CIA and Drugs
(I do not want to focus exclusively on the JFK assassination and I realize that so far in this blog I have just been throwing things out there almost at random. I currently do not have a computer at home so I am limited to what I can do in about half an hour on my lunch break at work and while visiting my daughter (Hi Tara!) on weekends. Hopefully, after I get a new home computer I will be able to get a little more focused.) Today, a news article I came across in my files (emphasis added):
(Cincinatti Post, October 2, 1976)
Justice Dept. accused of CIA cover-up in opium case
By Gene Goldenberg
Scrippt-Howard Staff Writer
WASHINGTON--The Justice Department dropped charges against a CIA operative indicted in 1973 for smuggling opium into the United States after the CIA argued that prosecuting the case posed a "national security" risk.
A House subcommittee which investigated the incident concluded that by failing to prosecute this case the Justice Department "may have assisted in a cover-up of CIA participation in Southeast Asian drug traffic."
In a supressed report, the House government and individual rights subcommittee recommended that an independent special prosecutor be appointed to investigate illegal activities of CIA personnel because of the Justice Department's "disturbing ineptitude and neglect" in this and other cases.
The subcommittee report has not been made public because not enough members of the parent Government Oerations Comittee showed up to vote for it at the committee's final meeting of the year. However, a copy of the report was obtained by Scripps-Howard News Service.
The smuggling case involved seven persons, six Americans and a Thai national who the CIA admitted was a "contract employee." The seven were indicted on Aug. 3, 1973, in Chicago on narcotics smuggling charges developed by the U.S. Customs Service, which intercepted a shipment of 25 kilos of raw opium from Thailand to Chicago.
When prosecutors discovered that the Thai citizen was actually a CIA operative, they sought CIA assistance in pursuing their investigation, according to the subcommittee report. This became vital when the defendent promised he would testify that the CIA knew of his smuggling activities and approved them.
After initially promising full cooperation, the CIA then balked, according to the subcommittee report, and refused to provide any of the documentation or rebuttal witnesses necessary to convict the CIA employee in the smuggling case.
John K. Greaney, associate general counsel of the CIA, told the prosecutors that the necessary documents, if exposed would reveal sources and methods of on-going CIA operations in Southeast Asia, the report said.
Greaney further refused to allow a federal judge to examine the documents to determine whether their exposure would jeopardize national security, the subcommittee found.
The U.S. Attorney in Chicago then appealed to the Justice Department to intervene with the CIA. On April 15, 1974, Henry Petersen, then assistant attorney general in charge of the criminal division, and other Justice officials met with Greaney, who reiterated his claim of "national security" and asked that the case against the CIA employee be dropped.
Petersen testified that he ordered subordinates to look into the matter. Two weeks later, William e. Ryan, the narcotics section chief in the criminal division, signed dismissal papers dropping charges against the CIA operative.
"Neither Ryan nor Petersen asked to see the documents in order to judge whether they were relevant or too sensitive", said the subcommittee report. "They simply accepted the CIA's assertion."
"The behavior of CIA officials in this case indicates that they still believe that the agency and its employees are above the criminal law and that CIA personnel may be set above the law by the mere invocation of 'national security'," the report concluded.
(I do not want to focus exclusively on the JFK assassination and I realize that so far in this blog I have just been throwing things out there almost at random. I currently do not have a computer at home so I am limited to what I can do in about half an hour on my lunch break at work and while visiting my daughter (Hi Tara!) on weekends. Hopefully, after I get a new home computer I will be able to get a little more focused.) Today, a news article I came across in my files (emphasis added):
(Cincinatti Post, October 2, 1976)
Justice Dept. accused of CIA cover-up in opium case
By Gene Goldenberg
Scrippt-Howard Staff Writer
WASHINGTON--The Justice Department dropped charges against a CIA operative indicted in 1973 for smuggling opium into the United States after the CIA argued that prosecuting the case posed a "national security" risk.
A House subcommittee which investigated the incident concluded that by failing to prosecute this case the Justice Department "may have assisted in a cover-up of CIA participation in Southeast Asian drug traffic."
In a supressed report, the House government and individual rights subcommittee recommended that an independent special prosecutor be appointed to investigate illegal activities of CIA personnel because of the Justice Department's "disturbing ineptitude and neglect" in this and other cases.
The subcommittee report has not been made public because not enough members of the parent Government Oerations Comittee showed up to vote for it at the committee's final meeting of the year. However, a copy of the report was obtained by Scripps-Howard News Service.
The smuggling case involved seven persons, six Americans and a Thai national who the CIA admitted was a "contract employee." The seven were indicted on Aug. 3, 1973, in Chicago on narcotics smuggling charges developed by the U.S. Customs Service, which intercepted a shipment of 25 kilos of raw opium from Thailand to Chicago.
When prosecutors discovered that the Thai citizen was actually a CIA operative, they sought CIA assistance in pursuing their investigation, according to the subcommittee report. This became vital when the defendent promised he would testify that the CIA knew of his smuggling activities and approved them.
After initially promising full cooperation, the CIA then balked, according to the subcommittee report, and refused to provide any of the documentation or rebuttal witnesses necessary to convict the CIA employee in the smuggling case.
John K. Greaney, associate general counsel of the CIA, told the prosecutors that the necessary documents, if exposed would reveal sources and methods of on-going CIA operations in Southeast Asia, the report said.
Greaney further refused to allow a federal judge to examine the documents to determine whether their exposure would jeopardize national security, the subcommittee found.
The U.S. Attorney in Chicago then appealed to the Justice Department to intervene with the CIA. On April 15, 1974, Henry Petersen, then assistant attorney general in charge of the criminal division, and other Justice officials met with Greaney, who reiterated his claim of "national security" and asked that the case against the CIA employee be dropped.
Petersen testified that he ordered subordinates to look into the matter. Two weeks later, William e. Ryan, the narcotics section chief in the criminal division, signed dismissal papers dropping charges against the CIA operative.
"Neither Ryan nor Petersen asked to see the documents in order to judge whether they were relevant or too sensitive", said the subcommittee report. "They simply accepted the CIA's assertion."
"The behavior of CIA officials in this case indicates that they still believe that the agency and its employees are above the criminal law and that CIA personnel may be set above the law by the mere invocation of 'national security'," the report concluded.
posted by gary at 1:22 PM
3 Comments:
I have first hand knowledge of the CIA's drug movemnt and the money laundering that is associated with it. I have been harassed to the max for 4 years now, and I am currently being kept form working. Here is a letter that I sent to the NSA.
XXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXX
Cell XXXXXXXX
Home & Fax XXXXXXXXX
January 3, 2007
National Security Agency
Attn: XXXXXXXXX
Chief XXXXXXX
Re: FOIA Case XXXXXXXXX
Dear XXXXXXXX,
I am in receipt of your letter dated November 2, 2006. I thank you in advance with your help in this matter. You asked me to be more specific about the information that I am seeking. There is a story that surrounds this matter. This is an abbreviated synopsis of it.
I was employed as a salesman between 1998 and 2003 at Carole Fabrics, located in Augusta, Ga. This Carole Fabrics is owned by a larger company, known as Hunter Douglas, based in the Netherlands, but it has a US corporate office in Upper Saddle River, NJ. At some point during my employ, a woman by the name of “Donna Chapman” was installed as a Human Resource Director and payroll master.
In September of 2002, I visited my cousin, a Mr. XXXXXXXXXXX, a long time high ranking employee of the Central Intelligence Agency. I had already had discussions with this Donna Chapman about her alleged ties to the CIA, though the conversations went in one ear and out the other. But I had also mentioned to her about my cousin. In November 2002, I experienced what the police thought to be a “road rage” incident in XXXXXXXXX. I now believe that someone deliberately tried to run me off the road.
In March of 2003, I found that I had a large deficit in my tax withholdings, and I addressed Donna Chapman about it. She became very nervous about it, as did other individuals in the company, and I lost a good job over it. At the time I did not understand why. I believe I do now. I must assume that because the CIA says Hunter Douglas, the parent company of Carole Fabrics, is “classified by Executive Order”, that it is an agency operation. I also assume that my cousin has knowledge he can not divulge of its role.
In April of 2003, I was APPROACHED by Vertilux, the company in Miami that I had previously filed a FOIA on. I was asked during the interview if I had a passport. A strange question, considering I was being hired to sell products in the southwestern US. Shortly after being hired, I was shown an empty warehouse in Dallas and told “not to sell to much”. Being suspicious, I started recording all of the conversations I had with the Vertilux people. They too, made comments to me about their links to the CIA, and indeed told me which drug dealers they had arrested in South America; all of this from a “window covering company”……
At a later time, I wrote a letter to my cousin about this matter. I told him it was obvious that they were some sort of a CIA operation. He said no and insisted that I go to the FBI. I did so reluctantly. When I showed up at an FBI office in Tucson, Arizona, it was obvious to me that they were alerted that I might show up. They actually told me to “ask for a raise since Vertilux seems to be very fat and happy with me”. They also asked me if my cousin had gotten me the job!
I have recordings that prove that I wanted to quit Vertilux, but was told they liked my “work”, even though there wasn’t any work, and that I must stay. In the meantime, I was trying to get away from these people, but Carole Fabrics was telling prospective employers not to hire me. I filed a slander suit that is still in litigation.
In 2004, this Donna Chapman was outed and “sent to prison” for wire fraud. I already conclude that she is a CIA agent as she intimated; her social security number dead ends and I wrote a letter to her in prison, from which I received a reply not of her handwriting.
As a result of all of this, my reputation is in shambles. I keep getting approached by companies that I have to assume are tied to this matter. In January of this year, I was asked by Wayne Madsen, a former employee of your agency to meet with a UPI reporter by the name of John Daly. At that meeting at the National Press Club in D.C., he speculated to me that my cousin had gotten me into all of this. He also asked me if I would accept a $50,000 a year job for the next 20 years, $250,000.00 in cash and an apology. I said ok, and he told me that the “job” would be offered in the next few days. Sure enough, the following week, I was offered a job at Rockland Industries in Baltimore.
Almost immediately, I was subject to much verbal abuse, which I can substantiate because I recorded the conversations; comments such as “shut your god dammed mouth” and “be a team player”. They also asked me how I felt about the NSA spying on people.
I understand that it is the mission of the NSA to supply intelligence to other agencies and to provide directions, support, and problem solutions. Someone is doing “spook jobs” with prospective employers; for instance I recently had an interview with a company representative that sent me an email requesting that I meet her in a Marriott Courtyard in Scottsdale. When I met her there, she and I were the only people in the lobby but as the interview began, a guy came in and sat down and proceeded to take notes about our conversation. Since then, the company I had the interview with has ignored all subsequent emails I sent to them. If this is what you do, then the disinformation you are supplying about me is being used in an illegal and highly inappropriate manner.
I assume this is being done to “contain me”. It will not work, as this has now attracted the attention of other media outlets. It is my contention to you that those transcripts of my phone calls and emails are being used to keep me from working. I also assume that included among the responsible parties are the attorneys of record for the Hunter Douglas operation, Richard Gottuso and Tom Hill. I believe that my cousin, in semi-retirement, has some role. I suspect that this matter began with a bad management decision, thinking that I knew what was occurring at Carole Fabrics/Hunter Douglas, even though I knew nothing at the time.
I want to think it is possible that your agency was never informed as to the real reasons my conversations were requested. I did not ask to be put into this type of a situation.
I had no concern for national security issues or anything but doing a good job as a salesman. It is just what I do. And for a long time, in ignorance, if what I do was a small part of some kind of elaborate cover for a larger agenda, I would never have known-or cared to know. But something is very wrong here. My livelihood is at stake and I feel abused by a system I had no reason not to trust before. And maybe worst of all, I come to have faith in nothing, believe in nothing. It is hard to believe anyone anymore. This I do believe, someone’s stupid game is destroying my life to cover an error and then to compound it by others.
I just want this matter to be settled to my satisfaction and to be left alone. A prompt response from your agency would be greatly appreciated. If you need to speak to me further, call me on my cell, XXXXXXX
Regards,
XXXXXXXXX
Hunter Douglas is a CIA narcotic trafficking operation. So is Vertlux in Miami. And a company known as American Technical Solutions located in Walkertown, NC. Also, beware of two recruitment firms known as Manangement Recuiters and Aerotek, they are recruiters for the Agency. If any foreign government is interested in the info I can provide, post a message here.
Wow, this is an amazing article. While the corruption was obviously already rampant then, how nice it would be to have legislators who weren't wholly owned by the national security criminal establishment, & a press which actually did its job.
Where did you find this article? If you have it, could you scan in the original & post the images?
Post a Comment
<< Home