CIA_Terrorism_FalseFlags


Kingman-Douglass  CIA_Director March 2, 1946 – July 11, 1946


 

Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter CIA Director May 1, 1947 to October 7, 1950

Roscoe Henry Hillenkoetter (May 8, 1897 – June 18, 1982) was the third director of the post-World War II United States Central Intelligence Group (CIG), the third Director of Central Intelligence (DCI), and the first director of the Central Intelligence Agency created by the National Security Act of 1947. He served as DCI and director of the CIG and the CIA from May 1, 1947 to October 7, 1950 and after his retirement from the United States Navy was a member of the board of governors of National Investigations Committee On Aerial Phenomena (NICAP) from 1957 to 1962.

Born in St. Louis, Missouri, Hillenkoetter graduated from the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland in 1919.

He served tours in naval intelligence, several as assistant naval attaché to France. As Executive Officer of the USS West Virginia (BB-48), he survived the attack on Pearl Harbor, and afterwards was officer in charge of intelligence on Chester W. Nimitz's Pacific Fleet staff.

Then Captain Hillenkoetter commanded the USS Missouri in 1946.

First Director of the CIA

President Truman persuaded a reluctant Hillenkoetter, then a rear admiral, to become Director of Central Intelligence(DCI), and run the Central Intelligence Group (September 1947). Under the National Security Act of 1947 he was nominated and confirmed by the U.S. Senate as DCI, now in charge of the newly established Central Intelligence Agency (December 1947). At first, the U.S. State Department directed the new CIA's covert operations component, and George F. Kennan chose Frank Wisner to be its director. Hillenkoetter expressed doubt that the same agency could be effective at both covert action and intelligence analysis.

As DCI, Hillenkoetter was periodically called to testify before Congress. One instance concerned the CIA’s first major Soviet intelligence failure, the failure to predict the Soviet atomic bomb test (August 29, 1949). In the weeks following the test, but prior to the CIA’s detection of it, Hillenkoetter released the 9/20/49 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) stating, “the earliest possible date by which the USSR might be expected to produce an atomic bomb is mid-1950 and the most probable date is mid-1953.” Hillenkoetter was called before the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy (JCAE) to explain how the CIA not only failed to predict the test, but also how they did not even detect it after it occurred. JCAE members were steaming that the CIA could be taken by such surprise. Hillenkoetter imprecisely replied that the CIA knew it would take the Soviets approximately five years to build the bomb, but the CIA misjudged when they started:

"We knew that they were working on it, and we started here, and this organization [CIA] was set up after the war and we started in the middle and we didn’t know when they had started and it had to be picked up from what we could get along there. That is what I say: this thing of getting a fact that you definitely have on the exploding of this bomb has helped us in going back and looking over what we had before, and it will help us in what we get in the future. But you picked up in the mid-air on the thing, and we didn’t know when they started, sir."

The JCAE was not satisfied with Hillenkoetter’s answer and his and the CIA’s reputation suffered among government heads in Washington, even though the press did not write about the CIA’s first Soviet intelligence failure.

The U.S. government had no intelligence warning of North Korea's invasion (June 25, 1950) of South Korea. DCI Hillenkoetter convened an ad hoc group to prepare estimates of likely communist behavior on the Korean peninsula; it worked well enough that his successor institutionalized it.

Two days prior to North Korea’s invasion of South Korea, Hillenkoetter went before Congress (the House Foreign Affairs Committee) and testified that the CIA had good sources in Korea, implying that the CIA would be able to provide warning before any invasion. Following the invasion, the press suspected the administration was surprised by it, and wondered whether Hillenkoetter would be removed. The DCI was not influential with President Harry S. Truman, but Hillenkoetter insisted to the President that as the Director of Central Intelligence, it would be politically advantageous to testify before Congress to try to remedy the situation. After the testimony, some Senators told the Washington Post that Hillenkoetter confused them when explaining the CIA did not predict when North Korea would invade by saying it was not the CIA’s job to analyze intelligence, just to pass it on to high-ranking policymakers. Even though most Senators believed Hillenkoetter ably explained the CIA’s performance, many at the CIA were embarrassed by the news reports and by mid-August the rumors of Hillenkoetter’s removal were confirmed when President Truman announced that General Walter Bedell "Beetle" Smith would replace him as DCI.

President Truman installed a new DCI in October. Nebraska Congressman Howard Buffett alleged that Hillenkoetter's classified testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee "established American responsibility for the Korean outbreak," and sought to have it declassified until his death in 1964.

Admiral Hillenkoetter returned to the fleet, commanding Cruiser Division 1 of the Cruiser-Destroyer Force, Pacific Fleet from October 1950 – August 1951 during the Korean War. He then commanded the Third Naval District with headquarters in New York City from July 1952 to August 1956 and was promoted to the rank of vice admiral on 9 April 1956.

His last assignment was as Inspector General of the Navy from 1 August 1956 until his retirement from the Navy on 1 May 1957.

 The National Investigations Committee On Aerial Phenomena was formed in 1956, with the organization's corporate charter being approved October 24. Hillenkoetter was on NICAP's board of governors from about 1957 until 1962. Donald E. Keyhoe, NICAP director and Hillenkoetter's Naval Academy classmate, wrote that Hillenkoetter wanted public disclosure of UFO evidence. Perhaps Hillenkoetter's best-known statement on the subject was in 1960 in a letter to Congress, as reported in The New York Times: "Behind the scenes, high-ranking Air Force officers are soberly concerned about UFOs. But through official secrecy and ridicule, many citizens are led to believe the unknown flying objects are nonsense."

Hillenkoetter lived in Weehawken, New Jersey following his retirement from the Navy, until his death on June 18, 1982, at New York City's Mount Sinai Hospital



Allen Welsh Dulles CIA Deputy Director August 23, 1951 – February 26, 1953

Allen Welsh Dulles (/ˈdʌləs/; April 7, 1893 – January 29, 1969) was an American diplomat and lawyer who became the first civilian but third Director of Central Intelligence and its longest-serving director to date. As head of the Central Intelligence Agency during the early Cold War, he oversaw the 1954 Guatemalan coup d'étatOperation Ajax (the overthrow of Iran's elected government), the Lockheed U-2 aircraft program and the Bay of Pigs Invasion. Following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Dulles was one of the members of the Warren Commission. Between his stints of government service, Dulles was a corporate lawyer and partner at Sullivan & Cromwell. His older brother, John Foster Dulles, was the Secretary of State during the Eisenhower Administration.



Charles Pearre Cabell CIA Deputy Director April 23, 1953  to  January 31, 1962

Charles Pearre Cabell (October 11, 1903 – May 25, 1971) was a United States Air Force General and Deputy Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

He was the son of Ben E. (son of Confederate general William L. Cabell) and Sadie E. (Pearre) Cabell and attended Oak Cliff High School in Dallas, Texas. He graduated from West Point in 1925. He was initially commissioned as an artillery lieutenant and served in the field artillery until 1931, when he went to flying school, and was transferred to the Air Corps. He served in a variety of aviation roles as a staff officer and squadron commander throughout the pre-war years, primarily in observation and pursuit squadrons. His observation roles led naturally to his later involvement in photographic and intelligence roles.

Cabell achieved the rank of colonel in 1942 and brigadier general in 1944, serving both at air force headquarters at the Pentagon and in the European Theater. During the late 1940s and early 1950s, he held a variety of staff headquarters positions, including chief of Air Force Intelligence 1948-1951, and director of the staff for the Joint Chiefs of Staff from 1951-1953.

In 1949, Cabell set up Project Grudge to "make a study reviewing the UFO situation for AF HQ." However, Grudge quickly became all but moribund, while simultaneously reporting that all UFO cases were being closely investigated. When Cabell learned of this, he ordered Grudge dissolved and ordered that the "open minded"[1]Project Blue Book be created.

In November 1951, he was named director of the Joint Staff for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  During this time, he was promoted to Lieutenant General.  

In 1952, he was an enthusiastic promoter of the U-2 spy plane, along with Allen Welsh Dulles and John Foster Dulles.

CIA Career

On April 23, 1953, while still an active air force officer, he was appointed deputy director of the CIA. In 1956, along with the CIA's Richard Bissell, he flew to Bonn, to brief the West German Chancellor, Konrad Adenauer, on the U-2 program. Adenauer allowed U-2 planes, pilots, and support teams to be based at Wiesbaden. He was promoted to full general in 1958.

Cabell became Deputy Director of CIA under Allen Dulles. He was forced by President Kennedy to resign, on January 31, 1962, following the failure of the Bay of Pigs Invasion. Cabell's brother, Earle Cabell, was Mayor of Dallas when Kennedy visited that city and was assassinated, on November 22, 1963.

General Cabell died in 1971, four years before his brother Earle.




Allen Welsh Dulles (/ˈdʌləs/; April 7, 1893 – January 29, 1969) was an American diplomat and lawyer who became the first civilian but third Director of Central Intelligence and its longest-serving director to date. As head of the Central Intelligence Agency during the early Cold War, he oversaw the 1954 Guatemalan coup d'étatOperation Ajax (the overthrow of Iran's elected government), the Lockheed U-2 aircraft program and the Bay of Pigs Invasion. Following the assassination of John F. Kennedy, Dulles was one of the members of the Warren Commission. Between his stints of government service, Dulles was a corporate lawyer and partner at Sullivan & Cromwell. His older brother, John Foster Dulles, was the Secretary of State during the Eisenhower Administration.

Walter Bedell Smith, 1950–1953


General Walter Bedell "Beetle" Smith (5 October 1895 – 9 August 1961) was a senior officer of the United States Army who served as General Dwight D. Eisenhower's chief of staff at Allied Forces Headquarters (AFHQ) during the Tunisia Campaign and the Allied invasion of Italy in 1943 during World War II. He was Eisenhower's chief of staff at the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF) in the campaign in Western Europe from 1944 through 1945.

Smith enlisted as a private in the Indiana Army National Guard in 1911. In 1917, during World War I, he was commissioned as a second lieutenant. He was wounded in the Aisne-Marne Offensive in 1918. After World War I, he was a staff officer and instructor at the U.S. Army Infantry School. In 1941, he became Secretary of the General Staff, and in 1942 he became the Secretary to the Combined Chiefs of Staff. His duties involved taking part in discussions of war plans at the highest level, and Smith often briefed President Franklin D. Roosevelt on strategic matters.

Smith became chief of staff to Eisenhower at AFHQ in September 1942. He acquired a reputation as Eisenhower's "hatchet man" for his brusque and demanding manner. However, he was also capable of representing Eisenhower in sensitive missions requiring diplomatic skill. Smith was involved in negotiating the armistice between Italy and the Allies, which he signed on behalf of Eisenhower. In 1944, he became the Chief of Staff of SHAEF, again under Eisenhower. In this position, Smith also negotiated successfully for food and fuel aid to be sent through German lines for the cold and starving Dutch civilian population, and opened discussions for the peaceful and complete German capitulation to the First Canadian Army in the Netherlands. In May 1945, Smith met representatives of the German High Command in Reims, France, to conduct the surrender of the German Armed Forces, and he signed the German Instrument of Surrender on behalf of General Eisenhower.

After World War II, he served as the U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union from 1946 to 1948. Then in 1950, Smith became the Director of Central Intelligence, the head of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and other intelligence agencies in the United States. Smith reorganized the CIA, redefined its structure and its mission, and he gave it a new sense of purpose. He made the CIA the arm of government primarily responsible for covert operations. He left the CIA in 1953 to become an Under Secretary of State. After retiring from the State Department in 1954, Smith continued to serve the Eisenhower Administration in various posts for several years, until his retirement and his death in 1961.

Early Life of Walter Bedell Smith

Walter Bedell Smith was born in Indianapolis, Indiana, on 5 October 1895,[1] the eldest of two sons of William Long Smith, a silk buyer for the Pettis Dry Goods Company, and his wife, Ida Francis née Bedell, who worked for the same company.

Smith was called Bedell from his boyhood. From an early age he was nicknamed "Beetle", or occasionally "Beedle" or "Boodle". He was educated at St. Peter and Paul School, public schools #10 and #29, Oliver Perry Morton School,and Emmerich Manual High School, where he studied to be a machinist. While still there, he took a job at the National Motor Vehicle Company, and eventually left high school without graduating. Smith enrolled at Butler University, but his father developed serious health problems, and Smith left university to return to his job and support his family.

In 1911, at the age of 16, Smith enlisted as a private in Company D of the 2nd Indiana Infantry of the Indiana National Guard. The Indiana National Guard was called out twice in 1913, for the Ohio River flood and during the Indianapolis streetcar strike. Smith was promoted to corporal and then sergeant. During the Pancho Villa Expedition he served on the staff of the Indiana National Guard.

In 1913, Smith met Mary Eleanor (Nory) Cline, who was born in 1893 and died in 1963, and they were married in a traditional Roman Catholic wedding ceremony on 1 July 1917. Their marriage was of long duration but childless.

First World War

Smith's work during the Ohio River flood of 1913 led to his nomination for officer training in 1917, and he was sent to the Officer Candidate Training Camp at Fort Benjamin Harrison, Indiana. Upon his graduation on 27 November 1917, he was commissioned as a second lieutenant. He was then assigned to the newly formed Company A, 1st Battalion, 39th Infantry, part of the 4th Infantry Division at Camp GreeneNorth Carolina.[8] The 4th Infantry Division embarked for Europe, then embroiled in World War I, from Hoboken, New Jersey, on 9 May 1918, reaching Brest, France, on the 23rd of May. After training with the British and French Armies, the 4th Division entered the front lines in June 1918, joining the Aisne-Marne Offensive on 18 July 1918. Smith was wounded by shell fragments during an attack two days later.

Because of his wounds, Smith was returned to the United States for service with the U.S. Department of War's General Staff, and he was assigned to the Military Intelligence Division. In September 1918, he was commissioned as a first lieutenant in the regular army of the United States.[10]

Smith was next sent to the newly formed 379th Infantry Regiment as its intelligence officer. This regiment was part of the 95th Infantry Division, based at Camp Sherman, Ohio. The 95th Infantry Division was disbanded following the signing of the Armistice with Germany on 11 November 1918. In February 1919 Smith was assigned to Camp DodgeIowa, where he was involved with the disposal of surplus equipment and supplies. In March 1919 he was transferred to the 2nd Infantry Regiment, a regular unit based at Camp Dodge, remaining there until November 1919, when it moved to Camp Sherman.

World War II

Washington

When General George C. Marshall became the Army's Chief of Staff in September 1939, he brought Smith to Washington, D.C., to be the Assistant to the Secretary of the General Staff.[18] The Secretary of the General Staff was primarily concerned with records, paperwork, and the collection of statistics, but he also performed a great deal of analysis, liaison, and administration.[19] One of Smith's duties was liaison with Major General Edwin "Pa" Watson, the Senior Military Aide to President Franklin D. Roosevelt.[18] Smith was promoted to lieutenant colonel on 4 May 1941, and then to colonel on 30 August 1941.[20] On 1 September, the Secretary of the General Staff, Colonel Orlando Ward, was given command of the 1st Armored Division, and Smith became Secretary of the General Staff.[21]

The Arcadia Conference, which was held in Washington, D.C., December 1941 and January 1942, mandated the creation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as a counterpart to the British Chiefs of Staff Committee, and Smith was named as its secretary on 23 January 1942. The same conference also brought about the creation of the Combined Chiefs of Staff, which consisted of the (American) Joint Chiefs of Staff and the (British) Chiefs of Staff Committee meeting as a single body. Brigadier Vivian Dykes of the British Joint Staff Mission provided the secretarial arrangements for the new organization at first, but General Marshall thought that an American secretariat was required. He appointed Smith as the secretary of the Combined Chiefs of Staff as well as of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Since Dykes was senior in service time to Smith, and Marshall wanted Smith to be in charge, Smith was promoted to brigadier general on 2 February 1942. He assumed the new post a week later, with Dykes as his deputy. The two men worked in partnership to create and organize the secretariat, and to build the organization of the Combined Chiefs-of-Staff into one that could coordinate the war efforts of the two allies, along with the Canadians, Australians, French and others. Smith's duties involved taking part in discussions of strategy at the highest level, and he often briefed President Roosevelt on strategic matters.However Smith became frustrated as he watched other officers receive operational commands that he desired.He later remarked: "That year I spent working as secretary of the general staff for George Marshall was one of the most rewarding of my entire career, and the unhappiest year of my life."

When Major General Dwight D. Eisenhower was appointed as the commander of the European Theater of Operations in June 1942, he requested that Smith be sent from Washington as his chief-of-staff. Smith's record as a staff officer, and his proven ability to work harmoniously with the British, made him a natural choice for the post. Reluctantly, Marshall acceded to this request, and Smith took over as the chief-of-staff at Allied Forces Headquarters (AFHQ) on 15 September 1942. Reporting to him were two deputy chiefs of staff, Brigadier General Alfred Gruenther and Brigadier John Whiteley, and also the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), Major General Humfrey Gale.

AFHQ was a balanced binational organization, in which the chief of each section was paired with a deputy of the other nationality. Its structure was generally American, but with some British aspects. For example, Gale as CAO controlled both personnel and supply functions, which under the American system would have reported directly to Smith.Initially AFHQ was located in London, but it moved to Algiers during November and December 1942, with Smith arriving on December 11. Although AFHQ had an authorized strength of only 700, Smith aggressively expanded it. By January 1943 its American component alone was 1,406 and its strength eventually topped 4,000 men and women As the chief-of-staff, Smith zealously guarded access to Eisenhower. He acquired a reputation as a tough and brusque manager, and he was often referred to as Eisenhower's "hatchet man".[

Pending the organization of the North African Theater of Operations, U.S. Army (NATOUSA), Smith also acted as its chief-of-staff until 15 February, when Brigadier General Everett S. Hughes became the Deputy Theater commander and the commanding general of the Communications Zone.[31] The relationship between Smith and Hughes, an old friend of Eisenhower, was tense. Smith later accused Hughes of "empire building", and the two clashed over trivial issues.In Algiers, Smith and Eisenhower seldom socialized together. Smith conducted formal dinners at his villa, an estate surrounded by gardens and terraces, with two large drawing rooms decorated with mosaics, oriental rugs, and art treasures. Like Eisenhower, Smith had a female companion, a nurse, Captain Ethel Westerman.

Following the disastrous Battle of the Kasserine Pass, Eisenhower sent Smith forward to report on the state of affairs at the American II Corps. Smith recommended the relief of its commander, Major General Lloyd Fredendall, as did General Harold Alexander and Major Generals Omar Bradley and Lucian Truscott. On their advice, Eisenhower replaced Fredendall with Major General George S. Patton, Jr. Eisenhower also relieved his Assistant Chief of Staff Intelligence (G-2), Brigadier Eric Mockler-Ferryman, pinpointing faulty intelligence at AFHQ as a contributing factor in the defeat at Kasserine. Mockler-Ferryman was replaced by Brigadier Kenneth Strong.

The debacle at Kasserine Pass strained relations between the Allies, and another crisis developed when II Corps reported that enemy aviation was operating at will over its sector because of an absence of Allied air cover. This elicited a scathing response from British Air Marshal Arthur Coningham on the competence of American troops.Eisenhower drafted a letter to Marshall suggesting that Coningham should be relieved of his command since he could not control the acrimony between senior Allied commanders, but Smith persuaded him not to send itInstead, Air Chief Marshal Arthur Tedder, Major General Carl Spaatz, and Brigadier General Laurence S. Kuter paid Patton a visit at his headquarters. Their meeting was interrupted by a German air raid that convinced the airmen that General Patton had a point. Coningham withdrew his written criticisms and he apologized.

Allied leaders in the Sicilian campaign.

General Eisenhower meets in North Africa with (foreground, left to right): Air Chief Marshal Sir Arthur Tedder, General Sir Harold R.L.G. Alexander, Admiral Sir Andrew B. Cunningham, and (top row): Mr. Harold Macmillan, Major General W. Bedell Smith, and several unidentified British officers.

Secret Emissaries to Lisbon (left to right) Brigadier Kenneth W. D. Strong, Generale di Brigata Giuseppe Castellano, Smith, and Consul Franco Montanari, an official from the Italian Foreign Office.


John Alexander McCone was an American businessman and politician who served as Director of Central Intelligence from 1961 to 1965, during the height of the Cold War
Born: January 4, 1902, San Francisco, California, United States
Died: February 14, 1991, Pebble Beach, California, United States
Spouse: Rosemary Cooper (m. 1938–1961)
Education: University of California, Berkeley
Awards: Hoover Medal
Books: The Philosophical Method Rev 2, The Philosophical Method


Former CIA agent Victor Marchetti explained the U.S.-Australian relationship very well: "Australia is going to be increasingly important to the United States, and so long as Australians keep electing the right people then there'll be a stable relationship between the two countries." (Secret Country, p. 353).


The ‘Intelligence Special Relationship’ between Britain and the United States

JONJO ROBB, JUN 15 2014, 3147 VIEWS

THIS CONTENT WAS WRITTEN BY A STUDENT AND ASSESSED AS PART OF A UNIVERSITY DEGREE. E-IR PUBLISHES STUDENT ESSAYS & DISSERTATIONS TO ALLOW OUR READERS TO BROADEN THEIR UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS POSSIBLE WHEN ANSWERING SIMILAR QUESTIONS IN THEIR OWN STUDIES.

http://www.e-ir.info/2014/06/15/the-intelligence-special-relationship-between-britain-and-the-united-states/

Is it accurate to talk of an ‘intelligence special relationship’ between Britain and the United States?

The United Kingdom and the United States are often regarded as having incredibly close and cordial bilateral relations, to the extent that this is often described as a ‘special relationship’. President Barack Obama remarked when addressing Parliament on a state visit to the UK in 2011 that the two nations enjoyed ‘one of the oldest, one of the strongest alliances the world has ever known’.[1] On taking office in 2010, Secretary of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs William Hague commented that ‘the United States is without doubt the most important ally of the United Kingdom’.[2]  The two states share a language, a vast history, and a number of interests and values. The UK and USA have both in the past and at present cooperated intensively on military matters. Both were members of the ‘Big Three’ during World War II, both were founding members of NATO, and both formed the leading contingents in the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. As a result of their shared military experiences, the UK and USA have also cooperated on intelligence matters.

Much like other aspects of UK-USA relations, intelligence liaison and cooperation could be described as exceptionally close. It is said that ‘the US and UK have developed a complex network of close links between their defence and intelligence communities’[3], and that the UK and US intelligence communities regularly grant each other access to privileged intelligence ‘that would be unthinkable between most other states’.[4] They are the two founding members of what is often termed ‘Five Eyes’, a global intelligence community which has been described as ‘the world’s most exclusive intelligence sharing club’.[5] Once more, the recent public disclosure of the global surveillance programs jointly operated by the US National Security Agency (NSA) and the UK’s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) further demonstrates the intensity of this association.

This essay will endeavour to understand and explain the substance and relevance of the intelligence relationship between the two states. It will begin by exploring the emergence of intelligence cooperation between them during World War II and in its immediate aftermath. It will then discuss cooperation between the two states during the Cold War period, firstly with regards to Iran in 1953 and secondly during the Falklands Conflict of 1982. The second section will analyse present-day intelligence cooperation, both within the realms of Signals Intelligence (SIGINT) and finally with regards to counter-terrorism and Human Intelligence (HUMINT). It will conclude by determining that both historical examples of UK-US intelligence cooperation, but more importantly present day instances, demonstrate the intelligence relationship between the two countries could indeed be considered special.

From BRUSA to UKUSA: The emergence of an Intelligence relationship

It could be said that the United Kingdom and the United States first began cooperating extensively on intelligence matters during the Second World War. On 17 May 1943 the British Government Code and Cipher School (GC&CS, precursor to GCHQ) concluded an agreement with the US War Department concerning cooperation on matters of ‘special intelligence’.[6]  Also known as the BRUSA agreement, its significance for the intelligence relationship that would follow cannot be underestimated. Bradley F. Smith describes the BRUSA agreement as ‘the written constitution which arose the Anglo-American cryptanalytic partnership that flourished during the final two-and-a-half years of World War II, and, in modified forms, has continued until the present’.[7] Focused mainly on Communications Intelligence (COMINT) and the breaking of enemy ciphers during the War, BRUSA was ‘monumental. It established for the first time intimate cooperation on COMINT at the highest level’.[8] Aside from COMINT, British Security Coordination (BSC), an element of the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS), played a central role in the establishment of the Office of the Coordinator of Information (COI), the forerunner of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and consequently the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).[9] Clearly, British and US Intelligence services were very much intertwined from as early as the 1940s.

UK-US cooperation on COMINT was further cemented shortly after the end of the Second World War. The ‘British-US Communication Intelligence Agreement’ was settled on 5th March 1946.[10] This originally concise agreement was edited and enlarged numerous times, before taking its current form as the UKUSA Agreement on 10th May 1955.[11] This is the most recent version of the treaty publicly available and was significant in that Canada, Australia and New Zealand became parties to the alliance as UKUSA-collaborating Commonwealth countries.[12] Though the UKUSA agreement was a continuation of previous cooperation under the auspices of the BRUSA agreement, it deepened collaboration and allowed the five nations to ‘carve up the earth into spheres of primary SIGINT collection responsibility’.[13] This resulted in Britain and the US (as well as the three Commonwealth countries) coordinating their intelligence targets and trusting each other’s agencies to collect and disseminate intelligence within the alliance. This is clearly an exceptional level of intelligence cooperation and there is arguably no other intelligence relationship comparable. For example, it is alleged that the United States was heavily reliant on GCHQ’s collection capabilities in Britain’s outposts of Empire in the 1950s,[14] as ‘Britain’s old imperial bases dotted across the globe, from Cyprus to Singapore, became new homes to substantial SIGINT collection centres’.[15]

Arguably, the intelligence relationship between the United Kingdom and the United States has been ‘special’ since the outset. In wartime, the two states decided to coordinate COMINT resources in the hope of a more effective intelligence machinery for the allies. In the immediate peace following the conflict, the two countries chose to deepen their intelligence ties and take the unprecedented action of sharing burdens by allocating responsibility for certain targets between them, and distributing the intelligence collected between themselves and their Commonwealth partners. It is claimed that the UKUSA agreement remains in force,[16] and so continues to serve as the framework for SIGINT cooperation between the two countries. The arrangements made in the 1940s and 1950s laid the foundations for an intensely close intelligence relationship that remains to this day.

Cold War Companions: Operation BOOT and Operation CORPORATE

Though the intelligence relationship between Britain and the US was (and to an extent remains) prominently concerned with the realm of SIGINT, this has by no means been the limit of cooperation between the two nations’ intelligence communities. The Iranian regime change which occurred in 1953 provides a pertinent example of British and US intelligence agencies cooperating to execute covert action, rather than simply to collect and analyse signals and data.

When Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadeq nationalised the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) in 1951, Britain and its ally across the Atlantic sought to bring about the demise of Mossadeq.[17] The emerging prominence of the pro-Communist Tudeh Party was also significant in generating the political will necessary to authorise the operation.[18] The ‘London Draft’ of the Operational Plan to carry out this action, codenamed Operation BOOT by SIS, outlined the steps SIS and the CIA would take to execute ‘a planned and controlled replacement’ of Mossadeq.[19] This included ‘a massive propaganda campaign against Mossadeq’,[20] and the bribery of members of Iran’s legislature to ensure their support for the new government, which was to be headed by a new Prime Minister selected by SIS/CIA.[21] The intelligence agencies successfully conducted the operation, and Mossadeq was deposed as desired. That the British SIS and the American CIA conspired together to execute regime change in a joint operation demonstrates the special and truly unique relationship between the two countries’ intelligence services.

Nearly 30 years after Operation BOOT, Britain launched Operation CORPORATE to retake the Falkland Islands, then a British Crown Colony in the South Atlantic. The Islands were invaded by Argentina on 2nd April 1982, and British Forces sought to liberate the territory from its occupying Argentine forces.[22] Though the United States was not militarily involved in the conflict, released archival documents reveal the wealth of intelligence that the US provided to Britain. In a meeting with US Secretary of State Alexander Haig, Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher ‘expressed appreciation for U.S. cooperation in intelligence matters’.[23] Declassified intelligence reports disclose the highly detailed assessments US intelligence provided Britain. This included reports on the state and location of Argentine military assets which were ascertained from US satellite imagery.[24] As well as imagery intelligence, the CIA provided SIS with a ‘comprehensive overview’[25] of the Argentine military in the form of a ‘complete order of battle for President Galtieri’s army, navy and air force’,[26] which helped to provide British forces with ‘a highly accurate picture of the opposing team in the South Atlantic’.[27] Further to this, the NSA offered assistance to GCHQ by re-tasking one of its satellites for a few hours daily, providing valuable SIGINT on Argentine communications.[28] From what we know of US assistance during the Falklands War, it appears that a significant amount of CIA and NSA resources were delegated to assisting their British counterparts. The re-tasking of reconnaissance satellites was particularly expensive, and even shortened their operational lives.[29] However, this was to be no impediment for the willingness of the US to provide a vast quantity of intelligence assistance to the UK during its conflict with Argentina. This further underlines the distinctive levels of cooperation that make up the intelligence relationship between Britain and the United States.

SIGINT in the Twenty-First Century: ECHELON & Tempora

This essay has hitherto explored numerous examples in history of the special intelligence relationship between the United Kingdom and the United States. It will now examine how this intelligence relationship has developed in the twenty-first century, by examining intelligence cooperation between the two states in 2014. SIGINT continues to be an area of significant interest to the intelligence agencies of the UK and USA, and as such cooperation on SIGINT matters continues to evolve. As previously discussed, SIGINT cooperation between Britain and the United States is exercised within the framework of the ‘Five Eyes’ alliance that was established by the UKUSA agreement, comprising of the United Kingdom, United States, Australia, Canada and New Zealand.

The capability of the Five Eyes coalition to intercept a momentous quantity of telecommunications data has long been a cause of concern to foreign states and privacy groups alike. It is alleged that a global interception system known as ECHELON is operated by Britain, the United States, and its three allies which it is suggested is able to ‘intercept any telephone, fax, Internet or e-mail message sent by any individual and thus to inspect its contents’.[30] The European Parliament established a temporary committee to investigate the ECHELON system, which reported its findings in 2001. Though the lengthy and in-depth report concluded that ECHELON did not provide such an absolute interception capability, it did state that given sufficient collection stations across the world, Five Eyes would be able to intercept ‘all telephone, fax and data traffic’[31] transmitted via satellites. The committee noted that ‘international cooperation is essential in particular for the worldwide interception of satellite communications’.[32] Such cooperation between the United Kingdom and the United States can be perceived at intercept stations such as RAF Menwith Hill in North Yorkshire, which was singled out as part of the ECHELON network by the Parliament’s report.[33] The official website of the Royal Air Force describes Menwith Hill as ‘an integral part of the US DoD world-wide defence communications network. Its primary mission is to provide intelligence support for UK, US and allied interests.’[34] The website also notes that only one-third of the 2200 staff at Menwith Hill are British citizens, and so the station is dominated by American staff of the NSA.[35]

Aside from the ECHELON system, the true scale of Five Eyes’ ability to intercept communications on a mass and global scale in the internet age has recently been revealed by a number of Western newspapers, with the aid of classified material provided by whistle-blower Edward Snowden.[36] Internal GCHQ documents provided by Snowden to The Guardian disclosed the existence of Project Tempora, a GCHQ system that allowed the intelligence agency to ‘tap into and store huge volumes of data drawn from fibre-optic cables for up to 30 days so that it can be sifted and analysed.’[37] The paper claims that this includes ‘recordings of phone calls, the content of email messages, entries on Facebook and the history of any internet user’s access to websites’.[38] The Guardian states that GCHQ’s ‘special source exploitation’ capability to intercept communications transmitted via fibre-optic cables led it to boast of having the ‘biggest internet access’ in the UKUSA alliance.[39] Consequently, GCHQ shares access to intelligence produced by the Tempora program with the NSA.[40] Cooperation between GCHQ and NSA is reciprocal, and documents obtained from Snowden also reveal that GCHQ has access to the NSA’s Dishfire database, which collects ‘almost 200 million text messages a day from across the globe, using them to extract data including location, contact networks and credit card details’.[41] Further to this, The Guardian has revealed that at least £100m has been invested in GCHQ’s capabilities by the NSA in recent years, including £15.5m for the redevelopment of GCHQ Bude, £17.2m for its ‘Mastering the Internet’ project, and half the costs of operating GCHQ’s listening post for the Middle East, Ayios Nikolaos on the island of Cyprus.[42]

Even with the little information that is publicly available, it is clear to see that the present relationship between Britain’s GCHQ and the United States’ NSA is incredibly close. Whether it be satellite communications mustered from the ECHELON system, or metadata produced by the Tempora and Dishfire programs, the two agencies appear to work in tandem and to be very open to sharing intelligence and technical information. The intimacy of the two agencies’ operations is emphasised by the revelation that the NSA provides funding for GCHQ’s projects, and that the two organisations jointly fund a SIGINT collection facility on Cyprus. It is difficult to envisage a closer relationship between two foreign intelligence agencies.

Cooperation on Counter-Terrorism

The UK Government’s Strategy for Countering Terrorism states that it aims to ‘work with other countries and multilateral organisations to enable us to better tackle the threats we face at their source’.[43] The nature of such cooperation is understandably secret and therefore there is even less information publicly available than that of cooperation on SIGINT matters. However, the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee did give an insight into some intelligence matters in its report on UK-US relations, published in March 2010.

The committee found that ‘the field of intelligence co-operation is one of the areas where the UK-US relationship can rightly be described as ‘special’’, and that ‘that there can be no doubt that both the UK and US derive considerable benefits from this co-operation, especially in relation to counter-terrorism.’[44] The committee did note that HUMINT cooperation is not as intimate as SIGINT cooperation, with the Security Service (MI5) and SIS ‘retaining operational independence, despite close co-operation with their US counterparts’.[45] However, the committee’s suggestion that ‘the default UK position appears to be set to allow the automatic relay of human intelligence to the US’[46] is a telling indication of the intelligence special relationship, if accurate. That one state permits its intelligence agencies to freely pass HUMINT to another without let or hindrance underscores the level of cooperation between them. One of the more curious findings of the committee’s evidence hearings was that the US benefit from their close HUMINT cooperation with the UK because ‘foreign assets are more willing to talk to British intelligence rather than to the Americans for a variety of historical or other reasons.’[47] The Foreign & Commonwealth Office, the ministerial department responsible for SIS, told the committee in their investigation that the ‘US is the UK’s most important partner in protecting UK interests at home and that strategic and operational co-operation is close in a bid to deny Al-Qaeda and other extremists safe haven’.[48] It is evident that counter-terrorism cooperation between the two states is indeed close due to their obvious shared interests to prevent terrorism attacks. This is yet further evidence of an ‘intelligence special relationship’.

Conclusions on the Special Relationship

This essay has presented what appears to be overwhelming evidence that the United Kingdom and the United States have an incredibly intimate intelligence relationship which could certainly be described as special. Even as early as the 1940s, the two states were forming alliances to share what was then unprecedented access to each other’s COMINT intelligence and capabilities. Since then, their level of collaboration appears to have grown and grown. Whether it be peacetime or wartime, a fight against the Third Reich or a conflict over islands in the South Atlantic, the two countries have stood by each other in the realms of intelligence cooperation.

What appears distinctive about the intelligence relationship between Britain and the United States is the level within which their intelligence agencies, specifically their SIGINT agencies, are entwined. It is not simply a matter of sharing what intelligence is relevant to the other state on an ad hoc basis. Rather, from what we can gather, their networks and technical capabilities are interlinked to such an extent that the intelligence product of GCHQ is freely accessible to the NSA, and vice-versa. Of course, there will be exceptions to this. It would be naïve to suggest that allintelligence collected by the two countries is freely shared between them. However, it does not appear unreasonable to suggest that the vast majority of such intelligence is pooled between them, with a relationship akin to that between two intelligence agencies of the same government, rather than two agencies of foreign powers. With regards to HUMINT, investigation into cooperation of a recent nature is hindered by the need for official secrets. However, from what little light was shone on the nature of HUMINT cooperation by the Foreign Affairs Committee, we can see that the bonds between MI5/SIS and the CIA/FBI appear close, even if not as close as those between GCHQ and the NSA.

One final point to make about the gravity of the intelligence special relationship that this essay has examined is its longevity. This relationship has stood the test of time. It is clear to see that the relationship has evolved to meet the requirements of intelligence consumers as old threats have dissipated and new threats emerged. Where the GC&CS and the US War Department would once work together to decrypt German and Japanese ciphers, GCHQ and the NSA now work together to scupper communications between terrorists in the internet age. This is perhaps the best testament to the relationship’s intensity, and it is unimaginable that this association will dissolve at any point in the near future. The intelligence relationship between the United Kingdom and the United States is indeed a relationship of a special nature, and it is hard to envisage another relationship so much so.

Bibliography

Aldrich, R. GCHQ: The Uncensored Story of Britain’s Most Secret Intelligence Agency (London, HarperPress, 2011).

Bamford, J. The Puzzle Palace: America’s National Security Agency and its Special Relationship with Britain’s GCHQ (London, Sidgwick & Jackson, 1982).

BBC News, Profile: Edward Snowden. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22837100 [Accessed 07 April 2014].

Embassy of the United States, Remarks by the President to Parliament. Available from: http://london.usembassy.gov/obamavisit019.html [Accessed 05 April 2014].

European Parliament, ‘Report on the existence of a global system for the interception of private and commercial communications (ECHELON interception system)’ (Brussels: European Union, 2001).

Hastings, M., Jenkins, S. The Battle for the Falklands (London, Book Club Associates, 1983).

Her Majesty’s Government, ‘CONTEST: The United Kingdom’s Strategy for Countering Terrorism’ (London: The Stationary Office, 2011).

Her Majesty’s Government, Washington meeting press conference. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/foreign-secretary-william-hague-washington-meeting-press-conference [Accessed 05 April 2014].

House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, ‘Global Security: UK-US Relations’ (London: The Stationary Office, 2010).

James Cox ‘Canada and the Five Eyes Intelligence Community’ (Calgary: Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute and Canadian International Council, 2012).

National Security Agency, Agreement between British Government Code and Cipher School and US War Department in regard to certain “Special Intelligence.” Available from: http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/ukusa/spec_int_10jun43.pdf [Accessed 05 April 2014].

Richelson, J., Ball, D. The Ties That Bind: Intelligence Cooperation between the UKUSA Countries (North Sydney, Allen & Unwin, 1990).

Royal Air ForceAvailable from: http://www.raf.mod.uk/

Royal United Services Institute, The UK-US Alliance Under the Microscope. Available from: https://www.rusi.org/analysis/commentary/ref:C4BD6E91B58EE6/#.U0A7l6K9aLw [Accessed 05 April 2014].

Smith, B. The Ultra-Magic Deals and the Most Secret Special Relationship, 1940-1946 (Novato, Presidio, 1993).

The Guardian. Available from: http://theguardian.com

The National Archives. Available from: http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/

The National Security Archive, George Washington University. Available from: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/

Walton, C. Empire of Secrets: British Intelligence, The Cold War and the Twilight of Empire(London, William Collins, 2014).

West, N. The Secret War for the Falklands: The SAS, MI6, and the War Whitehall Nearly Lost(London, Little, Brown, 1997).


[1] Embassy of the United States, Remarks by the President to Parliament. Available from: http://london.usembassy.gov/obamavisit019.html [Accessed 05 April 2014].

[2] Her Majesty’s Government, Washington meeting press conference. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/foreign-secretary-william-hague-washington-meeting-press-conference [Accessed 05 April 2014].

[3] Royal United Services Institute, The UK-US Alliance Under the Microscope. Available from: https://www.rusi.org/analysis/commentary/ref:C4BD6E91B58EE6/#.U0A7l6K9aLw [Accessed 05 April 2014].

[4] Ibid

[5] James Cox ‘Canada and the Five Eyes Intelligence Community’ (Calgary: Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute and Canadian International Council, 2012), p. 2.

[6]National Security Agency, Agreement between British Government Code and Cipher School and US War Department in regard to certain “Special Intelligence.” Available from: http://www.nsa.gov/public_info/_files/ukusa/spec_int_10jun43.pdf [Accessed 05 April 2014].

[7] Smith, B. The Ultra-Magic Deals and the Most Secret Special Relationship, 1940-1946 (Novato, Presidio, 1993), p. 153.

[8] Bamford, J. The Puzzle Palace: America’s National Security Agency and its Special Relationship with Britain’s GCHQ (London, Sidgwick & Jackson, 1982), p. 314.

[9] Richelson, J., Ball, D. The Ties That Bind: Intelligence Cooperation between the UKUSA Countries (North Sydney, Allen & Unwin, 1990), p. 139.

[10] The National Archives, British-US Communication Intelligence Agreement (HW 80/4).Available from: http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/details?Uri=C11536914 [Accessed 05 April 2014].

[11] The National Archives, Amendment No. 4 to the Appendices to the UKUSA Agreement (Third Edition) (HW 80/11). Available from: http://discovery.nationalarchives.gov.uk/SearchUI/details?uri=C11536921 [Accessed 05 April 2014].

[12] Ibid

[13] Richelson, J., Ball, D. The Ties That Bind: Intelligence Cooperation between the UKUSA Countries (North Sydney, Allen & Unwin, 1990), p. 143.

[14] Walton, C. Empire of Secrets: British Intelligence, The Cold War and the Twilight of Empire(London, William Collins, 2014), p. 154.

[15] Walton, C. Empire of Secrets: British Intelligence, The Cold War and the Twilight of Empire(London, William Collins, 2014), p. 155.

[16] Aldrich, R. GCHQ: The Uncensored Story of Britain’s Most Secret Intelligence Agency(London, HarperPress, 2011), p. 90.

[17] Walton, C. Empire of Secrets: British Intelligence, The Cold War and the Twilight of Empire(London, William Collins, 2014), p. 288.

[18] Walton, C. Empire of Secrets: British Intelligence, The Cold War and the Twilight of Empire(London, William Collins, 2014), p. 289.

[19] The National Security Archive, “London” Draft of the TPAJAX Operational Plan. Available from: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB28/appendix%20B.pdf [Accessed 06 April 2014].

[20] Ibid

[21] Ibid

[22] Hastings, M., Jenkins, S. The Battle for the Falklands (London, Book Club Associates, 1983), p. 61.

[23] The National Security Archive, Secretary’s Meeting with Prime Minister Thatcher April 8: Falkland Islands Crisis. Available from: https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/329527/19820410-secretarys-meeting-with-prime-minister.pdf [Accessed 06 April 2014].

[24] The National Security Archive, Secretary’s Military Forces, Argentina. Available from: https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.documentcloud.org/documents/329563/19820528-military-forces-argentina.pdf [Accessed 06 April 2014].

[25]  West, N. The Secret War for the Falklands: The SAS, MI6, and the War Whitehall Nearly Lost(London, Little, Brown, 1997), p. 48.

[26] Ibid

[27] Ibid

[28] Aldrich, R. GCHQ: The Uncensored Story of Britain’s Most Secret Intelligence Agency(London, HarperPress, 2011), p. 415.

[29] Ibid

[30] European Parliament, ‘Report on the existence of a global system for the interception of private and commercial communications (ECHELON interception system)’ (Brussels: European Union, 2001), p. 23.

[31] European Parliament, ‘Report on the existence of a global system for the interception of private and commercial communications (ECHELON interception system)’ (Brussels: European Union, 2001), p. 34.

[32] European Parliament, ‘Report on the existence of a global system for the interception of private and commercial communications (ECHELON interception system)’ (Brussels: European Union, 2001), p. 23.

[33] European Parliament, ‘Report on the existence of a global system for the interception of private and commercial communications (ECHELON interception system)’ (Brussels: European Union, 2001), p. 56.

[34] Royal Air Force, RAF Menwith Hill – Primary Mission. Available from: http://www.raf.mod.uk/organisation/rafmenwithhillmission.cfm [Accessed 07 April 2014].

[35] Royal Air Force, RAF Menwith Hill – Personnel and Administration. Available from: http://www.raf.mod.uk/organisation/rafmenwithhilladministration.cfm [Accessed 07 April 2014].

[36] BBC News, Profile: Edward Snowden. Available from: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22837100 [Accessed 07 April 2014].

[37] The Guardian, GCHQ taps fibre-optic cables for secret access to world’s communications.Available from: http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2013/jun/21/gchq-cables-secret-world-communications-nsa [Accessed 07 April 2014].

[38] Ibid

[39] Ibid

[40] Ibid

[41] The Guardian, NSA collects millions of text messages daily in ‘untargeted’ global sweep.Available from: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/16/nsa-collects-millions-text-messages-daily-untargeted-global-sweep [Accessed 08 April 2014].

[42] The Guardian, Exclusive: NSA pays £100m in secret funding for GCHQ. Available from: http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/01/nsa-paid-gchq-spying-edward-snowden [Accessed 08 April 2014].

[43] Her Majesty’s Government, ‘CONTEST: The United Kingdom’s Strategy for Countering Terrorism’ (London: The Stationary Office, 2011), p. 7.

[44] House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, ‘Global Security: UK-US Relations’ (London: The Stationary Office, 2010), p. 42.

[45] House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, ‘Global Security: UK-US Relations’ (London: The Stationary Office, 2010), p. 39.

[46] Ibid

[47] House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, ‘Global Security: UK-US Relations’ (London: The Stationary Office, 2010), p. 40.

[48] Ibid

Written by: Jonjo Robb
Written at: Aberystwyth University
Written for: Claudia Hillebrand
Date written: April 2014


CIA Directors' management styles and effect on operations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Director_of_Central_Intelligence

Roscoe H. Hillenkoetter, 1947–1950

Walter Bedell Smith, 1950–1953

Allen W. Dulles, 1953–1961

John McCone, CIA Director from 1961–1965



John Alexander McCone was an American businessman and politician who served as Director of Central Intelligence from 1961 to 1965, during the height of the Cold WarJohn Alexander McCone was an American businessman and politician who served as Director of Central Intelligence from 1961 to 1965, during the height of the Cold WarJohn Alexander McCone was an American businessman and politician who served as Director of Central Intelligence from 1961 to 1965, during the height of the Cold WarJohn Alexander McCone was an American businessman and politician who served as Director of Central Intelligence from 1961 to 1965, during the height of the Cold War.

Atomic Energy Commission
In 1958, he became chairman of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission. According to journalist Seymour Hersh, in December 1960, while still Atomic Energy Commission chairman, McCone revealed CIA information about Israel's Dimona nuclear weapons plant to The New York Times. Hersh writes that President John F. Kennedy was "fixated" on the Israeli nuclear weapons program and one of the reasons that contributed to McCone's appointment as CIA director was his willingness to deal with this and other nuclear weapons issues – and despite the fact that McCone was a conservative Republican.


Director of Central Intelligenc
After the disaster of the Bay of Pigs Invasion, President John F. Kennedy[6] forced the resignation of CIA director Allen Dulles and some of his staff. McCone replaced Dulles as DCI on November 29, 1961.
He married Mrs. Theiline McGee Pigott on August 29, 1962 at St. Anne's Chapel of the Sacred Heart Villa in Seattle, Washington.
McCone was not Kennedy's first choice; the President had tentatively offered the job to Clark Clifford, his personal lawyer, who politely refused (Clifford would later serve as Secretary of Defense for Lyndon Johnson); and then to Fowler Hamilton, a Wall Street lawyer with experience in government service during the Roosevelt and Truman administrations. Hamilton accepted, but when a problem developed at the Agency for International Development, he was shifted there.[9] Thus Kennedy, urged on by his brother Robert, turned to McCone.[10]
He was a key figure in the Executive Committee of the National Security Council (EXCOMM) during the October 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. In the Honeymoon telegram of September 20, 1962, he insisted that the CIA remain imaginative when it came to Soviet weapons policy towards Cuba, as a September 19 National Intelligence Estimate had concluded it unlikely that nuclear missiles would be placed on the island. The telegram was so named because McCone sent it while on his honeymoon in Paris, France, accompanied not only by his bride, Theiline McGee Pigott but by a CIA cipher team.
McCone's suspicions of the inaccuracy of this assessment proved to be correct, as it was later found out the Soviet Union had followed up its conventional military buildup with the installation of MRBMs (Medium Range Ballistic Missiles) and IRBMs (Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles), sparking off the crisis in October when they were later spotted by CIA's Lockheed U-2 surveillance flights.
While McCone was DCI, the CIA was involved in many covert plots; according to Admiral Stansfield Turner (who himself later served as DCI from 1977 to 1981, under President Jimmy Carter) these included:
In the Dominican Republic, the CIA had armed an assassination plot to take out President Rafael Leonidas Trujillo Molina. After the Bay of Pigs, Kennedy wanted the project stopped because it was too soon for another debacle. The problem is that once you encourage and arm a group of highly motivated locals, you can't just turn them off. Trujillo's enemies gunned him down dramatically, though technically speaking without U.S. help.
In Laos, the CIA backed the Hmong (then known by the derogatory name Meo) people of the highlands to fight a counterinsurgency. This set off a complicated three-way civil war that hit the Hmong hard.
In Ecuador, the CIA helped overthrow President José Velasco Ibarra. His replacement didn't last long before the CIA turned on him, looking for greater stability and allegiance.
In British Guiana, the CIA stirred up trouble through the labor unions to take down the democratically elected Cheddi Jagan.
The centerpiece of all covert operations was Mongoose, a secret campaign against Castro.
Mccone was also involved in the 1964 Brazilian coup d'état;[citation needed] he was friends with ITT president Harold Geneen whose company stood to lose its Brazilian subsidiary if president João Goulart nationalized it. McCone would later work for ITT.
McCone represented the CIA's opposition to U.S. support of a coup in South Vietnam against President Ngo Dinh Diem, but such objections were overruled by November 1963, when the State Department managed to convince Kennedy to allow the coup to proceed.
In 1964 he was awarded the Hoover Medal.
McCone resigned from his position of DCI in April 1965, believing himself to be unappreciated by President Lyndon B. Johnson, who, he complained, would not read his reports, including on the need for full-fledged inspections of Israeli nuclear facilities. Before his resignation, McCone submitted a final memorandum regarding the war in Vietnam to President Johnson, arguing that Johnson's plan of attack was too limited in scope to successfully defeat the Hanoi regime; he further asserted that public support (in the United States and abroad) for any effort in North Vietnam would erode if the plan went unchanged:
Dear Mr. President:
I remain concerned, as I have said before to you, Secretary Rusk and Secretary McNamara, over the limited scale of air action against North Vietnam which we envision for the next few months.
Specifically I feel that we must conduct our bombing attacks in a manner that will begin to hurt North Vietnam badly enough to cause the Hanoi regime to seek a political way out through negotiation rather than expose their economy to increasingly serious levels of destruction. By limiting our attacks to targets like bridges, military installations and lines of communication, in effect we signal to the Communists that our determination to win is significantly modified by our fear of widening the war.
If this situation develops and lasts several months or more, I feel world opinion will turn against us, Communist propaganda will become increasingly effective, and indeed domestic support of our policy may erode. I therefore urge that as we deploy additional troops, which I believe necessary, we concurrently hit the north harder and inflict greater damage. In my opinion, we should strike their petroleum supplies, electric power installations, and air defense installations (including the SAM sites which are now being built).
I am not talking about bombing centers of population or killing innocent people, though there will of course be some casualties. I am proposing to "tighten the tourniquet" on North Vietnam so as to make the Communists pause to weigh the losses they are taking against their prospects for gains. We should make it hard for the Viet Cong to win in the south and simultaneously hard for Hanoi to endure our attacks in the north. I believe this course of action holds out the greatest promise we can hope for in our effort to attain our ultimate objective of finding a political solution to the Vietnam problem.
John A. McCone, Director of Central Intelligence, (Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, Vietnam, Vol. XXXII. Top Secret)
Other
Throughout his career, McCone served on numerous commissions that made recommendations on issues as diverse as civilian applications of military technology and the Watts riots.[16]
In 1987, McCone was presented with the Presidential Medal of Freedom by President Ronald Reagan.
Death
John A. McCone died on February 14, 1991 of cardiac arrest at his home in Pebble Beach, California. He was 89 years old.

William Raborn CIA Director from 1965–1966

William Francis Raborn, Jr.United States Navy (June 8, 1905 – March 6, 1990) was a United States Navy officer, the leader of the project to develop the Polaris missile system, and the 7th Director of Central Intelligence as well as the 5th Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.[1]

Born in Decatur, Texas, he graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1928. During World War II he directed the Gunnery Training Section at the Bureau of Aeronautics. He also served in the Pacific on aircraft carriers: Raborn was the executive officer of the carrier USS Hancock (CV-19) when her deck was damaged by a kamikaze attack. He had the deck repaired in four hours, allowing the ship's aircraft (which had been airborne when the kamikaze struck) to land safely - for this Raborn was awarded the Silver Star.[2] He later commanded the carriers USS Bairoko (CVE-115) and USS Bennington (CVA-20).

Raborn was a rear admiral when he was appointed, on November 8, 1955, as Director of Special Projects at the Bureau of Weapons. His task was to develop a submarine-launched ballistic missile. He reported directly to Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Arleigh Burke and the Secretary of the Navy Charles Thomas. Raborn was told the new system had to achieve interim capability by early 1963 and full capability by early 1965. The USS George Washington (SSBN-598), the first ballistic missile submarine, was commissioned December 30, 1959, fired its first test missile July 20, 1960, and departed on the Navy's first deterrent patrol on November 15, 1960. Raborn received the Distinguished Service Medal and was appointed Vice Admiral in 1960. The same year he was awarded the Collier Trophy for his work on Polaris.[3]

Raborn had delivered Polaris three years ahead of schedule, due in part to his application of the PERT methodology. He became Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Development in 1962. Raborn retired from the Navy in 1965 and on April 28 of that year, despite his having no intelligence experience, President Lyndon B. Johnson appointed Raborn as the seventh Director of Central Intelligence (DCI). As DCI, one of his primary responsibilities was to direct the Central Intelligence Agency.

Time magazine wrote that his organizational skills would be invaluable in a CIA that admitted it was in danger of being "drowned in data",[2] but his tenure was not successful: author David Barrett described Raborn as "incompetent at CIA, not understanding the agency or the intelligence business",[4] and even the CIA's own historians said "Raborn did not 'take' to the DCI job".[5] A later CIA director, William Colby, described Raborn as focused on intelligence technology and not sufficiently attuned to the cultural issues involved in dealing with foreign nationals and governments.

Raborn resigned on June 30, 1966, having served for only fourteen months as DCI. He was replaced by his deputy, Richard Helms.

He was involved, during his time at the CIA, in its early activities against Ramparts magazine and its editors.[6]

Raborn is buried in the United States Naval Academy Cemetery in Annapolis, Maryland.

Raborn was also:


Richard M. Helms, CIA Director from 1966–1973

Richard McGarrah Helms (March 30, 1913 – October 23, 2002) served as the United States Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) from June 1966 to February 1973. Helms began intelligence work with the Office of Strategic Services during World War II. Following the 1947 creation of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) he rose in its ranks during the Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy administrations. Helms then served as DCI under Presidents Johnson and Nixon.

As a professional Helms highly valued information gathering (favoring the interpersonal, but including the technical, obtained by espionage or from published media) and its analysis. He also prized counterintelligence. Although a participant at planning such activities, he remained a skeptic about covert and paramilitary operations. Helms understood the bounds of his agency role as being able to express strong opinions over a decision under review, yet working as a team player once a course was set by the administration. He saw it as his duty to keep official secrets from press scrutiny. While DCI, Helms managed the agency following the lead of his predecessor John McCone. In 1977, as a result of earlier clandestine operations in Chile, he became the only DCI convicted of misleading Congress. His last post in government service was Ambassador to Iran, 1973–1977. Yet he was a key witness before the Senate during its investigation of the CIA by the Church Committee in the mid-1970s, 1975 being called the "Year of Intelligence" This investigation was hampered severely by Helms having ordered the destruction of all files related to the CIA's mind control program in 1973.

Helms began his career in intelligence by serving in the war-time Office of Strategic Services (OSS). Following the allied victory Helms was stationed in Germany, serving under Allen Dulles and Frank Wisner. Then in late 1945 President Truman terminated the OSS. Back in Washington, Helms continued in similar intelligence work as part of the Strategic Services Unit (SSU), which later became called the Office of Special Operations (OSO). Helms focused then on espionage in central Europe at the start of the Cold War, and his work included the vetting of the German Gehlen spy organization. When the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was founded in 1947, the OSO was incorporated into the new agency.

In 1950 Truman appointed General Walter Bedell Smith as the fourth Director of Central Intelligence (DCI). The CIA became firmly established institutionally within the United States Intelligence Community. DCI Smith merged the OSO (being mainly espionage, and newly led by Helms) and the rapidly expanding Office of Policy Coordination under Wisner (clandestine operations) to form a new unit to be managed by the Deputy Director for Plans (DDP). Wisner led the Directorate for Plans, serving as DDP from 1952 to 1958, with Helms as his Chief of Operations.

In 1953 Dulles became the fifth DCI under President Eisenhower. His brother John Foster Dulles was Eisenhower's Secretary of State. Under the DDP Helms was specifically tasked in the defense of the agency against the threatened attack by Senator Joseph McCarthy, and also in the development of "truth serum" and other "mind control" drugs per the CIA's controversial Project MKUltra. From Washington Helms oversaw the Berlin Tunnel, the 1953–1954 espionage operation which later made newspaper headlines. Regarding CIA activity, Helms considered information obtained by espionage to be more beneficial in the long run than the more strategically risky work involved in clandestine operations, which could backfire politically. Under his superior and mentor the DDP Wisner, the CIA marshaled such clandestine operations, which resulted in regime change in Iran in 1953 and Guatemala in 1954 and interference in the Congo in 1960. During the crises in Suez and Hungary in 1956 the DDP Wisner became distraught by what he saw as the disloyalty of allies and the loss of a precious cold-war opportunity. Wisner retired in 1958. Passing over Helms, the DCI Dulles appointed his rival as the new DDP: Richard Bissell, who had managed the U-2 spy plane.

During the Kennedy presidency, Dulles selected Helms to testify before Congress on Soviet-made forgeries. Following the 1961 Bay of Pigs fiasco, President Kennedy appointed John McCone as the new DCI, and Helms then became the DDP. Helms was assigned to manage the CIA's role in Kennedy's multi-agency effort to dislodge Castro. During the Cuban Missile Crisis, while McCone sat with the President and his cabinet at the White House, Helms in the background supported McCone's significant contributions to the strategic discussions. After the 1963 coup in South Vietnam, Helms was privy to Kennedy's anguish over the killing of President Diem. A month later Kennedy was assassinated. Helms eventually worked to manage the CIA's complicated response during its subsequent investigation by the Warren Commission.

In June 1966, Helms was appointed Director of Central Intelligence (DCI). At the White House later that month, he was sworn in during a ceremony arranged by President Lyndon Baines Johnson, which included members of Congress and featured a marine band  In April of the prior year John McCone had resigned as DCI. Johnson then had appointed Admiral William Raborn, well regarded for his work on the submarine-launched Polaris missile, as the new DCI (1965–1966). Johnson immediately chose Helms to serve as Deputy Director of Central Intelligence (DDCI). Raborn and Helms soon journeyed to the LBJ ranch in Texas. Notwithstanding, Raborn did not fit well into the institutional complexities at CIA, with its specialized intellectual culture. He resigned in 1966. 

As DCI, Helms served under President Johnson during the second half of his administration, then continued in this post until 1973 (through President Nixon's first term), "two of the most complex and controversial Presidents in the nation's history". At CIA Helms was its first Director to 'rise through the ranks'.

Vietnam became the key issue during the Johnson years. Helms reviews the war in his memoirs.[10] The CIA was fully engaged in political-military affairs in Southeast Asia, both getting intelligence information and for overt and covert field operations. CIA, for example, organized an armed force of minority Hmong in Laos, and in Vietnam of rural counterinsurgency forces, and of minority Montagnards in the highlands. Further, CIA became actively involved in South Vietnamese politics, especially after Diem. "One of the CIA's jobs was to coax a genuine South Vietnamese government into being."[11][12] Helms traveled to Vietnam twice,[13] and with President Johnson to Guam.[14]

In June 1966, Helms was appointed Director of Central Intelligence (DCI). At the White House later that month, he was sworn in during a ceremony arranged by President Lyndon Baines Johnson, which included members of Congress and featured a marine band. In April of the prior year John McCone had resigned as DCI. Johnson then had appointed Admiral William Raborn, well regarded for his work on the submarine-launched Polaris missile, as the new DCI (1965–1966). Johnson immediately chose Helms to serve as Deputy Director of Central Intelligence (DDCI). Raborn and Helms soon journeyed to the LBJ ranch in Texas. Notwithstanding, Raborn did not fit well into the institutional complexities at CIA, with its specialized intellectual culture. He resigned in 1966.

As DCI, Helms served under President Johnson during the second half of his administration, then continued in this post until 1973 (through President Nixon's first term), "two of the most complex and controversial Presidents in the nation's history". At CIA Helms was its first Director to 'rise through the ranks'.

Vietnam became the key issue during the Johnson years. Helms reviews the war in his memoirs. The CIA was fully engaged in political-military affairs in Southeast Asia, both getting intelligence information and for overt and covert field operations. CIA, for example, organized an armed force of minority Hmong in Laos, and in Vietnam of rural counterinsurgency forces, and of minority Montagnards in the highlands. Further, CIA became actively involved in South Vietnamese politics, especially after Diem. "One of the CIA's jobs was to coax a genuine South Vietnamese government into being." Helms traveled to Vietnam twice,  and with President Johnson to Guam.

Vietnam: Estimates

In 1966, Helms as the new DCI inherited a CIA "fully engaged in the policy debates surrounding Vietnam." The CIA itself had formed "a view on policy but [was] expected to contribute impartially to the debate all the same."American intelligence agents had a relatively long history in Vietnam, dating back to OSS contacts with the communist-led resistance to Japanese occupation forces during World War II. In 1953 the CIA's first annual National Intelligence Estimate on Vietnam reported that French prospects may "deteriorate very rapidly". After French withdrawal in 1954, CIA agents including Lt. Col. Edward Lansdale assisted the new President Ngo Dinh Diem in his efforts to reconstitute an independent government in the south: the Republic of Viet Nam.

Nonetheless, CIA reports did not present an optimistic appraisal of Diem's future. Many of its analysts reluctantly understood that, in the anti-colonialist and nationalist context then prevailing, a favorable outcome was more likely for the new communist regime in the northunder its long-term party leader Ho Chi Minh, who was widely admired as a Vietnamese patriot. A 1954 report by the CIA qualifiedly stated that if nationwide elections scheduled for 1956 by the recent Geneva Accords were held, Ho's party "the Viet Minh will almost certainly win."  Yet that election was avoided and, in the cold war context, the 1959 CIA reports evidently saw Diem as "the best anticommunist bet" if he undertook reforms, but reporting also that Diem consistently avoided reform.

As the political situation progressed during the 1960s and American involvement grew, subsequent CIA reports crafted by its careful analysts continued to trend pessimistic regarding the prospects for South Vietnam. "Vietnam may have been a policy failure. It was not an intelligence failure." Yet the Agency itself eventually became sharply divided over the issue. Those active in CIA operations in Vietnam, e.g., Lucien Conein, and William Colby, naturally adopted a robust optimism regarding the outcome of their contentious projects. Teamwork in dangerous circumstances, and social cohesion among such operatives in the field, worked to reinforce and intensify their positive views.

"At no time was the institutional dichotomy between the operational and analytic components more stark." Helms later described how he then understood his predicament at CIA.

"From the outset, the intelligence directorate and the Office of National Estimates held a pessimistic view of the military developments. The operations personnel—going full blast ... in South Vietnam—remained convinced the war could be won. Without this conviction, the operators could not have continued their difficult face-to-face work with the South Vietnamese, whose lives were often at risk. In Washington, I felt like a circus rider standing astride two horses, each for the best of reasons going its own way."

Negative news would prove to be highly unwelcome at the Johnson White House. "After each setback the CIA would gain little by saying 'I told you so' or by continuing to emphasize the futility of the war," author Ranelagh writes about the CIA predicament.[33] In part it was DCI McCone's worrisome reports and unwelcome views about Vietnam that led to his being excluded from the President Johnson's inner circle; consequently McCone resigned in 1965. Helms remembered that McCone left the CIA because "he was dissatisfied with his relation with President Johnson. He didn't get to see him enough, and he didn't feel that he had any impact... ."

Helms' institutional memory evident here probably contested for influence over his own decisions as DCI when he later served under Johnson. According to CIA intelligence officer Ray Cline, "Up to about 1965/66, estimates were not seriously biased in any direction." As American political commitment to Vietnam surged under Johnson, however, "the pressure to give the right answer came along," stated Cline. "I felt increasing pressure to say the war was winnable."

Laos: "secret war"


The "second Geneva Convention" of 1962 settled de jure the neutrality of the Kingdom of Laos, obtaining commitments from both the Soviets and the Americans. Nonetheless, such a neutral status quo in Laos soon became threatened de facto, e.g., by North Vietnamese (NVN) armed support for the communist Pathet Lao. The CIA in 1963 was tasked to mount an armed defense of the "neutrality" of the Kingdom. Helms then served as DDP and thus directed the overall effort. It was a secret war because both NVN and CIA were in violation of Geneva's 1962 terms.

Thereafter during the 1960s the CIA accomplished this mission largely by training and arming native tribal forces, primarily those called the Hmong.[40] Helms called it "the war we won". At most several hundred CIA personnel were involved, at a small fraction of the cost of the Vietnam war. Despite prior criticism of CIA abilities due to the 1961 Bay of Pigs disaster in Cuba, here the CIA for years successfully managed a large-scale paramilitary operation. At the height of the Vietnam war, much of royal Laos remained functionally neutral, although over its southeast borderlands ran the contested Ho Chi Minh trail. The CIA operation fielded as many as 30,000 Hmong soldiers under their leader Vang Pao, while also supporting 250,000 mostly Hmong people in the hills. Consequently, more than 80,000 NVN troops were "tied down" in Laos.

At the time of Nixon's Vietnamization policy, CIA concern arose over sustaining the covert nature of the secret war. In 1970 Helms decided "to transfer the budgetary allocations for operations in Laos from the CIA to the Defense Department." William Colby, then a key American figure in Southeast Asia and later DCI, comments that "a large-scale paramilitary operation does not fit the secret budget and policy procedures of CIA."

About Laos, however, Helms wrote that "I will always call it the war we won." In 1966 the CIA had termed it "an exemplary success story".Colby concurred. Senator Stuart Symington, after a 1967 visit to the CIA chief of station in Vientiane, the Laotian capital, reportedly called it "a sensible way to fight a war." Yet others disagreed, and the 'secret war' would later draw frequent political attack. Author Weiner criticizes the imperious insertion of American power, and the ultimate abandonment of America's Hmong allies in 1975. Other problems arose because of the Hmong's practice of harvesting poppies


Due to political developments, the war ultimately ended badly. Helms acknowledges that after President Nixon, through his agent Kissinger, negotiated in Paris to end the Vietnam war in 1973, America failed to continue supporting its allies and "abdicated its role in Southeast Asia." Laos was given up and the Hmong were left in a desperate situation. Helms references that eventually 450,000 Laotians including 200,000 Hmong emigrated to America.

As the 'secret war' eventually became public it created a firestorm in Washington. While this Laotian struggle continued on the borderlands of the Vietnam conflict, DCI Helms was blindsided when several Senators began to complain that they had been kept in the dark about "CIA's secret war" in Laos. Helms recalls that three Presidents, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon, had each approved the covert operation, the "secret war", and that fifty Senators had been briefed on its progress, e.g., Senator Symington had twice visited Laos. Helms elaborates on the turnabout:

In 1970, it came as a jolt when, with a group of senators, Senator Stuart Symington publicly expressed his "surprise, shock and anger" at what he and the others claimed was their "recent discovery" of "CIA's secret war" in Laos. At the time I could not understand the reason for this about-face. Nor have I since been able to fathom it.

Israel: Six Day War

Liaison with Israeli intelligence was managed by James Jesus Angleton of CIA counterintelligence from 1953 to 1974. For example, the Israelis had quickly provided CIA with the Russian text of Khrushchev's Secret Speech of 1956 which severely criticized the deceased Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin. In August 1966 Mossad had arranged for Israeli acquisition of a Soviet MiG-21 fighter from a disaffected Iraqi pilot. Mossad's Meir Amit later came to Washington to tell DCI Helms that Israel would loan America the plane, with its up-until-now secret technology, to find out how it flew. At a May 1967 NSC meeting Helms voiced praise for Israel's military preparedness, and argued that from the captured MiG-21 the Israelis "had learned their lessons well".

In 1967, CIA analysis addressed the possibility of an armed conflict between Israel and neighboring Arab states, predicting that "the Israelis would win a war within a week to ten days." Israel "could defeat any combination of Arab forces in relatively short order" with the time required depending on "who struck first" and circumstances. Yet CIA's pro-Israel prediction was challenged by Arthur Goldberg, the American ambassador to the United Nations and Johnson loyalist.  Although Israel then had requested "additional military aid" Helms opines that here Israel wanted to control international expectations prior to the outbreak of war.

As Arab war threats mounted, President Johnson asked Helms about Israel's chances and Helms stuck with his agency's predictions. At a meeting of his top advisors Johnson then asked who agreed with the CIA estimate and all assented. "The temptation for Helms to hedge his bet must have been enormous".  After all, opinions were divided, e.g., Soviet intelligence thought the Arabs would win and were "stunned" at the Israeli victory. Admiral Stansfield Turner (DCI 1977–1981) wrote that "Helms claimed that the high point of his career was the Agency's accurate prediction in 1967." Helms believed it had kept America out of the conflict. Also, it led to his entry within the inner circle of the Johnson administration, the regular 'Tuesday lunch' with the President.

In the event, Israel decisively defeated its neighborhood enemies and prevailed in the determinative Six Day war of June 1967. Four days before the sudden launch of that war, "a senior Israeli official" had privately visited Helms in his office and hinted that such a preemptive decision was imminent. Helms then had passed the information to President Johnson.[ The conflict reified America's "emotional sympathy" for Israel. Following the war, America dropped its careful balancing act between the belligerents and moved to a position in support of Israel, eventually supplanting France as Israel's chief military supplier.

In the afternoon of the third day of the war, the American SIGINT spy ship USS Liberty, outfitted by the NSA, was attacked by Israeli warplanes and torpedo boats in international waters north of Sinai. This U.S. Navy ship was severely damaged with loss of life. The Israelis quickly notified the Americans and later explained that they "had mistaken the Liberty (455 feet long) for the Egyptian coastal steamer El Quseir (275 feet long). The US government formally accepted the apology and the explanation." Some continue to accept this position.  Yet "scholars and military experts," according to author Thomas Powers, state that "the hard question is not whether the attack was deliberate but why the Israelis thought it necessary." About the Liberty Helms in his memoirs quotes the opinion of his deputy, DDCI Rufus Taylor, and mentions the conclusion of a board of inquiry. Then Helms adds, "I have yet to understand why it was felt necessary to attack this ship or who ordered the attack".

On the morning of the sixth day of the war, President Johnson summoned Helms to the White House Situation Room. Soviet Premier Aleksei Kosygin had called to threaten military intervention if the war continued. Defense Secretary McNamara suggested that the Sixth Fleet be sent east, from the mid Mediterranean to the Levant. Johnson agreed. Helms remembered the "visceral physical reaction" to the strategic tension, similar to the emotions of the 1962 Cuban missile crisis. "It was the world's good fortune that hostilities on the Golan Heights ended before the day was out," wrote Helms later.

LBJ: Tuesday lunch

As a result of the CIA's accurate prognosis concerning the duration, logistics, and outcome of the Six-Day War of June, 1967, Helms' practical value to the President, Lyndon Baines Johnson, became evident. Recognition of his new status was not long in coming. Helms soon took a place at the table where the president's top advisors discussed foreign policy issues: the regular Tuesday luncheons with LBJ. Helms unabashedly called it "the hottest ticket in town"

In a 1984 interview with a CIA historian, Helms recalled that following the Six-Day War, he and Johnson had engaged in intense private conversations which addressed foreign policy, including the Soviet Union. Helms went on:

"And I think at that time he'd made up his mind that it would be a good idea to tie intelligence into the inner circle of his policy-making and decision-making process. So starting from that time he began to invite me to the Tuesday lunches, and I remained a member of that group until the end of his administration."

Helms' invitation to lunch occurred about three-and-a-half years into Johnson's five-year Presidency and a year into Helms' nearly seven-year tenure as DCI. Thereafter in the Johnson administration, Helms functioned in proximity to high-level policymaking, with continual access to America's top political leadership. It constituted the pinnacle of Helms' influence and standing in Washington. Helms describes the "usual Tuesday lunch" in his memoirs.

"[W]e gathered for a sherry in the family living room on the second floor of the White House. If the President, who normally kept to a tight schedule, was a few minutes late, he would literally bound into the room, pause long enough to acknowledge our presence, and herd us into the family dining room, overlooking Pennsylvania Avenue. Seating followed protocol, with the secretary of state (Dean Rusk) at the President's right, and the secretary of defense (Robert McNamara, later Clark Clifford) at his left. General Bus Wheeler (the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) sat beside the secretary of defense. I sat beside Dean Rusk. Walt Rostow (the Special Assistant for National Security Affairs), George Christian (the White House Press Secretary), and Tom Johnson (the deputy press secretary) made up the rest of the table."

In CIA interviews long after the war ended, Helms recalled the role he played in policy discussions. He was the neutral party who could come up with facts applicable to the issue at hand. The benefit of such a role was that he could be decisive in "keeping the game honest". Helms comments that many advocates of particular policy positions will almost invariably 'cherry pick' facts supporting their positions, whether consciously or not. Then the voice of a neutral could perform a useful function in helping to steer the conversation on routes within realistic parameters.

The out-sized political personality of Johnson, of course, was the dominating presence at lunch. From his perch Helms marveled at the learned way President Johnson employed the primary contradictions in his personality to direct those around him, and forcefully manage the atmosphere of discourse.

Regarding the perennial issues of Vietnam, a country in civil war, Helms led as an important institutional player in the political mix of Washington. Yet CIA people were themselves divided on the conflict. As the DCI, Helms' daily duties involved the difficult task of updating CIA intelligence and reporting on CIA operations to the American executive leadership. Vietnam then dominated the news. Notoriously, the American political consensus eventually broke. The public became sharply divided, with the issues being vociferously contested. About the so-called Vietnamese 'quagmire' it seemed confusion reigned within and without. Helms saw himself as struggling to best serve his view of America and his forceful superior, the President.

Viet Cong numbers

Differences and divisions might emerge within the ranks of analysts, across the spectrum of the USG Intelligence Community. Helms as DCI had a statutory mandate giving him responsibility for reconciling the discrepancies in information, or the conflicting views, promoted by the various American intelligence services, e.g., by the large Defense Intelligence Agency or by the Bureau of Intelligence and Research at State. While the CIA might agree on its own Estimates, other department reports might disagree, causing difficulties, and making inter-agency concord problematic. The process of reaching the final consensus could become a contentious negotiation.

In 1965, Johnson had substantially escalated the war; he sent large numbers of American combat troops to fight in South Vietnam, and ordered warplanes to bomb the North. Nonetheless, the military put stiff pressure on him to escalate further. In the "paper wars" that followed, Helms at CIA was regularly asked for intelligence reports on military action, e.g., the political effectiveness of bombing Hanoi. The military resented such review of its conduct of the war.[114]

The American strategy had become the pursuit of a war of attrition. The objective was to make the Viet Cong enemy suffer more losses than it could timely replace. Accordingly, the number of combatants fielded by the communist insurgency at any one time was a key factor in determining whether the course of the war was favorable or not. The political pressure on the CIA to conform to the military's figures of enemy casualties became intense. Under Helms CIA reports on the Viet Cong order of battle numbers were usually moderate; CIA also questioned whether the strategy employed by the U.S. Army would ever compel Hanoi to negotiate. Helms himself was evidently sceptical, yet Johnson never asked for his personal opinion. This dispute between Army and CIA over the number of Viet Cong combatants became bitter, and eventually common knowledge in the administration.

According to one source, CIA Director Richard Helms "used his influence with Lyndon Johnson to warn about the growing dangers of U.S. involvement in Vietnam." On the other hand, Stansfield Turner (DCI 1977-1981) describes Helms in his advisory relationship to Lyndon Johnson as being overly loyal to the office of president. Hence, the CIA staff's frank opinions on Vietnam were sometimes modified before reaching President Johnson. At one point the CIA analysts estimated enemy strength at 500,000, while the military insisted it was only 270,000. No amount of discussion could resolve the difference. Eventually, in September 1967, the CIA under Helms went along with the military's lower number for the combat strength of the Vietnamese Communist forces. This led a CIA analyst directly involved in this work to file a formal complaint against DCI Helms, which was accorded due process within the Agency.

Vietnam: Phoenix

As a major element in his counterinsurgency policy, Ngo Dinh Diem (President 1954–1963) had earlier introduced the establishment of strategic hamlets in order to contest Viet Cong operations in the countryside. From several antecedents the controversial Phoenix program was launched during 1967-1968. Various Vietnamese forces (intelligence, military, police, and civilian) were deployed in the field against Viet Cong support networks. The CIA played a key role in its design and leadership, and built on practices developed by Vietnamese, i.e., the provincial chief, Colonel Tran Ngoc Chau.

Yet, CIA was not officially in control of Phoenix, CORDS was. DCI Helms, however, in early 1968 had agreed to allow William Colby to take a temporary leave of absence from the CIA in order to go to Vietnam and lead CORDS, a position with ambassadorial rank. In doing so, Helms personally felt "thoroughly disgusted"... thinking Robert Komer had "put a fast one over on him". Komer was then in charge of the CORDS pacification program in South Vietnam. Recently Helms had promoted Colby to a top CIA post: head of the Soviet Division (before Colby had been running the CIA's Far East Division, which included Vietnam). Now Colby transferred out of CIA, to CORDS to run Phoenix.  Many other Americans worked to monitor and manage the Phoenix program including, according to Helms, "a seemingly ever-increasing number of CIA personnel".

After receiving special Phoenix training, Vietnamese forces in rural areas went head to head against the Viet Cong Infrastructure, e.g., they sought to penetrate communist organizations, to arrest and interrogate or slay their cadres.The Vietnamese conflict resembled a ferocious civil war; the Viet Cong had already assassinated thousands of Vietnamese village leaders. Unfortunately, in its strategy of fighting fire with fire, forces in the Phoenix program used torture, and became entangled in actions involving local and official corruption, resulting in many questionable killings, perhaps thousands. Despite its grave faults, Colby opined that the program did work well enough to stop Viet Cong gains. Colby favorably compared Operation Phoenix with the CIA's relative success in its "secret war" in Laos.

Helms notes that the early efforts of Phoenix "were successful, and of serious concern to the NVN [North Vietnamese] leadership". Helms then goes on to recount the Phoenix program's progressive slide into corruption and counterproductive violence, which came to nullify its early success. Accordingly, by the time it was discontinued Phoenix had become useless in the field and a controversial if not a notorious political liability. Helms in his memoirs presents this situation:

"PHOENIX was directed and staffed by Vietnamese over whom the American advisors and liaison officers did not have command or direct supervision. The American staff did its best to eliminate the abuse of authority—the settling of personal scores, rewarding of friends, summary executions, prisoner mistreatment, false denunciation, illegal property seizure—that became the by-products of the PHOENIX counterinsurgency effort. In the blood-soaked atmosphere created by Viet Cong terrorism, the notion that regulations and directives imposed by foreign liaison officers could be expected to curb revenge and profit-making was unrealistic."[148]

After the war, interviews were conducted with Vietnamese communist leaders and military commanders familiar with the Viet Cong organization, its war-making capacity, and support infrastructure. They said the Phoenix operations were very effective against them, reports Stanley KarnowThomas Ricks, in evaluating the effectiveness of the counterinsurgency tactics of the Marine Corps and of the Phoenix program, confirmed their value by reference to "Hanoi's official history of the war". If one discounts the corrupt criminality and its political fallout, the Phoenix partisans were perhaps better able tactically to confront the elusive Viet Cong support networks, i.e., the sea in which the fish swam, than the regular units of the ARVN and the U. S. Army. Yet the military lessons of the war in full complexity were being understood by the Army, later insisted Colonel Summers.

Regarding the Phoenix legacy, a sinister controversy haunts it. Distancing himself, Helms summarized: "As successful a program as PHOENIX was when guided by energetic local leaders," as a national program it succumbed to political corruption and "failed". Colby admitted serious faults, yet in conclusion found a positive preponderance. "It was not the CIA," writes John Ranelagh, "that was responsible for the excesses of Phoenix (although the agency clearly condoned what was happening)." Author Tim Weinercompares the violent excesses of Phoenix to such associated with the early years of the Second Iraq War.

Johnson withdraws

In America, what became the Vietnam quagmire lost domestic political support, and seriously injured the popularity of the Johnson administration. In the spring of election year 1968, following the unexpected January Tet offensive in Vietnam, the war issue reached a crisis.[163][164] In March Helms prepared yet another special CIA report for the President; he arranged for CIA officer George Carver to present it in person to Johnson. The diminutive Carver was then the CIA's Special Assistant for Vietnam Affairs (SAVA).[165]

Helms writes, "In his typically unvarnished manner, George had presented a bleak but accurate view of the situation and again demonstrated that the NVN strength in South Vietnam was far stronger than had been previously reported by MACV." Carver "closed by saying in effect that not even the President could not tell the American voters on one day that the United States planned to get out of Vietnam, and on the next day tell Ho Chi Minh that we will stick it out for twenty years. With this LBJ rose like a roasted pheasant and bolted from the room." But Johnson soon returned.[166][167][168] Helms described of what happened next.

"The President, who was a foot and a half taller and a hundred pounds heavier than George, struck him a resounding clap on the back and caught his hand in an immense fist. Wrenching George's arm up and down with a pumping motion that might have drawn oil from a dry Texas well, Johnson congratulated him on the briefing, and on his services to the country and its voters. As he released George, he said, 'Anytime you want to talk to me, just pick up the phone and come over.' It was a vintage LBJ performance."[169]

Earlier, a group of foreign policy elders, known as The Wise Men, themselves having first heard from CIA, then confronted Johnson about the difficulty of winning in Vietnam. The President was unprepared to accept their negative findings. "Lyndon Johnson must have considered March 1968 the most difficult month of his political career," wrote Helms later. Eventually this frank advice contributed to Johnson's decision in March to withdraw from the 1968 presidential election.

Nixon Presidency

In the 1968 Presidential election, the Republican nominee Richard M. Nixon triumphed over the Democrat, Vice President Hubert Humphrey. Shortly after the election, President Johnson invited President-Elect Nixon to his LBJ Ranch in Texas for a discussion of current events. There he introduced Nixon to a few members of his inner circle: Dean Rusk at State, Clark Clifford at Defense, Gen. Earle Wheeler, and DCI Richard Helms. Later Johnson in private told Helms that he had represented him to Nixon as a political neutral, "a merit appointment", a career federal official who was good at his job.[173][174]

Nixon then invited Helms to his pre-inauguration headquarters in New York City, where Nixon told Helms that he and J. Edgar Hoover at FBI would be retained as "appointments out of the political arena". Helms expressed his assent that the DCI was a non-partisan position. Evidently, already Nixon had made his plans when chief executive to sharply downgrade the importance of the CIA in his administration, in which case Nixon himself would interact very little with his DCI, e.g., at security meetings.[175][176]

Role of Agency

The ease of access to the President that Helms enjoyed in the Johnson Administration changed dramatically and for the worse with the arrival of President Richard Nixon and Nixon's national security advisorHenry Kissinger. In order to dominate policy, "Nixon insisted on isolating himself" from the Washington bureaucracy he did not trust. His primary gatekeepers were H. R. Haldeman and John Ehrlichman; they screened Nixon from "the face-to-face confrontations he so disliked and dreaded." While thus pushing away even top officials, Nixon started to build policy-making functions inside the White House. From a secure distance he would direct the government and deal with "the outside world, including cabinet members".  Regarding intelligence matters, Nixon appointed Kissinger and his team to convey his instructions to the CIA and sister services. Accordingly, Nixon and Kissinger understood that "they alone would conceive, command, and control clandestine operations. Covert action and espionage could be tools fitted for their personal use. Nixon used them to build a political fortress at the White House."

In his memoirs, Helms writes of his early meeting with Kissinger. "Henry spoke first, advising me of Nixon's edict that effective immediately all intelligence briefings, oral or otherwise, were to come through Kissinger. All intelligence reports? I asked. Yes."  A Senate historian of the CIA observes that "it was Kissinger rather than the DCIs who served as Nixon's senior intelligence advisor. Under Kissinger's direction the NSC became an intelligence and policy staff." Under Nixon's initial plan, Helms was to be excluded even from the policy discussions at the National Security Council (NSC) meetings.

"Very early in the Nixon administration it became clear that the President wanted Henry Kissinger to run intelligence for him and that the National Security Council staff in the White House, under Kissinger, would control the intelligence community. This was the beginning of a shift of power away from the CIA to a new center: the National Security Council staff." 

Stansfield Turner (DCI 1977–1981) describes Nixon as basically being hostile to the CIA, questioning its utility and practical value, based on his low evaluation of the quality of its information. Turner, who served under President Carter, opines that Nixon considered the CIA to be full of elite "liberals" and hence contrary to his policy direction. Helms agreed regarding Nixon's hostility toward the CIA, also saying in a 1988 interview that "Nixon never trusted anybody."[189][190] Yet Helms later wrote:

"Whatever Nixon's views of the Agency, it was my opinion that he was the best prepared to be President of any of those under whom I served-Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson. ...Nixon had the best grasp of foreign affairs and domestic politics. His years as Vice President had served him well."

When Nixon attended NSC meetings, he would often direct his personal animosity and ire directly at Helms, who led an agency Nixon considered overrated, whose proffered intelligence Nixon thought of little use or value, and which had a history of aiding his political enemies, according to Nixon. Helms found it difficult to establish a cordial working relationship to the new President. Ray Cline, former Deputy Director of Intelligence at CIA, wrote how he saw the agency under Helms during the Nixon years:

"Nixon and his principal assistant, Dr. Kissinger, disregarded analytical intelligence except for what was convenient for use by Kissinger's own small personal staff in support of Nixon-Kissinger policies. Incoming intelligence was closely monitored and its distribution controlled by Kissinger's staff to keep it from embarrassing the White House... ." They employed "Helms and the CIA primarily as an instrument for the execution of White House wishes" and did not seem "to understand or care about the carefully structured functions of central intelligence as a whole. ... I doubt that anyone could have done better than Helms in these circumstances." 

Under the changed policies of the Nixon administration, Henry Kissinger in effect displaced the DCI and became "the President's chief intelligence officer". Kissinger writes that, in addition, Nixon "felt ill at ease with Helms personally." 

Domestic Chaos

Under both the Johnson and Nixon administrations, the CIA was tasked with domestic surveillance of protest movements, particularly anti-war activities, which efforts later became called Operation CHAOS.  Investigations were opened on various Americans and their organizations based on the theory that they were funded and/or influenced by foreign actors, especially the Soviet Union and other communist states. The CIA covertly gathered information on Ramparts magazine, many anti-war groups, and others, eventually building thousands of clandestine files on American citizens.[200][201] These CIA activities, if not outright illegal (the declared opinion of critics), were at the margin of legality as the CIA was ostensibly forbidden from domestic spying.  Later in 1974, the Chaos operation became national news, which created a storm of media attention. 

With the sudden rise in America during the mid-1960s of the opposition to the Vietnam War, President Johnson had become suspicious, surmising that foreign communists must be supplying various protest groups with both money and organization skills. Johnson figured an investigation would bring this to light, a project in which the CIA would partner with the FBI. When in 1967 he instructed Helms to investigate, Helms remarked that such activity would involve some risk, as his agency generally was not permitted to conduct such surveillance activity within the national borders. In reply to Helms Johnson said, "I'm quite aware of that." The President then explained that the main focus was to remain foreign. Helms understood the reasons for the president's orders, and the assumed foreign connection. Later apparently, both the Rockefeller Commission and the Church Committee found the initial investigation to be within the CIA's legislative charter, although at the margin.

As a prerequisite to its conduct of the foreign espionage, the CIA was first to secretly develop leads and contacts within the domestic anti-war movement. In the process its infiltrating agents would acquire anti-war bona fides that would provide them some amount of cover when overseas. On that rationale, the CIA commenced activity, which continued for almost seven years. Helms kept the operation hidden, from nearly all agency personnel, in Angleton's counterintelligence office

"Eleven CIA officers grew long hair, learned the jargon of the New Left, and went off to infiltrate peace groups in the United States and Europe. The agency compiled a computer index of 300,000 names of American people and organizations, and extensive files on 7,200 citizens. It began working secretly with police departments all over America. Unable to draw a clear distinction between the far left and the mainstream opposition to the war, it spied on every major organization in the peace movement. At the president's command, transmitted through Helms and the secretary of defense, the National Security Agency turned its immense eavesdropping powers on American citizens."

Yet the CIA found no substantial foreign sources of money or influence. When Helms reported these findings to the President, the reaction was hostile. "LBJ simply could not believe that American youth would on their own be moved to riot in protest against U. S. foreign policy," Helms later wrote.[215] Accordingly, Johnson instructed Helms to continue the search with increased diligence. The Nixon presidency later would act to extend the reach and scope of Chaos and like domestic surveillance activity. In 1969 intra-agency opposition to Chaos arose. Helms worked to finesse his critics. Lawrence Houston, the CIA general counsel, became involved, and Helms wrote an office memorandum to justify the Chaos operation to CIA officers and agents.

Meanwhile, the FBI was reporting a steady stream of data on domestic anti-war and other 'subversive' activity, but the FBI obstinately refused to provide any context or analysis. For the CIA to do such FBI work was considered a clear violation of its charter. Nixon, however, "remained convinced that the domestic dissidence was initiated and nurtured from abroad."  A young lawyer, Tom Charles Huston, was then selected by Nixon in 1970 to manage a marked increase in the surveillance of domestic dissenters and protesters: a multi-agency investigative effort, more thorough and wider in scope. Called the Interagency Committee on Intelligence (ICI), included were the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, and the CIA. It would be "a wholesale assault on the peace and radical movements," according to intelligence writer Thomas Powers. Yet the new scheme was delayed, and then the Watergate scandal 'intervened'. In late 1974, the news media discovered a terminated Operation Chaos.

Soviet Missiles

The Soviet Union developed a new series of long-range missiles, called the SS-9 (NATO codename Scarp). A question developed concerning the extent of their capability to carry nuclear weapons; at issue was whether the missile were a Multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle (MIRV) or not. The CIA information was that these missiles were not 'MIRVed' but Defense intelligence considered that they were of the more potent kind. If so, the Soviet Union was possibly aiming at a first strike nuclear capacity. The Nixon administration, desiring to employ the existence of such Soviet threat to justify a new American antiballistic missile system, publicly endorsed the Defense point of view. Henry Kissinger, Nixon's national security advisor, asked Helms to review the CIA's finding, yet Helms initially stood by his analysts at CIA. Eventually, however, Helms compromised.

Perhaps Helms's most controversial undertaking as CIA chief concerned the subversive efforts to block the socialist programs of Salvador Allende of Chile, actions done at President Nixon's behest. The operation was code-named Project Fubelt. After Allende's victory in the 1970 election, CIA jumped into action with a series of sharp and divisive maneuvers. Nonetheless, Allende was inaugurated as President of Chile. Thereafter, the CIA's efforts markedly declined in intensity, though softer tactics continued. Three years later (11 Sept. 1973) the military coup led by Augusto Pinochet violently ended the then troubled regime of President Allende.[245][246][247]

During the 1970 Chilean presidential election, the USG had sent financial and other assistance to the two candidates opposing Allende, who won anyway.[248][249][250] Helms states that then, on Sept. 15, 1970, he met with President Nixon who ordered the CIA to support an army coup to prevent an already elected Allende from being confirmed as president; it was to be kept secret. "He wanted something done and he didn't care how," Helms later characterized the order.[251][252] The secret, illegal (in Chile) activity ordered by Nixon was termed "track II" to distinguish it from the CIA's covert funding of Chilean "democrats" here called "track I".[253][254][255] Accordingly, the CIA took assorted clandestine steps, including actions to badger a law-abiding Chilean army to seize power. CIA agents were once in communication, but soon broke off such contact, with rogue elements of the country's military who later assassinated the "constitutionally minded" General René Schneider, the Army Commander-in-Chief. Following this criminal violence, the Chilean army's support swung firmly behind Allende, whom the Congress confirmed as President of Chile on November 3, 1970.[256][257] CIA did not intend the killing. "At all times, however, Helms made it plain that assassination was not an option."[258][259] Yet Nixon and Kissinger blamed Helms for Allende's presidency.[256][260]

Thereafter, the CIA funneled millions of dollars to opposition groups, e.g., political parties, the media, and striking truck drivers, in a continuing, long-term effort to destabilize Chile's economy and so subvert the Allende administration. Nixon's initial, memorable phrase for such actions had been "to make the Chilean economy scream". Even so, according to DCI Helms, "In my remaining months in office, Allende continued his determined march to the left, but there was no further effort to instigate a coup in Chile." Helms here appears to parse between providing funds for Allende's political opposition ("track I") versus actually supporting a military overthrow ("track II").[262]Although in policy disagreement with Nixon, Helms assumed the role of the "good soldier" in following his presidential instructions. Helms left office at the CIA on February 2, 1973, seven months before the coup d'etat in Chile.

Another account of CIA activity in Chile, however, states that during this period 1970-1973 the CIA worked diligently to propagandize the military into countenancing a coup, e.g., the CIA supported and cultivated rightists in the formerly "constitutionally minded" army to start thinking 'outside the box', i.e., to consider a coup d'etat. Thus, writes author Tim Weiner, while not per se orchestrating the 1973 coup, the CIA worked for years, employing economic and other means, to seduce the army into doing so. Allende's own actions may have caused relations with his army to become uneasy.[ The CIA sowed "political and economic chaos in Chile" which set the stage for a successful coup, Weiner concludes. Hence, Helms's careful parsing appears off the mark. Yet views and opinions differ, e.g., Henry Kissinger contests, what William Colby in part acknowledges.

After Helms' departure from the CIA in early 1973, Nixon continued to work directly against the Allende regime.Although elected with 36.3% of the vote (to 34.9% for runner-up in a three-way contest), Allende as President reportedly ignored the Constitución de 1925 in pursuit of his socialist policies, namely, ineffective projects which proved very unpopular and polarizing. Yet the military junta's successful September 1973 coup d'etat was double-down unconstitutional, and very dirty. Thousands of citizens were eventually killed and tens of thousands were held as political prisoners, many being tortured. The civil violence of the military coup provoked widespread international censure.

RN: Watergate

Immediately after Nixon's re-election in 1972, he called for all appointed officials in his administration to resign; Nixon here sought to gain more personal control over the federal government. Helms did not consider his position at CIA to be a political job, which was the traditional view within the Agency, and so did not resign as DCI. Previously, on election day Helms had lunch with General Alexander Haig, a top Nixon security advisor; Haig didn't know Nixon's mind on the future at CIA. Evidently neither did Henry Kissinger, Helms discovered later. On November 20, Helms came to Camp David to an interview with Nixon about what he thought was a "budgetary matter". Nixon's chief of staffH. R. Haldeman also attended. Helms was then informed by Nixon that his services in the new administration would not be required.[302] On Helms' dismissal William Colby (DCI Sept. 1973 to Jan. 1976) later commented that "Dick Helms paid the price for that 'No' [to the White House over Watergate]."

In the course of this discussion, Nixon learned or was reminded that Helms was a career civil servant, not a political appointee. Apparently spontaneously, Nixon then offered him the ambassadorship to the Soviet Union. After shortly considering it, Helms declined, wary of the potential consequences of the offer, considering his career in intelligence. "I'm not sure how the Russians might interpret my being sent across the lines as an ambassador," Helms remembers telling Nixon. Instead Helms proposed being sent to Iran. Nixon assented. Among other things Nixon perhaps figured Helms, after managing CIA's long involvement in Iranian affairs, would be capable in addressing issues arising out of Nixon's recent policy decision conferring on the Shah his new role as "policeman of the Gulf".

Helms also suggested that since he could retire when he turned 60, he might voluntarilly do so at the end of March. So it was agreed, apparently. But instead the event came without warning as Helms was abruptly dismissed when James R. Schlesinger was named the new DCI on February 2, 1973.[

"The timing caught me by surprise. I had barely enough time to get my things out of the office and to assemble as many colleagues of all ranks as possible for a farewell. ... [¶] A few days later, I encountered Haldeman. "What happened to our understanding that my exit would be postponed for a few weeks?" I asked. "Oh, I guess we forgot," he said with the faint trace of a smile. [¶] And so it was over.

After Helms left the leadership of the CIA, he began his service as U.S. ambassador to Iran as designated by President Nixon. This had caused the dismissal of the then current ambassador, Joseph Farland. After being confirmed by the Senate, in April 1973 Helms proceeded to his new residence in Tehran, where he served as the American representative until resigning effective January 1977. During these years, however, his presence was often required in Washington, where he testified before Congress in hearings about past CIA activities, including Watergate. His frequent flights to America lessened somewhat his capacity to attend to being ambassador.

At the Shah's court

"The presentation of ambassadorial credentials to the Shah was a rather formal undertaking," reads a photograph caption in Helms' memoirs, which shows him in formal attire, standing before the Shah who is dressed in military uniform. Yet already Helms enjoyed an elite student experience which he shared with the Shah: circa 1930, both had attended Le Rosey, a French-language prep school in Switzerland.[317] Decades later the CIA station chief in Iran first introduced Helms to the Shah. Helms was there about an installation to spy on the Soviets.[318] "I had first met the Shah in 1957 when I visited Tehran to negotiate permission to place some sophisticated intercept equipment in northern Iran."[319]

A "celebrated" story was told in elite circles about Helms' appointment. The Soviet ambassador had said with a sneer, to Amir Abbas Hoveyda the Shah's prime minister, "We hear the Americans are sending their Number One spy to Iran." Hoveyda replied, "The Americans are our friends. At least they don't send us their Number Ten spy." Helms, for his part, referred to Hoveyda as "Iran's most consummate politician."

For many years, the CIA had operated extensive technical installations to monitor Soviet air traffic across Iran's northern border. Also the CIA, along with Mossad and USAID, since the early 1950s had trained and supported the controversial Iranian intelligence and police agency SAVAK.Further from 1972 to 1975 the CIA was involved in assisting Iran with its project to support the Kurdish struggle against Iraq. As a result of this security background and official familiarity with the government of Iran, Helms figured that as the American ambassador he could "hit the ground running" when he started work in Tehran.

Long before Helms arrived in country his embassy, and other western embassies as well, entertained an "almost uncritical approval of the Shah. He was a strong leader, a reformer who appreciated the needs of his people and who had a vision of a developed, pro-Western, anti-Communist, prosperous Iran." The Shah remained an ally. "Too much had been invested in the Shah—by European nations as well as by the U.S.—for any real changes in policy." Helms inspected and adjusted the security provided for the embassy, which was located in the city on 25-acres with high walls. A CIA agent accompanied Helms wherever he went. The usual ambassador's car was "a shabby beige Chevrolet" with armor-plating. There was "the traditional ambassador's big black Cadillac, with the flag flying from the front fender" but Helms used it only once, accompanied by his wife.

The ruler and Iran

Most important for his effectiveness would be to establish a good working relationship with the ruler. All the while, the Shah's terminal illness of prostate cancer remained a well-kept secret from everyone. Helms found himself satisfied with his "as much as might be asked for" dealings with the Shah. The monarch was notorious for an "I speak, you listen" approach to dialogue. Yet Helms describes lively conversations with "polite give-and-take" in which the Shah never forgot his majesty; these discussions could end with an agreement to disagree. The Shah allowed that they by happenstance might meet at a social function and then "talk shop". Usually they met in private offices, the two alone, where it was "tête à tête with no note-takers or advisors."

British author and journalist William Shawcross several times makes the point that the Shah prohibited foreign governments from any contact with his domestic political opposition. Replying to one such request for access, by the Secretary-General of the United Nations, an 'irritated' Shah had replied, "I will not have any guest of mine waste a moment on these ridiculous people." As with other ambassadors before and during his tenure, Helms was reluctant to cross the Shah on this point, because of the fear of "being PNG'ed (made persona non grata)." For any ambassador to do so "would at the very least have jeopardized his country's export opportunities in Iran." Consequently, "American and other diplomats swam in a shallow pool of courtiers, industrialists, lawyers, and others who were somehow benefiting from the material success of the regime. ¶ ... people more or less licensed by the Shah." About the immediate court, however, a U.N. official wrote, "There was an atmosphere of overwhelming nouveau-riche, meretricious chi-chi and sycophancy ..." Helms himself managed to circulate widely among the traditional elites, e.g., becoming a "close friend" of the aristocrat Ahmad Goreishi.

The Shah's policy of keeping foreign agents and officials away from his domestic foes applied equally to the CIA. In fact, the Agency remained somewhat uninformed about his foes, but for what information SAVAK (Iran's state security) gave it. The CIA evidently did not even closely monitor the Shah's activities. During Helms' last year this situation was being reviewed, but State seemed complacent and willing to rely on the Shah's soliloquies and its own diplomatic queries. While Helms' 'notorious' connection to the CIA might have been considered an asset by the Shah and his circle, many Iranians viewed the American embassy and its spy Agency as distressing reminders of active foreign meddling in their country's affairs, and of the CIA's 1953 coup against the civil democrat Mohammad Mossadegh. "[F]ew politically minded Iranians doubted that the American embassy was deeply involved in Iranian domestic politics and in promoting particular individuals or agendas" including actions by "the CIA station chief in Tehran".

Events and views

During his first year as ambassador, Helms had fielded the American and Iranian reaction to the 1973 Arab oil embargo and consequent price hikes following the Yom Kippur War. Immediately, Helms made requests to the Shah regarding fueling favors for the United States Navy near Bandar Abbas. Subsequently, the Shah, flush with increased oil revenue, had placed huge orders for foreign imports and American military hardware, e.g., high performance warplanes. Helms wrote in his memoirs, "Foreign businessmen flooded Tehran. Few had any knowledge of the country; fewer could speak a word of Persian." Tens of thousands of foreign commercial agents, technicians and experts, took up temporary residence. "There is no doubt [the Shah] tried to go too fast. Which led to the ports' congestion and the overheating of the economy," Helms later commented. The 'oil bonanza' followed by the rapid expenditure of 'petrodollars' led to an accelerated corruption involving enormous sums

In March 1975 Helms learned the Shah alone had negotiated a major agreement with Saddam Hussein of Iraq while in Algiers at an OPEC meeting. There the Algerian head of state Houari Boumedienne had translated the Shah's French into Arabic for the negotiation. As part of the deal, the Shah had disowned, quit his support for the Kurdish struggle in Iraq. The resulting treaty was evidently a surprise to the Shah's own ministers, as well as to Helms and the USG. As a result, the CIA also abandoned the Kurds, whose struggling people became another of those stateless nations who would remember with "regret and bitterness" their dealings with the Agency.

Helms articulated several understandings, derived from his working knowledge and experiences as ambassador in Iran. "He came to realize that he could never understand the Iranians," writes William Shawcross. He quotes Helms, "They have a very different turn of mind. Here would be ladies, dressed in Parisian clothes. ... But before they went on trips abroad, they would ship up to Mashhad in chadors to ask for protection." Helms with his wife had visited the pilgrimage site in Mashhad, 'the tomb of the eighth Imam'. As to the Shah's statecraft, Helms' May 1976 memo observes, "Iranian government and society are highly structured and authoritarian and all major decisions are made at the top. Often even relatively senior officials are not well informed about policies and plans and have little influence on them."[355] In July 1976 Helms send a message to State which, while confident, again voiced various concerns, e.g., about the "inadequate 'political institutionalization'" of the regime.  Professor Abbas Milani comments that in 1975 Helms had "captured the nature of the Shah's vulnerability when he wrote that 'the conflict between rapid economic growth and modernization vis-à-vis a still autocratic rule' was the greatest uncertainty about the Shah's future." Milani, looking ahead after Helms' departure, writes that the election of President Carter in 1976 "forced the Shah to expedite his liberalization plans."

During the course of his service as ambassador, Helms had dealt with the 1973 oil crisis and Iran's oil bonanza, and the Shah's 1975 deal with Iraq and abandonment of the Kurds. In 1976 Secretary of State Kissinger visited Iran. He agreed to Helms' plan to resign as ambassador before the Presidential election. Helms submitted his resignation to President Ford in the middle of October. Meanwhile, the grand jury sitting in Washington had "shifted the focus of its investigation" about past activities of the CIA.

Secrets: policy, politics

In mid-1970s America, an emerging public attitude had become mainstream. Consequently, politicians no longer deigned to countenance a blanket exception to "what-might-be-questionable" CIA activities. With regard to the application of the Constitution, henceforth all USG agencies were expected to conform explicitly to usual principles of transparency. Earlier, Helms had given testimony about prior clandestine CIA actions in Chile, at a time when he considered that older, pre-existing, informal understandings concerning the CIA still prevailed in Congress. This testimony was later judged under the new rules, which led to his perjury indictment in a court of law. His advocates thus claimed that Helms was unfairly held to a form of double standard.

Year of intelligence

During the 1960s and 1970s, there was a dramatic, fundamental shift in American society generally, which profoundly affected public political behavior. Elected officials were compelled to confront new constituents with new attitudes. In particular, for the Central Intelligence Agency, the societal change altered notions of what was considered 'politically acceptable conduct'. In the early cold war period, the Agency had been somewhat exempt from normal standards of accountability, so that it could employ its special espionage and covert capacities against what was understood as an amoral communist enemy. At times during this period, the CIA operated under a cloak of secrecy, where it met the ideological foe in a gray-and-black world. In that era, normal Congressional oversight was informally modified to block unwanted public scrutiny, which might be useful to the enemy.

An immediate cause of the surge in Congressional oversight activity may be sourced in the American people's loss of confidence in the USG due to the Watergate scandal. Also, the apparent distortions and dishonesty concerning the reported progress of the war in Vietnam gravely eroded the public's previous tendency to put its trust in the word of USG officials. Evidence published in 1971 had demonstrated "systemized abuse of power" by J. Edgar Hoover, the FBI director. The September 1973 overthrow of a democratically elected government in Chile ultimately revealed earlier CIA involvement there. Other factors contributed to the political unease, e.g., the prevalence of conspiracy theories about the Kennedy assassination, and the emergence of whistleblowers. Accordingly, the Central Intelligence Agency, which was tangentially involved in Watergate, and which had been directly engaged in the Vietnam conflict from the beginning, became a subject of Congressional inquiry and media interest. Helms, of course, had served as head of the CIA, 1965–73. Eventually the process of scrutiny opened a secret pandora's box of questionable CIA activities.

First, the Senate, in order to investigate charges of political malfeasance in the 1972 presidential election, had created the select Watergate Committee, chaired by Senator Sam Ervin. Later, independent press discovery of the CIA's domestic spying, (Operation Chaos), created national headlines. Thereafter, a long list of questionable CIA activities surfaced which caught the public's attention, and were nicknamed the family jewels. Both the Senate, (January 1975), and the House, (February 1975), created select committees to investigate intelligence matters. Senator Frank Church headed one, and Representative Otis Pike headed the other. In an effort to head off such inquiries, President Gerald Ford had already created a Commission chaired by Vice President Nelson Rockefeller, whose seminal interest was the CIA's recent foray into collecting intelligence on Americans. 1975 would become known as the "Year of Intelligence".

Before Congress

Helms testified in appearances before Congress many times during his long career. After he left the CIA in 1973, however, he entered an extraordinary period in which he was frequently called to testify before Congressional committees. While serving as ambassador to Iran (1973–1977), Helms was required to travel from Tehran to Washington sixteen times, thirteen in order to give testimony "before various official bodies of investigation" including the President's Rockefeller Commission. Among the Congressional committee hearings where Helms appeared were the Senate Watergate, the Senate Church,  the Senate Intelligence, the Senate Foreign Relations, the Senate Armed Services, the House Pike, the House Armed Services, and the House Foreign Affairs

As a long-time professional practitioner, Helms held strong views concerning the proper functioning of an intelligence agency. Highly valued was the notion of maintaining state security by keeping sensitive state secrets away from an enemy's probing awareness. Secrecy was held to be an essential, utilitarian virtue, of great value to the government. It was necessary in the conduct of both surreptitious information gathering, i.e., espionage, and in covert operations, i.e., the reputed ability to directly intervene by stealth in the course of political events. Consequently, Helms became utterly dismayed at the various investigations of USG intelligence agencies, especially when they resulted in the publication or broadcast of classified information, highly sensitive, that had previously remained secret. For example, among the information divulged were facts that exposed Richard Welch, the CIA station chief in Athens, who was subsequently murdered. At points during the many hours of testimony given by Helms before Congress, his frustration and irritation with the direction of the proceedings are clearly discernible.

In testifying before Congress, both former DCIs John McCone and Richard Helms were informed beforehand by a CIA officer as to what documents Congress had been given and hence the probable contours of its knowledge. According to author Thomas Powers, both McCone and Helms could thus tailor their testimony so as to limit the scope of discussion to matter already known by the committee. Such stance of institutional loyalty to their agency showed through in their demeanor.

"From these characteristic evasions, lapses of memory, hints, and suggestions the [Church] committee and its staff concluded that the men they questioned, including Helms, knew more than they would say. Then why did many of them grow to trust Helms? For the simple reason that he never tried to convince them they knew all there was to know, when they did not."

Yet Helms' testimony, which made headlines, for the most part amounted to a circumspect, professional defense of the agency. It was rather the testimony of William Colby the current DCI that had more lasting import and created greater controversy. Colby also sparked division within the CIA. Helms parted ways with Colby as a result, and especially regarding Colby's delicate role in the perjury allegations against him.

Plea, aftermath

An especially thorny issue concerned the interpretation of the secrecy which the CIA had previously enjoyed. According to its agents, the CIA's mandate included not only access to state secrets, but also the commission of clandestine acts in furtherance of USG policy, as ordered from time to time by the President. Consequently, the CIA had a primary duty to protect such secrets and to refrain from public discussion of any covert activity. An area of conflict arose when this CIA duty of confidentiality to the President came into direct conflict with the Agency's duty to respond honestly to legislative investigations of the executive branch authorized by the Constitution. Up until then, such potential conflict had been negotiated by quiet understandings between Congress and the CIA.

For Helms, the potential conflict became manifest with regard to his 1973 testimony about secret CIA activity during 1970 in Chile, ordered by President Nixon. At some point, the recorded facts of Helms's testimony ostensibly moved to territory outside the perimeters of the previously prevailing quiet and confidential understandings with Congress, and entered an arena in which new and different rules applied: those of transparency.

In late 1972, Nixon had appointed Helms as Ambassador to Iran. During his confirmation hearings before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in February, 1973, Helms was questioned concerning the CIA's earlier role in Chile. Because these past operations were then still effectively a state secret, and because the Senate hearings were public events, Helms, following past Congressional understandings with the CIA, in effect, denied that the CIA had, in 1970, aided the Chilean opponents of President-elect Allende.

After Nixon's 1974 resignation, information uncovered in 1975 by the 


James Rodney Schlesinger CIA Director 1973
 



James Rodney Schlesinger (February 15, 1929 – March 27, 2014) was an American economist and public servantwho was best known for serving as Secretary of Defense from 1973 to 1975 under Presidents Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. He became America's first Secretary of Energy under Jimmy Carter.

While Secretary of Defense, he opposed amnesty for draft resisters and pressed for development of more sophisticated nuclear weapon systems. Additionally, his support for the A-10 and the lightweight fighter program (later the F-16) helped ensure that they were carried to completion.

James Rodney Schlesinger was born in New York City, the son of Jewish parents, Rhea Lillian (née Rogen) and Julius Schlesinger. His mother was a Lithuanian emigrant from what was then part of the Russian Empire and his father's family was from Austria. He converted to Lutheranism in his early 20s. Schlesinger was educated at the Horace Mann School and Harvard University, where he earned a B.A. (1950), M.A. (1952), and Ph.D. (1956) in economics. Between 1955 and 1963 he taught economics at the University of Virginia and in 1960 published The Political Economy of National Security. In 1963, he moved to the Rand Corporation, where he worked until 1969, in the later years as director of strategic studies.

Nixon Administration

Then Chairman Schlesinger with Nixon in September 1971

In 1969, Schlesinger joined the Nixon administration as assistant director of the Bureau of the Budget,[5] devoting most of his time to Defense matters. In 1971, President Nixon appointed Schlesinger a member of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) and designated him as chairman. Serving in this position for about a year and a half, Schlesinger instituted extensive organizational and management changes in an effort to improve the AEC's regulatory performance. On February 2, 1973, he became Director of Central Intelligence.



William Egan Colby CIA Director _ 1973 to 1976
 
 

William Egan Colby (January 4, 1920 – April 27, 1996) spent a career in intelligence for the United States, culminating in holding the post of the Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) from September 1973 to January 1976.

During World War II Colby served with the Office of Strategic Services. After the war he joined the newly created Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Before and during the Vietnam War, Colby served as chief of station in Saigon, chief of the CIA's Far East Division, and head of the Civil Operations and Rural Development effort, as well as overseeing the Phoenix Program. After Vietnam, Colby became director of central intelligence and during his tenure, under intense pressure from the United States Congress and the media, adopted a policy of relative openness about U.S. intelligence activities to the Senate Church Committee and House Pike Committee. Colby served as DCI under President Richard Nixon and President Gerald Ford and was replaced with future president George H. W. Bush on January 30, 1976

William Egan Colby was born in Saint Paul, Minnesota, in 1920. His father, Elbridge Colby, who came from a New England family with a history of military and public service, was a professor of English, an author, and a military officer who served in the Army and in university positions in Tientsin, China; Georgia; Vermont; and Washington, D.C. Though a career officer, Elbridge Colby's professional pursuits focused less on strictly military activities and more on intellectual and scholarly contributions to military and literary subjects. Elbridge's father, Charles Colby, had been a professor of chemistry at Columbia University but had died prematurely, leaving his family largely without money. William's mother, Margaret Egan, was from an Irish family in St. Paul active in business and Democratic politics. With his Army father, William Colby had a peripatetic upbringing before attending public high school in Burlington, Vermont, and then Princeton University, graduating in 1940 and entering Columbia Law School the following year. Colby recounted that he took from his parents a desire to serve and a commitment to liberal politics, Catholicism, and independence, exemplified by his father's career-damaging protest in The Nation magazine regarding the lenient treatment of a white Georgian who had murdered a black U.S. soldier also based at Ft. Benning

Colby was for most of his life a staunch Roman Catholic.[ He was often referred to as "the warrior–priest". He married Barbara Heinzen (1920–2015) in 1945 and they had five children. The Catholic Church played a "central role" in the family's life, with Colby's two daughters receiving their First Communion at St. Peter's Basilica. In 1984, he divorced Barbara and married Democratic diplomat Sally Shelton-Colby.

Office of Strategic Services

Following his first year at Columbia, in 1941 Colby volunteered for active duty with the United States Army and served with the Office of Strategic Services (OSS)N as a "Jedburgh", or special operator, trained to work with resistance forces in occupied Europe to harass German and Axis forces. During World War II, he parachuted behind enemy lines twice and earned the Silver Star as well as commendations from Norway, France, and Great Britain. In his first mission he deployed to France as a Jedburgh commanding Team BRUCE, in mid-August 1944, and operated with the Maquis until he joined up with Allied forces later that fall. In April 1945, he led the NORSO Group into Norway on a sabotage mission to destroy railway lines, in an effort to hinder German forces in Norway from reinforcing the final defense of Germany.

After the war, Colby graduated from Columbia Law School and then briefly practiced law in William J. Donovan's New York firm. Bored by the practice of law and inspired by his liberal beliefs, he moved to Washington to work for the National Labor Relations Board.

Central Intelligence Agency

Post War Europe

Then an OSS friend offered him a job at the CIA, and Colby accepted. Colby spent the next 12 years in the field, first in StockholmSweden. There, he helped set up the stay-behind networks of Operation Gladio, a covert paramilitary organization organized by the CIA to make any Soviet occupation more difficult, as he later described in his memoirs.

Colby then spent much of the 1950s based in Rome, under cover as a State Department officer,[5] where he led the Agency's covert political operations campaign to support anti-Communist parties in their electoral contests against left wingSoviet Union–associated parties. The Christian Democrats and allied parties won several key elections in the 1950s, preventing a takeover by the Communist Party. Colby was a vocal advocate within the CIA and the United States government for engaging the non-Communist left wing parties in order to create broader non-Communist coalitions capable of governing fractious Italy; this position first brought him into conflict with James J. Angleton.

Vietnam, SE Asia

In 1959 Colby became the CIA's deputy chief and then chief of station in SaigonSouth Vietnam, where he served until 1962. Tasked by CIA with supporting the government of Ngo Dinh Diem, Colby established a relationship with President Diem's family and with Ngo Ngô Đình Nhu, the president's brother, with whom Colby became close.[5] While in Vietnam, Colby focused intensively on building up Vietnamese capabilities to combat the Viet Cong insurgency in the countryside. He argued that "the key to the war in Vietnam was the war in the villages." In 1962 he returned to Washington to become the deputy and then chief of CIA's Far East Division, succeeding Desmond Fitzgerald, who had been tapped to lead the Agency's efforts against Castro's Cuba. During these years Colby was deeply involved in Washington's policies in East Asia, particularly with respect to Vietnam, as well as Indonesia, Japan, Korea, and China. He was deeply critical of the decision to abandon support for Diem, and he believed this played a material part in the weakening of the South Vietnamese position in the years following.

In 1968, while Colby was preparing to take up the post of chief of the Soviet Bloc Division of the Agency, President Johnson instead sent Colby back to Vietnam as deputy to Robert Komer, who had been charged with streamlining the civilian side of the American and South Vietnamese efforts against the Communists. Shortly after arriving Colby succeeded Komer as head of the U.S./South Vietnamese rural pacification effort named CORDS. Part of the effort was the controversial Phoenix Program, an initiative designed to identify and attack the "Viet Cong Infrastructure." There is considerable debate about the merits of the program, which was subject to allegations that it relied on or was complicit in assassination and torture. Colby, however, consistently insisted that such tactics were not authorized by or permitted in the program.

More broadly, along with Ambassador Ellsworth Bunker and Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV) commander General Creighton Abrams, Colby was part of a leadership group that worked to apply a new approach to the war designed to focus more on pacification (winning hearts and minds) and securing the countryside as opposed to the "search and destroy" approach that had characterized General William Westmoreland's tenure as MACV commander.[9] Some, including Colby later in life, argue that this approach succeeded in reducing the Communist insurgency in South Vietnam, but that South Vietnam, without air and ground support by the United States after the 1973 Paris Peace Accords, was ultimately overwhelmed by a conventional North Vietnamese assault in 1975. The CORDS model and its approach influenced U.S. strategy and thinking on counterinsurgency in the 2000s in Iraq and Afghanistan.

CIA HQ: Director

Colby returned to Washington in 1971 and became executive director of CIA. After long-time DCI Richard Helms was dismissed by President Nixon in 1973, James Schlesinger assumed the helm at the Agency. A strong believer in reform of the CIA and the intelligence community more broadly, Schlesinger had written a 1971 Bureau of the Budget report outlining his views on the subject. Colby, who had had a somewhat unorthodox career in the CIA focused on political action and counterinsurgency, agreed with Schlesinger's reformist approach. Schlesinger appointed him head of the clandestine branch in early 1973. When Nixon reshuffled his agency heads and made Schlesinger secretary of defense, Colby emerged as a natural candidate for DCI—apparently on the basis of the recommendation that he was a professional who would not make waves. Colby was known as a media-friendly CIA director. His tenure as DCI, which lasted two and a half tumultuous years, was overshadowed by the Church and Pike congressional investigations into alleged U.S. intelligence malfeasance over the preceding 25 years, including 1975, the so-called Year of Intelligence.

Colby's time as DCI was also eventful on the world stage. Shortly after he assumed leadership, the Yom Kippur War broke out, an event that surprised not only the American intelligence agencies but also the Israelis. This intelligence surprise reportedly affected Colby's credibility with the Nixon administration. Colby participated in the National Security Council meetings that responded to apparent Soviet intentions to intervene in the war by raising the alert level of U.S. forces to DEFCON 3 and defusing the crisis. In 1975, after many years of involvement, South Vietnam fell to Communist forces in April 1975, a particularly difficult blow for Colby, who had dedicated so much of his life and career to the American effort there. Events in the arms-control field, Angola, Australia, the Middle East, and elsewhere also demanded attention.

Colby also focused on internal reforms within the CIA and the intelligence community. He attempted to modernize what he believed to be some out-of-date structures and practices by disbanding the Board of National Estimates and replacing it with the National Intelligence Council.

 In a speech from 1973 addressed to NSAemployees he emphasised the role of free speech in USA and moral role of CIA as defender, not preventer of civil rights. He also mentioned a number of reforms intended to limit excessive classification of governmental information.[13]

President Ford, advised by Henry Kissinger and others concerned by Colby's controversial openness to Congress and distance from the White House, replaced Colby late in 1975 with George H. W. Bush during the so-called Halloween Massacre in which Secretary of Defense Schlesinger was also replaced (by Donald Rumsfeld). Colby was offered the position of United States Permanent Representative to NATO but turned it down.

After the CIAIn 1977 Colby founded a D.C. law firm—Colby, Miller & Hanes, with Marshall Miller, David Hanes, and associated lawyers, and worked on public policy issues. In consonance with his long-held liberal views, Colby became a supporter of the nuclear freeze and of reductions in military spending. He practiced law and advised various bodies on intelligence matters.

During this period he also wrote two books, both of which were memoirs of his professional life combined with discussions of history and policy. One was titled Honorable Men: My Life in the CIA; the other, on Vietnam and his long involvement with American policy there, was called Lost Victory. In the latter book, Colby argued that the U.S.–RVN counterinsurgency campaign in Vietnam had succeeded by the early 1970s and that South Vietnam could have survived had the U.S. continued to provide support after the Paris Accords. Though the topic remains open and controversial, some recent scholarship, including by Lewis "Bob" Sorley, supports Colby's arguments.

Colby also lent his expertise and knowledge, along with Oleg Kalugin, to the Activision game Spycraft: The Great Game, which was released shortly before his death. Both Colby and Kalugin played themselves in the game.

William E. Colby was a member of the National Coalition to Ban Handguns. His name appears on a note to Senator John Heinz dated July 5, 1989 as a "National Sponsor".

Death

On April 27, 1996, Colby set out from his weekend home in Rock Point, Maryland on a solo canoe trip.[14] His canoe was found the following day on a sandbar in the Wicomico River, a tributary of the Potomac, approximately a quarter mile from his home.On May 6, Colby's body was found in a marshy riverbank lying facedown not far from where his canoe was found. After an autopsy, Maryland's Chief Medical Examiner John E. Smialek ruled his death to be accidental.Smialek's report noted that Colby was predisposed to having a heart attack or stroke due to "severe calcified atherosclerosis" and that Colby likely "suffered a complication of this atherosclerosis which precipitated him into the cold water in a debilitated state and he succumbed to the effects of hypothermia and drowned".

Colby's death triggered conspiracy theories that his death was due to foul play. In his 2011 documentary The Man Nobody Knew, Colby's son Carl suggested that his father suffered from guilt due to his actions in the CIA and committed suicide.[ Carl's step-mother and siblings, as well as Colby's biographer Randall Woods, criticized Carl's portrayal of William Colby, and rejected the allegation that the former CIA director killed himself as inconsistent with his character.[19][20]

Legacy

Colby was the subject of a biography, Lost Crusader, by John Prados, published in 2003. His son, Carl Colby, released a documentary on his father's professional and personal life, The Man Nobody Knew, in 2011.[ In May 2013, Randall B. Woods, Distinguished Professor of History at the J. William Fulbright School at the University of Arkansas, published his biography of Colby, titled Shadow Warrior: William Egan Colby and the CIA. Norwich University hosts an annual writers symposium named in his honor.







Western State Sponsored Terrorism:

False Flags Spreading Islamophobia, Race and Religious Wars and New World Disorder

By Joachim Hagopian

December 25, 2015

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/12/joachim-hagopian/new-world-disorder-2/

LewRockwell.comanti-stateanti-warpro-market

“The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened”.  – Josef Stalin

Western national governments using their intelligence communities to collectively manufacture, orchestrate and stage violent world events promoting their endless war on terror and then employing their bought and paid for MSM propagandists to subsequently shape public opinion and perception has increasingly been the twenty-first century’s go-to menu utilized by the powers-that-shouldn’t-be. This presentation will provide a dot connecting overview that examines this unfolding process in detail showing how the US government and its Western vassals have deployed the Hegelian Dialectic to systematically create crises, and then implement a so called solution in order to gain maximum control over the global population to divide and rule the planet. Ultimately the globalists’ objective behind all these disturbing events and developments is leading humanity towards their New World Order tyranny of a one world government.

The biggest pivotal game changer since the JFK assassination has been 9/11, when a handful of powerful Zionist neocons in Washington deploying CIA, FBI and Pentagon collaborators worked directly with Israel and its Mossad along with Saudi intelligence to cold-bloodedly murder 3000 Americans in their much needed “new Pearl Harbor” event in order to pull off the manufactured launch of their war on terror. With the deep Bush-bin Laden family connection going way back as both business and terrorist crime partners, globalist George Bush senior then acting as CIA director and Jimmy Carter’s foreign security advisor-fellow globalist Zbigniew Brzezinski employed a rag-tag group of Saudi Wahhabis called the mujahedeen to fight as US proxy terrorists against an overextended Soviet Army in the notorious empire graveyard Afghanistan in the late 1970’s. Brzezinski went on public record bragging that he had enticed President Carter to “sign the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul” a full half year ahead of the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in December 1979. That’s how callous the psychopathic architects of war are to think nothing of starting a proxy war that lasts a decade and kills a million Afghans. Thus the bloody origins of this unholy marriage between US Empire of Chaos and its proxy war ally the Islamic jihadists still going stronger than ever today can be traced as far back as June 1979.

Playing the same demonic mastermind role that Dick Cheney later commanded during George W’s reign of terror as the real power behind the executive throne, throughout Reagan’s 1980’s then Vice President George Bush was busily funding, arming and training Islamic extremists led by up and coming Osama bin Laden to ultimately defeat and help destroy the crumbling Soviet Empire. Bush was also the central figure behind the Iran Contra scandal coordinating the enormous CIA cocaine smuggling operation that financed arms supplied to Central American death squads that the actor in the White House affectionately called his “freedom fighters.”

Next came redeployment of Osama’s al Qaeda brand of terrorism again acting as US proxy mercenaries throughout the Bush-Clinton years of the 1990’s to help balkanize Yugoslavia into a half dozen broken pieces. Enter the neocons think tank Project for a New American Century (PNAC) formed in 1997 and its treatise “Rebuilding America’s Defense” that became their “Mein Kampf” playbook on how to conquer and control the world. Thus the stage could be set to create the fabricated storyline of Osama bin Laden “directing” from his Afghan cave his “vast” al Qaeda network of terrorists to act once again as CIA hired guns posing as the 9/11 box cutting patsies. For decades al Qaeda as a US terrorist creation has served the exact same purpose that Islamic State’s been providing Empire the last three plus years in Syria as America’s number one anti-Assad proxy war ally.

Thus by the time the manufactured attacks on the Pentagon and Twin Towers went down in September 2001, Washington had already been maintaining an enduring, cozily active partnership with Islamic terrorists for more than two decades, nearly twice as long as the DC cabal’s secret partners-in-crime relationship with al Qaeda/Islamic State since 9/11. And now at this very late hour with 2016 knocking on our door, Americans need to urgently realize and ultimately accept that key policymakers in our own treasonous crime syndicate government have been in bed with terrorists since they created their Frankenstein monster nearly four decades agoTo this very day the criminals in Washington and the West have misused Islam as their scapegoat to turn ignorant, dumbed down Westerners against Muslims worldwide in order to promote a war that never ends for the benefit of the ruling elite, its central banking cabal, the military industrial complex, the security-prison industrial complex and the pathway towards a one world government. Manufactured wars manufacture failed state wastelands in the Middle East and North Africa that in turn manufacture mass migration crises in the West while manufacturing cold war 2 hostilities against Russia and China manufactures the pretext for WWIII – all by globalist design to implement New World Order tyranny.

Every false flag event of the twenty-first century involves state sponsored terrorism, including all the most deadly mass shootings and bombings carried out in both North America and Europe. 20-year Marine Corps military intelligence and CIA officer David Steelehad this to say in a TV interview earlier this year:

Most terrorists are false flag terrorists, or are created by our own security services. In the United States, every single terrorist incident we have had has been a false flag, or has been an informant pushed on by the FBI. In fact, we now have citizens taking out restraining orders against FBI informants that are trying to incite terrorism. We’ve become a lunatic asylum.

The CIA and FBI operate as rogue forces unto themselves regularly engineering false flag shootings like the one earlier this month in San Bernardino. The US used the international intelligence community to pull off last month’s false flag in Paris. The elite’s public servant puppets are traitors betraying the trust of their own citizenry by using national security and counterterrorism as their standardized excuse to enslave the Western population enforcing draconian laws obliterating our freedom, civil liberties and rights to privacy. Though most Westerners might agree that their freedoms have been compromised, they still resist dealing with the fact that their own governments are using them as pawns by murdering their own people in ruthless pursuit of deep state’s obsession for absolute control.

The tumultuous events of 2015 have brought the ruling elite’s endgame scenario into operation as the perfect storm of co-occurring disasters that are creating dire enough conditions necessary to ignite another manufactured world war – but this time against nuclear powered Russia and China – while the elite’s manufactured house of cards, debt-based economy is totally collapsing and the divisive effects of the elite’s manufactured mass migration crisis triggers widespread civil, religious and racial unrest and violence to simultaneously usher in martial law conditions throughout Europe and North America. According to the globalists’ diabolical design, out of the ashes of death and destruction will emerge a “sustainable,” drastically reduced global population of a half to one billion human inhabitants living out the rest of their days on earth in total bondage serving a genocidal power elite ruling over what’s left alive on the planet with its fully operationalized one world government.

Recently I’ve presented how this endgame scenario is manifesting through an analysis of the destabilizing and polarizing geopolitical eventsunfolding in the last couple years resurrecting cold war 2 hostilities between the East and West, also how the ruling elite’s been utilizing its divide and conquer strategy to achieve its wicked ends. But this current examination will unveil the common systematically applied patterns of how Western oligarchs have been exploiting Islam through relentless major false flag operations intended to create religious and race wars by fomenting Islamophobia and xenophobia. The common elements blaming Muslims in numerous false flag operations will be examined linking the February 1993 first World Trade Center bombing, the 9/11 attacks, the 3/11 Madrid train attacks, the London 7/7 subway attacks, the 1/6/15 Paris Charlie Hebdo shootings and last month’s Friday the 13th attacks. These state sponsored terrorist attacks that became Spain, UK, and France’s 9/11 false flag massacres have been designed to spread panic throughout the Western world in order to enflame an artificially created war on terror at the expense of Muslims worldwide, us and our freedom. The so called terrorists are mere extensions of the Western crime cabal murdering its own people for the sake of New World Order tyranny and control.

A number of smaller scale attacks that likewise smack of false flag operation serve the same function to keep terror alive, move toward domestic gun confiscation and convince Americans to willingly sacrifice their freedom and civil liberties for increased deep state surveillance and control under the false pretense of national security. The domestic mass shootings allegedly committed by Muslims in the last half dozen years will not be covered here. However, in another installment common patterns of smaller scaled state sponsored terrorism perpetrated on US soil using Muslim patsies could be further linked. Among them would be the first Fort Hood shooting in 2009, the April 2013 Boston Marathon bombings, the May 2015 Garland, Texas aborted attack, the July 2015 Chattanooga shootings and the recent December 2nd San Bernardino killing spree. The increasing frequency of these alarming attacks only conditions the populace toward accepting deep state tyranny as a necessary sacrifice in exchange for a false sense of security that only equates to a deeper state of insecurity, fear and terror.

1993 First World Trade Center Bombing

The earliest major terrorist event on US soil blaming Muslims with often overlooked false flag implications was the February 26, 1993 World Trade Center bombing a full eight years ahead of 9/11. An October 28th, 1993 New York Times article reported that the FBI well in advance of the World Trade Center bombing was aware of plans that Muslim extremists were making bombs that would be used to blow up a number of targeted sites in New York City. Former Egyptian army officer turned FBI informant Emad Salemapparently was able to secretly infiltrate the bomb making group and a plan was in place for him to substitute a non-explosive powder. According to Salem a supervisor from the New York FBI office called it off and the mammoth Trade Center truck bomb explosion proceeded unhindered, killing six people, injuring over a thousand and causing over a half billion dollars’ worth of structural damage.

Throughout his couple years of undercover work for the FBI, Salem had secretly taped hundreds of hours of meetings with FBI personnel and eventually some of the tapes were turned over to the NYT. The article makes reference to Salem’s anguish, guilt and upset over not being allowed to thwart the Trade Center bombing. An FBI agent identified as Susan Floyd attempted to console him, “Hey, I mean it wasn’t like you didn’t try and I didn’t try… you can’t force people to do the right thing.” At one point Salem wanted to take the matter to the highest level, registering his formal grievance against the New York FBI to the higher ups in Washington but was dissuaded by FBI supervisor John Anticev who told Salem that the New York office wouldn’t want “things… to go to Washington DC.”

Once the WTC bombing took place, the FBI swooped in to arrest four Muslims charged with the crime, all tried and convicted within a year. After interviewing a fifth man accused in the bombing, Abdul Rahman Yasin was strangely released by the FBI and allowed to fly back to Iraq in 1993. According to a May 31, 2002 CBS article entitled “The Man Who Got Away,” the FBI let Yasin go because he “was so helpful and cooperative, giving the FBI names and addresses, that they released him.” Unless Yasin was on the FBI payroll like Emad Salem holding potentially damaging evidence that could become a major liability for the FBI in its role in the bombing, a terrorist would never be allowed to leave the country. 

While the FBI was touted for its quick work in bringing to justice the “guilty parties,” in fact the FBI was complicit in aiding and abetting what amounts to state sponsored terrorism that killed a half dozen Americans and injured 1042 more that it could have and should have easily prevented but chose not to. Not surprisingly, despite the New York Timesarticle, the FBI’s gross criminal misconduct was never pursued by either the mainstream press or the Department of Justice. Had they, 3000 American lives at that same World Trade Center could have been spared from the biggest mass murder on US soil a few years later, along with over 13000 Americans who’ve died fighting the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and the millions who perished in the Middle East and North Africa that should all be alive today. The sinister truth was never followed up because the crime cabal government led by President George HW Bush just one month out of office at the time was already executing US state sponsored terrorism for his New World Order takeover on the exact same 9/11 spot using Muslim stooges much the same way eight years later his son used 19 more. It’s no accident that Bush made his New World Order speech to Congress on 9/11/91, exactly one decade to the day in advance of 9/11/01. Author of Fifty Years of the Deep State Mark Gorton concluded George senior was the mastermind behind both the 1993 forerunner as well as the big 9/11 killer:

The purpose of the 1993 WTC bombing was to create a rationale for a “security upgrade” of the WTC complex.

At a cost of a half billion the Port Authority director of New York and New Jersey brought in Kroll Associates led by Rand counterterrorism expert Brian Michael Jenkins to perform a “complete security analysis.”

Another 9/11 inner circle player was the future Secretary of Homeland Security (2005-2009). In 1993 Michael Chertoff was the United States Attorney for the district of New Jersey. His neocon affiliations resulted in a meteoric rise in his legal career into a national security tsar. Another Zionist holder of dual Israeli-US citizenship, Chertoff wrote a substantial part of the unconstitutional Patriot Act, Bush-Cheney’s illegal torture practice and draconian laws that permitted detainment of hundreds of Muslims in the US. For one month in 2000 our future Homeland Security director was both defending an accused terrorist financier linked to supplying arms to Osama bin Laden while appointed by Bush to head Operation Green Quest, a multiagency initiative investigating terrorist funding sources. By corrupt design, an unbelievable conflict of interest that of course attracted no press.

Just like Dick Cheney who went from Secretary of Defense under Bush senior to CEO of Halliburton and then onto VP with Bush junior awarding enormous no bid contracts to his old company bilking billions off the Iraq/Afghanistan Wars, their forever war on terror and Homeland Security… or the Bush family’s deep state connections to the bin Ladens and the Carlyle Group. Our shadowy international crime syndicate government is trademarked by high level cronyism constantly floating shady players in and out of public life, revolving doors between government, think tanks, Fortune 500 corporations, and special interest lobbyism. As a typical example, Michael Chertoff is now teamed up as a partner with former NSA director General Michael Hayden in a private security consulting firm for the government, just like Hayden’s NSA successor General Keith Alexander.

In a post-9/11 interview former station chief of the Dallas and Los Angeles FBI offices Ted Gunderson stated that he believed the CIA and FBI are ultimately responsible for most acts of terrorism. He quoted a statement made by a Department of Justice attorney back in the 1980’s who had just authored the antiterrorism legislation that eventually would become the Patriot Act, “People will have to be killed for this to pass.” Then came the first Trade Center Bombing in 1993 where only six people died and it failed to pass muster with Congress. So the ante was upped big time with the next inside job – the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing that killed 168 Americans including many women and children to put homegrown terrorism on the USA map to stay but also ensured that Clinton’s Antiterrorism Act of 1996 passed. However, the end product signed into law was a watered down version from the original legislation. So leave it to the neocons to come along a couple years later with their PNAC to pen their infamous plot calling for a “new Pearl Harbor” event to jump start their twenty-first century’s hegemonic conquest and war on terror, and as they say the rest is history, unfortunately still being scripted and staged today by either those same neocon traitors or their protégés.

The 1993 twin towers attack paved the way for the 2001 monster attack to finish the job, more than likely vaporizing the towers with a Tesla scalar weapon in combo with prepositioned demolition explosives inside the three buildings. In the same way the Boston Marathon bombing provided the dry run for a major US city lockdown, likewise, this year’s Paris attacks served the same purpose for France and the Jade Helm Operation as the beta test for US military massively deployed over nine states amongst the civilian population, all incremental steps tightening the NWO security noose moving the West toward full blown martial law tyranny coming soon to your neighborhood with perhaps the next false flag or two. 

9/11

So much has already been written on 9/11 exposing the dozens of in-our-face gaping holes in the deep state’s false narrative. Again the US had created Osama and al Qaeda and had already been effectively deploying them as allies on two separate proxy warfronts (Afghanistan and the Balkans) in back-to-back decades by the time fake planes flew into the towers and Pentagon. The CIA was busted handing out free passports in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia so that 15 Saudis amongst the 19 box cutting 9/11 stooges could freely travel back and forth from their native homeland to America. Former Consular General Michael Springmann maintains he was “repeatedly ordered to issue more than 100 visas to unqualified applicants.” Despite the boldface lies coming from Bush and his national security advisor Condoleezza Rice, “I don’t think anybody could have predicted that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile,” the facts speak for themselves. As far back as the mid-90’s it was known that Islamic extremists were taking flight lessons in America to strategically blow up key buildings on US soil.

Like every major terrorist act this century, the CIA and international intelligence community have a long history of already knowing the whereabouts of closely monitored terrorists. The lead 9/11 hijacker said to have flown the flight out of Boston into the North Tower, 33-year old Saudi Mohamed Atta, turns out was not an Islamic fundamentalist at all but a hard drinking, coke snorting, bar hopping, party hardy animal. Evidence shows he was a protected multi-lingual intelligence asset that met and knew CIA and German security personnel. Additionally, two years prior to 9/11, it was reported that a Pentagon employee was ordered to remove all documents indicating Atta was a terrorist. While living in Naples, Florida Atta was connected to a notorious CIA run Venice Municipal Airport making frequent trips to South America for cocaine. Three of the four alleged hijacking pilots on 9/11 were graduates of that same Venice airport aviation school. The CIA facilitated flying lessons for Arabs entering the US in 1999 in a number of states including California, Arizona, Oklahoma and Florida. Concerted efforts were made by FBI headquarters to sit on reports coming in from field offices at the time alerting that Muslim foreign nationals were suspiciously taking flying lessons. So we absolutely know federal authorities allowed several alleged 9/11 terrorists into the country through unauthorized obtained passports and set them up in aviation schools across the nation including a CIA drug connected one in Florida despite awareness since the mid 90’s of terrorist plans to fly planes into US buildings. The “new Pearl Harbor” in the making.

Ample anomalies further cast doubt on the official story. Airline manifest lists providing complete passenger names and seat numbers onboard the four 9/11 planes were obtained from the trial of the alleged 20th hijacker Zacarias Moussaoui arrested just weeks prior to 9/11. These lists indicate that none of the identified 9/11 terrorists were even onboard those ill-fated flights. The question then becomes how did they get onboard the planes or they never were on those flights to begin with. Backing up the latter conclusion, confirmations have surfaced that a handful of the false flag Muslim patsies are still alive. As many as ten have been reported in various locations after 9/11 with several threatening to sue the US government for personal damages.

Then there’s that deep layered fine ash and rubble strewn for blocks around what used to be the two tallest buildings in the world and lo and behold within a couple days after the attack suddenly an intact, unblemished passport belonging to a suspected 9/11 terrorist was miraculously found a block away from ground zero. Recovering instant ID’s so that the mainstream media hype can spin to pin instant blame on those violent Muslim terrorists is a common theme running in nearly all false flag operations where the demonic Western crime cabal quickly points the finger at practitioners of Islam religion as the world’s twenty-first century bogeyman.

Bush-Cheney’s overt delays and sabotage of an investigation getting started finally yielded to their initial first choice heading the commission none other than fellow globalist war criminal Henry Kissinger. But since that was met with a brick wall of resistance, they settled on cherry-picking implanted shills to stack the 9/11 commission to ensure another whitewashed cover-up just like the JFK Warren commission was secured. Contrast that with the blinding speed at the crime scene to rapidly dispose of all non-powdered rubble of steel fragments shipping it all off to China prior to any forensics analysis. Willful destruction of evidence where thousands died in itself is a crime of the highest magnitude but it too was swept under the filthy carpet. Yet the criminal Bush-Cheney regime stole two electionsand started two illegal costly wars killing millions with complete impunity and they’re still walking around free. Slowly their tons of blood soaked karma are catching up to them. A three judge panel earlier this year ruled that foreigners can sue members of the Bushadministration for racial profiling and other charges after the feds swept up visa violators who were Arab or South Asian and detained them for months after 9/11. Though it’s not for war crimes or treason, it’s at least a start.

On 9/11 Cheney made sure that all the air defense systems on the East Coast of the United States were ordered to stand down, and that the US military defending our shores happened to be participating in live action drills far enough south in North Carolina to not be available to defend the capitol until after 10:45AM. Meanwhile a major military exercise Global Guardian normally scheduled every year in October mysteriously got moved up a month, no doubt to not interfere with the neocons’ false flag agenda. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Henry Shelton who was not among the conspiratorial insiders was conveniently sent away flying over the Atlantic to a meeting in Hungary when the towers were struck, allowing his vice chairman General Richard Myers who was an insider to within days replace him as Chairman.

Another key 9/11 architect was Paul Bremer who two years later would disastrously lead the grand theft looting of Iraq during the first US occupation phase. It was Bremer’s shortsighted decision to disband Saddam’s 400,000 man security force that became the single biggest catalyst for creating a new formidable enemy insurgent that would cost thousands of American soldiers’ lives. But on the morning of 9/11, instead of attending a scheduled meeting at his workplace in the South Tower, he was among the first talking heads on TV pointing the finger at Osama while 200 colleagues in his company were being slaughtered. But then that’s the kind of heartless psychopath with blood on his hands that gets to rule the world.

And how can we ever forget that premature announcement by the infamous BBC reporter while Building 7 was still standing 47 stories tall right behind her a full 20 minutes before it fell. Its less than seven second freefall cannot be explained away by one little smoldering fire observed in a small section after the demolition order “pull it” was heard by Larry Silverstein the World Trade Center lease owner who’d just bought an insurance policy against airplanes flying into his buildings  for an $4.6 billion payout. 

Then there were the hundreds of witnesses who distinctly heard countless loud explosions like a controlled demolition caught on tape prior to the sudden collapse of the tall buildings defying all laws of physics. The thermite debate of conventional demolition explosives versus what likely was a strike by a scalar pulse weapon delivering directed free energy technology unfortunately has bitterly splintered the Truther movement into two camps – the free energy Dr. Judy Wood proponents and the Architect and Engineer crowd. Dr. Wood maintains that the sheer volume of a million tons of steel from 110 story buildings would produce far more bulk volume rubble than the fine powder lack of volume dust. She also cites the lack of seismic activity that buildings with that much mass would produce. Her latest book “Where Did the Towers Go” attempts to answer how so much massive steel and concrete could be instantly vaporized by the controversial Tesla free energy technology. Those more conventional scientifically minded challenge her theoretical hypothesis accepting that all that steel and debris simply was propelled by the controlled demotion into falling over a wide area. What all doubters of the 9/11 Commission’s fake rendition know is that fires on the uppermost tower levels could never have produced sufficient enough heat to melt into molten steel much less bring down the tallest buildings in the world. And it doesn’t take hundreds of architects and scientists telling us it’s impossible even though they did.

Then there’s the Mossad connection to 9/11 whose fingerprints invariably are left on virtually every false flag operation. It was no accident that the Washington Times ran an article on 9/10/01 reporting that a group of 60 US Army officers had just released their Fort Leavenworth study calling Israel’s intelligence agency a “Wildcard. Ruthless and cunning. Has capability to target U.S. forces and make it look like a Palestinian/Arab act.” Less than 24 hours later the Mossad made good on that prophetic warning playing a key role in murdering 3000 Americans. Evidence includes the van full of Israeli Mossad agents posing as movers caught attempting to blow up the George Washington Bridge. They were detained but then mysteriously released even after police dogs detected traces of explosives in their van. A few weeks after 9/11 another moving van of Israeli agents were stopped in Pennsylvania possessing a video of Chicago with zoomed up shots of the Sears Tower. The local police contacted the FBI and soon enough they too were let go. Then there were the Israeli “Mossad art students” who had rented out an entire floor in one of the towers for months leading up to the attack all the while stockpiling prepackaged explosives. And of course we can’t forget those dancing Israelis whooping it up in the New Jersey park celebrating their victory watching the fruits of their labor come crashing to ground zero.

The fact that no body parts or actual authentic crash site in Pennsylvania of Flight 93 was ever found indicates yet more cover-up. It was a small area that appeared staged with very little debris, nothing like any other plane crash. Evidence that at least one of the four “hijacked” airliners flew to Westover Air Base in Chicopee, Massachusetts and the strong plausibility that those so called cell phone conversations were actually recorded from the ground inside a Westover hanger and not from the air is highly probable.

The little bombshell announcement the day before 9/11 that went unnoticed uttered by Defense Secretary Rumsfeld that his Pentagon could not track $2.3 trillion in its spending. Since 1996 that squandered unaccounted for pile of taxpayer dollars has soared to an incredible $8.5 trillion dollars. The Pentagon is the only government organization that hasn’t even been audited in this century. Rumsfeld of course was off the hot seat the very next day purposely timed since he was one of the original PNAC “new Pearl Harbor” planners. And then Building 7 housed all the accounting records for the IRS, the Defense Department and the CIA. How convenient to rip America off and then destroy all the evidence. The criminal malfeasance was off the charts. But with 3000 Americans dead, who bothered to notice? Speaking of financial criminality, how about all those millions made on the stock market just prior to 9/11 by inside traders who just stole unaccounted for taxpayers’ money – a double rip-off. Then like the JFK coup de taut, “mysterious” deaths started surfacing of witnesses who began talking truth exposing deep state lies. The precedent of falsely blaming Muslim terrorists for an inside job was already established eight years earlier using the exact same crime scene after a half billion dollar “security upgrade.” The inside job was finally done.

Then there’s that missile sized hole left in the Pentagon where an airliner would be impossible to fit through. Interestingly, in late October 2000 less than a year prior to 9/11, there was a simulation exercise of an airliner crashing into the Pentagon. Meanwhile on the morning of 9/11 just when the US fired one of its own missiles into the Pentagon building, a few miles away sat NWO ringleader George HW meeting at theRitz Carlton with his favorite Saudi family the bin Ladens. A little later while not one plane was seen in the sky over America, only the bin Ladens were free to safely fly US airspace home. Bush even authorized a special plane to pick up two dozen bin Laden relatives in ten different US cities while America it remained a no fly zone for the rest of us. Aside from excessively close ties with the Saudi family, such preferential treatment for relatives of an accused murderer of 3000 Americans strongly suggests that Osama had nothing to do with the attacks.

Then there was George junior looking as confused and feeble-minded as ever playing classroom Patti-cakes in his brother Jeb’s state of Florida when informed that America was under attack. Our commander-in-chief sat there frozen for an additional “eight or nine minutes” nervously twitching as though he’d seen that movie before… because in fact he had, the government had been practicing simulations of planes flying into the World Trade Center for months prior to 9/11.

As a matter of fact, as standard operating procedure in every false flag operation including the big one on that 9/11 morning, within minutes that the US government was sending mock passenger airliners crashing into the twin towers and a missile later photoshopped into an airplane piercing the Pentagon building, a live simulation exercise involving planes flying into buildings was actually being conducted at the CIA Reconnaissance Office in Chantilly, Virginia. Though the drill was not reported until it leaked out at a Homeland Security conference nearly a year after 9/11, AP picked the story up describing the drill as “a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building.” George W merely shirked off the suspicious timing with his characteristically smug smile calling it “a bizarre coincidence.” One would have to be as moronic as George himself to not accept the fact that every single false flag terrorist event is accompanied by a government exercise that invariably goes live with every state sponsored terrorist attack on record.

After just scratching the surface here, the list of sloppy 9/11 anomalies is seemingly endless. Finally with any act of terrorism, the first question to ask is who stands to gain the most with both the motivation and means to pull off a false flag operation on such a large scale? Definitely not some bushwhacking Bush friend in an Afghan cave dying of kidney disease. Nor any Muslims in the Middle East, North Africa or anywhere else on the planet maliciously used by Zionist conspirators as convenient scapegoated targets. Only longtime US Empire partners-in-crime Israel, Saudi Arabia and the PNAC power pinheads were “gifted” by 9/11’s readymade villain for their endless war on terror. Only those three governments comprising the real axis of evil in this world stood could gain so much by the preplanned events orchestrated on 9/11 and really no one else. Noted intelligence analyst George Friedman writing for a known CIA website stratfor.com on the very same day as 9/11 made it explicitly clear:

The big winner today, intended or not, is the state of Israel. There is no question that the Israeli leadership is feeling relief.

Friedman already knew that this “new Pearl Harbor” would result in US Empire fighting Israeli proxy wars in the Middle East to eliminate any potential Arab opposition while elevating Israel’s regional hegemony to unprecedented heights.

3/3 Madrid Train Bombings

Then exactly 911 days after 9/11 came Spain’s turn for its 9/11 when ten Madrid train bombs ripped apart four fully occupied passenger cars in moving in different locations transporting morning commuters comprised mostly of a lower class immigrant population killing 191 people and injuring 2050 more in the worst terrorist attack in Spanish history. One million Spaniards had protested vehemently against the Iraq invasion the year before despite the right wing prime minister’s support for the war architects meeting with George W. Bush and Tony Blair just three days prior to their Iraq invasion a year earlier. Moreover, with the attacks occurring just three days prior to Spain’s national election, its timing was intended to instantly enflame the wrath of the Spanish citizenry to turn from being against the war to seeking revenge against al Qaeda Islamic terrorists. But instead the public astutely interpreted the attacks as blowback for the incumbent prime minister’s pro-war involvement that had defied the will of the people. After 3/11 nearly 30% of Madrid’s population of 11.4 million residents took to the streets, and the socialist challenger Luis Zapatero won a landslide victory two days later and within the week declared a Spanish troop pullout of Iraq.

This heinous operation had all the earmarks of a highly professional hit job on the Spanish people by Mossad. But its intended purpose completely backfired. The press was persuaded by early arrests of North Africans to rule out initial perception that it was the work of Basque separatists that Spain’s rightwing prime minister adamantly accused as perpetrators of the ghastly crime. As the investigation dragged on with so many botched, changing and conflicting errors and revisions, the press gradually grew divided, split over who the real culprits were though it eventually became clear that no real link to al Qaeda was ever established despite all the planted false flag evidence Mossad had purposely left behind.

From the very start to the verdict finish the police and prosecution engaged in criminal misconduct resulting in growing public suspicion of planted police evidence, witness and evidence tampering, record falsification and extreme incompetence. Similar to 9/11, a top down decision to immediately remove critical crime scene evidence ensured that all four train cars were destroyed within two days after the 3/11 blasts. This marks a historic pattern of deep state willfully committing the blatant crime of destroying crucial evidence and thereby circumventing the possibility of the full truth from ever being uncovered. Recall the 9/11 rubble quickly shipped off to China preventing forensic investigation. That those in the highest echelons of governing power in Western nations would so flagrantly and repeatedly conceal the darker truth of their own criminality speaks volumes.

Another virtual constant in false flag operations is ensuring suspects cannot talk by simply killing them. Conflicting and altered police accounts of how a gang of seven prime suspects were tracked down to an apartment in a Madrid suburb (similar to the recent Paris attacks) three weeks later where all were purported to have blown themselves up along with one policeman in a dramatic suicide act only further muddled the case. The police claimed the group made calls to family just prior to the explosion yet no evidence other than a supposed brother to one of the dead suspects was called as a witness and he maintained he did not believe it was his brother he spoke to.

Moreover, the bomb squad handled the initial chemical explosives analysis instead of the normally better trained and equipped forensics experts to further obscure the actual contents of the bombs that killed so many train victims. Years went by before the chemical analyst even divulged a list of chemicals and her explanation of as to why that critical information was withheld so long – because no one explicitly had asked her for it. Because the investigation was so mishandled clearly by design to intentionally hide the truth, the trial was delayed by three years and in the end only one conviction resulted despite lack of any real solid evidence pinning him to the deadly blasts. What seems most apparent is more Muslims were used as patsies in a failed attempt to link the terrorism directly to al Qaeda. Those fingered were amateurs purposely utilized as fall guy decoys to facilitate the real terrorist professionals – the Mossad – to easily get away with mass murder [again just like 9/11].

7/7/05 London Bombings

As part of a PSYOPS operation, on May 16, 2004 the government-controlled BBC aired on its BBC ONE Panorama broadcast “a what if” script imagining a terrorist attack striking three underground tube subway stations and an above ground bus simultaneously. The panelists were discussing the need for the government to be able to control how the media would present this “hypothetical” terrorist attack. Little more than a year later on 7/7/05 three tube subway bombs exploded underground followed less than an hour later by a blast on a two decker bus in London killing a total of 52 people and wounding hundreds. Immediately afterwards on the same day UK Foreign Secretary Jack Strawmimicked past false flag terror events connecting 7/7 to Muslim extremists, “the attacks bear all the hallmarks of al Qaeda.”

As if the BBC broadcast a year earlier outlining in detail the future terror come true isn’t enough to arouse suspicion that 7/7 was another preplanned false flag operation, just like 9/11 and 3/11 before it, another scheduled crisis drill was taking place at the exact same time and places as the real terrorist events. Former senior Scotland Yard counterterrorism expert Peter Power acting as managing director of Visor Consultants, the private security firm contracted with London Metropolitan Police happened to be conducting a live terror exercise in the same subway stations where the bombs exploded and was soon providing a live BBC interview.

Many parallels unfolded between the London bombings and 9/11. Whereas all the air defense systems on the East Coast were shut down on 9/11, hundreds of surveillance cameras within the subway stations were strangely turned off or out of order on 7/7. An Israeli security company called Verint Systems happened to be in charge of all those nonfunctioning surveillance cameras inside London’s underground subway system. Also based on both witness testimony and physical evidence, at least some of the bombs were not carried in backpacks by alleged suicide bombers but planted underneath the train. The metal flooring where the bombs went off ripped holes pushing adjoining metal upwards to indicate the blast came from below.

It’s been determined that the four suspected suicide bombers the authorities maintain were responsible for 7/7 were hired as role players testing subway security and had no idea that their MI5 handler was setting them up to be sacrificed victims in a state sponsored terrorist plot. Moreover, according to Charles Shoebridge a London Metro Police detective and terror expert, the supposed 7/7 ringleader of the group was a paid informant working for MI5 at the time. The four young men aged 18 to 30 were apparently duped by British intelligence into becoming UK’s 9/11 Muslim patsies.  Another terrorist expert and former Justice Department prosecutor John Loftus told Fox News that the 7/7 mastermind Haroon Rashid Aswat was an MI6 asset protected by British security prior to the bombings. Other evidence points to a convicted US terrorist who as an informant was let out of prison after only four and a half years of a possible 70-year sentence to train the lead London bomber. A New York judge described the terrorist Mohammed Junaid Babar’s service as “exceptional cooperation.” Babar’s probable role as a US informant while training the 7/7 fall guy and his extreme lenient treatment by the US only adds more weight that the London bombings were entirely staged state sponsored terrorism. And just like in both WTC bombings as well as the 3/3 Madrid bombs, accomplices of the crimes were set free.

It turns out that Visor Consultants were also part of a larger US Homeland Security sponsored Atlantic Blue joint security exercises in the same London underground subway system in April 2005. The US Homeland Security Secretary at the time Michael Chertoff, previously involved in both the 1993 and 2001 WTC incidents as well as defending a known arms peddler linked to supplying weapons to al Qaeda, contracted with Britain’s counterpart to run the mock terror drill that went live.

Adding further indication that 7/7 was a preplanned event, the Scotland Yard contacted the Israeli Embassy in London warning of an impending bomb attack prior to the explosions. Israel’s Finance Minister at the time Benjamin Netanyahu was advised not to attend an economic conference organized by the Embassy, Tel Aviv Stock Exchange and Deutsche Bank. The conference was scheduled at the Great Eastern Hotel located very near the Liverpool Street subway station as one of three targeted tube stations. Former New York City MayorRudolf Giuliani of 9/11 fame happened to be staying at that same Great Eastern Hotel at the time the 7/7 bombs went off. After his politician run, Giuliani started his own security corporation and was a colleague of Peter Power. Coincidence? You be the judge.

Along with confirmed evidence of pre-knowledge of the false flag terrorism, numerous links between Netanyahu, Giuliani and Peter Power within the Western intelligence community have fueled speculation of both 9/11 and 7/7 involvement. Additionally their striking parallels reinforce the case for another inside job. Just as Bush resisted a 9/11 investigation, so did his British war crime partner Tony Blair. And the usual anomalies of changing false narratives, deep state secrecy enshrouded by withheld and/or omitted key evidence prohibiting full investigative disclosure, obstruction of justice, known intelligence involvement, immediate linkage by both government and media to al Qaeda as perpetrators and the same means and motive were present for both 9/11 and 7/7.

Three weeks prior to 7/7 the Telegraph announced a UK plan that by the end of 2005, battalions of British soldiers would begin coming home from Iraq. With a majority of Britons favoring pullout, support for the Iraq War was already sagging. So the criminal cabal represented by the US-Israel-UK realized to give its war on terror a shocking jolt, a “new 9/11” British-style would need to be injected. And since preparations had long been in the works that entire year preceding 7/7, the diabolical elite ordered the greenlight for the already scheduled training exercise to suddenly go live. Thus the US, Spain and Britain each had to endure its own “new Pearl Harbor” to ensure the ruling elite’s endless war on terror would stay endless.

January 7th, 2015 Charlie Hebdo Paris Attack

In early December 2014 France made its bold move to formally recognize the Palestinian state. At the same time it also sought lifting Russian sanctions led by the US. When you piss off the big boys of the world, the heart of the ruling beast the international crime cabal led by US Empire of Chaos and its Zionist masters, use of either false flag attacks or scalar technology producing unnatural “natural” disasters are a usual form of punishment. The biggest global bullies have been increasingly using those covertly sinister weapons to intimidate, pressure and threaten other less powerful nations for a quarter century now. And no sooner did the French government take the moral high ground, it was promptly hit with its turn to suffer the French version of 9/11, of course falsely blaming the 21stcentury villain – Muslim terrorists.

The three Charlie Hebdo patsies – all French citizens – who allegedly attacked the satirizing cartoonist office killing seven and then went on a three day shooting spree killing ten more people before dying in police shootouts were all very much known to French intelligencefor an entire decade. The Kouachi brothers had arrived back in France fresh off the battlefields in Syria fighting against Assad forces that of course are completely backed by the US and its NATO allies. Thus they had been armed and trained as the West’s proxy war terrorists. And France is a NATO member and active player in the bombing and terrorism that took down Gaddafi in Libya as well as a strong supporter of terrorist groups fighting in Syria that the Hebdo participants belonged to. Thus France’s aiding and abetting the Hebdo terrorists automatically makes them culpable for killing its own citizens. French intelligence and security forces apparently had been tracking the Hebdo terrorists for many years with one of the jihadists actually arrested twice for terrorist activities in 2005 and again in 2010 and another one for an attempted jail breakout of a fellow terrorist. French authorities were all too aware of both brothers’ extremist leanings, the appeal that joining al Qaeda to fight and die for their violent cause and their professed desire to fight against what they observed were American injustices occurring daily in Iraq.

Both of the Kouachi brothers were reported by US and French officials to have spent time in Yemen receiving arms training in 2011. The older brother is reported to have even briefly lived across the hall from the Nigerian “Underwear Bomber” years earlier in Yemen prior to his Christmas day 2009 arrest at the Detroit airport. That the Hebdo terrorist is directly connected to the Nigerian terrorist is significant in that US intelligence was caught planting the Underwear Bomber with a fake bomb and was allowed to board the plane without a passport for false flag purposes to create another scare in the air in order to panic America. Just more PR lies reinforcing fear of Muslim terrorists lurking behind every corner was busted in another staged incident to promote US state sponsored terrorism and its war on terror. It provides preexisting context for government deception that preys on vulnerable young Muslims as war on terror assets in a long history using false flag terrorism. As an aside, the false flag underwear bomb was used to sell invasive body scanning equipment to TSA aggressively being peddled by none other than Homeland Security head Michael Chertoff who happened to own large shares in the body scanning business. More conflict of interest by a morally corrupt, treasonous, high powered public official getting richer off more false flags promoting his fake war on terror that inflicts so much death and suffering on others.

The older Hebdo brother Said was also alleged to have received his terrorist marching orders in Yemen from the US born, radical Islamic preacher Anwar al-Awlaki, who before Obama’s drone strike assassinated him in 2011 and then his innocent Colorado born 16-year old non-terrorist son two weeks later. Awlaki was a who’s who celebrity amongst the terrorist world as he apparently was invited to dine at the Pentagon shortly after 9/11. He was questioned about his connections to three of the alleged 9/11 terrorists, and been confirmed to have met with the Underwear Bomber and shared known links to the Islamic psychiatrist Army Major Nidal Malik Hasan responsible for the 2009 Fort Hood shootings. Insightful US historian Webster Tarpley has even gone so far as to classify Awlaki as “an obvious US double agent who has been used to give the al Qaeda seal of approval to dozens of terrorists.” That would explain why Obama chose to kill an American citizen without arrest or trial. The Hebdo terrorists never operated as lone wolves but were part of a much larger cell of terrorist networks connected to al Qaeda and/or ISIS, although the affiliated al Qaeda branch was not known to team up with ISIS. In any event, the underlying connecting hub is undeniably the creator – US Empire and its NATO allies along with Israel, Saudi Arabia and Gulf State monarchies.

So with such a long terrorist rap sheet as veterans of US foreign supported wars, for the world to simply accept the Paris authorities’ bogus claim that there are just too many potential terrorists in France to keep close tabs on is not to be believed. French security forces are tasked with daily monitoring over a thousand identified jihadists that are known to have fought in Syria, Iraq or Yemen and returned home to France. Yet the official line that such high profile seasoned terrorists that embarked on the killing spree last January in Paris somehow as of late spring 2014 just simply vanished off France’s radar screen is preposterous. If we’re expected to swallow that line, we’re also supposed to buy that 9/11, 3/11 and 7/7 weren’t really false flags at all. Or that the Western crime cabal never supports nor uses known terrorists to commit terrorist acts in the Middle East, Africa, North America, Europe or wherever. And Western governments never lie, cheat or steal, nor commit criminal offenses engaging in state sponsored terrorism to strip away civil liberties for more invasive surveillance and control over the global population. You can pull the wool over the eyes of some of the dumbed down masses for only so long before a growing segment finally starts to wake up to deep state’s dark sinister truth. And we’re waking up now.

A question of a third possible Hebdo suspect remains unanswered. This is another common occurrence, confusion over identifying the patsies from their handlers. Some eyewitnesses claimed that a third terrorist drove the getaway car after the Hebdo office attack. An 18-year old brother-in-law of one of the Kouachi brothers who did not participate in the attack turned himself in when he saw his name flashed all over the news as the third gunman due to his identification papers suspiciously found in the terrorists’ getaway car as a standard false flag calling card. Strange considering he was not part of the attack at all and was subsequently released from police custody two days later. Recall the miracle find right after 9/11 of the passport belonging to one of the terrorists. This immediate linkage following a false flag terrorist event with instant identification and association of more guilty Muslim terrorists has become cliché in false flag-ology and it’s another malicious weapon in deep state’s arsenal against Islam.

As with virtually all the so called terrorist acts allegedly committed by “Muslim extremists,” Western governments represented by their intelligence agencies actively plan, recruit, coordinate and execute state sponsored terrorism that receives further spin by mainstream propaganda controlling the official false narrative to manipulate and shape public perception and opinion, in effect brainwashing the North American and European populations into associating Muslims with terrorism even more than associated with it being a religion. Tony Blair, Bush, Cheney, Obama all have carried the torch advancing elite’s divisive agenda convincing citizens to fear Islamic extremism as violent, bloodthirsty terrorists desiring to kill every last one of us infidels in this world. False flag terrorism leads the way to promote fear and hate. The bottom line reality is that over 90% of terrorist acts in America have been committed by non-Muslims.

Another noted peculiarity without closure occurred at the kosher Jewish deli where the self-proclaimed ISIS terrorist was killed in a shootout with police after he murdered a policewomen and five deli patrons held hostage. It was initially reported that he had an accomplice inside the deli grocer believed to be his common law wife but then it was later confirmed that she had already fled the country and seamlessly slipped through the Turkish border into Syria. So what happened with that other phantom player? Was he or she a handler or just a prop as part of the larger false flag backdrop? In any event, the deli outcome left none of the known terrorists alive, which of course is extremely common in false flag operations since dead men can’t reveal the truth. It also turns out that back in 2009 the deli terrorist met in person then French President Nicolas Sarkozy after obtaining employment in a local factory. By itself this could well be pure coincidence but when taken into account with all the numerous circumstantial anomalies as part of another false flag, it becomes one more factor to weigh in and consider.

Then just a few days later one of the lead Hebdo investigators shows up suddenly dead in his office with the official storyline that he committed suicide. This very strange twist of sudden mysterious deaths cropping up after a false flag however is extremely common and almost always points to silencing those who knew too much and were unwilling to support the false flag narrative covering up the truth. That this odd development was treated with near media blackout only casts more doubt and suspicion that his death was caused by foul play and not suicide.

Yet another coincidence or anomaly – the day before the Hebdo attack the French aircraft carrier quietly set sail to the Middle East to fight ISIS. Deep state has a long history of using false flags to whip up anger, revenge and war lust amongst populations that may be reluctant or opposed to war. But terrorism never fails to entice an instant majority that otherwise might be hesitant and wavering to fervently get behind any military intervention. Recall that this was the signature calling card in Mossad’s filthy fingerprints left all over the 3/11 Spain tragedy that fortunately backfired.

The first reaction to such an egregious assault as terrorism is to most often automatically produce a public surge to seek immediate emotional revenge through retaliation. As a recent precedent, when French citizens objected to getting involved again in more fighting in Iraq, suddenly ISIS released on YouTube their beheading of the week featuring a Frenchman and that eliminated any reservation. And some of those graphically violent videos have already been proven and admitted to being staged events for shock and awe theater. Of course since Hebdo has all the trappings of a false flag, leaving the day before a staged terrorist attack actually occurs on French soil might be just another indicator of inside pre-knowledge. French President Hollande was planning to make what would have likely been a controversial announcement to send the naval fleet on January 14th, but sending the weapon of mass destruction complete with fighter planes and a submarine off to combat and vanquish those evil Middle Eastern terrorists became a done deal.

As a follow-up to Hebdo, noted Islamologist Kevin Barrett who maintains close ties with Muslims on the ground in France and North Africa writes of the brutal totalitarian oppression currently underway in NATO ally France. He calls these two false flag attacks on both Parisians and Muslims more Gladio operations engineered by the international Anglo-Zionist crime cabal. Keven both translated as well as recently posted the original account written by Algerian-French citizen Mohamed Boutiche. As a Hebdo witness holding damning evidence that it was another inside job, Boutiche has revealed that the Kouachi brothers were French intelligence assets used as Muslim patsies on 1/7. Mr. Boutiche’s disturbing plight as a persecuted witness details the criminal transgressions the French thug overlords posing as the French government have been resorting to in their determined efforts to silence him one way or the other. The national government’s security apparatus has been cracking down with ironclad fist to squelch freedom of speech, dissent and all efforts exposing the criminal truth regarding deep state-sponsored terrorism. Sadly, what’s happening to Mohamed Boutiche is happening to honest hardworking citizens throughout the Western world who see grossly criminal injustice being customarily swept under the rug. That perfect storm of world war the ruling elite’s been brewing includes not just fighting other global powers that oppose the senseless violence and destruction perpetrated by US Empire-led West, but war against both Islam as well as all humanity. Every citizen of the world who dares to stand up to the evil and speak the truth is now being targeted as enemies of deep state. Mohamed Boutiche’s battle is our battle.

November 13th, 2015 Friday the Thirteenth Paris Attacks

Again timing is everything when it comes to false flags. October saw Putin shocking and rocking the boat making an enormous dent indestroying ISIS infrastructure and with the Syrian army cutting off Islamic State’s vital supply line from Turkey into northern Syria, an ISIS longtime stronghold. The US policy of protecting the terrorists in its pretend war was abruptly turned upside down. Obama’s status as a world leader was badly upstaged and humiliated at the September 28th UN meeting when Putin outed him as a fraud and liar and again weeks later when he exposed the fact that the US and the West including France were the chief ISIS financiers and the only reason why the terrorists have been steadily winning, growing stronger and spreading their violent plague far beyond just the Middle East and North Africa. Putin was radically changing the geopolitics chessboard, threatening to destroy the West’s no longer secret terrorist ally and Assad was successfully averting US Empire’s regime change operation.

Moreover, the political tide was dramatically turning. European nations like Germany and France were recognizing Putin’s strengths as a dynamic, take charge kind of world leader that stood in total contrast to Obama’s feeble lack of leadership and his subversive deceit and destruction. The US led wars created the massive refugee crisis Europe is and will be reeling from for years to come. The US led sanctions against Russia were and are hurting Europe more than Russia. Italy is now pushing back against EU sanctions. The phony US led allied air coalition against ISIS was in total shambles. Saudi Arabia announced it was pulling out. With the nuke deal over Iran, the US-Israeli juggernaut controlling the West was crumbling. France, Germany and Italy have been experiencing serious misgivings over the increasingly volatile mess the US had created in both Syria and Ukraine. Europe does not want to be dragged into World War III against nuclear-powered Russia and China. Yet with reckless abandon the US-NATO appear hell bent on igniting a global war fought in Euro’s backyard. France and Germany were increasingly weary over further involvement with their Empire puppet role. Status quo as set and controlled by US Empire of Chaos and Destruction was fast falling apart. France was ready to jump ship just as the damn was about to break.

Since the temporary war mongering effects from last January’s Hebdo attack had long been evaporated and with Putin’s unanticipated monumentally decisive sea change shaking the balance of world power, Empire of Chaos and Destruction desperately knew it had to reassert itself if its unipolar world hegemony was to be salvaged. The war in Syria and ISIS were both being rapidly lost, once again outsmarted and defeated by grandmaster Putin. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

Enter CIA Director John Brennan who goes fast to work to come up with a plan to hatch a far more potent, “new 9/11” inside France. On October 29th Brennan hosts a conference meeting with his French counterpart along with a former Mossad director and an MI6 consultant and came up with Friday the 13th‘s Paris II false flag attacks. On the second day of their conference a Russian airliner flying over the Sinai was suddenly blown up killing all 224 Russians onboard. At the time the US and Israel happened to be engaging in a nearby joint military exercisewhile their Islamic State terrorist ally most likely snuck the crude bomb onboard the Russian plane while parked at the Egyptian airport. Take that Putin! The Empire strikes back!

Two weeks later 130 people in Paris were suddenly dead and hundreds more fighting for their lives in nearby hospitals in the worst attack on French soil since WWII. A large scale, highly coordinated and well-organized Friday night massacre was simultaneously launched at multiple locations. The Friday night massacre was totally preplanned. If you don’t believe me, just ask Brennan himself who was already playing Monday morning quarterback the following Monday when he readily admitted to the press that the international intelligence community had long seen this attack coming. Like Hebdo, 9/11 and all the rest, the Muslim fall guys on the 13th had been monitored for months and years in advance as well. Former antiterrorist Judge Marc Trevidic interviewing French jihadists back in August alerted the French security forces that ISIS was planning a hit on a Paris concert venue.

In an assault and siege at the Bataclan Theater where the Eagles of Death Metal band was performing a live concert, three alleged gunmen opened up firing off hundreds of rounds with their assault weapons into a defenseless, unsuspecting audience of 1000 killing 89 concertgoers. The one theater photo of the deadly crime scene released to the public showed bloodstained carpet streaks clearly indicating the bodies had been dragged and carefully laid into place just for this single photo with the conspicuous absence of any first responders and EMT’s tending to the bodies or crime scene. That alone makes it highly suspect. With 1000 concertgoers carrying hundreds of iPhones, not one other photo or video of the actual crisis in process, except one very poor quality, darkly lit footage lasting all of several seconds leading up to the alleged first gunshots. The video shows nothing and proves nothing except that authorities have chosen to withhold from the public massive amounts of evidence which of course only generate more reason for suspicion that the staged attacks were anything less than just more of the same old, same old – state sponsored terrorism willfully slaughtering its own people and then amateurishly engaging in yet another half-assed cover-up.

Also similar to 9/11, two months prior to the November attacks, the Jewish family that had owned the Bataclan for the last forty years decided to unload it, reminiscent of Larry Silverstein’s WTC lease and insurance policy. Mainstream press have recently made claims that the terrorists had targeted that particular venue because the owners were Jewish. As of 9/11/15 the current owner is the monarch from Qatar, the wealthiest of all Arab nations per capita and among Islamic State’s biggest Gulf State financiers. In the inside world of international terrorism comes Obama bud-Chicago mayor Rahm Emmanuel’s brother who booked the Eagles of Death Metal band to play at the Bataclan on last month’s fateful Friday the 13th.

Not far from the theater, from the first drive-by shooting to the third drive-by shooting for 11 straight minutes a black car with spoke rimmed wheels leisurely drove around the city rapid firing bullets into three different cafes and restaurants in touristy upscale District 11 killing dozens more. Strangely enough during this 11 minute killing rampage, the entire time the police were nowhere to be found as the car was allowed to freely navigate the Paris streets unobstructed to complete its deadly drive-by route without any law enforcement interference or presence. Already aware that a terrorist attack was eminent, it appears the authorities made a decision to simply let this savagely mounted second false flag assault on Paris this year just happen.

Meanwhile, other bizarre, red flag anomalies went down not far away from that concert hall. Three suicide bombers were busily blowing themselves up outside the Stade de France where France was playing Germany in a soccer match. Oddly only one pedestrian who happened to be passing by one of the bombers was killed, suggesting that these alleged suicide bombers could have actually been victims, either that or they foolishly failed to purchase tickets in advance. One was reported to have been prevented from entering the stadium by a Muslim guard. The whole purpose of a terrorist putting on a suicide bomber vest is to take out as many nearby victims as possible which would have obviously placed them all inside the crowded stadium where even French President François Hollande was a spectator. A true terrorist who hates the West and all our “freedoms” would have at least made better attempts to get closer to the French president before blowing himself up.

Immediately after the attacks the media announced that a Syrian passport was found on one of the three dead suicide bombers. Now all that fearmongering warning us of terrorists covertly posing as refugees coming to kill Westerners has now been predictably played out. We knew this was coming and of course expect more. Have you noticed how terrorists’ passports are incredibly durable? Recall the 9/11 passport that survived a vaporized WTC hit, and now this one showing up after a bomb goes off. Then the ID papers of an 18-year old brother-in-law who had nothing to do with the Hebdo attack mysteriously left in the gunmen’s getaway car.

From the beginning the agenda is for mainstream media to spread the news that another terrorist attack has been perpetrated by more Muslim terrorists. This dirty trick of “planting false evidence” is to instantly register in people’s minds the world over that the guilty murderers behind every heinous act of terrorism are Muslim terrorists. It’s become another standard false flag fixture. Even before any investigation has the chance to start, MSM ensures that it shapes worldwide public opinion and reality as judge, jury and executioner.

Speaking of which, no accident that President Hollande became a crowd witness to the explosions near the stadium, just as no accident that before the crime was even completed the French leader was declaring to the world that France was at war, and then kept repeating his “France-at-war” mantra over and over again. Thanks to the false flag formula before the smokescreen even cleared, the world was already convinced that more Muslim terrorists were murdering over a hundred innocent people who look just like you or me, that we [the West] are now really at war against those barbaric MENA monsters. No more Obama fake job war, this time the West really means it when they say we’re at war with those bad guy terrorists. And within an hour or so angry citizens in Calais began setting fires to a Syrian refugee camp as “righteous” retaliation against the twenty-first century enemy of all decency and white bread.

You can’t have a false flag without a co-occurring government exercise training or drill that goes live. This is the one constant that’s present in every false flag. And it’s always a bottom line giveaway that whatever event or crisis, however tragic, in actuality it’s preplanned. Patrick Pelloux is supposedly an emergency medical services specialist and a first responder in last month’s Paris attack as well as January’s Hebdo attack. What are the odds of that? But for all his “valuable experience,” he’s most likely a crisis actor, not an EMT. In any event, he was sure quick to book a radio spot interview confirming that a live drill had been conducted that very same morning on the 13th.

There was even a BBC-Building 7 prophetic touch or two during and even before that Friday the 13th evening when a Twitter account posted a description of the attacks two days in advance of the event. And then Wikipedia two hours into the attacks already had a completed and detailed summary of the night’s happenings including footnotes specifying “this is for Syria” mentioned by a witness, “5 or 6 terrorists” and “3 suicide bombers.” But the clincher was when Wikipedia specified that Hollande would make a televised statement declaring a state of emergency nearly a whole hour before he actually did! Can’t get any more preplanned than that folks. Our governments are killing us for their war on terror and to keep their secret ally ISIS going.

Let’s talk about motive and means that capitalize from such horrific events at our expense. Definitely not the Muslim refugees in Calais whose home got burned down. Nor any of the migrants in Europe or North America, or for that matter no ethnic Middle Easterner or North African regardless of how long they’ve been European or North American citizens. The whole lot of them undoubtedly are only being resented, distrusted and hated even more so by many who feel their native countries have been invaded by unwelcomed outsiders that are destroying their native cultural identities.

The ISIS terrorists would stand little to gain if in fact Hollande’s war and bombs are really dropping on them and not Syria’s infrastructure, ormilitary or civilians like so many US and Israeli bombs seem to target. Again, the only true winners in all these diabolical bloodbaths are the murderers themselves, and I don’t mean all the dead Muslims patsies posing as deep state KIA actors who can’t talk about their CIA or Mossad handlers. I’m talking about the ruling elite and their Western governments.

What did the Paris attacks do? The first thing Hollande did was shut down the French border, locking down Paris into martial law conditions and declaring a national emergencythat’s since been extended another three months. Like clockwork, it’s unleashing yet another round of draconian antiterrorism laws and raids intended to enslave the population even more. It also ensured that the one world government conference, I mean that UN Global Climate Change Conference, didn’t attract any unwanted visitors who would have protested that global warming is one big NWO hoax. So no one could show up in Paris to demonstrate or call attention to the truth and the ruling elite got their way once again, bringing their one world government one giant step closer for psychopaths. After all, to them, what’s 130 people dead if they’re not inconvenienced by a bunch of raggedy malcontent protesters?

Friday the 13th massacre was the crime cabal’s attempt to steal Putin’s thunder with a bloodthirsty renewed vengeance to expand the war in Syria in order to wrest control away from that wily Putin and re-secure Empire of Chaos’ full spectrum dominance and global hegemony. And the winner is…the war on terror, fully reignited and recharged. Within 24-hours France was once again dropping bombs over Syria, but now bombing like they never bombed before. Obama and his neocon cronies also are winners. Just when they were losing their war to Putin and Assad, now they enlisted on board the war zealot from France followed one by one with the UK, Germany and Italy. Whatever ground was being lost before in waning allied interest for war was instantly regained in spades by the Paris slaughter.

NATO was so gleeful and emboldened by the 130 dead that with Obama’s greenlight, a mere week and a half later they authorized fellow NATO member Turkey to commit an act of war against Russia by shooting down its fighter jet killing the pilot for simply flying inside Syria’s sovereign airspace at the request of its sovereign leader. And then lest we forget Israel and its Mossad, the undisputed masters of False Flags-R-US. Allied proxy wars against Muslims in the Middle East never fail to bring a big shit-eating grin to genocidal war criminal Netanyahu and his fellow Zionazis. The real reason terrorism struck Paris last month was to jump start US Empire’s failing regime change war against Assad and Putin in Syria. The same global fixation to maintain its unipolar prowess and hegemonic control at all cost is the same reason the US refuses to share a global balance of power with Eastern nations Russia and China. Bottom line, the globalists want war and terror and Empire dadgummit better deliver.

Conclusions

Though with each passing terrorist attack comes more anti-terror laws giving deep state unlimited power to track citizens’ every move on this planet, have you noticed it doesn’t seem to be making any difference? After each deadly attack we learn the identified terrorists had been known to the authorities for months and even years in advance. Clearly despite all their sophisticated technological means and usurped legal authority to track and monitor, both the frequency and magnitude of terrorist incidents just seems to be skyrocketing, and the disturbing facts presented below confirm this public consensus. This suggests that neither the hi-tech tracking mechanism nor the increasing legal authority for invasively unlawful surveillance is working for us at all, or much more sinister and probable, deep state intentionally authorizes and manufactures terrorism at will. And since governing Western powers have been proven beyond any doubt to finance, control and have long been in bed with the terrorists all along, the naked truth is that our own crime cabal government is killing us in more Gladio-type operations every year.

Another grim reality, we citizens are perceived by our totalitarian government as mere expendables, as longtime globalist guru Henry Kissinger has not-so-fondly referred to us as “useless eaters.” Moreover, this kind of increasing contempt and animosity has also been reflected in how our own Israeli trained law enforcement officers operating in police state USA have come to both view and treat us average everyday Americans. And then for years such high profile globalists as Bill Gates and Ted Turner’s bogus misadventures have been casually calling forthinning the human herd down by 90%. With this all too sobering, bigger picture perspective, state sponsored terrorism is indeed very real… just another hard kill method in their unlimited WMD arsenal.

A few factoids: The most recent global terrorism index (GTI) released a month ago reports that last year in 2014 the number of human lives lost to terrorism around the world rose by an astounding 80%, the highest it’s ever been. The neocons who actually invented their war on terror out of thin air back in 2000 when they devised their nightmarish vision for this century, there was little terrorism to speak of, at least compared to today’s global terrorism that their diabolical policies have currently led us to in 2015. Since 2000 and the Cheney-Bush-Rumsfeld PNAC, the number of people dying from terrorism has soared to nine times what it was. Deaths from terrorism in the Middle East from 2002 to 2014 have spiked 4500%. Prior to the 2003 US invasion of Iraq, there were zero suicide attacks in Saddam’s WMD-free zone. Since then there have been 1892. In the 14 years prior to 9/11 only one suicide attack was recorded in Pakistan. But since 9/11 where the US has been fighting its undeclared drone war for the past 14 years now, Pakistan has suffered 486 suicide attacks. Last year alone saw more civilians killed in Afghanistan at 2643 than ever before since the US 2001 invasion despite our military occupation and war lasting over a decade still raging on with no end in sight. So much for America’s war on terror when all it has produced in this world is more war and more terror. But then that’s never really been the Bush-Obama objective. All along the real US Empire agenda has only been to increase terror around the planet. After all, terrorism-R-US. More terror, more fear, more control.

Globalists have long known that keeping humans afraid in the dark living daily in fear is the easiest way to control them. Despite more 9/11-like terrorist attacks impacting the West, 78% of 2014’s terrorist attacks occurred in just five countries, the very ones that have been most destroyed by US wars – Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Pakistan and Nigeria. That fact only reinforces the earlier point, that wherever America fights its global war on terror always produces the most terrorism. As the world’s worst violator of state sponsored terrorism, it only makes sense that nations the Empire of Chaos and Destruction chooses to fight are where terrorism most flourishes. So much for our boys [and girls] in uniform being the good guys of the world. This reality check also proves that the US military is not the global force for good as the propaganda commercials have always claimed.

It’s finally time we stop with the phony pious platitudes “supporting our troops” when we need to face the dark truth that the fruits of their labor have only made us less safe in a far more dangerous world. If you love our servicemen and women in uniform, remind them to honor their sworn constitutional oaths by protecting our nation and citizens from enemies both foreign and domestic. Tell them not to fight in any more foreign wars but protect us from a criminal government that increasingly shows signs it plans use our own military to harm us. Though volumes could be written on how our government is on course to do us grave harm, one simple question can suffice to illustrate that point. Why else would US Postal Service and the Social Security Administration be buying up billions of rounds of hollow point bullets? Perhaps one day they’ll deliver a bullet with our name on it instead of our mail. Or when we retire we automatically report to the SSI office where they line us up before a firing squad.

When it’s the governments engineering the state sponsored terrorism killing their own people that’s then used to justify more antiterrorism laws and more surveillance, the more is better syndrome is a trap, a deceptive excuse to imprison humans in tyrannical deep state misery. Plus even the experts who worked years at NSA emphatically unequivocally warn that more tracking simply doesn’t work to keep us any safer. Former NSA head of global intelligence operations Bill Binney believes the more is better syndrome actually interferes with trying to stop terrorists:

I am calling all these attacks a result of “Data bulk failure.” Too much data and too many people for the 10-20 thousand analysts to follow. Simple as that.

In conclusion, first the US Empire created the al Qaeda/ISIS Frankenstein to promote its perpetual state of global terror, and then took turns replicating its “new Pearl Harbor” over and over and over again, first on 9/11 in the US, then on 3/3 in Spain and then on 7/7 in the UK. Tragically with last month’s bloodbath, two more this year have been added in France. Then just three weeks after Paris, another false flag hit us much closer to home in San Bernardino killing 14, the biggest mass killing on US soil since the Sandy Hook false flag. As a result,Americans’ fear of terrorism has never been this high since right after 9/11, dreading that only more terrorist violence is on the way since it’s clear the government cannot, or will not protect us, especially since own our government is the perpetrator. By design all this false flag terrorism is guaranteed to brainwash people into fearing Muslim terrorists when the actual murderers terrorizing all us citizens on this planet are our own treasonous governments, not their Muslim patsies.

The world needs to wake up and hold accountable the demonic, guilty architects inflicting so much blood, sorrow and terror on all of us. We can no longer afford to stick our heads in the sand hoping the problem will go away on its own. It won’t. Nor can we allow the ruling elite and its government errand boys and girls to continue killing us with impunity while deceitfully blaming the Muslims that only foments increasing hostilities, ignorance and hatred. Spreading the seeds of distrust and hate only assists the globalists’ agenda to divide and conquer the human domain handing them absolute power and control over the entire global population. The only sane and moral choice is to stand up for humanity and the truth in the face of the real enemy out to destroy us.

The Best of Joachim Hagopian

Joachim Hagopian [send him mail] is a West Point graduate and former US Army officer. He has written a manuscript based on his unique military experience entitled “Don’t Let The Bastards Getcha Down.” It examines and focuses on US international relations, leadership and national security issues. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field for more than a quarter century. In recent years he has focused on his writing, becoming an alternative media journalist. His blog site is at http://empireexposed.blogspot.com.

Previous article by Joachim Hagopian: Supporting the Troops



A Friend of the Devil

Inside a famous Cold War deception.

A Critic at Large

March 23, 2015 Issue

A Friend of the Devil

Inside a famous Cold War deception.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2015/03/23/a-friend-of-the-devil

Participants in the 1957 World Youth Festival, in Moscow, which was sponsored by left-wing student organizations. The C.I.A. infiltrated the festival.

Photograph by Robert Carl Cohen

Louis Menand



Louis Menand has contributed to The New Yorker since 1991, and has been a staff writer since 2001. His book “The Metaphysical Club” was awarded the 2002 Pulitzer Prize for history and the Francis Parkman Prize from the Society of American Historians. He was an associate editor of The New Republic from 1986 to 1987, an editor at The New Yorker from 1992 to 1993, and a contributing editor of The New York Review of Books from 1994 to 2001. He is the Anne T. and Robert M. Bass Professor of English at Harvard University. He has also taught at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, Queens College, Princeton, Columbia, and the University of Virginia School of Law. In 2016, he was awarded the National Humanities Medal by President Obama.

onsider the following strategic dilemma. You are a superpower that hopes to convert other nations to principles you hold vital—these might be individual liberty, private property, and free markets. There is another superpower out there that is hoping to do the same thing, to persuade other nations to embrace its principles—for example, social equality, state ownership, and centralized planning.

One day, you realize that this rival superpower has been busy creating international organizations and staging world congresses and festivals in the name of peace and democracy, and inviting people from other nations to participate.

These organizations and festivals are fronts. Their membership, their programs, and the political positions they enthusiastically adopt are all clandestinely orchestrated by the rival superpower, which is pumping large amounts of money into them. What’s more, in your view that rival superpower is not a peace-loving democracy at all. It’s a totalitarian regime. Yet its slogans attract unwary writers and artists, intellectuals, students, organized labor—people who believe in world peace and international coöperation.

You believe in those things, too. But you think that the slogans are being used to advance your rival’s interests, one of which is to rob you of your superpowers. What do you do? Doing nothing is not an option. Remember, you are a superpower.

The obvious response is to create your own international organizations and sponsor your own world congresses and festivals, and use them to promote your interests. Sadly, however, you cannot do this in a public and transparent way. For it happens that your citizens are not all that taken with the ideals of world peace and international coöperation, and they would not be pleased to see you spend their tax dollars to support the kind of people who advance that agenda. They would prefer to see their tax dollars spent on defense. In fact, they would prefer for there to be no tax dollars at all.

There is also the problem that one of your principles as a superpower is the belief that governments should not interfere with the activities of voluntary associations, such as writers’ congresses and student groups. You don’t believe in fronts. This is a key point of difference between you and your rival superpower. So your hands appear to be tied.

Unless you could do it all in secret. Suppose you directed taxpayer dollars through back channels, disguised as gifts from private benefactors and foundations, to organizations that operated internationally, and that reached out to groups in other countries in the name of the principles you believe in. You would want to be sure that the people running those organizations either didn’t know where the money was coming from or could be trusted to keep it a secret. You might need to pull strings occasionally to get the right people in charge and the right positions enthusiastically adopted.

Wouldn’t that be like creating fronts? Sort of. But here’s the thing: fundamentally, everyone would be on the same page. They just might not be knowingly on the same page. No one would be forced to do or say anything. After you succeeded in stripping your rival of its superpowers, there would no longer be a need for secrecy. Until that day arrived, however, national security might demand this tiny bite out of the principle of transparency. The only people who could object would be people who were already on the wrong side.

After the Second World War, our superpower solved this dilemma in exactly this way and on exactly this line of reasoning. From the more or less official start of the Cold War, Harry Truman’s speech to Congress in March, 1947, announcing his policy “to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures”—that is, Communist aggression—the United States created fronts and secretly infiltrated existing nongovernmental organizations in order to advance American interests abroad.

Almost exactly twenty years after Truman’s speech, in February, 1967, the government’s cover was spectacularly blown by a college dropout. The dropout’s name was Michael Wood, and the operation he exposed was the C.I.A.’s covert use of an organization called the National Student Association. The revelation had a cascading effect, and helped to mark the end of the first phase of the Cold War.

The C.I.A. had its eye on the N.S.A. from the start—both were born in 1947, a few months after Truman’s speech—and the relationship gained steadily in strength and intimacy until the day the secret became public. Its story is now told in detail for the first time, in Karen M. Paget’s “Patriotic Betrayal” (Yale).

“Patriotic Betrayal” is an amazing piece of research. Paget has industriously combed the archives and interviewed many of the surviving players, including former C.I.A. officials. And Paget herself is part of the story she tells. In 1965, her husband, a student-body president at the University of Colorado, became an officer in the N.S.A., and, as a spouse, she was informed of the covert relationship by two former N.S.A. officials who had become C.I.A. agents.

She was sworn to secrecy. The penalty for violating the agreement was twenty years. Paget describes herself back then as “an apolitical twenty-year-old from a small town in Iowa,” and she says that she was terrified. Fifty years later, she is still angry. She has channelled her outrage into as scrupulous an investigation of the covert relationship as the circumstances allow.

One circumstance is the fact that a good deal of material is classified. Paget was able to fish up bits and pieces using the Freedom of Information Act. But most of the iceberg is still underwater, and will probably remain there. So there is sometimes an aura of vagueness around who was calling the tune and why.

The vagueness was also there by design. It was baked into the covert relationship. There was a lot of winking and nodding; that’s what helped people believe they were on the same page. But it means that much of the history of what passed between the C.I.A. and the N.S.A. is irrecoverable. Still, “Patriotic Betrayal” is a conscientious attempt to take the full measure of an iconic piece of Cold War subterfuge.

It’s a dense book. Readers will be glad for the three-page guide in the back to abbreviations and acronyms. (There are also nearly ninety pages of endnotes, with more references accessible online.) Organizationally, the N.S.A.-C.I.A. affair was quite complex. There were a number of quasi-independent parts—another reason, besides the secrecy, that it was hard to see what was really going on.

The parts included the World Federation of Democratic Youth, or W.F.D.Y., a Soviet front organization created right after the war; the International Union of Students, or I.U.S., formed at a world congress of students in Prague in 1946, with a Czech Communist elected president; and the N.S.A. itself, which was founded at a student convention in Madison, Wisconsin, in 1947, in order to represent the United States in the I.U.S.

The Madison convention also created an N.S.A. subcommittee on international affairs and gave it authority to deal with international issues. The key move was the separation of the main N.S.A. office, which was in Madison, from the international division, which was housed in Cambridge, Massachusetts. It was the Cambridge branch of the N.S.A. that received most of the C.I.A.’s funding and did most of the C.I.A.’s bidding. Madison was kept out of the loop.

In 1948, there was a Communist coup in Czechoslovakia, a crucial event in the hardening of postwar relations. When the I.U.S. refused to condemn the coup, the N.S.A. withdrew and set about forming a rival group, the International Student Conference, or I.S.C. These two organizations, the I.U.S. and the I.S.C., became superpower proxies in the looking-glass war that was the Cold War. Through the N.S.A., the C.I.A. tried to orchestrate what happened in the I.S.C., just as the I.U.S. was responsive to the demands of the Kremlin.

The N.S.A. was never a virgin. Paget reveals that, even before Prague, American students were subject to surveillance and scheming by three groups of grownups: the State Department, the F.B.I., and the Catholic Church. It can be forgotten how influential a role the Church’s highly disciplined anti-Communism played in Cold War affairs. The Holy Father took a personal interest in the danger of Communist infiltration of youth organizations, including the N.S.A.; the bishops kept a close eye on Catholic student leaders; and Catholics usually voted as a bloc in N.S.A. and I.S.C. meetings.

The Pope’s anti-Communism was too rigid for the C.I.A. The agency also had little use for J. Edgar Hoover, with whom the Church collaborated in investigating students’ backgrounds, or for Senator Joseph McCarthy and his hunt for Communists in the government. Agency politics—or, rather, the politics of agency policies—were farther to the left.

The N.S.A., for example, was a forthrightly liberal organization. Civil rights was part of the agenda early on. The N.S.A.’s second president (1948-49), James (Ted) Harris, was an African-American (and a Catholic). Its fourth president (1950-51) was the future civil-rights and antiwar activist Allard Lowenstein (not a Catholic). The N.S.A. helped found the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee, a principal organizer of the march from Selma that led to the passage of the Voting Rights Act, in 1965. And the N.S.A.’s politics were typical of most of the organizations in the C.I.A.’s covert network: they were socially progressive, anti-colonialist, and sometimes even socialist.

One customary explanation is that the people who ran covert operations at the C.I.A. from 1947 to 1967 were not right-wing jingoists. They were liberal anti-Communists, veterans of Roosevelt’s Office of Strategic Services, the forerunner of the C.I.A. They were good guys who despised the Soviet Union as a traitor to progressive principles.

If people held this belief about the C.I.A., the agency exploited it. C.I.A. officials used to tell N.S.A. students who were in the know—the agency’s term for them was “witting” (or “witty”)—that, while the State Department supported authoritarian dictatorships, the C.I.A. supported foreign students who were involved in democratic resistance and national liberation movements. This was supposed to make the N.S.A. students feel that they had bargained with the right devil.

The students were being misled. The C.I.A. is part of the executive branch. Its director reports to the President; its operations and expenditures are subject to congressional oversight. The director of the C.I.A. during the nineteen-fifties, Allen Dulles, was the Secretary of State’s brother. The notion that the C.I.A. was running its own foreign policy, or that it was a “rogue elephant,” as one senator later called it, is absurd.

After the revelations of the nineteen-sixties and seventies, when many of the C.I.A.’s undercover operations were exposed, people began talking about the agency as though it were some kind of underground cell, an organization with no accountability, up to its own dirty tricks. But a report on the C.I.A.’s covert operations made immediately after the 1967 revelations concluded that the agency “did not act on its own initiative.” In 1976, a more critical congressional report, which was never officially released, stated, “All evidence in hand suggests that the CIA, far from being out of control, has been utterly responsive to the instructions of the President and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs.”

It’s true that the C.I.A. did not always fully inform Administrations about what it was up to, but the agency had reason to believe that there were some things Administrations preferred not to know. Deniability is a crucial ingredient of covert operations. The C.I.A. used the N.S.A. to further the policies of the American government. If it had been found doing anything contrary to the wishes of the President, its plug would have been pulled very fast.

So what, exactly, was the N.S.A. useful for? This is where things get murky. According to Paget’s account, the N.S.A. was apparently not used for what the C.I.A. called “political warfare.” The agency did create a front organization called the Independent Research Service (inventing titles that are as meaningless as possible is part of the spy game) for the purpose of recruiting American students to disrupt Soviet-controlled World Youth Festivals in Vienna, in 1959, and Helsinki, in 1962. The person in charge was the future feminist Gloria Steinem, who knew perfectly well where the money was coming from and never regretted taking it. “If I had a choice I would do it again,” she later said.

Consider the following strategic dilemma. You are a superpower that hopes to convert other nations to principles you hold vital—these might be individual liberty, private property, and free markets. There is another superpower out there that is hoping to do the same thing, to persuade other nations to embrace its principles—for example, social equality, state ownership, and centralized planning.

One day, you realize that this rival superpower has been busy creating international organizations and staging world congresses and festivals in the name of peace and democracy, and inviting people from other nations to participate.

These organizations and festivals are fronts. Their membership, their programs, and the political positions they enthusiastically adopt are all clandestinely orchestrated by the rival superpower, which is pumping large amounts of money into them. What’s more, in your view that rival superpower is not a peace-loving democracy at all. It’s a totalitarian regime. Yet its slogans attract unwary writers and artists, intellectuals, students, organized labor—people who believe in world peace and international coöperation.

You believe in those things, too. But you think that the slogans are being used to advance your rival’s interests, one of which is to rob you of your superpowers. What do you do? Doing nothing is not an option. Remember, you are a superpower.

The obvious response is to create your own international organizations and sponsor your own world congresses and festivals, and use them to promote your interests. Sadly, however, you cannot do this in a public and transparent way. For it happens that your citizens are not all that taken with the ideals of world peace and international coöperation, and they would not be pleased to see you spend their tax dollars to support the kind of people who advance that agenda. They would prefer to see their tax dollars spent on defense. In fact, they would prefer for there to be no tax dollars at all.

There is also the problem that one of your principles as a superpower is the belief that governments should not interfere with the activities of voluntary associations, such as writers’ congresses and student groups. You don’t believe in fronts. This is a key point of difference between you and your rival superpower. So your hands appear to be tied.

Unless you could do it all in secret. Suppose you directed taxpayer dollars through back channels, disguised as gifts from private benefactors and foundations, to organizations that operated internationally, and that reached out to groups in other countries in the name of the principles you believe in. You would want to be sure that the people running those organizations either didn’t know where the money was coming from or could be trusted to keep it a secret. You might need to pull strings occasionally to get the right people in charge and the right positions enthusiastically adopted.

Wouldn’t that be like creating fronts? Sort of. But here’s the thing: fundamentally, everyone would be on the same page. They just might not be knowingly on the same page. No one would be forced to do or say anything. After you succeeded in stripping your rival of its superpowers, there would no longer be a need for secrecy. Until that day arrived, however, national security might demand this tiny bite out of the principle of transparency. The only people who could object would be people who were already on the wrong side.

After the Second World War, our superpower solved this dilemma in exactly this way and on exactly this line of reasoning. From the more or less official start of the Cold War, Harry Truman’s speech to Congress in March, 1947, announcing his policy “to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures”—that is, Communist aggression—the United States created fronts and secretly infiltrated existing nongovernmental organizations in order to advance American interests abroad.

Almost exactly twenty years after Truman’s speech, in February, 1967, the government’s cover was spectacularly blown by a college dropout. The dropout’s name was Michael Wood, and the operation he exposed was the C.I.A.’s covert use of an organization called the National Student Association. The revelation had a cascading effect, and helped to mark the end of the first phase of the Cold War.

The C.I.A. had its eye on the N.S.A. from the start—both were born in 1947, a few months after Truman’s speech—and the relationship gained steadily in strength and intimacy until the day the secret became public. Its story is now told in detail for the first time, in Karen M. Paget’s “Patriotic Betrayal” (Yale).

“Patriotic Betrayal” is an amazing piece of research. Paget has industriously combed the archives and interviewed many of the surviving players, including former C.I.A. officials. And Paget herself is part of the story she tells. In 1965, her husband, a student-body president at the University of Colorado, became an officer in the N.S.A., and, as a spouse, she was informed of the covert relationship by two former N.S.A. officials who had become C.I.A. agents.

She was sworn to secrecy. The penalty for violating the agreement was twenty years. Paget describes herself back then as “an apolitical twenty-year-old from a small town in Iowa,” and she says that she was terrified. Fifty years later, she is still angry. She has channelled her outrage into as scrupulous an investigation of the covert relationship as the circumstances allow.

One circumstance is the fact that a good deal of material is classified. Paget was able to fish up bits and pieces using the Freedom of Information Act. But most of the iceberg is still underwater, and will probably remain there. So there is sometimes an aura of vagueness around who was calling the tune and why.

The vagueness was also there by design. It was baked into the covert relationship. There was a lot of winking and nodding; that’s what helped people believe they were on the same page. But it means that much of the history of what passed between the C.I.A. and the N.S.A. is irrecoverable. Still, “Patriotic Betrayal” is a conscientious attempt to take the full measure of an iconic piece of Cold War subterfuge.

It’s a dense book. Readers will be glad for the three-page guide in the back to abbreviations and acronyms. (There are also nearly ninety pages of endnotes, with more references accessible online.) Organizationally, the N.S.A.-C.I.A. affair was quite complex. There were a number of quasi-independent parts—another reason, besides the secrecy, that it was hard to see what was really going on.

The parts included the World Federation of Democratic Youth, or W.F.D.Y., a Soviet front organization created right after the war; the International Union of Students, or I.U.S., formed at a world congress of students in Prague in 1946, with a Czech Communist elected president; and the N.S.A. itself, which was founded at a student convention in Madison, Wisconsin, in 1947, in order to represent the United States in the I.U.S.

The Madison convention also created an N.S.A. subcommittee on international affairs and gave it authority to deal with international issues. The key move was the separation of the main N.S.A. office, which was in Madison, from the international division, which was housed in Cambridge, Massachusetts. It was the Cambridge branch of the N.S.A. that received most of the C.I.A.’s funding and did most of the C.I.A.’s bidding. Madison was kept out of the loop.

In 1948, there was a Communist coup in Czechoslovakia, a crucial event in the hardening of postwar relations. When the I.U.S. refused to condemn the coup, the N.S.A. withdrew and set about forming a rival group, the International Student Conference, or I.S.C. These two organizations, the I.U.S. and the I.S.C., became superpower proxies in the looking-glass war that was the Cold War. Through the N.S.A., the C.I.A. tried to orchestrate what happened in the I.S.C., just as the I.U.S. was responsive to the demands of the Kremlin.

The N.S.A. was never a virgin. Paget reveals that, even before Prague, American students were subject to surveillance and scheming by three groups of grownups: the State Department, the F.B.I., and the Catholic Church. It can be forgotten how influential a role the Church’s highly disciplined anti-Communism played in Cold War affairs. The Holy Father took a personal interest in the danger of Communist infiltration of youth organizations, including the N.S.A.; the bishops kept a close eye on Catholic student leaders; and Catholics usually voted as a bloc in N.S.A. and I.S.C. meetings.

The Pope’s anti-Communism was too rigid for the C.I.A. The agency also had little use for J. Edgar Hoover, with whom the Church collaborated in investigating students’ backgrounds, or for Senator Joseph McCarthy and his hunt for Communists in the government. Agency politics—or, rather, the politics of agency policies—were farther to the left.

The N.S.A., for example, was a forthrightly liberal organization. Civil rights was part of the agenda early on. The N.S.A.’s second president (1948-49), James (Ted) Harris, was an African-American (and a Catholic). Its fourth president (1950-51) was the future civil-rights and antiwar activist Allard Lowenstein (not a Catholic). The N.S.A. helped found the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee, a principal organizer of the march from Selma that led to the passage of the Voting Rights Act, in 1965. And the N.S.A.’s politics were typical of most of the organizations in the C.I.A.’s covert network: they were socially progressive, anti-colonialist, and sometimes even socialist.

One customary explanation is that the people who ran covert operations at the C.I.A. from 1947 to 1967 were not right-wing jingoists. They were liberal anti-Communists, veterans of Roosevelt’s Office of Strategic Services, the forerunner of the C.I.A. They were good guys who despised the Soviet Union as a traitor to progressive principles.

If people held this belief about the C.I.A., the agency exploited it. C.I.A. officials used to tell N.S.A. students who were in the know—the agency’s term for them was “witting” (or “witty”)—that, while the State Department supported authoritarian dictatorships, the C.I.A. supported foreign students who were involved in democratic resistance and national liberation movements. This was supposed to make the N.S.A. students feel that they had bargained with the right devil.

The students were being misled. The C.I.A. is part of the executive branch. Its director reports to the President; its operations and expenditures are subject to congressional oversight. The director of the C.I.A. during the nineteen-fifties, Allen Dulles, was the Secretary of State’s brother. The notion that the C.I.A. was running its own foreign policy, or that it was a “rogue elephant,” as one senator later called it, is absurd.

After the revelations of the nineteen-sixties and seventies, when many of the C.I.A.’s undercover operations were exposed, people began talking about the agency as though it were some kind of underground cell, an organization with no accountability, up to its own dirty tricks. But a report on the C.I.A.’s covert operations made immediately after the 1967 revelations concluded that the agency “did not act on its own initiative.” In 1976, a more critical congressional report, which was never officially released, stated, “All evidence in hand suggests that the CIA, far from being out of control, has been utterly responsive to the instructions of the President and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs.”

It’s true that the C.I.A. did not always fully inform Administrations about what it was up to, but the agency had reason to believe that there were some things Administrations preferred not to know. Deniability is a crucial ingredient of covert operations. The C.I.A. used the N.S.A. to further the policies of the American government. If it had been found doing anything contrary to the wishes of the President, its plug would have been pulled very fast.

So what, exactly, was the N.S.A. useful for? This is where things get murky. According to Paget’s account, the N.S.A. was apparently not used for what the C.I.A. called “political warfare.” The agency did create a front organization called the Independent Research Service (inventing titles that are as meaningless as possible is part of the spy game) for the purpose of recruiting American students to disrupt Soviet-controlled World Youth Festivals in Vienna, in 1959, and Helsinki, in 1962. The person in charge was the future feminist Gloria Steinem, who knew perfectly well where the money was coming from and never regretted taking it. “If I had a choice I would do it again,” she later said.

….

But that operation did not involve the N.S.A. Nor was the N.S.A. used only to promote American principles abroad, although that was part of the reason for funding it. The C.I.A. embedded agents in the N.S.A., and it worked behind the scenes to insure that pliable students got elected to run the association and that the desired policy positions got adopted. It took the extra precaution of starting up a covertly funded summer program, called the International Student Relations Seminar, and using it to groom future N.S.A. leaders. A number of N.S.A. members who went through the seminar went on to have careers at the agency.

Essentially, the N.S.A. functioned as a glove that concealed the American government’s hand and allowed it to do business with people who would never knowingly have done business with the American government. These people thought that they were dealing with a student group that was independent of the government. They had no idea that the N.S.A. was a front.

And what did this permit the C.I.A. to do? First, the N.S.A. was used as a cutout. The C.I.A. funnelled financial support to favored foreign-student groups by means of grants ostensibly coming from the N.S.A. Second, the N.S.A. was a recruitment device. It enabled the agency to identify potential intelligence sources among student leaders in other countries. And, third, N.S.A. members who attended international conferences filed written reports or were debriefed afterward, giving the C.I.A. a huge database of information.

The C.I.A. did not buy into the adage that the student leader of today is the student leader of tomorrow. It calculated that the heads of national student organizations were likely some day to become important figures in their countries’ governments. When that happened (and it often did), the American government had a file on them. “Over time, witting staff reported on thousands of foreign students’ political tendencies, personality traits, and future aspirations,” Paget writes. “They submitted detailed analyses of political dynamics within foreign student unions and countries.”

This may seem benign enough, but there was a problem. It had to do with the “State Department bad guys, C.I.A. good guys” routine. The State Department deals with nations with which the United States has diplomatic relations. Having diplomatic relations with a foreign government prohibits you from negotiating with, or acknowledging the legitimacy of, groups committed to that government’s overthrow. This is why it’s convenient to have an agency that operates clandestinely. The C.I.A. could cultivate relations with opposition groups secretly, and this permitted the American government to work both sides of the street.

Paget thinks that, in some cases, the information the C.I.A. gathered about students who were political opponents of a regime may have ended up in the hands of that regime, which could then have used the information to arrest and execute its enemies. She suspects that this may have happened in several countries where the American government was involved in regime change, including Iraq, Iran, and South Africa.

But it’s all speculation. There are no smoking guns in Paget’s book—no specific cases in which the C.I.A. made students’ names available to a foreign government. And the reason, of course, has to do with the classified material. No intelligence agency will ever release documents that reveal the identities of people with whom it had contacts. That information is at the very bottom of the iceberg.

It’s odd that the relationship remained secret as long as it did. The N.S.A. was one of many organizations covertly funded by the C.I.A. Over the life of those relationships, hundreds of people must have been in the know. But until Michael Wood spilled the beans no one ever spoke up publicly. This is a testament to something: in the case of the N.S.A., the naïveté of the students; the arrogance of the grownups (at the C.I.A., N.S.A. students were referred to as “the kiddies”); the power of anti-Communism to trump every scruple.

One thing it is not a testament to is the C.I.A.’s tradecraft. The evidence of the agency’s covert funding system was hidden in plain sight. The world got a peek in 1964, when a House of Representatives subcommittee ran an investigation into the tax-exempt status of philanthropic foundations. The committee had trouble getting information from the I.R.S. about a certain New York-based charitable foundation, the J. M. Kaplan Fund.

The chair of the committee, a Texas congressman named Wright Patman, surmised that the reason the I.R.S. was not coöperating was that the C.I.A. was preventing it. Patman didn’t appreciate the disrespect; in retaliation, he made public a list of eight foundations that, between 1961 and 1963, had given almost a million dollars to the J. M. Kaplan Fund.

patman attacks ‘secret’ c.i.a. link: Says Agency Gave Money to Private Group Acting as Its Sub-Rosa ‘Conduit’ ” was the headline in the Times, which published the names of the eight “conduit” foundations. After a closed-door meeting with representatives from the C.I.A. and the I.R.S., Patman emerged to announce that if there was a C.I.A. connection it was no longer of interest to his subcommittee, and that he was dropping the matter.

But the cat was partway out of the bag. As their transparently invented names suggest—the Gotham Foundation, the Borden Trust, the Andrew Hamilton Fund, and so on—these eight foundations were C.I.A. cutouts. The agency had approached wealthy people it knew to be sympathetic and asked them to head dummy foundations. Those people were then put on a masthead, a name for the foundation was invented, sometimes an office was rented to provide an address, and a conduit came into being. The members of the phony boards even held annual meetings, at which “business” was discussed, expenses paid by the agency.

The dummy foundations were used to channel money to groups the agency wanted to support. Sometimes the C.I.A. passed funds through the dummies to legitimate charitable foundations, like the Kaplan Fund, which in turn passed it along to groups like the National Student Association. Sometimes the cutouts existed solely to write checks to the C.I.A.’s beneficiaries.

The C.I.A.’s name did not appear anywhere. The giveaway was the dollar-for-dollar equivalence of the amount received from the dummy and the amount granted to the target group. If the expenses side of Kaplan’s books showed a two-hundred-thousand-dollar grant to the N.S.A., the income side would show a two-hundred-thousand-dollar donation from one of the agency’s dummy foundations.

The Times published an editorial saying that “the practice ought to stop. . . . The use of Government intelligence funds to get foundations to underwrite institutions, organizations, magazines and newspapers abroad is a distortion of C.I.A.’s mission on gathering and evaluating information.” In 1966, the paper ran a series of articles on the C.I.A.’s spying operations, in which it revealed that the C.I.A. was funding the Congress for Cultural Freedom and its many European-based magazines. The paper also reported that the agency had funded some American academics when they travelled abroad. The C.I.A. seems to have done nothing in response to these stories, and nothing came of them.

Then Michael Wood made his appearance. Wood was from Glendale, California. In 1964, he had dropped out of Pomona College to become a civil-rights organizer in the Watts neighborhood of Los Angeles. His work there attracted the attention of the National Student Association, and it offered him a job.

By then, the N.S.A. represented about a million students from more than four hundred American colleges. It had just moved its offices (with help from the C.I.A.) to Washington, D.C., to adjoining four-story town houses near Dupont Circle. Wood was soon promoted to the position of director of development—fund-raising.

He discovered something strange. No one at the N.S.A. seemed terribly interested in raising money. Grant proposals were perfunctory, and Wood learned that the president of the N.S.A., Philip Sherburne, the man who had hired him, was negotiating for donations on his own. Wood confronted Sherburne and told him that unless he was given control of all fund-raising activities he would have to resign. Sherburne invited him to lunch. This was in March, 1966.

Sherburne had grown up on a dairy farm in Oregon. Wood liked him. They met in a restaurant on Connecticut Avenue called the Sirloin and Saddle, where Sherburne violated his secrecy agreement and told Wood about the C.I.A. He told Wood that he was desperately trying to terminate the relationship (which was true), and asked him to keep their conversation secret.

Wood knew that if he revealed the contents of the conversation Sherburne could go to jail. But he hated the thought that the C.I.A. had financial leverage over the N.S.A. That fall, Wood was fired from the N.S.A. Paget reports that he was not getting along with people at the office. But he had already decided to go public, and had begun surreptitiously making copies of N.S.A. financial records.

Paget doesn’t explain how Wood contacted the press. The story is that he met Marc Stone, a public-relations man who happened to be the brother of the investigative journalist I. F. Stone, and who represented a West Coast magazine called Ramparts. Though only four years old, Ramparts had become a slick muckraker with a New Left slant and a rapidly growing circulation under its young editor, Warren Hinckle.

The magazine began looking into Wood’s story, which seemed hard to believe and impossible to confirm. But its researchers discovered records showing that some of the eight dummy foundations named by Patman two years before were donors to the N.S.A. The C.I.A. had not even bothered to change their names. By February, 1967, the magazine had a story ready to go.

The C.I.A. got wind of the magazine’s investigation. It gathered past presidents of the N.S.A. and scheduled a news conference at which the presidents were to admit receiving C.I.A. money but swear that the C.I.A. had never influenced N.S.A. policy. They thought this would defuse any story that the magazine eventually published.

Ramparts, in turn, got wind of the C.I.A.’s plan to scoop its scoop. Hinckle bought ads in the New York Times and the Washington Post. These ran on February 14th, Valentine’s Day; they announced, “In its March issue, Rampartsmagazine will document how the CIA has infiltrated and subverted the world of American student leaders.” Placing the ad tipped off the Times and the Post, and their reporters called the C.I.A. for comment. And so, on the same day the Ramparts ads appeared, both newspapers ran articles on the C.I.A.’s covert funding of the N.S.A.

This time, the story caught fire. Wood went on ABC’s “Issues and Answers,” where he was asked whether he thought that he had destroyed the C.I.A. as an effective instrument in the Cold War. CBS News broadcast an hour-long program, hosted by Mike Wallace, called “In the Pay of the CIA.” The major news magazines ran cover stories.

Once the N.S.A. thread had been pulled, the whole tapestry of C.I.A. covert operations started to unravel. Reporters discovered that the money trail wound through some eighteen dummy foundations and twenty-one legitimate foundations. The Los Angeles Times found more than fifty grantees. The agency gave money to the National Council of Churches, the United Auto Workers, the International Commission of Jurists, the International Marketing Institute, the American Friends of the Middle East, the Pan American Foundation, the American Newspaper Guild, the National Education Association, the Communications Workers of America, and the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Church Outside Russia.

Some of the funded groups were creatures of the C.I.A. Radio Free Europe and the Free Russia Fund, which regularly appealed to the public for contributions, had actually been created by the government and were funded by the C.I.A. Other organizations had C.I.A. agents planted in them. A few groups had no idea about the real source of the funds they lived on. An organization headed by the socialist Norman Thomas got money from the C.I.A.

The Ramparts story effectively killed the covert-funding system. As Hinckle put it in his delightful memoir, “If You Have a Lemon, Make Lemonade,” “It is a rare thing in this business when you say bang and somebody says I’m dead.” More than that, the revelations meant that the whole covert-funding operation had backfired. An effort to curry the allegiance of foreign élites ended up alienating them almost completely. After 1967, every American venture in international cultural relations, official or unofficial, became suspect. The cultural Cold War came apart.

Paget struggles at the end of her book to find an upside to the story she tells, some case in which C.I.A. involvement in the N.S.A. helped the United States win the Cold War. The record, she concludes, “is mixed at best and frequently dismal.” There is no evidence, for example, that the N.S.A. ever persuaded anyone to renounce Communism. The most that can be said, she thinks, is that the Soviet Union did not get to have the field of international student affairs all to itself. There was another front in the game

https://media.newyorker.com/cartoons/593b616257b86d47b169c4c1/master/w_280,c_limit/150323_a18910.jpg

“What is friendship if not constant amateurish psychoanalysis?”

March 11, 2015


Edwin Paul Wilson-CIA

http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKwilsonE2.htm

  

Edwin Paul Wilson (May 3, 1928 – September 10, 2012) was a former CIA and U.S. Naval Intelligence officer who was convicted in 1983 of illegally selling weapons to Libya. It was later found that the United States Department of Justice and the CIA had covered up evidence in the case. Wilson's convictions were overturned in 2003 and he was freed the following year.

Edwin Paul Wilson was a former CIA and U.S. Naval Intelligence officer who was convicted in 1983 of illegally selling weapons to Libya. It was later found that the United States Department of Justice and the CIA had covered up evidence in the case.

Edwin P. Wilson was born to a poor farming family in Nampa, Idaho in 1928. Six foot five inches tall, charming, rugged and a consummate networker, he first worked as a merchant seaman. In 1953, Wilson earned a psychology degree from the University of Portland. That same year, Wilson joined the Marines and fought in the last days of the Korean War. He was said to have been impressive during his military service and, when he was discharged in 1956 for a knee injury, went to work for the Central Intelligence Agency.

CIA Career

Wilson's first assignments were for the Office of Security; this included a stint in 1956 guarding U-2 spy planes in Turkey. In 1960, the Agency sent him to Cornell University for graduate studies in Labor Relations. He put this and his knowledge of psychology to use in the Agency's International Organizations Division (IOD) tackling communism in trade unions around the world. Wilson was involved in attempts to destabilize European labour unions, for example, by using methods as diverse as involving Corsican mobsters and using plagues of cockroaches.

However, Wilson's most valuable time for the CIA was in Special Operations Division (SOD) setting up front companies like Maritime Consulting Associates (1964) and Consultants International (1965), which were used to covertly ship supplies around the world. For example, cargoes included disassembled boats sent to central Africa where they were welded together on the shores of Lake Tanganyika and used to intercept Soviet arms being ferried across the lake to rebels in the Congo; arms to Angola; crowd-control gear to Chile, Brazil and Venezuela; all kinds of equipment for intelligence-gathering facilities in Iran; supplies for a group of dissident army officers planning a coup in Indonesia; and barges sent to Vietnam.[5] As director of these firms, which were conducted as legitimate businesses, Wilson began to amass a lot of money, but as a contractor, not an employee. He invested in property around the world.[6] In 1971, after 15 years with the CIA, events that have been disputed ended Wilson's official career there. He nevertheless received a year's pay and acquired ownership of some of his front companies.

ONI Career

In 1971, with the CIA's knowledge and approval, Wilson moved to the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) where he worked full-time for a secret intelligence unit called the Naval Field Operations Support Group (NFOSG) or Task Force 157. Between its inception in 1966 and termination in 1977, the focus was on acquiring intelligence on Soviet naval activity. However, the unit's remit was wider and later described as “the U.S. military's only network of undercover agents and spies operating abroad using commercial and business 'cover' for their espionage." At this time, Wilson set up another front company—World Marine, Inc.—to assist with his logistics work. Wilson then retired from the ONI in 1976 after events that have been disputed. After a change in commanders, Wilson reportedly appealed to Admiral Bobby Inman, the Director of Naval Intelligence, offering his influence in Congress to the ONI's budget troubles if he, Wilson, could be made chief of Task Force 157. Allegedly outraged, Inman shut down Task Force 157 altogether and reported Wilson to the FBI> However, other calculations may have been in play.

Wilson continued to run the businesses he had built under the guidance of the CIA, the largest of which was Consultants International. He reportedly amassed a fortune of over $20 million through these businesses, and continued to offer covert shipping services at the request of the CIA after his official retirement.

Arms for Libya controversy

In the 1970s, he became involved in dealings with Libya. Wilson claims that a high-ranking CIA official Theodore "Blond Ghost" Shackley asked him to go to Libya to keep an eye on Carlos the Jackal, the infamous terrorist, who was living there.  At the time, a strict sanctions regime was in place against Libya and the country was willing to pay a great deal for weapons and material. Wilson began conducting elaborate dealings, and guns and military uniforms were smuggled into the country. Wilson also recruited a group of retired Green Berets—decorated Vietnam veteran Billy Waugh among them —to go to Libya and train its military and intelligence officers. The Libyans used Wilson's provisions to advance their interests around the world, including training terrorist cells to build explosive devices inside radios. One cell trained by Wilson's operatives was the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine - General Command (PFLF-GC) under the command of Ahmad Jibril. Jibril was suspected of being behind the bombing of Pan Am 103 in Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988. In 1979, a gun that Wilson had arranged to be delivered to the Libyan embassy in Bonn was used to assassinate a prominent dissident. The next year, one of the Green Berets assassinated another dissident in Colorado. Wilson states that he regrets these incidents and had no prior knowledge of them. He states that he was still working for the CIA and his supplying of weapon to the Libyans was an attempt to get close to them and gain valuable intelligence. This included attempts at gathering information on the Libyan nuclear program.

The most dramatic deal, and the one that brought Wilson to the attention of the U.S. government, was for some twenty tons of military-grade C-4 plastic explosives.  This was a massive quantity that was equal to the entire U.S. domestic stockpile.  Most of Wilson's connections were still under the impression that he was working for the CIA and a wide network in the United States supported his actions. The explosives were presumed assembled by a California company and hidden in barrels of oil drilling mud. They were presumed flown to Libya aboard a chartered jet.

Another scandal broke out around Wilson when a company he had formed to ship United States military aid to Egypt was convicted of overcharging the United States Department of Defense by $8 million.  A partner with Edwin P. Wilson in this company was another former CIA officer, Thomas G. Clines.  Wilson also maintained that Major General Richard V. Secord was also a "silent partner" in this company, though Secord denied this allegation. Nonetheless, Wilson, Clines and Theodore Shackley (another former CIA officer) were all working together with Secord in the summer of 1984 when Oliver North approached Secord to ask for help in buying arms for the Contras, a group of armed rebels then trying to overturn the leftist Sandinista government of Nicaragua.

Investigation and conviction[edit]

After a lengthy investigation by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (then part of the U.S. Department of the Treasury), Wilson was indicted by the U.S. Justice Department for firearms and explosives violations. However, he was in Libya, which would not extradite him. Wilson was very unhappy in Libya, the Libyans were suspicious of him, and he feared for his safety. The prosecutors, led by Lawrence Barcella, knew this and they sent a con-man with links to the CIA named Ernest Keiser to convince Wilson that he would be safe in the Dominican Republic. Wilson flew to the Caribbean, but upon arrival was arrested and flown to New York.

He was put on trial four separate times. He was found not guilty of trying to hire a group of Cubans to kill a Libyan dissident. He was found guilty of exporting guns, including the one used in the Bonn assassination, and of shipping the explosives and sentenced to 15 years in prison for the former and 17 years for the latter. While awaiting trial, he allegedly approached a fellow prisoner and attempted to hire him to kill the federal prosecutors. This prisoner was never questioned by anyone outside the CIA. The prisoner instead went to the authorities and they set Wilson up with an undercover agent. The agent taped Wilson hiring him to kill the prosecutors, six witnesses and his ex-wife. In a subsequent trial, he was sentenced to an added 24 years in jail for conspiracy to murder. The voice in the recording was never solidly identified as Wilson's.

Legal defense

Wilson's defense to the Libyan charges was that he was working at the behest of the CIA. The CIA gave the DOJ an affidavit stating that, after his retirement, he had not been employed directly or indirectly by the agency. The CIA later informed the DOJ that it should not use the affidavit at trial, but the prosecutor Ted Greenberg decided to use it anyway.

While in prison, Wilson campaigned vigorously for his innocence and repeatedly filed Freedom of Information Act requests with the government. Eventually, he found information linked to the memo and hired a new lawyer. His lawyer was David Adler, a former CIA officer who had clearance to view classified documents. Adler spent long hours poring through thousands of files and eventually found 80 incidents where Wilson met on a professional basis with the CIA and proof that the CIA had indirectly used Wilson after his retirement. "His revenge for his framing came almost too late. In 2003 his conviction for the explosives-shipping was overturned because, wrote the judge, the government had lied. Far from no contacts with the CIA between 1971 and 1978, there had been at least 80. Several ran intriguingly 'parallel' to the illegal acts he had been charged with. The next year he was released, white-haired at 76, fighting fit and pumped up with his own righteousness, to spend the rest of his days trying to clear his name." [6]

A federal judge ruled that the prosecution had acted improperly. In October 2003, Wilson's conviction on the explosives charge was overturned. Wilson was released from prison on September 14, 2004, after being incarcerated for 22 years.

Civil action

Wilson filed a civil suit against seven former federal prosecutors, two of whom are now federal judges, and a past executive director of the CIA. On 29 March 2007, U.S. District Judge Lee Rosenthal dismissed his case on the ground that all eight had immunity covering their actions.

Edwin PaulWilson was born in Idaho in 1928. The son of an unsuccessful farmer who died of cancer in 1940, Wilson managed to obtain a degree in psychology before joining the Marine Corps in 1953.

Wilson joined the Central Intelligence Agency in 1956. As a CIA agent, he spied on European unions before running shipping companies secretly owned by the agency. Over the next few years he arranged clandestine CIA arms shipments to Angola, Laos, Indonesia and the Congo.

In 1971, Wilson left the CIA to run shipping companies for a secret Navy intelligence organization called Task Force 157. This included a company based in Washington called World Marine Incorporated. Wilson used World Marine to carry out his own private business deals. In 1973 Wilson earned a $500,000 fee by delivering a spy ship to Iran under the cover of World Marine.

In 1973 Frank Nugan, an Australian lawyer, and Michael Hand, a former CIA contract operative, established the Nugan Hand Bank. Another key figure in this venture was Bernie Houghton, who was closely connected to CIA officials, Ted Shackley and Thomas G. Clines.

Nugan ran operations in Sydney whereas Hand established a branch in Hong Kong. This enabled Australian depositors to access a money-laundering facility for illegal transfers of Australian money to Hong Kong. According to Alfred W. McCoy, the "Hand-Houghton partnership led the bank's international division into new fields - drug finance, arms trading, and support work for CIA covert operations." Hand told friends "it was his ambition that Nugan Hand became banker for the CIA."

In 1974 the Nugan Hand Bank got involved in helping the CIA to take part in covert arms deals with contacts within Angola. It was at this time that Edwin Wilson became involved with the bank. Two CIA agents based in Indonesia, James Hawes and Robert Moore, called on Wilson at his World Marine offices to discuss "an African arms deal". Later, Bernie Houghton arrived from Sydney to place an order for 10 million rounds of ammunition and 3,000 weapons including machine guns. The following year Houghton asked Wilson to arrange for World Marine to purchase a high-technology spy ship. This ship was then sold to Iran.

By 1976 the Nugan-Hand Bank appeared to have become a CIA-fronted company. This is reflected in the type of people recruited to hold senior positions in the bank. For example, Rear-Admiral Earl P. Yates, the former Chief of Staff for Policy and Plans of the U.S. Pacific Command and a counter-insurgency specialist, became president of the company. Other appointments included William Colby, retired director of the CIA, General Leroy J. Manor, the former chief of staff of the U.S. Pacific Command and deputy director for counterinsurgency and special activities, General Edwin F. Black, former commander of U.S. forces in Thailand, Walter J. McDonald, retired CIA deputy director for economic research and Dale C. Holmgren, former chairman of the CIA's Civil Air Transport.

The investigative journalist, Jonathan Kwitny, became convinced that the Nugan Hand Bank had replaced the Castle Bank & Trust of Nassau, as the CIA's covert banker. Former CIA agent, Kevin P. Mulcahy later told the National Times newspaper "about the Agency's use of Nugan Hand for shifting money for various covert operations around the globe."

In February 1976, Admiral Bobby Ray Inman, the new head of the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI), discovered that Wilson was involved in some dubious undercover business deals. A few months later Wilson was asked to leave the ONI. Wilson continued to run the CIA-fronted companies he had established. The largest of these was Consultants International and over the next few years amassed a fortune of over $20 million. This enabled him to buy a 2,338-acre farm in Northern Virginia, where he often entertained his close friends, Ted Shackley and Thomas G. Clines.

Much of his money was made in the arms trade. His most important customer was Moammar Gaddafi, the dictator of Libya. Wilson later claimed that it was Ted Shackley who first suggested he should go to Libya. Wilson got contracts to sell Libya army uniforms, ammunition, explosive timers and 20 tons of C-4 plastic explosives.

In 1976 Wilson recruited Raphael Quintero to kill a Libyan dissident in Egypt. Quintero selected two brothers, Rafael and Raoul Villaverde, to carry out the killing. However, the contract was later cancelled.

One of the men Wilson employed was former CIA officer Kevin P. Mulcahy. He became concerned about Wilson's illegal activities and sent a message about them to the agency. Ted Shackley, Deputy Director of Operations, was initially able to block any internal investigation of Wilson. However, in April, 1977, the Washington Post, published an article on Wilson's activities stating that he may be getting support from "current CIA employees". Stansfield Turner, director of the CIA, ordered an investigation and discovered that both Shackley and Clines had close relationships with Wilson. As a result, Turner made sure that both men's careers came to an end in the CIA.

In 1978 Thomas G. Clines left the CIA. He now joined with Raphael Quintero and Ricardo Chavez (another former CIA operative) to establish API Distributors. According to David Corn (Blonde Ghost: Ted Shackley and the CIA's Crusades) Wilson provided Clines with "half a million dollars to get his business empire going". In 1979 Clines established International Research and Trade Limited in Bermuda. Later that year he joined forces with Hussein Salem in providing U.S. military hardware to Egypt.

After leaving the CIA in September, 1979, Ted Shackley formed his own company, Research Associates International, which specialized in providing intelligence to business. He was also given consulting work with API Distributors, the company established by Thomas G. ClinesRaphael Quintero, and Ricardo Chavez.

In 1979 a gun that Wilson arranged to be delivered to the Libyan embassy in Bonn was used to kill a political dissident. Another dissident was murdered in Colorado by one of Wilson's men. According to Alfred W. McCoy (The Politics of Heroin: CIA Complicity in the Global Drug Trade): "Throughout 1979 the Wilson network and the Nugan Hand Bank began to build a close commercial alliance in the netherworld of national security subcontracting". Ted Shackley and Thomas G. Clines were also drawn into a relationship with the Nugan Hand Bank. Michael Hand wrote to Shackley on 27th November, 1979, suggesting a business meeting. Hand's latter also referred to Bernie Houghton, who had worked for Shackley in Vietnam.

Michael Hand probably wanted to talk about Edwin Wilson. In 1979 a Washington grand jury began gathering incriminating evidence about his illegal arms sales. To avoid arrest he moved to London. In the winter of 1979, Wilson had a meeting with Bernie Houghton and Thomas G. Clines in Switzerland in an attempt to help him out of his difficulties. This included a non-delivery of 5,000 M16 automatic rifles. The three men discussed ways of using the Nugan Hand Bank to float a $22 million loan to finance the delivery. Hand was obviously concerned that if Wilson was arrested he might begin talking about his dealings with Nugan Hand.

Michael Hand also had talks with William Colby, the former director of the CIA. It is not known what was discussed at this meeting but Colby submitted a bill to Nugan Hand Bank for $45,684 for his legal advice.

On 27th January, 1980 Frank Nugan was found dead in his car. Bernie Houghton was in Switzerland at the time and he immediately rang his branch office in Saudi Arabia and ordered the staff to leave the country. Houghton also visited Edwin Wilson's office in Geneva and left a briefcase with bank documents for safekeeping. Soon afterwards, a witness saw Thomas G. Clines going through the briefcase at Wilson's office and remove papers that referred to him and General Richard Secord.

Two days after Nugan died, Michael Hand held a meeting of Nugan Hand Bank directors. He warned them that unless they did as they were told they could "finish up with concrete shoes" and would be "liable to find their wives being delivered to them in pieces".

According to one witness, Thomas G. Clines helped Bernie Houghton escape from AustraliaMichael Hand also left the country accompanied by James Oswald Spencer, a man who served with Ted Shackley in Laos. The two men traveled to America via Fiji and Vancouver. Hand then disappeared and has never been seen again.

The Australian authorities were forced to investigate the bank. They discovered that Ricardo Chavez, the former CIA operative who was co-owner of API Distributors with Thomas G. Clines and Raphael Quintero, was attempting to take control of the bank. The Corporate Affairs Commission of New South Wales came to the conclusion that Chavez was working on behalf of Clines, Quintero and Wilson.

Wilson was eventually indicted by the Department of Justice. However, he had moved to Libya and Moammar Gaddafi refused to extradite him. Wilson feared for his safety and the prosecutors knew this and in 1982 they sent Ernest Keiser to convince him that he would be safe in the Dominican Republic. Wilson flew to the Caribbean but upon arrival was arrested and flown to New York.

While awaiting trial Wilson attempted to recruit a fellow prisoner to kill Lawrence Barcella, the federal prosecutor. The prisoner instead went to the authorities and they set Wilson up with an undercover agent. The agent taped Wilson hiring him to kill the prosecutors, six witnesses and his ex-wife.

In 1984 Wilson was found not guilty of trying to hire Raphael Quintero and other Cubans to kill a Libyan dissident. However, he was found guilty of exporting guns and conspiracy to murder and was sentenced to 52 years in prison.

Wilson claimed he had been framed and claimed that he was working on behalf of the CIA. He employed David Adler, a former CIA agent, as his lawyer. Adler eventually found evidence that Wilson was indeed working for the CIA after he retired from the agency. In October 2003 a Houston federal judge, Lynn Hughes, threw out Wilson's conviction in the C-4 explosives case, ruling that the prosecutors had "deliberately deceived the court" about Wilson's continuing CIA contacts, thus "double-crossing a part-time informal government agent."

Despite the decision of Lynn Hughes, Edwin P. Wilson was not released. Eric Margolis has described him as "America's Man in the Iron Mask". Margolis has always believed Wilson innocent and spoke to him many times in prison. "I was framed by the government," Wilson told Margolis, "they want me to disappear. I know too much."

Edwin P. Wilson was released from prison in 2004 and died on 10th September 2012.


Divide and Conquer: The Globalist Pathway to New World Order Tyranny from an International Perspective

By Joachim Hagopian

October 17, 2015

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2015/10/joachim-hagopian/divide-and-conquer/

The idiom “divide and conquer” is said to have originated with the Latin maxim “divide et impera” meaning divide and rule. Julius Caesar used it in reference to defeating the Gauls during the Gaelic War. While its first usage in the English language began circa 1600, through the centuries it’s carried a commonly understood meaning. The retention of power by utilizing a deliberate strategy of causing those in subordinate positions to engage in conflicts with each other that weaken and keep them from any unified effort to remove the status quo force from power. This policy of maintaining control over subordinates or potential opponents by encouraging or causing dissent between them, thereby preventing them from uniting in opposition to pose any serious threat to the existing power structure is a very familiar story throughout history. It’s an age old formula having multiple applications, most commonly used in the political arena but also in the military, sociological and economic realm as well.

Machiavelli formulated the divide and conquer strategy as an axiom in his Art of War where the enemy can be forced to break up their forces or where the mutual trust between the opponent’s leader and his men can be sabotaged and broken. Economically in the corporate world it’s used to gain advantage by triggering smaller competitors to take business away from each other and in effect canceling each other out, leaving the larger corporation to move in to reap greater profits, an indirect way the bigger fish eat the littler fish. Business models also use it to successfully tackle a large project by breaking it down into smaller, more manageable components. Sociological application of the divide and conquer strategy involves causing discord and conflict amongst racial/ethnic groups, or exploiting class, religious, age or gender differences to divide and diminish power of various groups according to these sociological classifications.

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/4145Q3WAneL.jpg

The Art Of WarSun TzuBest Price: $3.20Buy New $3.74(as of 06:36 EDT - Details)https://www.lewrockwell.com/wp-content/mu-plugins/amazon-ad-link-lr/img/buy-from-tan.gif

History is ripe with examples of its successful implementation. One illustration of its sociological application was during the 17thcentury when the Virginia elite quelled a rash of uprisings from ex-indentured servant white men unified with black slaves by enacting race laws that elevated the rabble status of poor whites so far above the slaves that it effectively eliminated the threat of their ever joining forces in armed rebellion again. This divide and conquer stratagem was frequently repeated by European colonial powers typically pitting competitive tribal, ethnic and religious factions against each other to ensure they would not conspire revolt against the ruling imperialists. In Asia the British took full advantage of Moslems versus Hindus in India as well as creating conflict between Indians and Pakistanis. In the African colonies of Rwanda and Burundi Germany and Belgium created conflict between the Tutsis and Hutus that’s continued right into the genocidal 1990’s. For centuries the Rothschilds made it a family tradition funding both sides in a long series of wars in Europe and America guaranteeing them as the sole benefactors of waging war over the long haul.

This constant thematic thread of divide and conquer permeates the twentieth century on an epic, never before seen scale. The globalist-internationalists intentionally instigated both World War I and II as well as every major rise and fall of the stock market. The German militarization that led directly to WWI, the Bolshevik Revolution that violently evolved into both the Soviet and eventual Chinese Communist regimes along with Hitler’s rise to power (compliments of the likes of globalist George H.W. Bush’s father Prescott) were all examples of how the ruling elite directly funds and willfully creates conflict amongst competing powers, thereby covertly consolidating and expanding their own power base. Their heinous crimes against humanity for their own selfish gain resulted in the two most destructive, bloodiest conflicts in human history. And as such, the global elite also played a sinister yet crucial role financing the three most murderous dictators in human history – Mao Tse-tung, Josef Stalin and Adolph Hitler. And with all that blood on their hands, their thirst for more blood soaked power and control only continues with their call for both hard and soft kill methods to cull the human population from its present 7.3 billion people down to just half a billion.

As an outgrowth of World War II, the globalists devised the diabolical scheme of carving up the world by political ideology, promoting a relatively permanent, ready-made solution. The so called free world’s chief nemesis would be the Communist enemy. Thus, the despot Josef Stalin was intentionally allowed to seize vast amounts of the European continent. And so Eastern Europe as the Communist Iron Curtain was deliberately sacrificed as the West’s concession to Soviet Empire expansion and the convenience of a readymade enemy and the Cold War was born.

Fervent anti-Communist and noted New York-Hollywood writer, director and producer Cecil Fagan in the late 1960’s recorded The Illuminati and the Council on Foreign Relations:

The idea was that those who direct the overall conspiracy could use the differences in those two so-called ideologies [marxism/fascism/socialism/communism v. democracy/capitalism] to enable them [the Illuminati] to divide larger and larger portions of thehuman race into opposing camps so that they could be armed and then brainwashed into fighting and destroying each other.

Using these same divide and conquer tactics elsewhere in Asia, at the end of WWII the globalists using longtime Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member and future Secretary of State Dean Rusk [1961-1969] to arbitrarily split Korea at the 38th parallel (a nation and people that for centuries had always been unified) into two separate enemy camps. South Korea remained under US control complete with an installed bloodthirsty dictator puppet while very similar to a cockfight the Soviets were grooming their Communist tyrant to the North. The ensuing cold war set the stage for yet more violence with each side vying to wage war to win back reunification from the other. Instead, the three year conflict dragged on finally grinding to a bloody stalemated halt after killing over a million Koreans along with plenty of dead Chinese (well over 100,000 Chinese estimate to 400,000 US estimate) fighting with Communist North Korea and about 36,000 dead Americans fighting as a UN coalition force alongside South Korea.The internationalists discreetly gave away American technology and large sums of cash to the Russians while Senator Joe McCarthy domestically led his Red Scare inquisition. To ensure this Communist scare really got off the ground guaranteeing the rise of the military industrial complex and more unstoppable war, the Rockefellers and their fellow Western globalists also saw fit to secretly finance and back Mao’s power grab taking control over China’s mainland, conveniently splitting the Chinese people into Red Communists while covertly undermining yet publicly supporting Chiang Kai-shek’s island retreat to Formosa (later Taiwan).

And to this day the US maintains a strong military presence in South Korea despite sentiments voiced last year by South Korea indicating it desires reunification. But in this polarized geopolitical world compliments of the globalists’ re-installment of Cold War 2, NWO puppet Obama’s been busily militarizing East Asia in his feebly aggressive “pivotal” push toward military confrontation with the East. As a result, tensions are heating up with Beijing asserting its emerging leadership role in the region taken by the Washington neocons as a direct threat and challenge to Empire’s global hegemony.

Within a decade after the Korean War was over, the globalists were at it again replicating this same proven lethal formula fueling another cold war wedge in Asia, this time with the divided Vietnamese population. Again with the Communists in the North and another corrupt US supported puppet in the South, once the globalists got rid of Kennedy who’d vowed to return all US military advisors and thereby avoid war in Vietnam entirely, less than a year after JFK’s murder, co-conspirator Lyndon Johnson plunged the imperialistic Empire into its longest running war in US history under the pretense of yet another false flag lie in the Gulf of Tonkin in August 1964. Nine years later, three more million Southeast Asians lay dead along with 58,000 more Americans. But this time America suffered its first humiliating military defeat in its exhaustive warring history (at war 93% of the time).

But military defeat nor heavy loss of human life would ever phase psychopathic globalist-bankers always out to make their greedy killing feeding their imperialistic greed and Empire’s hegemonic control. After all, war profiteering in Asia had become an American pastime and big business for the globalists. At the turn of the twentieth century as the first Asian bloodbath ended, the Spanish American War witnessed the US military brutally slaughtering close to a million Filipinos (per Filipino historians). This level of violence was meant to send the chilling message to the Third World that nothing would stop US imperialism from having its way with lesser powered nations. By the way, the internationalist robber barons were behind the false flag excuse to start that war too. Media mogul Randolph Hearst knew yellow journalism – “Remember the Maine?” Fact: each and every war in the bloodiest century known to man was initiated by yet another premeditated globalist false flag event.

Unsurprisingly, pro-New World Order globalists’ true but largely hidden ideology has always leaned far closer to their supposed Communist totalitarian enemy than any real democracy. They’ve always been about killing off all competition for the sake of maintaining monopolized control of an anything but free market. They’ve used their secret fraternity to retain their global power into the fewest hands. And their lust for Third World exploitation, theft and violence is so insatiable that any foreign national leader who actually attempts to practice democratic principles directly benefiting and uplifting their native population is simply not tolerated and through the globalists’ secret private army the CIA that answers to no one in government, that leader is quickly assassinated and/or overthrown. Iran’s Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953 and Chile’s President Salvador Allende in 1973 are but two among many examples of international leaders who were violently cut short from continuing their noble work improving the economic lives of their people. Because they were loyal to their own citizens and nations and United States business interests were not given high enough priority, the CIA made sure they were eliminated from power.

Again straight out of organized crime’s playbook, the message to all nations on earth is either you play ball allowing the mighty US bully to come rape and pillage your country or your leader will suddenly be gone in a heartbeat. With near total impunity for more than 60 years the CIA’s been covertly deployed around the world engaging in state sponsored terrorism as the globalists’ mercenary death squad constantly violating every international law, UN Charter and Geneva Convention rule in order to subversively wreak havoc around the globe, again protected with complete impunity by US’ deep state exceptionalism.

Indeed there are very few regions on earth where US Empire has not actively supported or organized coup d’états or otherwise overthrown and/or assassinated foreign leaders and governments. One readily can see that the alphabetical shortlist that follows is actually very long:

Afghanistan, Albania, Angola, Argentina, Bolivia, Bosnia, Brazil, Cambodia, Chile, China, Colombia, Colorado, Congo, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Germany, Greece, Grenada, Guam, Guatemala, Haiti, Hawaii, Honduras, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Korea, Kuwait, Laos, Lebanon, Liberia, Libya, Macedonia, Mexico, Nicaragua, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Philippines, Puerto Rico, Russia, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, South Dakota, Sudan, Syria, Turkey, Uruguay, USSR, Ukraine, Venezuela, Vietnam, Virgin Islands, Yemen, Yugoslavia and Zaire

And the list above doesn’t even include assassinations committed by government insiders inside the US of such prominent American leaders as JFK, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King and RFK. With thousands of murderous hitmen posing as federal agents undoubtedly never serving even one day in prison for committing so much murder, mayhem and chaos over so many years on such a colossal global scale, it’s mind boggling to even fathom how their sins go unpunished. Speaking of getting away with murder, despite the CIA getting caught red-handed committing unlawful acts of torture (euphemistically called enhanced interrogation techniques) on a regular basis during the Bush-Cheney years, Obama refused to prosecute because he more than likely allowed it to continue on his watch. So says the imprisoned CIA officer turned whistleblower John Kiriakou who ended up doing serious time because he did the right thing courageously exposing the widespread inhumane practice while the perpetrators got away with their crimes. But then consistent with history, good deeds go punished and evil ones don’t.

Despite each US president paying lip service to both domestic and international law explicitly prohibiting political assassination, the exceptional Empire-crime syndicate’s track record proves that through the CIA the US government regularly engages in tampering with other nation’s sovereignty to the extent that coups de tats, murders, at least 50 attempted murders and 600 assassination plots of foreign leaders in the last 50 years are commonplace. The divide and conquer strategy is easily met by separating another sovereign nation from its deposed leader, thus conquering and subjugating both the people and the next US installed handpicked puppet. The two examples Shah of Iran and General Pinochet as selected past US puppets were both infamous tyrants and war criminals guilty of viciously killing thousands of their own people. But since birds of the same criminal ilk flock together, they gave the predatory US vultures everything they wanted and demanded.

While war criminal-globalist with the rock star status Henry Kissinger was being selected as Nobel Peace Prize winner, similar to Obama years later, Kissinger was busily orchestrating Allende’s death on Chile’s own 9/11. Bottom line reality, globalist-led US Empire neither encourages nor permits independence and prosperity to reign in any nation, especially ones endowed with a wealth of natural resources that must be milked, mined and stolen by the elite.

Active membership in the globalist dominated Council on Foreign Relations or any number of other globalist organizations like the Bilderbergers, Trilateral Commission, Yale’s Skull and Bones Society automatically places you at the head of the class as a prime mover and shaker of world events and developments. Since 1921 CFR globalists have remained a permanent, very visible fixture in Washington operating at the power pyramid pinnacle within all branches of the federal government, over-stacked especially in the executive and legislative branches. Over the last century most US presidents and nearly all heads of their State, Defense, Treasury and Justice Departments as well as the key Congressional powerbrokers have all been CFR plants pushing relentlessly toward their New World Order.

Famed American historian, John Kennedy’s award winning biographer, confidant and globalist Arthur Schlesinger Jr. in 1995 remarked in the CFR publication Foreign Affairs, “We are not going to achieve a New World Order without paying for it in blood as well as words and money.”

With a bloody full century behind them of blatant dividing, conquering and destroying other peoples and nations at will, at the start of this century the geopolitical stage was already set for globalists to step up their despicable low-bar standards by sinking even lower, committing unprecedented, unthinkable acts of evil. Since 9/11 they’ve been turning to their tried and true divide and conquer methodology at an accelerated clip paving the way to their endgame scenario – a New World Order complete with a one world government and a cashless, micro-chipped feudalistic society. At this late stage in their game, 2015 so far has been the year they’re smelling blood and closing in for the kill.

For many years the US Empire has been employed to do the global elite’s dirty bidding. After using Osama bin Laden’s al Qaeda originally to defeat an overextended Soviet Empire in the world’s empire graveyard Afghanistanthroughout the 1980’s, forcing the breakup of the Soviet Union nearly a quarter century ago, the US Empire then used its clout as the world’s only superpower to ensure that Russia and China would never challenge US hegemony and full spectrum dominance again. The globalists proceeded on an ambitious worldwide quest to increase dominance and control by embarking on an agenda to destabilize the entire world. Though the US has focused its most destructive power on the Middle East and North Africa, the sheer madness of destabilization has spread deeper into the sub-Saharan African continent as well.

Their favorite method of achieving this objective involves employing their divide and conquer strategy that’s embodied in the imperialistic operational term “balkanizing.” It most accurately describes the Modus Operandi by which the elite’s quest to global destabilization has been accomplished. But as Pebe Escobar aptly says, ”Empire of Chaos isn’t working out too well for them.” For all its destructive power to destroy other nations, the US appears to also be self-imploding. Of course that’s what empires do, just like the sun, they rise and they fall, and currently the sun’s fast setting on the American Empire.

This presentation aims to address the cold hard reality that it’s clearly no accident but purely by globalist design that as the US powers-that-be so zealously and willfully export their most dubious, most skilled commodity – bombing other nations around the world into oblivion – the global elite also desires to simultaneously bring down America as the most powerful country on earth. The modern roots to this tragic tale with such a seemingly sad ending for so many is conspicuously embedded in plain sight in the not so distant past.

Fresh off the cold war with the Soviet breakup, in the 1990’s globalist Bill Clinton used NATO’s dirty bombs to soften the resistance for Osama’s US mercenary band of al Qaeda terrorists that had been hired to move Afghan heroin from the Balkansinto the West while killing demonized Serbs in Bosnia and Kosovo. The end result was the systematic destruction of the former Yugoslavia, balkanizing the country by breaking it up into a half dozen separate ineffectual pieces as failed nation-state puppets for US transnationals to divvy up their predatory claims with first dibs reserved for US military expansion. Thus, the US quickly installed yet more killer machine airfields and military bases (near a thousand dot the Empire occupied planet) as part of a strategy to seal off Russia’s borderland nations, quickly turning them into anti-Russian, pro-NATO vassal enclaves. Next came the proliferation of installing warhead missiles aimed directly at Moscow from such close doorstep vantage points as Poland and Romania with the strategic goal of stretching them into Central Asia. As suicidal insanity, currently the neocons are both prepping and pressing US-NATO for a preemptive nuke strike against Russia.

The location hub of Eastern Europe in Russia’s backyard has always served empires well for nearby military incursions into the Middle East and Central Asia. US military bases in Croatia, Romania and Bulgaria along with the strategic Eurasian gateway ally Turkey offered the necessary precursor launching pad for the neocons’ Project for the New American Century’s (PNAC) post-9/11 US invasion-occupation-destabilization-regime change-failed state endgame war agenda scenario across the Middle East and North Africa.

The major players in the international crime cabal government occupying Washington when not at their home away from home Tel Aviv, that infamous neocon Bush-Cheney gang holding so many dual US-Israeli citizenships as both the 9/11 and war-on-terror architects (in cahoots of course with Israeli Mossad and the Saudi royals) are clearly responsible for carrying out the bloodiest, most ambitious and diabolical false flag in history on 9/11. Their Project for the New American Century from a couple years earlier prior to 9/11 was the blueprinted plot laying bare their new century’s aggressive foreign policy-on-steroids. Under the false pretext of their war on terror, they’ve engaged in multiple regime changes (their plan called for seven in five years per General Wesley Clark) after executing their “new Pearl Harbor event,” they’ve consistently employed their divide and conquer strategy to destabilize, weaken and destroy targeted Muslim nations throughout the Middle East and North Africa. And those very same treasonous Washington neocons holding dual US-Israeli citizenship who pulled off the 9/11 coup are incredibly still driver-seated in power still plundering the globe today. But make no mistake, all along they’ve been receiving their marching orders directly from the globalists in charge, representing the 1% wealthiest people on earth that own more than the rest of us 7 plus billion combined!

The growing list of US victimized nations-turned-war-ravaged failed states include Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Central African Republic, Congo, Ukraine and a few others we likely still don’t know. By using oil rich, corrupt Muslim monarchy Gulf states as their co-conspiring vassals – namely Saudi ArabiaQatarUnited Arab EmiratesKuwait and Jordan along with Turkey, together creating the scourge of well-funded, well-trained, well-armed and well-supplied proxy mercenary terrorists ISIS, the US-Israeli-NATO alliance controlled by the globalists have – again by design – pitted Muslim nation against Muslim nation, Shiites against Sunnis, Western white Christians against Muslims worldwide. And that’s not even counting the thousands of Muslim family members who’ve lost relatives due to US war and drone strike transgressions over the last decade and a half that’s acting as an ideal recruiting station for Islamic extremism. Undoubtedly many vowing to avenge the death of their loved ones are now fighting against the US as ISIS jihadists. But then that feeds right into the globalist strategy to keep fresh angry recruits fighting their manufactured war of terror.

As if this tragic mess created in the Middle East and North Africa isn’t enough for the bloodthirsty globalists, in 2014 enter Hillary and Soros’ NGO-led coup in Ukraine and the globalists with one illicit stroke reignited Cold War 2 that currently has the Western world on the brink of triggering a possible nuclear war against the powerful Eastern alliance of Russia-China-Iran. By their shameless demonic design, the globalists’ deceitfully delivered war of terror with its $6 trillion price tag and counting has bankrupted the globalist-created Ponzi scheme of a house of cards economy, made our only planet the most armed and dangerous in recorded history, and is now rapidly pushing humans toward yet another world war and/or human-induced mass extinction that might well spell the end of all life on earth. With the stakes never higher, the lethal culmination of their divide and conquer strategy being fulfilled through this century’s escalating events and developments are unfolding upon us now at breakneck speed.

At the behest of Israel, the US seized the opportunity for more dividing and conquering by “balkanizing” the entire MENA region into weakened failed states for superpower’s global hegemony and further blood-for-oil plundering. Subsequently Iraq has been partitioned off by ethnic-sectarian divide reserved for more manageably designated Sunni, Shiite and Kurd states. Of course the destabilizing presence of ISIS invading Iraq in June 2014 seizing an undefended Mosul conveniently allowed the US excuse to reinstall its military posts back in Iraq, something the then quickly deposed Maliki had obstinately refused when US military departed Iraq in December 2011. But two weeks ago this Middle East quagmire by globalist design compliments of US Empire of Chaos just got jolted by Putin’s game-changing wakeup call at the UN.

Until Putin’s recent no nonsense interventions to start snuffing out ISIS in Syriawhere Obama for over a year was playing his pretend game to “hunt them down,” the determined US agenda for over four years had been to regime change Assad, destabilize and balkanize Syria a small nation into weaker factions so the oil-gas pipeline war against Russia could be won on the way to claiming the final grand prize in the region – taking down Iran as Israel’s and hence Empire’s foremost thorn in its side. Just months before the US-P5-Iran nuke agreement, the CFR’s Foreign Policy was still frothing at the mouth calling for an Iran regime change.

The same globalist/US design to destabilize through balkanization is either in process or been deployed in LibyaYemenUkrainePakistanCongoSudan, the South Caucasus,MyanmarThailand and other places where Black Ops go that we don’t know. But regardless of where, we do know America’s destabilizing agenda has everything to do with its transparently futile attempt to cut off, isolate and weaken renewed cold war adversaries Russia and China as well as nemesis Iran. With US Special Operations Forces secretly deployed in 135 nations around the world, terrorism-r-us comes in the form of a destabilizing meat cleaver gone global. After all, the US Empire of Chaos is carving up yet more of the geopolitics chessboard using divide and conquer tactics straight out of its favorite Machiavellian playbook “the art of war.”

Another alarming consequence of this NWO agenda that’s never been more glaringly obvious is the out of control refugee migration crisis presently spreading throughout Europe. Unfortunately by globalist design the failed foreign policy of Western governments spearheaded by the United States Empire has also led directly to this manufactured human crisis. The neocon plan to destroy the Middle East and North Africa through prolonged military occupation, continued air strike bombing and forever war spilling blood into its second decade along with the fabrication of the fake enemy ISIS has singlehandedly created the migration crisis in Europe.

But with Obama’s open door policy operating for nearly seven years now along the southern US-Mexican boundary line, last summer’s 50,000 kids from Central America converging at the border fueled the immigration crisis that was capturing all the headlines in America. A similar policy in the Western Hemisphere concocted a long fake war on drugs that’s been maintained by an illicitly covert US-Latin American crime cabal. Washington has been in partnership with the Latin American drug cartels, their criminal gangs and their national governments when not staging coups. Recall the numerous failed attempts in Venezuela and the one Obama and Hillary pulled off in 2009 when they overthrew another democratically elected leader in Honduras. Obama is simply following orders from the globalists to carry out a border policy that’s allowing millions of illegal aliens to enter the United States. The refugee migration crisis in both America and Europe is part of the globalist divide and conquer agenda, specifically designed to create racial tensions and conflicts between the native populations and the new arrivals. It also conveniently provides the perfect cover for yet more false flag terrorism in both the US and Europe.

Too many ignorant distressed Americans and Europeans latch onto the old blame the victim game, increasingly resenting and scapegoating darker-skinned outsiders as the mistaken cause of all their perceived problems such as lack of jobs they insist illegals are stealing and paying high taxes to support a welfare state the illegals are allege to be abusing. Obviously this globalist mixing of races and religions is causing mutual distrust, enflaming racial discrimination and open hostilities triggering massive protests and an alarming rise of racially motivated hate crimes across both North America and Europe.

A sizeable portion of the largely white Westerner holds the foreign migrant population in total contempt for forever literally changing the complexion and national and cultural identity of their homeland. Europeans are justified in their complaints citing wealthy Middle Eastern nations like Israel, Saudi Arabia and other oil rich Gulf states that have largely caused the crisis are adamantly refusing to take in any refugees. To take some of the political heat off, the Saudis just pledged Jordan that’s overrun with Syrian refugees $10 billion. As dire conditions unfold, many Europeans’ concerns are legitimate but as the crisis grows, so are people’s intolerance and anger. Yet too many out of ignorance and kneejerk reactivity may simply be giving the globalist culprits another free pass despite the elite’s premeditated agenda to spawn this ongoing deepening mess carrying  untold heavy long term consequences.

Last year globalist Peter Sutherland, former BP CEO, non-executive chairman of Goldman Sachs International and active Bilderberger and Trilateral Commission member, speaking before the British House of Lords, candidly disclosed the globalist plan a full year ahead of today’s full blown crisis:  

The European Union should do its best to undermine the homogeneity of its member states, because the future prosperity of many EU states depends on them becoming multicultural, [adding]… migration is a crucial dynamic for economic growth in some EU nations however difficult it may be to explain this to the citizens of those states.

The ruling elite intentionally pursued a horribly violent, criminally inhumane policy that knowingly would create dire conditions in war ravaged nations that would ensure that hordes of fleeing, displaced outsiders flood into nearby nations and eventually begin spilling over into Western countries to specifically create the racial and religious divide using the deceptively benign excuse of “multiculturalism.” In turn, the elite can exploit a new source of cheap slave labor that results in bringing down wages across the boards for workers. The globalist agenda is all about raising profits at the expense of human beings, inducing conflict, crisis and civil unrest amongst different population groups that in turn only opens the door for increased government oppression. This self-feeding, circular dynamic of the Hegelian dialectic combined with the divide and conquer strategy simultaneously moves nations closer toward the ultimate globalist agenda of a one world government. Enter the final diabolical piece to this horror show, the so called “free trade” agreements TPP and TTIP that will totally undermine and completely destroy whatever national sovereignty is left and their sweet dream becomes our nightmare come true.

Only by becoming aware of the pervasive grip that globalists wield in promoting their emerging New World Order can we citizens of the world come together to make every effort to thwart the elite’s sinister design. A good start is crushing the trade agreements. The Trans-Pacific Partnership was recently agreed upon by the twelve trade ministers representing the nations involved. Within about four months it will reach US Congress for the all-important vote to ratify or not. Fortunately numerous organizations have long been admirably and actively opposing the trade agreements and will welcome all the help and support we can give them. Since they’ve been toiling away in the trenches and already accomplished some remarkable results, let’s learn from their experience and knowledge so that we can cohesively come together to produce optimal results. Citizens from their respective countries need to mobilize as activists and ensure their voice is heard by their governing representatives. Together we must and will stop these Trojan horse enemies dead in their tracks.

Regarding a strategy to best deal with the existing and coming migration crisis and its array of adjunctive issues, the same committed drive and collective resolve we take to generating constructive action to defeat the trade agreements, we must also bring to responding to this formidable humanitarian crisis as well. Attempting to resolve the complex, multi-tiered issues and challenges facing all citizens, we will need to work in close partnership together with an ever-cognizant awareness as much as we humanly can to transcend the negative, powerfully divisive forces intended to divide, weaken and even break us. We need to come together as open-minded problem solvers recognizing that what we face isn’t a refugee problem or an immigrant problem, nor an outsider vs. insider problem, nor a “him or me” problem. What we collectively face is a shared human problem not of our making that requires a meeting of open, overlapping minds and values. We’ll need to think creatively outside the box both practically and judiciously, as much as possible always with humanitarian understanding and compassion.

Finally, we will need to interface and work with those at all levels of our governing bodies, exercising patience and tolerance when encountering negativity, incompetent bureaucracy and the systemic dysfunction so pervasive in institutional settings. Finally, many of the individuals we encounter hold positions aligned with the elite diametrically opposed to working in our best interests. Again, approach the challenge of finding solutions to our human problems, knowing where there is a will, especially goodwill, it’s always possible there is also a way.

Joachim Hagopian [send him mail] is a West Point graduate and former US Army officer. He has written a manuscript based on his unique military experience entitled “Don’t Let The Bastards Getcha Down.” It examines and focuses on US international relations, leadership and national security issues. After the military, Joachim earned a master’s degree in Clinical Psychology and worked as a licensed therapist in the mental health field for more than a quarter century. In recent years he has focused on his writing, becoming an alternative media journalist. His blog site is at http://empireexposed.blogspot.com.

creativecommons.org

Previous article by Joachim Hagopian: The Warfare of Unnatural Disasters




The Best of Joachim Hagopian