Who's A Rat - Largest Online Database of Informants and Agents
HomeMembers LoginLatest NewsRefer A LawyerMessage BoardOnline StoreAffiliatesAbout UsContact Us
Who's A Rat - Largest Online Database of Informants and Agents Worldwide!
Site Navigation
Visit Our Store
Refer A Lawyer
Link To Us
Latest News
Top Secret Documents
Make A Donation
Important Case Law
Members Login
Message Board
Legal Information
Advertise your AD, Book or Movie

Informants and Agents?Who's a Rat Message Board

Sign up Calendar

  Author   Comment  

Posts: 8,839
Reply with quote  #1 

Posts: 8,839
Reply with quote  #2 
High school dropout can't find work joins Army reserves to be all he can be killing women and children in foreign countries while America Empire
plunders their natural resources to meet our unquenchable thirst for oil to fuel our gas guzzling SUV's.
High school drop out engages the enemy combatants, citizens of their own country, and is successful killing many women and children. He returns to the United States victorious suffering from a mild case of Post Traumatic Stress , a disease you develop once you become a serial killer.
High school dropout still can't find work so he is recruited by other high school dropout serial killers to go to work for his local police department
where he can continue to terrorize the civilian population. You remember Snelgrove at Fenway Park?
High school dropout soon joins forces with other serial killers out groups like the FBI and Mafia where they create the Whitey Bulger model of community policing.
One of their first tasks is to spy on pathological pacifists who have lost the ability to protect themselves by hiring bodyguards to protect them, who just happen to be the serial killers returning from Iraq.
Real communities don't hire bodyguards to protect them they know how to protect each other.
one easy read
NSA Used City Police to Track Peace Activists
By Douglas Birch
The Baltimore Sun

Friday 13 January 2006

Activists monitored on way to Fort Meade war protest, agency memos show.

The National Security Agency used law enforcement agencies, including the Baltimore Police Department, to track members of a city anti-war group as they prepared for protests outside the sprawling Fort Meade facility, internal NSA documents show.

The target of the clandestine surveillance was the Baltimore Pledge of Resistance, a group loosely affiliated with the local chapter of the American Friends Service Committee, whose members include many veteran city peace activists with a history of nonviolent civil disobedience.

Under various names, the activists have staged protests at the NSA campus off the Baltimore-Washington Parkway every year since 1996.

Since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, members of the group say, their protests have come under increasing scrutiny by federal and local law enforcement officials working on behalf of the NSA.

An internal NSA e-mail, posted on two Internet sites this week, shows how operatives with the "Baltimore Intel Unit" provided a minute-by-minute account of Pledge of Resistances' preparations for a July 3, 2004, protest at Fort Meade. An attorney for the demonstrators said he obtained the document through the discovery process from NSA.


Later, those shadowing the peace group reported on their arrival at the NSA's Fort Meade headquarters.


Ellen E. Barfield, a veteran peace activist from Hampden, was one of three Pledge members detained and cited that afternoon, charged with creating a "disturbance." The charges were later dropped.

Barfield called the effort law enforcement agencies put into monitoring this act of civil disobedience "totally absurd."

"We have a history of nonviolence," she said. "We are absolutely no threat to anyone, and they know it. And they're wasting tons of money and tons of time doing this."

An agency spokesman said protests are routinely monitored by the NSA Police, who are responsible only for the installation's security, not the code breakers and eavesdroppers who monitor international electronic communications.

The only reference to technical information-gathering in the three public NSA documents - two e-mails and an internal "Action Plan" - is a reference in to an NSA employee's effort to check on the protesters' plans by browsing the Web.

"Security at NSA serves to protect the agency and its employees," NSA spokesman Don Weber said in a statement. "Like any security force, they maintain documentation to include activity logs and action plans used in response to potential activities impacting the agency.

"Furthermore, they partner with state, local and federal law enforcement agencies to assess these activities and the potential impact on the agency and its personnel," Weber continued. "All these activities are conducted in a lawful manner. The allegations that NSA is spying on local peace groups is simply not true."

James Bamford, a lawyer and journalist who has written two acclaimed books about the NSA, said the agency has a right to protect itself from external threats. "But it would be an entirely separate thing if the NSA tried to monitor communications" from the Baltimore anti-war group, using the agency's sophisticated technology.

There is no evidence this happened. But the documents have surfaced at a critical time for the NSA.

The New York Times reported in December that after Sept. 11, the NSA began monitoring the electronic communications of Americans suspected of contacts with terrorists, without first obtaining court orders. President Bush authorized the program in 2002 and has defended it as necessary to protect the nation.

Some legal analysts and administration critics say the agency's actions violate the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

In some ways, Independence Day weekend protests by members of the Baltimore Pledge of Resistance have become an annual ritual.

Every year, protesters demand to talk with NSA officials. Some try to slip in one of the entrances and get arrested. Even before Sept. 11, Bamford said, the NSA overreacted, "considering the scale of the protest."

An NSA e-mail contained in court files shows that before the Pledge of Resistance's Oct. 4, 2003, protest, which coincided with the agency's annual "family day" picnic, NSA relied on a detective working for the Baltimore Police Department's Criminal Intelligence Unit to monitor the demonstrators' movements.

That unit handles some of the city's most politically sensitive investigations, including threats to public officials.

The city detective, the 2003 e-mail said, "advised that they will have someone working this weekend who will scope out their departure from the American Friends Service Committee 4806 York Rd. Govans. The Baltimore City PD counterpart will give [name of an NSA official blacked out] a heads up as to the numbers departing from the Govans location."

The NSA e-mail regarding the July 2004 protest does not make clear who conducted that day's surveillance on the agency's behalf. While it refers to the "Baltimore Intel Unit," the chief of the city's Criminal Intelligence Unit, Major David Engel, said he had no record that any of his officers participated.

"We have absolutely nothing in our files related to it," he said, referring to the protest in 2004.

Max J. Obuszewski, a veteran Baltimore anti-war activist who works for the American Friends Service Committee, said protesters have been trying to publicize the two documents since they were released in Federal District Court in August 2004.

The NSA July 2004 e-mail and the NSA's "Action Plan" for the October 2003 protest were finally publicized this week by Kevin B. Zeese, a candidate for the US Senate from Maryland, on the Web sites "rawstory.com" and "democracyrising.us."

The NSA disclosed them as part of the discovery process in the prosecution of two Baltimore Pledge of Resistance members, Cynthia H. Farquhar and Marilyn Carlisle. Both were detained during the October 2003 protest and convicted of failing to obey a police officer's orders. They were fined $250, according to federal court records.

Posts: 8,839
Reply with quote  #3 

The FBI's not-so-safehouse

Posted on Wednesday, March 26, 2008 1:59 PM PT
Filed Under:        

By Jim Popkin, NBC News Senior Investigative Producer

On the FBI’s Kids’ Page Web site, young G-Men-in-training are urged to “go on an undercover assignment” to keep “Special Agent Bobby Bureau” from blowing his cover.

But on the mean streets of Washington, D.C., the FBI doesn’t always seem to practice what it preaches.

Take the house, pictured below, which is located directly across the street from the embassy of one of our former Cold War adversaries. Most of the time, the large skylights in the attic of the house appear opaque, as seen here:

Candid cameras
But in the late afternoon, when the sun sinks low, it shines through those skylights like a movie-theater searchlight. Even a 10-year-old gumshoe can see what’s hiding in the attic:

Behind the three skylights, tucked behind black fabric, are three video cameras. Their lenses are trained on the embassy across the street. Passersby on the sidewalk below can see the lenses sparkling in the sunlight, and so, presumably, can the former Cold Warriors just across the street.

It’s no surprise that there’s close surveillance of foreign embassies inside the U.S. The FBI employs hundreds of counter-intelligence agents and employees, to keep an eye on friends and foes alike. Journalists have reported on the surveillance programs for decades. Back in 1988, for example, author Ronald Kessler described in “Spy vs. Spy” how the FBI “takes photographs of everyone walking down the street in both directions in front of” selected foreign embassies to catch spies and potential traitors on camera. “Anyone walking near the embassy is on film,” Kessler wrote.

Nonetheless, you’d think the Bureau would be a little more careful about safeguarding its own safehouse, and not blowing the cover of its real-life Bobby Bureaus.

Bungled tradecraft?
How do I know it’s an FBI facility?  A simple web search confirmed it.

From my desk, I plugged the house’s street address into a commercial database that NBC and many media organizations use - legally, of course - to conduct public-records searches. In about 30 seconds, and for just about $2 in fees, I learned the names of three probable residents of the house.

One of the residents had helpfully provided his employer’s name. There it was in black and white: “Company: FBI.”

But that’s not all. Under the job-title section, this same FBI employee is described as “Clerk Really a Spy.” [I edited out his name, below.]

Holy Efrem Zimbalist, Jr!

My curiosity piqued, I called the FBI employee, a.k.a. “really a spy,” to ask about this apparent breach of basic tradecraft. He’s working now out of the FBI’s Memphis Field Office as a surveillance specialist, and didn’t seem thrilled with the call. He didn’t deny having lived at the D.C. house, but quickly passed me to his local FBI media representative. The FBI spokesman in Memphis told me he couldn’t comment, other than to inform me that the employee worked for the Bureau but not as a Special Agent.

In fairness to “really a spy,” he probably never intentionally listed his employer or his job title in the commercial database. Like most public-records databases, it likely just sucked up some application or paperwork the FBI employee had filled out years ago and now has saved it forever. Why he ever apparently joked that his job was “really a spy” is a separate issue.

The ease in identifying an FBI spyhouse and one of the Bureau’s counter-espionage employees is reminiscent of some investigative reporting done by the Chicago Tribune two years ago. Tribune reporter John Crewdson and a researcher revealed in their March 12, 2006, article that they had identified the locations of two dozen CIA safehouses and covert workplaces in the United States, plus the names of 2,600 CIA employees. Their trick? They had done a series of inexpensive, overlapping Internet searches, scooping up supposedly secret addresses from public-record databases.

The FBI would not comment on this story. But out of an abundance of caution, and on the advice of several senior U.S. officials, NBC News has decided not to reveal the address of the FBI house or to name the FBI employee. The officials caution that identifying the hapless employee and his former stakeout location could compromise future investigations. Even though many of the sources said it’s a certainty that officials at the nearby embassy “made” the FBI safehouse years ago, NBC News reasoned that we could tell this story without identifying the address, the employee or even the embassy in question.

I first made the FBI aware of this apparent tradecraft bungle more than a month ago. At last check, the G-Men hadn’t hidden the attic video cameras. And the commercial database still lists the FBI employee as “really a spy.”



Posts: 8,839
Reply with quote  #4 
watch the preview, pass it on and

Posts: 8,839
Reply with quote  #5 
DefCon's Moss: Undercover Reporter Damages 'Neutral Zone'
An undercover associate producer from NBC's Dateline tried to surreptitiously videotape hackers and federal agents at last Friday's conference, until she was outed and fled the building.

By Sharon Gaudin
August 6, 2007

The founder of DefCon says the undercover reporter who infiltrated the conference late last week posing as a regular attendee did more than lie to people and break the rules.
The woman who was outed at the beginning of a late afternoon DefCon session in Las Vegas last Friday actually poses a risk to the neutral zone that Jeff Moss -- a.k.a. "Dark Tangent" -- worked for years to create. Moss said in an interview that DefCon has become a meeting place for security researchers, federal prosecutors, and investigators from the likes of FBI, CIA, Department of Homeland Security, and Department of Defense.

"When I started DefCon, I openly invited everybody -- Secret Service, FBI, hackers, prosecutors. I wanted to develop a big open forum for exchange," said Moss. "As the attackers have become more organized -- organized criminals and nation states -- the good guys and the feds are trying to get a handle on what the bad guys are up to. DefCon is a way to look into the crystal ball and see what criminal hackers are working on. If you ruin that trust, who wants to be the one who is demonized? If there's a hidden camera, they're not going to want to share information openly. It's very easy when you're dealing with hackers to sensationalize it. It's kind of voodoo."

Having undercover reporters getting information surreptitiously or putting federal agents' pictures on television could be greatly damaging to the neutral zone.

"There's a lot of private discussion here," Moss added. "A lot of people ask researchers how liable certain attacks are, how fast things can spread. And the feds are constantly asked for help from the audience... The vast majority of attendees are feds and white-hat hackers. If you're a criminal, you don't go where all the feds and good guys are going."

Michelle Madigan, an associate producer with Dateline NBC, went to DefCon, not as a recognized member of the press, but as a regular attendee. This was against DefCon's strict rules that call for all members of the press to be duly recognized. Armed with a video camera hidden in a purse with holes cut away for the lens, Madigan allegedly was out to work on a story titled "Hiring Hackers," according to Moss.

Moss said they had been tipped off that someone from Dateline, which is well known for its "To Catch a Predator" series of reports on child molesters, was going to DefCon undercover, so they were on the watch for her. Once they realized who she was, Moss noted that different DefCon staffers approached her and offered her a press badge several different times but she turned them down.

The DefCon founder said he was worried about Dateline's "hit-and-run entrapment" kind of work. "We were concerned she was going to find some underage kid or someone and ask if they could break into her Hotmail account or something foolish," he added. "And she'd keep trying until she found someone who said something stupid. At what point do we try to stop the shenanigans?"

Moss did put a stop to it at an afternoon session, which people had purposefully steered Madigan toward. In a session that was videotaped by freelance blogger Elizabeth Safran and posted on YouTube, Moss took the stage and told the audience that there was an undercover reporter in their midst. There were instant boos and commotion. Saying he thought they should play "spot the undercover reporter," Moss then told them someone from Dateline was in the audience. As people shouted things like "tar and feather 'em," Madigan made a hasty retreat out of the room and then out of the building.

But she wasn't alone. The outed reporter was trailed by a vociferous crowd of attendees and other reporters who tossed questions at her and heckled her until she got into her car and drove away.

"If she wanted to come back as press, we'll give her a press badge," Moss said as Madigan headed out the door. "I don't know if she heard that or didn't care [because I had] just ruined her whole undercover thing."

Posts: 8,839
Reply with quote  #6 
see link for full story
see link for taxpayer funded eyeball
and hearing aid


Public Buses Across Country Quietly Adding Microphones to Record Passenger Conversations

Photo: Oran Viriyincy/Flickr

Transit authorities in cities across the country are quietly installing microphone-enabled surveillance systems on public buses that would give them the ability to record and store private conversations, according to documents obtained by a news outlet.

The systems are being installed in San Francisco, Baltimore, and other cities with funding from the Department of Homeland Security in some cases, according to the Daily, which obtained copies of contracts, procurement requests, specs and other documents.

The use of the equipment raises serious questions about eavesdropping without a warrant, particularly since recordings of passengers could be obtained and used by law enforcement agencies.

It also raises questions about security, since the IP audio-video systems can be accessed remotely via a built-in web server (.pdf), and can be combined with GPS data to track the movement of buses and passengers throughout the city.

The RoadRecorder 7000 surveillance system being marketed for use on public buses consists of a high-definition IP camera and audio recording system that can be configured remotely via built-in web server.

According to the product pamphlet for the RoadRecorder 7000 system made by SafetyVision (.pdf), “Remote connectivity to the RoadRecorder 7000 NVR can be established via the Gigabit Ethernet port or the built-in 3G modem. A robust software ecosystem including LiveTrax vehicle tracking and video streaming service combined with SafetyNet central management system allows authorized users to check health status, create custom alerts, track vehicles, automate event downloads and much more.”

The systems use cables or WiFi to pair audio conversations with camera images in order to produce synchronous recordings. Audio and video can be monitored in real-time, but are also stored onboard in blackbox-like devices, generally for 30 days, for later retrieval. Four to six cameras with mics are generally installed throughout a bus, including one near the driver and one on the exterior of the bus.


Posts: 8,839
Reply with quote  #7 
see link for full story

Saturday, December 22 2012 @ 07:29 PM CST

FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring

FBI documents just obtained by the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF) pursuant to the PCJF’s Freedom of Information Act demands reveal that from its inception, the FBI treated the Occupy movement as a potential criminal and terrorist threat even though the agency acknowledges in documents that organizers explicitly called for peaceful protest and did “not condone the use of violence” at occupy protests.

FBI Documents Reveal Secret Nationwide Occupy Monitoring

The Partnership for Civil Justice Fund
December 22, 2012

FBI documents just obtained by the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF) pursuant to the PCJF’s Freedom of Information Act demands reveal that from its inception, the FBI treated the Occupy movement as a potential criminal and terrorist threat even though the agency acknowledges in documents that organizers explicitly called for peaceful protest and did “not condone the use of violence” at occupy protests.

The PCJF has obtained heavily redacted documents showing that FBI offices and agents around the country were in high gear conducting surveillance against the movement even as early as August 2011, a month prior to the establishment of the OWS encampment in Zuccotti Park and other Occupy actions around the country. 

“This production, which we believe is just the tip of the iceberg, is a window into the nationwide scope of the FBI’s surveillance, monitoring, and reporting on peaceful protestors organizing with the Occupy movement,” stated Mara Verheyden-Hilliard, Executive Director of the Partnership for Civil Justice Fund (PCJF).  “These documents show that the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security are treating protests against the corporate and banking structure of America as potential criminal and terrorist activity.  These documents also show these federal agencies functioning as a de facto intelligence arm of Wall Street and Corporate America.”

“The documents are heavily redacted, and it is clear from the production that the FBI is withholding far more material. We are filing an appeal challenging this response and demanding full disclosure to the public of the records of this operation,” stated Heather Benno, staff attorney with the PCJF.

  • As early as August 19, 2011, the FBI in New York was meeting with the New York Stock Exchange to discuss the Occupy Wall Street protests that wouldn’t start for another month. By September, prior to the start of the OWS, the FBI was notifying businesses that they might be the focus of an OWS protest.
  • The FBI’s Indianapolis division released a “Potential Criminal Activity Alert” on September 15, 2011, even though they acknowledged that no specific protest date had been scheduled in Indiana. The documents show that the Indianapolis division of the FBI was coordinating with “All Indiana State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies,” as well as the “Indiana Intelligence Fusion Center,” the FBI “Directorate of Intelligence” and other national FBI coordinating mechanisms.
  • Documents show the spying abuses of the FBI’s “Campus Liaison Program” in which the FBI in Albany and the Syracuse Joint Terrorism Task Force disseminated information to “sixteen (16) different campus police officials,” and then “six (6) additional campus police officials.”  Campus officials were in contact with the FBI for information on OWS.  A representative of the State University of New York at Oswego contacted the FBI for information on the OWS protests and reported to the FBI on the SUNY-Oswego Occupy encampment made up of students and professors.
  • Documents released show coordination between the FBI, Department of Homeland Security and corporate America. They include a report by the Domestic Security Alliance Council (DSAC), described by the federal government as “a strategic partnership between the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security and the private sector,” discussing the OWS protests at the West Coast ports to “raise awareness concerning this type of criminal activity.” The DSAC report shows the nature of secret collaboration between American intelligence agencies and their corporate clients - the document contains a “handling notice” that the information is “meant for use primarily within the corporate security community. Such messages shall not be released in either written or oral form to the media, the general public or other personnel…” (The DSAC document was also obtained by the Northern California ACLU which has sought local FBI surveillance files.)
  • Naval Criminal Investigative Services (NCIS) reported to the DSAC on the relationship between OWS and organized labor for the port actions. The NCIS  describes itself as “an elite worldwide federal law enforcement organization” whose “mission is to investigate and defeat criminal, terrorist, and foreign intelligence threats to the United States Navy and Marine Corps ashore, afloat and in cyberspace.” The NCIS also assists with the transport of Guantanamo prisoners.
  • DSAC issued several tips to its corporate clients on “civil unrest” which it defines as ranging from “small, organized rallies to large-scale demonstrations and rioting.” It advised to dress conservatively, avoid political discussions and “avoid all large gatherings related to civil issues. Even seemingly peaceful rallies can spur violent activity or be met with resistance by security forces. Bystanders may be arrested or harmed by security forces using water cannons, tear gas or other measures to control crowds.”
  • The FBI in Anchorage reported from a Joint Terrorism Task Force meeting of November 3, 2011, about Occupy activities in Anchorage.
  • A port Facility Security Officer in Anchorage coordinated with the FBI to attend the meeting of protestors and gain intelligence on the planning of the port actions. He was advised to request the presence of an Anchorage Police Department official to also attend the event. The FBI Special Agent told the undercover private operative that he would notify the Joint Terrorism Task Force and that he would provide a point of contact at the Anchorage Police Department.
  • The Jacksonville, Florida FBI prepared a Domestic Terrorism briefing on the “spread of the Occupy Wall Street Movement” in October 2011. The intelligence meeting discussed Occupy venues identifying “Daytona, Gainesville and Ocala Resident Agency territories as portions …where some of the highest unemployment rates in Florida continue to exist.”
  • The Tampa, Florida FBI “Domestic Terrorism” liaison participated with the Tampa Police Department’s monthly intelligence meeting in which Occupy Lakeland, Occupy Polk County and Occupy St. Petersburg were discussed. They reported on an individual “leading the Occupy Tampa” and plans for travel to Gainesville for a protest planning meeting, as well as on Veterans for Peace plans to protest at MacDill Air Force Base.
  • The Federal Reserve in Richmond appears to have had personnel surveilling OWS planning. They were in contact with the FBI in Richmond to “pass on information regarding the movement known as occupy Wall Street.” There were repeated communications “to pass on updates of the events and decisions made during the small rallies and the following information received from the Capital Police Intelligence Unit through JTTF (Joint Terrorism Task Force).”
  • The Virginia FBI was collecting intelligence on the OWS movement for dissemination to the Virginia Fusion Center and other Intelligence divisions.
  • The Milwaukee division of the FBI was coordinating with the Ashwaubenon Public Safety division in Green Bay Wisconsin regarding Occupy.
  • The Memphis FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force met to discuss “domestic terrorism” threats, including, “Aryan Nations, Occupy Wall Street, and Anonymous.”
  • The Birmingham, AL division of the FBI sent communications to HAZMAT teams regarding the Occupy Wall Street movement.
  • The Jackson, Mississippi division of the FBI attended a meeting of the Bank Security Group in Biloxi, MS with multiple private banks and the Biloxi Police Department, in which they discussed an announced protest for “National Bad Bank Sit-In-Day” on December 7, 2011.
  • The Denver, CO FBI and its Bank Fraud Working Group met and were briefed on Occupy Wall Street in November 2011. Members of the Working Group include private financial institutions and local area law enforcement.
  • Jackson, MS Joint Terrorism Task Force issued a “Counterterrorism Preparedness” alert. This heavily redacted document includes the description, “To document…the Occupy Wall Street

Posts: 8,839
Reply with quote  #8 

Bonus read


NOVEMBER 15, 2016 AT 5:32 AM
FBI Director Comey’s credibility issues go beyond presidential politics to 9/11 panel
Filed under 9/11, A1 TOP STORY, FBI{NO COMMENTS}

FBI Director James Comey discusses the 9/11 Review Commission’s findings during a press conference at FBI headquarters on March 25, 2015. Former Attorney General Edwin Meese (left), and former Congressman Tim Roemer (right), are also pictured.
FBI Director James Comey’s credibility is under heavy fire due to his headline-making public statements about the FBI’s investigation of Hillary Clinton that have entangled the bureau in presidential politics.

Republicans howled in July when Comey publicly declared he wouldn’t recommend criminal charges against Clinton for her use of a private email server while she was secretary of state. Over the weekend, Democrat Clinton reportedly told supporters she blames her surprising loss to President-elect Donald Trump on Comey’s announcement 11 days before the election that he had restarted the email probe, as well as his announcement two days before the election that an examination of newly discovered emails had not changed his July findings.

But those aren’t the first credibility issues to be raised about Republican Comey since he became FBI chief in 2013. Others, largely unreported, arose

Link du jour





Off-duty NYPD cop allegedly pulls gun on driver who cut him off

Tuesday, November 15, 2016, 9:20 AM


NYPD cop found guilty of helping Bronx drug lord traffic cocaine
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Tuesday, November 1, 2016, 10:32 AM


Two FBI agents removed
from KS bomb plot case


GREENVILLE, N.C. (WNCT) – A Greenville man and seven others, including a TSA officer, have been arrested on charges of operating a drug trafficking network ...


Cop son of police union boss Pat Lynch stripped of gun, badge
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Tuesday, November 15, 2016, 8:53 PM


Former Jacksonville sheriff’s officer convicted in money-laundering scheme

A former officer with the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office faces up to five years in prison after he was convicted Monday for his role in a money-laundering scheme, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

A federal jury found 48-year-old Michael Rounsville of Callahan guilty of accessing a law enforcement database without authorization

FBI Octopus

Miller, director of new development at Quontic Bank
New York Real Estate Journal Online
Q: How did you go from pursuing a career in the FBI to mortgage banking? A: During the ... I became a real estate agent, and had a very successful first year.

Former FBI special agent to lead Sikich LLP's investigations team in ...
Chicago Tribune-
NAPERVILLE, Ill. - Nov. 15, 2016 - Sikich LLP recently announced the hiring of former FBI Special Agent Frederick M. Bennett, who will lead the firm's new ...


FBI counterterrorism agent speaks Wednesday at ERAU
The Daily Courier-
FBI counterterrorism agent speaks Wednesday at ERAU ... officer of 28 years with the FBI, and provide insights about the future security of the United States.


Mike Rogers, Cathy Minehan Join Mitre Board of Trustees
Jay Clemens November 15, 2016         Executive Moves, News 628 Views

Mike Rogers
Mike Rogers, former representative of Michigan’s eighth congressional district, and Cathy Minehan, managing director of Arlington Advisory Partners, have joined the board of trustees of Mitre Corp.

Rogers was a member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and chaired the House Intelligence Committee, where he oversaw a $70 billion budget for the U.S. intelligence community, Mitre said Thursday.

Prior to his political career, Rogers served as an officer in the U.S. Army and as an FBI special agent and founded the Mike Rogers Center for Intelligence and Global Affairs under the Global Digital Challenge Initiative.

He also serves on the board of directors at IronNet Cybersecurity, board of advisers at Next Century Corp., board of trustees at the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress and the Cybersecurity Industry Advisory Council at Trident Capital.

Cathy Minehan
Minehan previously served as a member of the Mitre board of trustees from 2009 to 2012, dean at Simmons College School of Management in Boston from 2011 to 2016 and CEO and president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston for 13 years.

She also held positions at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York as well as served on the staff of the D.C. Board of Governors and chaired the Federal Reserve System’s Financial Services Policy Committee.

She currently serves as chair of the bo

FBI agent/ Congressman Mike Rogers part
of 911 coverup
MSM handles public relations for the FBI


White House Knew That Mike Rogers Withheld Details Of NSA Surveillance From Others In Congress | Techdirt
Techdirt › articles › white-house-knew-th...
Aug 14, 2013 - from the it's-the-coverup-that-gets-you dept ... Mike Rogers, the head of the House Intelligence Committee has actively blocked requests from ...


Why Mike Rogers's departure from the Trump team is alarming
Washington Post (blog)-
Rogers, a widely respected former FBI agent who headed the House Intelligence Committee, had been seen as a figure of stability and continuity in intelligence ...


Donald Trump's transition team loses a key figure as he struggles to find his footing

Donald Trump transition team in disarray after key adviser 'purged'
The Guardian-
Rogers chaired the House intelligence committee and is a former army officer and FBI special agent. He said he was proud of the work his team had done to ...


REVEALED: Donald Trump Vows to 'Reopen 9/11 Probe' That Could 'Spark a Revolution'
DONALD Trump has vowed to reopen the original investigation into the 9/11 terror attacks 15 years after the massacre shook the world.
By Joshua Nevett
Daily Star
November 14, 2016


Most recently, the National Whistleblower Center filed an amicus curiae brief in a case before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Parkinson v. Department of Justice in support of John C. Parkinson, a former FBI special agent and Iraq war veteran. Along with FBI whistleblowers Fred Whitehurst, Jane Turner, Mike German and Robert Kobus, the NWC advocated that Mr. Parkinson retains his whistleblower rights –even as a veteran, and any contrary holding would deprive all veterans of important substantive rights under the law.  The Federal Circuit has yet to issue an opinion in this case.

These cases share an essential thread:  the courageous actions of whistleblowers set on doing the right thing.  In Escobar, this meant uncovering Medicare fraud, including treatment performed by unlicensed doctors; in Rigsby, it meant unearthing State Farm’s $758 million scam for defrauding the Government following Hurricane Katrina; and in Parkinson, it was blowing the whistle on his FBI colleagues’ alleged sexual misconduct in 2008.

The National Whistleblower Center has an almost 30-year history of protecting the right of individuals to report wrongdoing without fear of retaliation. Please support the NWC so it can continue to expand and defend whistleblower laws.  Consider a donation to the NWC this #GivingTuesday. #BecauseOfWhistleblowers.


Border Patrol’s ‘Icebox’ Conditions Raise Troubling Questions in Court

Detainees used these mylar mats to stave off the cold in detention centers.

Border Patrol has come under fire from federal prosecutors and civil-rights advocates following the discovery that immigrants are forced to sleep on cold concrete floors.

Tucson.com reports that the floors were so called that they earned the nickname, hierleras,” or iceboxes.

A federal hearing on the issue began Monday, and U.S. District

NOVEMBER 14, 2016 3:13 PM
DEA source trafficking drugs from prison, says lawyer for Venezuelan ‘first ladys nephews


Civil liberties groups fear SFPD could again help FBI spy on locals ...
San Francisco Examiner
But the incident is an example of the SFPD violating city law by taking part in an interview with a federal agent. Gilani was not suspected of breaking the law, and ...


Stop NorCal Logging Project
November 15, 2016

An attorney on Tuesday accused the U.S. Forest Service of prioritizing money-making over environmental protection when it approved logging on 2,000 acres of a protected watershed in


Mother Says Marshals Killed the Wrong Man
U.S. marshals executing a warrant at the wrong address shot to death an innocent, unarmed man as he worked on his truck, his mother claims in a lawsuit

Posts: 8,839
Reply with quote  #9 


AG Peterson rejects senators’ request for NSP special prosecutor
AUGUST 24, 2017

Attorney General Doug Peterson rejects the suggestion from 17 state senators that he appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Nebraska State Patrol.

Peterson has written the senators, responding to their letter requesting that he ask the courts to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the patrol for any violations of state law.

The request comes in light of Gov. Pete Ricketts ordering an investigation of the patrol by Chief Human Resources Officer Jason Jackson June 23rd after allegations surfaced that Col. Brad Rice exerted inappropriate influence over four internal affairs investigations.

Ricketts fired Rice June 30th after receiving the preliminary report from Jackson.

Five others have been suspended over allegations of dishonesty and dereliction of duty in two investigations into whether troopers used excessive force.

Jackson delivered his full report to the governor at the beginning of this month.

The investigation states how the NSP chain of commanded handled two allegations troopers used excessive force raises suspicions of dishonesty and dereliction of duty. In one case, a trooper used a tactical maneuver during a pursuit, resulting in a wreck in which the suspect died. The second case involved allegations a trooper hit a drunk suspect in the head with a rifle butt.

Jackson also states NSP failed to forward 12 cases of misconduct onto the Crime Commission as required by law. His investigation also faults the patrol’s sexual harassment and workplace harassment policies and accuses the patrol of failing to address charges of misconduct.

In his letter


Court orders company to turn over metadata from anti-Trump website

A District of Columbia judge sided Thursday with the Justice Department in ordering web-hosting service DreamHost to turn over certain metadata from an anti-Trump website.

The site, disruptj20.org, helped organize political protests against the Trump administration including one on Inauguration Day which resulted in property damage and scores of arrests. The government’s subsequent push for information from the hosting service has touched off a constitutional battle between the federal government and the company.

Chief Judge Robert Morin, of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, acknowledged Thursday in court that he was struggling to balance First Amendment rights with the valid concerns of law enforcement enforcing a search warrant based on probable cause. While the DOJ has backed off its initial, controversial request for IP addresses, the government still wants other personal information included in the metadata from DreamHost – a request Morin granted.

But the challenge is to focus on pertinent emails from people organizing violent protests without violating the privacy of ordinary website visitors. Morin tried to include safeguards to protect First Amendment rights, by forcing the government to separate records of innocent users from those that fall within the guidelines of the search warrant and to seal all those records.

Defense attorneys, though, warned of the “chilling effect” of even turning over the records, much less letting government investigators “rummage” through the emails.

“The individuals who are visiting, and becoming members of an advocacy group will still know that at some point, someday, there is going to be an FBI agent sitting there and looking at this information,” DreamHost defense attorney Raymond Aghaian said. “At the time this information is in the government’s possession and at the time that the FBI agent is reviewing that email … that, in DreamHost’s view, has itself a chilling effect on the exercise of political expression and the right to association under the First Amendment.”

Defense attorneys added that,  

Link du jour



It shows the officer punching Hubbard more than a dozen times and hitting his head on the pavement repeatedly. Euclid police initially contended Hubbard refused to follow orders, but Hubbard’s attorney said dashcam video clearly shows that Amiott didn’t give his client an opportunity to comply.


NYPD detective saddled with suits after Pedro Hernandez arrest claims Bronx lawyers are out to get him
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Thursday, August 24, 2017, 11:48 AM


Five of the best - and five of the worst - sexual assault response policies across the country
by Vanessa Nason
August 24, 2017
The care rape victims receive is entirely dependent on where the crime occurred. Good sexual assault response policies are comprised of a number of initiatives, including (but not limited to) specific officer training, a victim-centered approach, access to victim advocates, guidelines for submitting kits to labs, and victim notification. Based on what we’ve seen in our reporting so far, we’ve rounded up a list of the five best - and the five worst - sexual assault response policies across the country.
Read More


Family of Bronx man shot to death a decade ago by NYPD cop wins $2M from city
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Thursday, August 24, 2017, 4:03 PM


Pence’s security detail removed after bringing women back to hotel: report
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Friday, August 25, 2017, 12:28 AM


FBI: Marines won’t be charged with hate crime
SAVANNAH, Ga. Two U.S. Marines accused of knocking a gay Savannah man unconscious will face only misdemeanor charges in the attack after the Justice Department declined to prosecute them for hate crimes, authorities said Wednesday. Savannah-Chatham County police arrested the Marines on June 12 after finding 27-year-old Kieran Daly unconscious on a downtown sidewalk. Witnesses said the Marines got upset because they thought Daly winked at them and attacked him as he tried to walk away.


City agrees to pay $5M to 470 former inmates who sued over solitary confinement
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Friday, August 25, 2017, 4:00 AM


Report: Pompeo Has CIA Unit on Edge Over Loyalty to Trump
Daily Beast-
Officials in a CIA counterintelligence unit that has played a vital role in the FBI's Russia probe say they have to “watch” CIA Director Mike Pompeo over fears he ...


CIA's secret spy tool helps agency steal data from NSA & FBI ...
Standard Republic
Details of an alleged CIA project that allows the agency to secretly extract biometric data from liaison services such as the NSA, the DHS and the FBI have been ...


New Jersey priest claims he uploaded child porn to get back at God for making him loose at poker

Friday, August 25, 2017, 9:29 AM


Malaysia Chronicle
That any person under investigation by the FBI and the DOJ for what has been described as the biggest case of money laundering ever would be invited ...


Two fully acquitted, two partly acquitted from Bundy standoff

After being given alcohol before the interview, Burleson told an undercover FBI agent posing as a documentary film maker that he "was hell bent on killing ...

Sekulow: The FBI Lied and More to Come on Indicted Computer Whiz
CBN News-
The FBI lied to the American Center for Law and Justice, says ACLJ's Jordan Sekulow, about having documents and relevant material regarding a meeting last ...


Christian Group Sues For Defamation After Being Equated With KKK ...
The Daily Caller
A Christian TV ministry announced Wednesday that it is suing the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) for labeling it a hate group, like the Ku Klux Klan.


UPDATE: Sheriff John Buncich guilty; U.S. Attorney keeps perfect record on public corruption cases

FBI Octopus

International art theft topic of forum
Corvallis Gazette Times
The former manager of the FBI's art theft program will share stories from the fight against the international trade in stolen artwork at the next Corvallis Chamber of ...


History Premieres Limited Documentary Series ROAD TO 9/11, 9/4
Broadway World-
FBI agents and analysts - Lewis Schiliro, FBI Assistant Director, New York; Special Agent Mark Rossini; Special Agent Ali Soufan; Matthew Besheer, Detective, ...


Pulse nightclub shooting: FDLE releases review of agency's response, recommends changes


Philly narcotics cop swapped drugs for sex, his lawyer says
FILE PHOTO – Stanley Davis, a 21-year veteran of the Philadelphia police force and a former member of an FBI narcotics squad, is scheduled to plead guilty ...


Police Sergeant Took Bribes From Tow Truck Drivers For Crash Info ...
Brian Smith was charged by indictment with two counts of bribery and two counts of making material false statements to the FBI, Lappen's office said.


Best advice is to click on link and read entire story detailing
evidence for the CIA dealing heroin in our cities

Growing Up With Big Brother
A historian tracks half a century of evolving state surveillance.
By Alfred McCoy

August 24 2017

In the wake of the 2001 terrorist attacks, Washington pursued its elusive enemies across the landscapes of Asia and Africa, thanks in part to a massive expansion of its intelligence infrastructure, particularly of the emerging technologies for digital surveillance, agile drones, and biometric identification. In 2010, almost a decade into this secret war with its voracious appetite for information, The Washington Post reported that the national-security state had swelled into a “fourth branch” of the federal government—with 854,000 vetted officials, 263 security organizations, and over 3,000 intelligence units, issuing 50,000 special reports every year.

Though stunning, these statistics only skimmed the visible surface of what had become history’s largest and most lethal clandestine apparatus. According to classified documents that Edward Snowden leaked in 2013, the nation’s 16 intelligence agencies alone had 107,035 employees and a combined “black budget” of $52.6 billion, the equivalent of 10 percent of the vast defense budget.

By sweeping the skies and probing the World Wide Web’s undersea cables, the National Security Agency (NSA) could surgically penetrate the confidential communications of just about any leader on the planet, while simultaneously sweeping up billions of ordinary messages. For its classified missions, the CIA had access to the Pentagon’s Special Operations Command, with 69,000 elite troops (Rangers, SEALs, Air Commandos) and their agile arsenal. In addition to this formidable paramilitary capacity, the CIA operated 30 Predator and Reaper drones responsible for more than 3,000 deaths in Pakistan and Yemen.

While Americans practiced a collective form of duck-and-cover as the Department of Homeland Security’s colored alerts pulsed nervously from yellow to red, few paused to ask the hard question: Was all this security really directed solely at enemies beyond our borders? After half a century of domestic security abuses—from the “red scare” of the 1920s through the FBI’s illegal harassment of anti-war protesters in the 1960s and ’70s—could we really be confident that there wasn’t a hidden cost to all these secret measures right here at home? Maybe, just maybe, all this security wasn’t really so benign, when it came to us.

From my own personal experience over the past half-century, and my family’s history over three generations, I’ve found out in the most personal way possible that there’s a real cost to entrusting our civil liberties to the discretion of secret agencies. Let me share just a few of my own “war” stories to explain how I’ve been forced to keep learning and relearning this uncomfortable lesson the hard way.

After finishing college in the late 1960s, I decided to pursue a PhD in Japanese history and was pleasantly surprised when Yale Graduate School admitted me with a full fellowship. But the Ivy League in those days was no ivory tower. During my first year at Yale, the Justice Department indicted Black Panther leader Bobby Seale for a local murder and the May Day protests that filled the New Haven green also shut the campus for a week. Almost simultaneously, President Nixon ordered the invasion of Cambodia and student protests closed hundreds of campuses across America for the rest of the semester.

In the midst of all this tumult, the focus of my studies shifted from Japan to Southeast Asia, and from the past to the war in Vietnam. Yes, that war. So what did I do about the draft? During my first semester at Yale, on December 1, 1969, to be precise, the Selective Service cut up the calendar for a lottery. The first 100 birthdays picked were certain to be drafted, but any dates above 200 were likely exempt. My birthday, June 8, was the very last date drawn, not number 365 but 366 (don’t forget leap year)—the only lottery I have ever won, except a high-school raffle for a Sunbeam electric frying pan. Through a convoluted moral calculus typical of the 1960s, I decided that my draft exemption, although acquired by sheer luck, demanded that I devote myself, above all else, to thinking about, writing about, and working to end the Vietnam War.

During those campus protests over Cambodia in the spring of 1970, our small group of graduate students in Southeast Asian history at Yale realized that the US strategic predicament in Indochina would soon require an invasion of Laos to cut the flow of enemy supplies into South Vietnam. So, while protests over Cambodia swept campuses nationwide, we were huddled inside the library, preparing for the next invasion by editing a book of essays on Laos for the publisher Harper & Row. A few months after that book appeared, one of the company’s junior editors, Elizabeth Jakab, intrigued by an account we had included about that country’s opium crop, telephoned from New York to ask if I could research and write a “quickie” paperback about the history behind the heroin epidemic then infecting the US Army in Vietnam.

I promptly started the research at my student carrel in the Gothic tower that is Yale’s Sterling Library, tracking old colonial reports about the Southeast Asian opium trade that ended suddenly in the 1950s, just as the story got interesting. So, quite tentatively at first, I stepped outside the library to do a few interviews and soon found myself following an investigative trail that circled the globe. First, I traveled across America for meetings with retired CIA operatives. Then I crossed the Pacific to Hong Kong to study drug syndicates, courtesy of that colony’s police drug squad. Next, I went south to Saigon, then the capital of South Vietnam, to investigate the heroin traffic that was targeting the GIs, and on into the mountains of Laos to observe CIA alliances with opium warlords and the hill-tribe militias that grew the opium poppy. Finally, I flew from Singapore to Paris for interviews with retired French intelligence officers about their opium trafficking during the first Indochina War of the 1950s.

The drug traffic that supplied heroin for the US troops fighting in South Vietnam was not, I discovered, exclusively the work of criminals. Once the opium left tribal poppy fields in Laos, the traffic required official complicity at every level. The helicopters of Air America, the airline the CIA then ran, carried raw opium out of the villages of its hill-tribe allies. The commander of the Royal Lao Army, a close American collaborator, operated the world’s largest heroin lab and was so oblivious to the implications of the traffic that he opened his opium ledgers for my inspection. Several of Saigon’s top generals were complicit in the drug’s distribution to US soldiers. By 1971, this web of collusion ensured that heroin, according to a later White House survey of a thousand veterans, would be “commonly used” by 34 percent of American troops in South Vietnam.

None of this had been covered in my college history seminars. I had no models for researching an uncharted netherworld of crime and covert operations. After stepping off the plane in Saigon, body slammed by the tropical heat, I found myself in a sprawling foreign city of 4 million, lost in a swarm of snarling motorcycles and a maze of nameless streets, without contacts or a clue about how to probe these secrets. Every day on the heroin trail confronted me with new challenges—where to look, what to look for, and, above all, how to ask hard questions.

If you like this article, please give today to help fund The Nation’s work.
Reading all that history had, however, taught me something I didn’t know I knew. Instead of confronting my sources with questions about sensitive current events, I started with the French colonial past when the opium trade was still legal, gradually uncovering the underlying, unchanging logistics of drug production. As I followed this historical trail into the present, when the traffic became illegal and dangerously controversial, I began to use pieces from this past to assemble the present puzzle, until the names of contemporary dealers fell into place. In short, I had crafted a historical method that would prove, over the next 40 years of my career, surprisingly useful in analyzing a diverse array of foreign-policy controversies—CIA alliances with drug lords, the agency’s propagation of psychological torture, and our spreading state surveillance.

Those months on the road, meeting gangsters and warlords in isolated places, offered only one bit of real danger. While hiking in the mountains of Laos, interviewing Hmong farmers about their opium shipments on CIA helicopters, I was descending a steep slope when a burst of bullets ripped the ground at my feet. I had walked into an ambush by agency mercenaries.

While the five Hmong militia escorts whom the local village headman had prudently provided laid down a covering fire, my Australian photographer John Everingham and I flattened ourselves in the elephant grass and crawled through the mud to safety. Without those armed escorts, my research would have been at an end and so would I. After that ambush failed, a CIA paramilitary officer summoned me to a mountaintop meeting where he threatened to murder my Lao interpreter unless I ended my research. After winning assurances from the US embassy that my interpreter would not be harmed, I decided to ignore that warning and keep going.

Six months and 30,000 miles later, I returned to New Haven. My investigation of CIA alliances with drug lords had taught me more than I could have imagined about the covert aspects of US global power. Settling into my attic apartment for an academic year of writing, I was confident that I knew more than enough for a book on this unconventional topic. But my education, it turned out, was just beginning.

Within weeks, a massive, middle-aged guy in a suit interrupted my scholarly isolation. He appeared at my front door and identified himself as Tom Tripodi, senior agent for the Bureau of Narcotics, which later became the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). His agency, he confessed during a second visit, was worried about my writing and he had been sent to investigate. He needed something to tell his superiors. Tom was a guy you could trust. So I showed him a few draft pages of my book. He disappeared into the living room for a while and came back saying, “Pretty good stuff. You got your ducks in a row.” But there were some things, he added, that weren’t quite right, some things he could help me fix.

Tom was my first reader. Later, I would hand him whole chapters and he would sit in a rocking chair, shirt sleeves rolled up, revolver in his shoulder holster, sipping coffee, scribbling corrections in the margins, and telling fabulous stories—like the time Jersey Mafia boss “Bayonne Joe” Zicarelli tried to buy a thousand rifles from a local gun store to overthrow Fidel Castro. Or when some CIA covert warrior came home for a vacation and had to be escorted everywhere so he didn’t kill somebody in a supermarket aisle.

Best of all, there was the one about how the Bureau of Narcotics caught French intelligence protecting the Corsican syndicates smuggling heroin into New York City. Some of his stories, usually unacknowledged, would appear in my book, The Politics of Heroin in Southeast Asia. These conversations with an undercover operative, who had trained Cuban exiles for the CIA in Florida and later investigated Mafia heroin syndicates for the DEA in Sicily, were akin to an advanced seminar, a master class in covert operations.

In the summer of 1972, with the book at press, I went to Washington to testify before Congress. As I was making the rounds of congressional offices on Capitol Hill, my editor rang unexpectedly and summoned me to New York for a meeting with the president and vice president of Harper & Row, my book’s publisher. Ushered into a plush suite of offices overlooking the spires of St. Patrick’s Cathedral, I listened to those executives tell me that Cord Meyer Jr., the CIA’s deputy director for covert operations, had called on their company’s president emeritus, Cass Canfield Sr. The visit was no accident, for Canfield, according to an authoritative history, “enjoyed prolific links to the world of intelligence, both as a former psychological warfare officer and as a close personal friend of Allen Dulles,” the ex-head of the CIA. Meyer denounced my book as a threat to national security. He asked Canfield, also an old friend, to quietly suppress it.

I was in serious trouble. Not only was Meyer a senior CIA official, but he also had impeccable social connections and covert assets in every corner of American intellectual life. After graduating from Yale in 1942, he served with the marines in the Pacific, writing eloquent war dispatches published in The Atlantic Monthly. He later worked with the US delegation drafting the UN charter. Personally recruited by spymaster Allen Dulles, Meyer joined the CIA in 1951 and was soon running its International Organizations Division, which, in the words of that same history, “constituted the greatest single concentration of covert political and propaganda activities of the by now octopus-like CIA,” including “Operation Mockingbird,” which planted disinformation in major US newspapers meant to aid agency operations. Informed sources told me that the CIA still had assets inside every major New York publisher and it already had every page of my manuscript.

Get unlimited digital access to the best independent news and analysis.
As the child of a wealthy New York family, Cord Meyer moved in elite social circles, meeting and marrying Mary Pinchot, the niece of Gifford Pinchot, founder of the US Forestry Service and a former governor of Pennsylvania. Pinchot was a breathtaking beauty who later became President Kennedy’s mistress, making dozens of secret visits to the White House. When she was found shot dead along the banks of a canal in Washington in 1964, the head of CIA counterintelligence, James Jesus Angleton, another Yale alumnus, broke into her home in an unsuccessful attempt to secure her diary. Mary’s sister Toni and her husband, Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee, later found the diary and gave it to Angleton for destruction by the agency. To this day, her unsolved murder remains a subject of mystery and controversy.

Cord Meyer was also in the Social Register of New York’s fine families along with my publisher, Cass Canfield, which added a dash of social cachet to the pressure to suppress my book. By the time he walked into Harper & Row’s office in that summer of 1972, two decades of CIA service had changed Meyer (according to that same authoritative history) from a liberal idealist into “a relentless, implacable advocate for his own ideas,” driven by “a paranoiac distrust of everyone who didn’t agree with him” and a manner that was “histrionic and even bellicose.” An unpublished 26-year-old graduate student versus the master of CIA media manipulation. It was hardly a fair fight. I began to fear my book would never appear.

To his credit, Canfield refused Meyer’s request to suppress the book. But he did allow the agency a chance to review the manuscript prior to publication. Instead of waiting quietly for the CIA’s critique, I contacted Seymour Hersh, then an investigative reporter for The New York Times. The same day the CIA courier arrived from Langley to collect my manuscript, Hersh swept through Harper & Row’s offices like a tropical storm, pelting hapless executives with incessant, unsettling questions. The next day, his exposé of the CIA’s attempt at censorship appeared on the paper’s front page. Other national media organizations followed his lead. Faced with a barrage of negative coverage, the CIA gave Harper & Row a critique full of unconvincing denials. The book was published unaltered.

I had learned another important lesson: The Constitution’s protection of press freedom could check even the world’s most powerful espionage agency. Cord Meyer reportedly learned the same lesson. According to his obituary in The Washington Post, “It was assumed that Mr. Meyer would eventually advance” to head CIA covert operations, “but the public disclosure about the book deal…apparently dampened his prospects.” He was instead exiled to London and eased into early retirement.

Meyer and his colleagues were not, however, used to losing. Defeated in the public arena, the CIA retreated to the shadows and retaliated by tugging at every thread in the threadbare life of a graduate student. Over the next few months, federal officials from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare turned up at Yale to investigate my graduate fellowship. The Internal Revenue Service audited my poverty-level income. The FBI tapped my New Haven telephone (something I learned years later from a class-action lawsuit).

In August 1972, at the height of the controversy over the book, FBI agents told the bureau’s director that they had “conducted [an] investigation concerning McCoy,” searching the files they had compiled on me for the past two years and interviewing numerous “sources whose identities are concealed [who] have furnished reliable information in the past”—thereby producing an 11-page report detailing my birth, education, and campus anti-war activities.

A college classmate I hadn’t seen in four years, who served in military intelligence, magically appeared at my side in the book section of the Yale Co-op, seemingly eager to resume our relationship. The same week that a laudatory review of my book appeared on the front page of the Sunday New York Times Book Review section, an extraordinary achievement for any historian, Yale’s History Department placed me on academic probation. Unless I could somehow do a year’s worth of overdue work in a single semester, I faced dismissal.

In those days, the ties between the CIA and Yale were wide and deep. The campus residential colleges screened students, including future CIA Director Porter Goss, for possible careers in espionage. Alumni like Cord Meyer and James Angleton held senior slots at the agency. Had I not had a faculty adviser visiting from Germany, the distinguished scholar Bernhard Dahm who was a stranger to this covert nexus, that probation would likely have become expulsion, ending my academic career and destroying my credibility.

During those difficult days, New York Congressman Ogden Reid, a ranking member of the House Foreign Relations Committee, telephoned to say that he was sending staff investigators to Laos to look into the opium situation. Amid this controversy, a CIA helicopter landed near the village where I had escaped that ambush and flew the Hmong headman who had helped my research to an agency airstrip. There, a CIA interrogator made it clear that he had better deny what he had said to me about the opium. Fearing, as he later told my photographer, that “they will send a helicopter to arrest me, or…soldiers to shoot me,” the Hmong headman did just that.

At a personal level, I was discovering just how deep the country’s intelligence agencies could reach, even in a democracy, leaving no part of my life untouched: my publisher, my university, my sources, my taxes, my phone, and even my friends.

Although I had won the first battle of this war with a media blitz, the CIA was winning the longer bureaucratic struggle. By silencing my sources and denying any culpability, its officials convinced Congress that it was innocent of any direct complicity in the Indochina drug trade. During Senate hearings into CIA assassinations by the famed Church Committee three years later, Congress accepted the agency’s assurance that none of its operatives had been directly involved in heroin trafficking (an allegation I had never actually made). The committee’s report did confirm the core of my critique, however, finding that “the CIA is particularly vulnerable to criticism” over indigenous assets in Laos “of considerable importance to the Agency,” including “people who either were known to be, or were suspected of being, involved in narcotics trafficking.” But the senators did not press the CIA for any resolution or reform of what its own inspector general had called the “particular dilemma” posed by those alliances with drug lords—the key aspect, in my view, of its complicity in the traffic.

During the mid-1970s, as the flow of drugs into the United States slowed and the number of addicts declined, the heroin problem receded into the inner cities and the media moved on to new sensations. Unfortunately, Congress had forfeited an opportunity to check the CIA and correct its way of waging covert wars. In less than 10 years, the problem of the CIA’s tactical alliances with drug traffickers to support its far-flung covert wars was back with a vengeance.

During the 1980s, as the crack-cocaine epidemic swept America’s cities, the agency, as its own inspector general later reported, allied itself with the largest drug smuggler in the Caribbean, using his port facilities to ship arms to the Contra guerrillas fighting in Nicaragua and protecting him from any prosecution for five years. Simultaneously on the other side of the planet in Afghanistan, mujahedeen guerrillas imposed an opium tax on farmers to fund their fight against the Soviet occupation and, with the CIA’s tacit consent, operated heroin labs along the Pakistani border to supply international markets. By the mid-1980s, Afghanistan’s opium harvest had grown tenfold and was providing 60 percent of the heroin for America’s addicts and as much as 90 percent in New York City.

Almost by accident, I had launched my academic career by doing something a bit different. Embedded within that study of drug trafficking was an analytical approach that would take me, almost unwittingly, on a lifelong exploration of US global hegemony in its many manifestations, including diplomatic alliances, CIA interventions, developing military technology, recourse to torture, and global surveillance. Step by step, topic by topic, decade after decade, I would slowly accumulate sufficient understanding of the parts to try to assemble the whole. In writing my new book, In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of US Global Power, I drew on this research to assess the overall character of US global power and the forces that might contribute to its perpetuation or decline.

In the process, I slowly came to see a striking continuity and coherence in Washington’s century-long rise to global dominion. CIA torture techniques emerged at the start of the Cold War in the 1950s; much of its futuristic robotic aerospace technology had its first trial in the Vietnam War of the 1960s; and, above all, Washington’s reliance on surveillance first appeared in the colonial Philippines around 1900 and soon became an essential though essentially illegal tool for the FBI’s repression of domestic dissent that continued through the 1970s.

In the wake of the 9/11 terror attacks, I dusted off that historical method, and used it to explore the origins and character of domestic surveillance inside the United States.

After occupying the Philippines in 1898, the US Army, facing a difficult pacification campaign in a restive land, discovered the power of systematic surveillance to crush the resistance of the country’s political elite. Then, during World War I, the Army’s “father of military intelligence,” the dour General Ralph Van Deman, who had learned his trade in the Philippines, drew upon his years pacifying those islands to mobilize a legion of 1,700 soldiers and 350,000 citizen-vigilantes for an intense surveillance program against suspected enemy spies among German-Americans, including my own grandfather. In studying Military Intelligence files at the National Archives, I found “suspicious” letters purloined from my grandfather’s army locker. In fact, his mother had been writing him in her native German about such subversive subjects as knitting him socks for guard duty.

In the 1950s, Hoover’s FBI agents tapped thousands of phones without warrants and kept suspected subversives under close surveillance, including my mother’s cousin Gerard Piel, an anti-nuclear activist and the publisher of Scientific American magazine. During the Vietnam War, the bureau expanded its activities with an amazing array of spiteful, often illegal, intrigues in a bid to cripple the anti-war movement with pervasive surveillance of the sort seen in my own FBI file.

Memory of the FBI’s illegal surveillance programs was largely washed away after the Vietnam War thanks to Congressional reforms that required judicial warrants for all government wiretaps. The terror attacks of September 2001, however, gave the National Security Agency the leeway to launch renewed surveillance on a previously unimaginable scale. Writing for TomDispatch in 2009, I observed that coercive methods first tested in the Middle East were being repatriated and might lay the groundwork for “a domestic surveillance state.” Sophisticated biometric and cyber techniques forged in the war zones of Afghanistan and Iraq had made a “digital surveillance state a reality” and so were fundamentally changing the character of American democracy.

Four years later, Edward Snowden’s leak of secret NSA documents revealed that, after a century-long gestation period, a US digital surveillance state had finally arrived. In the age of the Internet, the NSA could monitor tens of millions of private lives worldwide, including American ones, via a few hundred computerized probes into the global grid of fiber-optic cables.

And then, as if to remind me in the most personal way possible of our new reality, four years ago, I found myself the target yet again of an IRS audit, of TSA body searches at national airports, and—as I discovered when the line went dead—a tap on my office telephone at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. Why? Maybe it was my current writing on sensitive topics like CIA torture and NSA surveillance, or maybe my name popped up from some old database of suspected subversives left over from the 1970s. Whatever the explanation, it was a reasonable reminder that, if my own family’s experience across three generations is in any way representative, state surveillance has been an integral part of American political life far longer than we might imagine.

At the cost of personal privacy, Washington’s worldwide web of surveillance has now become a weapon of exceptional power in a bid to extend US global hegemony deeper into the 21st century. Yet it’s worth remembering that sooner or later what we do overseas always seems to come home to haunt us, just as the CIA and crew have haunted me this last half-century. When we learn to love Big Brother, the world becomes a more, not less, dangerous place.

This piece has been adapted and expanded from the introduction to Alfred W. McCoy’s new book, In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of US Global Power.


Harvey’s Approach Brings Potential Severe 5-Day Rain Event For Texas and Louisiana
For the third time in less than one month, powerful thunderstorms have dropped torrential rains in excess of 6 inches over Kansas City, Missouri. In the most recent event, a frontal system dropping down over the U.S. midsection encountered a very heavy load of atmospheric moisture streaming in off a much warmer than normal Gulf of Mexico. The result for Kansas City was the production of a towering boomer that dropped 10 inches in just one night.

Such an intense downpour turned roads into rivers and forced numerous residents to take refuge on rooftops as the waters rose once again. By morning, more than 130 water rescues had been called in across the city.

(NOAA predicts heavy rainfall for Texas and Louisiana over the coming week. Image source: NOAA.)

But this particular extreme event may be a simple prelude for what’s to come as the remnants of Harvey sets its sights on the Texas and Louisiana Gulf Coasts. Harvey is expected to strengthen into a tropical storm or weak hurricane over a very warm and moist Gulf of Mexico within the next 48 hours. Models then predict that it will combine its substantial moisture load with that of the frontal system responsible for such severe flooding in Missouri last night.

Already NOAA is predicting some very significant rainfall amounts over the coming days for the Texas and Louisiana coastal regions (see image above). And Harvey represents a considerable rainfall potential given the fact that it is expected to stall over Texas and Louisiana for the better part of 5 days. With regards to NOAA rainfall predictions, it is worth noting that extreme local precipitation values have significantly exceeded NOAA predictions recently in the case of the most severe thunderstorms.

(2 PM EST assessment of Harvey’s path and potential for restrengthening. Image source: The National Hurricane Center.)

One possible spoiler for Harvey reforming is an upper level low swirling just southeast of Texas. This low could rip Harvey apart. But if this happens, that system would tend to also direct Harvey’s moisture toward Texas, Louisiana and Alabama. In which case, strong rainfall potentials are also likely. However, the National Hurricane Center expects this upper level low and associated squalls to move toward the north and west — generating rainy conditions for Texas and Louisiana ahead of Harvey and creating space for a more powerful and heavily moisture laden storm to form.

Lower than normal precipitation totals in the region of Coastal Texas during the past couple of months may help to alleviate flood potential if the rains from Harvey remain on the somewhat lighter side (2-4 inches) and if the system continues to be disorganized. A more organized system would tend to bring heavier precipitation totals. However, it is worth noting that during recent years, much warmer than normal sea surface temperatures have combined with a warmer atmosphere to spike heavy rainfall totals. A result of human-forced climate change due to ongoing rampant fossil fuel burni
The National Hurricane Center

Historic Flooding Leaves One Dead

Over 130 Calls Made to Kansas City Fire Department Amid Life Threatening Flooding Overnight


Posts: 8,839
Reply with quote  #10 


October 19, 2017
The mystery of disgraced CIA spymaster James Angleton’s “retirement”
After being publicly ousted as counterintelligence chief, Agency wasted little time in signing a contract with Angleton at his old best
Soon after legendary spymaster and Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) counterintelligence chief James Jesus Angleton’s intelligence career supposedly ended with his forced retirement in December 1974 due to the exposure of CIA wrongdoing, he returned to the Agency, where counterintelligence operations reportedly remained under his purview until late 1975.

Documents obtained by obtained by MIT national security researcher Ryan Shapiro and shared exclusively with MuckRock show that the Agency soon signed a Top Secret contract with Angleton after his much publicized firing. The documents also show that both Angleton and CIA Director Colby gave misleading testimony to the Church Committee about this. A previously classified internal CIA History also raises doubts about the nature of Angleton’s contract work by contradicting CIA’s public statements. Part one of this article explores his rehiring and the lies directly surrounding it, while later parts will reexamines CIA’s “war in heaven” including the possibly libelous “Monster Plot” report and the circumstances surrounding Angleton’s fall from grace.

Angleton’s departure from his post as the Agency’s counterintelligence chief was announced in late December 1974, though he would be associated with the “unofficial intelligence community” called CIN as well as acting as a consultant to members of Congress, at least one CIA Commission, and the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Role. While a small handful of the Agency’s historians have acknowledged that Angleton spent time at the Agency following his forced retirement, they’ve done so in ways that are, at best, incomplete. For example, Cleveland Cram’s unclassified history says Angleton spent some of the following months at the Agency “introducing members of the new CI Staff” to people. However, both the description of Angleton’s activities there and the timeline are contradicted in official documents described below.

In another version very similar to Cram’s, an Agency spokesperson in early 1975 described Angleton as officially retired but continuing to work at CIA headquarters, serving as a consultant aiding in the transition to George Kalaris, Angleton’s replacement as CIA’s counterintelligence chief. The description of Angleton as officially retired was misleading, and the Agency’s partial admission was likely prompted only by the fact that the media had already followed Angleton on his way to work at CIA headquarters a month before.

According to documents reviewed by the FBI, CIA’s internal files show that Angleton was officially on the Agency’s payroll as a contract employee in 1975. As of this writing, the CIA has failed to release these records, having exceeded twenty three times over the time limit in which they’re legally required to do so. When asked why the CIA hadn’t yet responded to the FOIA request, the Agency declined to comment.

Less than a week before Angleton was granted the Top Secret Contract clearance, Congress had questioned the CIA’s handling of Angleton’s retirement at a briefing delivered by the CIA Director.

It was almost immediately after this that Angleton received the Distinguished Intelligence Medal. A letter from the FBI Director and addressed to Angleton at CIA Headquarters confirms that Angleton was known within the Intelligence Community to still be working at CIA headquarters.

CIA’s files in 1980, some of which were shared with the FBI, indicate that Angleton’s “intermittent contract as a Consultant” with the CIA had officially began on April 1st 1975, a week before he received the Distinguished Intelligence Medal and the FBI Director’s congratulatory letter - but nearly a month after Angleton was followed going to work at CIA Headquarters and three months after his public retirement.

The dates of the consultant contract, which ended on September 30th, 1975, appear to have been provided by someone from CIA’s personnel office, while the date the Top Secret Contract clearance was granted appears to have been derived from the security file provided by the Agency’s representative. The contract paid Angleton the same amount that he received as CIA’s Counterintelligence Chief at the time of his retirement, assuming a five day work week.

While the original contract expired in September 1975, the State Department’s website indicates that reciprocity would mean that the clearance granted on February 26 of the same year would remain valid for at least five years, during which time CIA would be free to renew the contract or sign a new one. Coincidentally, a new background check was conducted five years later and a new security clearance granted to allow Angleton to aid the defense of Mark Felt, Edward Miller, and L. Patrick Gray. Angleton had previously started the Security and Intelligence Fund/Foundation to help with the defense in the case against former FBI Agent John Kearney, a case which essentially morphed into the case against Felt, Miller and Gray.

The question of whether or not the contract was renewed or a new one signed can only be answered by the documents the CIA has refused to release. The dates of the known contract, however, are at odds not only with the public histories, but with what the Agency’s leadership reported to Congress in their classified testimony. When asked if the contract was renewed and when Angleton’s final contract with the CIA expired, the Agency declined to comment. This opacity seems to be nothing new, with even the Church Committee appearing to have been mislead on the matter.

In his May 23 1975 testimony before the Church Committee, Senator Church directly asked CIA Director Colby if James Angleton was being paid by the Agency as a consultant. According to the transcript, originally classified TOP SECRET, Colby replied that he believed it had “dropped off.” Continuing, Colby said that Angleton “did help us for three or four months but I believe that it is terminated. It is about time to terminate it.”

The “three or four months” mentioned by Colby lined up with when Angleton was dismissed, but not when he was granted the clearance or when the contract started.Colby’s “three or four months” were about twice what the official contract’s dates reflect. The record shows that the contract continued for more than four months after Colby said that it was “time to terminate it.”According to the transcript, Colby denied the Agency had a plan to “retain him indefinitely” and added that the Agency had set itself “about [a] six month period” which “was to help us get over this transition and phase [Angleton] out.”

The dates provided by Colby are further undermined by anecdotal accounts that appear to confirm the dates of the contract. According to Joseph Trento’s Prelude to Terror, “it took Angleton nine months to clean out his desk” after his public retirement in 1974.

When asked if either the Agency or Colby had corrected this by providing the Church Committee with accurate information, the Agency declined to comment. When asked if Angleton had worked for the Agency prior to the beginning of the contract - which might explain the Director’s erroneous testimony - the Agency declined to comment. When asked to confirm the CIA Director’s description of Angleton’s contract work as being limited to the transition, the Agency again declined to comment.

Angleton himself may have been even more dishonest with the Church Committee, as his declassified testimony fails to acknowledge the consultant work at all. When asked in his classified Executive Session testimony of June 19th 1975 about his employment with the Agency, Angleton responded that he had been with them “from the beginning until December, the end of December.”

When asked to clarify the year, Angleton confirmed that he had meant December 1974.

When Angleton again testified before the Church Committee on September 25th, 1975 he once more described his CIA employment as having ended in 1974, and asserted that he was retired. His contract with the Agency was not set to expire until September 30th. When asked if the Agency was aware of any reason for why Angleton would have omitted this mention, such as compartmentalization or separate briefings, an Agency spokesperson declined to comment.

In classified testimony given a few years later, Angleton described this time period as the Agency keeping him “on ice for the Church Committee.” Notably, at least some of Angleton’s Church Committee testimony was given well after his original contract with the Agency expired - raising additional questions about the timeline.

Angleton’s apparent omissions in his testimony before the Church Committee have a slightly greater significance in light of the fact that the CIA Director had intervened with the Department of Justice (DOJ) when it came time for Angleton to testify before the Church Committee. As a result, according to a letter written by the CIA Director, the DOJ “acted immediately to retain counsel for Mr. Angleton” with “respect to the taking of depositions by and appearances before” the Church Committee.

Curiously, in his testimony before the House Select Committee on Assassinations, Angleton appears to deny having had counsel while giving testimony and depositions before the Church Committee. His testimony before the Church Committee, however, confirms that he was represented by John T. Brown during the proceedings.

Additional questions are raised by Angleton’s FBI file, which asserts that while he was still under contract with the Agency and that while the Agency had helped arrange for his lawyer, Angleton was briefing the FBI, but not the CIA, about his Church Committee testimony. If this is true, it would seem to indicate that Colby may have been kept out of the loop on Angleton’s activities rather than deliberately lying to the Church Committee about them. The Bureau appears to have decided not to inform Colby, lest their interest in Angleton be “misconstrued.”

No mention is made in the file about Angleton’s testimony to the Rockefeller Commission while under contract with CIA. According to a declassified memo from Vice President Rockefeller, Angleton testified that “the counterintelligence activities of the CIA had been seriously undercut by certain organizational changes instituted by Colby. Angleton’s presentation so impressed the Commission members that he was asked to prepare a special memorandum on the subject.“ According to the Rockefeller memo, Angleton’s memo and its recommendations would have been included with the Rockefeller Commission Report had it been delivered any sooner.

Shortly after Angleton briefed of the FBI about his Church Committee testimony, and about two months before his contract with the CIA was set to expire, Angleton was again in contact with the FBI. This time, Angleton was requesting information instead of providing it. Angleton wanted “public source material relating to the Bureau’s assessment of the hostile foreign intelligence threat and the importance of counterintelligence.” The Bureau recommended providing him with the information, almost certainly helping lay the groundwork for some of Angleton’s work the American Security Council and the Security and Intelligence Fund/Foundation.

Perhaps most significantly, the description of Angleton’s activities while under a CIA contract is disputed by declassified documents. While an unnamed spokesperson previously described Angleton’s consultation as simply helping with the transition and a current spokesperson declined to comment on it at all, an internal CIA history describes Angleton’s work as operational. According to the declassified history, “during the period of 1973-75, operational issues remained solely the preserve of Angleton and his operations chief.” While the name of the operations chief is redacted in the history, it refers to Newton S. Miler - who had, according to Colby, agreed to stay on for a time along with Angleton and his other deputies, Raymond Rocca and William Hood.

The Agency has declined to explain or attempt to reconcile any of these apparent discrepancies, or to describe Angleton’s relationship with the Agency either during the time of his contract or in the following years.

In one curious instance, shortly after Colby was replaced by George H.W. Bush in early 1976, a member of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB) referenced Colby’s previous dismantling of CIA’s counterintelligence and said Colby had left it “confused.” Lamenting the Agency’s loss of institutional knowledge and experience for counterintelligence in the form of “the top people in counterintelligence,” the PFIAB member recommended that Bush speak to Angleton. When asked if the recommendation to the President was followed and if Angleton had briefed then-CIA Director Bush, the Agency once again declined to comment.

The Agency similarly declined to comment on Angleton’s consulting with the Agency in 1983, or his work with Accuracy In Media, the American Security Council, or the Security and Intelligence Fund - all members of the Common Interest Network, CIA’s “unofficial intelligence community.”

Before his death, Angleton himself appears to have been similarly loath to admit that his relationship with the Agency was anything but over after December 1974. In addition to omitting any mention of it in his Church Committee testimony, the SF-86 form filled out by Angleton in June 1980 traces his Agency employment from its predecessor organizations through December 1974. According to national security attorney Mark Zaid, he would have been expected to list the 1975 contract with CIA on the SF-86 from 1980 “unless it was covert.”

The scarce information and the Agency’s refusal to comment make it impossible to reconcile the contradictions. While Cram and Colby both indicated a six month timeline essentially beginning when Angleton was forced into retirement, that doesn’t coincide with either the dates of the clearance or the six month contract, both of which began several months after Angleton’s retirement. Angleton was spotted going to work at CIA Headquarters on March 4th, 1975 - a week after his clearance was granted on February 26th but before the contract began on April 1st. Not only can their dates not be reconciled with the security clearance, they are at odds with Trento’s reporting that Angleton took nine months to clear out his desk. However, Trento’s reporting not only indicates a departure in September that’s consistent with the dates of the contract - it suggests that Angleton might not have left the Agency before his contract began.

The most consistent explanation is that Angleton barely left the Agency after his forced retirement, returning for work that required a Top Secret clearance and lasting nine months. During this time, the CIA Director was either kept out of the loop or mislead the Church Committee. According to several accounts, Angleton’s contract work with the Agency reportedly went beyond a mere payoff into retirement or even introducing people to his replacement. During this time, Angleton says he was kept “on ice” for the Church Committee while one of CIA internals histories says “operational issues” remained under the sole purview of Angleton and Miler. Each of these often contradictory explanations, however, raises more questions - questions which can only be answered by the documents CIA has failed to release.

Check back in a few days for the next part in this series, which will explore the potentially libellous “Monster Plot” Report from John Hart. In the meantime, you can read Angleton’s report to the Rockefeller Commission here, or embedded below..


OCTOBER 19, 2017 |

A Close Look at Rex Tillerson and ExxonMobil

Rex Tillerson has reportedly called Donald Trump a “moron.” And, in the interest of accuracy and completeness, NBC amended that to a “f*cking moron.”

But what epithet might apply to Rex Tillerson?

For many years, Tillerson headed ExxonMobil, a company that he knew was contributing to global warming. And nothing changed under his leadership — with devastating and possibly irreversible results.

Recently, the Los Angeles Times released a detailed report on the extent to which ExxonMobil misled the public, for decades, on what it knew about how it was affecting the climate:

Reviewing 187 ExxonMobil documents, we found that 83% of peer-reviewed papers authored by ExxonMobil scientists and 80% of the company’s internal communications acknowledged that climate change was real and human-caused.

For a closer view of this phenomenal deception, and one of the people responsible for it, please see the following story, which we first posted earlier this year.

—WhoWhatWhy Staff

Rex Tillerson likes his privacy. Career diplomats working in the same building with him were given special instructions: Do not try to make eye contact with him, and do not speak to him directly.

On his first three trips abroad, Tillerson did not even meet with State Department employees in their embassies. Nor did he allow the usual press corps to accompany him on those trips. He took along only one reporter, one who was from the conservative website, Independent Journal Review. He does not like to answer questions.

To many, appointing the former CEO of Exxon as Secretary of State was about as appropriate as putting Bernie Madoff in charge of the treasury.

Tillerson is too close to Russia, and he’s too close to the oil business. He was with Exxon for 41 years. Since 2011, his company has been entering into multibillion-dollar deals with the Russian firm Rosneft, allowing Exxon access to the Russian Arctic, Siberia, and Russia’s far east. The Russian arctic alone contains approximately 22% of the world’s undiscovered oil and gas.

This association presents a conflict of interest. Because the US imposed sanctions against Russia after it invaded Ukraine in 2014, Exxon is reported to have lost $1 billion. Tillerson is opposed to the sanctions.

And there is another potential conflict of interest. Terry Collingsworth, a lawyer with International Rights Advocates, is concerned that a State Department under Tillerson may “intervene to side with big companies like Exxon Mobil in future human rights abuse cases.”

Collingsworth is the lawyer for plaintiffs involved in a lawsuit against Exxon Mobil for “damages” inflicted by Indonesian military hired to perform “security services” on behalf of Exxon. The “security services” involved “human rights abuses, including genocide, murder, torture, crimes against humanity, sexual violence, and kidnapping.” (According to a progressive website, this is just one of many lawsuits.) Collingsworth believes the appointment of Tillerson sends a message:

“The world is open for business — environment and human rights be damned.”

Dick Russell has just published a book on the very people who embrace that attitude — including Rex Tillerson — and the devastating consequences it has had on our planet: Horsemen of the Apocalypse: The Men Who are Destroying Life on Earth and What It Means for Our Children (with an Introduction by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.) (Hot books, April 2017) He says of them:

“These dark lords like to pose as good family men, benefactors of charities and the arts, upstanding pillars of their community. But first and foremost they are enemies of life on earth. This book has sought to put a face to the entrenched evil that has pushed us to the point of no return.”

Below is the first of two parts excerpted from Chapter One of this book. To see the second part, go here.


NYPD to remove political posters, stickers on department vehicles, stationhouse walls
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Thursday, October 19, 2017, 12:41 AM


White Oklahoma cop convicted of killing daughter's black boyfriend after three mistrials

NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Updated: Thursday, October 19, 2017, 7:20 AM


Chad landed on Trump travel ban list after it ran out of paper to process passports

Thursday, October 19, 2017, 8:16 AM


October 19, 2017
The CIA had after-work skydiving
Recently uncovered documents show that Agency employees unwound from the work day with sports cars, horseback riding, and archaeology

Sorry, but your employee softball team is pretty lame compared to what Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) employees were up to in 1963.

A list of recreation programs uncovered in CREST shows that CIA employees unwound from the work day by signing up for some bizarre activities. In December 1963, for example, 54 of the agency’s employees were signed up for the “Sky Diving Club.”

The logistics of such an activity are unclear, but thankfully it was one of the the clubs that offered instruction – unlike the archaeology club, where it seems all 36 members had to be previously educated in whatever exactly they were doing (digging up dinosaur bones? Cataloguing ancient artifacts?

Membership seems to fall in line with traditional gender role divisions that make sense for 1963 – ham radio, sports car club, and touch-football have no women members, while modern dance and the arts and crafts club have no men.

Comprised of only 15 members, the Agency journalism club was one of the smallest, smaller even than the 38 member stamp collecting club. The journalism club also didn’t offer instruction, and there’s no word on what they were doing there, either. If only they knew that 59 years later, journalists would be writing about how cool CIA clubs were, albeit complicated to join.

Read the full list of clubs embedded


Highest NY Court Seats First Openly Gay Judge
Justice Paul G. Feinman was sworn in Wednesday as the first openly gay judge on New York’s highest court, replacing the late Judge Sheila Abdus-Salaam, who was the first black woman to sit on the New York Court of Appeals.


Melania Trump has a Secret Service agent who looks strikingly similar to her — and it's fueling a wild conspiracy theory
Kate Taylor


Microsoft and Justice Department Will Square Off in Supreme Court Over Critical Privacy Case

The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments in a critical case over data privacy, the outcome of which will likely determine how easily law enforcement can gain access to information stored in tech companies’ overseas data centers. Microsoft will go head-to-head with the Justice Department, arguing that the agency cannot use a warrant to collect emails held in Microsoft’s Ireland data center.

In 2016, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Microsoft, asserting that a 1986 law, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), was not intended to grant law enforcement access to internationally-stored data. The Justice Department says that this ruling has hampered its investigative abilities in the digital age. In asking the Supreme Court to consider the case, the Justice Department argued that “hundreds if not thousands” of investigations into terrorism and child pornography “are being or will be hampered by the government’s inability to obtain electronic evidence.”

Article preview thumbnail
Justice Department Tries to Take Microsoft Email Warrant Fight to Supreme Court

The US Department of Justice is attempting to take its long-running legal battle with Microsoft…

“The continued reliance on a law passed in 1986 will neither keep people safe nor protect people’s rights,” Microsoft’s chief legal officer Brad Smith wrote in a blog post about the Supreme Court’s decision. “We believe that people’s privacy rights should be protected by the laws of their own countries and we believe that information stored in the cloud should have the same protections as paper stored in your desk.”

Microsoft’s legal battle kicked off in 2013, when the Justice Department asked the company to hand over emails stored in its Ireland data center for a drug investigation. Microsoft successfully challenged the warrant, arguing that DOJ needed to pursue international data


October 19, 2017

Is the FBI not fulfilling their responsibilities under FOIA?
And is Justice Department helping them get away with it?

This week, MuckRock contributor and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) researcher Emma Best made an interesting discovery about the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) FOIA search process and took to Twitter to announce her as-yet-not-completely-confirmed finding: the FBI has been failing to conduct searches in compliance with their FOIA responsibilities and the Department of Justice (DOJ) has been signing off on it.

FOIA veterans familiar with the FBI’s search procedure have long advised that extra specificity be provided in requests to the agency, which includes detailing that the search should extend to databases outside of the Bureau’s Central Records System (CRS). These other parameters should include “cross-referenced” records and a look for FBI’s Electronic Surveillance System (ELSUR) records. As Emma mentions in her tweet thread, the FBI, which receives thousands of FOIA requests a year, has developed a reputation for limiting its searches to just locations explicitly mentioned in requests, and, allegedly, have to be prodded even then.

It’s recommended that requesters, in general, appeal the integrity of the FOIA responses, and Best notes that some such appeal responses from the DOJ include a note particularly addressing the ELSUR search - or additional lack thereof.

As a follow up, Best submitted another request in February of this year, asking that any materials confirming the automatic inclusion of ELSUR searches in conjunction with CRS inquiries.

But a response received last week states that there are just no materials responsive to this request.

According to Best, this would have been an easy opportunity for the Bureau to provide some backup to claims they’d consolidated and made more efficient their search processes. But the response - which now will require its own sort of appeal - provides no substantiation at all that FBI’s search process is as they and the DOJ Appeal Authority say.

We’ve reached out to the DOJ office in charge of adjudicating appeals and are currently awaiting a comment or explanation. Have you had your own negative experiences with FOIA requests at the FBI and DOJ? Let us know on Twitter via @MuckRock.

Posts: 8,839
Reply with quote  #11 









Judge says L.A. County sheriff's officials must reveal if they know which deputies have skull tattoos




OCT 25, 2018 | 6:15 PM 







South Carolina deputies fired after driving van in Hurricane Florence floodwaters, killing two mental health patients





OCT 25, 2018 | 12:15 PM 








Brazil’s military dictatorship leaves a paper trail in the CIA archives

by Lucas Smolcic Larson

October 24, 2018

While Brazilian presidential front-runner Jair Bolsonaro’s overt embrace of authoritarianism may seem aberrant to many foreign observers, it differs only in degree from decades of United States influence in Latin America. Declassified Central Intelligence Agency and State Department records from the midst of the Brazilian military dictatorship reveal an official US policy of support for the very brutality Bolsonaro intends to revive.

Read More







FBI’s own guide to searching for records requested through FOIA confirms why you should always appeal FBI FOIA searches

by JPat Brown

October 24, 2018

A presentation from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Records Management Division uncovered by Paul Galante as part of our Ronald Reagan FBI file crowdsource outline the process used by FOIA officers to search for records.

Read More






October 23, 2018

FBI’s file on Accuracy In Media is just a bunch of kvetching

AIM alternated between defending Bureau’s actions during COINTELPRO to trying to get the FBI to admit to a 9/11 cover-up

Written by Emma Best

Edited by JPat Brown

Accuracy In Media isn’t an organization that MuckRock is particularly fond of, but its Federal Bureau of Investigation file is full of some of our favorite things: debates over what an FBI file actually says and complaints about FOIA denials.











 Updated October 24


Cumberland County corrections officer arrested on drug-dealing charge

Davis Glazener of South Portland is charged with cocaine trafficking, but there was no evidence yet suggesting it was connected with his work at the Cumberland County Jail, according to the sheriff's office. 









A corrections officer at the Cumberland County Jail has been arrested and charged with dealing cocaine.

Davis Glazener, 22, of South Po





Off-duty cop busted for drunken driving, hitting parked car





OCT 25, 2018 | 11:40 AM 






The Left Is Warming Up To The FBI. That’s A Mistake.






Terry Albury was a decorated FBI agent with a spotless career and only a few years from being eligible for retirement benefits. Yet as the only African American agent in the Minneapolis field office, he was increasingly unable to overlook systemic racism in the bureau. He was especially disturbed by what he believed was a widespread animus within the bureau against Muslims, particularly the local Somali American community. More chillingly, after serving as an FBI interrogator in Iraq he said he had not only observed anti-Muslim attitudes by U.S. personnel there but also believed the FBI was complicit in torture.

So he did what many public employees who are unable to be complicit in injustice have done: leak information to the media. And for this act of conscience, he was sentenced last week to four years in federal prison for violating the Espionage Act.

One might think Albury would be a hero among progressives. Yet his sentencing comes at an odd time when some in the anti-Trump “resistance” have begun to embrace the security state. The FBI, once the bête noire of progressives who saw it as a threat to civil liberties, now boasts more support among Democrats than Republicans.





A cocaine sting nets Miami police officers alleged to have worked for drug dealers and hitmen


NYPD underwear sergeant 'laughs off' reports of her attack on colleague — source




OCT 23, 2018 | 10:30 AM 









Ron DeSantis blames FBI for Parkland shooting during Florida gubernatorial debate









FBI Agent Who Outed Bureau’s Racial Profiling Sentenced to 4 Years for Leaking Classified Documents

By Tia Berger - 

October 21, 2018





The prosecution claimed Albury stole more than 50 classified documents and shared national defense information to a reporter from the online news outlet Intercept. One of the documents classified as “secret” included information on how to the FBI assesses confidential informants and a document “relating to threats posed by certain individuals from a particular Middle Eastern country.”

Albury told the court he leaked the documents because he felt the FBI policies were an act of racial profiling which he regarded as “suspicion” and “disrespect.” His attorneys said Albury acted out of “conscience” and was troubled by the racism within the bureau.






 USA Gymnastics president had ‘troubling’ contact with FBI during Larry Nassar investigation






By Matt Bonesteel

October 19

Steve Penny, the former president and CEO of USA Gymnastics, discussed








11:57 AM 10/20/2018 | US

Chuck Ross | Reporter







  • The U.S. government revealed Friday that it used multiple informants to obtain information against former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page.
  • In court filings, government officials also revealed confidential human sources were paid for their work.
  • The FBI relied heavily on an uncorroborated dossier to obtain warrants to spy on Page.




FBI interview of convicted marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev released





On Wednesday, October 24, 2018, 3:24 PM, Ed <uncleed33@hotmail.com> wrote:







That sensational New York Times story about LBJ saving ...


On Saturday, Oct. 6, presidential historian Michael Beschloss was on Twitter early and often, tweeting and retweeting a front-page New York Times story about his new book, Presidents of War.





On Thursday, October 25, 2018, 12:04 PM, Defending Rights & Dissent <chip@rightsanddissent.org> wrote:



We Must Stop Helping Saudi Arabia in Yemen

Bernie Sanders, The New York Times

Libel law is having a moment

Jonathan Peters, Columbia Journalism Review

Army Parrots Racist Right’s Talking Points on Antifa

Kelly Weill, Spencer Ackerman, Daily Beast 

Facebook Censorship of Alternative Media “Just the Beginning,” Says Top Neocon Insider

Max Blumenthal, Jeb Sprague, The Grey Zone

How the courts perpetuate broken-windows policy.

 Clio Chang, The Nation


Tech Companies Are Profiting Off ICE Deportations, Report Shows

Erin Corbett, Fortune 

Arrest Over Police-Trap Warning Spurs Federal Suit

Christine Stuart, Courthouse News Service

The Little Rock Drug Raid Story Is A Fourth Amendment Story. But It's Also A First Amendment One.

Cathy Gellis, TechDirt

House members demand answers about Khashoggi from top spy chief

Karoun Demirjian, Washington Post 


Written by DRAD Staff: The left is warming up to the FBI. That’s a mistake.

Chip Gibbons, Washington Post 

Amazon Pushes ICE to Buy Its Face Recognition Surveillance Tech

Jake Laperruque, Andrea Peterson, The Daily Beast

Facebook Erases Hundreds of Alternative Media Pages in Mass Purge

Staff, The Real News Network

When Will Obama Aides Come Clean About U.S.-Saudi War Crimes?

Sarah Lazare, In These Times

Leaked Memo Advises Silence on Fish & Wildlife Info Requests

Martin Macias Jr., Courthouse News Service

National Park Service Considers Charging Protesters Occupying National Mall

Lauren Gilger, Steve Goldstein, NPR


Whistleblower Who Challenged FBI’s Profiling And Informant Recruitment Practices Is Sentenced To Four Years In Prison

Kevin Gosztola, Shadowproof

Professor Was Improperly Punished for Israel Boycott Actions, Says Academic Group Cited in Punishment

Zaid Jilani, The Intercept 

Khashoggi’s Murder and Saudi War Crimes in Yemen Were Facilitated by US

Marjorie Cohn, Truthout

‘Transgender’ Could Be Defined Out of Existence Under Trump Administration

Erica L. Green, Katie Benner and Robert Pear, New York Times 

First Criminal Case Filed Over Russian Interference in 2018 Midterms

Brandi Buchman, Courthouse News Service

Follow Us



Contact Us


Defending Rights & Dissent
1325 G St. NW Suite 557
Washington, District of Columbia 20005


Previous Topic | Next Topic

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.

? ?
Copyright ? 2001-2004 Who?s A Rat. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without express written permission is prohibited.