPUSA's "secretiveness, its authoritarian internal structure, and the loyalty of its leaders to the Kremlin were fundamental flaws that help explain why and how it was demonized. On the other hand, most American Communists were idealists attracted by the party's militance against various forms of social injustice." Furthermore, based on later declassified evidence, "The paradoxical lesson from several decades of scholarship is that the same organization that inspired democratic idealists in the pursuit of social justice also was secretive, authoritarian, and morally compromised by ties to the Stalin regime."[74] In the mid 20th century, this attitude was not confined to arch-conservatives. In 1940, the American Civil Liberties Union ejected founding member Elizabeth Gurley Flynn, saying that her membership in the Communist Party was enough to disqualify her as a civil libertarian. In the government's prosecutions of Communist Party members under the Smith Act (see above), the prosecution case was based not on specific actions or statements by the defendants, but on the premise that a commitment to violent overthrow of the government was inherent in the doctrines of Marxism–Leninism. Passages of the CPUSA constitution that specifically rejected revolutionary violence were dismissed as deliberate deception.[75] In addition, it was often claimed that the party didn't allow members to resign; thus someone who had been a member for a short time decades previously could be thought a current member. Many of the hearings and trials of McCarthyism featured testimony by former Communist Party members such as Elizabeth Bentley, Louis Budenz, and Whittaker Chambers, speaking as expert witnesses.[76][77] Various historians and pundits have discussed alleged Soviet-directed infiltration of the U.S. government and the possible collaboration of high U.S. government officials.[78][79][80][81] Victims of McCarthyism This section possibly contains original research. Please improve it by verifying the claims made and adding inline citations. Statements consisting only of original research should be removed. (January 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message) See also: List of films by the Hollywood Ten, Hollywood blacklist, and Lavender scare Estimating the number of victims of McCarthy is difficult. The number imprisoned is in the hundreds, and some ten or twelve thousand lost their jobs.[82] In many cases, simply being subpoenaed by HUAC or one of the other committees was sufficient cause to be fired.[83] For the vast majority, both the potential for them to do harm to the nation and the nature of their communist affiliation were tenuous.[84] After the extremely damaging "Cambridge Five" spy scandal (Guy Burgess, Donald Maclean, Kim Philby, Anthony Blunt and John Cairncross), suspected homosexuality was also a common cause for being targeted by McCarthyism. The hunt for "sexual perverts", who were presumed to be subversive by nature, resulted in over 5,000 federal workers being fired, and thousands were harassed and denied employment.[85][86] Many have termed this aspect of McCarthyism the "lavender scare".[87][88] Homosexuality was classified as a psychiatric disorder in the 1950s.[89] However, in the context of the highly politicized Cold War environment, homosexuality became framed as a dangerous, contagious social disease that posed a potential threat to state security.[89] As the family was believed to be the cornerstone of American strength and integrity,[90] the description of homosexuals as "sexual perverts" meant that they were both unable to function within a family unit and presented the potential to poison the social body.[91] This era also witnessed the establishment of widely spread FBI surveillance intended to identify homosexual government employees.[92] The McCarthy hearings and according "sexual pervert" investigations can be seen to have been driven by a desire to identify individuals whose ability to function as loyal citizens had been compromised.[91] McCarthy began his campaign by drawing upon the ways in which he embodied traditional American values to become the self-appointed vanguard of social morality.[93] Dalton Trumbo and his wife, Cleo, at the HUAC in 1947 In the film industry, more than 300 actors, authors, and directors were denied work in the U.S. through the unofficial Hollywood blacklist. Blacklists were at work throughout the entertainment industry, in universities and schools at all levels, in the legal profession, and in many other fields. A port-security program initiated by the Coast Guard shortly after the start of the Korean War required a review of every maritime worker who loaded or worked aboard any American ship, regardless of cargo or destination. As with other loyalty-security reviews of McCarthyism, the identities of any accusers and even the nature of any accusations were typically kept secret from the accused. Nearly 3,000 seamen and longshoremen lost their jobs due to this program alone.[94] Some of the notable people who were blacklisted or suffered some other persecution during McCarthyism include: Larry Adler, musician Nelson Algren, writer[95] Lucille Ball, actress, model, and film studio executive.[96] Robert N. Bellah, sociologist Walter Bernstein, screenwriter Alvah Bessie, Abraham Lincoln Brigade, writer, journalist, screenwriter, Hollywood Ten Elmer Bernstein, composer and conductor[97] Leonard Bernstein, conductor, pianist, composer[98] David Bohm, physicist and philosopher[99] Bertolt Brecht, poet, playwright, screenwriter Archie Brown, Abraham Lincoln Brigade, veteran of World War II, union leader, imprisoned. Successfully challenged Landrum–Griffin Act provision[100] Esther Brunauer, forced from the U.S. State Department[101] Luis Buñuel, film director, producer[102] Charlie Chaplin, actor and director[103] Aaron Copland, composer[104] Bartley Crum, attorney[105] Howard Da Silva, actor[106] Jules Dassin, director[107] Chandler Davis, mathematician Natalie Zemon Davis, historian Dolores del Río, actress[108] Edward Dmytryk, director, Hollywood Ten W.E.B. Du Bois, civil rights activist and author[109] George A. Eddy, pre-Keynesian Harvard economist, US Treasury monetary policy specialist[110] Albert Einstein, Nobel Prize-winning physicist, philosopher, mathematician, activist[111] Hanns Eisler, composer[112] Howard Fast, writer[113] Lion Feuchtwanger, novelist and playwright[114] Carl Foreman, writer of High Noon John Garfield, actor[104] C.H. Garrigues, journalist[115] Jack Gilford, actor[106] Ruth Gordon, actress[106] Lee Grant, actress[116] Dashiell Hammett, author[104] Hananiah Harari, American painter and illustrator Elizabeth Hawes, clothing designer, author, equal rights activist[117] Lillian Hellman, playwright[104] Dorothy Healey, union organizer, CPUSA official[118] Lena Horne, singer[106] Langston Hughes, writer, poet, playwright[104] Marsha Hunt, actress Sam Jaffe, actor[104] Theodore Kaghan, diplomat[119] Garson Kanin, writer and director[104] Ernst Kantorowicz, historian Danny Kaye, comedian, singer[120][full citation needed] Benjamin Keen, historian[121] Otto Klemperer, conductor and composer[122] Gypsy Rose Lee, actress and stripper[104] Harold Lewis, physicist Cornelius Lanczos, mathematician and physicist[123] Ring Lardner Jr., screenwriter, Hollywood Ten Arthur Laurents, playwright[106] Philip Loeb, actor[124] Jacob Loewenberg, philosopher Joseph Losey, director[104] Albert Maltz, screenwriter, Hollywood Ten Heinrich Mann, novelist[125] Klaus Mann, writer[125] Thomas Mann, Nobel Prize winning novelist and essayist[125] Thomas McGrath, poet Burgess Meredith, actor[104] Arthur Miller, playwright and essayist[104] Jessica Mitford, author, muckraker. Refused to testify to HUAC. Dimitri Mitropoulos, conductor, pianist, composer[126] Zero Mostel, actor[104] Charles Muscatine, literary scholar Joseph Needham, biochemist, sinologist, historian of science J. Robert Oppenheimer, theoretical physicist, director of the Manhattan Project Dorothy Parker, writer, humorist[104] Linus Pauling, chemist, Nobel prizes for Chemistry and Peace[127] Samuel Reber, diplomat[128] Al Richmond, union organizer, editor[129] Martin Ritt, actor and director[130] Paul Robeson, actor, athlete, singer, writer, political activist[131] Edward G. Robinson, actor[104] Waldo Salt, screenwriter[132] David S. Saxon, physicist Jean Seberg, actress[133] Pete Seeger, folk singer, songwriter[104] Robert Serber, physicist Artie Shaw, jazz musician, bandleader, author[104] Irwin Shaw, writer[106] William L. Shirer, journalist, author[134] Lionel Stander, actor[135] Jack Steinberger, physicist Dirk Jan Struik, mathematician, historian of maths[136] Paul Sweezy, economist and founder-editor of Monthly Review[137] Charles W. Thayer, diplomat[138] Edward C. Tolman, psychologist Dalton Trumbo, screenwriter, Hollywood Ten Tsien Hsue-shen, physicist[139] Sam Wanamaker, actor, director, responsible for recreating Shakespeare's Globe Theatre in London, England. Gene Weltfish, anthropologist fired from Columbia University[140] Gian Carlo Wick, physicist In 1953, Robert K. Murray, a young professor of history at Pennsylvania State University who had served as an intelligence officer in World War II, was revising his dissertation on the Red Scare of 1919–20 for publication until Little, Brown and Company decided that "under the circumstances ... it wasn't wise for them to bring this book out." He learned that investigators were questioning his colleagues and relatives. The University of Minnesota press published his volume, Red Scare: A Study in National Hysteria, 1919–1920, in 1955.[141] Critical reactions The nation was by no means united behind the policies and activities that have come to be associated with McCarthyism. The critics of various aspects of McCarthyism included many figures not generally noted for their liberalism. In his overridden veto of the McCarran Internal Security Act of 1950, President Truman wrote, "In a free country, we punish men for the crimes they commit, but never for the opinions they have."[142] Truman also unsuccessfully vetoed the Taft–Hartley Act, which among other provisions denied trade unions National Labor Relations Board protection unless union leaders signed affidavits swearing they were not and had never been Communists. In 1953, after he left office, Truman criticized the current Eisenhower administration: It is now evident that the present Administration has fully embraced, for political advantage, McCarthyism. I am not referring to the Senator from Wisconsin. He is only important in that his name has taken on the dictionary meaning of the word. It is the corruption of truth, the abandonment of the due process law. It is the use of the big lie and the unfounded accusation against any citizen in the name of Americanism or security. It is the rise to power of the demagogue who lives on untruth; it is the spreading of fear and the destruction of faith in every level of society.[143] On June 1, 1950, Senator Margaret Chase Smith, a Maine Republican, delivered a speech to the Senate she called a "Declaration of Conscience". In a clear attack upon McCarthyism, she called for an end to "character assassinations" and named "some of the basic principles of Americanism: The right to criticize; the right to hold unpopular beliefs; the right to protest; the right of independent thought". She said "freedom of speech is not what it used to be in America", and decried "cancerous tentacles of 'know nothing, suspect everything' attitudes".[144] Six other Republican senators—Wayne Morse, Irving M. Ives, Charles W. Tobey, Edward John Thye, George Aiken, and Robert C. Hendrickson—joined Smith in condemning the tactics of McCarthyism. Joseph N. Welch (left) and Senator McCarthy, June 9, 1954 Elmer Davis, one of the most highly respected news reporters and commentators of the 1940s and 1950s, often spoke out against what he saw as the excesses of McCarthyism. On one occasion he warned that many local anti-communist movements constituted a "general attack not only on schools and colleges and libraries, on teachers and textbooks, but on all people who think and write ... in short, on the freedom of the mind".[145] In 1952, the Supreme Court upheld a lower-court decision in Adler v. Board of Education, thus approving a law that allowed state loyalty review boards to fire teachers deemed "subversive". In his dissenting opinion, Justice William O. Douglas wrote: "The present law proceeds on a principle repugnant to our society—guilt by association.... What happens under this law is typical of what happens in a police state. Teachers are under constant surveillance; their pasts are combed for signs of disloyalty; their utterances are watched for clues to dangerous thoughts."[146] Broadcast journalist Edward R. Murrow One of the most influential opponents of McCarthyism was the famed CBS newscaster and analyst Edward R. Murrow.

This film delves into the intricate realm of nuclear policy and propaganda, unveiling the unsettling reality of how language and messaging have shaped public perception of nuclear warfare. Through the lens of investigative journalism, the film exposes the deliberate use of reassuring rhetoric by politicians and institutions, creating an illusory sense of security regarding the existence and use of nuclear weapons. This controversial documentary encountered unprecedented opposition from regulatory bodies, reflecting the discomfort it provoked among authorities. It meticulously dissects the narrative constructed around nuclear deterrence, contrasting official narratives with hidden truths and presenting a compelling argument that challenges the prevailing perceptions of peace and security. The film confronts historical events like the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, unearthing suppressed accounts of the devastating aftermath and shedding light on the discrepancy between the "official truth" and the harsh realities experienced by victims. It navigates through geopolitical complexities, revealing discrepancies in the West's portrayal of nuclear capabilities compared to actual numbers and shedding light on the secrecy surrounding military bases and weapon deployment. The narrative stance emphasizes the responsibility of democratic societies in confronting the realities of nuclear warfare, advocating for a critical reevaluation of established beliefs. The documentary challenges the notion of inevitability surrounding nuclear armament, urging viewers to question the prevailing narratives and take proactive steps toward disarmament. The film's contentious nature led to its withdrawal from broadcast, sparking debates about censorship and the boundaries of media representation. Its counterpart, "The War About Peace," presented a contrasting view supportive of nuclear deterrence, demonstrating the polarized perspectives surrounding this critical global issue. It remains a thought-provoking and contentious exploration of the intricate relationship between propaganda, government narratives, and the realities of nuclear warfare, challenging viewers to reassess their understanding of security and peace in the shadow of nuclear weapons. Nuclear warfare, also known as atomic warfare, is a military conflict or prepared political strategy that deploys nuclear weaponry. Nuclear weapons are weapons of mass destruction; in contrast to conventional warfare, nuclear warfare can produce destruction in a much shorter time and can have a long-lasting radiological result. A major nuclear exchange would likely have long-term effects, primarily from the fallout released, and could also lead to secondary effects, such as "nuclear winter",[1][2][3][4][5][6] nuclear famine, and societal collapse.[7][8][9] A global thermonuclear war with Cold War-era stockpiles, or even with the current smaller stockpiles, may lead to various scenarios including the extinction of the human species.[10] To date, the only use of nuclear weapons in armed conflict occurred in 1945 with the American atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. On August 6, 1945, a uranium gun-type device (code name "Little Boy") was detonated over the Japanese city of Hiroshima. Three days later, on August 9, a plutonium implosion-type device (code name "Fat Man") was detonated over the Japanese city of Nagasaki. Together, these two bombings resulted in the deaths of approximately 200,000 people and contributed to the surrender of Japan, which occurred before any further nuclear weapons could be produced. After World War II, nuclear weapons were also developed by the Soviet Union (1949), the United Kingdom (1952), France (1960), and the People's Republic of China (1964), which contributed to the state of conflict and extreme tension that became known as the Cold War. In 1974, India, and in 1998, Pakistan, two countries that were openly hostile toward each other, developed nuclear weapons. Israel (1960s) and North Korea (2006) are also thought to have developed stocks of nuclear weapons, though it is not known how many. The Israeli government has never admitted nor denied having nuclear weapons, although it is known to have constructed the reactor and reprocessing plant necessary for building nuclear weapons.[11] South Africa also manufactured several complete nuclear weapons in the 1980s, but subsequently became the first country to voluntarily destroy their domestically made weapons stocks and abandon further production (1990s).[12][13] Nuclear weapons have been detonated on over 2,000 occasions for testing purposes and demonstrations.[14][15] After the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the resultant end of the Cold War, the threat of a major nuclear war between the two nuclear superpowers was generally thought to have declined.[16] Since then, concern over nuclear weapons has shifted to the prevention of localized nuclear conflicts resulting from nuclear proliferation, and the threat of nuclear terrorism. However, the threat of nuclear war is considered to have resurged after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, particularly with regard to Russian threats to use nuclear weapons during the invasion.[17][18] Since 1947, the Doomsday Clock of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists has visualized how close the world is to a nuclear war. The Doomsday Clock reached high points in 1953, when the Clock was set to two minutes until midnight after the U.S. and the Soviet Union began testing hydrogen bombs, and in 2018, following the failure of world leaders to address tensions relating to nuclear weapons and climate change issues.[19] Since 2023, the Clock has been set at 90 seconds to midnight, the closest it has ever been.[20] The most recent advance of the Clock's time setting was largely attributed to the risk of nuclear escalation that arose from the Russian invasion of Ukraine.[21] Types of nuclear warfare The possibility of using nuclear weapons in war is usually divided into two subgroups, each with different effects and potentially fought with different types of nuclear armaments. The first, a limited nuclear war[22] (sometimes attack or exchange), refers to the controlled use of nuclear weapons, whereby the implicit threat exists that a nation can still escalate their use of nuclear weapons. For example, using a small number of nuclear weapons against strictly military targets could be escalated through increasing the number of weapons used, or escalated through the selection of different targets. Limited attacks are thought to be a more credible response against attacks that do not justify all-out retaliation, such as an enemy's limited use of nuclear weapons.[23] The second, a full-scale nuclear war, could consist of large numbers of nuclear weapons used in an attack aimed at an entire country, including military, economic, and civilian targets. Such an attack would almost certainly destroy the entire economic, social, and military infrastructure of the target nation, and would likely have a devastating effect on Earth's biosphere.[7][24] Some Cold War strategists such as Henry Kissinger[25] argued that a limited nuclear war could be possible between two heavily armed superpowers (such as the United States and the Soviet Union). Some predict, however, that a limited war could potentially "escalate" into a full-scale nuclear war. Others[who?] have called limited nuclear war "global nuclear holocaust in slow motion", arguing that—once such a war took place—others would be sure to follow over a period of decades, effectively rendering the planet uninhabitable in the same way that a "full-scale nuclear war" between superpowers would, only taking a much longer (and arguably more agonizing) path to the same result. Even the most optimistic predictions[by whom?] of the effects of a major nuclear exchange foresee the death of many millions of victims within a very short period of time. Such predictions usually include the breakdown of institutions, government, professional and commercial, vital to the continuation of civilization. The resulting loss of vital affordances (food, water and electricity production and distribution, medical and information services, etc.) would account for millions more deaths. More pessimistic predictions argue that a full-scale nuclear war could potentially bring about the extinction of the human race, or at least its near extinction, with only a relatively small number of survivors (mainly in remote areas) and a reduced quality of life and life expectancy for centuries afterward. However, such predictions, assuming total war with nuclear arsenals at Cold War highs, have not been without criticism.[4] Such a horrific catastrophe as global nuclear warfare would almost certainly cause permanent damage to most complex life on the planet, its ecosystems, and the global climate.[5] A study presented at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union in December 2006 asserted that even a small-scale regional nuclear war could produce as many direct fatalities as all of World War II and disrupt the global climate for a decade or more. In a regional nuclear conflict scenario in which two opposing nations in the subtropics each used 50 Hiroshima-sized nuclear weapons (c. 15 kiloton each) on major population centers, the researchers predicted fatalities ranging from 2.6 million to 16.7 million per country. The authors of the study estimated that as much as five million tons of soot could be released, producing a cooling of several degrees over large areas of North America and Eurasia (including most of the grain-growing regions). The cooling would last for years and could be "catastrophic", according to the researchers.[26] Either a limited or full-scale nuclear exchange could occur during an accidental nuclear war, in which the use of nuclear weapons is triggered unintentionally. Postulated triggers for this scenario have included malfunctioning early warning devices and/or targeting computers, deliberate malfeasance by rogue military commanders, consequences of an accidental straying of warplanes into enemy airspace, reactions to unannounced missile tests during tense diplomatic periods, reactions to military exercises, mistranslated or miscommunicated messages, and others. A number of these scenarios actually occurred during the Cold War, though none resulted in the use of nuclear weapons.[27] Many such scenarios have been depicted in popular culture, such as in the 1959 film On the Beach, the 1962 novel Fail-Safe (released as a film in 1964); and the film Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, also released in 1964; the film WarGames, released in 1983. History Main articles: History of nuclear weapons and Timeline of nuclear weapons development 1940s Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Main article: Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki Mushroom cloud from the atomic explosion over Nagasaki rising 18,000 m (59,000 ft) into the air on the morning of August 9, 1945. During the final stages of World War II in 1945, the United States conducted atomic raids on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the first on August 6, 1945, and the second on August 9, 1945. These two events were the only times nuclear weapons have been used in combat.[28] For six months before the atomic bombings, the U.S. 20th Air Force under General Curtis LeMay executed low-level incendiary raids against Japanese cities. The most destructive air raid to occur during the process was not the nuclear attacks, but the Operation Meetinghouse raid on Tokyo. On the night of March 9–10, 1945, Operation Meetinghouse commenced and 334 Boeing B-29 Superfortress bombers took off to raid, with 279 of them dropping 1,665 tons of incendiaries and explosives on Tokyo. The bombing was meant to burn wooden buildings and indeed the bombing caused fire that created a 50 m/s wind, which is comparable to tornadoes. Each bomber carried 6 tons of bombs. A total of 381,300 bombs, which amount to 1,783 tons of bombs, were used in the bombing. Within a few hours of the raid, it had killed an estimated 100,000 people and destroyed 41 km2 (16 sq mi) of the city and 267,000 buildings in a single night — the deadliest bombing raid in military aviation history other than the atomic raids on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.[29][30][31][32] By early August 1945, an estimated 450,000 people had died as the U.S. had intensely firebombed a total of 67 Japanese cities. In late June 1945, as the U.S. wrapped up the two-and-a-half-month Battle of Okinawa (which cost the lives of 260,000 people, including 150,000 civilians),[33][34] it was faced with the prospect of invading the Japanese home islands in an operation codenamed Operation Downfall. Based on the U.S. casualties from the preceding island-hopping campaigns, American commanders estimated that between 50,000 and 500,000 U.S. troops would die and at least 600,000–1,000,000 others would be injured while invading the Japanese home islands. The U.S. manufacture of 500,000 Purple Hearts from the anticipated high level of casualties during the U.S. invasion of Japan gave a demonstration of how deadly and costly it would be. President Harry S. Truman realized he could not afford such a horrendous casualty rate, especially since over 400,000 American combatants had already died fighting in both the European and the Pacific theaters of the war.[35] On July 26, 1945, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the Republic of China issued a Potsdam Declaration that called for the unconditional surrender of Japan. It stated that if Japan did not surrender, it would face "prompt and utter destruction".[36][37] The Japanese government ignored this ultimatum, sending a message that they were not going to surrender. In response to the rejection, President Truman authorized the dropping of the atomic bombs. At the time of its use, there were only two atomic bombs available, and despite the fact that more were in production back in mainland U.S., the third bomb wouldn't be available for combat until September.[38][39] A photograph of Sumiteru Taniguchi's back injuries taken in January 1946 by a U.S. Marine photographer Hypocenter of Atomic bomb in Nagasaki On August 6, 1945, the uranium-type nuclear weapon codenamed "Little Boy" was detonated over the Japanese city of Hiroshima with an energy of about 15 kilotons of TNT (63,000 gigajoules), destroying nearly 50,000 buildings (including the headquarters of the 2nd General Army and Fifth Division) and killing approximately 70,000 people, including 20,000 Japanese combatants and 20,000 Korean slave laborers.[40][41] Three days later, on August 9, a plutonium-type nuclear weapon codenamed "Fat Man" was used against the Japanese city of Nagasaki, with the explosion equivalent to about 20 kilotons of TNT (84,000 gigajoules), destroying 60% of the city and killing approximately 35,000 people, including 23,200–28,200 Japanese munitions workers, 2,000 Korean slave laborers, and 150 Japanese combatants.[42] The industrial damage in Nagasaki was high, partly owing to the inadvertent targeting of the industrial zone, leaving 68–80 percent of the non-dock industrial production destroyed.[43] Six days after the detonation over Nagasaki, Japan announced its surrender to the Allied Powers on August 15, 1945, signing the Instrument of Surrender on September 2, 1945, officially ending the Pacific War and, therefore, World War II, as Germany had already signed its Instrument of Surrender on May 8, 1945, ending the war in Europe. The two atomic bombings led, in part, to post-war Japan's adopting of the Three Non-Nuclear Principles, which forbade the nation from developing nuclear armaments.[44] Immediately after the Japan bombings After the successful Trinity nuclear test July 16, 1945, which was the very first nuclear detonation, the Manhattan project lead manager J. Robert Oppenheimer recalled: We knew the world would not be the same. A few people laughed, a few people cried, and most people were silent. I remembered the line from the Hindu scripture the Bhagavad Gita. Vishnu is trying to persuade the prince that he should do his duty and to impress him takes on his multiarmed form and says, "Now, I am become Death, the destroyer of worlds." I suppose we all thought that one way or another. — J. Robert Oppenheimer, The Decision To Drop The Bomb[45] J. Robert Oppenheimer. Immediately after the atomic bombings of Japan, the status of atomic weapons in international and military relations was unclear. Presumably, the United States hoped atomic weapons could offset the Soviet Union's larger conventional ground forces in Eastern Europe, and possibly be used to pressure Soviet leader Joseph Stalin into making concessions. Under Stalin, the Soviet Union pursued its own atomic capabilities through a combination of scientific research and espionage directed against the American program. The Soviets believed that the Americans, with their limited nuclear arsenal, were unlikely to engage in any new world wars, while the Americans were not confident they could prevent a Soviet takeover of Europe, despite their atomic advantage. Within the United States, the authority to produce and develop nuclear weapons was removed from military control and put instead under the civilian control of the United States Atomic Energy Commission. This decision reflected an understanding that nuclear weapons had unique risks and benefits that were separate from other military technology known at the time. Convair B-36 bomber. For several years after World War II, the United States developed and maintained a strategic force based on the Convair B-36 bomber that would be able to attack any potential enemy from bomber bases in the United States. It deployed atomic bombs around the world for potential use in conflicts. Over a period of a few years, many in the American defense community became increasingly convinced of the invincibility of the United States to a nuclear attack. Indeed, it became generally believed that the threat of nuclear war would deter any strike against the United States. Many proposals were suggested to put all American nuclear weapons under international control (by the newly formed United Nations, for example) as an effort to deter both their usage and an arms race. However, no terms could be arrived at that would be agreed upon by both the United States and the Soviet Union.[citation needed] American and Soviet/Russian nuclear stockpiles. On August 29, 1949, the Soviet Union tested its first nuclear weapon at Semipalatinsk in Kazakhstan (see also Soviet atomic bomb project). Scientists in the United States from the Manhattan Project had warned that, in time, the Soviet Union would certainly develop nuclear capabilities of its own. Nevertheless, the effect upon military thinking and planning in the United States was dramatic, primarily because American military strategists had not anticipated the Soviets would "catch up" so soon. However, at this time, they had not discovered that the Soviets had conducted significant nuclear espionage of the project from spies at Los Alamos National Laboratory, the most significant of which was done by the theoretical physicist Klaus Fuchs.[citation needed] The first Soviet bomb was more or less a deliberate copy of the Fat Man plutonium device. In the same year the first US-Soviet nuclear war plan was penned in the US with Operation Dropshot. With the monopoly over nuclear technology broken, worldwide nuclear proliferation accelerated. The United Kingdom tested its first independent atomic bomb in 1952, followed by France developing its first atomic bomb in 1960 and then China developing its first atomic bomb in 1964. While much smaller than the arsenals of the United States and the Soviet Union, Western Europe's nuclear reserves were nevertheless a significant factor in strategic planning during the Cold War. A top-secret White paper, compiled by the Royal Air Force and produced for the British Government in 1959, estimated that British V bombers carrying nuclear weapons were capable of destroying key cities and military targets in the Soviet Union, with an estimated 16 million deaths in the Soviet Union (half of whom were estimated to be killed on impact and the rest fatally injured) before bomber aircraft from the U.S. Strategic Air Command reached their targets. 1950s Although the Soviet Union had nuclear weapon capabilities at the beginning of the Cold War, the United States still had an advantage in terms of bombers and weapons. In any exchange of hostilities, the United States would have been capable of bombing the Soviet Union, whereas the Soviet Union would have more difficulty carrying out the reverse mission. The widespread introduction of jet-powered interceptor aircraft upset this imbalance somewhat by reducing the effectiveness of the American bomber fleet. In 1949 Curtis LeMay was placed in command of the Strategic Air Command and instituted a program to update the bomber fleet to one that was all-jet. During the early 1950s the B-47 Stratojet and B-52 Stratofortress were introduced, providing the ability to bomb the Soviet Union more easily. Before the development of a capable strategic missile force in the Soviet Union, much of the war-fighting doctrine held by western nations revolved around using a large number of smaller nuclear weapons in a tactical role. It is debatable whether such use could be considered "limited" however because it was believed that the United States would use its own strategic weapons (mainly bombers at the time) should the Soviet Union deploy any kind of nuclear weapon against civilian targets. Douglas MacArthur, an American general, was fired by President Harry Truman, partially because he persistently requested permission to use his own discretion in deciding whether to utilize atomic weapons on the People's Republic of China in 1951 during the Korean War.[46] Mao Zedong, China's communist leader, gave the impression that he would welcome a nuclear war with the capitalists because it would annihilate what he viewed as their imperialist system.[47][48] Let us imagine how many people would die if war breaks out. There are 2.7 billion people in the world, and a third could be lost. If it is a little higher it could be half ... I say that if the worst came to the worst and one-half dies, there will still be one-half left, but imperialism would be razed to the ground and the whole world would become socialist. After a few years there would be 2.7 billion people again. — Mao Zedong, 1957[49] The U.S. and USSR conducted hundreds of nuclear tests, including the Desert Rock exercises at the Nevada Test Site, USA, pictured above during the Korean War to familiarize their soldiers with conducting operations and counter-measures around nuclear detonations, as the Korean War threatened to expand. The concept of a "Fortress North America" emerged during the Second World War and persisted into the Cold War to refer to the option of defending Canada and the United States against their enemies if the rest of the world were lost to them. This option was rejected with the formation of NATO and the decision to permanently station troops in Europe. In the summer of 1951, Project Vista started, in which project analysts such as Robert F. Christy looked at how to defend Western Europe from a Soviet invasion. The emerging development of tactical nuclear weapons was looked upon as a means to give Western forces a qualitative advantage over the Soviet numerical supremacy in conventional weapons.[50] Several scares about the increasing ability of the Soviet Union's strategic bomber forces surfaced during the 1950s. The defensive response by the United States was to deploy a fairly strong "layered defense" consisting of interceptor aircraft and anti-aircraft missiles, like the Nike, and guns, like the M51 Skysweeper, near larger cities. However, this was a small response compared to the construction of a huge fleet of nuclear bombers. The principal nuclear strategy was to massively penetrate the Soviet Union. Because such a large area could not be defended against this overwhelming attack in any credible way, the Soviet Union would lose any exchange. This logic became ingrained in American nuclear doctrine and persisted for much of the duration of the Cold War. As long as the strategic American nuclear forces could overwhelm their Soviet counterparts, a Soviet pre-emptive strike could be averted. Moreover, the Soviet Union could not afford to build any reasonable counterforce, as the economic output of the United States was far larger than that of the Soviets, and they would be unable to achieve "nuclear parity". Soviet nuclear doctrine, however, did not match American nuclear doctrine.[51][52] Soviet military planners assumed they could win a nuclear war.[51][53][54] Therefore, they expected a large-scale nuclear exchange, followed by a "conventional war" which itself would involve heavy use of tactical nuclear weapons. American doctrine rather assumed that Soviet doctrine was similar, with the mutual in mutually assured destruction necessarily requiring that the other side see things in much the same way, rather than believing—as the Soviets did—that they could fight a large-scale, "combined nuclear and conventional" war. In accordance with their doctrine, the Soviet Union conducted large-scale military exercises to explore the possibility of defensive and offensive warfare during a nuclear war. The exercise, under the code name of "Snowball", involved the detonation of a nuclear bomb about twice as powerful as that which fell on Nagasaki and an army of approximately 45,000 soldiers on maneuvers through the hypocenter immediately after the blast.[55] The exercise was conducted on September 14, 1954, under command of Marshal Georgy Zhukov to the north of Totskoye village in Orenburg Oblast, Russia. A revolution in nuclear strategic thought occurred with the introduction of the intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), which the Soviet Union first successfully tested in August 1957. In order to deliver a warhead to a target, a missile was much faster and more cost-effective than a bomber, and enjoyed a higher survivability due to the enormous difficulty of interception of the ICBMs (due to their high altitude and extreme speed). The Soviet Union could now afford to achieve nuclear parity with the United States in raw numbers, although for a time, they appeared to have chosen not to. Photos of Soviet missile sites set off a wave of panic in the U.S. military, something the launch of Sputnik would do for the American public a few months later. Politicians, notably then-U.S. Senator John F. Kennedy suggested that a "missile gap" existed between the Soviet Union and the United States. The US military gave missile development programs the highest national priority, and several spy aircraft and reconnaissance satellites were designed and deployed to observe Soviet progress. Early ICBMs and bombers were relatively inaccurate, which led to the concept of countervalue strikes — attacks directly on the enemy population, which would theoretically lead to a collapse of the enemy's will to fight. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union invested in extensive protected civilian infrastructure, such as large "nuclear-proof" bunkers and non-perishable food stores. By comparison, smaller scale civil defense programs were instituted in the United States starting in the 1950s, where schools and other public buildings had basements stocked with non-perishable food supplies, canned water, first aid, and dosimeter and Geiger counter radiation-measuring devices. Many of the locations were given "fallout shelter" designation signs. CONELRAD radio information systems were adopted, whereby the commercial radio sector (later supplemented by the National Emergency Alarm Repeaters) would broadcast on two AM radio frequencies in the event of a Civil Defense (CD) emergency. These two frequencies, 640 and 1240 kHz, were marked with small CD triangles on the tuning dial of radios of the period, as can still be seen on 1950s-vintage radios on online auction sites and museums. A few backyard fallout shelters were built by private individuals. Henry Kissinger's view on tactical nuclear war in his controversial 1957 book Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy was that any nuclear weapon exploded in air burst mode that was below 500 kilotons in yield and thus averting serious fallout, may be more decisive and less costly in human lives than a protracted conventional war. A list of targets made by the United States was released sometime during December 2015 by the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. The language used to describe targets is "designated ground zeros". The list was released after a request was made during 2006 by William Burr who belongs to a research group at George Washington University, and belongs to a previously top-secret 800-page document. The list is entitled "Atomic Weapons Requirements Study for 1959" and was produced by U.S. Strategic Air Command during the year 1956.[56] 1960s More than 100 US-built missiles having the capability to strike Moscow with nuclear warheads were deployed in Italy and Turkey in 1961 RF-101 Voodoo reconnaissance photograph of the MRBM launch site in San Cristóbal, Cuba (1962) In 1960, the United States developed its first Single Integrated Operational Plan, a range of targeting options, and described launch procedures and target sets against which nuclear weapons would be launched, variants of which were in use from 1961 to 2003. That year also saw the start of the Missile Defense Alarm System, an American system of 12 early-warning satellites that provided limited notice of Soviet intercontinental ballistic missile launches between 1960 and 1966. The Ballistic Missile Early Warning System was completed in 1964. The most powerful atomic bomb ever made, the Tsar Bomba, was tested by the Soviets on October 30, 1961. It was 50 megatons, or equal to 50 million tons of regular explosives.[57] A complex and worrisome situation developed in 1962, in what is called the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Soviet Union placed medium-range ballistic missiles 90 miles (140 km) from the United States, possibly as a direct response to American Jupiter missiles placed in Turkey. After intense negotiations, the Soviets ended up removing the missiles from Cuba and decided to institute a massive weapons-building program of their own. In exchange, the United States dismantled its launch sites in Turkey, although this was done secretly and not publicly revealed for over two decades. First Secretary Nikita Khrushchev did not even reveal this part of the agreement when he came under fire by political opponents for mishandling the crisis. Communication delays during the crisis led to the establishment of the Moscow–Washington hotline to allow reliable, direct communications between the two nuclear powers. By the late 1960s, the number of ICBMs and warheads was so high on both sides that it was believed that both the United States and the Soviet Union were capable of completely destroying the infrastructure and a large proportion of the population of the other country. Thus, by some western game theorists, a balance of power system known as mutually assured destruction (or MAD) came into being. It was thought that no full-scale exchange between the powers would result in an outright winner, with at best one side emerging the pyrrhic victor. Thus both sides were deterred from risking the initiation of a direct confrontation, instead being forced to engage in lower-intensity proxy wars. During this decade the People's Republic of China began to build subterranean infrastructure such as the Underground Project 131 following the Sino-Soviet split. One drawback of the MAD doctrine was the possibility of a nuclear war occurring without either side intentionally striking first. Early Warning Systems (EWS) were notoriously error-prone. For example, on 78 occasions in 1979 alone, a "missile display conference" was called to evaluate detections that were "potentially threatening to the North American continent". Some of these were trivial errors and were spotted quickly, but several went to more serious levels. On September 26, 1983, Stanislav Petrov received convincing indications of an American first strike launch against the Soviet Union, but positively identified the warning as a false alarm. Though it is unclear what role Petrov's actions played in preventing a nuclear war during this incident, he has been honored by the United Nations for his actions. Similar incidents happened many times in the United States, due to failed computer chips,[58] misidentifications of large flights of geese, test programs, and bureaucratic failures to notify early warning military personnel of legitimate launches of test or weather missiles. For many years, the U.S. Air Force's strategic bombers were kept airborne on a daily rotating basis "around the clock" (see Operation Chrome Dome), until the number and severity of accidents, the 1968 Thule Air Base B-52 crash in particular,[59] persuaded policymakers it was not worthwhile. 1970s Israel responded to the Arab Yom Kippur War attack on 6 October 1973 by assembling 13 nuclear weapons in a tunnel under the Negev desert when Syrian tanks were sweeping in across the Golan Heights. On 8 October 1973, Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir authorized Defense Minister Moshe Dayan to activate the 13 Israeli nuclear warheads and distribute them to Israeli air force units, with the intent that they be used if Israel began to be overrun.[60] On 24 October 1973, as US President Richard Nixon was preoccupied with the Watergate scandal, Henry Kissinger ordered a DEFCON-3 alert[dubious – discuss] preparing American B-52 nuclear bombers for war. Intelligence reports indicated that the USSR was preparing to defend Egypt in its Yom Kippur War with Israel. It had become apparent that if Israel had dropped nuclear weapons on Egypt or Syria, as it prepared to do, then the USSR would have retaliated against Israel, with the US then committed to providing Israeli assistance, possibly escalating to a general nuclear war.[61] By the late 1970s, people in both the United States and the Soviet Union, along with the rest of the world, had been living with the concept of mutual assured destruction (MAD) for about a decade, and it became deeply ingrained into the psyche and popular culture of those countries.[citation needed] On May 18, 1974, India conducted its first nuclear test in the Pokhran test range. The name of the operation was Smiling Buddha, and India termed the test as a "peaceful nuclear explosion." The Soviet Duga early warning over-the-horizon radar system was made operational in 1976. The extremely powerful radio transmissions needed for such a system led to much disruption of civilian shortwave broadcasts, earning it the nickname "Russian Woodpecker". The idea that any nuclear conflict would eventually escalate was a challenge for military strategists. This challenge was particularly severe for the United States and its NATO allies. It was believed (until the 1970s) that a Soviet tank offensive into Western Europe would quickly overwhelm NATO conventional forces, leading to the necessity of the West escalating to the use of tactical nuclear weapons, one of which was the W-70. This strategy had one major (and possibly critical) flaw, which was soon realized by military analysts but highly underplayed by the U.S. military: conventional NATO forces in the European theatre of war were far outnumbered by similar Soviet and Warsaw Pact forces, and it was assumed that in case of a major Soviet attack (commonly envisioned as the "Red tanks rolling towards the North Sea" scenario) that NATO—in the face of quick conventional defeat—would soon have no other choice but to resort to tactical nuclear strikes against these forces. Most analysts agreed that once the first nuclear exchange had occurred, escalation to global nuclear war would likely become inevitable. The Warsaw Pact's vision of an atomic war between NATO and Warsaw Pact forces was simulated in the top-secret exercise Seven Days to the River Rhine in 1979. The British government exercised their vision of a Soviet nuclear attack with Square Leg in early 1980. Large hardened nuclear weapon storage areas were built across European countries in anticipation of local US and European forces falling back as the conventional NATO defense from the Soviet Union, named REFORGER, was believed to only be capable of stalling the Soviets for a short time. 1980s Montage of the launch of a Trident C4 SLBM and the paths of its reentry vehicles. FEMA-estimated primary counterforce targets for Soviet ICBMs in 1990. The resulting fall-out is indicated with the darkest considered as lethal to lesser fall-out yellow zones.[62][failed verification] In the late 1970s and, particularly, during the early 1980s under U.S. President Ronald Reagan, the United States renewed its commitment to a more powerful military, which required a large increase in spending on U.S. military programs. These programs, which were originally part of the defense budget of U.S. President Jimmy Carter, included spending on conventional and nuclear weapons systems. Under Reagan, defensive systems like the Strategic Defense Initiative were emphasized as well. Another major shift in nuclear doctrine was the development and the improvement of the submarine-launched, nuclear-armed, ballistic missile, or SLBM. It was hailed by many military theorists as a weapon that would make nuclear war less likely. SLBMs—which can move with "stealth" (greatly lessened detectability) virtually anywhere in the world—give a nation a "second strike" capability (i.e., after absorbing a "first strike"). Before the advent of the SLBM, thinkers feared that a nation might be tempted to initiate a first strike if it felt confident that such a strike would incapacitate the nuclear arsenal of its enemy, making retaliation impossible. With the advent of SLBMs, no nation could be certain that a first strike would incapacitate its enemy's entire nuclear arsenal. To the contrary, it would have to fear a near-certain retaliatory second strike from SLBMs. Thus, a first strike was a much less feasible (or desirable) option, and a deliberately initiated nuclear war was thought to be less likely to start. However, it was soon realized that submarines could approach enemy coastlines undetected and decrease the warning time (the time between detection of the missile launch and the impact of the missile) from as much as half an hour to possibly under three minutes. This effect was especially significant to the United States, Britain and China, whose capitals of Washington D.C., London, and Beijing all lay within 100 miles (160 km) of their coasts. Moscow was much more secure from this type of threat, due to its considerable distance from the sea. This greatly increased the credibility of a "surprise first strike" by one faction and (theoretically) made it possible to knock out or disrupt the chain of command of a target nation before any counterstrike could be ordered (known as a "decapitation strike"). It strengthened the notion that a nuclear war could possibly be "won", resulting not only in greatly increased tensions and increasing calls for fail-deadly control systems, but also in a dramatic increase in military spending. The submarines and their missile systems were very expensive, and one fully equipped nuclear-powered and nuclear-armed missile submarine could cost more than the entire GNP of a developing country.[63] It was also calculated, however, that the greatest cost came in the development of both sea- and land-based anti-submarine defenses and in improving and strengthening the "chain of command", and as a result, military spending skyrocketed. South Africa developed a nuclear weapon capability during the 1970s and early 1980s. It was operational for a brief period before being dismantled in the early 1990s.[64] According to the 1980 United Nations report General and Complete Disarmament: Comprehensive Study on Nuclear Weapons: Report of the Secretary-General, it was estimated that there were a total of about 40,000 nuclear warheads in existence at that time, with a potential combined explosive yield of approximately 13,000 megatons. By comparison, the largest volcanic eruption in recorded history when the volcano Mount Tambora erupted in 1815—turning 1816 into the Year Without A Summer due to the levels of global dimming sulfate aerosols and ash expelled—it exploded with a force of roughly 33 billion tons of TNT or 33,000 megatons of TNT this is about 2.2 million Hiroshima Bombs,[65] and ejected 175 km3 (42 cu mi) of mostly rock/tephra,[66] that included 120 million tonnes of sulfur dioxide as an upper estimate.[67] A larger eruption, approximately 74,000 years ago, in Mount Toba produced 2,800 km3 (670 cu mi) of tephra, forming lake Toba,[68] and produced an estimated 6,000 million tonnes (6.6×109 short tons) of sulfur dioxide.[69][70] The explosive energy of the eruption may have been as high as equivalent to 20,000,000 megatons (Mt) of TNT,[71][better source needed] while the asteroid created Chicxulub impact, that is connected with the extinction of the dinosaurs corresponds to at least 70,000,000 Mt of energy, which is roughly 7000 times the maximum arsenal of the US and Soviet Union.[71] Protest against the deployment of Pershing II missiles in Europe, Bonn, West Germany, 1981 However, comparisons with supervolcanoes are more misleading than helpful due to the different aerosols released, the likely air burst fuzing height of nuclear weapons and the globally scattered location of these potential nuclear detonations all being in contrast to the singular and subterranean nature of a supervolcanic eruption.[3] Moreover, assuming the entire world stockpile of weapons were grouped together, it would be difficult, due to the nuclear fratricide effect, to ensure the individual weapons would go off all at once. Nonetheless, many people believe that a full-scale nuclear war would result, through the nuclear winter effect, in the extinction of the human species, though not all analysts agree on the assumptions that underpin these nuclear winter models.[4] On 26 September 1983, a Soviet early warning station under the command of Stanislav Petrov falsely detected 5 inbound intercontinental ballistic missiles from the US. Petrov correctly assessed the situation as a false alarm, and hence did not report his finding to his superiors. It is quite possible that his actions prevented "World War III", as the Soviet policy at that time was immediate nuclear response upon discovering inbound ballistic missiles.[72] The world came unusually close to nuclear war in November 1983 when the Soviet Union thought that the NATO military exercise Able Archer 83 was a ruse or "cover-up" to begin a nuclear first strike. The Soviets responded by raising readiness and preparing their nuclear arsenal for immediate use. Soviet fears of an attack ceased once the exercise concluded without incident. Post-Cold War See also: Second Cold War Although the dissolution of the Soviet Union ended the Cold War and greatly reduced tensions between the United States and the Russian Federation, the Soviet Union's formal successor state, both countries remained in a "nuclear stand-off" due to the continuing presence of a very large number of deliverable nuclear warheads on both sides. Additionally, the end of the Cold War led the United States to become increasingly concerned with the development of nuclear technology by other nations outside of the former Soviet Union. In 1995, a branch of the U.S. Strategic Command produced an outline of forward-thinking strategies in the document "Essentials of Post–Cold War Deterrence". In 1995, a Black Brant sounding rocket launched from the Andøya Space Center caused a high alert in Russia, known as the Norwegian Rocket Incident. The Russians thought it might be a nuclear missile launched from an American submarine.[73][74] In 1996, a Russian continuity of government facility, Kosvinsky Mountain, which is believed to be a counterpart to the US Cheyenne Mountain Complex, was completed.[75] It was designed to resist US earth-penetrating nuclear warheads,[75] and is believed to host the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces alternate command post, a post for the general staff built to compensate for the vulnerability of older Soviet era command posts in the Moscow region. In spite of this, the primary command posts for the Strategic Rocket Forces remains Kuntsevo in Moscow and the secondary is the Kosvinsky Mountain in the Ural Mountains.[citation needed] The timing of the Kosvinsky facilities completion date is regarded as one explanation for U.S. interest in a new nuclear "bunker buster" Earth-penetrating warhead and the declaration of the deployment of the B-61 mod 11 in 1997; Kosvinsky is protected by about 1000 feet of granite.[citation needed] UN vote on adoption of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons on 7 July 2017 Yes No Did not vote As a consequence of the September 11 attacks, American forces immediately increased their readiness to the highest level in 28 years, closing the blast doors of the NORAD's Cheyenne Mountain Operations Center for the first time due to a non-exercise event. But unlike similar increases during the Cold War, Russia immediately decided to stand down a large military exercise in the Arctic region, in order to minimize the risk of incidents, rather than following suit.[76] The former chair of the United Nations disarmament committee stated that there are more than 16,000 strategic and tactical nuclear weapons ready for deployment and another 14,000 in storage, with the U.S. having nearly 7,000 ready for use and 3,000 in storage, and Russia having about 8,500 ready for use and 11,000 in storage. In addition, China is thought to possess about 400 nuclear weapons, Britain about 200, France about 350, India about 80–100, and Pakistan 100–110. North Korea is confirmed as having nuclear weapons, though it is not known how many, with most estimates between 1 and 10. Israel is also widely believed to possess usable nuclear weapons. NATO has stationed about 480 American nuclear weapons in Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany, and Turkey, and several other nations are thought to be in pursuit of an arsenal of their own.[77] Pakistan's nuclear policy was significantly affected by the 1965 war with India.[78] The 1971 war and India's nuclear program played a role in Pakistan's decision to go nuclear.[79] India and Pakistan both decided not to participate in the NPT.[80] Pakistan's nuclear policy became fixated on India because India refused to join the NPT and remained open to nuclear weapons.[81] Impetus by Indian actions spurred Pakistan's nuclear research.[82] After nuclear weapons construction was started by President Zulfikar Ali Bhutto's command, the chair of Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission Usmani quit in objection.[83] The 1999 war between Pakistan and India occurred after both acquired nuclear weapons.[84] It is believed by some that nuclear weapons are the reason a big war has not broken out in the subcontinent.[85] India and Pakistan still have a risk of nuclear conflict on the issue of war over Kashmir. Nuclear capability deliverable by sea were claimed by Pakistan in 2012.[86] The aim was to achieve a "minimum credible deterrence".[87] Pakistan's nuclear program culminated in the tests at Chagai.[88] One of the aims of Pakistan's programs is fending off potential annexation and maintaining independence.[89] A key development in nuclear warfare throughout the 2000s and early 2010s is the proliferation of nuclear weapons to the developing world, with India and Pakistan both publicly testing several nuclear devices, and North Korea conducting an underground nuclear test on October 9, 2006. The U.S. Geological Survey measured a 4.2 magnitude earthquake in the area where the North Korean test is said to have occurred. A further test was announced by the North Korean government on May 25, 2009.[90] Iran, meanwhile, has embarked on a nuclear program which, while officially for civilian purposes, has come under close scrutiny by the United Nations and many individual states. Recent studies undertaken by the CIA cite the enduring India-Pakistan conflict as the one "flash point" most likely to escalate into a nuclear war. During the Kargil War in 1999, Pakistan came close to using its nuclear weapons in case the conventional military situation underwent further deterioration.[91] Pakistan's foreign minister had even warned that it would "use any weapon in our arsenal", hinting at a nuclear strike against India.[92] The statement was condemned by the international community, with Pakistan denying it later on. This conflict remains the only war (of any sort) between two declared nuclear powers. The 2001-2002 India-Pakistan standoff again stoked fears of nuclear war between the two countries. Despite these very serious and relatively recent threats, relations between India and Pakistan have been improving somewhat over the last few years. However, with the November 26, 2008 Mumbai terror attacks, tensions again worsened. External image image icon A geopolitical example of nuclear strike plan of ROC Army in Kinmen history. Effective Radius: 10 km; Pop.: 1.06 million Large stockpile with global range (dark blue), smaller stockpile with global range (medium blue), small stockpile with regional range (light blue). Another potential geopolitical issue that is considered particularly worrisome by military analysts is a possible conflict between the United States and the People's Republic of China over Taiwan. Although economic forces are thought to have reduced the possibility of a military conflict, there remains concern about the increasing military buildup of China (China is rapidly increasing its naval capacity), and that any move toward Taiwan independence could potentially spin out of control. Israel is thought to possess somewhere between one hundred and four hundred nuclear warheads. It has been asserted that the Dolphin-class submarines which Israel received from Germany have been adapted to carry nuclear-armed Popeye cruise missiles, so as to give Israel a second strike capability.[93] Israel has been involved in wars with its neighbors in the Middle East (and with other "non-state actors" in Lebanon and Palestine) on numerous prior occasions, and its small geographic size and population could mean that, in the event of future wars, the Israel Defense Forces might have very little time to react to an invasion or other major threat. Such a situation could escalate to nuclear warfare very quickly in some scenarios. On March 7, 2013, North Korea threatened the United States with a pre-emptive nuclear strike.[94] On April 9, North Korea urged foreigners to leave South Korea, stating that both countries were on the verge of nuclear war.[95] On April 12, North Korea stated that a nuclear war was unavoidable. The country declared Japan as its first target.[96] In 2014, when Russia-United States and Russia-NATO relations worsened over the Russo-Ukrainian War, the Russian state-owned television channel Russia 1 stated that "Russia is the only country in the world that is really capable of turning the USA into radioactive ash."[97] U.S. Secretary of Defense Ash Carter considered proposing deployment of ground-launched cruise missiles in Europe that could pre-emptively destroy Russian weapons.[98] In August 2017, North Korea warned that it might launch mid-range ballistic missiles into waters within 18 to 24 miles (29 to 39 km) of Guam, following an exchange of threats between the governments of North Korea and the United States.[99][100] Escalating tensions between North Korea and the United States, including threats by both countries that they could use nuclear weapons against one another, prompted a heightened state of readiness in Hawaii. The perceived ballistic missile threat broadcast all over Hawaii on 13 January 2018 was a false missile alarm.[101][102] In October 2018, the former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev commented that U.S. withdrawal from the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty is "not the work of a great mind" and that "a new arms race has been announced".[103][104] In early 2019, more than 90% of world's 13,865 nuclear weapons were owned by Russia and the United States.[105][106] In 2019, Vladimir Putin warned that Russia would deploy nuclear missiles in Europe if the United States deployed intermediate-range nuclear missiles there. Journalist Dmitry Kiselyov listed the targets in the United States, which includes The Pentagon, Camp David, Fort Ritchie, McClellan Air Force Base, and Jim Creek Naval Radio Station. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov denies the existence of the target list.[107][108] On February 24, 2022, in a televised address preceding the start of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that Russia "is today one of the most powerful nuclear powers in the world... No one should have any doubts that a direct attack on our country will lead to defeat and dire consequences for any potential aggressor." Later in the same speech, Putin stated: "Now a few important, very important words for those who may be tempted to intervene in ongoing events. Whoever tries to hinder us, and even more so to create threats for our country, for our people, should know that Russia's response will be immediate and will lead you to such consequences that you have never experienced in your history."[109][110] On February 27, 2022, Putin publicly put his nuclear forces on alert, stating that NATO powers had made "aggressive statements".[111] On April 14, The New York Times reported comments by CIA director William Burns, who said "potential desperation" could lead President Putin to order the use of tactical nuclear weapons.[112] On September 21, 2022, days before declaring the annexation of additional parts of Ukraine, Putin claimed in a national television address that high NATO officials had made statements about the possibility of "using nuclear weapons of mass destruction against Russia", and stated "if the territorial integrity of our country is threatened, we will certainly use all the means at our disposal to protect Russia and our people... It's not a bluff." NBC News characterized Putin's statements as a "thinly veiled" threat that Putin was willing to risk nuclear conflict if necessary to win the war with Ukraine.[113] Hans M. Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, stated that "if you start detonating nuclear weapons in the [battlefield] you potentially get radioactive fallout that you can't control — it could rain over your own troops as well, so it might not be an advantage to do that in the field."[114] According to a peer-reviewed study published in the journal Nature Food in August 2022,[115] a full-scale nuclear war between the U.S. and Russia would kill 360 million people directly, with a further 5 billion people dying from starvation. More than 2 billion people would die from a smaller-scale nuclear war between India and Pakistan.[116][117] Sub-strategic use See also: Nuclear bunker buster and Edward Teller § Decision to drop the bombs The above examples envisage nuclear warfare at a strategic level, i.e., total war. However, nuclear powers have the ability to undertake more limited engagements. "Sub-strategic use" includes the use of either "low-yield" tactical nuclear weapons, or of variable yield strategic nuclear weapons in a very limited role, as compared to battlefield exchanges of larger-yield strategic nuclear weapons. This was described by the UK Parliamentary Defence Select Committee as "the launch of one or a limited number of missiles against an adversary as a means of conveying a political message, warning or demonstration of resolve".[118] It is believed that all current nuclear weapons states possess tactical nuclear weapons, with the exception of the United Kingdom, which decommissioned its tactical warheads in 1998. However, the UK does possess scalable-yield strategic warheads, and this technology tends to blur the difference between "strategic", "sub-strategic", and "tactical" use or weapons. American, French and British nuclear submarines are believed to carry at least some missiles with dial-a-yield warheads for this purpose, potentially allowing a strike as low as one kiloton (or less) against a single target. Only the People's Republic of China and the Republic of India have declarative, unqualified, unconditional "no first use" nuclear weapons policies. India and Pakistan maintain only a credible minimum deterrence. Commodore Tim Hare, former Director of Nuclear Policy at the British Ministry of Defence, has described "sub-strategic use" as offering the Government "an extra option in the escalatory process before it goes for an all-out strategic strike which would deliver unacceptable damage".[119] However, this sub-strategic capacity has been criticized as potentially increasing the "acceptability" of using nuclear weapons. Combined with the trend in the reduction in the worldwide nuclear arsenal as of 2007 is the warhead miniaturization and modernization of the remaining strategic weapons that is presently occurring in all the declared nuclear weapon states, into more "usable" configurations. The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute suggests that this is creating a culture where use of these weapons is more acceptable and therefore is increasing the risk of war, as these modern weapons do not possess the same psychological deterrent value as the large Cold-War era, multi-megaton warheads.[120] In many ways, this present change in the balance of terror can be seen as the complete embracement of the switch from the 1950s Eisenhower doctrine of "massive retaliation"[121] to one of "flexible response", which has been growing in importance in the US nuclear war fighting plan/SIOP every decade since. For example, the United States adopted a policy in 1996 of allowing the targeting of its nuclear weapons at non-state actors ("terrorists") armed with weapons of mass destruction.[122] Another dimension to the tactical use of nuclear weapons is that of such weapons deployed at sea for use against surface and submarine vessels. Until 1992, vessels of the United States Navy (and their aircraft) deployed various such weapons as bombs, rockets (guided and unguided), torpedoes, and depth charges. Such tactical naval nuclear weapons were considered more acceptable to use early in a conflict because there would be few civilian casualties. It was feared by many planners that such use would probably quickly have escalated into a large-scale nuclear war.[123] This situation was particularly exacerbated by the fact that such weapons at sea were not constrained by the safeguards provided by the Permissive Action Link attached to U.S. Air Force and Army nuclear weapons. It is unknown if the navies of the other nuclear powers yet today deploy tactical nuclear weapons at sea. The 2018 US Nuclear Posture Review emphasised the need for the US to have sub-strategic nuclear weapons as additional layers for its nuclear deterrence.[124] Nuclear terrorism Main article: Nuclear terrorism Nuclear terrorism by non-state organizations or actors (even individuals) is a largely unknown and understudied factor in nuclear deterrence thinking, as states possessing nuclear weapons are susceptible to retaliation in kind, while sub- or trans-state actors may be less so. The collapse of the Soviet Union has given rise to the possibility that former Soviet nuclear weapons might become available on the black market (so-called 'loose nukes'). A number of other concerns have been expressed about the security of nuclear weapons in newer nuclear powers with relatively less stable governments, such as Pakistan, but in each case, the fears have been addressed to some extent by statements and evidence provided by those nations, as well as cooperative programs between nations. Worry remains, however, in many circles that a relative decrease in the security of nuclear weapons has emerged in recent years, and that terrorists or others may attempt to exert control over (or use) nuclear weapons, militarily applicable technology, or nuclear materials and fuel. Another possible nuclear terrorism threat are devices designed to disperse radioactive materials over a large area using conventional explosives, called dirty bombs. The detonation of a "dirty bomb" would not cause a nuclear explosion, nor would it release enough radiation to kill or injure a large number of people. However, it could cause severe disruption and require potentially very costly decontamination procedures and increased spending on security measures.[125] Radioactive materials can also be used for targeted assassinations. For example, the poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko was described by medical professionals, as "an ominous landmark: the beginning of an era of nuclear terrorism."[126][127][128][129] Survival See also: Nuclear famine, Nuclear War Survival Skills, and Civil defense The predictions of the effects of a major countervalue nuclear exchange include millions of city dweller deaths within a short period of time. Some 1980s predictions had gone further and argued that a full-scale nuclear war could eventually bring about the extinction of the human race.[7] Such predictions, sometimes but not always based on total war with nuclear arsenals at Cold War highs, received contemporary criticism.[4] On the other hand, some 1980s governmental predictions, such as FEMA's CRP-2B and NATO's Carte Blanche, have received criticism from groups such as the Federation of American Scientists for being overly optimistic. CRP-2B, for instance, infamously predicted that 80% of Americans would survive a nuclear exchange with the Soviet Union, a figure that neglected nuclear war's impacts on healthcare infrastructure, the food supply, and the ecosystem and assumed that all major cities could be successfully evacuated within 3–5 days.[130] A number of Cold War publications advocated preparations that could purportedly enable a large proportion of civilians to survive even a total nuclear war. Among the most famous of these is Nuclear War Survival Skills.[131] To avoid injury and death from a nuclear weapon's heat flash and blast effects, the two most far-ranging prompt effects of nuclear weapons, schoolchildren were taught to duck and cover by the early Cold War film of the same name. Such advice is once again being given in case of nuclear terrorist attacks.[132] Prussian blue, or "Radiogardase", is stockpiled in the US, along with potassium iodide and DPTA, as pharmaceuticals useful in treating internal exposure to harmful radioisotopes in fallout.[133] Publications on adapting to a changing diet and supplying nutritional food sources following a nuclear war, with particular focus on agricultural radioecology, include Nutrition in the postattack environment by the RAND corporation.[134] The British government developed a public alert system for use during a nuclear attack with the expectation of a four-minute warning before detonation. The United States expected a warning time of anywhere from half an hour (for land-based missiles) to less than three minutes (for submarine-based weapons). Many countries maintain plans for continuity of government following a nuclear attack or similar disasters. These range from a designated survivor, intended to ensure the survival of some form of government leadership, to the Soviet Dead Hand system, which allows for retaliation even if all Soviet leadership were destroyed. Nuclear submarines are given letters of last resort: orders on what action to take in the event that a

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ David William Belin (June 20, 1928 – January 17, 1999) was an attorney for the Warren Commission and the Rockefeller Commission.[1] Belin was a partner in a Des Moines, Iowa law firm and, with former NBC News president Michael Gartner, was co-owner of The Tribune in Ames, Iowa.[1] Early life Belin was born in Washington, D.C. and raised in Sioux City, Iowa.[1] Notable actions Belin served the Jewish community in many leadership positions, establishing the Jewish Outreach Institute in 1987 after serving as chairman of the Union of American Hebrew Congregations' outreach commission.[1] A successful businessman, Belin owned a number of Midwestern publications. Belin attended the University of Michigan where he received a bachelor's degree in 1951, a master's degree in business in 1953, and a law degree in 1954. He began practicing law in Des Moines in 1954.[1] Government service Belin served in the United States Army in Korea and in Japan.[1] He was a concert violinist for a period of his service.[2] Belin served as staff counsel to the Warren Commission, which investigated President John F. Kennedy's assassination. The Commission’s report concluded that Lee Harvey Oswald acted entirely on his own as Kennedy's assassin. Belin was hired by Lee Rankin, chief counsel to the Commission, who assigned a team of two lawyers to each of the major areas for investigation. Belin and Joe Ball, a criminal defense lawyer from Los Angeles, shared the important task of investigating Oswald’s activities during the assassination.[3] As their work progressed, Belin focused his efforts on trying to prove that a second shooter had participated in the assassination, but detailed work by the FBI and analysis of the Zapruder film suggested that all of the shots that hit President Kennedy and Texas Governor John Connally originated from Oswald’s position in the book depository.[4] At Robert Kennedy’s insistence, Chief Justice Earl Warren personally reviewed the evidence relating to President Kennedy’s medical treatment and autopsy.[5] Because the photos were so gruesome, Warren prevented the staff attorneys from using the autopsy evidence to corroborate the testimony of medical witnesses.[6] Belin described this decision as “disastrous� because it “gave rise to wild speculation and rumor� about the President’s injuries. Belin believed that the Kennedy family’s desire for privacy was outweighed by the public’s need to know the facts about the assassination.[7] In January 1975, President Gerald Ford, a former Warren Commission member, appointed Belin to serve as executive director of the Rockefeller Commission, which investigated illegal activities of the Central Intelligence Agency.[8] Belin led the Rockefeller Commission’s effort to investigate and publicize the CIA’s program to assassinate foreign officials. Under pressure from Belin, the CIA turned over records demonstrating the existence of these secret activities. When members of the Commission, including Vice President Nelson Rockefeller, objected to further investigation, Belin used favorable press coverage to convince the Commission to allow him to continue. Key CIA officials then testified about the agency’s plans from 1960 to 1964 to assassinate Fidel Castro – plans that had not been disclosed to the Warren Commission.[9] Based on this evidence, Belin prepared a draft chapter for the commission’s report, but both Rockefeller and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger successfully opposed publication of this chapter. Belin was upset about this decision, but the evidence that he collected provided important support for the groundbreaking work of the Church Committee in 1975 and 1976.[10] Responding to Oliver Stone’s movie “JFK,� Belin delivered a major defense of the Commission’s work in a speech at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., on March 26, 1992. He described “the lies, omissions, misrepresentations, and manufactured facts� in the film, and characterized Stone’s work as an effort to impeach the integrity of Earl Warren, “a great Chief Justice.� Belin also noted the massive amount of money spent by film studios and television networks to generate controversy and profits “as they rewrite the truth� about the Kennedy assassination.[11] Belin wrote two books on the JFK Assassination: November 22, 1963: You Are the Jury (1973) and Final Disclosure: The Full Truth About the Assassination of President Kennedy (1988). Belin stood by the findings of the Warren Commission’s report until his death, and was known to become incensed at any mention of an assassination conspiracy. As he lay in a coma in his final days, his friends would whisper conspiracy theories about the JFK assassination into his ear to confirm his unconsciousness by his unprecedented lack of response.[12] Belin Lectureship In 1991, Belin established the David W. Belin Lectureship in American Jewish Affairs at his alma mater the University of Michigan as an academic forum for the discussion of contemporary Jewish life in the United States. Belin graduated from the University of Michigan's College of Literature, Science and the Arts, Business School and Law School. Past Belin lecturers have included Egon Mayer, Stephen J. Whitfeld, Arthur Green, Deborah Dash Moore, Alvin Rosenfeld, Paula Hyman, Jeffrey S. Gurock, Arnold Eisen, Sylvia Barack Fishman, Jonathan Sarna, Hasia Diner, Susan Martha Kahn, Riv-Ellen Prell, Andrew Heinze, and Fred Lazin.[citation needed] The Belin lectures have been published annually by the University of Michigan Frankel Center for Judaic Studies.[13] Later years and death Belin lived in Windsor Heights, Iowa and on Manhattan's East Side. In January 1999, he sustained head injuries in a fall in a Rochester, Minnesota hotel room.[1] Belin was in a coma before dying twelve days later on January 17.[1] References Pace, Eric (January 18, 1999). "David W. Belin, Warren Commission Lawyer, Dies at 70". The New York Times. New York. Retrieved March 26, 2012. Belin, David William (June 20, 1928–January 17, 1999) Willens, Howard P., 1931- (31 October 2013). History Will Prove Us Right : Inside the Warren Commission report on the assassination of John F. Kennedy ("HWPUR"). New York, NY. pp. 43–45. ISBN 978-1-4683-0917-1. OCLC 863152345. Willens, HWPUR, pp. 85-87. Willens, HWPUR, pp. 193-94. Bugliosi, Vincent (2007). Reclaiming history : the assassination of President John F. Kennedy (First ed.). New York. pp. 426–27. ISBN 978-0-393-04525-3. OCLC 80180151. Belin, David W. (1973). November 22, 1963 : you are the jury. [New York]: Quadrangle. pp. 345–47. ISBN 0-8129-0374-9. OCLC 768651. Belin, David W. (1988). Final disclosure : the full truth about the assassination of President Kennedy. New York: Scribner's. pp. 86–91. ISBN 0-684-18976-3. OCLC 18017377. Willens, HWPUR, pp. 310-13. Belin, Final Disclosure, pp. 163-65. Willens, HWPUR, pp. 332-33. Sullivan, Andrew (January 2, 2000). "The Lives They Lived: David W. Belin, b. 1928". The New York Times Magazine. Retrieved August 25, 2020. "David W. Belin Lecture". www.lsa.umich.edu. Jean & Samuel Frankel Center for Judaic Studies. Archived from the original on September 27, 2015. Retrieved August 3, 2015. Authority control databases Edit this at Wikidata International FAST ISNI VIAF WorldCat National Israel United States Netherlands Other NARA Categories: 1928 births1999 deaths20th-century American businesspeople20th-century American JewsWriters from Des Moines, IowaUniversity of Michigan College of Literature, Science, and the Arts alumniWarren Commission counsel and staffWriters from New York (state)University of Michigan Law School alumniRoss School of Business alumniBusinesspeople from Manhattan

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Barton Springs is a set of four natural water springs located at Barton Creek on the grounds of Zilker Park[2] in Austin, Texas, resulting from water flowing through the Edwards Aquifer. The largest spring, Main Barton Spring (also known as Parthenia, "the mother spring"), supplies water to Barton Springs Pool, a popular recreational destination in Austin. The smaller springs are located nearby, two with man-made structures built to contain and direct their flow. The springs are the only known habitat of the Barton Springs Salamander, an endangered species.[3] The Barton Creek National Archeological and Historic District was formed in 1985. Geology Barton Springs is the main discharge point for the Barton Springs segment of the Edwards Aquifer of Texas, a well known karst aquifer. Geologically, the aquifer is composed of limestone from the Cretaceous period, about 100 million years old. Fractures, fissures, conduits, and caves have developed in this limestone. Both physical forces, such as faulting, and chemical forces, such as dissolution of limestone by infiltrating water, have enlarged these voids. This results in a karst aquifer made up of limestone with large void spaces. Water then enters the aquifer and fills the voids.[4] All water discharging from Barton Springs originates as rainfall. Some of this rain falls directly onto the area of land where the aquifer limestone rock is exposed, which is known as the recharge zone. Other rainfall enters into creeks that cross the recharge zone, and infiltrates the limestone bedrock. After water enters the aquifer, it flows along the gradients created by differences in hydraulic pressure into the area of lowest hydraulic pressure. This lowest point of hydraulic pressure is Barton Springs. Main spring Main Barton Spring/Parthenia is the most famous, yet least visible of the four springs because it is completely submerged by pool water. Located near the diving board in Barton Springs Pool, the spring's flow is not always visible at the surface. The main spring discharges an average flow of about 31 million US gallons (120,000 m3) per day. The lowest discharge ever recorded was 9 million US gallons (34,000 m3) per day during the drought of the 1950s, and the highest discharge ever recorded was 85 million US gallons (320,000 m3) per day during December 1991[5] and September 2016[6] flooding. By comparison, a typical domestic in-ground swimming pool holds about 20,000 US gallons (76 m3), and the City of Austin, a city of about 1 million residents, uses about 120 million US gallons (450,000 m3) per day for its public water supply system.[7] Other springs Eliza Spring in 2005. The three other springs associated with Barton Springs are Eliza, Old Mill, and Upper Barton Spring. Each is significantly smaller than Main Barton Spring, discharging an average of 3 million US gallons (11,000 m3) per day. Sometimes, these springs dry up completely. Eliza Spring, also known as Concession Spring, is located near the north entrance to Barton Springs Pool, 300 feet (100m) east towards the children's playscape. During the early 20th century, an amphitheater-style swimming enclosure was built around the spring. This structure is no longer open to the public due to safety concerns, and the fact that Eliza Spring has become a sensitive habitat area for the endangered Barton Springs Salamander. Old Mill Spring, also known as Sunken Gardens Spring or Zenobia Spring, is located on the south side of Barton Springs Pool. Like Eliza Spring, the early 20th century structure built around the spring is now closed to public access due to safety and endangered species habitat issues. Scientific analysis show that the water at Old Mill Spring has a slightly different chemistry than that of Main Barton Spring and Eliza Spring, even though it is less than half a mile (800 m) away from these springs. Upper Barton Spring is located in the creek bed of Barton Creek, about a half mile (800 m) upstream or west of Barton Springs Pool. Frequently dry, Upper Barton Spring is fully submerged by Barton Creek during floods. The water at Upper Barton Spring also has a significantly different chemistry than the other springs. The entire area around Barton Springs is riddled with faults from the Balcones Fault Zone and features other, smaller springs. For example, about one mile (2 km) upstream of Upper Barton Spring, an intermittent spring fills a popular natural swimming hole. Several other small springs empty directly into the Barton Creek bypass tunnel that passes to the side of Barton Springs Pool.[8] Fauna Two salamander species are found only at Barton Springs: Barton Springs salamander and Austin blind salamander.[9] Notes "National Register Information System – (#85003213)". National Register of Historic Places. National Park Service. March 13, 2009. Gregg Eckhardt. 2009 Gunnar, Brune. "Barton Springs". Retrieved September 12, 2011. Eckhardt, Gregg (2009). "Edwards Aquifer and Barton Springs". Edwards Aquifer. Retrieved September 12, 2011. "Barton SPGS at Austin, TX". "Barton SPGS at Austin, TX". "Austin Water Use at Record Low". Hill Country Alliance. Retrieved July 11, 2020. Lai, Valeria (July 23, 2010). "Barton Springs". Retrieved September 11, 2011. Frost, Darrel R. (2014). "Amphibian Species of the World: an Online Reference. Version 6.0". American Museum of Natural History. Retrieved February 14, 2015. External links Wikimedia Commons has media related to Barton Springs. Save Our Springs Alliance Barton Springs/Edwards Aquifer Conservation District vte Austin, Texas Slogan: Live Music Capital of the World Attractions Austin Zoo Circuit of the Americas Darrell K Royal–Texas Memorial Stadium Dell Diamond Driskill Hotel Frank Erwin Center NLand State Capitol Texas Governor's Mansion Treaty Oak UFCU Disch-Falk Field University of Texas Tower Zach Theatre History 1839 city plan 1928 city plan Austin Dam failure Capitol View Corridors COVID-19 pandemic French Legation Greater Austin Stephen F. Austin Texas Archive War Timeline Treaty Oak Waterloo, Texas Education Tertiary Austin Community College Concordia University Texas Huston–Tillotson University St. Edward's University University of Texas School districts Austin ISD template Del Valle ISD Eanes ISD Hays CISD Leander ISD Lake Travis ISD Manor ISD Pflugerville ISD State schools Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired Texas School for the Deaf Closed Texas Blind, Deaf, and Orphan School Libraries Austin Public Library Lorenzo de Zavala State Archives and Library Building Government City Hall Camp Mabry City Council (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,10) Fire Health Police Industry General Amy's Ice Creams Golfsmith Keller Williams Realty Schlotzsky's Whole Foods Market Creative arts Alamo Drafthouse Cinema/Drafthouse Films Collings Guitars Devolver Digital Gunfire Games Inner Sanctum Records Powerhouse Animation Studios Retro Studios Rooster Teeth Troublemaker Studios Waterloo Records Western Vinyl Technology Advanced Technology Development Facility (ATDF) Cirrus Logic Dell Freescale Semiconductor Luminex Corporation MCC National Instruments Silicon Labs Valence Technology Museums Arthouse at Laguna Gloria Arthouse at The Jones Center Austin History Center Austin Museum of Digital Art Blanton Museum of Art Bullock Texas State History Museum The Contemporary Austin Dolph Briscoe Center for American History Elisabet Ney Museum French Legation Museum George Washington Carver Museum and Cultural Center Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center Jacob Fontaine Religious Museum Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center Lyndon Baines Johnson Library and Museum Mexic-Arte Museum Neill-Cochran House Museum O. Henry Museum South Austin Museum of Popular Culture Texas Memorial Museum Texas Military Forces Museum Texas State Capitol Visitors Center Umlauf Sculpture Garden and Museum Music Antone's Armadillo World Headquarters Austin City Limits Austin Opera Austin Symphony Orchestra Cinematic Symphony Emo's Germania Insurance Amphitheater SXSW Neighborhoods Allandale Anderson Mill Barton Hills Blackland Bouldin Creek Bremond Block Historic District Brentwood Bryker Woods Canyon Creek Chinatown Circle C Ranch Clarksville Congress Avenue Copperfield Crestview Dawson Dove Springs Downtown Austin The Drag East Cesar Chavez East Riverside-Oltorf Easton Park French Place Galindo Granada Hills Hancock Hyde Park Historic District Jollyville Montopolis Moore's Crossing Historic District Mueller Community North Burnet–Gateway North Shoal Creek Northwest Hills Oak Hill Old West Austin Onion Creek Pemberton Heights Rainey Street Rosedale Saint John Scenic Brook Shadow Lawn Historic District Sixth Street South Congress South Lamar South River City Spyglass-Barton's Bluff Swedish Hill Tarrytown Travis Heights Waters Park West Campus Westgate West Line Willow-Spence Streets Windsor Hills Windsor Park Wooten Zilker Parks and recreation Auditorium Shores Barton Creek Barton Springs Big Walnut Creek Bull Creek Colorado River Deep Eddy Pool Emma Long Hippie Hollow Lady Bird Lake Lake Austin Lake Travis Lake Walter E. Long McKinney Falls Mount Bonnell Pease Park Republic Square Rosewood Park Walnut Creek Park Wild Basin Zilker Park Transportation Public Austin–Bergstrom International Airport CapMetro CapMetro Bus CapMetro Rail CapMetro Rapid Capital Area Rural Transportation System Freeways MoPac Expressway Interstate 35 Pickle Parkway SH 71 US 290 US 183 Streets Congress Avenue Guadalupe Street Sixth Street Bridges Ann W. Richards Congress Avenue Bridge Lamar Boulevard Bridge Larry Monroe Forever Bridge Montopolis Bridge Pennybacker Bridge Pfluger Pedestrian Bridge West Fifth Street Bridge West Sixth Street Bridge Culture Keep Austin Weird Leslie Cochran Occupy Austin Spamarama Weird City Sports Austin Aztex FC Austin Bold FC Austin FC Austin FC II Austin Gilgronis Austin Huns Austin Lightning Austin Lady Lone Stars Austin Lone Stars Austin Outlaws Austin Rise FC Austin Spurs Austin Thunder Austin United FC FC Austin Elite Round Rock Express Texas Stars vte National Register of Historic Places in Austin, Texas Archaeological Andrew M. Cox Ranch Site Levi Rock Shelter Smith Rock Shelter Business Arnold Bakery Austin Daily Tribune Building Blue Bonnet Court Brown Building Cambridge Tower Driskill Hotel Goodman Building Green Pastures Haehnel Building Lundberg Bakery Millett Opera House Norwood Tower Paramount Theatre J. P. Schneider Store Scholz Garten Victory Grill Westgate Tower Civic All Saints' Episcopal Church Anderson Stadium Austin Central Fire Station 1 Austin Fire Drill Tower Austin History Center Austin State Hospital Battle Hall Camp Mabry George Washington Carver Museum and Cultural Center Central Christian Church Elisabet Ney Museum French Legation General Land Office Building Gethsemane Lutheran Church Dewitt C. Greer State Highway Building Hyde Park Presbyterian Church Lamar Boulevard Bridge Littlefield House Montopolis Bridge Moonlight Towers O. Henry Hall Oakwood Cemetery Royal Arch Masonic Lodge James E. Rudder State Office Building St. David's Episcopal Church St. Edward's University Main Building St. Mary's Cathedral Scottish Rite Dormitory Seaholm Power Plant Texas Federation of Women's Clubs Headquarters Texas Governor's Mansion Texas State Capitol Texas State Cemetery Third Street Railroad Trestle Town Lake Gazebo United States Courthouse (1936) University Baptist Church University Junior High School Anthony and Louise Viaer Alumni Hall Wesley United Methodist Church West Fifth Street Bridge West Sixth Street Bridge Districts Bremond Block Historic District Clarksville Historic District Congress Avenue Historic District Hyde Park Historic District Little Campus Moore's Crossing Historic District Old West Austin Historic District Rainey Street Historic District Shadow Lawn Historic District Sixth Street Historic District Swedish Hill Historic District Travis Heights-Fairview Park Historic District West Line Historic District Willow–Spence Streets Historic District Private Aynesworth–Wright House Judge Robert Lynn Batts House Genaro P. and Carolina Briones House Brizendine House Carrington–Covert House Daniel H. and William T. Caswell Houses Frank M. and Annie G. Covert House Cox–Craddock House J. Frank Dobie House Fischer House Granger House and The Perch Hildreth–Flanagan–Heierman House Henry Hirshfeld House and Cottage A. J. Jernigan House Keith House Laguna Gloria Peter and Clotilde Shipe Mansbendel House Mayfield–Gutsch Estate McKinney Homestead Millett Opera House Neill–Cochran House Oliphant–Walker House Page–Gilbert House Perry Estate–St. Mary's Academy William Sidney Porter House Louis and Mathilde Reuter House Roberts Clinic Robinson–Macken House Sheeks–Robertson House Col. Monroe M. Shipe House Smith–Marcuse–Lowry House Southgate–Lewis House Wahrenberger House Woodlawn Goodall Wooten House Worrell–Ettlinger House Ziller House Recreational Barton Springs Deep Eddy Pool Lions Municipal Golf Course Mount Bonnell Wooldridge Park Zilker Park Categories: National Register of Historic Places in Austin, TexasCity of Austin Historic LandmarksGeography of Austin, TexasHistoric districts on the National Register of Historic Places in TexasSprings of TexasBodies of water of Travis County, TexasArchaeological sites on the National Register of Historic Places in Texas

The dark side of history: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ Blacks Britannica was a 1978 American documentary film directed and produced by David Koff and Musindo Mwinyipembe.[1] An analysis of the Black British experience of racism in Britain, it featured contributions by Colin Prescod, Darcus Howe, Jessica Huntley, Gus John, Claudia Jones, Courtney Hay, the Manchester community worker Ron Phillips, Tony Sealy and Steel Pulse. Making of the film Koff and Mwinyipembe, who had spent much of her childhood in Britain, became interested in the phenomenon of British racism. In the wake of riots against over-policing of the 1976 and 1977 Notting Hill Carnival, they saw racial discrimination in Britain as similar in degree to that in the United States. They wanted to understand how it had developed so quickly: "from, say, 1958 to 1978 ... one had a 20 year span of time in which a pattern of institutional racism developed in Britain but at the same time a very clear response to that racism was also beginning to manifest itself.[2] They initially proposed a documentary about the British black community to the Boston public television station WGBH in September 1977. To make the documentary, Koff and Mwinyipembe worked closely with Colin Prescod and other black British intellectuals and activists. By the end of May 1978, according to Koff, the film was ready to show to WGBH. However, it faced immediate opposition from WGBH executives such as David Fanning and Peter McGhee:[2] There was a very immediate and hostile reaction. Everyone felt that it was "revolutionary, that the audience just wouldn't be able to cope with a film that came out so clearly, as they said, with a "call for revolution."[2] It was officially agreed that Koff and Mwinyipembe should continue preparing the film for national television release on July 13, 1978.[2] Censorship After submitting the final cut of the film in late June Koff and Mwinyipembe learned that WGBH had decided to cancel the July 13 broadcast, and 're-edit' the film for release. Accusing WGBH of censorship, Koff and Mwinyipembe organized a London press conference, and private screenings of the original film. Blacks Britannica also went on public exhibition at one London cinema, until WGBH secured an injunction against it.[2] WGBH released a statement by David Fanning objecting to the "arrangement of the material within the film, which, when viewed out of context by an American audience, would be confusing."[3] They showcased their own re-edit to the press, blocking the original production team from attending viewings. The re-edit removed the beginning and end framing of the original film, removed provocative material such as and restructured the sequence of other material. The result was nearly five minutes shorter, with around 80 changes. The original film had presented an analysis "clearly from the black perspective", ascribing political responsibility for the situation to the British state in a post-colonial situation where capitalism was encountering limits. By contrast, the re-edited version presented what Mwinyipembe characterized as "the point of view of the state itself, laying the blame on blacks". All of the original production team disassociated themselves, and were not included in the credits for the re-edited version. Colin Prescod, outraged after managing to see the re-edit, demanded that the company remove all his material. WGBH ignored Prescod's request, and his legal attempt to block publication was unsuccessful.[2] Reception The critic Peter Biskind saw Blacks Britannica as approaching "British racism from an uncompromising Marxist perspective, showing how it is used to create a permanent underclass and to set the working class at war with itself". WBGH's recut version provided "an object lesson in the anatomy of censorship."[3] In December 1978 Blacks Britannica won the special prize of the International Organization of Journalists at the Leipzig Film Festival. Joel Dreyfuss, writing for Jump Cut in November 1979, called the film "a relentless and engrossing indictment of racism toward black immigrants to England, told from an obvious Marxist perspective."[4] Credits Producer & Director: David Koff Associate Producer: Musindo Mwinyipembe Editor: Tom Scott Robson Assistant Editor: Neil Gibson Photography: William Brayne, Mike Davis, Charles Stewart Music: Steel Pulse Sound Recording: Albert Bailey: Neil Kingsbury, Michael Lax Dubbing Mix: Tony Anscombe Research: Margaret Henry References Fisher, Tracy (2012). "Revolutions of the Mind: Afro-Asian Politics of Change in Babylon". What's Left of Blackness: Feminisms, Transracial Solidarities, and the Politics of Belonging in Britain. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 59–63. ISBN 978-0230339170. Koff, David; Mwinyipembe, Musindo (May–June 1979). "The Black Scholar Interviews: David Koff & Musindo Mwinyipembe". The Black Scholar. 10 (8/9): 68–80. doi:10.1080/00064246.1979.11644174. JSTOR 41163864. Biskind, Peter (November 1979). "Blacks Britannica: A Clear Case of Censorship". Jump Cut (21). Reprinted in Rosenthal, Alan (ed.). New Challenges for Documentary. pp. 402–407. Dreyfuss, Joel (November 1979). "Blacks Britannica: Racism in public TV". Jump Cut (21). External links Blacks Britannica at IMDb Edit this at Wikidata Blacks Britannica, YouTube Categories: 1978 documentary films American documentary television films Documentary films about racism Racism in the United Kingdom Black British culture Black British history Censored films

More CIA stories from John Stockwell: https://thememoryhole.substack.com/ The video "Reagan and Iran: Uncovering a Covert Action" features John Stockwell, a former CIA official, delving into Reagan's clandestine arms dealings with Iran. Drawing from his experience managing a similar scenario in Angola during his tenure at the CIA, Stockwell offers profound insights into the inner workings of the CIA and the National Security Council. He highlights parallels between the "Israeli connection" in the Iran situation and his past involvement in the Angolan operation. Stockwell contextualizes these covert actions within the expansive global arms industry, estimating its annual worth at a staggering $900 billion. He critically evaluates the disinformation campaigns orchestrated by the CIA and the Reagan administration in recent years. Additionally, he scrutinizes the media coverage surrounding these covert activities. Drawing from his recent visit to Nicaragua, Stockwell shares his firsthand observations on the state of the embattled country. The video, recorded on November 26, 1986, presents a comprehensive analysis of covert operations, arms trade, media coverage, and the geopolitical landscape during that period. The Iran–Contra affair (Persian: ماجرای ایران-کنترا; Spanish: Caso Irán-Contra), often referred to as the Iran–Contra scandal, was a political scandal in the United States that occurred during the second term of the Reagan administration. Between 1981 and 1986, senior administration officials secretly facilitated the illegal sale of arms to Iran, who was subjected to an arms embargo at the time.[1] The administration hoped to use the proceeds of the arms sale to fund the Contras, an anti-Sandinista rebel group in Nicaragua. Under the Boland Amendment, further funding of the Contras by legislative appropriations was prohibited by Congress, but the Reagan administration figured out a loophole by secretively using non-appropriated funds instead. The Iran–Contra affair is sometimes referred to as the McFarlane affair in Iran. The official justification for the arms shipments was that they were part of an operation to free seven US hostages being held in Lebanon by Hezbollah, an Islamist paramilitary group with Iranian ties connected to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.[2] The idea to exchange arms for hostages was proposed by Manucher Ghorbanifar, an expatriate Iranian arms dealer.[3][4][5] Some within the Reagan administration hoped the sales would influence Iran to get Hezbollah to release the hostages. In late 1985, Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North of the National Security Council (NSC) diverted a portion of the proceeds from the Iranian weapon sales to fund the Contras, a group of anti-Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) rebels, in their insurgency against the socialist government of Nicaragua. North later claimed that Ghorbanifar had given him the idea for diverting profits from BGM-71 TOW and MIM-23 Hawk missile sales to Iran to the Nicaraguan Contras.[6] While President Ronald Reagan was a vocal supporter of the Contra cause,[7] the evidence is disputed as to whether he personally authorized the diversion of funds to the Contras.[2] Handwritten notes taken by Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger on 7 December 1985 indicate that Reagan was aware of potential hostage transfers with Iran, by Israel, as well as the sale of Hawk and TOW missiles to "moderate elements" within that country.[8] Weinberger wrote that Reagan said "he could answer charges of illegality but he couldn't answer charge [sic] that 'big strong President Reagan passed up a chance to free hostages.'"[8] After the weapon sales were revealed in November 1986, Reagan appeared on national television and stated that the weapons transfers had indeed occurred, but that the US did not trade arms for hostages.[9] The investigation was impeded when large volumes of documents relating to the affair were destroyed or withheld from investigators by Reagan administration officials.[10] On 4 March 1987, Reagan made a further nationally televised address, saying he was taking full responsibility for the affair and stating that "what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages."[11] The affair was investigated by Congress and by the three-person, Reagan-appointed Tower Commission. Neither investigation found evidence that President Reagan himself knew of the extent of the multiple programs.[2] Additionally, US Deputy Attorney General Lawrence Walsh was appointed Independent Counsel in December 1986 to investigate possible criminal actions by officials involved in the scheme. In the end, several dozen administration officials were indicted, including then-Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger. Eleven convictions resulted, some of which were vacated on appeal.[12] The rest of those indicted or convicted were all pardoned in the final days of the presidency of George H. W. Bush, who had been vice president at the time of the affair.[13] Former Independent Counsel Walsh noted that, in issuing the pardons, Bush appeared to have been preempting being implicated himself by evidence that came to light during the Weinberger trial and noted that there was a pattern of "deception and obstruction" by Bush, Weinberger, and other senior Reagan administration officials.[14] Walsh submitted his final report on 4 August 1993[15] and later wrote an account of his experiences as counsel, Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover-Up.[14] Background The US was the largest seller of arms to Iran under Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, and the vast majority of the weapons that the Islamic Republic of Iran inherited in January 1979 were US-made.[16] To maintain this arsenal, Iran required a steady supply of spare parts to replace those broken and worn out. After Iranian students stormed the US embassy in Tehran in November 1979 and took 52 Americans hostage, US President Jimmy Carter imposed an arms embargo on Iran.[16] After Iraq invaded Iran in September 1980, Iran desperately needed weapons and spare parts for its current weapons. After Ronald Reagan took office as president on 20 January 1981, he vowed to continue Carter's policy of blocking arms sales to Iran on the grounds that Iran supported terrorism.[16] A group of senior Reagan administration officials in the Senior Interdepartmental Group conducted a secret study on 21 July 1981 and concluded that the arms embargo was ineffective because Iran could always buy arms and spare parts for its US weapons elsewhere, while, at the same time, the arms embargo opened the door for Iran to fall into the Soviet sphere of influence as the Kremlin could sell Iran weapons if the US would not.[16] The conclusion was that the US should start selling Iran arms as soon as it was politically possible in order to keep Iran from falling into the Soviet sphere of influence.[16] At the same time, the openly declared goal of Ayatollah Khomeini to export his Islamic revolution all over the Middle East and overthrow the governments of Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the other states around the Persian Gulf led to the Americans perceiving Khomeini as a major threat to the US.[16] In the spring of 1983, the US launched Operation Staunch, a wide-ranging diplomatic effort to persuade other nations all over the world not to sell arms or spare parts for weapons to Iran.[16] This was at least part of the reason the Iran–Contra affair proved so humiliating for the US when the story first broke in November 1986 that the US itself was selling arms to Iran. At the same time that the US government was considering its options on selling arms to Iran, Contra militants based in Honduras were waging a guerrilla war to topple the FSLN revolutionary government of Nicaragua. Almost from the time he took office in 1981, a major goal of the Reagan administration was the overthrow of the left-wing Sandinista government in Nicaragua and to support the Contra rebels.[17] The Reagan administration's policy toward Nicaragua produced a major clash between the executive and legislative branches as Congress sought to limit, if not curb altogether, the ability of the White House to support the Contras.[17] Direct US funding of the Contras insurgency was made illegal through the Boland Amendment, the name given to three US legislative amendments between 1982 and 1984 aimed at limiting US government assistance to Contra militants. By 1984, funding for the Contras had run out; and, in October of that year, a total ban came into effect. The second Boland Amendment, in effect from 3 October 1984 to 3 December 1985, stated: During the fiscal year 1985 no funds available to the Central Intelligence Agency, the Department of Defense or any other agency or entity of the United States involved in intelligence activities may be obligated or expended for the purpose of or which may have the effect of supporting directly or indirectly military or paramilitary operations in Nicaragua by any nation, organization, group, movement, or individual.[17] In violation of the Boland Amendment, senior officials of the Reagan administration continued to secretly arm and train the Contras and provide arms to Iran, an operation they called "the Enterprise".[18][19] Given the Contras' heavy dependence on US military and financial support, the second Boland Amendment threatened to break the Contra movement and led to President Reagan ordering in 1984 that the NSC "keep the Contras together 'body and soul'", no matter what Congress voted for.[17] A major legal debate at the center of the Iran–Contra affair concerned the question of whether the NSC was one of the "any other agency or entity of the United States involved in intelligence activities" covered by the Boland Amendment. The Reagan administration argued it was not, and many in Congress argued that it was.[17] The majority of constitutional scholars have asserted the NSC did indeed fall within the purview of the second Boland Amendment, though the amendment did not mention the NSC by name.[20] The broader constitutional question at stake was the power of Congress versus the power of the presidency. The Reagan administration argued that, because the constitution assigned the right to conduct foreign policy to the executive, its efforts to overthrow the government of Nicaragua were a presidential prerogative that Congress had no right to try to halt via the Boland Amendments.[21] By contrast, Congressional leaders argued that the constitution had assigned Congress control of the budget, and Congress had every right to use that power not to fund projects like attempting to overthrow the government of Nicaragua that they disapproved of.[21] As part of the effort to circumvent the Boland Amendment, the NSC established "the Enterprise", an arms-smuggling network headed by a retired US Air Force officer turned arms dealer Richard Secord that supplied arms to the Contras. It was ostensibly a private sector operation, but in fact was controlled by the NSC.[20] To fund "the Enterprise", the Reagan administration was constantly on the look-out for funds that came from outside the US government in order not to explicitly violate the letter of the Boland Amendment, though the efforts to find alternative funding for the Contras violated the spirit of the Boland Amendment.[22] Ironically, military aid to the Contras was reinstated with Congressional consent in October 1986, a month before the scandal broke.[23][24] In his 1995 memoir My American Journey, General Colin Powell, the US Deputy National Security Advisor, wrote that the weapons sales to Iran were used "for purposes prohibited by the elected representatives of the American people [...] in a way that avoided accountability to the President and Congress. It was wrong."[25] In 1985, Manuel Noriega offered to help the US by allowing Panama as a staging ground for operations against the FSLN and offering to train Contras in Panama, but this would later be overshadowed by the Iran–Contra affair itself.[26] At around the same time, the Soviet Bloc also engaged in arms deals with ideologically opponent buyers,[27] possibly involving some of the same players as the Iran–Contra affair.[28] In 1986, a complex operation involving East Germany's Stasi and the Danish-registered ship Pia Vesta ultimately aimed to sell Soviet arms and military vehicles to South Africa's Armscor, using various intermediaries to distance themselves from the deal. Manuel Noriega of Panama was apparently one of these intermediaries but backed out on the deal as the ship and weapons were seized at a Panamanian port.[29][30][28] The Pia Vesta led to a small controversy, as the Panama and Peru governments in 1986 accused the US and each other of being involved in the East Germany-originated shipment.[31][28] Arms sales to Iran See also: Brokers of Death arms case and Israel in the Iran–Iraq War As reported in The New York Times in 1991, "continuing allegations that Reagan campaign officials made a deal with the Iranian Government of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the fall of 1980" led to "limited investigations". However "limited", those investigations established that "Soon after taking office in 1981, the Reagan Administration secretly and abruptly changed United States policy." Secret Israeli arms sales and shipments to Iran began in that year, even as, in public, "the Reagan Administration" presented a different face, and "aggressively promoted a public campaign [...] to stop worldwide transfers of military goods to Iran". The New York Times explains: "Iran at that time was in dire need of arms and spare parts for its American-made arsenal to defend itself against Iraq, which had attacked it in September 1980", while "Israel [a US ally] was interested in keeping the war between Iran and Iraq going to ensure that these two potential enemies remained preoccupied with each other". Major General Avraham Tamir, a high-ranking Israeli Defense Ministry official in 1981, said there was an "oral agreement" to allow the sale of "spare parts" to Iran. This was based on an "understanding" with Secretary Alexander Haig (which a Haig adviser denied). This account was confirmed by a former senior US diplomat with a few modifications. The diplomat claimed that "[Ariel] Sharon violated it, and Haig backed away". A former "high-level" Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) official who saw reports of arms sales to Iran by Israel in the early 1980s estimated that the total was about $2 billion a year—but also said, "The degree to which it was sanctioned I don't know."[32] On 17 June 1985, National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane wrote a National Security Decision Directive which called for the US to begin a rapprochement with the Islamic Republic of Iran.[16] The paper read: Dynamic political evolution is taking place inside Iran. Instability caused by the pressures of the Iraq-Iran war, economic deterioration and regime in-fighting create the potential for major changes inside Iran. The Soviet Union is better positioned than the U.S. to exploit and benefit from any power struggle that results in changes from the Iranian regime [...]. The U.S. should encourage Western allies and friends to help Iran meet its import requirements so as to reduce the attractiveness of Soviet assistance [...]. This includes provision of selected military equipment.[33] Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger was highly negative, writing on his copy of McFarlane's paper: "This is almost too absurd to comment on [...] like asking Qaddafi to Washington for a cozy chat."[34] Secretary of State George Shultz was also opposed, stating that having designated Iran a State Sponsor of Terrorism in January 1984, how could the US possibly sell arms to Iran?[34] Only the Director of the CIA William J. Casey supported McFarlane's plan to start selling arms to Iran.[34] In early July 1985, the historian Michael Ledeen, a consultant of National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane, requested assistance from Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres for help in the sale of arms to Iran.[35] Having talked to an Israeli diplomat David Kimche and Ledeen, McFarlane learned that the Iranians were prepared to have Hezbollah release US hostages in Lebanon in exchange for Israelis shipping Iran US weapons.[34] Having been designated a State Sponsor of Terrorism since January 1984,[36] Iran was in the midst of the Iran–Iraq War and could find few Western nations willing to supply it with weapons.[citation needed] The idea behind the plan was for Israel to ship weapons through an intermediary (identified as Manucher Ghorbanifar) to the Islamic Republic as a way of aiding a supposedly moderate, politically influential faction within the regime of Ayatollah Khomeini who was believed to be seeking a rapprochement with the US; after the transaction, the US would reimburse Israel with the same weapons, while receiving monetary benefits.[37] McFarlane in a memo to Shultz and Weinberger wrote: The short term dimension concerns the seven hostages; the long term dimension involves the establishment of a private dialogue with Iranian officials on the broader relations [...]. They sought specifically the delivery from Israel of 100 TOW missiles [...].[34] The plan was discussed with President Reagan on 18 July 1985 and again on 6 August 1985.[34] Shultz at the latter meeting warned Reagan that "we were just falling into the arms-for-hostages business and we shouldn't do it".[34] The Americans believed that there was a moderate faction in the Islamic Republic headed by Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, the powerful speaker of the Majlis who was seen as a leading potential successor to Khomeini and who was alleged to want a rapprochement with the US.[38] The Americans believed that Rafsanjani had the power to order Hezbollah to free the US hostages and establishing a relationship with him by selling Iran arms would ultimately place Iran back within the US sphere of influence.[38] It remains unclear if Rafsanjani really wanted a rapprochement with the US or was just deceiving Reagan administration officials who were willing to believe that he was a moderate who would effect a rapprochement.[38] Rafsanjani, whose nickname is "the Shark", was described by the UK journalist Patrick Brogan as a man of great charm and formidable intelligence known for his subtlety and ruthlessness whose motives in the Iran–Contra affair remain completely mysterious.[38] The Israeli government required that the sale of arms meet high-level approval from the US government, and, when McFarlane convinced them that the US government approved the sale, Israel obliged by agreeing to sell the arms.[35] In 1985, President Reagan entered Walter Reed National Military Medical Center for colon cancer surgery. Reagan's recovery was nothing short of miserable, as the 74-year-old President admitted having little sleep for days in addition to his immense physical discomfort. While doctors seemed to be confident that the surgery was successful, the discovery of his localized cancer was a daunting realization for Reagan. From seeing the recovery process of other patients, as well as medical “experts� on television predicting his death to be soon, Reagan's typical optimistic outlook was dampened. These factors were bound to contribute to psychological distress in the midst of an already distressing situation.[39] Additionally, Reagan's invocation of the 25th Amendment prior to the surgery was a risky and unprecedented decision that smoothly flew under the radar for the duration of the complex situation. While it only lasted slightly longer than the length of the procedure (approximately seven hours and 54 minutes), this temporary transfer of power was never formally recognized by the White House. It was later revealed that this decision was made on the grounds that "Mr. Reagan and his advisors did not want his actions to establish a definition of incapacitation that would bind future presidents." Reagan expressed this transfer of power in two identical letters that were sent to the speaker of the House of Representatives, Representative Tip O'Neill, and the president pro tempore of the senate, Senator Strom Thurmond.[40] While the President was recovering in the hospital, McFarlane met with him and told him that representatives from Israel had contacted the National Security Agency to pass on confidential information from what Reagan later described as the "moderate" Iranian faction headed by Rafsanjani opposed to the Ayatollah's hardline anti-US policies.[37] The visit from McFarlane in Reagan's hospital room was the first visit from an administration official outside of Donald Regan since the surgery. The meeting took place five days after the surgery and only three days after doctors gave the news that his polyp had been malignant. The three participants of this meeting had very different recollections of what was discussed during its 23-minute duration. Months later, Reagan even stated that he "had no recollection of a meeting in the hospital in July with McFarlane and that he had no notes which would show such a meeting". This does not come as a surprise considering the possible short and long-term effects of anesthesia on patients above the age of 60, in addition to his already weakened physical and mental state.[39] According to Reagan, these Iranians sought to establish a quiet relationship with the US, before establishing formal relationships upon the death of the aging Ayatollah.[37] In Reagan's account, McFarlane told Reagan that the Iranians, to demonstrate their seriousness, offered to persuade the Hezbollah militants to release the seven US hostages.[41] McFarlane met with the Israeli intermediaries;[42] Reagan claimed that he allowed this because he believed that establishing relations with a strategically located country, and preventing the Soviet Union from doing the same, was a beneficial move.[37] Although Reagan claims that the arms sales were to a "moderate" faction of Iranians, the Walsh Iran–Contra Report states that the arms sales were "to Iran" itself,[43] which was under the control of the Ayatollah. Following the Israeli–US meeting, Israel requested permission from the US to sell a small number of BGM-71 TOW antitank missiles to Iran, claiming that this would aid the "moderate" Iranian faction,[41] by demonstrating that the group actually had high-level connections to the US government.[41] Reagan initially rejected the plan, until Israel sent information to the US showing that the "moderate" Iranians were opposed to terrorism and had fought against it.[44] Now having a reason to trust the "moderates", Reagan approved the transaction, which was meant to be between Israel and the "moderates" in Iran, with the US reimbursing Israel.[41] In his 1990 autobiography An American Life, Reagan claimed that he was deeply committed to securing the release of the hostages; it was this compassion that supposedly motivated his support for the arms initiatives. The president requested that the "moderate" Iranians do everything in their capability to free the hostages held by Hezbollah.[3] Reagan always publicly insisted after the scandal broke in late 1986 that the purpose behind the arms-for-hostages trade was to establish a working relationship with the "moderate" faction associated with Rafsanjani to facilitate the reestablishment of the US–Iranian alliance after the soon to be expected death of Khomeini, to end the Iran–Iraq War and end Iranian support for Islamic terrorism while downplaying the importance of freeing the hostages in Lebanon as a secondary issue.[45] By contrast, when testifying before the Tower Commission, Reagan declared that hostage issue was the main reason for selling arms to Iran.[46] A BGM-71 TOW antitank guided missile The following arms were supplied to Iran:[43][47] First arms sales in 1981 (see above) 20 August 1985 – 96 TOW antitank missiles 14 September 1985 – 408 more TOWs 24 November 1985 – 18 Hawk antiaircraft missiles 17 February 1986 – 500 TOWs 27 February 1986 – 500 TOWs 24 May 1986 – 508 TOWs, 240 Hawk spare parts 4 August 1986 – More Hawk spares 28 October 1986 – 500 TOWs First few arms sales The first arms sales to Iran began in 1981, though the official paper trail has them beginning in 1985 (see above). On 20 August 1985, Israel sent 96[contradictory] US-made TOW missiles to Iran through an arms dealer Manucher Ghorbanifar.[48] Subsequently, on 14 September 1985, 408 more TOW missiles were delivered. On 15 September 1985, following the second delivery, Reverend Benjamin Weir was released by his captors, the Islamic Jihad Organization. On 24 November 1985, 18 Hawk antiaircraft missiles were delivered. Modifications in plans Robert McFarlane resigned on 4 December 1985,[49][50] stating that he wanted to spend more time with his family,[51] and was replaced by Admiral John Poindexter.[52] Two days later, Reagan met with his advisors at the White House, where a new plan was introduced. This called for a slight change in the arms transactions: instead of the weapons going to the "moderate" Iranian group, they would go to "moderate" Iranian army leaders.[53] As each weapons delivery was made from Israel by air, hostages held by Hezbollah would be released.[53] Israel would continue to be reimbursed by the US for the weapons. Though staunchly opposed by Secretary of State George Shultz and Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, the plan was authorized by Reagan, who stated that, "We were not trading arms for hostages, nor were we negotiating with terrorists".[54] In his notes of a meeting held in the White House on 7 December 1985, Weinberger wrote he told Reagan that this plan was illegal, writing: I argued strongly that we have an embargo that makes arms sales to Iran illegal and President couldn't violate it and that 'washing' transactions through Israel wouldn't make it legal. Shultz, Don Regan agreed.[55] Weinberger's notes have Reagan saying he "could answer charges of illegality but he couldn't answer charge [sic] that 'big strong President Reagan passed up a chance to free hostages'."[55] Now retired National Security Advisor McFarlane flew to London to meet with Israelis and Ghorbanifar in an attempt to persuade the Iranian to use his influence to release the hostages before any arms transactions occurred; this plan was rejected by Ghorbanifar.[53] On the day of McFarlane's resignation, Oliver North, a military aide to the US National Security Council (NSC), proposed a new plan for selling arms to Iran, which included two major adjustments: instead of selling arms through Israel, the sale was to be direct at a markup; and a portion of the proceeds would go to Contras, or Nicaraguan paramilitary fighters waging guerrilla warfare against the Sandinista government, claiming power after an election full of irregularities.[56][not specific enough to verify] The dealings with the Iranians were conducted via the NSC with Admiral Poindexter and his deputy Colonel North, with the US historians Malcolm Byrne and Peter Kornbluh writing that Poindexter granted much power to North "who made the most of the situation, often deciding important matters on his own, striking outlandish deals with the Iranians, and acting in the name of the president on issues that were far beyond his competence. All of these activities continued to take place within the framework of the president's broad authorization. Until the press reported on the existence of the operation, nobody in the administration questioned the authority of Poindexter's and North's team to implement the president's decisions".[57] North proposed a $15 million markup, while contracted arms broker Ghorbanifar added a 41-percent markup of his own.[58] Other members of the NSC were in favor of North's plan; with large support, Poindexter authorized it without notifying President Reagan, and it went into effect.[59] At first, the Iranians refused to buy the arms at the inflated price because of the excessive markup imposed by North and Ghorbanifar. They eventually relented, and, in February 1986, 1,000 TOW missiles were shipped to the country.[59] From May to November 1986, there were additional shipments of miscellaneous weapons and parts.[59] Both the sale of weapons to Iran and the funding of the Contras attempted to circumvent not only stated administration policy, but also the Boland Amendment. Administration officials argued that, regardless of Congress restricting funds for the Contras, or any affair, the President (or in this case the administration) could carry on by seeking alternative means of funding such as private entities and foreign governments.[60] Funding from one foreign country, Brunei, was botched when North's secretary, Fawn Hall, transposed the numbers of North's Swiss bank account number. A Swiss businessperson, suddenly $10 million richer, alerted the authorities of the mistake. The money was eventually returned to the Sultan of Brunei, with interest.[61] On 7 January 1986, John Poindexter proposed to Reagan a modification of the approved plan: instead of negotiating with the "moderate" Iranian political group, the US would negotiate with "moderate" members of the Iranian government.[62] Poindexter told Reagan that Ghorbanifar had important connections within the Iranian government, so, with the hope of the release of the hostages, Reagan approved this plan as well.[62] Throughout February 1986, weapons were shipped directly to Iran by the US (as part of Oliver North's plan), but none of the hostages were released. Retired National Security Advisor McFarlane conducted another international voyage, this one to Tehran—bringing with him a gift of a Bible with a handwritten inscription by Ronald Reagan[63][64] and, according to George W. Cave, a cake baked in the shape of a key.[63] Howard Teicher described the cake as a joke between North and Ghorbanifar.[65] McFarlane met directly with Iranian officials associated with Rafsanjani, who sought to establish US–Iranian relations in an attempt to free the four remaining hostages.[66] The US delegation comprised McFarlane, North, Cave (a retired CIA officer who served as the group's translator), Teicher, Israeli diplomat Amiram Nir, and a CIA communicator.[67] They arrived in Tehran in an Israeli plane carrying forged Irish passports on 25 May 1986.[68] This meeting also failed. Much to McFarlane's disgust, he did not meet ministers, and instead met in his words "third and fourth level officials".[68] At one point, an angry McFarlane shouted: "As I am a Minister, I expect to meet with decision-makers. Otherwise, you can work with my staff."[68] The Iranians requested concessions such as Israel's withdrawal from the Golan Heights, which the US rejected.[66] More importantly, McFarlane refused to ship spare parts for the Hawk missiles until the Iranians had Hezbollah release the US hostages, whereas the Iranians wanted to reverse that sequence with the spare parts being shipped first before the hostages were freed.[68] The differing negotiating positions led to McFarlane's mission going home after four days.[69] After the failure of the secret visit to Tehran, McFarlane advised Reagan not to talk to the Iranians anymore, advice that was disregarded.[69] Subsequent dealings On 26 July 1986, Hezbollah freed the US hostage Father Lawrence Jenco, former head of Catholic Relief Services in Lebanon.[69] Following this, William J. Casey, head of the CIA, requested that the US authorize sending a shipment of small missile parts to Iranian military forces as a way of expressing gratitude.[70] Casey also justified this request by stating that the contact in the Iranian government might otherwise lose face or be executed, and hostages might be killed. Reagan authorized the shipment to ensure that those potential events would not occur.[70] North used this release to persuade Reagan to switch over to a "sequential" policy of freeing the hostages one by one, instead of the "all or nothing" policy that the Americans had pursued until then.[69] By this point, the Americans had grown tired of Ghorbanifar who had proven himself a dishonest intermediary who played off both sides to his own commercial advantage.[69] In August 1986, the Americans had established a new contact in the Iranian government, Ali Hashemi Bahramani, the nephew of Rafsanjani and an officer in the Revolutionary Guard.[69] The fact that the Revolutionary Guard was deeply involved in international terrorism seemed only to attract the Americans more to Bahramani, who was seen as someone with the influence to change Iran's policies.[69] Richard Secord, a US arms dealer, who was being used as a contact with Iran, wrote to North: "My judgment is that we have opened up a new and probably better channel into Iran".[69] North was so impressed with Bahramani that he arranged for him to secretly visit Washington DC and gave him a guided tour at midnight of the White House.[69] North frequently met with Bahramani in the summer and autumn of 1986 in West Germany, discussing arms sales to Iran, the freeing of hostages held by Hezbollah and how best to overthrow President Saddam Hussein of Iraq and the establishment of "a non-hostile regime in Baghdad".[69] In September and October 1986, three more Americans—Frank Reed, Joseph Cicippio, and Edward Tracy—were abducted in Lebanon by a separate terrorist group, who referred to them simply as "G.I. Joe", after the popular US toy. The reasons for their abduction are unknown, although it is speculated that they were kidnapped to replace the freed Americans.[71] One more original hostage, David Jacobsen, was later released. The captors promised to release the remaining two, but the release never happened.[72] During a secret meeting in Frankfurt in October 1986, North told Bahramani that: "Saddam Hussein must go".[69] North also claimed that Reagan had told him to tell Bahramani that: "Saddam Hussein is an asshole."[69] Behramani during a secret meeting in Mainz informed North that Rafsanjani "for his own politics [...] decided to get all the groups involved and give them a role to play".[73] Thus, all the factions in the Iranian government would be jointly responsible for the talks with the Americans and "there would not be an internal war".[73] This demand of Behramani caused much dismay on the US side as it made clear to them that they would not be dealing solely with a "moderate" faction in the Islamic Republic, as the Americans liked to pretend to themselves, but rather with all the factions in the Iranian government—including those who were very much involved in terrorism.[73] Despite this, the talks were not broken off.[73] Discovery and scandal After a leak by Mehdi Hashemi, a senior official in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, the Lebanese magazine Ash-Shiraa exposed the arrangement on 3 November 1986.[74] According to Seymour Hersh, an unnamed former military officer told him that the leak may have been orchestrated by a covert team led by Arthur S. Moreau Jr., assistant to the chair of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, due to fears the scheme had grown out of control.[75] This was the first public report of the weapons-for-hostages deal. The operation was discovered only after an airlift of guns (Corporate Air Services HPF821) was downed over Nicaragua. Eugene Hasenfus, who was captured by Nicaraguan authorities after surviving the plane crash, initially alleged in a press conference on Nicaraguan soil that two of his coworkers, Max Gomez and Ramon Medina, worked for the CIA.[76] He later said he did not know whether they did or not.[77] The Iranian government confirmed the Ash-Shiraa story, and, 10 days after the story was first published, President Reagan appeared on national television from the Oval Office on 13 November, stating: My purpose was [...] to send a signal that the United States was prepared to replace the animosity between [the US and Iran] with a new relationship [...]. At the same time we undertook this initiative, we made clear that Iran must oppose all forms of international terrorism as a condition of progress in our relationship. The most significant step which Iran could take, we indicated, would be to use its influence in Lebanon to secure the release of all hostages held there.[9] The scandal was compounded when Oliver North destroyed or hid pertinent documents between 21 November and 25 November 1986. During North's trial in 1989, his secretary, Fawn Hall, testified extensively about helping North alter and shred official US National Security Council (NSC) documents from the White House. According to The New York Times, enough documents were put into a government shredder to jam it.[58] Hall also testified that she smuggled classified documents out of the Old Executive Office Building by concealing them in her boots and dress.[78] North's explanation for destroying some documents was to protect the lives of individuals involved in Iran and Contra operations.[58] It was not until 1993, years after the trial, that North's notebooks were made public, and only after the National Security Archive and Public Citizen sued the Office of the Independent Counsel under the Freedom of Information Act.[58] The diversion of funds is revealed What is involved is that in the course of the arms transfers, which involved the United States providing the arms to Israel and Israel in turn transferring the arms -- in effect, selling the arms to representatives of Iran. Certain monies which were received in the transaction between representatives of Israel and representatives of Iran were taken and made available to the forces in Central America, which are opposing the Sandinista government there.[79] – U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese, White House news conference on November 25, 1986 During the trial, North testified that on 21, 22 or 24 November, he witnessed Poindexter destroy what may have been the only signed copy of a presidential covert-action finding that sought to authorize CIA participation in the November 1985 Hawk missile shipment to Iran.[58] U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese admitted on 25 November that profits from weapons sales to Iran were made available to assist the Contra rebels in Nicaragua. On the same day, John Poindexter resigned, and President Reagan fired Oliver North.[80] Poindexter was replaced by Frank Carlucci on 2 December 1986.[81] When the story broke, many legal and constitutional scholars expressed dismay that the NSC, which was supposed to be just an advisory body to assist the President with formulating foreign policy, had "gone operational" by becoming an executive body covertly executing foreign policy on its own.[82] The National Security Act of 1947, which created the NSC, gave it the vague right to perform "such other functions and duties related to the intelligence as the National Security Council may from time to time direct."[83] However, the NSC had usually, although not always, acted as an advisory agency until the Reagan administration when the NSC had "gone operational", a situation that was condemned by both the Tower Commission and by Congress as a departure from the norm.[83] The American historian John Canham-Clyne asserted that Iran-Contra affair and the NSC "going operational" were not departures from the norm, but were the logical and natural consequence of existence of the "national security state", the plethora of shadowy government agencies with multi-million dollar budgets operating with little oversight from Congress, the courts or the media, and for whom upholding national security justified almost everything.[83] Canham-Clyne argued that for the "national security state", the law was an obstacle to be surmounted rather than something to uphold and that the Iran-Contra affair was just "business as usual", something he asserted that the media missed by focusing on the NSC having "gone operational."[83] In Veil: The Secret Wars of the CIA 1981–1987, journalist Bob Woodward chronicled the role of the CIA in facilitating the transfer of funds from the Iran arms sales to the Nicaraguan Contras spearheaded by Oliver North. According to Woodward, then-Director of the CIA William J. Casey admitted to him in February 1987 that he was aware of the diversion of funds to the Contras.[84] The controversial admission occurred while Casey was hospitalized for a stroke, and, according to his wife, was unable to communicate. On 6 May 1987, William Casey died the day after Congress began public hearings on Iran-Contra. Independent Counsel, Lawrence Walsh later wrote: "Independent Counsel obtained no documentary evidence showing Casey knew about or approved the diversion. The only direct testimony linking Casey to early knowledge of the diversion came from [Oliver] North."[85] Gust Avrakodos, who was responsible for the arms supplies to the Afghans at this time, was aware of the operation as well and strongly opposed it, in particular the diversion of funds allotted to the Afghan operation. According to his Middle Eastern experts, the operation was pointless because the moderates in Iran were not in a position to challenge the fundamentalists. However, he was overruled by Clair George.[86] Tower Commission Main article: Tower Commission On 25 November 1986, President Reagan announced the creation of a Special Review Board to look into the matter; the following day, he appointed former Senator John Tower, former Secretary of State Edmund Muskie, and former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft to serve as members. This Presidential Commission took effect on 1 December and became known as the Tower Commission. The main objectives of the commission were to inquire into "the circumstances surrounding the Iran-Contra matter, other case studies that might reveal strengths and weaknesses in the operation of the National Security Council system under stress, and the manner in which that system has served eight different presidents since its inception in 1947". The Tower Commission was the first presidential commission to review and evaluate the National Security Council.[87] President Reagan (center) receives the Tower Commission Report in the White House Cabinet Room; John Tower is at left and Edmund Muskie is at right, 1987. President Reagan appeared before the Tower Commission on 2 December 1986, to answer questions regarding his involvement in the affair. When asked about his role in authorizing the arms deals, he first stated that he had; later, he appeared to contradict himself by stating that he had no recollection of doing so.[88] In his 1990 autobiography, An American Life, Reagan acknowledges authorizing the shipments to Israel.[89] The report published by the Tower Commission was delivered to the president on 26 February 1987. The commission had interviewed 80 witnesses to the scheme, including Reagan, and two of the arms trade middlemen: Manucher Ghorbanifar and Adnan Khashoggi.[88] The 200-page report was the most comprehensive of any released,[88] criticizing the actions of Oliver North, John Poindexter, Caspar Weinberger, and others. It determined that President Reagan did not have knowledge of the extent of the program, especially about the diversion of funds to the Contras, although it argued that the president ought to have had better control of the National Security Council staff. The report heavily criticized Reagan for not properly supervising his subordinates or being aware of their actions. A major result of the Tower Commission was the consensus that Reagan should have listened to his National Security Advisor more, thereby placing more power in the hands of that chair. Congressional committees investigating the affair Main article: Congressional committees investigating the Iran-Contra affair In January 1987, Congress announced it was opening an investigation into the Iran-Contra affair. Depending upon one's political perspective, the Congressional investigation into the Iran-Contra affair was either an attempt by the legislative arm to gain control over an out-of-control executive arm, a partisan "witch hunt" by the Democrats against a Republican administration or a feeble effort by Congress that did far too little to rein in the "imperial presidency" that had run amok by breaking numerous laws.[90] The Democratic-controlled United States Congress issued its own report on 18 November 1987, stating that "If the president did not know what his national security advisers were doing, he should have."[2] The Congressional report wrote that the president bore "ultimate responsibility" for wrongdoing by his aides, and his administration exhibited "secrecy, deception and disdain for the law".[91] It also read that "the central remaining question is the role of the President in the Iran-Contra affair. On this critical point, the shredding of documents by Poindexter, North and others, and the death of Casey, leave the record incomplete". Aftermath Reagan expressed regret with regard to the situation in a nationally televised address from the Oval Office on 4 March 1987, and in two other speeches.[92] Reagan had not spoken to the American people directly for three months amidst the scandal,[93] and he offered the following explanation for his silence: The reason I haven't spoken to you before now is this: You deserve the truth. And as frustrating as the waiting has been, I felt it was improper to come to you with sketchy reports, or possibly even erroneous statements, which would then have to be corrected, creating even more doubt and confusion. There's been enough of that.[93] Reagan then took full responsibility for the acts committed: First, let me say I take full responsibility for my own actions and for those of my administration. As angry as I may be about activities undertaken without my knowledge, I am still accountable for those activities. As disappointed as I may be in some who served me, I'm still the one who must answer to the American people for this behavior.[93] Finally, the president acknowledged that his previous assertions that the U.S. did not trade arms for hostages were incorrect: A few months ago I told the American people I did not trade arms for hostages. My heart and my best intentions still tell me that's true, but the facts and the evidence tell me it is not. As the Tower board reported, what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages. This runs counter to my own beliefs, to administration policy, and to the original strategy we had in mind.[93] Reagan's role in these transactions is still not definitively known. It is unclear exactly what Reagan knew and when, and whether the arms sales were motivated by his desire to save the U.S. hostages. Oliver North wrote that "Ronald Reagan knew of and approved a great deal of what went on with both the Iranian initiative and private efforts on behalf of the contras and he received regular, detailed briefings on both...I have no doubt that he was told about the use of residuals for the Contras, and that he approved it. Enthusiastically."[94] Handwritten notes by Defense Secretary Weinberger indicate that the President was aware of potential hostage transfers[clarification needed] with Iran, as well as the sale of Hawk and TOW missiles to what he was told were "moderate elements" within Iran.[8] Notes taken by Weinberger on 7 December 1985 record that Reagan said that "he could answer charges of illegality but he couldn't answer charge that 'big strong President Reagan passed up a chance to free hostages'".[8] The Republican-written "Report of the Congressional Committees Investigating the Iran-Contra Affair" made the following conclusion: There is some question and dispute about precisely the level at which he chose to follow the operation details. There is no doubt, however, ... [that] the President set the US policy towards Nicaragua, with few if any ambiguities, and then left subordinates more or less free to implement it.[95] Domestically, the affair precipitated a drop in President Reagan's popularity. His approval ratings suffered "the largest single drop for any U.S. president in history", from 67% to 46% in November 1986, according to a New York Times/CBS News poll.[96] The "Teflon President", as Reagan was nicknamed by critics,[97] survived the affair, however, and his approval rating recovered.[98] Internationally, the damage was more severe. Magnus Ranstorp wrote, "U.S. willingness to engage in concessions with Iran and the Hezbollah not only signaled to its adversaries that hostage-taking was an extremely useful instrument in extracting political and financial concessions for the West but also undermined any credibility of U.S. criticism of other states' deviation from the principles of no-negotiation and no concession to terrorists and their demands."[99] In Iran, Mehdi Hashemi, the leaker of the scandal, was executed in 1987, allegedly for activities unrelated to the scandal. Though Hashemi made a full video confession to numerous serious charges, some observers find the coincidence of his leak and the subsequent prosecution highly suspicious.[100] In 1994, just five years after leaving office, President Reagan announced that he had been diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease.[101] Lawrence Walsh, who was appointed Independent Counsel in 1986 to investigate the transactions later implied Reagan's declining health may have played a role in his handling of the situation. However, Walsh did note that he believed President Reagan's "instincts for the country's good were right".[102] Indictments North's mugshot,[103] after his arrest Caspar Weinberger, Secretary of Defense, was indicted on two counts of perjury and one count of obstruction of justice on 16 June 1992.[citation needed] Weinberger received a pardon from George H. W. Bush on 24 December 1992, before he was tried.[citation needed] Robert C. McFarlane, National Security Adviser, convicted of withholding evidence, but after a plea bargain was given only two years of probation. Later pardoned by President George H. W. Bush.[104] Elliott Abrams, Assistant Secretary of State, convicted of withholding evidence, but after a plea bargain was given only two years probation. Later pardoned by President George H. W. Bush.[105] Alan D. Fiers, Chief of the CIA's Central American Task Force, convicted of withholding evidence and sentenced to one year probation. Later pardoned by President George H. W. Bush. Clair George, Chief of Covert Ops-CIA, convicted on two charges of perjury, but pardoned by President George H. W. Bush before sentencing.[106] Oliver North, member of the National Security Council was indicted on 16 charges.[107] A jury convicted him of accepting an illegal gratuity, obstruction of a Congressional inquiry, and destruction of documents. The convictions were overturned on appeal because his Fifth Amendment rights may have been violated by use of his immunized public testimony[108] and because the judge had incorrectly explained the crime of destruction of documents to the jury.[109] Fawn Hall, Oliver North's secretary, was given immunity from prosecution on charges of conspiracy and destroying documents in exchange for her testimony.[110] Jonathan Scott Royster, Liaison to Oliver North, was given immunity from prosecution on charges of conspiracy and destroying documents in exchange for his testimony.[111] National Security Advisor John Poindexter was convicted of five counts of conspiracy, obstruction of justice, perjury, defrauding the government, and the alteration and destruction of evidence. A panel of the D.C. Circuit overturned the convictions on 15 November 1991 for the same reason the court had overturned Oliver North's, and by the same 2 to 1 vote.[112] The Supreme Court refused to hear the case.[113] Duane Clarridge. An ex-CIA senior official, he was indicted in November 1991 on seven counts of perjury and false statements relating to a November 1985 shipment to Iran. Pardoned before trial by President George H. W. Bush.[114][115] Richard V. Secord. Former Air Force major general, who was involved in arms transfers to Iran and diversion of funds to Contras, he pleaded guilty in November 1989 to making false statements to Congress and was sentenced to two years of probation. As part of his plea bargain, Secord agreed to provide further truthful testimony in exchange for the dismissal of remaining criminal charges against him.[116][18] Albert Hakim. A businessman, he pleaded guilty in November 1989 to supplementing the salary of North by buying a $13,800 fence for North with money from "the Enterprise," which was a set of foreign companies Hakim used in Iran-Contra. In addition, Swiss company Lake Resources Inc., used for storing money from arms sales to Iran to give to the Contras, plead guilty to stealing government property.[117] Hakim was given two years of probation and a $5,000 fine, while Lake Resources Inc. was ordered to dissolve.[116][118] Thomas G. Clines. A former CIA clandestine service officer. According to Special Prosecutor Walsh, he earned nearly $883,000 helping retired Air Force Maj. Gen. Richard V. Secord and Albert Hakim carry out the secret operations of "the Enterprise". He was indicted for concealing the full amount of his Enterprise profits for the 1985 and 1986 tax years, and for failing to declare his foreign financial accounts. He was convicted and served 16 months in prison, the only Iran-Contra defendant to have served a prison sentence.[119] The Independent Counsel, Lawrence E. Walsh, chose not to re-try North or Poindexter.[120] In total, several dozen people were investigated by Walsh's office.[121] George H. W. Bush's involvement On 27 July 1986, Israeli counterterrorism expert Amiram Nir briefed Vice President Bush in Jerusalem about the weapon sales to Iran.[122] In an interview with The Washington Post in August 1987, Bush stated that he was denied information about the operation and did not know about the diversion of funds.[123] Bush said that he had not advised Reagan to reject the initiative because he had not heard strong objections to it.[123] The Post quoted him as stating, "We were not in the loop."[123] The following month, Bush recounted meeting Nir in his September 1987 autobiography Looking Forward, stating that he began to develop misgivings about the Iran initiative.[124] He wrote that he did not learn the full extent of the Iran dealings until he was briefed by Senator David Durenberger regarding a Senate inquiry into them.[124] Bush added the briefing with Durenberger left him with the feeling he had "been deliberately excluded from key meetings involving details of the Iran operation".[124] In January 1988 during a live interview with Bush on CBS Evening News, Dan Rather told Bush that his unwillingness to speak about the scandal led "people to say 'either George Bush was irrelevant or he was ineffective, he set himself outside of the loop.'"[125] Bush replied, "May I explain what I mean by 'out of the loop'? No operational role."[125][126] Although Bush publicly insisted that he knew little about the operation, his statements were contradicted by excerpts of his diary released by the White House in January 1993.[125][127] An entry dated 5 November 1986 stated: "On the news at this time is the question of the hostages... I'm one of the few people that know fully the details, and there is a lot of flak and misinformation out there. It is not a subject we can talk about..."[125][127] Pardons On 24 December 1992, after he had been defeated for reelection, lame duck President George H. W. Bush pardoned five administration officials who had been found guilty on charges relating to the affair.[128] They were: Elliott Abrams; Duane Clarridge; Alan Fiers; Clair George; and Robert McFarlane. Bush also pardoned Caspar Weinberger, who had not yet come to trial.[129] Attorney General William P. Barr advised the President on these pardons, especially that of Caspar Weinberger.[130] In response to these Bush pardons, Independent Counsel Lawrence E. Walsh, who headed the investigation of Reagan administration officials' criminal conduct in the Iran-Contra scandal, stated that "the Iran-Contra cover-up, which has continued for more than six years, has now been completed." Walsh noted that in issuing the pardons Bush appears to have been preempting being implicated himself in the crimes of Iran-Contra by evidence that was to come to light during the Weinberger trial, and noted that there was a pattern of "deception and obstruction" by Bush, Weinberger and other senior Reagan administration officials.[120][13][14] Modern interpretations The Iran-Contra affair and the ensuing deception to protect senior administration officials (including President Reagan) was cast as an example of post-truth politics by Malcolm Byrne of George Washington University.[131] Reports and documents The 100th Congress formed a Joint Committee of the United States Congress (Congressional Committees Investigating The Iran-Contra Affair) and held hearings in mid-1987. Transcripts were published as: Iran-Contra Investigation: Joint Hearings Before the Senate Select Committee on Secret Military Assistance to Iran and the Nicaraguan Opposition and the House Select Committee to Investigate Covert Arms Transactions with Iran (U.S. GPO 1987–88). A closed Executive Session heard classified testimony from North and Poindexter; this transcript was published in a redacted format. The joint committee's final report was Report of the Congressional Committees Investigating the Iran-Contra Affair With Supplemental, Minority, and Additional Views (U.S. GPO 17 November 1987). The records of the committee are at the National Archives, but many are still non-public.[132] Testimony was also heard before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and can be found in the Congressional Record for those bodies. The Senate Intelligence Committee produced two reports: Preliminary Inquiry into the Sale of Arms to Iran and Possible Diversion of Funds to the Nicaraguan Resistance (2 February 1987) and Were Relevant Documents Withheld from the Congressional Committees Investigating the Iran-Contra Affair? (June 1989).[133] The Tower Commission Report was published as the Report of the President's Special Review Board (U.S. GPO 26 February 1987). It was also published as The Tower Commission Report by Bantam Books (ISBN 0-553-26968-2). The Office of Independent Counsel/Walsh investigation produced four interim reports to Congress. Its final report was published as the Final Report of the Independent Counsel for Iran/Contra Matters. Walsh's records are available at the National Archives.[134] See also icon1980s portal Israel–United States relations Israel's role in the Iran–Iraq War Timeline of the Iran–Contra affair Brokers of Death arms case CIA involvement in Contra cocaine trafficking Congressional committees investigating the Iran–Contra affair Iran–Iraq relations Iran–Israel relations Iran–United States relations Iraq–Israel relations Iraq–United States relations Latin America–United States relations List of federal political scandals in the United States William Northrop 1980 October Surprise theory Operation Tipped Kettle (the transfer of PLO weapons which were seized by Israel in Lebanon to the Contras) United States and state-sponsored terrorism United States foreign policy in the Middle East United States involvement in regime change in Latin America Footnotes The Iran-Contra Affair 20 Years On. The National Security Archive (George Washington University), 2006-11-24 "Reagan's mixed White House legacy". BBC. 6 June 2004. Retrieved 22 April 2008. Butterfield, Fox (27 November 1988). "Arms for Hostages – Plain and Simple". The New York Times (National ed.). sec. 7. p. 10. Retrieved 29 December 2018. Abshire, David (2005). Saving the Reagan Presidency: Trust Is the Coin of the Realm. Texas A&M University Press. ISBN 9781603446204. Valentine, Douglas (2008). Reagan, Bush, Gorbachev: Revisiting the End of the Cold War. Praeger Security International. ISBN 9780313352416. Rozen, Laura (21 March 2005). "The Front". Reagan 1990, p. 542. "Weinberger Diaries Dec 7 handwritten" (PDF). National Security Archive. George Washington University. Reagan, Ronald (13 November 1986). "Address to the Nation on the Iran Arms and Contra Aid Controversy". Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation. Retrieved 7 June 2008. "Excerpts From the Iran-Contra Report: A Secret Foreign Policy". The New York Times. 1994. Retrieved 7 June 2008. Reagan, Ronald (4 March 1987). "Address to the Nation on the Iran Arms and Contra Aid Controversy". Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation. Retrieved 7 June 2008. Dwyer, Paula. "Pointing a Finger at Reagan". Business Week. Archived from the original on 16 April 2008. Retrieved 22 April 2008. "Pardons Granted by President George H. W. Bush (1989-1993)". U.S. Department of Justice. 12 January 2015. Archived from the original on 23 December 2020. Retrieved 22 December 2020. Walsh, Lawrence E. (1997). Firewall: The Iran-Contra Conspiracy and Cover-up. New York: Norton & Company. p. 290. Walsh 1993. Kornbluh & Byrne 1993, p. 213. Hicks 1996, p. 965. Johnston, David (9 November 1989). "Secord Is Guilty of One Charge in Contra Affair". The New York Times (National ed.). sec. A. p. 24. Retrieved 19 July 2011. Corn, David (2 July 1988). "Is There Really A 'Secret Team'?". The Nation. Hicks 1996, p. 966. Hicks 1996, p. 964. Hicks 1996, pp. 966–967. Lemoyne, James (19 October 1986). "Ortega, Faulting Reagan, Warns of Coming War". The New York Times (National ed.). sec. 1. p. 6. Retrieved 15 November 2018. Payton, Brenda (4 April 1988). "Is U.S. Backing Contras with Drug Funds?". Oakland Tribune. Powell, Colin L.; Persico, Joseph E. (1995). My American Journey. New York: Random House. p. 341. ISBN 0-679-43296-5. "Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega's complex US ties suggest lessons for Trump era, historians say". ABC News. Retrieved 7 November 2021. Plaut, Martin (30 October 2018). "Apartheid, guns and money: book lifts the lid on Cold War secrets". The Conversation. Retrieved 7 November 2021. Van Vuuren, Hennie (2018). Apartheid guns and money : a tale of profit. London. pp. 260–269. ISBN 978-1-78738-247-3. OCLC 1100767741. Plaut, Martin (3 November 2018). "The Chinese and Soviets had a bigger role in supporting apartheid than we previously knew". Quartz. Retrieved 6 November 2021. Guerrero, Alina (18 June 1986). "Danish Ship Caught Carrying Soviet-Made Weapons". Associated Press News. Tyroler, Deborah (17 December 1986). "The Pia Vesta Caper: A New Dimension To Contragate". NotiCen. Hersh, Seymour M. (8 December 1991). "U.S. Said to Have Allowed Israel to Sell Arms to Iran". The New York Times (National ed.). sec. 1. p. 1. Retrieved 15 November 2018. Kornbluh & Byrne 1993, pp. 213–214. Kornbluh & Byrne 1993, p. 214. "The Iran-Contra Scandal". The American–Israeli Cooperative Enterprise. Retrieved 7 June 2008. "State Sponsors of Terrorism". State.gov. Retrieved 18 August 2014. Reagan 1990, p. 504. Brogan, Patrick (1989). The Fighting Never Stopped: A Comprehensive Guide To World Conflicts Since 1945. New York: Vintage Books. p.