Re: [A-List] British media -- a personal experience

["Michael Keaney" <michael.keaney@xxxxxx>]

James writes:

Several years later I read in the London Times that 13 paratroopers
had the previous day dived into the Kiel Canal and been drowned. There
was no inquiry into their amazing group incompetence. (By the way, it
was frequently reported at that time that British soldiers had walked
into railway tunnels and been killed by oncoming trains).

------

I alluded to this a few days ago in my diatribe against William Rees-Mogg.
With the benefit of hindsight, and given what we know now of that period in
history, an in-depth analysis of the contents of the "leading
opinion-formers" of the period is very necessary and long overdue. Much good
work was done during that period by the Glasgow Media Group, for instance
(Bad News, More Bad News), but I don't believe that it was as trained on the
use and abuse of the news media by the secret state. It was rather directed
at more overt propagandising against trade unions, etc.

Paul Foot, in "Who Framed Colin Wallace?", briefly mentions an episode
involving stories planted in a certain US-based news agency by unnamed
British "sources". The idea here was to convince US policy circles that
Britain under Heath/Wilson/Callaghan was a basket case and required
"surgery", whilst the stories would also "surface" back home and therefore
have the apparent authenticity associated with coming from a supposedly
reputable US source. Foot doesn't make the connection, but it's definitely a
lead I will be following as I build up the evidence supporting the charge of
collusion between the British secret state and the US Treasury Department in
1976.

Michael