Organized CrimeDrugs

And The

CIAClearance A1 required for access to Top Secret documentation

A3 - B6 clearance required for all other accessUnauthorized Access Prohibited

USE OF DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT THE NATIONALINTEREST IS AUTHORIZED

Well over 1 trillion dollars goes missing every year... or does it?

I know, you didn’t know... now you will.

Jeff Prager

CLASSIFIED

A Division Of Drugs-R-Us

Organized Crime, Drugs and the CIA (Reggae Version)

with US History According To Prager

presented by

Anarchy Books and

Renegade Publishing

The “Wake The Fuck Up!™

” Company

and Expose The Criminals Productions©

It’s All Class Warfare ...

And YOU aren’t a member of the Class!

with

Introduction by Dick “Global Thug” Cheney

Forward by George W. “Criminal Boss Hog” Bush

Technical Data by George “Chowderhead Puppet” Tenet

Financial Analysis by Buzzy “Klepto Thief” Krongard

Military Analysis by Oliver “Drug Lord” North

Expletives by Pat Sajack

Vowels by Vana White

Original Soundtrack Courtesy “The Harder They Come”

(This is not an endorsement for canned food. The publisher doesn’t eat canned food and doesn’t recommend canned food, but he likes the Popeye cartoon.)

Published to the internet without express permission of anyone.™ A Runaway Slaves, LLC.®

The propaganda and indoctrination, as Jethro Tull said, is “Thick As A Brick” ©®™®©, yada, yada, yada...

Remember Nugan Hand!

(Some small portions of this publication are a parody, a satire and Just-For-Fun but most of it is ABSOLUTELY TRUE)

I think most of you have heard and seen the video of Donald Rumsfeld diligently reporting that 2.3 trillion dollars was missing from DoD bank accounts on September 10th, 2001. Remember, the day before 911? Many of you might not know that Dov Zacheim, who held the same position subsequent to Rumsfeld, reported another 1.2 trillion dollars missing from DoD bank accounts during his reign. That news was released with much less fanfare and we saw little reporting in the mainstream media, as can and should be expected from any sophisticated propaganda machine. The mainstream lamestream alphabet soup of ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN, ad nauseum is controlled by the CIA just like the global banking system, the global drug system, the global murder system, the global investment and commodities system, the gold market, the silver market, the currency market and almost everything else of any value while we live in an illu-sory world of trompe l’oeil, apparition, misconception, fantasy and chimera. This book makes this all perfectly clear. At least it exposes the trillions in financing necessary to maintain the facade.

It’s all slight of hand, or would that be slight of word?

Deception, fantasy, simulacrum.

A fool’s paradise.

“Forward and payaaka, manhangle and den go saaka.”http://stevecotler.com/tales/2008/09/20/draw-your-brakes-a-jamaican-creole-shout/

Stop dat train I wanna get off...

Draw yer brakes brudda!

This report examines the existence of a CIA ‘black budget’ and an extensive network of ‘deep black projects’ that it funds. The report identifies the legal framework established by the US Congress for the creation of a CIA ‘black budget’ from the appropriations earmarked for other federal agencies that are siphoned through the CIA as the sole conduit of black budget funds. The report investigates the legal challenges to the constitutionality of the CIA’s black budget; how the CIA uses its legal authority to extract appropriations from government agencies such as HUD; how the CIA launders non-appropriated money through other federal agencies; and the efforts the CIA goes to prevent these financial transfers from being exposed. Using as a case study the legal difficulties faced by an innovative mortgage finance company, Hamilton Securi-ties, the report will argue that the CIA’s covert role in Hamilton’s demise is compelling evidence that the CIA was involved in funding irregularities in HUD.

It will be finally argued that the size of black budget, the secrecy surrounding it, the extent senior officials in Federal agencies go to targeting individuals and companies that threaten to reveal where congressional appropriations are ultimately going, suggest a vast number of ‘deep black projects’ that collectively form a highly classified second Manhattan Project whose exis-tence, goals and budget are kept secret. The project includes vast financial fraud, deceit and murder.

Who Is The CIA And Who Do They Represent?

This book is a technical expose of the CIA. It’s been carefully researched and written such that anyone can understand the content. While it addresses serious issues related to Na-tional Security those National Security issues are not examined from the perspective of the Military Industrial Oil and Banking Complex but rather from a civilian standpoint. The facts are clear. The CIA is a runaway criminal organization with far too much power and it’s im-possible to stop the train short of a revolution in the United States. That ain’t happenin’. The first couple of pages discuss Osama bin Laden as an opening salvo designed to rock the boat just a little. The remainder of the book fires missiles and makes a direct hit virtually every time, piercing the ship repeatedly. Yet she still floats. That’s because the United States of America is made up primarily of robots and zombies dedicated to the pursuit of nothing. Essentially, they shop at WalMart, eat Fast Food and poisoned, processed, adulterated food with complex addi-tives that effect the brain in more ways then Carter has pills. Then, eventually, they die leav-ing offspring behind that do the very same thing all over again. I call them fluoride heads for a reason. When you cook with fluoridated water, which about 60% of the US population does, it concentrates the fluoride. Add in the 1000 ppms of fluoride in their toothpaste and mouthwash and I’m surprised they can tie their shoes. Perhaps that was the impetus behind the plethora of shoes without laces inundating the market today. The aisles of WalMart seem not to have many lace-up shoes anymore. It’s no wonder why.

The American public has sustained intensive economic attacks across broad segments of the population. While the attacks have been increasingly severe in scale over the past ten years, they have been implemented with technocratic precision. They have been incrementally ap-plied thus far, successfully keeping the population passive and avoiding any large-scale civilian unrest, while effectively reducing living standards for the majority of the population. As you should be able to see by now, the 55 million Americans that have been hit the hardest have thus far acquiesced due to temporary financial assistance such as food stamps and extended unem-ployment benefits. They might care but they aren’t going to do shit. The global Economic Elite have been much more strategic in handling the American public, as they are potentially the greatest threat to their continued consolidation of wealth, resources and power. National populations that are not as powerful, and on the periphery of the Economic Elite’s global empire, have been dealt with in much harsher fashion. In many smaller and less powerful countries the dramatic rise in food prices and costs of living have led to all-out revolt — Tunisia, Algeria, Albania and Egypt were among the first to rebel assisted, of course, by the global intelligence communities. Make no mistake, there are no spontaneous rebellions in the 21st century. Heck, there weren’t any in the 20th century either. While the contagion of rebel-lion has rapidly spread throughout Northern Africa and the Middle East, it is also spreading in a decentralized manner throughout most of the world, now threatening popular rebellion throughout Europe. It’s all contrived. Like the US population, the geographically clustered Eu-ropean nations represent a potentially powerful countervailing force to the Economic Elite’s continued domination. This is where the global intelligence community steps in.

Within the United States, the technocratic suppression of the population has been extensive. Increasingly severe economic and governmental policies have systematically eroded civilian wealth, power and rights. Intensive propaganda has effectively distracted, confused, isolated, marginalized and divided the US population. Despite the success of these efforts thus far, given the severe, prolonged, unsustainable and escalating level of economic suffering, outbreaks of civil unrest are inevitable. The US population, if a critical mass is reached, represents the great-est threat to the Economic Elite. In this regard, the American people are their primary adver-sary. The CIA is the primary first-place contender to deal with these eventual problems. In writing this report, I will clearly demonstrate the severity and scale of the funding dedicated to the deliberate systemic attacks against the US population, in the hope that we can urgently build a critical mass of aware and engaged citizens. Still, that goal is unlikely to be achieved in my lifetime. This report will also prove, through historical context, that the CIA and the global elite they represent are the single most anti-freedom institutions in history.

The CIA represents power. They work for the global elite. They do not represent you or your interests and they never did. They represent the oil companies, weapons manufacturers, phar-maceutical companies, banks and the monied globalists. Yes, they even represent WalMart and Burger King and their gross spread across the globe. They use global drug sales, national finan-cial fraud, market manipulation and, well, any tactic at all that will produce the desired results. This includes all major terrorist attacks across the globe. And you can’t beat ‘em and you also can’t join ‘em. Unless of course you’re a confirmed sociopath without compassion, morals, em-pathy or substance.

... cause de wickedcarried us away captivity

required from us a songhow can we sing King Alpha’s song

in a strange land?

Tim Osman (Ossman) has recently become better known as Osa-ma Bin Ladin. “Tim Osman” was the name assigned to him by the CIA for his tour of the USA and USA military bases, in search of political support and armaments. There is some evidence that Tim Osman visited the White House. There is certainty that Tim Osman toured some USA military bases, even receiving special demonstrations of the latest equipment. Why hasn’t this been re-ported in the major media? Oh, never mind.

At right you’ll see the name “Wanta” which references Leo Wanta who played an integral part in US Government Black Ops. Using Google you’ll find a wealth of information still, I hope, about Leo Wanta. As fantastic as it all seems I firmly believe it’s all true. This book doesn’t go into this data and Leo Wanta won’t be men-tioned again but anyone with an interest in Black Ops, 911 and Project Hammer should spend a considerable amount of time re-searching the data available on Leo Wanta. I suspect you’ll find a great deal of really strange shit. That’s the CIA in a nutshell. A shit-storm of weirdness, death, drugs and fraud. You might want to search V.K. Durham also.

A Suggestion

A Word On Osama

Walking down da road wid a pistol in yer waistJohnny yer too bad...

Walking down da road wid da ratchet in yer waistJohnny yer too bad...

Yer robbing and yer stabbingAnd yer looting and yer shooting

Boy yer too bad...

The Testimony Of Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik

The following two pages are related to the death of Osama bin Laden, who died in 2001, and the scam by the current president to create a false premise for his support and the events of 911. If you don’t know by now that 911 was a False Flag Operation, you probably never will. That alone should have been enough for an American Revolution, but it wasn’t. That said, it’s unlikely ANYTHING these people do will ruffle the WalMart/Burger King feathers of the American pub-lic. Even the blatant truth doesn’t budge their fat asses.

Dr. Steve Pieczenik is a critically acclaimed author of psycho-political thrillers and the co-cre-ator of the New York Times best-selling “Tom Clancy’s Op-Center” and “Tom Clancy’s Net Force” book series. He is also one of the world’s most experienced international crisis managers and hostage negotiators. His novels are based on his twenty years experience in resolving interna-tional crises for four U.S. administrations.

Dr. Pieczenik trained in Psychiatry at Harvard and has both an M.D. from Cornell University Medical College and a Ph.D. in International Relations from M.I.T. He was the first psychiatrist ever to receive a PhD. focusing on international relations. He served as a Deputy Assistant Sec-retary of State and/or Senior Policy Planner under Secretaries Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, George Schultz and James Baker.

During his career as a senior State Department official, Dr. Pieczenik utilized his unique abili-ties and expertise to develop strategies and tactics that were instrumental in resolving major conflicts in Asia, the Middle East, Latin America, Europe and the United States.

Dr. Pieczenik was the principal International Crisis Manager and Hostage Negotiator under Secretaries Kissinger and Vance. During this time he developed conflict resolution techniques that were instrumental in saving over five hundred hostages in different terrorist episodes, including the Hanafi Moslem Seizure in Washington, DC, the TWA Croatian Hijacking, the Aldo Moro Kidnapping, the JRA Hijacking, the PLO Hijacking, and many other incidents involving such people as Idi Amin, Muammar Quaddafi, Carlos, FARC, Abu Nidal and Saddam Hussein.

Dr. Pieczenik helped develop negotiation strategies for major U.S.- Soviet arms control summits under the Reagan administration. He was also involved in advising senior officials on important psycho-political dynamics and conflict mediation strategies for President Carter’s successful Camp David Peace Conference. In 1991, Dr. Pieczenik was a chief architect of the Cambodian Peace Conference in Paris. He is currently an advisor to the Department of Defense.

This is his story...

“Bin Laden had already been “dead for months,” and that the government was waiting for the most politically expedient time to roll out his corpse. Pieczenik would be in a position to know, having personally met Bin Laden and worked with him during the proxy war against the Sovi-ets in Afghanistan back in the early 80’s.”

Top US government insider Dr. Steve R. Pieczenik, a man who held numerous different influ-ential positions under three different Presidents and still works with the Defense Department, shockingly told The Alex Jones Show yesterday that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001 and that he was prepared to tes-tify in front of a grand jury how a top general told him directly that 9/11 was a false flag inside job.

Pieczenik cannot be dismissed as a “conspiracy theo-rist”. He served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under three different administrations, Nixon, Ford and Carter, while also working under Reagan and Bush senior, and still works as a consultant for the De-partment of Defense. A former US Navy Captain, Piecze-nik achieved two prestigious Harry C. Solomon Awards at the Harvard Medical School as he simultaneously completed a PhD at MIT.

Recruited by Lawrence Eagleburger as Deputy Assis-tant Secretary of State for Management, Pieczenik went on to develop, “the basic tenets for psychologi-cal warfare, counter terrorism, strategy and tactics for transcultural negotiations for the US State Depart-ment, military and intelligence communities and other agencies of the US Government,” while also developing foundational strategies for hostage rescue that were later employed around the world.

Pieczenik also served as a senior policy planner under Secretaries Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, George Schultz and James Baker and worked on George W. Bush’s election campaign against Al Gore. His re-cord underscores the fact that he is one of the most deeply connected men in intelligence circles over the past three decades plus.

The character of Jack Ryan, who appears in many Tom Clancy novels and was also played by Harrison Ford in the popular 1992 movie Patriot Games, is also based on Steve Pieczenik.

Back in April 2002, over nine years ago, Pieczenik told the Alex Jones Show that Bin Laden had already been “dead for months,” and that the government was waiting for the most politically expedient time to roll out his corpse. Pieczenik would be in a position to know, having person-ally met Bin Laden and worked with him during the proxy war against the Soviets in Afghani-stan back in the early 80′s.

Pieczenik said that Osama Bin Laden died in 2001, “Not because special forces had killed him, but because as a physician I had known that the CIA physicians had treated him and it was on the intelligence roster that he had marfan syndrome,” adding that the US government knew

Bin Laden was dead before they invaded Afghanistan.

Marfan syndrome is a degenerative genetic disease for which there is no permanent cure. The illness severely shortens the life span of the sufferer.

“He died of marfan syndrome, Bush junior knew about it, the intelligence community knew about it,” said Pieczenik, noting how CIA physicians had visited Bin Laden in July 2001 at the

American Hospital in Dubai.

“He was already very sick from marfan syndrome and he was already dying, so nobody had to kill him,” add-ed Pieczenik, stating that Bin Laden died shortly after 9/11 in his Tora Bora cave complex.

“Did the intelligence community or the CIA doctor up this situation, the answer is yes, categorically yes,” said Pieczenik, referring to Sunday’s claim that Bin Laden was killed at his compound in Pakistan, adding, “This whole scenario where you see a bunch of people sitting there looking at a screen and they look as if they’re intense, that’s nonsense,” referring to the images re-leased by the White House which claim to show Biden, Obama and Hillary Clinton watching the operation to kill Bin Laden live on a television screen.

“It’s a total make-up, make believe, we’re in an Amer-ican theater of the absurd… why are we doing this again… nine years ago this man was already dead… why does the government repeatedly have to lie to the American people,” asked Pieczenik.

“Osama Bin Laden was totally dead, so there’s no way they could have attacked or confronted or killed Osama

Bin laden,” said Pieczenik, joking that the only way it could have happened was if special forces had attacked a mortuary.

Pieczenik said that the decision to launch the hoax now was made because Obama had reached a low with plummeting approval ratings and the fact that the birther issue was blowing up in his face.

“He had to prove that he was more than American… he had to be aggressive,” said Pieczenik, adding that the farce was also a way of isolating Pakistan as a retaliation for intense opposition to the Predator drone program, which has killed hundreds of Pakistanis.

“This is orchestrated, I mean when you have people sitting around and watching a sitcom, ba-sically the operations center of the White House, and you have a president coming out almost zombie-like telling you they just killed Osama Bin Laden who was already dead nine years ago,” said Pieczenik, calling the episode, “the greatest falsehood I’ve ever heard, I mean it was ab-surd.”

Dismissing the government’s account of the assassination of Bin Laden as a “sick joke” on the American people, Pieczenik said, “They are so desperate to make Obama viable, to negate the fact that he may not have been born here, any questions about his background, any irregularities about his background, to make him look asser-tive… to re-elect this president so the American public can be duped once again.”

Pieczenik’s assertion that Bin Laden died almost ten years ago is echoed by numerous intelligence professionals as well as heads of state across the world.

Bin Laden, “Was used in the same way that 9/11 was used to mo-bilize the emotions and feelings of the American people in order to go to a war that had to be justified through a narrative that Bush junior created and Cheney created about the world of terrorism,” stated Pieczenik.

During an interview Pieczenik also asserted he was directly told by a prominent general that 9/11 was a stand down and a false flag operation, and that he is prepared to go to a grand jury to reveal the general’s name.

“They ran the attacks,” said Pieczenik, naming Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Stephen Hadley, Elliott Abrams, and Condoleezza Rice amongst others as having been directly involved.

“It was called a stand down, a false flag operation in order to mobi-lize the American public under false pretenses… it was told to me even by the general on the staff of Wolfowitz – I will go in front of a federal committee and swear on perjury who the name was of the individual so that we can break it open,” said Pieczenik, adding that he was “furious” and “knew it had happened”.

“I taught stand down and false flag operations at the national war college, I’ve taught it with all my operatives so I knew exactly what was done to the American public,” he added.

Pieczenik re-iterated that he was perfectly willing to reveal the name of the general who told him 9/11 was an inside job in a federal court, “so that we can unravel this thing legally, not with the stupid 9/11 Commission, that was absurd.”

INSIDE JOB

The Black Budget Report: An Independent Investigation

of the CIA’s Black Budget and the Second Manhattan Project

Introduction

Each year the US Department of Defense (DoD) lists a number of single line items in its budget that have a program number such as 0605236F, code names like CLASSIC WIZARD or vague de-scription such as “special evaluation program,” that don’t refer to any weapons system known to the general public, Congressional officials or even defense analysts. These single line items are covers for the creation of a ‘black budget’ - a top secret slush fund set up by the DoD, with the approval of the US Congress, to apparently fund intelligence organizations such as the CIA as well as covert operations and classified weap-ons programs by the DoD. The ‘black budget’ al-lows intelligence activities, covert operations and classified weapons research to be conducted without Congressional oversight on the grounds that oversight would compromise the secrecy es-sential for the success of such ‘black programs’. These ‘black programs’ are typically classified as ‘Special Access’ or ‘Controlled Access Programs’ that have a security classification system more rigorous than the secret-top secret classifications for most government agencies, making such pro-grams known only to those with a ‘need to know’. This report seeks to unmask the size of the black budget and the covert world of ‘deep black’ proj-ects it funds by investigating the mechanisms used to transfer money into the black budget’. Fol-lowing the money trail and official efforts to keep secret the size of the black budget and how it is generated, provides the key pieces of a complex financial and national security jigsaw puzzle. The ‘black budget’ funds a covert world of unac-countable intelligence activities, covert military/intelligence operations and classified weapons programs. The conventional view is that this covert world is funded by Congressional appropriations that authorize the DoD to use US Trea-sury funds for classified projects and intelligence activities that appear as vague items on the DoD budget. Subtracting the cost of known weapons systems and programs from the total DoD budget gives Congressional analysts a means of estimating the size and scope of operations of the covert world of ‘black projects’, without knowing their precise budgets or activities. There

is however compelling evidence that the covert world of black programs is primarily funded by a black budget created by the CIA rather than the DoD. Rather than being a beneficiary of a Congressionally sanctioned DoD ‘black budget’, the CIA has its own ‘unofficial’ black budget that acts as a conduit for funds to be secretly siphoned into the various military intelligence agen-cies associated with both the CIA and the DoD for intelligence activities, covert operations and weapons research. The CIA has the unique legal ability among all US government departments and agencies to generate funds through appropriations of other federal government agencies and other sources “without regard to any provisions of law” and without regard to the intent behind Congressio-nal appropriations. Every year, billions of dollars of Congressional appropriations are diverted from their Congressionally sanctioned purposes to the CIA and DoD based intelligence agencies without knowledge of the public and with the collusion of Congressional leaders. The covert world of ‘black programs’ acts with virtual impunity, overseen and regulated by itself, funding

itself through secret slush funds, and is free of the limitations that come from Congressional oversight, proper auditing procedures and public scrutiny.

This report examines the existence of a CIA ‘black budget’ and an extensive network of ‘black projects’ that it funds. The report identifies the legal framework established by the US Congress for the creation of a CIA ‘black budget’ from the appropriations earmarked for other federal agencies that are siphoned through the CIA as the sole conduit of black budget funds. The report investigates the legal challenges to the constitutionality of the CIA’s black budget; how the CIA uses its legal authority to extract appropriations from government agencies such as HUD; how the CIA even launders non-appropri-ated money through other federal agencies; and the efforts the CIA goes to prevent these financial transfers from being exposed. Using as a case study the legal dif-ficulties faced by an innovative mortgage finance company, Hamilton Securities, the report will argue that the CIA’s covert role in Hamilton’s demise is compelling evidence that the CIA was involved in funding irregularities in HUD.

The key to uncovering the true size of the black budget are the chronic ac-counting anomalies in the DoD budget that reveal that as much as one trillion US dollars is annually being siphoned by the CIA into the DoD for secret distri-bution to various military intelligence agencies and the ‘deep black’ programs they respectively support. All of this, it will be argued, has dubious constitu-tional status but is made legal by the various Congressional enactments, senior Congressional officials and the Executive Office. It will be finally argued that the size of black budget, the secrecy surrounding it, the extent senior officials in Federal agencies go to targeting individuals and companies that threaten to reveal where Congressional appropriations are ultimately going, suggest a vast network of ‘deep black projects’ that collectively form a highly classified second Manhattan Project whose existence, goals and budget are kept secret.

Birth of the Black BudgetIn 1947, the National Security Act created the National Security Council, the Central Intel-ligence Organization (CIA) and consolidated the US military into one entity, the Department of Defense (DoD). One of the issues that remained unresolved from the creation and opera-tion of the CIA was the extent to which its budget and intelligence activities would remain a

secret. According to Article 1, sec. 9, of the US Constitution, “No money shall be drawn from the treasury, but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and a regular statement and account of receipts and expenditures of all public money shall be published from time to time.” This constitutional requirement conflicted with the need for secrecy concerning Congressional appropriations for the CIA. The solution was for Congress to pass legislation approving the se-crecy over the funding mechanisms used for the CIA and its intelligence related activities. The necessary bill was passed with great haste and minimal debate causing considerable concern among those few Congressmen brave enough to openly challenge the constitutionality of the Act. Congressman Emmanuel Celler of New York voted for the bill but protested: “If the mem-bers of the Armed Services Committee can hear the detailed information to support this bill, why cannot the entire membership? Are they the Brahmins and we the untouchables? Secrecy is the answer.” Celler, like the majority of Congressmen, passed the CIA Act very much like the wealthy father viewed the birth of an illegitimate child, appropriate care would be taken to pro-vide for the child, but there would be no official admission of patrimony and the responsibility that entails. The 1949 CIA Act comprised additions to those sections of the 1947 National Security Act that dealt with the creation of CIA. The 1949 CIA Act gave a Congressional stamp of approval to the creation of a ‘black budget’ as the following sections make clear:

… any other Government agency is authorized to transfer to or receive from the Agency such sums without regard to any provisions of law limiting or prohibit-ing transfers between appropriations [emphasis added]. Sums transferred to the Agency in accordance with this paragraph may be expended for the purpos-es and under the authority of sections 403a to 403s of this title without regard to limitations of appropriations from which transferred.

This section meant that funds could be transferred from the appropriations of other government departments earmarked for specific tasks, “without regard to any provisions of law”. For example, a Congressional appropriation earmarked for housing subsidies to low-income workers by Housing and Urban Develop-ment (HUD), could be legally transferred either to the CIA for covert intelligence activities or through the CIA to a DoD associated intelligence agency for a clas-sified program. Thus HUD employees might find that their relevant housing pro-grams were lacking the necessary funds for relief efforts even though Congress had appropriated these funds for this purpose. Any HUD official unfortunate enough as to enquire into the location of the missing funds would be deterred from pursuing the issue, and if these officials persisted, they could be summar-ily dismissed, and then exposed to a variety of CIA activities to silence them.

Despite its legal authority to transfer funds from other federal agencies regard-less of what their Congressional appropriations were for, the conventional wis-dom was that the major source of appropriations for the CIA came through the DoD. This is apparently what President Truman had in mind when he approved that the “operating funds for the organization [CIA] would be obtained from the Departments of State, War, and Navy instead of directly from Congress.” This funding arrangement ostensibly assured that the CIA would be subordinate to the Secretaries of Defense and State who would be in a better position to influence its covert activities. Four years after passage of the 1949 CIA Act, the following categories and sums in the relevant defense force appropriations apparently provided the bulk of the black budget funding of the CIA.

The Congressionally sanctioned method of CIA appropriations meant that the $587 million the CIA acknowledged receiving from DoD for its intelligence operations in 1953 would remain a se-cret both to rank and file members of Congress, and the general public. The alleged sum the CIA received from the DoD in 1953 ($3.4 billion in 2002 terms) was in likelihood already dwarfed, as will be argued later, by the funds the CIA was transferring through other government agen-cies into its black budget.

The constitutional validity of the CIA’s black budget and its size was something that did not unduly trouble most Congressmen during the early years of the Cold War who believed that national security considerations concerning the Soviet threat merited such an extraordinary practice. However, it did trouble one US citizen who in 1967 took the CIA to court over the se-crecy surrounding the true size of its black budget.

Legal and Congressional Efforts to Disclose the CIA’s Black Budget

William Richardson was an ‘or-dinary’ citizen who realized the inconsistency between the Con-stitution’s requirement that all government appropriations would have “a regular statement and account of receipts and expendi-tures” published, and the CIA’s Act’s secrecy provision concern-ing the CIA budget. In 1967, Rich-ardson made an effort to discover the true size of the CIA’s ‘black budget’ by writing a letter to the US Government Printing Office. He requested a copy of the CIA budget “published by the Govern-ment in compliance with Article I, section 9, clause 7 of the United States Constitution.” Richardson received replies from the US Trea-sury that essentially rebuffed his efforts and he decided to start a Federal court action against the US government. He argued that the CIA Act was “repugnant to the Constitution” since it “operates to

falsify the regular Statement and Account of all public Money.” After three years of legal wran-gling, Richardson’s case was dismissed by the Pittsburgh Federal Judge, Joseph P. Wilson, who decided that Richardson did not have ‘standing’ to sue the Federal government since he was not directly affected by issue at dispute. In short, the judge was taking the conservative legal position that a ‘generalized grievance’ is not a sufficient basis for a private citizen to take a US Federal Agency to court. Richardson appealed and in 1971, succeeded in having his case heard

before a full bench of the United States Court of Appeals in Philadelphia (the penultimate legal court in the US). In his legal brief, Richardson claimed:

Never in the history of this country has so much money been spent without the traditional safe-guard of openness and in direct defiance of constitutional provisions… Billions are spent each year by unknown entities and this amount is spread throughout the Treasury’s reporting system to con-fuse the public and belittle the Constitution.

The nine federal judges ruled in a 6-3 decision in 1972 that Richardson did have legal standing since the Court reasoned that a:

“… responsible and intelligent taxpayer and citizen, of course, wants to know how his tax money is spent. Without this information he cannot intelligently fol-low the actions of the Congress or the Executive. Nor can he properly fulfill his obligations as a member of the electorate.”

Richardson had won an extraordinary, though ulti-mately short lived, legal victory. He had succeeded in arguing that the ‘black budget’ was inconsistent with his constitutional obligations and that the CIA Act had doubtful constitutional standing. The 1971 decision of the Court of Appeals is the closest any US court has come to ruling on the constitutional-ity of the CIA Act. The Court had effectively decided that Congress had no right to deprive American citi-zens knowledge of the true size of the appropriated money that was being channeled to the CIA through other government agencies.

The Federal Government immediately appealed to the Supreme Court and in July 1974, the nine Supreme Court Justices ruled in a 5-4 decision, that Richard-son did not have the legal standing to challenge the Federal government. Adopting a conservative legal po-sition, the Court argued that Richardson’s suit was nothing more than a generalized political grievance by a citizen that needed to be dealt with through the political system, rather than the legal system. The Supreme Court concluded that it did not need to examine the merits of Richardson’s case, since he did not have legal standing to bring the suit to the Court. The Supreme Court thus overturned the earlier ruling of the US Court of Appeals. The immediate consequence was that the black budget would remain a secret for some years yet. Despite the setback, Richardson had demonstrated that the ‘black budget’ and the CIA Act that created it, had dubious constitutional standing, and only required a challenge from a party with legal standing to most likely have it struck from the statute books.

In the 1970’s the black budget and its true size became for the first time a subject of intense con-gressional scrutiny. In the aftermath of the Vietnam war and the behavior of the intelligence

community in sponsoring private wars throughout Indochina and elsewhere, the Senate de-cided in 1976 to elect a committee to investigate the CIA’s covert activities and the black budget for the intelligence community. In its final report, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (the Church Committee) found the black budget to be unconstitutional and recommended pub-lic disclosure of its size:

The budget procedures, which presently govern the Central Intelligence Agency and other agencies of the Intelligence Community, prevent most members of Congress from knowing how much money is spent by any of these agencies or even how much money is spent on intelligence as a whole. In addition, most members of the public are deceived about the ap-propriations and expenditures of other government agencies whose budgets are inflated to conceal funds for the intelligence community.The failure to provide this information to the public and to the Congress prevents either from effectively ordering priorities and violates Article I, Section 9, Clause 7 of the Constitution…. The Committee finds that publication of the aggregate figure for national intelligence would begin to satisfy the Constitutional requirement and would not damage the national se-curity.

Unfortunately, the Church Committee’s recommen-dation was never implemented as the CIA Director (DCI), George Bush, successfully argued for the com-mittee to hold off implementing its decision. The Committee voted 6-5 to hold off and the recommen-dation was never brought to the whole Senate for a decision.

It would have to wait until the 1990’s before Congress would once again take up the issue of the black budget. Ironically it was Congress that had provided the leg-islation that would be an effective mechanism to end the secrecy surrounding the size of the black budget.

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) was passed in 1966 and made it possible for individuals to gain access to the records of any federal government agency by making a written request. All agencies are required to disclose requested records except for information that falls under nine exemptions and three exclusions of the FOIA. The most relevant of these exemptions for the CIA Act was (b)(1) exemption 1 which says: “This exemption protects from disclosure na-tional security information concerning the national defense or foreign policy, provided that it has been properly classified in accordance with the substantive and procedural requirements of an executive order.” If an agency refused to release information, the requestor could ask for a Federal judge to adjudicate whether the information did or didn’t qualify for the exemption claimed by the agency in withholding the relevant information.

In 1967 when Richardson first took legal action, he did not use the newly passed FOIA in re-

In this picture William Colby (right), CIA former Director testifies before Congress and states: “The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the Major Media.” That statement has been downplayed and in fact relegated to the trash heap of history but it’s more true today then ever before, as this eBook makes perfectly clear.

questing information about the CIA’s ‘black budget’ since he was challenging the constitutional basis of the black budget and CIA Act, rather than arguing that release of the figures would not pose a national security threat. Richardson rightly assumed that the CIA would not release information concerning the black budget on the grounds of national security, and that it could persuasively argue this before a federal judge qualifying for exemption from FOIA.

In 1996, President Clinton introduced a major change in the secrecy over the size of the black budget when he argued that its disclosure would not threaten national security. The DCI under Clinton, John Deutsch gave Congressional testimony that President Clinton was “persuaded that disclosure of the annual amount appropriated for intelligence purposes would inform the public and not, in itself, harm intelligence activi-ties.” President Clinton had effectively undercut the main le-gal barrier to the CIA indefinitely withholding the size of the black budget from an FOIA request. In 1997 the Federation of Atomic Scientists made an FOIA request to the CIA, to dis-close the secret combined appropriations for the Intelligence community that comprises the CIA, National Security Agency (NSA), National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), Defense Intel-ligence Agency (DIA), National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA), and intelligence branches of the Air force, Navy and Army. The DCI refused and the case eventually went before a Federal Court. In a last ditch effort to prevent disclosure of the ‘black budget’ the DCI persuaded both the Senate and the House of Representatives to vote against amendments that would have recommended its disclosure.

The CIA’s efforts were to no avail and in 1997 the Federal Judge decided in favor of the FAS that the ‘black budget’ could be disclosed without harming the national security of the US. In what was the first major crack in the official secrecy surrounding the CIA’s budget and its intelligence activities, the CIA subsequently decided to release for the first time the size of its ‘official’ black budget (appropriations drawn from single line items on the DoD budget), but reserved the right to not disclose this figure in future. For the fiscal year of 1997, the combined aggregate appropriations for the Intelligence Community (black budget) was said to be 26.6 billion dollars.

The ‘official’ black budget for the CIA can be estimated by using the percentage of the black bud-get for the intelligence community that went to the CIA as opposed to other intelligence agen-cies from DoD appropriations. According to Victor Marchetti and John Marks, the CIA portion of the intelligence black budget was 750 million from 6.228 billion (approximately 12%) for 1973. [24] Victor Marchetti and John Marks put the overall intelligence budget at $6.228 bil-lion for 1973, of which the CIA disposed of $750 million.

According to David Wise in 1975 the entire CIA budget was hidden within a $2 billion appro-priation for “Other Procurement, Air Force.” The $12 billion total for all U.S. intelligence, much higher than previous estimates, was indicated in the report of the Senate intelligence commit-tee.

Wise’s estimate suggests that the proportion of the intelligence black budget that goes to the CIA is closer to approximately 16.7% than the 12.0% estimated by Marchetti and Mark. At the other end, the Federation of Atomic Scientists, using 1998 figures, estimated that the CIA’s portion of the black budget was 11.5%. If 12% is taken as the more accurate estimate of the CIA

portion of the black budget, then this suggests that of the 26.6 billion dollars Tenet disclosed went to the Intelligence Com-munity from DoD appropriations, approximately $3.2 billion (12%) was the official ‘black budget’ of the CIA. The 1998 es-timate converts to $3.5 billion in 2002 terms, and compares quite favorable with the 1953 figures that presumably made up DoD appropriations for the CIA black budget that can be converted to approximately $3.4 billion in 2002 using CPI ad-justments. Consequently it appears that much of the mystery surrounding the black budget of the CIA and the intelligence community had been ended once official figures for the CIA were released through FOIA in 1997.

However, it will now be argued that the figures released by Te-net in 1997 for the ‘official black budget’ for the intelligence community, and earlier estimates dating from 1953 data, committee reports in the 1970’s, is disinformation intended to steer analysts, Congress and the general public away from the true size of the CIA’s black budget. It will be argued that the ‘unofficial’ CIA black budget, in terms of Congressional ap-propriations and other funds the CIA transfers through other government departments and agencies far exceeds the ‘offi-cial’ black budget (DoD appropriations earmarked for the in-telligence community), and has been well disguised as a major purpose of the CIA ever since its creation. The major purpose of the CIA is to act as a funnel for the combined black budgets

of the intelligence community and the Department of Defense. This is the reverse of the conven-tional wisdom behind the ‘official’ black budget that the DoD funds the CIA. In fact it is the CIA that funds secret projects run by the various military and intelligence services in the DoD. Us-ing the testimony of whistleblowers of other federal government agencies and testimony of DoD Inspector Generals, I will argue that billions of dollars are annually extracted from these agen-cies by the CIA, topped up by revenue from other sources used by the CIA, and then siphoned to the military intelligence agencies within the DoD for distribution to ‘deep black projects’ outside of the regular appropriations and oversight process mandated by Congress for ‘black projects’.

HUD’s Missing MoneyCatherine Austin Fitts, Hamilton Securities

and the CIAIn 1989 Catherine Austin Fitts became Assistant Secretary for Housing in Department of Hous-ing and Urban Development (HUD). She began to notice money was not properly tracked as it moved between different HUD departments and there was a lack of proper accounting mecha-

Yes, this man ran the CIA. I can’t help but think he should be a stand-in for one of the Three Stooges movies. Nyuk nyuk.

nisms to deal with discrepancies in revenue indi-cated fraud at an alarming level. She attempted to put in place some credible financial tracking mechanisms to identify where the money was going and to identify the responsible individu-als and HUD departments, but after 18 months on the job she was suddenly fired by the Bush administration. Fitts was told the day after she left that her financial reforms through ‘place-based financial accounting and statements’ would also be terminated.

Fitts subsequently created her own investment company, Hamilton Securities Group that used specially created computer software for track-ing financial flows in the mortgage industry. In 1993, Hamilton Securities Group won a contract with HUD to manage its $500 billion portfolio. As a result of its innovative computer tracking of finances called ‘Community Wizard’, Hamil-ton Securities saved Federal Taxpayers $2 bil-lion and according to Fitts “took the world’s breath away.” Carolyn Betts, a former Hamilton Securities employee said:

“The HUD field office people went absolutely crazy when they saw it. You could go in with a pointer on a map and get to information on expen-ditures by each HUD program. It was a pretty beautiful program and would have become unbe-lievably powerful.”

Fitts’ innovative program was so successful that it was earning special attention from Con-gressmen with one chairman of an oversight committee in October 1997 favorably commenting on the “eye-popping” results. Fitts’ program had the potential to revolutionize the way in which large multibillion dollar portfolios were managed. Vice President Al Gore’s Reinventing Govern-ment Initiative gave her firm the Hammer Award for Excellence in Re-engineering Government. Fitts innovation also came to the attention of powerful individuals who viewed it as a threat to existing way in which finances were tracked in HUD and other federal government agencies that apparently allowed corporations to reap large profits from government inefficiency.

Fitts’ pioneering work came crashing down around her in June, 1996 when a qui tam (whistle-blower) suit was brought against her firm by a rival HUD contractor John Ervin who alleged Fitts committed fraud against HUD to the tune of $3.8 million. According to the Federal False Claims Act, a qui tam suit has 60 days to be investigated before a federal judge has to reach a conclusion on the substance of the suit and unseal the qui tam so that the defendant can re-spond to the allegations. Instead, the HUD Inspector General together with the federal judge in charge of the case took four years before another judge decided the allegations lacked sub-stance, unsealed the qui tam in July 2000, and the government decided to end its role in the case. In the meantime, Fitts’ firm was subjected to 18 audits and investigations, multiple sub-poenas for thousands of documents, not paid money owed to it by HUD while the ‘investigation’

was underway, subjected to media leaks and a smear campaign that frightened away potential investors, and ultimately raided by Department of Justice agents in 1998. The raid effectively destroyed the Community Wizard program and put an end to Hamilton Securities’ efforts to survive the legal onslaught that involved steep legal costs. At the end, Fitts company went bankrupt, Fitts was emotionally exhausted, but continued to fight for her reputation, repay-ment from HUD, and exposure of wrong doing by the HUD Inspector General in allowing the qui tam law suit to proceed for four years on a ‘fishing expedition’, while simultaneously leaking false information.

After her experiences in both working with HUD as an employee (1988-1989) and as a con-tractor (1993-1997) and observing at first hand the chronic state of finances that could not be accounted for under normal accounting rules, Fitts concluded that HUD was being run as a ‘criminal enterprise’:In the summer of 2000, a member of the staff for the Chairman of the Senate appropriation subcommittee (with jurisdiction over HUD …) confided to me that they believed that HUD was being run as “a criminal enterprise.” I responded that I “did not disagree.” Reaching that con-clusion was a long time coming. It took many years of experience implementing practical and sound reforms to the FHA mortgage system, only to have the system reject any and all efforts to have it become anything other than an integral part of a significant mortgage bubble and a pork and slush fund operation.

The fraudulent movement of finances through HUD were made possible by poor auditing stan-dards that enabled as much as tens of billions of dollars to go annually missing. In a March 2000 report, the HUD Inspector General, Susan Gaffney, reported a high number of ‘adjust-ments’ that had to be made to account for $59 billion that could not be located in 1999:

At the time we discontinued our audit work, a total of 42 adjustments totaling about $17.6 bil-lion had been processed in this manner to adjust fiscal year 1998 ending balances. An addition-al 242 adjustments totaling about $59.6 billion, were made to adjust fiscal year 1999 activity.

Gaffney argued that the ‘adjustments’ were caused by HUD’s difficulties in reconciling different computer systems. An unnamed official within HUD dismissed the idea of the adjustments be-ing solely problems associated with different computers systems:

Everything that has transpired at HUD is not an accident, and it sure isn’t a computer glitch. When you take the different material violations of the most basic financial-management rules

and compare them to the time and effort put in to have first-rate systems, it is impossible to explain it as any-thing other than significant financial fraud.

Such fraud would not have been possible without collu-sion at the highest level, the Director of HUD, Mario Cuo-mo. Confirmation that the missing $59 billion for 1999 was known to Cuomo was disclosed by the unnamed source in HUD:

The losses could be far greater than $59 billion, but they don’t know for sure because the audit isn’t completed. Secretary Cuomo is a very smart control freak, so it’s lu-dicrous to think that he doesn’t know what is going on.

Katherine Austin Fitts

Confirmation that losses from HUD were an endemic problem rather than peculiar to 1998 and 1999 comes from the Gen-eral Accounting Office of Congress that released a report in 2003 stating that in January 2003, “for the 12th year in a row, the HUD OIG [Office of Inspector General] cited the lack of an integrated financial-management system as a material weak-ness in its audit of the department’s financial statements.” In short, billions of dollars were annually missing from HUD and no one knew where the money was going. Of course it went to CIA Black Budget Operations.

Fitts analysis of the fraudulent movement of funds through HUD, her initial firing as an Assistant Secretary, subsequent difficulties her company had with HUD, indicated that she had stumbled on to one of the strategies used by the CIA to gener-ate its secret black budget. Fitts ultimately came to the conclu-sion that HUD was being run as a money laundering operation to fund black projects. The sums for HUD alone, $59 billion for 1999, were far greater than the official $3.5 billion annual es-timated budget of the CIA that came from DoD appropriations. Missing funds from HUD, the participation of the HUD Director in permitting the funds to go missing, and the difficulties suf-fered by Fitts, point to the CIA being behind the missing HUD funds. The CIA is the only govern-ment agency that has the legal authority to co-opt Federal Agency Directors in permitting bil-lions of dollars to go missing from or laundered through their budgets for transfer into a ‘black budget’. It is worth investigating the destruction of Fitts company, Hamilton Securities Group to identify any CIA fingerprints in covering up the secret transfer of HUD funds into what will be argued to be the CIA’s ‘unofficial’ black budget.

The individual who brought the lawsuit against Fitts, John Ervin, has been described as “noto-rious for filing nuisance lawsuits and “bid protests’.” His small mortgage investment firm ap-parently had, according to one inside source, “up to 17 in-house personnel working full time on mountains of paperwork regarding this and other cases.” Ervin may simply have been a small time contractor with a chip on his shoulder from losing the HUD mortgage contract to Fitts’ company. However, the large number of legal cases his firm was involved in suggests he may have been simply a front for more powerful actors threatened by Hamilton’s Securities who wished to cripple it through a damaging court process. More revealing was the behavior of the federal judge in charge of Fitts’ case that eventually presided over the case. According to court transcripts, the initial judge had indicated in 1996 that it would be inappropriate to extend the seal [on the qui tam] without evidence and that unless evidence was produced he would not extend the seal again. The case was then transferred to Judge Stanley Sporkin of the District of Columbia’s District Court. According to Uri Dowbenky, Sporkin “managed to illegally keep a qui tam lawsuit sealed for almost 4 years. That could be a ‘judicial’ record.” Sporkin had given multiple 60-day extensions to further investigate the allegations that he claimed were not lim-ited to the False Claims Act limit of 60 days that applied to Department of Justice investiga-tions, since the HUD Inspector General had independent subpoena power and chose to continue the investigation. Extending the qui tam in this highly dubious manner meant that it was kept sealed thus preventing Hamilton from responding to the allegations, and thus prolonged an elaborate ‘fishing expedition’ that would financially exhaust Hamilton Securities.

A significant background fact about Judge Sporkin was that he was the General Counsel for the CIA (1981-86) before being appointed as a federal judge to the District of Columbia District Court by Ronald Reagan in 1985. Sporkin’s CIA background and the continued extensions of the qui tam case that had questionable legal standing and which was finally unsealed and dropped by a new Federal judge appointed to the case after Sporkin’s retirement in 2000 point to a CIA covert program to destroy Hamilton Securities. One conclusion that emerges is that Fitts company was targeted since it threatened to under-mine and even expose the way the CIA secretly extracted con-gressional appropriations from or laundered funds through HUD and other government agencies. The CIA was using its unique legal status of being able to lawfully transfer Congres-sional appropriations or ‘laundered money’ through other fed-eral government agencies, to fund projects administered by the intelligence community, and to destroy any individual or company that threatened to reveal such a process.

The wide extent of chronic auditing irregularities for most government agencies suggested that it was not just HUD that was used by the CIA as vehicle for siphoning money into its

‘unofficial’ black budget. A Senate Committee on government reform investigated the auditing practices of federal government agencies in 2001, and the Committee Chairman, Senator Fred Thompson, released a report that found that ineffectual auditing practices were endemic and led to billions of dollars going annually missing from most government agencies. Rather than restricting itself to the appropriations through the DoD (the ‘official’ black budget), something Congress was aware of and tolerated, the accounting irregularities of many government agen-cies were possible evidence that the CIA was accumulating a sizable portion of the ‘actual’ black budget from other government agencies.

The Ultimate Beneficiary of the CIA ‘Black Budget’: The Intelligence Community and

the Second Manhattan ProjectThe covert role of the CIA in destroying Hamilton Securities suggests that the $59 billion miss-ing from HUD in 1999 was some of the money transferred to the CIA’s ‘unofficial black budget’. The ‘legal’ status of such a secret transaction on the basis of national security meant that the CIA could do this and be sure that senior officials in HUD and the Department of Justice would cooperate in keeping these transfers a secret. The legal onslaught suffered by Hamilton Secu-rities was indicative of a covert CIA operation that involved cooperation by senior officials in HUD, the DOJ, a federal judge and a former HUD contractor, in destroying a domestic US com-pany that had developed technology that threatened to reveal where the missing HUD money was really going.

Estimates of the CIA’s ‘official’ black budget have been shown earlier to be in the vicinity of $3.5 billion and thought to be extracted from DoD appropriations. If the CIA was the recipient of the

missing HUD money, this meant that the CIA was in fact a conduit for appropriated federal funds and non-appropriat-ed funds being channeled through HUD and the CIA. Rather than the CIA being a recipient of DoD funds, as commonly thought, the CIA was more likely secretly funding intelligence activities and covert operations conducted through the in-telligence community associated with the DoD. It is worth exploring how the CIA could be siphoning money to those elements of the intelligence community associated with the DoD, and how these funds could in turn be used by the DoD and the intelligence community to fund a large number of ‘deep black projects’ that operate outside of the oversight system that had been developed for regular classified proj-ects funded by Congressional appropriations. These regular classified programs are ‘waived’ Special Access Programs in the DoD, and ‘waived’ Covert Access Programs in the CIA. We turn now to examine events surrounding the inception of the CIA and its relationship with the DoD in jointly running and funding the intelligence community associated with the DoD.

The end of the Second World witnessed the dissolution of the CIA’s predecessor, Office of Strate-gic Services (OSS) that had been established in June 1942, and headed by a former civilian, Wil-liam Donovan. Donovan put together an assortment of adventurers, intellectuals, and military personnel that carried out a number of intelligence activities and covert operations during the war that had limited success. The OSS, however, was not trusted with the most sensitive war intelligence by the two main US military intelligence services - the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) and the Army’s G-2, nor by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The war’s end meant that foreign intelligence and covert operations were again dominated by the different military services, the State Department and the FBI (the FBI had extensive operations in Latin America) who would be very protective when it came to their most sensitive intelligence data.

The post-war structure of the national security system was debated, and the military services were on the record for being opposed to the formation a civilian agency that would play a lead-ing role in foreign intelligence gathering or covert operations. Indeed, the idea of the differ-ent military intelligence services being headed by a civilian agency would have been quite a challenge for President Truman and his advisors to argue due to the major role played by US military intelligence in successfully conducting the war, and the peripheral role played by the OSS. Despite the wartime experience and the conventional wisdom that the military were more than capable of handling intelligence related activities, the passage of the National Security Act in 1947, led to the formation of a unified defense bureaucracy, the Department of Defense, three main military services (US Army, Navy and Air Force), and the creation of the National Security Council and the CIA. The CIA became the formal head of the US intelligence Commu-nity responsible for coordinating and providing leadership on all intelligence related activities. This meant that an organization based on the wartime model of a relatively small organiza-tion that conducted covert operations (the OSS) would be formally responsible for all US intel-ligence activities both military and civilian. This represented a major shift for the different military services yet they acquiesced to Truman’s request, but did so in a way that meant the DoD through its various associated intelligence services maintained considerable bureaucratic power in running the intelligence community in association with the CIA.

The Director of the CIA (DCI) would be the formal head of the Intelligence Community comprising the CIA, the Na-tional Security Agency, National Reconnaissance Office, the various military intelligence agencies and intelligence services of civilian agencies such as the FBI and the State Department. Importantly, the DCI would play a key role in the budget allocations for agencies within the intelligence community to be funded by the black budget. The DCI has statutory power to move funds in the intelligence commu-nity with the approval of the Secretary of Defense as de-scribed in the following:

No funds made available under the National Foreign Intel-ligence Program may be reprogrammed by any element of the intelligence community without the prior approval of the Director of Central Intelligence except in accordance with procedures issued by the Director. The Secretary of Defense shall consult with the Director of Central Intelli-gence before reprogramming funds made available under

the Joint Military Intelligence Program.

In theory, this meant that the DCI would have some leverage despite what was conventionally thought to be the budgetary power of the DoD over the DCI since the ‘official’ black budget would comprise DoD appropriations in one form or another. If the CIA, however, were able to get more significant sources of funds than DoD appropriations, then the CIA would control the money flow that sustained the intelligence community associated with the DoD, and their various in-telligence activities, covert programs and classified technologies associated with these.

Leadership of the Intelligence Community is not exercised solely by the Director of the CIA (DCI), but is shared with the Secretary of Defense, who is responsibly for ensuring that budget needs are met for DoD associated intelligence agencies, and who also appoints key personal in these agencies. This power sharing and the extensive funding arrangement that involves the CIA in DoD operations, is evidenced in terms of the relevant statutory provision for funding military intelligence agencies:

The Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Director of Central Intelligence, shall:

(1) ensure that the budgets of the elements of the intelligence community within the Depart-ment of Defense are adequate to satisfy the overall intelligence needs of the Department of De-fense, including the needs of the chairman \1\ of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the commanders of the unified and specified commands …

One of clauses of this statute worth emphasizing is that the CIA has a ‘consultative role’ in sat-isfying the funding needs of the ‘Joint Chiefs of Staff and the commanders of the unified and specified commands.” Such a clause provides legal justification for the Secretary of Defense to transfer funds provided by the CIA’s black budget to an extensive number of military services, commands and operations.

As far as appointments are concerned, the Secretary of Defense has the power to nominate the Directors of military related intelligence agencies such as the NSA, NRO and National Imagery

and Mapping Agency, even in cases where the DCI does not approve of the Secretary’s choice. Thus the Secretary of Defense has considerable bureau-cratic power over the main military intelligence agencies in terms of senior appointments and how funds would be spent. Consequently, leadership of the intelligence community is shared between the Director of the CIA (DCI) and the Secretary of Defense who share decisions concerning appoint-ments, programs and budgetary allocations for the US intelligence community.

While the CIA is the junior partner to the DoD when it comes to intelligence activities and covert opera-tions, it has one major bureaucratic advantage to the DoD. This concerns ‘black budget’ allocations for highly classified projects. It would be far easier for the Congress to accept the idea of an ‘official’ black budget sanctioned by law, if it was a civilian agency that was formally in charge of this unusual budgetary mechanism that would require an ex-traordinary degree of trust by Congress that such budgetary power was not being abused. As far as the DoD was concerned, Congress was quite adamant that all appropriations to the DoD would be spent in ways that were consistent with the law, i.e., Congressional resolutions and en-actments. After all, this is what distinguished American style democracy from an authoritarian police state. This meant that the DoD’s power to create a ‘black budget’ would be circumscribed by relevant Congressional provisions governing the ‘unacknowledged’ Special Access Programs (‘black projects’) this funded. The CIA provided the ideal cover for the creation of an ‘unofficial’ black budget that could legally transfer the appropriations of, or launder funds through, non-DoD federal government agencies, not to the CIA as Congress intended in the CIA Act, but directly to ‘deep black projects’ institutionally located within the NSA, NRO, NIMA, DIA, the different military intelligence services of the Army, Navy, and Air Force; and to the various special proj-ects and commands overseen by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The CIA’s ‘official’ black budget is a cover for the large network of projects run by the different military intelligence agencies, the CIA and Joint Chiefs of Staff, that used government ap-propriations from, and money laundered through, different federal agencies. The CIA could provide for sufficient funding for an extensive number of ‘deep black projects’ that would be entirely separate to regular DoD appropriations and the over-sight process developed for DoD classified projects, without Congressional budget analysts and the general public being aware of how the different military intelligence services were secretly housing projects funded by the CIA siphoned funds.

A secret funding arrangement between the CIA and the differ-ent military intelligence services in a manner that bypassed

budgetary restraints on DoD associated activities would offer considerable mutual advantages to the CIA and the military intelligence services if they wanted to create deep black projects outside of both the normal Congressional appropriation sys-tem and the regular DoD oversight process. First, the CIA had the legal power to transfer appropria-tions from other government agencies, keeping this secret and moving these funds to whatever operations it deemed necessary. The 1949 CIA Act describes this power as follows:

The sums made available to the Agency may be expended without regard to the provisions of law and regulations relating to the expenditure of Gov-ernment funds; and for objects of a confidential, extraordinary, or emergency nature, such expen-ditures to be accounted for solely on the certificate of the Director.

As the clause makes clear, the CIA Director may use funds from the black budget “without regard to the provisions of law.” This means that the DCI has enormous power in funding ‘deep black programs’ and disregarding any legal or budgetary restrictions where he deems a project to be of “extraordinary” or “emergence nature”. Unlike other agencies, the Director of the CIA would be able to prevent the Inspector General of the CIA - an independent official appointed by Congress - from conducting a thorough audit of the CIA’s budget and exposing the actual size of the black budget. The relevant statute from the CIA Act is worth quoting since it is unique restriction not found in the case of the power of Inspector

Generals of other federal agencies:

The Director may prohibit the Inspector General from initiat-ing, carrying out, or completing any audit, inspection, or in-vestigation, or from issuing any subpoena, after the Inspector General has decided to initiate, carry out, or complete such audit, inspection, or investigation or to issue such subpoena, if the Director determines that such prohibition is necessary to protect vital national security.

The above clause directly contradicts the relevant federal statute that governs Inspector Generals in other government departments and agencies: “Neither the head of the establish-ment nor the officer next in rank below such head shall prevent or prohibit the Inspector General from initiating, carrying out, or completing any audit or investigation, or from issuing any subpoena during the course of any audit or investigation.

A second advantage from having the CIA act as the unofficial funding source, was that the various military intelligence agencies and Joint Chiefs of Staff would be able to provide

the physical and personnel infrastructure for deep black projects to be funded by the CIA’s black budget which comprised some funds from the appropriations of other gov-ernment departments and agencies. This enabled the DoD associated intelligence ser-vices to circumvent the Congressional re-quirement that no appropriations for DoD activities be expended “unless funds there-for have been specifically authorized by law”. In essence, the DoD and DCI were col-laborating in circumventing Congressional intent designed to prevent DoD ever using funding sources outside of the Congressio-nal appropriation process.

A third mutual advantage was that the CIA could play a significant consultative role in the various DoD associated intelligence agencies in both intelligence activities and covert operations that would be outside of the regular oversight process in Congress, the Executive Office and even the DoD. This would enable security professionals within the military intelligence agencies, rather than political appointees in Congress, the Executive Office and DoD to make key deci-sions in the oversight of the ‘deep black proj-ects’ that could run on whatever ‘unofficial’ black budget funding the CIA could raise. The only restraint was the willingness of di-rectors of different government agencies to allow some of portion of their budget alloca-tions to go to the CIA and DoD agencies in the intelligence community, and to cover up the movement of significant sums of money that the CIA had raised elsewhere and were ‘laundering’ through these agencies. Most disturbingly, there is a growing body of evi-dence that a portion of the funds laundered through government agencies such as HUD by the CIA comes from organized crime and the drug trade.

CIA CRACK

CIA COKE

Organized Crime, Drugs, and the CIAAllegations of links between the CIA and the drug trade first came to public attention in the 1970’s when a number of public officials came forward with evidence of such links. One of these was a former police officer in the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD), Michael Ruppert. In 1977, as a result of his official investigation into the drug trade in Los Angeles, Rupert uncov-ered evidence that the CIA was playing an active role in bringing drugs into New Orleans and Los Angeles. When Rupert disclosed this information to his superiors in the LAPD, he became a target for surveillance, harassment and burglaries that eventually led to his resignation.

Another key official is a retired Drug Enforcement Agency agent, Celerino Castillo III, who was the lead DEA agent in Guatemala and discovered that the CIA was involved in the drug trade to raise finances for its covert operations. In a written statement to the House Permanent Se-lect Committee on Intelligence Castillo gave detailed information on a number of drug running operations that involved cooperation between the CIA and organized crime cartels. Celerino claimed:

The key to understanding the “crack cocaine” epidemic, which exploded on our streets in 1984, lies in understanding the effect of congressional oversight on covert operations. In this case the Boland amendment(s) of the era, while intending to restrict covert operations as intended by the will of the People, only served to encourage C.I.A., the military and elements of the national intelligence community to completely bypass the Congress and the Constitution in an eager and often used covert policy of funding prohibited operations with drug money.

Another prominent official was Marine Colonel James Sebow, the third in command of the El Toro Airbase, California, who discovered evidence that C-130 cargo flights coming into the air-base from Central America were filled with drugs. Sebow communicated his finding to the base commander, Col Joseph Underwood, and then found himself along with Col Underwood, subject to investigations for minor offenses, relieved of command and threatened with Court Martial if he did not cooperate with the investigation. On January 22, 1991, Sebow was found dead, ap-parently by suicide, but an investigation by family members and supporters revealed evidence that he in fact was murdered for what he had discovered. On the day before his death, Sebow’s widow recalled a conversation Sebow had with Col Underwood who had stopped by for a visit:

Underwood stopped by and repeatedly tried to talk Jimmy into accepting an early retirement to avoid a court-martial. Jimmy objected strongly. At this, Underwood became quite angry. Sally stated, “I have never seen such a vicious face as Joe’s when Jimmy said he would not retire and would take the entire matter to a court-martial if necessary. Underwood jumped up and said, “You’ll never go to a court-martial, and I mean never!”

The events surrounding Sebow’s death support allegations that he had uncovered a CIA sup-ported drug running operation into the US, and was murdered to prevent this from being ex-posed.

In the July 12, 1985 personal notes of Oliver North, used by his legal defense during his various trials and Congressional hearings over his role in selling US weapons to Iran to fund the Nica-raguan Contras, North reported that at a meeting involving a number of NSC and CIA officials, $14 million was mentioned as the funds the Contra rebels would raise from the drug trade. North’s admission did not get serious press coverage despite the apparent confirmation that

the CIA was complicit in the use of drugs as revenue for covert operations. It can be inferred that North’s efforts were an amateurish effort by an NSC ‘basement team’ to raise revenue for NSC covert operations that was modeled on a far more successful effort by the CIA to use rev-enue from the drug trade.

The best known case of an alleged link between the CIA and the drug trade emerged from the pioneering investigative journalism of Gary Webb in 1996 who published the “Dark Alliance” series in the San Jose Mercury during Summer 1996. Webb presented a compelling case that the CIA played a role in allowing drug money to be used to fund the Contra rebels in Nicara-gua. While Webb’s series was focused on the proceeds of drug activities going to the Contras, his conclusion that the CIA colluded in this endeavor supported broader allegations of the CIA using the drug trade to finance covert operations. Webb’s series of articles generated intense national interest until the publication of ‘independent’ investigation by the Washington Post on October 4, 1996, claimed there was insufficient evidence to support Webb’s allegations. The New York Times and Los Angeles Times followed up on October 20 with equally critical articles. Criticisms began to mount and eventually led to the editors of the San Jose Mercury apologiz-ing for ‘errors’ in Webb’s Dark Alliance series, and had Webb transferred to a less prominent news bureau. Webb resigned in disgust in November, 1997, ending a nineteen year career as a journalist. It was subsequently learned that one of the two writers of the Washington Post article, Walter Pincus was once a CIA asset, suggesting that the Post had been co-opted into a covert campaign to undermine Webb’s work. The critical stories in the New York Times and Los Angeles Times relied on similar ‘unnamed sources’ to the Post article indicating that Webb had become a victim of a covert CIA operation through the ‘establishment’ newspapers to discredit his findings. In January 1998, the Inspector General of the CIA released a report exonerating the CIA of any role in the drug trade.

For those of you that aren’t in the know, Gary Webb committed suicide. He shot himself in the face with a gun, twice. Anyway ...

Having so far determined the existence of a black budget created by the CIA that circumvents Congressional intent on the use of appropriations of different federal departments and agen-cies, and/or involves laundering of funds possibly gained from organized crime and the drug trade, it is worth estimating the size of the CIA’s black budget and what it is used for.

Estimating the Size of the CIA’s ‘unofficial’ Black Budget

Using Fitts estimates of money missing from HUD, and knowledge of the appropriations pro-cess, a more accurate figure of the CIA’s ‘unofficial’ black budget that feeds the intelligence community associated with DoD can be estimated. It should be emphasized that it is only the CIA that has Congressional authority to draw appropriations through other government agen-cies without ‘without regard to any provisions of law’ or ‘intended use of appropriations’. This means that money missing from the Congressional appropriations of other agencies would be initially being siphoned through the CIA and no other intelligence agency. Other agencies in the intelligence community gather their appropriations through the DOD that generates the ‘official’ black budget through fictitious line items on its annual budget. Consequently, it can be concluded that appropriated money channeled through HUD and other agencies is going into the CIA’s ‘unofficial’ black budget that in turn goes directly into deep black programs within the

DoD associated intelligence agencies and specialized programs of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The CIA’s ‘unofficial’ black budget would therefore not appear on the DoD budget as single line items but would be annually moved through the DoD budgetary mechanisms in a way that cannot be financially tracked. A description of the way this is done appears is described by Tim Weiner, author of Blank Check: The Penta-gon’s Black Budget:

One way the form [Form 1080, Voucher for Transfer Between Ap-propriations and/or Funds] is used to allow money to flow from the Treasury to the Army, or from one Army account to another, is for an officer to fill out the 1080. The bursar then signs the form and issues a Treasury check. The 1080 vouches that the money has been used to pay for the costs of authorized programs. It cre-ates an audit trail - a paper path showing money flowing.

An estimate of the size of the CIA’s black budget, would therefore be unaccounted movement of funds through the DoD. According to an investigative journalist, Kelly O’Meara, the use of a range of accounting mechanisms such as “unsupported entries,” “materi-al-control weakness,” “adjusted records,” “unmatched disburse-ments,” “abnormal balances” and “unreconciled differences” are evidence of large sums of money that are moved through the DoD that cannot be accounted for. Since the Inspector General of DoD has a certain degree of independence, traces of the CIA black budget would appear in auditing anomalies using some of the terms O’Meara describes. David K. Steensma, Acting Assis-tant Inspector for auditing DoD wrote in a 2002 report that “DoD processed $1.1 trillion in unsupported accounting entries to DoD Component financial data used to prepare departmental reports and DoD financial statements for FY 2000.” Elaborating on the significance of the DoD Inspector General reports, O’Meara has written:

[T]he deputy IG [Inspector General] at the Pentagon read an eight-page summary of DOD fiduciary failures. He admitted that $4.4 trillion in adjustments to the Pentagon’s books had to be cooked to compile the required financial statements and that $1.1 trillion of that amount could not be supported by reliable information. In other words, at the end of the last full year on Bill Clinton’s watch, more than $1 trillion was simply gone and no one can be sure of when, where or to whom the money went.

According to the Office of the Inspector General, the accounting irregularities for fiscal year 1999 were even larger and added up to 2.3 trillion dollars; and for fiscal year 1998, these irregulari-ties were 1.7 trillion (see table 2 at right).

The Inspector General reports are important evidence that trillions of dollars were siphoned through the Department of Defense (DoD) for the fiscal years 1998-2002. Using the Inspector General reports of accounting anomalies, it can be estimated that Fitts and O’Meara’s estimates of missing money from the DoD is a close approximation to the CIA’s ‘unofficial’ black budget. Consequently, the CIA black budget is annually in the vicinity of 1.1 trillion dollars – a truly staggering figure when one considers that the DoD budget for 2004 will be approximately 380 billion dollars. This suggests that the vast size of the DoD in terms of its personnel, weapons systems and research into ‘conventional weapons systems’, is dwarfed by something that in funding terms is almost three times larger than the entire conventional military system funded by the DoD budget.

The vast size of the estimated CIA ‘unofficial’ black budget is strong evidence of a collective ef-fort by the CIA and DoD associated military intelligence agencies and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to fund a network of highly classified projects so large in scope that they collectively dwarf the original Manhattan project conducted at Los Alamos National Laboratories during the Second World War. Since the original Manhattan project aimed to develop an atomic bomb for use in the war against Nazi Germany, it can be inferred that the network of projects funded by the CIA’s black budget aims to develop a range of advanced weapons systems and intelligence capabili-ties for use against an adversary whose existence and identity still remains classified. I will henceforth refer to this network of highly classified projects as the second Manhattan Project - ‘Manhattan II’ is the ultimate beneficiary of the CIA’s ‘unofficial’ black budget.

Conventional Oversight System for the CIA’s and DoD’s Classified Programs

Oversight of the Manhattan II would predictably have been a major concern for the Truman administration that was instrumental in the passage of the National Security Act of 1947 and the CIA Act of 1949 that institutionalized the black budget that would fund Manhattan II. Ma-jor considerations of the Truman administration would have been to create an oversight body dominated by professionals that would not be affected by the partisan political process or by the new political appointees that came and went with each Presidential administration. Conse-quently, an oversight system would have evolved comprising individuals appointed either due to the technical abilities (e.g., scientists), political skills (e.g., international diplomacy experts), or military expertise (e.g., J-2 & J-3 directorates in the Joint Chiefs of Staff). This oversight system would have most likely evolved in a manner that was independent of the conventional oversight system for classified projects. Consequently, before considering how oversight of the Black Budget and Manhattan II are conducted, it is worth exploring how the conventional over-sight system works for classified programs in the CIA and DoD.

This conventional oversight system for highly classified intelligence activities and/or covert projects concerns Controlled Access Programs (CAPs) of the intelligence community or Special Access Programs (SAP) of the DoD. CAPs/SAPs are programs that have additional security measures attached to them over and above the normal classificatory system (confidential, se-cret, top-secret) attached to most classified information and programs. CAPs/SAPs are divided into two classes ‘acknowledged’ and ‘unacknowledged’ as described in a 1997 Senate Commis-sion Report: “Publicly acknowledged programs are considered distinct from unacknowledged programs, with the latter colloquially referred to as “black” programs because their very exis-tence and purpose are classified.”

A ‘waived’ CAP/SAP is so sensitive that only eight members of Congress (the chairs and rank-ing members of the four intelligence [or defense] committees divided between the House of Rep-resentatives and Senate) are notified of a waived CAP/SAP without being given any information about it. This would enable them to truthfully declare no knowledge of such a program if asked,

thereby maintaining secrecy of this CAP/SAP. If unacknowledged CAPs/SAPs are ‘black programs’, then ‘waived’ unacknowledged CAPs/SAPs are ‘deep black’. The most secret of the intelligence and covert operations conducted by the CIA are ‘deep black’ CAPs.

CAPs are funded through the ‘offi-cial’ black budget and in theory are subject to both Executive and Con-gressional oversight. In practice though, Congressional oversight in the case of waived acknowledged CAPs is nominal as revealed by the 1997 Senate Commission Report. President Clinton’s Executive Order 12958 issued on April 17, 1995, reformed how CAPs/SAPs would in future be created and oversight established. The main component of the Executive Order was that only the Director of Cen-tral Intelligence or the Secretaries of State, Defense and Energy (or their principal deputies) could cre-ate a CAP/SAP. CAPs/SAPs would be kept to an “absolute minimum”; and would be created when “the vulnerability of, or threat to, spe-cific information is exceptional,” and their secrecy cannot be pro-tected by the normal classification system.

As far as oversight was concerned, the key clause in Executive Order 12958 was an effort by the Clinton administration to coordi-nate oversight through a central executive office (Information Security Oversight Office) that would be responsible to the National Security Council (NSC) and annually report to the Presi-dent. The President’s effort to centralize and coordinate oversight features of CAPs/SAPs was resisted by both the Defense and Intelligence communities. While in theory, oversight coordina-tion occurs in the Information Security Oversight Office set up in the NSC that issues an annual report to the President; the power to approve or terminate a CAP/SAP lies with the respective intelligence community and DoD committees and executive officers. In general, Executive Of-fice oversight of CAPs/SAPs has been described as “nothing more than a sop used to placate

Don’t worry America, we’re ONLY missing 2.3 trillion.

anyone who questions the propriety of an administration’s covert action policy.”

Oversight of CAPs/SAPs is performed by a committee comprising officials from the Intelligence Community, the Controlled Access Program Oversight Committee (CAPOC); and a similar com-mittee in the DoD, the Special Access Program Oversight Committee (SAPOC). CAPOC reviews CAPs and Sensitive Compartmented Information (intelligence data) in the intelligence com-munity annually and can recommend their ‘compartmentation’ or termination. It is however, only the Director or Deputy Director of the CIA that has the authority to “create, modify, or terminate controlled access programs.”:

While CAPOC provides more direct over-sight and coordination of CAPs, it is not

ultimately the body that oversees the CIA’s most secret projects

conducted in collaboration with the military intelli-

gence community. The exclusion of some CIA

CAPs from CAPOC is indicated in the following Directive from the Director of the CIA (DCI): “The DCI or DDCI may waive review by the CAPOC for programs covered by equivalent over-sight mechanisms, or when review by the CAPOC is unnecessary to carry out the DCI’s respon-sibilities.” Essentially, if the DCI deems it unnecessary for CAPOC to provide oversight informa-tion of a CAP, then CAPOC plays no role in monitoring the program. While the DCI is legally obliged to verbally notify Congress of the CIA’s most sensitive CAPs without providing specific budgetary or operational details, there is no independent way of con-firming if he indeed is doing so. Similarly, the DCI could similarly withhold information of the CIA’s most sensitive CAPs to the National Security Council’s ‘Information Security Oversight Office” (ISOO). The extent to which authority is vested in the different security agencies is the way in which program managers of CAPs/SAPs have the authority to come up with their own rules concern-ing access and security. A 1994 Commission Report stated: The special access system gave the program manager the ability to decide who had a need-to-know and thus to strictly control access to the information. But elaborate, costly, and largely separate structures emerged. According to some, the system has grown out of control with each SAP [CAP] program manager able to set independent security rules.

Program managers of CAPs/SAPs have the power to restrict access and information to the heads of Congressional Intelligence Oversight Committees, and even to the NSC’s Information Secu-rity Oversight Office. Consequently, operational control of CAPs and SAPs is firmly maintained by CAP/SAP program managers who answer only to their immediate superiors despite the fact that they are funded by the CIA’s unofficial black budget with the explicit support of the DCI. Consequently there are two categories of waived CAPs/SAPs or ‘deep black programs’: those CAPs/SAPs where oversight is exercised by the relevant oversight committees in the CIA, DoD and the Executive Office; and those CAPs where the program managers answer to an entirely different oversight body. I now explore whom it is that does provide oversight of the CIA’s ‘unof-ficial’ Black Budget and Manhattan II.

Oversight of the CIA’s ‘Unofficial’ Black Budget & Manhattan II

Considering the vast size and unconventional funding source for Manhattan II, it is worth ex-ploring how oversight of both the CIA’s ‘unofficial’ black budget and of Manhattan II has evolved, and whom program managers for projects funded by the CIA’s unofficial black budget actually answer to. The vastness and secrecy surrounding Manhattan II from its inception sometime during the Truman administration places it outside of the conventional political process where the appointment of key civilian leaders is subject to partisan politics that could compromise the secrecy of Manhattan II and the black budget that funds it. In contrast, the conventional political process has little direct influence on the appointment of senior military personal who undergo a process of first being recommended to the President by the relevant DoD promotions boards, then appointed by the President and finally confirmed by the Senate. While the military leadership of the DoD is outside the partisan political arena, this is not the case for the appoint-ment of the civilians who take on key positions as Secretaries, Deputy Secretaries, and Under-secretaries of the different military services in the DoD with each new administration.

It is very likely that the senior military officials in key bodies such as the Joint Chiefs of Staff, are aware of Manhattan II without having detailed knowledge of the black budget that funds it. It is likely that the politically appointed leaders of the DoD have little substantive knowl-edge of Manhattan II, and have as their chief task the goal of ensuring secrecy of Manhattan II and of the CIA generated ‘black budget’ that feeds it. Thus the Secretary of Defense would play no formal oversight of Manhattan II, far less of the black budget that sustains it. The operational side of Manhattan II, in terms of product testing and application, is most likely be controlled by the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Directorates for Intelligence (J-2) and Operations (J-3) that are responsible for intelligence and operational func-tions of the DoD.

It is unlikely that the Director of the CIA (DCI) is made fully aware of the extent of the ‘unof-ficial’ black budget, the activities used to raise money for it, and the second Manhattan project it funds. The DCI like all agency and department heads appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate is subject to the partisan political process. Up to the Carter administration, the tra-dition was that the appointment DCI would not be politicized. However, President Gerald Ford ef-fectively abandoned this with the appointment of George Bush as DCI in 1975.

President Carter appointed Admiral Stansfield Turner as the new DCI in 1977, who in turn was replaced by William Casey as the new DCI by President Reagan in 1981. Given the partisan political nature of the DCI since Bush, it is likely much of the budgetary authority of the DCI was secretly delegated by executive authority to a body that formally plays the key oversight role for the ‘unofficial’ black budget, and the covert projects it funds that make up Manhattan II. The delegated powers would most likely have derived from the Truman administration in the form of an executive order and/or National Security Council directive not published in the US Federal Gazette that is required for all executive orders, and thereby remains secret. Such an executive order/NSC directive would been reconfirmed and gradually expanded by subsequent administrations so that ultimate oversight of the black budget and of Manhattan II remained firmly outside of the conventional oversight process.

Consequently, effective oversight of Manhattan II, comes from an ‘executive committee’ espe-cially established in a way that would make it immune to the partisan political process thus ensuring strict secrecy can be preserved, and politically motivated leaks prevented. The power and resources delegated to this ‘executive oversight committee’ for Manhattan II by the Execu-

tive Office, and its role in ensuring that ‘black budget’ funds are correctly used and kept secret from the general public, justifies a description of it as a ‘shadow government’.

ConclusionThe method used in guiding the analysis in this re-

port is to simply follow the money trail created by the CIA’s black budget that enables a number of important insights to be drawn by the institu-tions playing key roles in generating, protecting and distributing black budget funds. Critical in this analysis has been the experience of individ-uals and companies such as Catherine Fitts and Hamilton Securities that experienced what evi-dence indicates was a CIA orchestrated covert campaign to discredit the financial tracking re-forms that threatened to make more transparent the financial flows of HUD and other government agencies. The systematic accounting problems experienced by HUD and other agencies points to the existence of an unofficial black budget of up to one trillion dollars annually. The size of the black budget and the CIA activities used to gen-erate funds for it, point to a vast secret network of projects that is funded outside of the normal Congressional appropriation process. Conse-quently, what follows is a discussion of some of the primary conclusions that can be drawn and arguments made concerning the CIA’s ‘unoffi-cial’ black budget and the Manhattan II project it has been argued to fund.

It is worth repeating that the CIA is legally au-thorized by Congress to transfer, “without re-gard to any provisions of law”, funds from oth-er government agencies for the generation of a black budget. There is strong evidence that the CIA uses this power to disregard law to comple-ment whatever funds it can generate through Congressional appropriations, with funds gained

through the drugs trade and organized crime that is laundered through different government agencies. The total annual sum of the black budget is best estimated in the form of accounting anomalies in the main departmental recipient of all black budget funds, the DoD, and is in the vicinity of 1.1 trillion dollars that funds a network of classified intelligence activities and covert operations that collectively form a second Manhat-tan Project.

The oversight of Manhattan project occurs outside of the conventional oversight system that can be easily compromised by partisan politics. The oversight system that has evolved has

been very successful in dividing different functions for Manhattan II in ways that balance in-stitutional rivalries between national security organizations without compromising secrecy. Thus the CIA generates the black budget that in turns transfers these funds to projects that are institutionally located in the military intelligence and special operations units of the DoD. The various military intelligence agencies in turn hire private contractors and/or provide the necessary military resources for these covert programs to be conducted in national laborato-ries, military bases, private corporations or other classified locations. The program managers of each of the classified projects associated with Manhattan II answer directly to an ‘executive committee’ that is outside of the regular oversight process in DoD, CIA, Congress and the Exec-utive Office. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have control of the testing and applications of Manhattan II products that are conducted in collaboration with the intelligence community. The respective intelligence, defense and appropriations committees in the US Congress provide legitimacy for Manhattan II and the black budget that funds it by not revoking the budgetary powers allocated to the CIA through the 1949 CIA Act. Finally, the Executive Office through the National Security Council issues the necessary executive orders/NSC directives to coordinate the functions and activities in all the branches of government in order to secretly run Manhattan II. Thus each branch of the national security system plays an important role in Manhattan II, without being fully in control of it, thereby insuring a division of powers according to different functions re-quired for Manhattan II. Effective oversight of Manhattan II, however, comes from an ‘execu-tive committee’ that is immune to the partisan political process and whose oversight power and control of resources makes it virtually a ‘shadow government’.

It needs to be emphasized that the ‘unofficial’ black budget and Manhattan Project have legally evolved in ways to respond to a national security contingency that is yet to be revealed to the American public. The classified adversary that this elaborate secret system has been developed to respond to is arguably a potential threat that warrants an extraordinary network of covert programs that dwarf the original Manhattan Project and annually consume as much as 1.1 tril-lion dollars or much more in a non-transparent manner. More disturbingly, the importance of Manhattan II is such that the CIA has evidently used organized criminal networks and the drug trade as sources to partially fund Manhattan II. This is abundantly clear.

It is unclear when the full scope and impact of Manhattan II will be disclosed to the American public, if ever. However, the consequences in terms of increased loss of trust in federal govern-ment agencies, loss of morale among senior agency officials instructed to cover up black budget transactions, non-transparency in the flow of government appropriations, targeting of policy makers and business leaders who discover the fraudulent accounting and money laundering that occurs with the black budget, and outright murders all warrant a serious examination of the need for maintaining the secrecy of Manhattan II and the black budget that funds it. Finally, the classified adversary against whom Manhattan II is directed requires immediate declassifi-cation due to the inherent dangers of dealing with what appears to be an undisclosed security threat in a non-transparent and unaccountable manner, and totally outside of the moral/legal restrictions that emerge from vigorous public debate in democratic societies.

Black Ops funding requires vast amounts of money selectively taken from the American people without their consent or oversight. Your tax dollars, your hard earned money is used to fund drug sales, murders and fraud. Get used to it. This has been going on for decades and only since the advent of the internet has there been enough accumulated data to prove it.

Sure, you thought you lived in a Democracy. Well you DO! Sort of. The definition of a Democ-racy is “Mob Rule” meaning those with the money and access rule. Look it up. A Democracy

doesn’t afford equal rights to it’s citizens. A Democratic state has a responsibility to protect the commercial trade and maintain hegemony over global commerce. This is done with impunity. Make no mistake, you live in a Fascist Totalitarian Two-Party Dictatorship very thinly and very cleverly disguised as a Democracy all the while posing as a Constitutional Republic. The truth is always stranger than fiction and even the worlds best authors couldn’t put together the various national and global scenarios exposed in my books. I suggest that anyone reading this far should also make it a point to download the free eBooks linked on the following pages. They follow the money and while Americans do have a difficult time balancing checkbooks and filing tax returns, myself included, following the money is a necessary part of understanding your world and I’ve laid it bare for you in the first 3 free eBooks linked here. The rest are just icing on the cake, so to speak.

Murdering Liberty Killing Hope

The Office Of Naval Intelligence, The Eldorado Task Force, The Securities and Exchange Com-mission, Cantor-Fitzgerald, The Federal Reserve, The US Treasury, The Bank Of New York, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, Nugan Hand Bank, The Bush Crime Family and the Global Bankers. A forensic financial study in criminal global finance and the events of 911.

http://www.box.net/shared/4vbu1tkq32

911 Gold

Vast global financial fraud, gold market manipulation and exactly what Dick Cheney and George Bush actually did while in the White House.

http://www.box.net/shared/yghazdjnmd

After 911Connecting the SubPrime Crisis directly to the same people.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16017306/Book%20II%20Complete.pdf

Dust - Short Version

The Physics, Mathematics & Chemistry of 911 using USGS Scanning Electron Microscopy on 35 sample locations from lower Manhattan.

http://www.box.net/shared/hf1eev4jvv

Dust - The Full Version

Part 1:http://www.box.net/shared/9duecajohk

Part 2:http://www.box.net/shared/h81kjfkvg9

Part 3:http://www.box.net/shared/td6593g25y

The Suitcase Bomb

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16017306/Book%204.pdf

Ionizing Radiation 911

A comparative study of Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Chernobyl and 911 with Sandia Labs, Lawrence Livermore and Oak Creek data to include the Japanese Ministry of Health and the IAEA.

Part 1:http://www.box.net/shared/9ilkg3pkfs

Part 2:http://www.box.net/shared/h5gvyev9q8

Part 3:http://www.box.net/shared/ctdmz7la4j

The Golden Lily: 1945-1975 and the historic context and foundation for 911

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16017306/Book%20III%20Complete.pdf

Fascism In America:

A Report Confirming The US Media Is Controlled By An Organized Crime Syndicate involved in murder and financial fraud started by the Bush family and perpetuated by Obama and the Military Industrial Oil and Banking Complex.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16017306/Book%205.pdf

There Were Bombs In The Buildings:Exposing The Pentagon Lies

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16017306/Book%206.pdf

Cocaine FEMAHow FEMA was established with the proceeds of cocaine sales

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16017306/Cocaine%20FEMA-email.pdf

ChemPharma

The same companies that manufacture 10,000 toxic chemicals also manufacture all food addi-tives and also manufacture the pharmaceuticals designed to cure you once they make you sick.

The worlds greatest scam.

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/16017306/Chem%20Pharma.pdf

Notes On MurderTeaching Americans To Kill For The State and The Corporations That ARE The State

(you didn’t think YOU were part of the state, did you?)

Some scholars propose that the military provides the social context where servicemen learn aggression, violence, and murder. Grossman (1996), a military expert on the psychology of killing, discusses these methods in On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society. Grossman coined the term killology to describe a new interdisciplinary field: the study of the methods and psychological effects of training military recruits to circumvent their inhibition’s to killing fellow human beings.

Grossman (1996) noted that previous military research showed that servicemen were not very inclined to kill. During the Civil War, only a tiny percentage of servicemen fired to hit, whereas the vast majority fired over the enemy’s head. A team of researchers, studying what servicemen did in battle during World War II, discovered that only 15% to 20% of individual servicemen were able to fire at an exposed enemy. Consider-ing this unwillingness to kill in battle a problem, the military adopted different techniques in an attempt to increase this percentage.

By the time of the Korean War, the rate of ser-vicemen willing to fire to kill increased to 55%. During the Vietnam War, the rate had risen to more than 90% (Grossman, 1996). Grossman (1996) stated that today, the military uses vari-ous training methods to increase the killing rates of servicemen, including brutalization, classical conditioning, operant conditioning, and role modeling. Brutalization and desensiti-zation to violence are first encountered at boot camp.

Cadets are verbally and physically abused by superiors for the entire duration of boot camp. Cadets also lose all individuality by being forced to act and dress alike. The author reports that this brutalization is designed to break down existing mores and norms and to accept a new set of values that embrace violence and death as a way of life. Cadets eventually become desensi-tized to violence and accepts it as a normal and essential survival skill.

Classical conditioning is also used by the military so that servicemen learn to associate vio-lence with pleasurable consequences. Grossman (1996) provided an example of the Japanese using classical conditioning during World War II. The Japanese placed Chinese prisoners in a ditch with their hands bound. A few Japanese servicemen would go into the ditch and kill their

prisoners with a bayonet. Groups of young servicemen were placed on the banks to watch and cheer on the other servicemen. Afterward, the servicemen who watched were treated to nice meals and prostitutes. The Japanese found these techniques to be effective in enabling very large numbers of servicemen to commit atrocities, thus associating pleasure with death and suffering.

Operant conditioning, the procedure of repetitive stimulus-response reinforcement chaining, is also used by the military to condition servicemen to react a certain way. An appropriate example of operant conditioning by the military is the use of flight simulators to train pilots. When pilots are flying and experience a problem, they will react reflexively due to the hours

of training on the flight simulator (Grossman, 1996). Grossman (1996) also suggested that conditioned responses are beneficial in various ways. Servicemen and police officers, for exam-ple, are trained to shoot at man-shaped targets. This is the stimulus. The conditioned response is to shoot the target. The trainees repeat these procedures many times. Later, servicemen and police officers will reflexively shoot to kill when faced with the same situation. According to Grossman (1996), role models are also used by the military. Servicemen are provided immedi-ate role models, their drill sergeants. Drill ser-geants personify violence and aggression, and servicemen strive to be like their role models. Dehumanization also contributes to service-men learning to kill. Enemies are viewed as sub-human and become objects. The learned, con-ditioned responses take over, and servicemen then become killers (Grossman, 1996).

Unfortunately, only one empirical study has ex-amined the possible link between serial murder and military experience. Using data collected from 354 previously identified case studies, Castle (2001) identified 25 American serial kill-ers with previous military experience. Thus, approximately 7% of all the serial killers iden-tified in her study had a military background. The lack of study in this area present us, the ci-vilian population, with a significant problem.

We create murderers and we allow them back into society without mitigating their sophisti-cated psychological programming and training to kill.

Finally, the strength of deviant behavior is a direct function of the amount, frequency, and probability of its reinforcement. Violence and aggression are continuously and consistently re-inforced in the military. Servicemen learn that these values will be positively reinforced. Have a nice day. And be careful out there. Your world is a sophisticated series of lies and you’re sur-rounded by brutally manufactured killers.

The History Of The United States According To Prager(Tell me, where do the children play?)

We’re only going to cover a short period of US history here; the early 1950s. Of course I could write this stuff endlessly and the data across the internet is plentiful but I don’t want to bore you. I just want you to get a little taste of the America you don’t know about. I’m sure everyone reading here is capable of digging in the dirt, urine and feces all by themselves. Anyway, 1952 was a very good year so we’ll examine it. A more complete timeline follows but the totality of CIA atrocities really requires a book far larger then I’m committed to producing.

1952-60

The team which had been so successful in installing der Führer in Germany, decides it will in-stall der President in the U.S. Once again, ruling class bum boy Prescott Bush is there to help things along as are Nazi lawyer John Foster Dulles and C. Douglas Dillon of Dillon, Read and Company, financiers and organizers of the Thyssen Nazi steel trust among other enlightened enterprises. The perfect candidate for the latest project is General Dwight D. “Ike” Eisenhower who doubtless appealed to the boys in the back room as a result of his operation of the “Eisen-hower Death Camps” in which between 2 and 3 million German POWs are thought to have been exterminated by starvation, exposure and abuse in the years immediately after World War Two. Didn’t know about the American Concentration Camps where almost as many Germans as alleged Jews were killed? Hmmm.

When the Dillons invite Ike to dinner it is to introduce him to Wall Street bankers and lawyers. The managers of the Ike Project believe, correctly, that Ike will not interfere with even the dirtiest of their covert action programs. Bland, pleasant, Harriman errand boy and front man, Prescott Bush is positioned as a “friend” to Eisenhower, to be perceived by him as an early backer of his presidency. Also involved in the Ike Project is Clint Murchison, a mob-connected Texas oil multi-millionaire who funds much of the anti-Semitic press in the U.S. as well as Lin-coln Rockwell’s American Nazi Party and provides a fortune in “no-lose” investment income (otherwise known as bribes) to FBI Director J. “Edna” Hoover. Remember, J. “Edna” Hoover was the homosexual FBI head who could suck dick like a vacuum cleaner but despised gays. Self hate must be horrid.

In gratitude, perhaps, for the profitable investment “tips”, Hoover and the FBI get into the act during the election campaign, orchestrating a smear campaign against Democratic candidate Adlai Stevenson with the stock allegations that he is a “commie” and a homosexual, a classic ploy of the homosexual, cross-dressing Hoover. The FBI file on Stevenson is marked “Steven-son, Adlai Ewing-Governor of Illinois - Sex Deviate”. Of course Hoover himself was exempt from the folly he created.

Eisenhower is duly elected and immediately starts doling out oil leases on government land to his friends and supporters.

1952-1959: CUBA

Would-be Cuban strongman Fulgencio Batista has been languishing in the land of the free, like

so many American puppet dictators-in-waiting. He runs for election in 1952 but, facing defeat, spearheads a U.S.-sponsored coup which overthrows the democratically-elected government of Carlos Prio Socorras. The Batista dictatorship is brutal, ruthless and profoundly evil, even by America’s demanding standards.

Batista suspends the Cuban constitution, destroys all political freedom and turns Cuba into a ha-ven for drugs, gambling, prostitution and the Mafia, especially FBI Director J. “Edna” Hoover’s good friend Meyer Lansky. Havana becomes home to dozens of Mafia-owned hotels and casi-nos. American business interests, most notably Nazi-linked DuPont and United Fruit, prosper. Freedom of speech is destroyed and hundreds of teachers, lawyers and public officials are fired from their jobs. Death squads, notably the deceptively-named Buro de Represion Actividades Communistas (BRAC), created by the CIA in 1956, kidnap, torture and murder thousands of Cubans under America’s firm guiding hand. Batista’s U.S. sponsored reign of terror will go on until ended by Fidel Castro in 1959.

1952

Medical experimenters at the New York State Psychiatric Institute of Columbia University, sponsored by the Department of “Defense”, inject Henry Blauer with a fatal dose of the hal-lucinogen mescaline. Evidence surrounding the killing of Blauer will be concealed by the U.S. government for twenty three years. Shocking shit Sherlock.

1952

Portly King Farouk is screwing up as dictator, not being as useful to the U.S. ruling class as he might be, so the CIA conspires with members of the Egyptian military, led by Gamal Abdul Nasser, to successfully overthrow Farouk. In Langley, the conspiracy to overthrow Farouk is called Project FF for “Fat Fucker”.

1952: PUERTO RICO

With a United Nations investigation into the U.S. government’s torture by radiation of Puerto Rican freedom fighter and independence leader Pedro Albizu-Campos pending, the U.S. abrupt-ly pardons Campos and releases him from prison, effectively preventing the investigation. Yes, I did say torture by radiation.

1952-53: GUATEMALA

The democratically-elected government of Jacobo Arbenz Guzman behaves outrageously, guar-anteeing freedom of the press, legalizing labor unions, guaranteeing equal rights for women and native people and maintaining a one-term limit for presidents. This is really dangerous stuff and it gets worse.

Prior U.S.-puppet dictatorships in Guatemala had sold for a pittance vast tracts of land stolen

from indigenous Guatemalans to the Rockefellers’ United Fruit Company (Chiquita Bananas). United Fruit also owns the country’s telephone and telegraph facilities, administers its only important Atlantic harbor and monopolizes its vital banana exports. A subsidiary of the com-pany owns nearly every mile of railroad track in the country. Another U.S. corporation controls virtually all Guatemalan electric generation. All of this is courtesy of various U.S.-installed and maintained dictatorships.

In addition to his rash commitment to genuine democracy, a terrifying idea to the U.S. ruling class, Arbenz raises the ire of the Rockefellers by building a public highway and an Atlantic har-bor to compete with their monopolies. Arbenz builds a major hydro-electric project to provide electricity at lower rates than the American-owned monopoly. The concept of free enterprise and competition is, of course, almost as repugnant to the Rockefellers as genuine democracy.

Arbenz pushes the Rockefellers over the edge when he attempts to institute agrarian reform. In the overwhelmingly rural nation, 2.2 percent of the landowners, the Rockefellers and their clubmates, own seventy percent of the arable land. The annual per capita income of agricul-tural workers is $87 and most are virtual slaves on large plantations. Arbenz wants to recover over half a million acres of unused land from United Fruit and offers to pay one hundred per-cent of the full value as declared for tax purposes by United Fruit itself in order to return it to the indigenous people from whom it had been stolen in the first place. The Rockefellers quickly decide that they must have been declaring false values for the land, and that it is really worth almost thirty two times the previously declared value.

The conspiracy against Arbenz begins under the Eisenhower regime. Rockefeller proxy cum Nazi shyster and financier cum CIA Deputy-director, Allen Dulles is a former president of Unit-ed Fruit and his brother, Nazi financier and shyster John Foster Dulles, soon to become U.S. Secretary of State, is a shareholder in United Fruit. Both Rockefeller cousins had been instru-mental in financing the rise of Nazi Germany and, later, in extricating Prescott Bush, Sosthenes Behn and other pillars of the U.S. ruling class from prosecution for treason and crimes against humanity stemming from their roles in financing and arming Adolf Hitler and the Nazis.

Not to be outdone in the corruption sweepstakes, Under-secretary of State (and former Direc-tor of the CIA) Walter Bedell Smith is seeking an executive position with United Fruit at the same time that he is helping to plan the coup against Arbenz. Smith will later be named to the Board of Directors of a grateful United Fruit.

The CIA plans and launches a conspiracy it calls Operation PBFORTUNE to overthrow the dem-ocratically-elected government of Guatemala. A massive demonization and propaganda cam-paign, under the name of Operation Sherwoood, is mounted by the CIA against Arbenz, employ-ing the durable bogeyman of creeping communism as the requisite threat. Millions of dollars are allocated by the CIA for psychological warfare against the American public. United Fruit goes into the book publishing business and produces comprehensive lies such as “Report on Guatemala” a book which it distributes to U.S. Congresssmen falsely claiming that Arbenz’s agrarian reforms have been planned in Moscow. In fact, Arbenz is far from being a Communist and repeatedly votes in the U.N. with the U.S. against the Soviet Union. The CIA and United Fruit begin orchestrating and financing staged demonstrations and strikes against the Arbenz government even in those pre-Twitter days.

Planning begins at CIA headquarters in the leafy glades of Langley, Virginia, for the systematic “neutralization through executive action” (non-psychopaths may like to think of this as mur-

der) of members of the elected Guatemalan government during the planned coup. Belated and begrudging releases under the Freedom of Information Act in 1997 will reveal that the CIA’s murder conspiracy against members of the Guatemalan government was very detailed and included budgeting, training programs, creation of death squads, drafting of target lists and transfers of armaments to the killers.

1952: UNITED STATES

Journalist Drew Pearson exposes the fact that a Nazi concentration camp mad scientist, Major General Walter Emil Schreiber, is happily employed at the United States Air Force School of Medicine at Randolph Field in Texas doing God knows what for the world’s most morally bank-rupt nation, although we can probably guess. Of course, he is only obeying orders.

Although Schreiber is only one among some ten thousand Nazis the United States has protected from prosecution for war crimes and crimes against humanity in order to exploit their unique talents, the American public has no idea what is going on and the U.S. government wants to keep it that way. And they do. A visa is quickly arranged for Herr Doktor Schreiber and he is flown to an exciting new life and new employment opportunities in Argentina.

1952: UNITED STATES

Taking the moral high ground yet again, the U.S. deploys the M33 germ warfare cluster bomb. Each M33 contains 108 bomblets which explode in mid-air releasing the germ warfare agent, brucella suis.

1952

CIA & Military scientists use the Dugway Proving Ground -- which is located 87 miles southwest of Salt Lake City, Utah -- in a series of experiments to determine how Brucella suis and Brucella melitensis spread in human populations. Today, over a half-century later, some experts claim that we are all infected with these agents as a result of these experiments (Goliszek).

1952: KOREA

An independent study is launched into claims that the United States is waging germ and chemi-cal warfare against the people of Korea. The Commission of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers’ Report on U.S. Crimes in Korea concludes that the U.S. has, in fact, used both germ and chemical warfare against both civilians and combatants in North Korea. The Commission consists of eight lawyers, one each from Austria, Italy, Great Britain, France, Chi-na, Belgium, Brazil and Poland. Among the germ warfare agents identified as being used are anthrax, bubonic plague, encephalitis and yellow fever.

The investigation had been prompted by by an international commission with members from eighteen countries which had determined that the U.S. and its South Korean puppet regime is systematically committing war crimes. China carries out its own study and comes to exactly the same conclusion. The U.S., naturally, denies everything.

In later years, evidence will accrue that the U.S. government had yet again been telling fibs and that it had, indeed, used chemical and biological weapons on the Korean people. Notable is the twenty years of research conducted by two Canadians into the allegations. Steven Endicott

and Edward Hagerman of York University will publish their findings in 1998, confirming that not only did the U.S. use biological weapons in Korea but that it systematically lied to both the American people and Congress about it. Hard to believe, ain’t it?

1952: GERMANY

Rockefeller errand boy and trusted advisor to Benito Mussolini, John J. McCloy, and Nazi finan-cier and master race proponent William Draper revive and reposition their Nazi industrialist clients and clubmates in post-war Germany.

Prominent executives of IG Farben are released early from jail after serving only short portions of their sentences for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Farben itself rises Phoenix-like from the ashes of Germany in the guise of Bayer, BASF, Hoechst, Agfa, Sterling and hundreds of affiliated companies which retain and then expand Farben’s worldwide domination of the world chemical, pesticide and pharmaceutical industries. By 2004, Farben’s “daughters” will account for more than two thirds of world pharmaceutical and chemical sales. The Farben octopus will eventually acquire its American moral soulmates, chemical weapons maker Dow Chemical and Union Carbide, owners of the Bhopal chemical plant in India.

Alongside IG Farben in financing and arming the Nazis, with lots of assistance from the Rock-efellers, Bushes, Harrimans, Dulles brothers and various Wall Street banks, were two huge Nazi combines, Krupp and Thyssen. These two companies also miraculously rise from the ashes of Germany, eventually to merge and become one of Europe’s richest and most powerful corpora-tions, Krupp-Thyssen.

1952: UNITED STATES

The Senate Select Committee on Small Business releases a report entitled “The International Petroleum Cartel”. The report shows that the seven largest oil companies, nicknamed the Seven Sisters, form a cartel which controls the majority of the oil-producing areas outside the United States, controls all major foreign refineries, divides world markets among its members, shares pipelines and tankers and fixes oil prices worldwide. What a shock.

1952: UNITED STATES

A 1953 article in Clinical Science describes a medical experiment in which researchers pur-posely blister the abdomens of 41 children, ranging in age from eight to 14, with cantharide in order to study how severely the substance irritates the skin (Goliszek). The AEC performs a series of field tests known as “Green Run,” dropping radiodine 131 and xenon 133 over the Hanford, Wash. site -- 500,000 acres encompassing three small towns (Hanford, White Bluffs and Richland) along the Columbia River (Sharav). In an AEC-sponsored study to learn whether radioactive iodine affects premature babies differently from full-term babies, researchers at Harper Hospital in Detroit give oral doses of iodine-131 to 65 premature and full-term infants weighing between 2.1 and 5.5 pounds (Goliszek).

1952: MOROCCO

The U.S. provides military aid and weaponry to France to assist in crushing the independence movement in its colony of Morocco. Can’t be havin’ no freedom in Morocco.

1952: ALGERIA

The U.S. provides military aid to France to assist in crushing the independence movement in its colony of Algeria. Can’t be havin’ no freedom in Algeria.

1952-72

For two decades, FBI Director J. “Edna” Hoover and his lover, miraculously promoted FBI As-sistant Director Clyde Tolson, spend extended summer vacations at the Del Charro, a La Jolla, California hotel owned by Mafia-connected multi-millionaire oil man, political fixer and Ameri-can Nazi Party financier Clint Murchison. The Del Charro is a very exclusive, very expensive hotel, no kikes or niggers allowed, except as servants of course. None of this troubles the happy couple since Murchison picks up the tab and the FBI provides agents at public expense to act as errand boys for the happy couple. J. “Edna” and Clyde’s lovefests at La Jolla are usually booked as FBI “inspection trips” with the hapless U.S. taxpayers picking up the tab. Yes, you’re parents paid for Edna’s sexcapades.

Murchison arranges a very special “no lose” investment strategy for Hoover and Tolson. They will invest, usually in oil or gas ventures on federal land. If the investment pays off, they keep the profits. If the well is a dry hole, Murchison will give them their money back. By amazing co-incidence, Murchison’s shady business and political dealings are never investigated by the FBI. According to a Senate committee of the early fifties, twenty percent of the Murchison Oil Lease Company is owned by the Vito Genovese Mafia family. More shock and awe!

The Del Charro is also the vacation spot of choice for many well-known gangsters and mob fig-ures. Hoover’s regular poolside companion at the Del Charro is Dub McClanahan, partner of New Orleans Mafia boss Carlos Marcello. J. “Edna” and little Clydie traditionally spend their Christ-mas holidays in Miami as the guest of mob-connected hotelier/casino operator Myer Schine.

1952: UNITED STATES

As soon as the Ike Project is underway, the Lord takes a hand and gives Nazi front man and unprosecuted traitor Prescott Bush a second crack at a Senate seat and a ride into office on Ike’s coattails. The 48-year-old senator from Connecticut, James O’Brien McMahon, contracts cancer and dies. Bush gets the Republican Senate nomination at a special meeting, with the backing of the Yale-dominated state party leadership. He runs in a special election for the sud-denly vacant Senate seat and, as expected, is swept into office on the same electoral ticket as “Ike”. The always cooperative U.S. mass media makes not a mention of Bush’s important role in financing the rise of Adolf Hitler. By a technicality, Bush becomes Connecticut’s senior Sena-tor, with extra power in Congress. The next regularly-scheduled senatorial race will be in 1956, when McMahon’s term would have ended, at which time, Bush can expect once again to ride into office on Eisenhower’s coattails.

McMahon’s death is convenient and not just for Bush’s political ambitions. McMahon had been Assistant U.S. Attorney General, in charge of the Criminal Division, from 1935 to 1939, in a po-sition to know what Bush, the Harrimans, the Rockefellers, the Dulles brothers and the rest of the gang had been doing in Nazi Germany in those years. Cancer becomes a useful CIA tool.

1952: UNITED STATES

The U.S. Army conducts open air testing of biological weapons at Fort McClellan, Alabama. Re-spiratory illness in the area skyrocket and dozens of civilians die. Fort McClellan is also used to train the military of numerous U.S. client dictatorships and rogue states in the use of chemical and biological weapons. Among the nations who have learned all about using chemical and bio-logical weapons at Fort McClellan are such fine upstanding world citizens as Israel, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and South Vietnam.

1952-70: UNITED STATES

The U.S. Army creates a 19,000 acre top-secret chemical and biological testing range at Fort Greely, Alaska. The Army fires thousands of rockets and drops thousands of bombs containing Nazi cartel IG Farben’s Sarin and VX nerve gases. Hard to believe, but the U.S. Army lies consis-tently, if not convincingly, over decades about the testing and falsifies records, thereby prevent-ing the American soldiers who become victims of the nerve gases from receiving appropriate care and compensation. Don’t it make you proud?

If you can stomach more of your precious US government sponsored horrors they are plentiful across the internet.

The CIA Timeline Of AtrocitiesThe following timeline describes just a few of the many thousands of atrocities and crimes com-mitted by the CIA.

CIA operations follow the same recurring script. First, American business interests abroad are threatened by a popular or democratically elected leader. The people support their leader be-cause he intends to conduct land reform, strengthen unions, redistribute wealth, nationalize foreign-owned industry, and regulate business to protect workers, consumers and the envi-ronment. So, on behalf of American business, and often with their help, the CIA mobilizes the opposition. First it identifies right-wing groups within the country (usually the military), and offers them a deal: “We’ll put you in power if you maintain a favorable business climate for us.” The Agency then hires, trains and works with them to overthrow the existing government (usually a democracy). It uses every trick in the book: propaganda, stuffed ballot boxes, pur-chased elections, extortion, blackmail, sexual intrigue, false stories about opponents in the lo-cal media, infiltration and disruption of opposing political parties, kidnapping, beating, torture, intimidation, economic sabotage, death squads and even assassination. These efforts culminate in a military coup, which installs a right-wing dictator. The CIA trains the dictator’s security ap-paratus to crack down on the traditional enemies of big business, using interrogation, torture and murder. The victims are said to be “communists,” but almost always they are just peasants, liberals, moderates, labor union leaders, political opponents and advocates of free speech and democracy. Widespread human rights abuses follow.

This scenario has been repeated so many times that the CIA actually teaches it in a special school, the notorious “School of the Americas.” (It opened in Panama but later moved to Fort Benning, Georgia.) Critics have nicknamed it the “School of the Dictators” and “School of the Assassins.” Here, the CIA trains Latin American military officers how to conduct coups, includ-ing the use of interrogation, torture and murder.

The Association for Responsible Dissent estimates that by 1987, 6 million people had died as a result of CIA covert operations. Former State Department official William Blum correctly calls this an “American Holocaust.”

The CIA justifies these actions as part of its war against communism. But most coups do not involve a communist threat. Unlucky nations are targeted for a wide variety of reasons: not only threats to American business interests abroad, but also liberal or even moderate social re-forms, political instability, the unwillingness of a leader to carry out Washington’s dictates, and declarations of neutrality in the Cold War. Indeed, nothing has infuriated CIA Directors quite like a nation’s desire to stay out of the Cold War.

The ironic thing about all this intervention is that it frequently fails to achieve American ob-jectives. Often the newly installed dictator grows comfortable with the security apparatus the CIA has built for him. He becomes an expert at running a police state. And because the dictator knows he cannot be overthrown, he becomes independent and defiant of Washington’s will. The CIA then finds it cannot overthrow him, because the police and military are under the dictator’s control, afraid to cooperate with American spies for fear of torture and execution. The only two options for the U.S at this point are impotence or war. Examples of this “boomerang effect” include the Shah of Iran, General Noriega and Saddam Hussein. The boomerang effect also ex-plains why the CIA has proven highly successful at overthrowing democracies, but a wretched failure at overthrowing dictatorships.

The following timeline should confirm that the CIA as we know it should be abolished and re-placed by a true information-gathering and analysis organization. The CIA cannot be reformed — it is institutionally and culturally corrupt.

1929

The culture we lost — Secretary of State Henry Stimson refuses to endorse a code-breaking op-eration, saying, “Gentlemen do not read each other’s mail.”

1941

COI created — In preparation for World War II, President Roosevelt creates the Office of Coor-dinator of Information (COI). General William “Wild Bill” Donovan heads the new intelligence service.

1942

OSS created — Roosevelt restructures COI into something more suitable for covert action, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). Donovan recruits so many of the nation’s rich and powerful that eventually people joke that “OSS” stands for “Oh, so social!” or “Oh, such snobs!”

1943

Italy — Donovan recruits the Catholic Church in Rome to be the center of Anglo-American spy operations in Fascist Italy. This would prove to be one of America’s most enduring intelligence alliances in the Cold War.

1945

OSS is abolished — The remaining American information agencies cease covert actions and re-turn to harmless information gathering and analysis.

Operation PAPERCLIP – While other American agencies are hunting down Nazi war criminals for arrest, the U.S. intelligence community is smuggling them into America, unpunished, for their use against the Soviets. The most important of these is Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler’s master spy who had built up an intelligence network in the Soviet Union. With full U.S. blessing, he cre-ates the “Gehlen Organization,” a band of refugee Nazi spies who reactivate their networks in Russia. These include SS intelligence officers Alfred Six and Emil Augsburg (who massacred Jews in the Holocaust), Klaus Barbie (the “Butcher of Lyon”), Otto von Bolschwing (the Ho-locaust mastermind who worked with Eichmann) and SS Colonel Otto Skorzeny (a personal friend of Hitler’s). The Gehlen Organization supplies the U.S. with its only intelligence on the Soviet Union for the next ten years, serving as a bridge between the abolishment of the OSS and the creation of the CIA. However, much of the “intelligence” the former Nazis provide is bogus. Gehlen inflates Soviet military capabilities at a time when Russia is still rebuilding its devastated society, in order to inflate his own importance to the Americans (who might other-wise punish him). In 1948, Gehlen almost convinces the Americans that war is imminent, and the West should make a preemptive strike. In the 50s he produces a fictitious “missile gap.” To make matters worse, the Russians have thoroughly penetrated the Gehlen Organization with double agents, undermining the very American security that Gehlen was supposed to protect.

1947

Greece — President Truman requests military aid to Greece to support right-wing forces fight-ing communist rebels. For the rest of the Cold War, Washington and the CIA will back notorious Greek leaders with deplorable human rights records.

CIA created — President Truman signs the National Security Act of 1947, creating the Cen-tral Intelligence Agency and National Security Council. The CIA is accountable to the president through the NSC — there is no democratic or congressional oversight. Its charter allows the CIA to “perform such other functions and duties… as the National Security Council may from time to time direct.” This loophole opens the door to covert action and dirty tricks.

1948

Covert-action wing created — The CIA recreates a covert action wing, innocuously called the Office of Policy Coordination, led by Wall Street lawyer Frank Wisner. According to its secret charter, its responsibilities include “propaganda, economic warfare, preventive direct action, including sabotage, antisabotage, demolition and evacuation procedures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of indig-enous anti-communist elements in threatened countries of the free world.”

Italy — The CIA corrupts democratic elections in Italy, where Italian communists threaten to win the elections. The CIA buys votes, broadcasts propaganda, threatens and beats up opposi-tion leaders, and infiltrates and disrupts their organizations. It works -- the communists are defeated.

1949

Radio Free Europe — The CIA creates its first major propaganda outlet, Radio Free Europe. Over the next several decades, its broadcasts are so blatantly false that for a time it is considered il-legal to publish transcripts of them in the U.S.

Late 40s

Operation MOCKINGBIRD — The CIA begins recruiting American news organizations and jour-nalists to become spies and disseminators of propaganda. The effort is headed by Frank Wisner, Allan Dulles, Richard Helms and Philip Graham. Graham is publisher of The Washington Post, which becomes a major CIA player. Eventually, the CIA’s media assets will include ABC, NBC, CBS, Time, Newsweek, Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspa-pers, Scripps-Howard, Copley News Service and more. By the CIA’s own admission, at least 25 organizations and 400 journalists will become CIA assets.

1953

Iran – CIA overthrows the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh in a military coup, after he threatened to nationalize British oil. The CIA replaces him with a dictator, the Shah of Iran, whose secret police, SAVAK, is as brutal as the Gestapo.

Operation MK-ULTRA — Inspired by North Korea’s brainwashing program, the CIA begins ex-periments on mind control. The most notorious part of this project involves giving LSD and other drugs to American subjects without their knowledge or against their will, causing several to commit suicide. However, the operation involves far more than this. Funded in part by the Rockefeller and Ford foundations, research includes propaganda, brainwashing, public rela-tions, advertising, hypnosis, and other forms of suggestion.

1954

Guatemala — CIA overthrows the democratically elected Jacob Arbenz in a military coup. Ar-benz has threatened to nationalize the Rockefeller-owned United Fruit Company, in which CIA Director Allen Dulles also owns stock. Arbenz is replaced with a series of right-wing dictators whose bloodthirsty policies will kill over 100,000 Guatemalans in the next 40 years.

1954-1958

North Vietnam — CIA officer Edward Lansdale spends four years trying to overthrow the com-munist government of North Vietnam, using all the usual dirty tricks. The CIA also attempts to legitimize a tyrannical puppet regime in South Vietnam, headed by Ngo Dinh Diem. These ef-forts fail to win the hearts and minds of the South Vietnamese because the Diem government is opposed to true democracy, land reform and poverty reduction measures. The CIA’s continuing failure results in escalating American intervention, culminating in the Vietnam War.

1956

Hungary — Radio Free Europe incites Hungary to revolt by broadcasting Khruschev’s Secret Speech, in which he denounced Stalin. It also hints that American aid will help the Hungarians fight. This aid fails to materialize as Hungarians launch a doomed armed revolt, which only in-

vites a major Soviet invasion. The conflict kills 7,000 Soviets and 30,000 Hungarians.

1957-1973

Laos — The CIA carries out approximately one coup per year trying to nullify Laos’ democratic elections. The problem is the Pathet Lao, a leftist group with enough popular support to be a member of any coalition government. In the late 50s, the CIA even creates an “Armee Clandes-tine” of Asian mercenaries to attack the Pathet Lao. After the CIA’s army suffers numerous de-feats, the U.S. starts bombing, dropping more bombs on Laos than all the U.S. bombs dropped in World War II. A quarter of all Laotians will eventually become refugees, many living in caves.

1959

Haiti — The U.S. military helps “Papa Doc” Duvalier become dictator of Haiti. He creates his own private police force, the “Tonton Macoutes,” who terrorize the population with machetes. They will kill over 100,000 during the Duvalier family reign. The U.S. does not protest their dismal human rights record.

1961

The Bay of Pigs — The CIA sends 1,500 Cuban exiles to invade Castro’s Cuba. But “Operation Mongoose” fails, due to poor planning, security and backing. The planners had imagined that the invasion will spark a popular uprising against Castro -– which never happens. A promised American air strike also never occurs. This is the CIA’s first public setback, causing President Kennedy to fire CIA Director Allen Dulles.

Dominican Republic — The CIA assassinates Rafael Trujillo, a murderous dictator Washington has supported since 1930. Trujillo’s business interests have grown so large (about 60 percent of the economy) that they have begun competing with American business interests.

Ecuador — The CIA-backed military forces the democratically elected President Jose Velasco to resign. Vice President Carlos Arosemana replaces him; the CIA fills the now vacant vice presi-dency with its own man.

Congo (Zaire) — The CIA assassinates the democratically elected Patrice Lumumba. However, public support for Lumumba’s politics runs so high that the CIA cannot clearly install his op-ponents in power. Four years of political turmoil follow.

1963

Dominican Republic — The CIA overthrows the democratically elected Juan Bosch in a military coup. The CIA installs a repressive, right-wing junta.

Ecuador — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows President Arosemana, whose independent (not socialist) policies have become unacceptable to Washington. A military junta assumes com-mand, cancels the 1964 elections, and begins abusing human rights.

1964

Brazil — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows the democratically elected government of

Joao Goulart. The junta that replaces it will, in the next two decades, become one of the most bloodthirsty in history. General Castelo Branco will create Latin America’s first death squads, or bands of secret police who hunt down “communists” for torture, interrogation and murder. Often these “communists” are no more than Branco’s political opponents. Later it is revealed that the CIA trains the death squads.

1965

Indonesia — The CIA overthrows the democratically elected Sukarno with a military coup. The CIA has been trying to eliminate Sukarno since 1957, using everything from attempted assas-sination to sexual intrigue, for nothing more than his declaring neutrality in the Cold War. His successor, General Suharto, will massacre between 500,000 to 1 million civilians accused of being “communist.” The CIA supplies the names of countless suspects.

Dominican Republic — A popular rebellion breaks out, promising to reinstall Juan Bosch as the country’s elected leader. The revolution is crushed when U.S. Marines land to uphold the mili-tary regime by force. The CIA directs everything behind the scenes.

Greece — With the CIA’s backing, the king removes George Papandreous as prime minister. Pa-pandreous has failed to vigorously support U.S. interests in Greece.

Congo (Zaire) — A CIA-backed military coup installs Mobutu Sese Seko as dictator. The hated and repressive Mobutu exploits his desperately poor country for billions.

1966

The Ramparts Affair — The radical magazine Ramparts begins a series of unprecedented anti-CIA articles. Among their scoops: the CIA has paid the University of Michigan $25 million dol-lars to hire “professors” to train South Vietnamese students in covert police methods. MIT and other universities have received similar payments. Ramparts also reveals that the National Students’ Association is a CIA front. Students are sometimes recruited through blackmail and bribery, including draft deferments.

1967

Greece — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows the government two days before the elections. The favorite to win was George Papandreous, the liberal candidate. During the next six years, the “reign of the colonels” — backed by the CIA — will usher in the widespread use of torture and murder against political opponents. When a Greek ambassador objects to President John-son about U.S. plans for Cypress, Johnson tells him: “Fuck your parliament and your constitu-tion.”

Operation PHEONIX — The CIA helps South Vietnamese agents identify and then murder al-leged Viet Cong leaders operating in South Vietnamese villages. According to a 1971 congres-sional report, this operation killed about 20,000 “Viet Cong.”

1968

Operation CHAOS — The CIA has been illegally spying on American citizens since 1959, but with Operation CHAOS, President Johnson dramatically boosts the effort. CIA agents go undercover

as student radicals to spy on and disrupt campus organizations protesting the Vietnam War. They are searching for Russian instigators, which they never find. CHAOS will eventually spy on 7,000 individuals and 1,000 organizations.

Bolivia — A CIA-organized military operation captures legendary guerilla Che Guevara. The CIA wants to keep him alive for interrogation, but the Bolivian government executes him to prevent worldwide calls for clemency.

1969

Uruguay — The notorious CIA torturer Dan Mitrione arrives in Uruguay, a country torn with political strife. Whereas right-wing forces previously used torture only as a last resort, Mitri-one convinces them to use it as a routine, widespread practice. “The precise pain, in the precise place, in the precise amount, for the desired effect,” is his motto. The torture techniques he teaches to the death squads rival the Nazis’. He eventually becomes so feared that revolutionar-ies will kidnap and murder him a year later.

1970

Cambodia — The CIA overthrows Prince Sahounek, who is highly popular among Cambodians for keeping them out of the Vietnam War. He is replaced by CIA puppet Lon Nol, who immedi-ately throws Cambodian troops into battle. This unpopular move strengthens once minor op-position parties like the Khmer Rouge, which achieves power in 1975 and massacres millions of its own people.

1971

Bolivia — After half a decade of CIA-inspired political turmoil, a CIA-backed military coup over-throws the leftist President Juan Torres. In the next two years, dictator Hugo Banzer will have over 2,000 political opponents arrested without trial, then tortured, raped and executed.

Haiti — “Papa Doc” Duvalier dies, leaving his 19-year old son “Baby Doc” Duvalier the dictator of Haiti. His son continues his bloody reign with full knowledge of the CIA.

1972

The Case-Zablocki Act — Congress passes an act requiring congressional review of executive agreements. In theory, this should make CIA operations more accountable. In fact, it is only marginally effective.

Cambodia — Congress votes to cut off CIA funds for its secret war in Cambodia.

Wagergate Break-in — President Nixon sends in a team of burglars to wiretap Democratic offices at Watergate. The team members have extensive CIA histories, including James McCord, E. Howard Hunt and five of the Cuban burglars. They work for the Committee to Reelect the Presi-dent (CREEP), which does dirty work like disrupting Democratic campaigns and laundering Nixon’s illegal campaign contributions. CREEP’s activities are funded and organized by another CIA front, the Mullen Company.

1973

Chile — The CIA overthrows and assassinates Salvador Allende, Latin America’s first democrat-ically elected socialist leader. The problems begin when Allende nationalizes American-owned firms in Chile. ITT offers the CIA $1 million for a coup (reportedly refused). The CIA replaces Allende with General Augusto Pinochet, who will torture and murder thousands of his own countrymen in a crackdown on labor leaders and the political left.

CIA begins internal investigations — William Colby, the Deputy Director for Operations, orders all CIA personnel to report any and all illegal activities they know about. This information is later reported to Congress.

Watergate Scandal — The CIA’s main collaborating newspaper in America, The Washington Post, reports Nixon’s crimes long before any other newspaper takes up the subject. The two report-ers, Woodward and Bernstein, make almost no mention of the CIA’s many fingerprints all over the scandal. It is later revealed that Woodward was a Naval intelligence briefer to the White House, and knows many important intelligence figures, including General Alexander Haig. His main source, “Deep Throat,” is probably one of those.

CIA Director Helms Fired — President Nixon fires CIA Director Richard Helms for failing to help cover up the Watergate scandal. Helms and Nixon have always disliked each other. The new CIA director is William Colby, who is relatively more open to CIA reform.

1974

CHAOS exposed — Pulitzer prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh publishes a story about Operation CHAOS, the domestic surveillance and infiltration of anti-war and civil rights groups in the U.S. The story sparks national outrage.

Angleton fired — Congress holds hearings on the illegal domestic spying efforts of James Jesus Angleton, the CIA’s chief of counterintelligence. His efforts included mail-opening campaigns and secret surveillance of war protesters. The hearings result in his dismissal from the CIA.

House clears CIA in Watergate — The House of Representatives clears the CIA of any complicity in Nixon’s Watergate break-in.

The Hughes Ryan Act — Congress passes an amendment requiring the president to report non-intelligence CIA operations to the relevant congressional committees in a timely fashion.

1975

Australia — The CIA helps topple the democratically elected, left-leaning government of Prime Minister Edward Whitlam. The CIA does this by giving an ultimatum to its Governor-General, John Kerr. Kerr, a longtime CIA collaborator, exercises his constitutional right to dissolve the Whitlam government. The Governor-General is a largely ceremonial position appointed by the Queen; the Prime Minister is democratically elected. The use of this archaic and never-used law stuns the nation.

Angola — Eager to demonstrate American military resolve after its defeat in Vietnam, Henry Kissinger launches a CIA-backed war in Angola. Contrary to Kissinger’s assertions, Angola is

a country of little strategic importance and not seriously threatened by communism. The CIA backs the brutal leader of UNITAS, Jonas Savimbi. This polarizes Angolan politics and drives his opponents into the arms of Cuba and the Soviet Union for survival. Congress will cut off funds in 1976, but the CIA is able to run the war off the books until 1984, when funding is legal-ized again. This entirely pointless war kills over 300,000 Angolans.

“The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence” — Victor Marchetti and John Marks publish this whistle-blowing history of CIA crimes and abuses. Marchetti has spent 14 years in the CIA, eventually becoming an executive assistant to the Deputy Director of Intelligence. Marks has spent five years as an intelligence official in the State Department.

“Inside the Company” — Philip Agee publishes a diary of his life inside the CIA. Agee has worked in covert operations in Latin America during the 60s, and details the crimes in which he took part.

Congress investigates CIA wrong-doing — Public outrage compels Congress to hold hearings on CIA crimes. Senator Frank Church heads the Senate investigation (“The Church Committee”), and Representative Otis Pike heads the House investigation. (Despite a 98 percent incumbency reelection rate, both Church and Pike are defeated in the next elections.) The investigations lead to a number of reforms intended to increase the CIA’s accountability to Congress, includ-ing the creation of a standing Senate committee on intelligence. However, the reforms prove ineffective, as the Iran/Contra scandal will show. It turns out the CIA can control, deal with or sidestep Congress with ease.

The Rockefeller Commission — In an attempt to reduce the damage done by the Church Commit-tee, President Ford creates the “Rockefeller Commission” to whitewash CIA history and propose toothless reforms. The commission’s namesake, Vice President Nelson Rockefeller, is himself a major CIA figure. Five of the commission’s eight members are also members of the Council on Foreign Relations, a CIA-dominated organization.

1979

Iran — The CIA fails to predict the fall of the Shah of Iran, a longtime CIA puppet, and the rise of Muslim fundamentalists who are furious at the CIA’s backing of SAVAK, the Shah’s blood-thirsty secret police. In revenge, the Muslims take 52 Americans hostage in the U.S. embassy in Tehran.

Afghanistan — The Soviets invade Afghanistan. The CIA immediately begins supplying arms to any faction willing to fight the occupying Soviets. Such indiscriminate arming means that when the Soviets leave Afghanistan, civil war will erupt. Also, fanatical Muslim extremists now pos-sess state-of-the-art weaponry. One of these is Sheik Abdel Rahman, who will become involved in the World Trade Center bombing in New York.

El Salvador — An idealistic group of young military officers, repulsed by the massacre of the poor, overthrows the right-wing government. However, the U.S. compels the inexperienced of-ficers to include many of the old guard in key positions in their new government. Soon, things are back to “normal” — the military government is repressing and killing poor civilian protest-ers. Many of the young military and civilian reformers, finding themselves powerless, resign in disgust.

Nicaragua — Anastasios Samoza II, the CIA-backed dictator, falls. The Marxist Sandinistas take over government, and they are initially popular because of their commitment to land and anti-poverty reform. Samoza had a murderous and hated personal army called the National Guard. Remnants of the Guard will become the Contras, who fight a CIA-backed guerilla war against the Sandinista government throughout the 1980s.

1980

El Salvador — The Archbishop of San Salvador, Oscar Romero, pleads with President Carter “Christian to Christian” to stop aiding the military government slaughtering his people. Carter refuses. Shortly afterwards, right-wing leader Roberto D’Aubuisson has Romero shot through the heart while saying Mass. The country soon dissolves into civil war, with the peasants in the hills fighting against the military government. The CIA and U.S. Armed Forces supply the gov-ernment with overwhelming military and intelligence superiority. CIA-trained death squads roam the countryside, committing atrocities like that of El Mazote in 1982, where they massa-cre between 700 and 1000 men, women and children. By 1992, some 63,000 Salvadorans will be killed.

1981

Iran/Contra Begins — The CIA begins selling arms to Iran at high prices, using the profits to arm the Contras fighting the Sandinista government in Nicaragua. President Reagan vows that the Sandinistas will be “pressured” until “they say ‘uncle.’” The CIA’s Freedom Fighter’s Manual disbursed to the Contras includes instruction on economic sabotage, propaganda, extortion, bribery, blackmail, interrogation, torture, murder and political assassination.

1983

Honduras — The CIA gives Honduran military officers the Human Resource Exploitation Train-ing Manual – 1983, which teaches how to torture people. Honduras’ notorious “Battalion 316” then uses these techniques, with the CIA’s full knowledge, on thousands of leftist dissidents. At least 184 are murdered.

1984

The Boland Amendment — The last of a series of Boland Amendments is passed. These amend-ments have reduced CIA aid to the Contras; the last one cuts it off completely. However, CIA Director William Casey is already prepared to “hand off” the operation to Colonel Oliver North, who illegally continues supplying the Contras through the CIA’s informal, secret, and self-fi-nancing network. This includes “humanitarian aid” donated by Adolph Coors and William Si-mon, and military aid funded by Iranian arms sales.

1986

Eugene Hasenfus — Nicaragua shoots down a C-123 transport plane carrying military supplies to the Contras. The lone survivor, Eugene Hasenfus, turns out to be a CIA employee, as are the two dead pilots. The airplane belongs to Southern Air Transport, a CIA front. The incident makes a mockery of President Reagan’s claims that the CIA is not illegally arming the Contras.

Iran/Contra Scandal — Although the details have long been known, the Iran/Contra scandal fi-

nally captures the media’s attention in 1986. Congress holds hearings, and several key figures (like Oliver North) lie under oath to protect the intelligence community. CIA Director William Casey dies of brain cancer before Congress can question him. All reforms enacted by Congress after the scandal are purely cosmetic.

Haiti — Rising popular revolt in Haiti means that “Baby Doc” Duvalier will remain “President for Life” only if he has a short one. The U.S., which hates instability in a puppet country, flies the despotic Duvalier to the South of France for a comfortable retirement. The CIA then rigs the upcoming elections in favor of another right-wing military strongman. However, violence keeps the country in political turmoil for another four years. The CIA tries to strengthen the military by creating the National Intelligence Service (SIN), which suppresses popular revolt through torture and assassination.

1989

Panama — The U.S. invades Panama to overthrow a dictator of its own making, General Manuel Noriega. Noriega has been on the CIA’s payroll since 1966, and has been transporting drugs with the CIA’s knowledge since 1972. By the late 80s, Noriega’s growing independence and in-transigence have angered Washington… so out he goes.

1990

Haiti — Competing against 10 comparatively wealthy candidates, leftist priest Jean-Bertrand Aristide captures 68 percent of the vote. After only eight months in power, however, the CIA-backed military deposes him. More military dictators brutalize the country, as thousands of Haitian refugees escape the turmoil in barely seaworthy boats. As popular opinion calls for Aristide’s return, the CIA begins a disinformation campaign painting the courageous priest as mentally unstable.

1991

The Gulf War — The U.S. liberates Kuwait from Iraq. But Iraq’s dictator, Saddam Hussein, is an-other creature of the CIA. With U.S. encouragement, Hussein invaded Iran in 1980. During this costly eight-year war, the CIA built up Hussein’s forces with sophisticated arms, intelligence, training and financial backing. This cemented Hussein’s power at home, allowing him to crush the many internal rebellions that erupted from time to time, sometimes with poison gas. It also gave him all the military might he needed to conduct further adventurism — in Kuwait, for ex-ample.

The Fall of the Soviet Union — The CIA fails to predict this most important event of the Cold War. This suggests that it has been so busy undermining governments that it hasn’t been doing its primary job: gathering and analyzing information. The fall of the Soviet Union also robs the CIA of its reason for existence: fighting communism. This leads some to accuse the CIA of intention-ally failing to predict the downfall of the Soviet Union. Curiously, the intelligence community’s budget is not significantly reduced after the demise of communism.

1992

Economic Espionage — In the years following the end of the Cold War, the CIA is increasingly used for economic espionage. This involves stealing the technological secrets of competing for-

eign companies and giving them to American ones. Given the CIA’s clear preference for dirty tricks over mere information gathering, the possibility of serious criminal behavior is very great indeed.

1993

Haiti — The chaos in Haiti grows so bad that President Clinton has no choice but to remove the Haitian military dictator, Raoul Cedras, on threat of U.S. invasion. The U.S. occupiers do not ar-rest Haiti’s military leaders for crimes against humanity, but instead ensure their safety and rich retirements. Aristide is returned to power only after being forced to accept an agenda fa-vorable to the country’s ruling class.

EPILOGUE

In a speech before the CIA celebrating its 50th anniversary, President Clinton said: “By neces-sity, the American people will never know the full story of your courage.”

Clinton’s is a common defense of the CIA: namely, the American people should stop criticizing the CIA because they don’t know what it really does. This, of course, is the heart of the problem in the first place. An agency that is above criticism is also above moral behavior and reform. Its secrecy and lack of accountability allows its corruption to grow unchecked.

Furthermore, Clinton’s statement is simply untrue. The history of the agency is growing pain-fully clear, especially with the declassification of historical CIA documents. We may not know the details of specific operations, but we do know, quite well, the general behavior of the CIA. These facts began emerging nearly two decades ago at an ever-quickening pace. Today we have a remarkably accurate and consistent picture, repeated in country after country, and verified from countless different directions.

The CIA’s response to this growing knowledge and criticism follows a typical historical pattern. (Indeed, there are remarkable parallels to the Medieval Church’s fight against the Scientific Revolution.) The first journalists and writers to reveal the CIA’s criminal behavior were ha-rassed and censored if they were American writers, and tortured and murdered if they were foreigners. (See Philip Agee’s On the Run for an example of early harassment.) However, over the last two decades the tide of evidence has become overwhelming, and the CIA has found that it does not have enough fingers to plug every hole in the dike. This is especially true in the age of the Internet, where information flows freely among millions of people. Since censorship is impossible, the Agency must now defend itself with apologetics. Clinton’s “Americans will never know” defense is a prime example.

Another common apologetic is that “the world is filled with unsavory characters, and we must deal with them if we are to protect American interests at all.” There are two things wrong with this. First, it ignores the fact that the CIA has regularly spurned alliances with defenders of democracy, free speech and human rights, preferring the company of military dictators and tyrants. The CIA had moral options available to them, but did not take them.

Second, this argument begs several questions. The first is: “Which American interests?” The CIA has courted right-wing dictators because they allow wealthy Americans to exploit the country’s cheap labor and resources. But poor and middle-class Americans pay the price when-ever they fight the wars that stem from CIA actions, from Vietnam to the Gulf War to Panama.

Cops Of The Worldby Phil Ochs • 1966

...You’d better watch what you say, boys, Better watch what you say, We’ve rammed in your harbor and tied to your port, And our pistols are hungry and our tempers are short, So bring your daughters around to the port, ‘Cause we’re the Cops of the World, boys, We’re the Cops of the World. ...Our boots are needing a shine, boys, Boots are needing a shine, But our Coca-Cola is fine, boys, Coca-Cola is fine. ...You’d better wipe off that smile, boys, Better wipe off that smile, We’ll spit through the streets of the cities we wreck, And we’ll find you a leader that you can elect; Those treaties we signed were a pain in the neck, ‘Cause we’re the Cops of the World, boys, We’re the Cops of the World. ...And clean the johns with a rag, boys, Clean the johns with a rag, If you like you can use your flag, boys, If you like you can use your flag; We’ve got too much money, we’re looking for toys, And guns will be guns and boys will be boys, But we’ll gladly pay for all we destroy... ...We’ll smash down your doors, we don’t bother to knock, We’ve done it before, so why all the shock? We’re the biggest and the toughest kids on the block, ...And when we’ve butchered your sons, boys, When we’ve butchered your sons, Have a stick of our gum, boys, Have a stick of our bubble gum...

The second begged question is: “Why should American interests come at the expense of other peoples’ human rights?”

The CIA should be abolished, its leadership dismissed and its relevant members tried for crimes against humanity. Our intelligence community should be rebuilt from the ground up, with the goal of collecting and analyzing information. As for covert action, there are two moral options. The first one is to eliminate covert action completely. But this gives jitters to people worried about the Adolf Hitlers of the world. So a second option is that we can place covert action under extensive and true democratic oversight. For example, a bipartisan Congressional Committee of 40 members could review and veto all aspects of CIA operations upon a majority or super-majority vote. Which of these two options is best may be the subject of debate, but one thing is clear: like dictatorship, like monarchy, unaccountable covert operations should die like the dinosaurs they are.

All history concerning CIA intervention in foreign countries is summarized from William Blum’s encyclopedic work, Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions since World War II (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1995). Sources for domestic CIA operations come from Jonathan Vankin and John Whalen’s The 60 Great-est Conspiracies of All Time (Secaucus, N.J.: Citadel Press, 1997).

You can make a world of difference if you’re into death, torture, murder, fraud, drug dealing and deceiving the American Public on EVERY level.

Next time you listen to your Congressional Criminals discussing budget cuts and national debt remember, the CIA is abusing TRILLIONS of dollars of YOUR MONEY every year.

CUT THE CIA BUDGET

And there’s enough money for Social Security, Food Stamps, Welfare, Medical Care and Unemployment for every American in need for as long as they have that need.

KILL THE BEAST

I’d like to leave you with the following quote:

“The commitment of government to deal with the population issue is of course essential. There are many ways to make the death rate increase.”

Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense, New Solidarity Magazine, March 30th, 1981