You're viewing a single thread.
That’s some big words for a CIA asset.
In the case of Nina Simone, the CIA had to use trickery. As Wilford uncovered, Simone was sent on a tour to Nigeria in 1961 by the American Society of African Culture, a CIA front organization. As Keefe notes, “It’s one thing for the government to pressure Louis Armstrong to go to Africa on a propaganda mission and have him grudgingly but knowingly go along. It’s a very different thing to covertly send an artist on false pretenses. And Nina Simone was no patriot. She ended up renouncing the United States and living abroad. She called it, ‘the United Snakes of America.’”
https://www.thenation.com/article/culture/wind-of-change-cia/
Way to bury the lead. But anything to disparage a woman of color I suppose.
This is literally what I said in my follow up comment.
You are being extremely uncharitable to me.
You called her a CIA asset when she was tricked. There's only one person being uncharitable and it certainly isn't me.
There is a term of art for people that do the bidding of an intelligence service while unaware. They are called “useful idiots”, and are managed by intelligence officers as assets.
This is just the lingo in the business. You can take offense at that if you want. Think it’s uncharitable. Call Langley and see if they care.
One way or the other, Nina Simone was duped into working for the single largest, best funded and most ruthless counterrevolutary force in the history of the world, and here there are a bunch of so-called communists up in arms because I’m mean to the poor black woman?
Do I have to remind you what the CIA was up to in those days in Latin America and Africa?
Being a CIA asset is part of her legacy. I’m not going to tip toe around it because she said strong words about capitalism.
Based on the meme above do you think she would have done the tour if she knew that it was funded by the CIA?
do you think she would have done the tour if she knew that it was funded by the CIA?
I don’t know. Maybe not. But does it really matter?
A lot of what the CIA does is done through deniable means and intermediaries. Not knowing you work for the CIA, or being able to claim you do not know you worked for the CIA, is standard operating procedure.
“But comandante! I did not know I was working for the CIA!” has been heard before in the jungles of South America, usually in the presence of a firing squad. Do you think claiming ignorance should immediately be a plenary absolution?
Or do you think only people who are not famous are responsible for the outcomes of their actions, comrade?
But does it really matter?
This is where I should have stopped reading.
A lot of what the CIA does is done through deniable means and intermediaries. Not knowing you work for the CIA, or being able to claim you do not know you worked for the CIA, is standard operating procedure.
Some standard leftist paranoid purity testing. While partially true, I doubt Nina Simone was going to be tricked into hurting someone. But you knew that.
"But comandante! did not know I was working for the CIA!" has been heard before in the jungles of South America, usually in the presence of a firing squad. Do you think claiming ignorance should immediately be a plenary absolution?
Quite the jump from unknowingly performing your art for a CIA front to a firing squad. But you do you boo.
Or do you think only people who are not famous are responsible for the outcomes of their actions,
Gods damn, this is quite the jump of a conclusion. I think people are responsible, famous or not, for the knowledge that motivates their actions.
comrade?
Don't "comrade" me. You sound like one of those self proclaimed vanguards that'll shoot my dumb ass in the back of the head.
I suggest doing some mutual aid. Make some solidarity irl. Because takes like this aren't going to find it online.
If only you could edit the original comment rather than just clarifying in a follow-up to a reply that many people won't see or read...
Oh well