CIA, "Voters News Service", and Operation MOCKINGBIRD
Chive Mynde
Posted on 04/27/2000 12:28:50 PDT by Michael Rivero
Are our elections truly fair, or are they simply an illusion that the
public approves of whatever despot has cheated his or her way to power.
Cuba is a good example. It's now generally acknowledged by historians
that the elections which kept Batista in power were rigged. The CIA is
known to have rigged elections in numerous countries around the world,
to put in governments friendly to American interest, often detrimental
to the people of those nations (often leading to revolution). A search
through the news reports of elections around the world shows that a
truly fair and honest election is indeed a rarity. It is therefore
naive (not to mention racist) to start out assuming American elections
are honest simply because we are Americans.
Are the elections in the United States fair and honest? A review of the
facts is far less than reassuring.
Since 1964, right after John F. Kennedy was assassinated, vote
tabulation for national elections has been handled not by the
government, but by a private company lacking any official oversight at
all. This company, which changes its name on a regular basis, is
currently called "Voters News Service" and is located in New York City.
This company is owned by a consortium of TV networks and wire services,
which are in turn controlled by the CIA through its Operation
MOCKINGBIRD. The TV networks will make a great show of being "first
with the election results", but in reality all of them rely on the
numbers sent to them by VNS, while seldom acknowledging its existence
during the election coverage.
This is the voting process most in use in America today. A voter
punches a card in the voting booth. That card is run through a computer
at the local voting center, then that computer contacts computers at
Voters News Service, or the precinct official telephones the numbers
the computer shows him to Voters News Service, which then announces the
results via the networks. Poll watchers are allowed to watch the voting
booths, to guard against polling place electioneering, but in most
precincts, the actual counting of the ballots is concealed from the
public, and nobody is allowed to see inside the voting machines, or
review the computer software that counts the ballots. 70% of all votes
in America are counted by machine, and nobody, not private citizen, not
local election official, nobody, is allowed to examine how it all
works. The accuracy tests conducted on the voting machines before and
after the actual election are utterly worthless, as they cannot detect
fraud designed to fool the accuracy test itself. In 1988, when voting
machines in Illinois were tested with tens of thousands of ballots
instead of the few dozen normally used for the accuracy test, over 1/4
of the machines which had passed the standard accuracy test were found
to have mistabulated the larger test vote results!
While researching the book, "VOTESCAM", the Collier brothers actually
managed to videotape members of the League of Women voters forging
ballots, and found hard evidence that Shouptronics and Printomatic vote
machines were rigged in the Dade County Elections. In the Shouptronics,
the wheels of the mechanical counters were shaved to cause miscounts.
In the Printomatic machines, a malfunction revealed that the paper tape
with the voting results had been pre-printed before the voting even
started! The Colliers, along with attorney Ellis Rubin, handed the
evidence to the assistant State Attorney for Florida. Sadly, that
assistant State Attorney was Janet Reno, who in a pattern we have all
become too familiar with, killed the investigation. 60 Minutes taped a
segment on the Dade County Vote Fraud, but never aired it.
Mandatory voter registration laws, such as "Motor voter" have been a
boon to election fraud, generating registered voters who don't vote and
whose names may be used to obtain absentee ballots. In the California
election that unseated Bob Dornan following his efforts to investigate
the Clinton White House, canvassers discovered that nearly half of the
names registered to vote in the GOP election from 7 precincts simply
did not exist. The California Attorney General's office was informed by
the precinct worker, but again nothing was done. In 1998, almost 20,000
fraudulent voter registrations were discovered on the voting rolls, but
were allowed to remain on the excuse that their removal in time for the
election would cost too much!
The evidence for massive vote fraud in the United States uncovered by
the Voting Integrity Project and organizations like it are ignored by
the government, which has obviously been the beneficiary of such
chicanery, and by the media, which is complicit in the fraud. When vote
fraud was suspected in the 1996 Arizona Primary (the one that ended Pat
Buchanon's winning streak after New Hampshire), the Arizona legislature
passed a special law forbidding a recount for that one primary election
only! When the Miami Magazine ran a story on the Dade County Vote
Fraud, the magazine was purchased just one month later by the editor of
the Miami News, Sylvan Meyer, who ordered that no further stories on
vote fraud be published. When precinct workers in the 1974 Dade County
elections discovered that the voting machines they were using were
rigged, they walked off the job and refused to certify the election
process. Police and fire fighters took over the polling duties. The
next day, the Miami Herald reported the walk out, but not the reason.
When the precinct workers went to the media to report the election
rigging, the media ignored them. So did the local attorney general. So
did the FBI. Citizens who tried to observe the next election were
arrested.
Typical of the horror stories associated with the media-owned Voters
News Service is what happened in Dubuque County Iowa during the 1996
Caucuses. The county's 41 precincts met in 41 classrooms at two high
schools and voted on old fashioned paper ballots, which were then
counted in full view of all present (including representatives of the
candidates), and the results posted for all to see and verify. The vote
totals were then phoned directly into Voters News Service by the county
chairman, again in full view of all participants that night. Buchanon
won the county by a wide margin, garnering 870 votes. By next morning,
Voters News Service had dropped Buchanon's vote total for that county
down to 757 votes, a 13% drop. Buchanon lost Iowa by a much smaller
margin than 13%.
The Iowa state GOP claimed it could do nothing about the problem; they
were "in VNS' hands". VNS, despite the paper ballots proving Buchanon's
870 votes, refused to admit error and refused to change the results for
the county. Needless to say, the question of whether Buchanon had had
13% of his votes shaved off in other Iowa counties, ones in which
computerized vote machines meant there was no audit trail to check, was
ignored. The fact that an obviously fraudulent vote had made it all the
way through the system to be reported on national television was also
ignored by the media. (Iowa is the state, it should be noted, where a
columnist for Salon magazine was recently charged with vote fraud.)
The complicity by the law enforcement machinery of this nation is
astounding. In one election in Boston, a judge declared 968 ballots
which had been declared "blank" due to multiple punches to be valid,
arbitrarily assigning most of the disputed votes to the incumbent
candidate, thereby reversing his defeat. In a computer vote fraud case
in West Virginia, an expert witness testifying for the plaintiff sat
down at a CES voting machine provided by the defendants, studied it for
a while, then with a single ballot card added 10,000 votes to one of
the fictional candidates. The judge refused to allow the jury to see
the demonstration and the charges were eventually dropped.
Three states, California, Florida, and Michigan, have laws requiring
that the voting machine source code be placed in escrow should it need
to be examined after an election. None of those states have any means
to verify that the source code placed in escrow is in fact the origin
of the compiled code running on the machines election night, and in
Michigan, the escrow is simply handled by the voting machine company
itself with no overview by a state agency or public interest group.
All the voting machines used in the United States come from just three
companies. The Presidents of two of them have been convicted of vote
fraud and yet all state governments continue to do business (at very
steep fees) with just these three companies. The largest of the three
companies has direct access to 50% of the nation's votes. Nobody is
allowed to inspect the machines, or watch as the vote totals are
accumulated and counted, and there is no audit trail anywhere along the
path from the voting machine to Voter's News Service, the private media-
owned company that without any official oversight, tells us all what
the election results are.
Most states have now passed laws requiring a challenge to election
results to be filed within a few weeks of the election, far too short a
time for anyone to properly determine if such a challenge is warranted.
Despite such an obvious inhibition, a Democrat who lost a legislative
seat in the 1998 Hawaiian election did file a challenge, claiming there
was vote fraud. A quick audit showed that vote fraud involving absentee
ballots had indeed occurred, but mostly by the Democrat; who had
cheated, but not enough to win. This scandal triggered public questions
about several races, including that of the Democratic Governor, Ben
Cayutano, who had been trailing his Republican challenger all during
the election night, only to have a sudden surge of votes at the last
second push him over the top. The governor offered to over-ride the
state's two week filing deadline for election challenges and allow a
full recount, then back-peddled and made a full recount contingent on
a "pre-audit". The "pre-audit" was assigned to the company which had
run the election, along with a warning that if it turned out the
election was flawed, their final payment would be withheld from the
State of Hawaii. Needless to say the pre-audit found no errors in the
election, and despite the urging of the Voter Integrity Project (which
was conducting its own investigation) the full recount was canceled.
Who chooses what government we live under? Those who cast the votes, or
as Stalin observed, those who count them? Do We The People pick those
who govern us, or does a private company, owned by the CIA controlled
media, and operating without any public oversight do? Have We The
People consented by vote to bear the $14 trillion burden of a
government's reckless fiscal policy, or was that consent and that vote
fraudulently obtained?
Just think about all it really means if the elections are being rigged
on a massive scale.
It means that the contract between ruler and ruled is broken. The
government does not govern with the consent of the governed, it rules
by treachery and deception. The crown it wears is a stolen one, usurped
from the people by three voting machine companies and one media owned
results-announcer totally beyond review and reproach.
So, now we come back to the issue of government debt and who is really
responsible for it. If, as appears to be the case, our elections are
routinely being rigged, then it cannot be argued that We The People
either chose, or approved of, those officials who borrowed trillions of
dollars without our permission and sought to enslave us to that debt.
In an atmosphere of doubt about the validity of the voting process, it
cannot be assumed that the American people have actually voted for or
approved of any of the government's actions and policies for the last
35 years. That includes a couple of wars and some $14 trillion in debt,
and the $60,000 in interest payments alone each taxpayer has had to
fork over since the 60s.
In light of the numerous incidents of vote fraud uncovered through the
years and the quite obvious stonewall on the subject by the officials
who benefit from rigged elections and the media that at least helps in
the rigging, it is dangerous to assume that American elections are
honest. The burden of proof must lie with VNS and the voting machine
companies to prove their honesty.
In an atmosphere of doubt about the validity of the voting process, it
appears that the entire voting process is a sham, a trick to fool the
American people into accepting whatever is done to them by creating the
illusion that the people somehow voted for and approved of whatever is
being done. That's how Batista fooled the Cuban people. That's how the
USSR fooled the Soviet citizens. And that's how the American government
fools us.
Do We The People owe that $14 trillion? No, we do not. It was borrowed
without our permission. No citizen agreed to repay that money.
Those government officials who borrowed that money and intend that We
The People should be forced to repay it can no longer do so on the
assumption that they rule with the consent of those who vote.
The best that can be said is that they rule with the consent of those
who count the vote.
--
The general root of superstition is that men observe
when things hit, and not when they miss, and commit
to memory the one, and pass over the other
-Sir Francis Bacon 1561-1626
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Chive Mynde
The Depraved Spies and Moguls of the CIA's Operation MOCKINGBIRD
by Alex Constantine
Who Controls the Media?
Soulless corporations do, of course. Corporations with grinning, double-
breasted executives, interlocking directorates, labor squabbles and
flying capital. Dow. General Electric. Coca-Cola. Disney. Newspapers
should have mastheads that mirror the world: The Westinghouse Evening
Scimitar, The Atlantic-Richfield Intelligentser . It is beginning to
dawn on a growing number of armchair ombudsmen that the public print
reports news from a parallel universe - one that has never heard of
politically-motivated assassinations, CIA-Mafia banking thefts, mind
control, death squads or even federal agencies with secret budgets
fattened by cocaine sales - a place overrun by lone gunmen, where the
CIA and Mafia are usually on their best behavior. In this idyllic land,
the most serious infraction an official can commit __is a the
employment of a domestic servant with (shudder) no residency status.
This unlikely land of enchantment is the creation of MOCKINGBIRD.
It was conceived in the late 1940s, the most frigid period of the cold
war, when the CIA began a systematic infiltration of the corporate
media, a process that often included direct takeover of major news
outlets.
In this period, the American intelligence services competed with
communist activists abroad to influence European labor unions. With or
without the cooperation of local governments, Frank Wisner, an
undercover State Department official assigned to the Foreign Service,
rounded up students abroad to enter the cold war underground of covert
operations on behalf of his Office of Policy Coordination. Philip
Graham, a graduate of the Army Intelligence School in Harrisburg, PA,
then publisher of the Washington Post., was taken under Wisner's wing
to direct the program code-named Operation MOCKINGBIRD.
"By the early 1950s," writes formerVillage Voice reporter Deborah Davis
in Katharine the Great, "Wisner 'owned' respected members of the New
York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles, plus
stringers, four to six hundred in all, according to a former CIA
analyst." The network was overseen by Allen Dulles, a templar for
German and American corporations who wanted their points of view
represented in the public print. Early MOCKINGBIRD influenced 25
newspapers and wire agencies consenting to act as organs of CIA
propaganda. Many of these were already run by men with reactionary
views, among them William Paley (CBS), C.D. Jackson (Fortune), Henry
Luce (Time) and Arthur Hays Sulzberger (N.Y. Times).
Activists curious about the workings of MOCKINGBIRD have since been
appalled to find in FOIA documents that agents boasting in CIA office
memos of their pride in having placed "important assets" inside every
major news publication in the country. It was not until 1982 that the
Agency openly admitted that reporters on the CIA payroll have acted as
case officers to agents in the field.
"World War III has begun," Henry's Luce's Life declared in March,
1947. "It is in the opening skirmish stage already." The issue featured
an excerpt of a book by James Burnham, who called for the creation of
an "American Empire," "world-dominating in political power, set up at
least in part through coercion (probably including war, but certainly
the threat of war) and in which one group of people ... would hold more
than its equal share of power."
George Seldes, the famed anti-fascist media critic, drew down on Luce
in 1947, explaining that "although avoiding typical Hitlerian phrases,
the same doctrine of a superior people taking over the world and ruling
it, began to appear in the press, whereas the organs of Wall Street
were much more honest in favoring a doctrine inevitably leading to war
if it brought greater commercial markets under the American flag."
On the domestic front, an abiding relationship was struck between the
CIA and William Paley, a wartime colonel and the founder of CBS. A firm
believer in "all forms of propaganda" to foster loyalty to the
Pentagon, Paley hired CIA agents to work undercover at the behest of
his close friend, the busy grey eminence of the nation's media, Allen
Dulles. Paley's designated go-between in his dealings with the CIA was
Sig Mickelson, president of CBS News from 1954 to 1961.
The CIA's assimilation of old guard fascists was overseen by the
Operations Coordination Board, directed by C.D. Jackson, formerly an
executive of Time magazine and Eisenhower's Special Assistant for Cold
War Strategy. In 1954 he was succeeded by Nelson Rockefeller, who quit
a year later, disgusted at the administration's political infighting.
Vice President Nixon succeeded Rockefeller as the key cold war
strategist.
"Nixon," writes John Loftus, a former attorney for the Justice
Department's Office of Special Investigations, took "a small boy's
delight in the arcane tools of the intelligence craft - the hidden
microphones, the 'black' propaganda." Nixon especially enjoyed his
visit to a Virginia training camp to observe Nazis in the "special
forces" drilling at covert operations.
One of the fugitives recruited by the American intelligence underground
was heroin smuggler Hubert von Blücher, the son of A German ambassador.
Hubert often bragged that that he was trained by the Abwehr, the German
military intelligence division, while still a civilian in his twenties.
He served in a recon unit of the German Army until forced out for
medical reasons in 1944, according to his wartime records. He worked
briefly as an assistant director for Berlin-Film on a movie entitled
One Day ..., and finished out the war flying with the Luftwaffe, but
not to engage the enemy - his mission was the smuggling of Nazi loot
out of the country. His exploits were, in part, the subject of Sayer
and Botting's Nazi Gold, an account of the knockover of the Reichsbank
at the end of the war.
In 1948 he flew the coop to Argentina. Posing as a photographer named
Huberto von Bleucher Corell, he immediately paid court to Eva Peron,
presenting her with an invaluable Gobelin tapestry (a selection from
the wealth of artifacts confiscated by the SS from Europe's Jews?).
Hubert then met with Martin Bormann at the Hotel Plaza to deliver
German marks worth $80 million. The loot financed the birth of the
National Socialist Party in Argentina, among other forms of Nazi
revival.
In 1951, Hubert migrated northward and took a job at the Color
Corporation of America in Hollywood. He eked out a living writing
scripts for the booming movie industry. His voice can be heard on a
film set in the Amazon, produced by Walt Disney. Nine years later he
returned to Buenos Aires, then Düsseldorf, West Germany, and
established a firm that developed not movie scripts, but anti-chemical
warfare agents for the government. At the Industrie Club in Düsseldorf
in 1982, von Blücher boasted to journalists, "I am chief shareholder of
Pan American Airways. I am the best friend of Howard Hughes. The Beach
Hotel in Las Vegas is 45 percent financed by me. I am thus the biggest
financier ever to appear in the Arabian Nights tales dreamed up by
these people over their second bottle of brandy."
Not really. Two the biggest financiers to stumble from the drunken
dreams of world-moving affluence were, in their time, Moses Annenberg,
publisher of The Philadelphia Inquirer, and his son Walter , the
CIA/mob-anchored publisher of the TV Guide. Like most American high-
rollers, Annenberg lived a double life. Moses, his father, was a scion
of the Capone mob. Both Moses and Walter were indicted in 1939 for tax
evasions totalling many millions of dollars - the biggest case in the
history of the Justice Department. Moses pled guilty and agreed to pay
the government $8 million and settle $9 million in assorted tax claims,
penalties and interest debts. Moses received a three-year sentence. He
died in Lewisburg Penitentiary.
Walter Annenbeg, the TV Guide magnate, was a lofty Republican. On the
campaign trail in April, 1988, George Bush flew into Los Angeles to woo
Reagan's kitchen cabinet. "This is the topping on the cake," Bush's
regional campaign director told the Los Angeles Times. The Bush team
met at Annenberg's plush Rancho Mirage estate at Sunnylands,
California. It was at the Annenberg mansion that Nixon's cabinet was
chosen, and the state's social and contributor registers built over a
quarter-century of state political dominance by Ronald Reagan, whose
acting career was launched by Operation MOCKINGBIRD.
The commercialization of television, coinciding with Reagan's
recruitment by the Crusade for Freedom, a CIA front, presented the
intelligence world with unprecedented potential for sowing propaganda
and even prying in the age of Big Brother. George Orwell glimpsed the
possibilities when he installed omniscient video surveillance
technology in 1948, a novel rechristened 1984 for the first edition
published in the U.S. by Harcourt, Brace. Operation Octopus, according
to federal files, was in full swing by 1948, a surveillance program
that turned any television set with tubes into a broadcast transmitter.
Agents of Octopus could pick up audio and visual images with the
equipment as far as 25 miles away.
Hale Boggs was investigating Operation Octopus at the time of his
disappearance in the midst of the Watergate probe.
In 1952, at MCA, Actors' Guild president Ronald Reagan - a screen idol
recruited by MOCKINGBIRD's Crusade for Freedom to raise funds for the
resettlement of Nazis in the U.S., according to Loftus - signed a
secret waiver of the conflict-of-interest rule with the mob-controlled
studio, in effect granting it a labor monopoly on early television
programming. In exchange, MCA made Reagan a part owner. Furthermore,
historian C. Vann Woodward, writing in the New York Times, in 1987,
reported that Reagan had "fed the names of suspect people in his
organization to the FBI secretly and regularly enough to be
assigned 'an informer's code number, T-10.' His FBI file indicates
intense collaboration with producers to 'purge' the industry of
subversives."
No one ever turned a suspicious eye on Walter Cronkite, a former
intelligence officer and in the immediate postwar period UPI's Moscow
correspondent. Cronkite was lured to CBS by Operation MOCKINGBIRD's
Phil Graham, according to Deborah Davis.
Another television conglomerate, Cap Cities, rose like a horror-film
simian from CIA and Mafia heroin operations. Among other organized-crime
Republicans, Thomas Dewey and his neighbor Lowell Thomas threw in to
launch the infamous Resorts International, the corporate front for
Lansky's branch of the federally-sponsored mob family and the corporate
precursor to Cap Cities. Another of the investors was James Crosby, a
Cap Cities executive who donated $100,000 to Nixon's 1968 presidential
campaign. This was the year that Resorts bought into Atlantic City
casino interests. Police in New jersey attempted, with no success, to
spike the issuance of a gambling license to the company, citing Mafia
ties.
In 1954, this same circle of investors, all Catholics, founded the
broadcasting company notorious for overt propagandizing and general
spookiness. The company's chief counsel was OSS veteran William Casey,
who clung to his shares by concealing them in a blind trust even after
he was appointed CIA director by Ronald Reagan in 1981.
"Black radio" was the phrase CIA critic David Wise coined in The
Invisible Government to describe the agency's intertwining interests in
the emergence of the transistor radio with the entrepreneurs who took
to the airwaves. "Daily, East and West beam hundreds of propaganda
broadcasts at each other in an unrelenting babble of competition for
the minds of their listeners. The low-price transistor has given the
hidden war a new importance," enthused one foreign correspondent.
A Hydra of private foundations sprang up to finance the propaganda
push. One of them, Operations and Policy Research, Inc. (OPR), received
hundreds of thousands of dollars from the CIA through private
foundations and trusts. OPR research was the basis of a television
series that aired in New York and Washington, D.C. in 1964, Of People
and Politics, a "study" of the American political system in 21 weekly
installments.
In Hollywood, the visual cortex of The Beast, the same CIA/Mafia
combination that formed Cap Cities sank its claws into the film studios
and labor unions. Johnny Rosselli was pulled out of the Army during the
war by a criminal investigation of Chicago mobsters in the film
industry. Rosselli, a CIA asset probably assassinated by the CIA,
played sidekick to Harry Cohn, the Columbia Pictures mogul who visited
Italy's Benito Mussolini in 1933, and upon his return to Hollywood
remodeled his office after the dictator's. The only honest job Rosselli
ever had was assistant purchasing agent (and a secret investor) at
Eagle Lion productions, run by Bryan Foy, a former producer for 20th
Century Fox. Rosselli, Capone's representative on the West Coast,
passed a small fortune in mafia investments to Cohn. Bugsy Seigel
pooled gambling investments with Billy Wilkerson, publisher of the
Hollywood Reporter.
In the 1950s, outlays for global propaganda climbed to a full third of
the CIA's covert operations budget. Some 3, 000 salaried and contract
CIA employees were eventually engaged in propaganda efforts. The cost
of disinforming the world cost American taxpayers an estimated $265
million a year by 1978, a budget larger than the combined expenditures
of Reuters, UPI and the AP news syndicates.
In 1977, the Copely News Service admitted that it worked closely with
the intelligence services - in fact, 23 employees were full-time
employees of the Agency.
Most consumers of the corporate media were - and are - unaware of the
effect that the salting of public opinion has on their own beliefs. A
network anchorman in time of national crisis is an instrument of
psychological warfare in the MOCKINGBIRD media. He is a creature from
the national security sector's chamber of horrors. For this reason
consumers of the corporate press have reason to examine their basic
beliefs about government and life in the parallel universe of these
United States.
Chive Mynde
By Steve Kangas
The following timeline describes just a few of the hundreds of
atrocities and crimes committed by the CIA. (1)
CIA operations follow the same recurring script. First, American
business interests abroad are threatened by a popular or democratically
elected leader. The people support their leader because he intends to
conduct land reform, strengthen unions, redistribute wealth,
nationalize foreign-owned industry, and regulate business to protect
workers, consumers and the environment. So, on behalf of American
business, and often with their help, the CIA mobilizes the opposition.
First it identifies right-wing groups within the country (usually the
military), and offers them a deal: "We'll put you in power if you
maintain a favorable business climate for us." The Agency then hires,
trains and works with them to overthrow the existing government
(usually a democracy). It uses every trick in the book: propaganda,
stuffed ballot boxes, purchased elections, extortion, blackmail, sexual
intrigue, false stories about opponents in the local media,
infiltration and disruption of opposing political parties, kidnapping,
beating, torture, intimidation, economic sabotage, death squads and
even assassination. These efforts culminate in a military coup, which
installs a right-wing dictator. The CIA trains the dictator’s security
apparatus to crack down on the traditional enemies of big business,
using interrogation, torture and murder. The victims are said to
be "communists," but almost always they are just peasants, liberals,
moderates, labor union leaders, political opponents and advocates of
free speech and democracy. Widespread human rights abuses follow.
This scenario has been repeated so many times that the CIA actually
teaches it in a special school, the notorious "School of the Americas."
(It opened in Panama but later moved to Fort Benning, Georgia.) Critics
have nicknamed it the "School of the Dictators" and "School of the
Assassins." Here, the CIA trains Latin American military officers how
to conduct coups, including the use of interrogation, torture and
murder.
The Association for Responsible Dissent estimates that by 1987, 6
million people had died as a result of CIA covert operations. (2)
Former State Department official William Blum correctly calls this
an "American Holocaust."
The CIA justifies these actions as part of its war against communism.
But most coups do not involve a communist threat. Unlucky nations are
targeted for a wide variety of reasons: not only threats to American
business interests abroad, but also liberal or even moderate social
reforms, political instability, the unwillingness of a leader to carry
out Washington’s dictates, and declarations of neutrality in the Cold
War. Indeed, nothing has infuriated CIA Directors quite like a nation’s
desire to stay out of the Cold War.
The ironic thing about all this intervention is that it frequently
fails to achieve American objectives. Often the newly installed
dictator grows comfortable with the security apparatus the CIA has
built for him. He becomes an expert at running a police state. And
because the dictator knows he cannot be overthrown, he becomes
independent and defiant of Washington's will. The CIA then finds it
cannot overthrow him, because the police and military are under the
dictator's control, afraid to cooperate with American spies for fear of
torture and execution. The only two options for the U.S at this point
are impotence or war. Examples of this "boomerang effect" include the
Shah of Iran, General Noriega and Saddam Hussein. The boomerang effect
also explains why the CIA has proven highly successful at overthrowing
democracies, but a wretched failure at overthrowing dictatorships.
The following timeline should confirm that the CIA as we know it should
be abolished and replaced by a true information-gathering and analysis
organization. The CIA cannot be reformed — it is institutionally and
culturally corrupt.
1929
The culture we lost — Secretary of State Henry Stimson refuses to
endorse a code-breaking operation, saying, "Gentlemen do not read each
other’s mail."
1941
COI created — In preparation for World War II, President Roosevelt
creates the Office of Coordinator of Information (COI). General
William "Wild Bill" Donovan heads the new intelligence service.
1942
OSS created — Roosevelt restructures COI into something more suitable
for covert action, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS). Donovan
recruits so many of the nation’s rich and powerful that eventually
people joke that "OSS" stands for "Oh, so social!" or "Oh, such snobs!"
1943
Italy — Donovan recruits the Catholic Church in Rome to be the center
of Anglo-American spy operations in Fascist Italy. This would prove to
be one of America’s most enduring intelligence alliances in the Cold
War.
1945
OSS is abolished — The remaining American information agencies cease
covert actions and return to harmless information gathering and
analysis.
Operation PAPERCLIP – While other American agencies are hunting down
Nazi war criminals for arrest, the U.S. intelligence community is
smuggling them into America, unpunished, for their use against the
Soviets. The most important of these is Reinhard Gehlen, Hitler’s
master spy who had built up an intelligence network in the Soviet
Union. With full U.S. blessing, he creates the "Gehlen Organization," a
band of refugee Nazi spies who reactivate their networks in Russia.
These include SS intelligence officers Alfred Six and Emil Augsburg
(who massacred Jews in the Holocaust), Klaus Barbie (the "Butcher of
Lyon"), Otto von Bolschwing (the Holocaust mastermind who worked with
Eichmann) and SS Colonel Otto Skorzeny (a personal friend of Hitler’s).
The Gehlen Organization supplies the U.S. with its only intelligence on
the Soviet Union for the next ten years, serving as a bridge between
the abolishment of the OSS and the creation of the CIA. However, much
of the "intelligence" the former Nazis provide is bogus. Gehlen
inflates Soviet military capabilities at a time when Russia is still
rebuilding its devastated society, in order to inflate his own
importance to the Americans (who might otherwise punish him). In 1948,
Gehlen almost convinces the Americans that war is imminent, and the
West should make a preemptive strike. In the 50s he produces a
fictitious "missile gap." To make matters worse, the Russians have
thoroughly penetrated the Gehlen Organization with double agents,
undermining the very American security that Gehlen was supposed to
protect.
1947
Greece — President Truman requests military aid to Greece to support
right-wing forces fighting communist rebels. For the rest of the Cold
War, Washington and the CIA will back notorious Greek leaders with
deplorable human rights records.
CIA created — President Truman signs the National Security Act of 1947,
creating the Central Intelligence Agency and National Security Council.
The CIA is accountable to the president through the NSC — there is no
democratic or congressional oversight. Its charter allows the CIA
to "perform such other functions and duties… as the National Security
Council may from time to time direct." This loophole opens the door to
covert action and dirty tricks.
1948
Covert-action wing created — The CIA recreates a covert action wing,
innocuously called the Office of Policy Coordination, led by Wall
Street lawyer Frank Wisner. According to its secret charter, its
responsibilities include "propaganda, economic warfare, preventive
direct action, including sabotage, antisabotage, demolition and
evacuation procedures; subversion against hostile states, including
assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of indigenous
anti-communist elements in threatened countries of the free world."
Italy — The CIA corrupts democratic elections in Italy, where Italian
communists threaten to win the elections. The CIA buys votes,
broadcasts propaganda, threatens and beats up opposition leaders, and
infiltrates and disrupts their organizations. It works -- the
communists are defeated.
1949
Radio Free Europe — The CIA creates its first major propaganda outlet,
Radio Free Europe. Over the next several decades, its broadcasts are so
blatantly false that for a time it is considered illegal to publish
transcripts of them in the U.S.
Late 40s
Operation MOCKINGBIRD — The CIA begins recruiting American news
organizations and journalists to become spies and disseminators of
propaganda. The effort is headed by Frank Wisner, Allan Dulles, Richard
Helms and Philip Graham. Graham is publisher of The Washington Post,
which becomes a major CIA player. Eventually, the CIA’s media assets
will include ABC, NBC, CBS, Time, Newsweek, Associated Press, United
Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Copley
News Service and more. By the CIA’s own admission, at least 25
organizations and 400 journalists will become CIA assets.
1953
Iran – CIA overthrows the democratically elected Mohammed Mossadegh in
a military coup, after he threatened to nationalize British oil. The
CIA replaces him with a dictator, the Shah of Iran, whose secret
police, SAVAK, is as brutal as the Gestapo.
Operation MK-ULTRA — Inspired by North Korea’s brainwashing program,
the CIA begins experiments on mind control. The most notorious part of
this project involves giving LSD and other drugs to American subjects
without their knowledge or against their will, causing several to
commit suicide. However, the operation involves far more than this.
Funded in part by the Rockefeller and Ford foundations, research
includes propaganda, brainwashing, public relations, advertising,
hypnosis, and other forms of suggestion.
1954
Guatemala — CIA overthrows the democratically elected Jacob Arbenz in a
military coup. Arbenz has threatened to nationalize the Rockefeller-
owned United Fruit Company, in which CIA Director Allen Dulles also
owns stock. Arbenz is replaced with a series of right-wing dictators
whose bloodthirsty policies will kill over 100,000 Guatemalans in the
next 40 years.
1954-1958
North Vietnam — CIA officer Edward Lansdale spends four years trying to
overthrow the communist government of North Vietnam, using all the
usual dirty tricks. The CIA also attempts to legitimize a tyrannical
puppet regime in South Vietnam, headed by Ngo Dinh Diem. These efforts
fail to win the hearts and minds of the South Vietnamese because the
Diem government is opposed to true democracy, land reform and poverty
reduction measures. The CIA’s continuing failure results in escalating
American intervention, culminating in the Vietnam War.
1956
Hungary — Radio Free Europe incites Hungary to revolt by broadcasting
Khruschev’s Secret Speech, in which he denounced Stalin. It also hints
that American aid will help the Hungarians fight. This aid fails to
materialize as Hungarians launch a doomed armed revolt, which only
invites a major Soviet invasion. The conflict kills 7,000 Soviets and
30,000 Hungarians.
1957-1973
Laos — The CIA carries out approximately one coup per year trying to
nullify Laos’ democratic elections. The problem is the Pathet Lao, a
leftist group with enough popular support to be a member of any
coalition government. In the late 50s, the CIA even creates an "Armee
Clandestine" of Asian mercenaries to attack the Pathet Lao. After the
CIA’s army suffers numerous defeats, the U.S. starts bombing, dropping
more bombs on Laos than all the U.S. bombs dropped in World War II. A
quarter of all Laotians will eventually become refugees, many living in
caves.
1959
Haiti — The U.S. military helps "Papa Doc" Duvalier become dictator of
Haiti. He creates his own private police force, the "Tonton Macoutes,"
who terrorize the population with machetes. They will kill over 100,000
during the Duvalier family reign. The U.S. does not protest their
dismal human rights record.
1961
The Bay of Pigs — The CIA sends 1,500 Cuban exiles to invade Castro’s
Cuba. But "Operation Mongoose" fails, due to poor planning, security
and backing. The planners had imagined that the invasion will spark a
popular uprising against Castro -– which never happens. A promised
American air strike also never occurs. This is the CIA’s first public
setback, causing President Kennedy to fire CIA Director Allen Dulles.
Dominican Republic — The CIA assassinates Rafael Trujillo, a murderous
dictator Washington has supported since 1930. Trujillo’s business
interests have grown so large (about 60 percent of the economy) that
they have begun competing with American business interests.
Ecuador — The CIA-backed military forces the democratically elected
President Jose Velasco to resign. Vice President Carlos Arosemana
replaces him; the CIA fills the now vacant vice presidency with its own
man.
Congo (Zaire) — The CIA assassinates the democratically elected Patrice
Lumumba. However, public support for Lumumba’s politics runs so high
that the CIA cannot clearly install his opponents in power. Four years
of political turmoil follow.
1963
Dominican Republic — The CIA overthrows the democratically elected Juan
Bosch in a military coup. The CIA installs a repressive, right-wing
junta.
Ecuador — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows President Arosemana,
whose independent (not socialist) policies have become unacceptable to
Washington. A military junta assumes command, cancels the 1964
elections, and begins abusing human rights.
1964
Brazil — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows the democratically
elected government of Joao Goulart. The junta that replaces it will, in
the next two decades, become one of the most bloodthirsty in history.
General Castelo Branco will create Latin America’s first death squads,
or bands of secret police who hunt down "communists" for torture,
interrogation and murder. Often these "communists" are no more than
Branco’s political opponents. Later it is revealed that the CIA trains
the death squads.
1965
Indonesia — The CIA overthrows the democratically elected Sukarno with
a military coup. The CIA has been trying to eliminate Sukarno since
1957, using everything from attempted assassination to sexual intrigue,
for nothing more than his declaring neutrality in the Cold War. His
successor, General Suharto, will massacre between 500,000 to 1 million
civilians accused of being "communist." The CIA supplies the names of
countless suspects.
Dominican Republic — A popular rebellion breaks out, promising to
reinstall Juan Bosch as the country’s elected leader. The revolution is
crushed when U.S. Marines land to uphold the military regime by force.
The CIA directs everything behind the scenes.
Greece — With the CIA’s backing, the king removes George Papandreous as
prime minister. Papandreous has failed to vigorously support U.S.
interests in Greece.
Congo (Zaire) — A CIA-backed military coup installs Mobutu Sese Seko as
dictator. The hated and repressive Mobutu exploits his desperately poor
country for billions.
1966
The Ramparts Affair — The radical magazine Ramparts begins a series of
unprecedented anti-CIA articles. Among their scoops: the CIA has paid
the University of Michigan $25 million dollars to hire "professors" to
train South Vietnamese students in covert police methods. MIT and other
universities have received similar payments. Ramparts also reveals that
the National Students’ Association is a CIA front. Students are
sometimes recruited through blackmail and bribery, including draft
deferments.
1967
Greece — A CIA-backed military coup overthrows the government two days
before the elections. The favorite to win was George Papandreous, the
liberal candidate. During the next six years, the "reign of the
colonels" — backed by the CIA — will usher in the widespread use of
torture and murder against political opponents. When a Greek ambassador
objects to President Johnson about U.S. plans for Cypress, Johnson
tells him: "Fuck your parliament and your constitution."
Operation PHEONIX — The CIA helps South Vietnamese agents identify and
then murder alleged Viet Cong leaders operating in South Vietnamese
villages. According to a 1971 congressional report, this operation
killed about 20,000 "Viet Cong."
1968
Operation CHAOS — The CIA has been illegally spying on American
citizens since 1959, but with Operation CHAOS, President Johnson
dramatically boosts the effort. CIA agents go undercover as student
radicals to spy on and disrupt campus organizations protesting the
Vietnam War. They are searching for Russian instigators, which they
never find. CHAOS will eventually spy on 7,000 individuals and 1,000
organizations.
Bolivia — A CIA-organized military operation captures legendary
guerilla Che Guevara. The CIA wants to keep him alive for
interrogation, but the Bolivian government executes him to prevent
worldwide calls for clemency.
1969
Uruguay — The notorious CIA torturer Dan Mitrione arrives in Uruguay, a
country torn with political strife. Whereas right-wing forces
previously used torture only as a last resort, Mitrione convinces them
to use it as a routine, widespread practice. "The precise pain, in the
precise place, in the precise amount, for the desired effect," is his
motto. The torture techniques he teaches to the death squads rival the
Nazis’. He eventually becomes so feared that revolutionaries will
kidnap and murder him a year later.
1970
Cambodia — The CIA overthrows Prince Sahounek, who is highly popular
among Cambodians for keeping them out of the Vietnam War. He is
replaced by CIA puppet Lon Nol, who immediately throws Cambodian troops
into battle. This unpopular move strengthens once minor opposition
parties like the Khmer Rouge, which achieves power in 1975 and
massacres millions of its own people.
1971
Bolivia — After half a decade of CIA-inspired political turmoil, a CIA-
backed military coup overthrows the leftist President Juan Torres. In
the next two years, dictator Hugo Banzer will have over 2,000 political
opponents arrested without trial, then tortured, raped and executed.
Haiti — "Papa Doc" Duvalier dies, leaving his 19-year old son "Baby
Doc" Duvalier the dictator of Haiti. His son continues his bloody reign
with full knowledge of the CIA.
1972
The Case-Zablocki Act — Congress passes an act requiring congressional
review of executive agreements. In theory, this should make CIA
operations more accountable. In fact, it is only marginally effective.
Cambodia — Congress votes to cut off CIA funds for its secret war in
Cambodia.
Wagergate Break-in — President Nixon sends in a team of burglars to
wiretap Democratic offices at Watergate. The team members have
extensive CIA histories, including James McCord, E. Howard Hunt and
five of the Cuban burglars. They work for the Committee to Reelect the
President (CREEP), which does dirty work like disrupting Democratic
campaigns and laundering Nixon’s illegal campaign contributions.
CREEP’s activities are funded and organized by another CIA front, the
Mullen Company.
1973
Chile — The CIA overthrows and assassinates Salvador Allende, Latin
America’s first democratically elected socialist leader. The problems
begin when Allende nationalizes American-owned firms in Chile. ITT
offers the CIA $1 million for a coup (reportedly refused). The CIA
replaces Allende with General Augusto Pinochet, who will torture and
murder thousands of his own countrymen in a crackdown on labor leaders
and the political left.
CIA begins internal investigations — William Colby, the Deputy Director
for Operations, orders all CIA personnel to report any and all illegal
activities they know about. This information is later reported to
Congress.
Watergate Scandal — The CIA’s main collaborating newspaper in America,
The Washington Post, reports Nixon’s crimes long before any other
newspaper takes up the subject. The two reporters, Woodward and
Bernstein, make almost no mention of the CIA’s many fingerprints all
over the scandal. It is later revealed that Woodward was a Naval
intelligence briefer to the White House, and knows many important
intelligence figures, including General Alexander Haig. His main
source, "Deep Throat," is probably one of those.
CIA Director Helms Fired — President Nixon fires CIA Director Richard
Helms for failing to help cover up the Watergate scandal. Helms and
Nixon have always disliked each other. The new CIA director is William
Colby, who is relatively more open to CIA reform.
1974
CHAOS exposed — Pulitzer prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh
publishes a story about Operation CHAOS, the domestic surveillance and
infiltration of anti-war and civil rights groups in the U.S. The story
sparks national outrage.
Angleton fired — Congress holds hearings on the illegal domestic spying
efforts of James Jesus Angleton, the CIA’s chief of
counterintelligence. His efforts included mail-opening campaigns and
secret surveillance of war protesters. The hearings result in his
dismissal from the CIA.
House clears CIA in Watergate — The House of Representatives clears the
CIA of any complicity in Nixon’s Watergate break-in.
The Hughes Ryan Act — Congress passes an amendment requiring the
president to report nonintelligence CIA operations to the relevant
congressional committees in a timely fashion.
1975
Australia — The CIA helps topple the democratically elected, left-
leaning government of Prime Minister Edward Whitlam. The CIA does this
by giving an ultimatum to its Governor-General, John Kerr. Kerr, a
longtime CIA collaborator, exercises his constitutional right to
dissolve the Whitlam government. The Governor-General is a largely
ceremonial position appointed by the Queen; the Prime Minister is
democratically elected. The use of this archaic and never-used law
stuns the nation.
Angola — Eager to demonstrate American military resolve after its
defeat in Vietnam, Henry Kissinger launches a CIA-backed war in Angola.
Contrary to Kissinger’s assertions, Angola is a country of little
strategic importance and not seriously threatened by communism. The CIA
backs the brutal leader of UNITAS, Jonas Savimbi. This polarizes
Angolan politics and drives his opponents into the arms of Cuba and the
Soviet Union for survival. Congress will cut off funds in 1976, but the
CIA is able to run the war off the books until 1984, when funding is
legalized again. This entirely pointless war kills over 300,000
Angolans.
"The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence" — Victor Marchetti and John
Marks publish this whistle-blowing history of CIA crimes and abuses.
Marchetti has spent 14 years in the CIA, eventually becoming an
executive assistant to the Deputy Director of Intelligence. Marks has
spent five years as an intelligence official in the State Department.
"Inside the Company" — Philip Agee publishes a diary of his life inside
the CIA. Agee has worked in covert operations in Latin America during
the 60s, and details the crimes in which he took part.
Congress investigates CIA wrong-doing — Public outrage compels Congress
to hold hearings on CIA crimes. Senator Frank Church heads the Senate
investigation ("The Church Committee"), and Representative Otis Pike
heads the House investigation. (Despite a 98 percent incumbency
reelection rate, both Church and Pike are defeated in the next
elections.) The investigations lead to a number of reforms intended to
increase the CIA’s accountability to Congress, including the creation
of a standing Senate committee on intelligence. However, the reforms
prove ineffective, as the Iran/Contra scandal will show. It turns out
the CIA can control, deal with or sidestep Congress with ease.
The Rockefeller Commission — In an attempt to reduce the damage done by
the Church Committee, President Ford creates the "Rockefeller
Commission" to whitewash CIA history and propose toothless reforms. The
commission’s namesake, Vice President Nelson Rockefeller, is himself a
major CIA figure. Five of the commission’s eight members are also
members of the Council on Foreign Relations, a CIA-dominated
organization.
1979
Iran — The CIA fails to predict the fall of the Shah of Iran, a
longtime CIA puppet, and the rise of Muslim fundamentalists who are
furious at the CIA’s backing of SAVAK, the Shah’s bloodthirsty secret
police. In revenge, the Muslims take 52 Americans hostage in the U.S.
embassy in Tehran.
Afghanistan — The Soviets invade Afghanistan. The CIA immediately
begins supplying arms to any faction willing to fight the occupying
Soviets. Such indiscriminate arming means that when the Soviets leave
Afghanistan, civil war will erupt. Also, fanatical Muslim extremists
now possess state-of-the-art weaponry. One of these is Sheik Abdel
Rahman, who will become involved in the World Trade Center bombing in
New York.
El Salvador — An idealistic group of young military officers, repulsed
by the massacre of the poor, overthrows the right-wing government.
However, the U.S. compels the inexperienced officers to include many of
the old guard in key positions in their new government. Soon, things
are back to "normal" — the military government is repressing and
killing poor civilian protesters. Many of the young military and
civilian reformers, finding themselves powerless, resign in disgust.
Nicaragua — Anastasios Samoza II, the CIA-backed dictator, falls. The
Marxist Sandinistas take over government, and they are initially
popular because of their commitment to land and anti-poverty reform.
Samoza had a murderous and hated personal army called the National
Guard. Remnants of the Guard will become the Contras, who fight a CIA-
backed guerilla war against the Sandinista government throughout the
1980s.
1980
El Salvador — The Archbishop of San Salvador, Oscar Romero, pleads with
President Carter "Christian to Christian" to stop aiding the military
government slaughtering his people. Carter refuses. Shortly afterwards,
right-wing leader Roberto D’Aubuisson has Romero shot through the heart
while saying Mass. The country soon dissolves into civil war, with the
peasants in the hills fighting against the military government. The CIA
and U.S. Armed Forces supply the government with overwhelming military
and intelligence superiority. CIA-trained death squads roam the
countryside, committing atrocities like that of El Mazote in 1982,
where they massacre between 700 and 1000 men, women and children. By
1992, some 63,000 Salvadorans will be killed.
1981
Iran/Contra Begins — The CIA begins selling arms to Iran at high
prices, using the profits to arm the Contras fighting the Sandinista
government in Nicaragua. President Reagan vows that the Sandinistas
will be "pressured" until "they say ‘uncle.’" The CIA’s Freedom
Fighter’s Manual disbursed to the Contras includes instruction on
economic sabotage, propaganda, extortion, bribery, blackmail,
interrogation, torture, murder and political assassination.
1983
Honduras — The CIA gives Honduran military officers the Human Resource
Exploitation Training Manual – 1983, which teaches how to torture
people. Honduras’ notorious "Battalion 316" then uses these techniques,
with the CIA’s full knowledge, on thousands of leftist dissidents. At
least 184 are murdered.
1984
The Boland Amendment — The last of a series of Boland Amendments is
passed. These amendments have reduced CIA aid to the Contras; the last
one cuts it off completely. However, CIA Director William Casey is
already prepared to "hand off" the operation to Colonel Oliver North,
who illegally continues supplying the Contras through the CIA’s
informal, secret, and self-financing network. This
includes "humanitarian aid" donated by Adolph Coors and William Simon,
and military aid funded by Iranian arms sales.
1986
Eugene Hasenfus — Nicaragua shoots down a C-123 transport plane
carrying military supplies to the Contras. The lone survivor, Eugene
Hasenfus, turns out to be a CIA employee, as are the two dead pilots.
The airplane belongs to Southern Air Transport, a CIA front. The
incident makes a mockery of President Reagan’s claims that the CIA is
not illegally arming the Contras.
Iran/Contra Scandal — Although the details have long been known, the
Iran/Contra scandal finally captures the media’s attention in 1986.
Congress holds hearings, and several key figures (like Oliver North)
lie under oath to protect the intelligence community. CIA Director
William Casey dies of brain cancer before Congress can question him.
All reforms enacted by Congress after the scandal are purely cosmetic.
Haiti — Rising popular revolt in Haiti means that "Baby Doc" Duvalier
will remain "President for Life" only if he has a short one. The U.S.,
which hates instability in a puppet country, flies the despotic
Duvalier to the South of France for a comfortable retirement. The CIA
then rigs the upcoming elections in favor of another right-wing
military strongman. However, violence keeps the country in political
turmoil for another four years. The CIA tries to strengthen the
military by creating the National Intelligence Service (SIN), which
suppresses popular revolt through torture and assassination.
1989
Panama — The U.S. invades Panama to overthrow a dictator of its own
making, General Manuel Noriega. Noriega has been on the CIA’s payroll
since 1966, and has been transporting drugs with the CIA’s knowledge
since 1972. By the late 80s, Noriega’s growing independence and
intransigence have angered Washington… so out he goes.
1990
Haiti — Competing against 10 comparatively wealthy candidates, leftist
priest Jean-Bertrand Aristide captures 68 percent of the vote. After
only eight months in power, however, the CIA-backed military deposes
him. More military dictators brutalize the country, as thousands of
Haitian refugees escape the turmoil in barely seaworthy boats. As
popular opinion calls for Aristide’s return, the CIA begins a
disinformation campaign painting the courageous priest as mentally
unstable.
1991
The Gulf War — The U.S. liberates Kuwait from Iraq. But Iraq’s
dictator, Saddam Hussein, is another creature of the CIA. With U.S.
encouragement, Hussein invaded Iran in 1980. During this costly eight-
year war, the CIA built up Hussein’s forces with sophisticated arms,
intelligence, training and financial backing. This cemented Hussein’s
power at home, allowing him to crush the many internal rebellions that
erupted from time to time, sometimes with poison gas. It also gave him
all the military might he needed to conduct further adventurism — in
Kuwait, for example.
The Fall of the Soviet Union — The CIA fails to predict this most
important event of the Cold War. This suggests that it has been so busy
undermining governments that it hasn’t been doing its primary job:
gathering and analyzing information. The fall of the Soviet Union also
robs the CIA of its reason for existence: fighting communism. This
leads some to accuse the CIA of intentionally failing to predict the
downfall of the Soviet Union. Curiously, the intelligence community’s
budget is not significantly reduced after the demise of communism.
1992
Economic Espionage — In the years following the end of the Cold War,
the CIA is increasingly used for economic espionage. This involves
stealing the technological secrets of competing foreign companies and
giving them to American ones. Given the CIA’s clear preference for
dirty tricks over mere information gathering, the possibility of
serious criminal behavior is very great indeed.
1993
Haiti — The chaos in Haiti grows so bad that President Clinton has no
choice but to remove the Haitian military dictator, Raoul Cedras, on
threat of U.S. invasion. The U.S. occupiers do not arrest Haiti’s
military leaders for crimes against humanity, but instead ensure their
safety and rich retirements. Aristide is returned to power only after
being forced to accept an agenda favorable to the country’s ruling
class.
EPILOGUE
In a speech before the CIA celebrating its 50th anniversary, President
Clinton said: "By necessity, the American people will never know the
full story of your courage."
Clinton’s is a common defense of the CIA: namely, the American people
should stop criticizing the CIA because they don’t know what it really
does. This, of course, is the heart of the problem in the first place.
An agency that is above criticism is also above moral behavior and
reform. Its secrecy and lack of accountability allows its corruption to
grow unchecked.
Furthermore, Clinton’s statement is simply untrue. The history of the
agency is growing painfully clear, especially with the declassification
of historical CIA documents. We may not know the details of specific
operations, but we do know, quite well, the general behavior of the
CIA. These facts began emerging nearly two decades ago at an ever-
quickening pace. Today we have a remarkably accurate and consistent
picture, repeated in country after country, and verified from countless
different directions.
The CIA’s response to this growing knowledge and criticism follows a
typical historical pattern. (Indeed, there are remarkable parallels to
the Medieval Church’s fight against the Scientific Revolution.) The
first journalists and writers to reveal the CIA’s criminal behavior
were harassed and censored if they were American writers, and tortured
and murdered if they were foreigners. (See Philip Agee’s On the Run for
an example of early harassment.) However, over the last two decades the
tide of evidence has become overwhelming, and the CIA has found that it
does not have enough fingers to plug every hole in the dike. This is
especially true in the age of the Internet, where information flows
freely among millions of people. Since censorship is impossible, the
Agency must now defend itself with apologetics. Clinton’s "Americans
will never know" defense is a prime example.
Another common apologetic is that "the world is filled with unsavory
characters, and we must deal with them if we are to protect American
interests at all." There are two things wrong with this. First, it
ignores the fact that the CIA has regularly spurned alliances with
defenders of democracy, free speech and human rights, preferring the
company of military dictators and tyrants. The CIA had moral options
available to them, but did not take them.
Second, this argument begs several questions. The first is: "Which
American interests?" The CIA has courted right-wing dictators because
they allow wealthy Americans to exploit the country’s cheap labor and
resources. But poor and middle-class Americans pay the price whenever
they fight the wars that stem from CIA actions, from Vietnam to the
Gulf War to Panama. The second begged question is: "Why should American
interests come at the expense of other peoples’ human rights?"
The CIA should be abolished, its leadership dismissed and its relevant
members tried for crimes against humanity. Our intelligence community
should be rebuilt from the ground up, with the goal of collecting and
analyzing information. As for covert action, there are two moral
options. The first one is to eliminate covert action completely. But
this gives jitters to people worried about the Adolf Hitlers of the
world. So a second option is that we can place covert action under
extensive and true democratic oversight. For example, a bipartisan
Congressional Committee of 40 members could review and veto all aspects
of CIA operations upon a majority or super-majority vote. Which of
these two options is best may be the subject of debate, but one thing
is clear: like dictatorship, like monarchy, unaccountable covert
operations should die like the dinosaurs they are.
Endnotes:
1. All history concerning CIA intervention in foreign countries is
summarized from William Blum’s encyclopedic work, Killing Hope: U.S.
Military and CIA Interventions since World War II (Monroe, Maine:
Common Courage Press, 1995). Sources for domestic CIA operations come
from Jonathan Vankin and John Whalen’s The 60 Greatest Conspiracies of
All Time (Secaucus, N.J.: Citadel Press, 1997).
2. Coleman McCarthy, "The Consequences of Covert Tactics" Washington
Post, December 13, 1987.
Chive Mynde
Forbes.com
VNS Election Foul-Ups Spark Antitrust Talk
By Amy Doan
Voters already have a long list of complaints about Tuesday's
presidential election. There are the hasty projections for Florida, the
vestigial Electoral College, and the fact that some Americans had to
use garbage can lids instead of booths to vote because polls were so
crowded.
Add to that list the unchecked power of the Voter News Service, a New
York organization that has a monopoly on the media's exit poll data
during election night. The VNS is jointly owned by ABC, CBS, NBC and
the Associated Press. It was formed by news outlets in the early 1990s,
mostly to save them money. The VNS was largely responsible for the
networks' Florida flip-flop, and some critics are saying that voters
would be better served if the media used a few competing data services.
``There's a legitimate scientific argument that having multiple
organizations collecting and analyzing data on election night would
improve results,'' says Michael Traugott, a former VNS analyst and a
professor at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor.
Traugott stresses that the VNS has ``a good basis of science.'' And
goofs happened in pre-VNS days. For example, some individual networks
made bad calls on the 1964 Goldwater/Rockefeller primary. The VNS was
established in part because the networks thought viewers wanted to see
more consistent data.
But critics worry that complacency over the VNS's predictions has
resulted in a game of chicken among broadcasters. Since the data the
VNS supplies is identical for everyone, each outlet wants to be the
first to label the numbers decisive. And even smaller news outlets,
which don't pay for the data, usually follow the big networks' lead.
One data entry error or a few ill-supported analyses may have caused
the VNS' wrong projections for Florida on Tuesday and Wednesday. The
networks and the AP separately analyze the data, and some were quicker
to retract the Florida projections than others. But the VNS has an
enormous amount of influence on when its members run with state-by-
state results. Its analysts are the first to compare actual raw votes
with exit poll data, to compare early votes with historical demographic
and party trends in precincts, and otherwise perform reality checks on
the numbers.
The VNS, which is not a profit center for its member companies, budgets
an estimated $10 million to $25 million every two years on its exit
polls. Prior to that, the major networks probably spent a little less
than $10 million apiece for the data. So the savings are substantial.
This week's mistakes will put pressure on the networks to break up what
some call the VNS' information cartel.
``If someone wants to try to prove that this joint venture results in
reduced quality, there's potentially a decent antitrust case, even if
[having a monopoly] reduces prices for VNS' media customers,'' says
Howard Morse, an antitrust attorney with Drinker, Biddle and Reath in
Washington, D.C.
The VNS did not respond to repeated requests for comment. Even if this
week's mess doesn't result in litigation against the VNS, it may at
least force the outfit to explain itself to voters. As of yesterday,
the organization hadn't even set up an informational Web site for the
public.
``They're the only game in town, and nobody really knows anything about
them,'' says Carroll Doherty, an editor at the Pew Research Center in
Washington, D.C.
Go to www.forbes.com to see all of our latest stories.
Chive Mynde
- THE HOLY TRINITY OF MEDIA ABUSE
From Yahoo:
Wednesday November 08 12:35 PM EST
ELECTION 2000: Inside Dope
While Matt Drudge may have sworn no retreat, no surrender in his fight
to post exit poll numbers, his own popularity is conspiring against
him. Drudgereport.com has been available only intermittently today for
readers on both coasts, and his posting of Voter News Service numbers --
which become available at 2 p.m. ET. -- could drag the site down.
Thus, Lucianne Goldberg to the rescue. As the one who brokered the
Linda Tripp tapes to Newsweek, who then sat on the story long enough
for Drudge to scoop it, she indirectly created Drudge, and her site,
Lucianne.com, shares a symbiotic link with his. Goldberg plans to join
Drudge in posting VNS data where others, like Slate and The National
Review Online, have backed off. ''News is news,'' she says. ''Why, as
Drudge said, should Dan Rather know and not the American people? That's
such elitism on the part of the networks. Screw 'em all.'' Goldberg
says she hopes that by 3 p.m. ''we should have a real map of the
country.'' And she adds, ''If I can't verify stuff I'm not going to put
it up.''
--
The general root of superstition is that men observe
when things hit, and not when they miss, and commit
to memory the one, and pass over the other
-Sir Francis Bacon 1561-1626
Chive Mynde
ELECTION 2000: Neither Bush nor Gore Ends the Night a Loser. But the
Networks Are Another Story
By David Carr
At 7:56 p.m. ET last night, MSNBC boldly stepped forward onto the firm
ground of Voter News Service projections and suggested that Florida's
25 electoral votes belonged to Al Gore. Other networks quickly fell
into step and in no time a horde of pundits descended like so many
flying monkeys to suggest that the night would belong to Gore.
Two hours later, VNS retracted. And the scramble that followed produced
a whole load of great television moments. Random-metaphor generator Dan
Rather on CBS turned on a dime and still pretended to know what he was
talking about. MSNBC's Brian Williams made like Wile E. Coyote and
longingly eyed the ledge behind him -- only to see the vast abyss
below. The sage panel on CNN passed around a plate of crow. Peter
Jennings's brat-pack ease fell away in between bites of humble pie on
ABC. Tom Brokaw's head was on a swivel, looking for an expert, any
expert, to explain how NBC and the other networks had been so wrong.
Fox News's Brit Hume sniffed the wind for a fix.
They all looked like rubes. It was a fine moment for democracy and a
bad turn for all of the savants who pretend to know the big, heaving
beast's next move. Two hours later -- with the electoral vote knotted
at 242 at the stroke of midnight -- it became clear that a process they
thought they owned actually belonged to the people. It dawned on the
television types that they had lost custody of the process and that
what they thought would be a nice, tidy, made-for-TV movie had turned
into a 12-hour math problem.
At least they didn't have to goose the drama. An issue of great
national import was at hand and craft won out for a time. They began
grinding it out deep into the night, showing real live vote totals,
finally covering the nation like a precinct instead of some pollster's
construct. But then new numbers came in from VNS and all the networks
headed off the cliff together anew: Bush wins, and soon there were more
flying monkeys proudly displaying how they knew it all along.
That petered out soon enough. People are never going to look at
election projections the same way again.
When the VNS numbers goaded the networks into calling Florida for Gore
early, the Bush people went batshit and started banging the phones at
various networks. Bush campaign chief Karl Rove called up Williams and
said that MSNBC and its cohorts were dead-bang wrong.
And then Bush himself made an extraordinary mid-evening election night
appearance on TV, inviting the press corps in to tell them to knock it
off with the fuzzy math.
''The networks called this thing a little early, but the people who are
actually counting the votes are coming up with a different
perspective,'' Bush said. ''I don't believe that you have enough
evidence to call these races.''
''I'm waiting till they count all the votes and I think America should
wait until they count all the votes,'' Bush suggested.
We're still waiting.
Everybody on the tube knew it was going to be tight early on. But none
of the television types could have known that they were on a story that
might require a change of clothes to cover. And no one saw, or pointed
out, that Ralph Nader's tiny numbers would end up making a huge
difference in an election that was tighter than a gnat's backside.
Nobody caught on to the significance until the election was decided --
or make that undecided.
It was a tough, dynamic story in which bad data and professional hubris
had the broadcasters overplaying their hand all night long.
CNN tanked coming out of the gate and never completely recovered. Judy
Woodruff was pushed around by random graphics that seemed to come and
go of their own accord. Her co-anchor Bernard Shaw asked the kind of
winding, existential questions that had people at the other end of the
camera checking their earpieces to see if there was actually a question
in there somewhere. Jeff Greenfield swung in with amiable commentary,
but in general, CNN looked bewildered to be in the middle of a breaking
political story -- just the kind of news story the network was invented
to cover.
MSNBC continued to stretch its journalistic lead among cable news
providers, mostly by doing a good job of hanging on through the hairpin
turns of the night. The network got it wrong like everyone else, but
recovered quickly. Chris Matthews was calm and spittle-free for most of
the evening, except for a brief moment when Hillary Clinton gave her
acceptance speech in the New York Senate race.
Williams and Matthews used a rotating hack-ocracy that included
pollster Pat Cadell, ex-presidential aide Paul Begala, Reaganite Ed
Rollins and Voter.com's Amy Holmes to fine effect. (Columnist Mike
Barnicle also had a place at the table for reasons that never became
clear.)
Williams and Matthews had some fun, kept the blather to a minimum, did
infill with lots of salient data and hosted infrequent but enlightening
appearances by Newsweek's Jonathan Alter. A little more of him and
little less of the Vanna White character who was putting cutouts of
states up on the electoral map would have been nice.
NBC got hold of a Florida elections official at 4:30 a.m. and while
Brokaw's interview with him settled nothing, it did shed some light on
the story, including the fact that a recount might take a full day.
Brokaw made more liberal use of caveats about exit polls through the
night, and did a great job of playing off some of the more talented TV
political reporters to keep advancing a story that moved at its own
pace. His elegiac interview of Bob Dole provided a good backdrop of
failures past to a night of would-be Republican triumph. It's too bad
he had to invoke his trademark generational motif, though. Hasn't he
sold enough books?
This either will be, or should be, Dan Rather's last election. He
seemed to spend a significant amount of time between contests picking
up metaphors like so many paw paws and deploying them at random moments
through the evening. Leads ''melted faster than ice cream in a
microwave.'' The contest ''crackled like a hickory fire'' and a loser
would be ''madder than a rained-on rooster''
Had enough? What about a margin that's ''shakier than cafeteria
jello.'' Or a trend that moves like a ''tornado through a trailer
park.'' Bush ''ran through Dixie like a big wheel through a field of
cotton.'' Bush supporters responded to the news that Florida was being
taken out of the Gore column by ''jumping out of their seats like they
had been jabbed by a hatpin.''
He went deep into the night, stacking up metaphors like -- sorry about
this -- cordwood. And CBS's decision to choose star wattage -- Ed
Bradley and Leslie Stahl -- over hardcore experts left the network
skimming the surface all night long when the first draft of history was
unfolding.
There were other low points. Bo Derek and Wayne Newton
singing ''America the Beautiful'' to rain-soaked Bush supporters
gathered in Texas comes to mind, although nothing can beat the second
coming of pollster Frank Luntz on MSNBC near the end of the night. He
had been interviewed earlier in Philadelphia and because the story ran
so long, MSNBC put him back on after he traveled to Washington at 1:30
a.m. Brian Williams mentioned that the story had gone on so long
that ''babies have been born, and people have died.'' Trust Luntz to
put the situation, and himself, in perspective. ''I feel like Phil
Collins of Live Aid, who performed both in London and U.S.''
By 2 a.m., the nation's foremost political reporters were reduced to
waiting for absentee ballots from the parts of Florida they never go
to. Anchors defaulted to the synchronized swimming that is part of
treading water over a story that has plateaued. They paddled through
adjectives --- ''extraordinary,'' ''historic'' and ''unexpected'' --
while speculating about whether the story might go on for minutes,
hours or days.
The alleged money shot finally arrived at 2:17 a.m. ''Bush wins,'' Dan
Rather said, ''if our CBS News estimates are correct, and we believe
they are.'' Nice caveat under the circumstances and he still managed to
leave himself room for one more twisted metaphor. ''The son also
rises.''
A phone call from Gore to Bush was made, conceding defeat. But just
when the smirk began to creep back onto the televised faces, word came
through that the voters who provided the margin of victory in Florida
could fit in one large airplane. More uncertainty, more water to be
tread. Ninety minutes later, the marble had rolled off the table and
the smart guys on TV were back to playing, ''Now wait just a minute.''
The guy in charge of making sure that the votes in Florida were counted
correctly was the presumptive president's brother. Gore's concession is
retracted. CBS puts Florida back in the undecided column. More plot
points, more questions about whether there might be recounts, more
treading of vast expanses of empty air.
This time around, the story surpassed the storytellers' ability to
explain it.
Copyright Š 2000 Yahoo! Inc., and Powerful Media Inc. All rights
reserved.
Chive Mynde
Networks Try To Explain Blown Call
By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer
NEW YORK (AP) - Television networks tried to explain Wednesday how they
blew a call on the Florida election results - not once but twice - the
second time prematurely declaring George W. Bush (news - web sites) the
next president.
The networks were forced to take back that call after 4 a.m. EST when
it became clear that the close Florida count would be contested.
``We don't just have egg on our face,'' NBC's Tom Brokaw said. ``We
have an omelette.''
NBC had been first to declare a winner in Florida on Tuesday, saying Al
Gore (news - web sites) won at 7:50 p.m EST. Its rivals quickly
followed suit, basing their information largely on polling data
provided by Voter News Service, a consortium created by The Associated
Press, ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox and NBC.
The networks take their victory projections seriously and promised
before Election Day to be cautious if the race was close.
``Let's get one thing straight right from the get-go: We would rather
be last in reporting returns than be wrong,'' Dan Rather said on CBS at
the outset of coverage. ``If we say somebody's carried the state, you
can take that to the bank.''
But at 9:55, CNN took back its projection, saying Florida was now too
close to call. CNN election experts had noticed a discrepancy between a
VNS estimate and the actual vote, a network spokeswoman said.
Other networks, VNS and the AP quickly took back their predictions of a
Gore victory in Florida. As the evening wore on, TV analysts
increasingly gave Bush the edge. After polls closed on the West Coast,
it became clear that Florida would decide things.
At 2:16 a.m., Fox News Channel declared Bush the winner in Florida.
Within four minutes, NBC, CBS, CNN and ABC did the same. The AP said
the race was still too close to name a winner.
Fox made the call based on its analysis of the vote count - it believed
Bush's lead was so large there was no way Gore could overcome it given
what experts knew about ballots left uncounted, said John Moody, Fox
News Channel's vice president of news and editorial quality.
He said Fox did not make its call based on any advice from VNS. In
fact, because of the earlier mistake on Gore, ``we were all aware that
their model was not perfect,'' he said.
Why were the other networks so quick to follow?
``It's competitive,'' pollster John Zogby said on Fox News Channel.
``One network does it and it creates a panic among the other networks.''
Executives at CBS and NBC denied they took their cues from a rival.
Each said their experts reached essentially the same conclusion as
Moody.
``There's always competitive juices flowing on this, but people spent
hours looking at Florida,'' said Al Ortiz, executive producer of the
CBS election coverage. ``When we made this call, we really felt it was
solid.''
CBS blamed VNS, saying the consortium provided incorrect information on
uncounted votes. As a result, Ortiz said, the networks were taken by
surprise when the vote count later tightened - at one point bringing
Gore to within 224 votes.
In a statement issued Wednesday, VNS said it had based its Florida-for-
Gore call on exit polls, augmented by actual votes from model
precincts. ``These models, based on sampling precincts, have served us
well through many elections. However, we will investigate why they did
not work properly in this specific situation,'' the service said.
The later Florida-for-Bush declaration was based on actual votes
indicating Bush had a sufficient lead to take the state, VNS said.
After Bush's lead dropped dramatically with the tabulation of the
remaining votes, ``the responsible thing to do was to withdraw the
call,'' it said.
CNN said in a statement that it has ``initiated an immediate review of
all procedures involved and has already begun consultations with other
news organizations.'' ABC also said it was looking into what happened.
``We made mistakes,'' said Jeff Zucker, a producer of NBC's coverage.
``But we made mistakes based on bad information. If you make a mistake
and own up to it, that's fine.''
Despite the network projections, the AP did not declare Bush the winner.
``By midnight we knew Florida was going to deliver the presidency to
one candidate or the other, and when our TV partners called the state
for Bush, the vote was in his favor,'' said AP Executive Editor Jon
Wolman. ``We saw that, too, but we also saw that some significant
Democratic precincts were still being tallied, and our vote-count
experts felt strongly that it was too close to call.''
About an hour after declaring Bush the winner, the networks began to
get queasy. Ed Bradley read an advisory explaining the AP's non-call on
the air. ``A very reliable news service,'' Rather said.
The networks all took the Bush projection back around 4 a.m. ``We're
not absolutely sure quite what to do next,'' ABC anchor Peter Jennings
confessed at 4 a.m. EST.
It made for gripping television, and early indications are many
Americans stayed up to watch. Between 2 a.m. and 3 a.m. EST, Nielsen
Media Research reported that 22 percent of American homes with TVs had
their sets on. The audience for ABC, CBS and NBC was 225 percent higher
than usual at that hour.
An audience in Austin, standing in the rain waiting to celebrate a Bush
victory and watching large-screen TVs, cheered at the network
projections. A Nashville audience was glum.
Newspapers across the country made decisions based on what they heard
on TV. The final edition headline in the Daily Gazette in Schenectady,
N.Y., blared: ``Networks: Bush Wins.'' There were reports of editors
shouting ``stop the presses'' in newsrooms when the calls were
reversed - just like in the movies.
``I'm not sure television's had as bad a night as this,'' Tom
Rosensteil, director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, said
on CNN.
Marvin Kalb, executive director of the Shorenstein Center on Press and
Politics at Harvard University, said he feared repercussions from this
``very major goof.''
``Television news is supposed to cover the news,'' Kalb said. ``It is
not supposed to be a player, certainly not a player on the scale that
was demonstrated last night. My concern is there may be calls for
legislative or executive control over the way television news calls
elections in the future, and that will get us into a fundamental
constitutional fight.''
CBS' Ortiz said in the network's defense: ``We leveled with our viewers
all night long about where we stood.''
And Fox's Moody said he doesn't regret the decision. ``When that
recount is completed, I feel that our call will be correct.''
Phil Hays
<1678 lines deleted>
A bit here, a byte there, sooner or later it adds up to real bandwidth.
--
Phil Hays
BirdTribe
I thought I would repost it to piss you off. You seem to have some kind
of stake involved in keeping this info off the net. Are you a paid
disinformation agent Phil?
BT2000XL
>
> --
> Phil Hays
--
* Nature is the most politically explosive issue in the world *
Artworks, games, keys - visit http://www.birdtribe.net/
Get your own domain and 50megs, CGI and PHP, PostGreSQL
and Linux Turbine Generator only $100.00 per year with
no hidden fees - http://www.mosthost.net
Chive Mynde
http://www.igc.apc.org/raenergy/cia-bush.html
Kennedy: The George Bush Connection
by Mark Turner
THE KENNEDY FILES
FILE #3
© 1992 by Mark D. Turner
P.O. Box 1955, Bluefield, WV 24701-6955
The Outer Limits BBS - (540) 322-2529
--------------------------------------
This file may be freely distributed but Mark D. Turner retains all
copyrights. Do not make any changes to this file, please. Comments
and suggestions for future issues are appreciated.
--------------------------------------
THE GEORGE BUSH CONNECTION
In this day and age when some people can not even name the
president of the United States, it is not the least bit surprising
that most have no knowledge of George Bush's possible connections
to the Kennedy assassination. The relationship has its roots in
Bush's "former" employment with the CIA. As CIA agents have been
quoted in the past, you never really leave the Agency.
THE CIA DID IT!
Many researchers place the blame for the murder of John F. Kennedy
on the CIA. The easiest way to clear the mafia or other
non-governmental groups is to look at the massive cover-up that
the government has participated in over the years. If mafia boss
Carlos Marcello had really ordered the hit, could he have had the
CIA and FBI suppress so much evidence from the public for so long?
Could he have had the normal security lowered for the
assassination? Could he have had the Washington D.C. phone system
knocked out of order for an hour right as the shooting took place?
Could he have convinced the Warren Commission to release such an
idiotic official version of the murder? Of course not. The set-up
and cover-up had to take place INSIDE of the government, not
outside.
The CIA seemed to have the most (and best) motives for the
elimination of Kennedy. During the Eisenhower presidency, the CIA
came up with a plan to invade Cuba at the Bay of Pigs. The thought
was that the citizens would hear of the attack and join in to
overthrow Castro. Former Cubans were trained by the CIA and the
U.S. government fur- nished them with weapons and transportation.
Since it was near the end of his administration, Eisenhower put
the plan on hold so the new president would not have to deal with
any problems which might arise from the mission.
Upon entering office Kennedy decided that the plan's requirement
of 16 planes would obviously reveal American backing of the plot.
The plan had hoped that American involvement would not become
known to the world. The use of 16 planes would make American
backing obvious to everyone. Kennedy cut the number of planes down
to six. As the date of the invasion neared, Kennedy decided
against the plan and announced in the press that the United States
would not invade Cuba with the military.
The CIA went ahead with the plan and quickly found that things
were not going as they had hoped for. They asked for more planes
but were told they would have to be held back until the forces
captured a Cuban airport. Then, the planes could be sent and the
explanation would be that they were captured planes which the
rebels had put into use. The CIA-backed rebels never got that far
and were quickly defeated. The citizens of Cuba never joined them
in the fight. The CIA, as has been revealed in books by
participants, blamed Kennedy for the defeat. The books and papers
reveal a deep hatred for the imagined betrayal.
Later, Kennedy formed a panel to keep him informed as to what was
going on in Vietnam. American involvement was still low at this
point but Kennedy was worried. He has been quoted as saying he
could not justify sending American boys half-way around the world
to fight communism when it existed just south of Florida in Cuba.
One of the panel's members was Allen Dulles, head of the CIA.
Kennedy caught him in various lies and fired him. The fact that
the CIA had kept training Cubans for another invasion until
Kennedy finally sent in FBI agents to break up their camps and
confiscate their weapons was another reason for the dismissal.
Other high-ranking CIA officials were fired, too, including the
brother of Dallas' mayor. Kennedy changed the operating procedure
of the CIA so they would have to get approval for any future
covert actions from Robert Kennedy.
Due to persistent problems with the CIA and their continual
involve- ment in matters which were not their concern, Kennedy
declared that he was going to shatter the CIA into a thousand
pieces and scatter them to the winds. Even former president
Truman, who had created the CIA, expressed concerns about their
behavior. Kennedy was apparently going to leave their destruction
until after the next election but did start withdrawing troops
from Vietnam, much to the dislike of the CIA. One of Johnson's
first moves after he replaced Kennedy as president was to increase
American involvement in Vietnam. It seems he owned an airline
company that was contracted to fly troops back and forth across
the Pacific Ocean, but that is another matter.
Later, E. Howard Hunt, on behalf of the CIA, faked cables to
implicate John F. Kennedy in the assassination of South Vietnam's
president, Ngo Dinh Diem. So, it is apparent that the CIA disliked
Kennedy and had the means to set-up and cover-up the
assassination. Now, it is known that they convinced the Warren
Commission that the Soviet Union and Cuba had murdered Kennedy.
They scared the members into believing that revealing this to the
American public would result in a nuclear war in which millions
would be killed. To further this theory, they produced fake
evidence showing that Oswald had visited the Soviet and Cuban
embassies in Mexico to arrange the killing and escape. The head of
the CIA operations in Mexico has since admitted that no such real
evidence ever existed. A Warren Commission investigator has
admitted that they acted to save millions by sacrificing one man
(Oswald).
The job was not too hard to pull off since former CIA-head Allen
Dulles was a member of the Commission. He was the only one to
attend more than half of the hearings and was also in charge of
deciding what intelligence data was seen by the other members.
President Johnson didn't seem to find it strange to appoint the
man that Kennedy had fired to investigate his hated former boss'
murder.
SO HOW DOES BUSH FIT IT?
Although he denies it, there is a growing body of evidence that
George Bush was working for the CIA as early as 1961. Many feel he
was actually recruited during his college days (which is when he
joined the Skull and Bones Society, a front for the Illuminati).
Bush claims to have been working for his own oil company during
the early 1960's. It would make for a convenient front since he
claims to have been off- shore on drilling rigs for weeks at a
time. The rigs were located all over the world. Was he really on
the rigs or was he running around on CIA business? The various
biographies of Bush are all sketchy on this phase of his life.
During this time, Bush had moved to HOUSTON, Texas. His wife was,
of course, BARBARA. His oil company was ZAPATA Off Shore Co.
(which he named after a communist Mexican revolutionary who would
invade towns and murder every man, woman and child. Bush also
named an earlier oil company after Zapata, a questionable choice
for a hero). The code name for the Bay of Pigs invasion was
Operation ZAPATA! A former high-ranking Pentagon official, Col.
Fletcher Prouty, was the man who secured two Navy ships for the
operation. He has told of seeing the two ships repainted to
non-Navy colors for the invasion. The ships were given the new
names HOUSTON and BARBARA!
Of course, maybe the names were just coincidences, but Bush was
living in Houston with Barbara and running Zapata in 1961 during
the planning of the invasion. The name "Operation Zapata" was top
secret and known only to a very few.
In 1977 and 1978, the government released nearly 100,000 pages of
documents on the Kennedy assassination. One which slipped out by
mistake was from the FBI to the State Department written a few
days after the assassination. The State Department was worried
that anti- Castro groups in Miami might stage another invasion of
Cuba in the aftermath of the JFK murder. The FBI informed them
that they had questioned both pro-Castro and anti-Castro groups
and could find no information about such plans. The memo went on
to state that the information was passed along to "George Bush of
the Central Intelli- gence Agency" the day after the
assassination.
Why was the information passed along to the CIA? Probably because
of their previous invasion attempt and other planned attacks. Why
George Bush? Probably because he was involved in previous invasion
plans!
When the document first surfaced no one paid much attention to it.
When the presidential campaigns began for the 1980 election then
the name George Bush caught researchers' eyes. When asked about
the memo, Bush denied working for the CIA at the time. As evidence
built that it was indeed him, the CIA claimed it was a different
George Bush although their policy had always been to neither
confirm nor deny a person's employment. The other George Bush was
tracked down by reporters and said that although he did work for
the CIA at the time, he was never involved in that sort of work.
The interesting point is that the CIA did not bother to contact
the other George Bush and inform him that reporters might soon be
calling. Other evidence surfaced that showed the George Bush
mentioned in the document was actually George H. W. Bush and had
the same address as the famous George Bush.
Another Bush connection involved George de Mohrenschildt, a rich
Russian oil man who lived in Texas when Lee Harvey Oswald settled
there after his trip to the Soviet Union. De Mohrenschildt was a
long-time CIA agent and quite possibly served as a CIA control
officer for Oswald. The Warren Commission described him and his
wife as being the two people friendliest to Oswald at the time of
the assassination. De Mohrenschildt's son-in-law told the Warren
Commission that if any- one had helped with the assassination it
was most likely de Mohren- schildt. De Mohrenschildt was also the
man who moved Oswald to Dallas.
Shortly before the House Select Committee on Assassinations
started meeting in the late 1970's a new doctor appeared in de
Mohrenschildt's town. De Mohrenschildt started seeing him and
quickly became mentally unstable. His wife convinced him to stop
seeing the doctor. The doctor then moved away and left a false
forwarding address. The very day the Committee tried to contact de
Mohrenschildt about testifying, he was found dead of a gun shot
wound. His personal address book was found and it contained the
entry "Bush, George H. W. (Poppy) 1412 W. Ohio also Zapata
Petroleum Midland." Bush's full name is George Herbert Walker Bush
which matches the initials given and his earlier oil company was
named Zapata Petroleum Corp. Why was his name in de
Mohrenschildt's book? Is "Poppy" his CIA code name?
It is known that in the early 1960's de Mohrenschildt made
frequent trips to Houston, which was the location of Bush's home.
He told friends he was visiting the Brown brothers, who were close
friends and financial supporters of Lyndon Johnson. CIA documents
reveal that during the planning phase of Operation Zapata, de
Mohrenschildt made frequent trips to Mexico and Panama and gave
reports to the CIA. His son-in-law told the Warren Commission that
he believed de Mohren- schildt was spying for the planned Cuban
invasion.
A QUESTION OF CHARACTER
When Bush was picked to be director of the CIA in 1976, he
testified to Congress that he had never worked for the CIA before.
Of course, it did not make much sense to appoint a director who
had no such back- ground but Congress approved him anyway. Now it
would seem that Bush committed perjury in his congressional
testimony.
George Bush was apparently high enough in the CIA to help plan the
Bay of Pigs invasion. It would probably be safe to assume that he
even named the operation and its two ships. Considering the hatred
that the CIA felt toward Kennedy over their failed mission and
Bush's involvement in that same mission, it would be quite
interesting to know what Bush's feelings toward John F. Kennedy
really were and what his full role in the assassination
investigation was.
Langrrr
> Since 1964, right after John F. Kennedy was assassinated, vote
> tabulation for national elections has been handled not by the
> government, but by a private company lacking any official oversight at
> all. This company, which changes its name on a regular basis, is
> currently called "Voters News Service" and is located in New York
City.
> This company is owned by a consortium of TV networks and wire
services,
> which are in turn controlled by the CIA through its Operation
> MOCKINGBIRD. The TV networks will make a great show of being "first
> with the election results", but in reality all of them rely on the
> numbers sent to them by VNS, while seldom acknowledging its existence
> during the election coverage.
"You see, it goes back... and to the left. Back... and to the left.
Back... and to the left." - Kevin Costner as Jim Garrison in JFK.
Wake me up when you start talking about HAWCS, Chive.
- Andrew Langer
--
Any posts by Andrew Langer are his own, written by him, for his own
enjoyment (and the education of others). Unless expressly stated,
they represent his own views, and not those of any other individuals
or entities. He is not, nor has he ever been, paid to post here.
Chive Mynde
Langrrr <Lan...@aol.com> wrote:
> In article <8udp2g$bj1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Chive Mynde <chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > tabulation for national elections has been handled not by the
> > government, but by a private company lacking any official oversight
at
> > all. This company, which changes its name on a regular basis, is
> > currently called "Voters News Service" and is located in New York
> City.
> > This company is owned by a consortium of TV networks and wire
> services,
> > which are in turn controlled by the CIA through its Operation
> > MOCKINGBIRD. The TV networks will make a great show of being "first
> > with the election results", but in reality all of them rely on the
> > numbers sent to them by VNS, while seldom acknowledging its
existence
> > during the election coverage.
BACKGROUND ON THE S&L BAILOUT. The failure of hundreds of U.S. Savings
and Loans during the 1980s, as detailed in such sources as Stephen
Pizzo’s Inside Job1 and Pete Brewton’s Untold Story,2 cost U.S.
taxpayers an estimated $500 billion.3 A U.S. House committee
concluded that over three-quarters of all S&L insolvencies appeared to
be linked to serious misconduct by senior insiders or outsiders.4 In
1988, the comptroller of the currency found that less than 10 percent
of recent bank failures had been caused solely by economic factors.5
One indication of the role of criminal conduct in S&L losses was the
workings of just one New York figure, Mario Renda, who worked in
conjunction with the Mob, according to a sworn federal deposition.6
Renda brokered as much as $5 billion per year in deposits into 130
S&Ls across the county, all of which failed.7 As Kwitny noted, “many
of these deposits were made on the specific condition that the S&Ls
would lend money out to borrowers Renda would recommend, who turned out
to be local Mafia people or strangers from out-of-state.”8
The Bush family’s dealings illustrate some of the ways this S&L loot
was extracted. In some loan transactions, money was simply siphoned
out fraudulently to outsiders under lucrative arrangements with bank
directors; Neil Bush’s record illustrates these type of transactions.
In other instances, as exemplified by Jeb’s S&L dealings, loans were
made for speculative investments or ventures without attempts to secure
repayment if they were not profitable. Political connections often
helped protect S&L misconduct;9 in the Bush’s case, George senior’s
record demonstrated laxity toward the perpetrators, several of whom
were in his own social circles.
1. Stephen Pizzo, Mary Fricker and Paul Muolo, Inside Job: The Looting
of America’s Savings and Loans. New York: McGraw- Hill, 1989.
2. New York: SPI Books, 1992.
3. LA Times, 7/31/1990, p. 1.
4. Pizzo, Inside Job, p. 305.
5. Ibid.
6. 123-6, 302
7. Jonathan Kwitny, “How Bush’s Pals Broke the Banks,” The Village
Voice, 10/20/1992, p. 27.
8. Ibid.
9. Id., pp. 24ff.
NEIL BUSH. In 1990, federal regulators filed a $200-million lawsuit
against Neil Bush and other officers of the Silverado Banking, accusing
them of “gross negligence” contributing to its $1 billion
collapse.1 “Our conclusion is that Silverado was the victim of
sophisticated schemes and abuses by insiders and of gross negligence by
its directors and outside professionals,” FDIC Senior Deputy General
Counsel Douglas H. Jones said in a statement.2
Bush was reprimanded by the Office of Thrift Supervision for “multiple
conflicts of interest” as a paid director of the S&L, including his
approval of $132 million in loans from Silverado to two business
partners, Bill Walters and Kenneth Good.3 Bush, in turn, had received
$550,000 in salaries from a company funded by Walters and Good plus a
$100,000 loan from Good that was subsequently forgiven.4 Walters and
Good looted an estimated $330 million from Silverado; one Silverado
director had shared instructions on how to establish family trusts to
protect such secreted funds from repossession by the government.5
A top federal regulator testified to Congress that Washington officials
postponed Silverado’s shutdown from October to December 1988, after
George Bush’s presidential campaign was successfully culminated.6 The
director of the Office of Thrift Supervision asked the Treasury
Department to investigate whether political considerations caused the
delay, but no such probe was conducted.7 Neil got off paying only
$50,000 in a settlement of the $200 million federal suit against him
other Silverado directors.8 He didn’t have to worry about his $250,000
legal bill, as Thomas Ashley, a friend of George Bush senior and the
head of a banking association that was lobbying the federal government
for bank deregulation, formed a legal defense fund to pay the bills.9
1. LA Times, 9/23/1990, p. 1.
2. Ibid.
3. LA Times, 5/10/1992, p. 1; The Washington Post, 7/4/1992, p. A1.
4. Ibid.
5. Kwitny, The Village Voice, 10/20/1992, p. 32.
6. LA Times, 5/10/1992, p. 1.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid.
9. Ibid.
JEB BUSH. In 1987, Miguel Recarey, a longstanding business associate of
Tampa Mafia boss Santos Trafficante, fled the U.S. under three
indictments for labor racketeering, illegal wiretapping, and Medicare
fraud.1 His firm, International Medical Centers (IMC), which was
America’s largest health maintenance organization for the elderly and
which had received $1 billion in Medicare funds, collapsed.2 Recarey’s
HMO left $222 million in unpaid bills,3 and was suspected of up to $100
million in Medicare fraud.4 “IMC is the classic case of embezzlement
of government funds,” said William Teich, who headed the U.S. Office of
Labor Racketeering in Miami. Teich called it a “bust-out operation”
where money was “drained out the back door” and disappeared down “a
black hole.”5
But in 1985, Recarey had faced a major obstacle to building his
Medicare empire: a Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
regulation that restricted an HMO to drawing no more than 50% of its
revenue from Medicare.6 Jeb Bush came to the rescue: he called both
HHS Secretary Margaret Heckler and a top aide, C. McLain Haddow and
successfully convinced them to waive the regulation for Recarey, Haddow
testified to Congress.7 Bush’s lobbying of HHS took place during the
same period that top-level Republican lobbyists whom Recarey had hired
for $1 million were also courting HHS for the waiver.8 Bush said that
said he did not recall making any calls to Heckler or Haddow, but
confirmed that he made one call on Recarey’s behalf to Haddow’s
assistant, to secure Recarey a “fair hearing” within HHS.9
Haddow added in a news interview that in November 1984, Jeb had also
called Heckler and Haddow for Recarey about another problem -
complaints to HHS from doctors and patients about IMC’s medical care
and allegations that Recarey had embezzled funds a few years earlier
from another hospital.10 Bush had told Haddow that “contrary to any
rumors that were floating around concerning Mr. Recarey, that he was a
solid citizen from Mr. Bush’s perspective down there [in Miami], that
he was a good community citizen and a good supporter of the Republican
Party.”11
In 1986, the year after he successfully lobbied HHS to allow Recarey’s
Medicare business to grow ultimately to a total of $1 billion, Jeb
Bush’s small real estate firm received $75,000 from Recarey’s HMO for
the purpose of finding it a new headquarters.12 Bush said that the
payment was unrelated to his lobbying for Recarey.13 But Bush never
did actually locate a headquarters for IMC, and the record suggests
that the HMO had already selected the headquarters it ultimately moved
into when it hired Bush.14 Jeb confirmed that he received $75,000 from
Recarey without closing any real estate deals.15
Jeb’s defaulted loan from Broward Federal Savings and Loan in Sunrise,
Florida transpired as follows.16 On February 1, 1985, Broward Federal
loaned $4,565,000 to real estate developer J. Edward Houston, secured
only by Houston’s personal guarantee. The same day, a company headed
by Houston turned around and loaned the same amount to a partnership of
Jeb Bush and Miami real estate developer Armondo Codina for them to buy
a five-story building in Miami’s financial district.
Curiously, the Bush-Codina partnership was required to repay the loan
from Houston “only as, if and to the extent that the cash flow from the
building was sufficient to support those payments.” In fact, Bush and
Codina made no payments at all on the loan prior to the final default
settlement. In 1987 Houston defaulted on the $4.5 million Broward
Federal loan, and the S&L sued both him and the Bush-Codina
partnership. In an unusual settlement with the FDIC, Bush and Codina
were obligated to repay just $500,000 of the loan and got to keep the
building in the Miami financial district that collateralized the loan.
In 1991, federal regulators sued the officers and directors of Broward,
charging that the loan used by Bush and Codina cost the savings and
loan at least $4.97 million and was representative of the association’s
negligent lending practices.17 The Bush-Codina loan contributed to the
collapse of the Florida S&L, which cost taxpayers $285 million.18
1. Wall Street Journal, 8/9/1988, p. A1.
2. Ibid.; Newsday, 10/3/1988, p. 4.
3. Wall Street Journal, 8/9/1988, p. A1.
4. Austin American- Statesman, 5/17/92, p. G1.
5. Wall Street Journal, 8/9/1988, p. A1.
6. Wall Street Journal, 8/9/1988, p. A1; Newsday, 10/3/1988, p. 4.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid.
9. Wall Street Journal, 8/9/1988, p. A1; Newsday, 10/3/1988, p. 4.
10. Newsday, 10/3/1988, p. 4
11. Ibid.
12. Wall Street Journal, 8/9/1988, p. A1; Newsday, 10/3/1988, p. 4.
13. Ibid.
14. Newsday, 10/3/1988, p. 4.
15. Ibid.
16. Washington Post, 10/15/1990, p. A24.
17. Austin American- Statesman, 5/17/92, p. G1.
18. Washington Post, 10/15/1990, p. A24.
GEORGE W. BUSH. In 1992, US News and World Report concluded that in
one important respect, “George W. Bush has less in common with his
father than with his younger brother Neil,” having “also benefited from
some questionable but less well-known business associations.”1 It
noted, in particular, that
Bush sold $828,560 worth of Harken stock [on June 20, 1990] just one
week before the company stock posted unusually poor quarterly earnings
and Harken stock plunged sharply. Shares lost more than 60% of their
value over 6 months. When Bush sold his shares, he was a member of a
company committee studying the effect of Harken’s restructuring, a move
to appease anxious creditors. According to documents on file with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, his position on the Harken
committee gave Bush detailed knowledge of the company’s deteriorating
financial condition. The SEC received word of Bush’s trade eight
months late. Bush has said he filed the notice but that is was lost.2
UPDATE. On September 7, 2000, Associated Press reported that U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission documents newly released under the
Freedom of Information act demonstrated that before he sold the stock,
George W. Bush was fully aware that Harken was suffering from a severe
cash crisis and was poised to lose millions.3 Two months before the
stock sale, Harken President Mikel Faulkner had told Bush and other
directors that “the full capacity of the company is dedicated toward
resolving this liquidity crisis.”4
Bush’s lawyer, Robert Jordan, explained that these documents had been
provided to the SEC a decade ago and contributed to its finding that
Bush’s trading was appropriate.5 Jordan also related some
circumstances of the trade that he said demonstrated this was the case.6
In fact, however, the SEC had not exonerated Bush. On October 18,
1993, Bruce A. Hiler, the SEC’s associate director for enforcement,
wrote a letter to Bush’s lawyer stating that “the investigation has
been terminated as to the conduct of Mr. Bush, and that, at this time,
no enforcement action is contemplated with respect to him.”7 Bush
claimed he had been cleared, and the head of the SEC’s enforcement
division, William McLucas, went beyond the letter and stated
that “there was no case there.”8
Yet Hiler’s official letter had added that it “must in no way be
construed as indicating that the party has been exonerated or that no
action may ultimately result from the staff’s investigation [emphasis
added].”9 It is also noteworthy that the head of the SEC at the time
of the probe was a staunch supporter of then-President Bush, as was the
SEC’s general counsel (who later acted as George W’s private
attorney),10 which could provide some context for McLucas’s differing
perspective.
While Bush’s lawyer, Robert Jordan, readily explained away Bush’s stock
sale a decade after the fact, all parties involved were less talkative
when the incident was initially reported. George W. declined repeated
requests for interviews from U.S. News and World Reports in 1992,
explaining that he “[did] not wish to read about himself.”11 He
likewise declined phone calls from The Wall Street Journal seeking
comment.12 When questioned in 1999 by The Washington Post, Jordan, who
had also represented Harken, referred to a Harken communiqué and
minutes that he claimed would support his story, but refused to provide
them.13 The company president, who had spoken with reporters on
several prior occasions, refused the Post’s request for an interview
about Bush’s stock sale, as did the company counsel.14
Indeed, Bush’s delayed explanation for his Harken sale is questionable,
especially in the context of financial misconduct by several others in
his family and of Bush’s lack of credibility concerning a recent
campaign impropriety. Also questionable were, as The Wall Street
Journal detailed, Harken’s links to the infamous Bank of Credit and
Commerce International (BBCI), which was shut down in 1991 after a $10
billion global looting spree.15 “The mosaic of BCCI connections
surrounding Harken Energy may prove nothing more than how ubiquitous
the rogue bank’s ties were,” The Wall Street Journal noted. “But the
number of BCCI-connected people who had dealings with Harken -- all
since George W. Bush came on board -- likewise raises the question of
whether they mask an effort to cozy up to a presidential son.”16
George W’s financial history exhibits other similarities to brother
Neil’s. Just as Apex Energy paid Neil Bush over $300,000 in salaries
and oil deed compensation while on the verge of insolvency,17 Harken,
despite its small size, poor performance and large losses, paid
unusually high salaries and benefits to Bush and other directors.18
Although Harken, as US News and World Report noted, was “characterized
by a pattern of financial deal making so burdened with debt and tangled
stock swaps that its largest creditors threatened to shut the company
down,” Bush and other directors were allowed to purchase stock options
at a 40% discount through company loans that were often forgiven.19
In 1990, without any experience drilling an oil well overseas or in
water, Harken received a contract to drill offshore wildcat wells from
the government of Bahrain, reminiscent of a contract Neil Bush’s small
oil firm had received in 1987 to drill for oil in Argentina.20 Bahrain
officials explained they had no idea the President’s son was involved
with Harken, but a Harken source told The New York Times there
was “never any question” about George W. Bush’s involvement.21
The Wall Street Journal noted that in his purchase of the Texas Rangers
baseball team, following “a pattern repeated through his business
career, Mr. Bush’s play did not quite make the grade.”22 In 1989, an
investment group he led was given preferential treatment to buy the
Texas Rangers baseball team by its seller, a friend of George
senior.23 When his bid proved deficient, baseball commissioner Peter
Ueberroth brought another financier into the deal; he did this in
part “out of respect for his father,” President Bush, according to a
source close to the negotiations.24 Bush later successfully promoted a
controversial arrangement in which the City of Arlington provided a
$135 million subsidy for a new ballpark, funded by a sales tax
increase, with an option for the team to repurchase the park at a
vastly reduced price.25 The upshot was that George W. earned $15
million on a $600,000 investment when he sold his share of the team in
1998.26
1. US News and World Report, 3/16/1992, pp. 57-59.
2. Ibid.
3. Peter Yost, "Crisis at Bush’s Oil Company," AP Online, 9/7/2000.
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. Washington Post, 7/30/1999, p. A1.
8. Ibid.
9. Ibid.
10. Peter Yost, "Crisis at Bush’s Oil Company," AP Online, 9/7/2000.
11. US News and World Report, 3/16/1992, pp. 57-59.
12. Wall Street Journal, 4/4/91, p. A4.
13. Washington Post, 7/30/1999, p. A1.
14. Ibid.
15. Wall Street Journal, 12/6/1991, p. A4; see Wall Street Journal,
9/28/1999, p. A26.
16. Ibid.
17. San Francisco Examiner, 9/15/92, p. A9; LA Times, 5/10/1992, p. 1;
Washington Post, 7/4/1992, p. A1.
18. US News and World Report, 3/16/1992, pp. 57-59.
19. Ibid.
20. Wall Street Journal, 12/6/1991, p. A4.
21. Wall Street Journal, 9/28/1999, p. A26.
22. Ibid.
23. Ibid.; NY Times 5/8/1999, p. 1.
24. Wall Street Journal, 9/28/1999, p. A26; NY Times, 5/8/1999, p. 1.
25. Washington Post 7/25/2000, p. A1, 7/31/1999, p. A1.
26. Wall Street Journal, 9/28/1999, p. A26.
GEORGE BUSH, SENIOR. A 20,000-word report by the late Jonathan Kwitny,
an award-winning investigative journalist for PBS and The Wall Street
Journal, on President Bush’s record with respect to S&L misconduct, is
excepted here. Also noteworthy was the disbanding of the federal
independent strike forces against organized crime during the first year
of Bush’s presidency.
In December 1989, the Bush Administration dismantled all 14 of the
regional strike forces and folded them into the Justice Department.1
Attorney General Richard Thornburgh took this step despite widespread
protests from Congress and law enforcement officials that it would
cripple federal efforts against organized crime.2 Indeed, during their
two decades of operation, the independent strike forces had made
enormous progress against organized crime, and had played key roles in
convictions of Mafia bosses in major U.S. cities throughout the
country.3 In contrast, after strike forces were abolished in New
Orleans, New York City, Pittsburgh and St. Louis in 1977 years ago by
then-Assistant Attorney General Thornburgh, gangland-related crime
increased in each city, and the New Orleans strike force was
subsequently re-established under the Carter administration.4
A federal strike force against organized crime in Miami had brought an
indictment against Miguel Recarey,5 for whom Jeb Bush had successfully
lobbied the federal government, while others such strike forces
nationwide prosecuted Mob figures involved in S&L fraud.6 Strike Force
efforts helped convict, among others, Mario Renda, who, working with
the Mob, brokered deposits into 130 S&Ls nationwide, all of which
failed.
1. Washington Post, 12/28/1989, p. A21; San Diego Union-Tribune,
1/1/1990, p. B8.
2. Ibid.
3. San Diego Union-Tribune, 1/1/1990, p. B8.
4. Ibid.
5. Wall Street Journal, 8/9/1988, p. A1.
6. Pizzo, Inside Job, pp. pp. 112, 120-23, 303, 337.
JONATHAN BUSH. The securities chief for the Massachusetts Secretary of
State, Neal Sullivan, said that Jonathan Bush compounded his situation
by taking a “cavalier” attitude toward the violation of the Uniform
Securities Act when he continued to carry out stock transactions within
the state even as state regulators were negotiating a consent decree
with him. “That created great concern for us. We were dismayed,”
Sullivan commented. “Anyone who has been notified that he is violating
state law and continues to do so certainly exemplifies a cavalier
attitude toward the registration laws.” Sullivan also said that Bush,
an experienced stockbroker, could not explain his failure to register
in the state as a technical or minor issue. “Any time you have 880
transactions over several years, I wouldn’t characterize that as
minor,” he said.1
1. Boston Globe, 7/26/1991, p. 1
PRESCOTT BUSH. In 1989, when Japanese organized crime elements were
seeking to extend their financial interests into the U.S.,1 Prescott
Bush arranged investments by a Japanese Mob front company in two U.S.
businesses and a large piece of U.S. land.2 The Japanese company, West
Tsusho, was identified by Japanese police as a front company for one of
Japan’s largest organized crime syndicates.3 Bush was paid $500,000
for help in arranging the company’s purchase of a controlling interest
of one U.S. firm, Assets Management,4 and also helped the Japanese Mob
front to invest in Quantam access, a U.S. software firm; it ultimately
took complete control.5 Both U.S. companies subsequently filed for
bankruptcy.6 Bush denied any knowledge of the Japanese Mob’s role in
these deals,7 which came under investigation by both a U.S. bankruptcy
court-appointed trustee,8 and the Japanese police.9
Also in 1989, Prescott flew twice to China as a paid advisor for Assets
Management to promote a company plan to link Chinese universities and
businesses into a Satellite communications network.10 Later that year,
President Bush granted a national security waiver for the sale of two
Hughes Aircraft company satellites to China, a move that Assets
Management officials described as advantageous for its proposed plans.11
1. LA Times, 8/1/1991, p. 1.
2. Ibid.; Washington Post, 7/4/1992, p. A1
3. Washington Post, 7/4/1992, p. A1.
4. Ibid.; LA Times, 6/11/1991, p. 10.
5. Washington Post, 7/4/1992, p. A1.
6. Ibid.; Wall Street Journal, 12/6/1991, p. A4
7. Washington Post, 7/4/1992, p. A1.
8. Wall Street Journal, 9/9/1992, p. C15.
9. Wall Street Journal Europe, 7/11/1991, p. 12.
10. Washington Post, 7/4/1992, p. A1.
11. Ibid.
BUSH’S LACK OF CREDIBILITY CONCERNING A RECENT CAMPAIGN IMPROPRIETY.
In September 2000, the Bush campaign ran a television ad attacking the
Democrats prescription drug plan in which the word “RATS” flashed on
the screen for one-thirtieth of a second.1 The FCC commenced a probe
as to whether the ad violated its policy against subliminal
advertising.2
Republican strategist Ralph Reed, who ran Bob Dole’s 1996 presidential
campaign, said that he could not believe the word “rats” was inserted
accidentally or inadvertently, and that “someone ought to have the
grace to resign.”3 Dartmouth political scientist Lynn Vavreck
observed, “the word ‘Rats’ was clearly put there intentionally.
Somebody made this frame specifically. You can see the word is in a
larger font and comes on top of the previous text,” she said.4
Yet when questioned by reporters, Bush said the idea that his campaign
was flashing subliminal messages was absurd, adding “conspiracy
theories abound in America’s politics.”5
1. “Bush Campaign Struggles with ‘Rats’ ad,” Reuters English News
Service, 9/13/00; Seattle Times, 9/13/00, p. A1.
2. “USA: FCC to review broadcast of Republican ‘RATS’ ad,” Reuters
English News Service, 9/13/00; LA Times, 9/14/00, p. A22.
3. “Bush Campaign Struggles with ‘Rats’ ad,” Reuters English News
Service, 9/13/00; Seattle Times, 9/13/00, p. A1.
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid.
THE TWICE-REVISED STORY OF LAURA BUSH’S AUTO FATALITY. On November 6,
1963, when she was 17, George W. Bush's wife Laura, then Laura Welch,
drove past a stop sign and crashed into a car in Midland, Texas,
killing the other driver, Michael Douglas, also 17.1 This tragic
mistake in Laura's youth is not relevant to George W’s record; the same
cannot be said for the succession of changing stories about the crash
that were released last May, clarified only in the end by Bush sources.
Police records on the crash were withheld until last Spring, when, in
response to a Freedom of Information request, Texas Attorney General
John Cornyn ruled that they should be made public.2 An initially
released, abbreviated police report which failed to mention that Laura
ran a stop sign was followed by release on May 3 of a full police
report by Midland City Attorney Keith Stretcher.3 The full report
noted that point, but also included the bizarre and distracting twist
that the victim was Laura’s boyfriend,4 which Laura subsequently denied.
Laura and a passenger in her car were treated for minor injuries after
the crash.5 The police report listed two violations by Laura as
contributing to the accident; one was “disregard stop sign or light,”
and the other was illegible.6 Her speed prior to the crash as recorded
in the report was also illegible.7
1. Dallas Morning News, 5/4/2000, p. 29A.
2. Ibid; New York Post, 5/4/2000, p. 28.
3. Dallas Morning News, 5/4/2000, p. 29A; New York Post, 5/4/2000, p.
28.
4. New York Post, 5/4/2000, p. 28; AP Online 5/3/2000.
5. Dallas Morning News, 5/4/2000, p. 29A.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
Chive Mynde
by Uri Dowbenko ©1999
Despite Big Media's coronation of George W. Bush as the next president,
new — or rather decades old — skeletons keep rattling in the Bush
family closet.
You won't find them in Talk magazine however. Headed by Tina Brown,
former editor of the New Yorker and Vanity Fair, Talk's September 1999
premiere issue is a hefty 254 pages of celebrity fluff disguised as
editorial content.
Sandwiched between the typical fashion ads featuring the typical
nymphets, there's an ironically titled article by neoconservative
wunderkinder Tucker Carlson called "Devil May Care." It's
subtitled "George W. Bush doesn't give a damn what you think of him.
That may be why you'll vote for him for president."
In Carlson's casually written hagiography, you'll learn that "Bush
announced that his campaign had raised $36 million so far, a record in
American politics. Bush chuckles at the memory," continues Carlson, who
obviously inhabits a parallel universe of squeaky clean politicians
with oh-so-hip repartee. "‘The press should have been able to figure it
out,' [Bush] says. ‘They're not paying much attention. We raised
$800,000 in Fort Meyers'." Presumably that doesn't even include the
laundered drug money.
According to LAPD whistleblower Michael C. Ruppert, the Drug
Enforcement Agency has in its possession a video of George W. Bush and
Jeb Bush flying in to Tamiami Airport outside of Miami, Florida "to
pick up a couple of kilos of powder for a party." (From the Wilderness
newsletter, P.O. Box 6061-350, Sherman Oaks, CA 91413.)
Ruppert head about it from Terry Reed, author of "Compromised: Clinton,
Bush and the CIA" (1994). "I was with Terry recently at a public
speaking engagement where he reminded the audience of a little passage
from his book ‘Compromised'," writes Ruppert. "In that passage he
describes how Barry Seal had told him that he had ‘insurance' in the
form of proof that the Bush Boys were doing heavy drugs."
According to Reed, "the FBI had inserted a female undercover agent into
the inner circle of Medellin Cartel founder Pablo Escobar. Her name was
Darlene Novinger and she got very close to an Escobar cousin named
Steve Plata."
"Thanks to the ‘uc,' as undercovers are called, Barry Seal and Terry
Reed were sent on a drug sting to meet some wealthy Texans," writes
Ruppert. "It turns out that the wealthy Texans were George W. and Jeb
Bush who flew in on the family-owned King Air to pick up the cocaine
themselves. Hidden DEA cameras filmed the whole incident, including the
tail number of the aircraft and both Bushes' participation. According
to Reed, nobody knew in advance who the buyers were. Reed states that
he has both the tail number of the aircraft and the DEA case file
number and he strongly suspects that tape to turn up during the 2000
presidential election."
WAR BETWEEN THE BUSHES AND THE CLINTONS
Former CIA operative Terry Reed had worked closely with the late Barry
Seal, a notorious drug smuggling pilot who also worked for the CIA. In
his excellent book "Compromised," written with veteran journalist John
Cummings (556 pgs., hardback, available from Northern Voice, P.O. Box
281, Wildwood, PA 15091 for $24.00 + $2.00 p&h), Reed describes a
conversation he had with Seal about his "insurance," aka blackmail, in
case the Bush Family Crime Syndicate would try to double-cross
him: "Ever hear the old expression, it's not what ya know, it's who ya
know? Well, whoever said that just hadn't caught the Vice President's
kids in the dope business, ‘cause I can tell ya for sure what ya know
can definitely be more important than who ya know," bragged Seal to his
buddy.
Reed was incredulous. ". . . Barry, are you telling me George Bush's
kids are in the drug business?" he asked. "Yup, that's what I'm telling
ya. A guy in Florida who flipped for the DEA has got the goods on the
Bush boys. Now I heard this from a reliable source in Colombia, but I
just sat on it then, waiting to use it as a trump card if I ever needed
it. Well I need to use it now. I got names, dates, places, even got
some tape recordings. I even got surveillance videos catchin' the Bush
boys red-handed. I consider this stuff my insurance policy," said Seal.
"It makes me and the mole on the inside that's feeding the stuff to me
invincible. Now this is real sensitive [expletive deleted] inside of
U.S. Customs and DEA and those guys are pretty much under control. It's
damage control as usual. But where it gets real interestin' is what the
Republicans will do to the Democrats in order to dirty up the people
who might use this information against Bush."
Hinting at a high-level Mob War between the Bush Family and the Clinton
Family, Seal told Reed that "he was on a secret mission by none other
than the [CIA] to sort of dirty up some people real close to
[Clinton]." "Now I had been working on this through Dan Lasater,"
continued Seal. "Now Dan's a good ol' boy and all that, but he's gotta
drug problem and he's got the [guts] to be stealin' from the [CIA] too."
When Reed questioned him about the duffel bag Seal had taken to Skeeter
Ward, Seal said, "Let's don't call it cocaine. Let's call it
neutralizing powder. Least that's the way the Bush family saw it. This
is just one family warrin' against another. Just like the Mob."
Reed claims he found these revelations "disquieting." Seal tried to
reassure him by saying, "Terry I told ya when I met ya. I'm in
transportation and I transport what the government wants transported.
In this case, the Republicans. . . the Bush family wanted some stuff
transported into Mena and into Arkansas that would end up in the noses
of some very prominent Democrats."
Seal was later assassinated.
The Bush brothers — George W., Jeb and Neil — are also implicated in
many other top level criminal activities, according to private
investigator Stewart A. Webb. Webb, a political whistleblower on fraud
in the highest levels of federal institutions, has been investigating
government corruption since 1986. He uncovered key evidence linking
government officials with illegal drug smuggling and money laundering,
as well as evidence on the 1980s era Savings & Loan scandal, in which
an estimated $1 trillion was stolen from the American people.
‘THE GREY MEN'S EMPIRE'
In his research, Webb also discovered the connection between the so-
called HUD scandals in which over $50 billion was stolen in HUD fraud
and the junk bond/loan swaps of Michael Milken, Larry Mizel and Charles
Keating (The Daisy Chain), which claimed over $6 billion.
Since then he has been a prime source of information to Rodney Stich,
author of "Defrauding America" (1994), Pete Browton, author of "The
Mafia, CIA and George Bush" (1992), and Jonathan Beatty, a senior
correspondent for Time magazine. "The news articles that Mr. Webb
contributed to exposed a pattern of illicit political influence in
Denver and led to the indictments and subsequent convictions of several
businessmen," wrote Beatty.
Reporter Sarah McClendon wrote in her Washington Report (12/24/91)
that "Stu Webb cannot lay his head on a pillow at home because he must
keep running from the FBI which wants to jail him for talking publicly
how private industry was involved in raising money for covert action by
the CIA and also how Bush friends in Denver are involved in using
government housing money for developments and profit making."
Single-handedly, Webb has pursued justice in a system in which key
government officials and judges have been compromised through bribery
and other scandals.
It's gotten personal since Webb's former father-in-law, Leonard Y.
Millman, a prominent Denver businessman, has blocked access to Webb's
daughter. Webb claims to have evidence that Millman (MDC Holdings,
National Brokerage Companies) has been George Bush's primary money
launderer for the last 20 years. His fight for a grand jury demand has
been stalled.
In a letter to U.S. District Court Judge Richard P. Matsch, who was the
judge during Timothy McVeigh's controversial trial for his part in the
Oklahoma City bombing, Webb writes that he has "a Justice Department
Assistant Inspector General who is prepared to act on our behalf to
assist in the Grand Jury investigation. Other government agents are
willing to help. A dozen secret witnesses can be selected from more
than 200 potential witnesses. They will testify about Leonard Y.
Millman, Larry Mizel (MDC Holdings), Norman Brownstein (NSA attorney;
Director, MDA Holdings) and others involved in an ongoing criminal
enterprise."
Webb also claims that the Bush Family Crime Syndicate — he calls
them "The Grey Men's Empire" — is responsible for high-level national
corruption that includes illegal drug smuggling, arms smuggling, money
laundering, insurance fraud, savings and loan fraud and murder for hire.
The sons of George Bush, Webb claims, are also co-conspirators. Texas
Governor George W. Bush, for example, was involved with Stephens Inc.
of Little Rock, Arkansas and also handled inside stock trading
involving Harkin Oil. The country of Bahrain gave the unknown company
oil drilling rights in exchange for a new airbase to be built at
American taxpayer expense.
According to Webb, "George W., Jeb and Neil Bush were all party to the
crimes involving drugs and gun money laundering through Silverado
Savings in Denver. They were all aware of ‘Poppy' George's schemes
using CIA, Israeli Mossad, Homestead Air Force Base and Mena, Arkansas
to import drugs and ship weapons."
In the biowarfare-treason department, "Jeb Bush controlled the shipping
of 18 strains of chemicals shipped to Iraq through Leonard Millman's
National Gulf Stream Aviation warehouses at Boca Raton Airport. These
chemicals are now being reported as responsible for Gulf War Syndrome
currently killing Americans who served in the Gulf War."
Talk magazine has — surprise! — not mentioned any of these allegations.
Who knows? Maybe the Central Intelligence Agency is one of the
company's silent partners.
Langrrr
Chive Mynde <chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> In article <8uhtqj$prs$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Langrrr <Lan...@aol.com> wrote:
> > In article <8udp2g$bj1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > Chive Mynde <chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Since 1964, right after John F. Kennedy was assassinated, vote
> > > tabulation for national elections has been handled not by the
> > > government, but by a private company lacking any official
oversight
> at
> > > all. This company, which changes its name on a regular basis, is
> > > currently called "Voters News Service" and is located in New York
> > City.
> > > This company is owned by a consortium of TV networks and wire
> > services,
> > > which are in turn controlled by the CIA through its Operation
> > > MOCKINGBIRD. The TV networks will make a great show of
being "first
> > > with the election results", but in reality all of them rely on the
> > > numbers sent to them by VNS, while seldom acknowledging its
> existence
> > > during the election coverage.
>
"Back... and to the left. Back... and to the left."
Let me know when you start posting something relevant to the situation
at hand, please.
- Andrew Langer
--
Any posts by Andrew Langer are his own, written by him, for his own
enjoyment (and the education of others). Unless expressly stated,
they represent his own views, and not those of any other individuals
or entities. He is not, nor has he ever been, paid to post here.
spqr...@my-deja.com
>
> Posted on 04/27/2000 12:28:50 PDT by Michael Rivero
Somewhere a village pharmacist has run out of lithium....
Bob Myers
"Chive Mynde" <chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8uhsg7
> > Since 1964, right after John F. Kennedy was assassinated, vote
> > tabulation for national elections has been handled not by the
> > government, but by a private company lacking any official oversight at
> > all. This company, which changes its name on a regular basis, is
> > currently called "Voters News Service" and is located in New York
> City.
This is, of course, complete and utter nonsense. Voter News Service is
a "pool" service which does exit polling and provides such data and
projections to the various news agencies, TV networks, etc.. It does not
in any way participate in or direct the actual voting process or vote
counting, which of course is managed by the individual states. (The
federal government does not now have , nor has it ever had, anything
to do with "running" the election. The U.S. truly HAS no federal election
process, but rather 50 individual state elections which all take place
on the same day.)
> > This company is owned by a consortium of TV networks and wire
> services,
> > which are in turn controlled by the CIA through its Operation
> > MOCKINGBIRD. The TV networks will make a great show of being "first
> > with the election results", but in reality all of them rely on the
> > numbers sent to them by VNS, while seldom acknowledging its existence
> > during the election coverage.
This part, with the exception of the obligatory CIA paranoia, is
essentially correct.
> >
> > This is the voting process most in use in America today. A voter
> > punches a card in the voting booth. That card is run through a
> computer
> > at the local voting center, then that computer contacts computers at
> > Voters News Service, or the precinct official telephones the numbers
> > the computer shows him to Voters News Service, which then announces
> the
> > results via the networks.
This is complete nonsense. VNS does NOT have access to any
actual ballot information (in general, the votes from ballots themselves
are NOT tabulated at any central location until after the polls close;
this is what results in the "number of precincts reporting" data as
the central offices in each city/county/state receive the data from
the precincts). VNS conducts exit polling, which is NOT related to
the official balloting, and later serves as the "pool" conduit to the
results AS THEY ARE RELEASED by each city/county/state
vote-counting office or authority
Chivey has done his usual utterly-worthless attempt at checking
the facts before he posts these things (always written by someone
else) verbatim and ad nauseum.
Bob M.
Chive Mynde
Langrrr <Lan...@aol.com> wrote:
> In article <8uhubm$q9g$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> Chive Mynde <chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > In article <8uhtqj$prs$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > Langrrr <Lan...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > In article <8udp2g$bj1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > > Chive Mynde <chyve...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Since 1964, right after John F. Kennedy was assassinated, vote
> > > > tabulation for national elections has been handled not by the
> > > > government, but by a private company lacking any official
> oversight
> > at
> > > > all. This company, which changes its name on a regular basis, is
> > > > currently called "Voters News Service" and is located in New
York
> > > City.
> > > > This company is owned by a consortium of TV networks and wire
> > > services,
> > > > which are in turn controlled by the CIA through its Operation
> > > > MOCKINGBIRD. The TV networks will make a great show of
> being "first
> > > > with the election results", but in reality all of them rely on
the
> > > > numbers sent to them by VNS, while seldom acknowledging its
> > existence
> > > > during the election coverage.
CHAPTER VIII-b - THE BAY OF PIGS AND THE KENNEDY ASSASSINATION
"...JM/WAVE ...proliferated across [Florida] in preparation for the Bay
of Pigs invasion. A subculture of fronts, proprietaries, suppliers,
transfer agents, conduits, dummy corporations, blind drops, detective
agencies, law firms, electronic firms, shopping centers, airlines,
radio stations, the mob and the church and the banks: a false and
secret nervous system twitching to stimuli supplied by the cortex in
Clandestine Services in Langley. After defeat on the beach in Cuba,
JM/WAVE became a continuing and extended Miami Station, CIA's largest
in the continental United States. A large sign in front of the [...]
building complex reads: US GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS PROHIBIT DISCUSSION
OF THIS ORGANIZATION OR FACILITY.
Donald Freed, Death in Washington (Westport, Connecticut, 1980), p.
141.
The review offered so far of George Bush's activities during the late
1950's and early 1960's is almost certainly incomplete in very
important respects. There is good reason to believe that Bush was
engaged in something more than just the oil business during those
years. Starting about the time of the Bay of Pigs invasion in the
spring of 1961, we have the first hints that Bush, in addition to
working for Zapata Offshore, may also have been a participant in
certain covert operations of the US intelligence community.
Such participation would certainly be coherent with George's role in
the Prescott Bush, Skull and Bones, and Brown Brothers, Harriman
networks. During the twentieth century, the Skull and Bones/Harriman
circles have always maintained a sizable and often decisive presence
inside the intelligence organizations of the State Department, the
Treasury Department, the Office of Naval Intelligence, the Office of
Strategic Services, and the Central Intelligence Agency. Indeed, the
Harriman and related Anglophile financier factions of Wall Street have
generally regarded those parts of the state apparatus dealing with
intelligence and covert operations as their own very special property,
property which had to be kept seeded with control networks in order to
be effectively steered from above. For George Bush to interface with
the intelligence community while ostensibly engaged in his business
career would be coherent with that well-established pattern.
A body of leads has been assembled which suggests that George Bush may
have been associated with the CIA at some time before the autumn of
1963. According to Joseph McBride of The Nation, "a source with close
connections to the intelligence community confirms that Bush started
working for the agency in 1960 or 1961, using his oil business as a
cover for clandestine activities." 1 By the time of the Kennedy
assassination, we have an official FBI document which refers to "Mr.
George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency," and despite official
disclaimers there is every reason to think that this is indeed the man
in the White House today. The mystery of George Bush as a possible
covert operator hinges on four points, each one of which represents one
of the great political and espionage scandals of postwar American
history. These four cardinal points are:
1. The abortive Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba, launched on April 16-17,
1961, prepared with the assistance of the CIA's "Miami Station" (also
known under the code name JM/WAVE). After the failure of the amphibious
landings of Brigade 2506, Miami station, under the leadership of
Theodore Shackley, became the focus for Operation Mongoose, a series of
covert operations directed against Castro, Cuba, and possibly other
targets.
2. The assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas on November
22, 1963, and the coverup of those responsible for this crime.
3. The Watergate scandal, beginning with an April, 1971 visit to Miami,
Florida by E. Howard Hunt on the tenth anniversary of the Bay of Pigs
invasion to recruit operatives for the White House Special
Investigations Unit (the "Plumbers" and later Watergate burglars) from
among Cuban-American Bay of Pigs veterans.
4. The Iran-contra affair, which became a public scandal during October-
November 1986, several of whose central figures, such as Felix
Rodriguez, were also veterans of the Bay of Pigs.
George Bush's role in both Watergate and the October surprise/Iran-
contra complex will be treated in detail at later points in this book.
Right now it is important to see that thirty years of covert
operations, in many respects, form a single continuous whole. This is
especially true in regard to the dramatis personae. Georgie Anne Geyer
points to the obvious in a recent book: "...an entire new Cuban cadre
now emerged from the Bay of Pigs. The names Howard Hunt, Bernard
Barker, Rolando Martinez, Felix Rodriguez and Eugenio Martinez would,
in the next quarter century, pop up, often decisively, over and over
again in the most dangerous American foreign policy crises. There were
Cubans flying missions for the CIA in the Congo and even for the
Portuguese in Africa; Cubans were the burglars of Watergate; Cubans
played key roles in Nicaragua, in Irangate, in the American move into
the Persian Gulf." 2 Felix Rodriguez tells us that he was infiltrated
into Cuba with the other members of the "Grey Team" in conjunction with
the Bay of Pigs landings; this is the same man we will find directing
the contra supply effort in central American during the 1980's, working
under the direct supervision of Don Gregg and George Bush. 3 Theodore
Shackley, the JM/WAVE station chief, will later show up in Bush's 1979-
80 presidential campaign.
To a very large degree, such covert operations (and the great political
scandals attendant upon them) have drawn upon the same pool of
personnel. They are a significant extent the handiwork of the same
crowd. It is therefore revealing to extrapolate forward and backward in
time the individuals and groups of individuals who appear as the cast
of characters in one scandal and compare them with the cast of
characters for the other scandals, including the secondary ones that
have not been enumerated here. Howard Hunt, for example, shows up as a
confirmed part of the overthrow of the Guatemalan government of Jacopo
Arbenz in 1954, as an important part of the chain of command in the Bay
of Pigs, as a person repeatedly accused of having been in Dallas on the
day Kennedy was shot, and as one of the central figures of Watergate.
(One wonders what secrets, after all, were contained in Howard Hunt's
safe, the contents of which were so conventiently "deep sixed" by FBI
Director Patrick Gray.)
George Bush is demonstrably one of the most important protagonists of
the Watergate scandal, and was the overall director of Iran-contra.
Since he appears especially in Iran-contra in close proximity to Bay of
Pigs holdovers, it is surely legitimate to wonder when his association
with those Bay of Pigs Cubans might have started.
1959 was the year that Bush started operating out of his Zapata
Offshore headquarters in Houston; it was also the year that Fidel
Castro seized power in Cuba. Officially, as we have seen, George was
now a businessman whose work took him at times to Louisiana, where
Zapata had offshore drilling operations. George must have been a
frequent visitor to New Orleans. Because of his family's estate on
Jupiter Island, he would also have been a frequent visitor to the Hobe
Sound area. And then, there were Zapata Offshore drilling operations in
the Florida Strait. On all of these activities, the official "red
Studebaker" biographical material and the Zapata Offshore annual
reports are extremely cryptic.
The Jupiter Island connection and father Prescott's Brown Brothers,
Harriman/Skull and Bones networks are doubtless the key. Jupiter Island
meant Averell Harriman, Robert Lovett, C. Douglas Dillon and other
Anglophile financiers who had directed the US intelligence community
long before there had been a CIA at all. And, in the back yard of the
Jupiter Island Olympians, and under their direction, a powerful covert
operations base was now being assembled, in which George Bush would
have been present at the creation as a matter of birthright.
During 1959-60, Allen Dulles and the Eisenhower Administration began to
assemble in south Florida the infrastructure for covert action against
Cuba. This was the JM/WAVE capability, later formally constituted as
the CIA Miami station. JM/WAVE was an operational center for the
Eisenhower regime's project of staging an invasion of Cuba using a
secret army of anti-Castro Cuban exiles organized, armed, trained,
transported, and directed by the CIA. The Cubans, called Brigade 2506,
were trained in secret camps in Guatemala, and they had air support
from B-26 bombers based in Nicaragua. This invasion was crushed by
Castro's defending forces in less than three days.
Before going along with the plan so eagerly touted by Allen Dulles,
Kennedy had established the pre-condition that under no circumstances
whatsoever would there be direct intervention by US military forces
against Cuba. On the one hand, Dulles had assured Kennedy that the news
of the invasion would trigger an insurrection which would sweep Castro
and his regime away. On the other, Kennedy had to be concerned about
provoking a global thermonuclear confrontation with the USSR, in the
eventuality that N.S. Khrushchev decided to respond to a US Cuban
gambit by, for example, cutting off US access to Berlin.
Hints of the covert presence of George Bush are scattered here and
there around the Bay of Pigs invasion. According to some accounts, the
code name for the Bay of Pigs was Operation Pluto. 4 But Bay of Pigs
veteran Howard Hunt scornfully denies that this was the code name used
by JM/WAVE personnel; Hunt writes: "So perhaps the Pentagon referred to
the Brigade invasion as PLUTO. CIA did not." 5 But Hunt does not tell
us what the CIA code name was, and the contents of Hunt's Watergate era
White House safe, which might have told us the answer, were of
course "deep-sixed" by FBI Director Patrick Gray. One code name
frequently used by CIA Miami Station personnel appears to have
been "Don Eduardo," roughly the Spanish equivalent of "Mr. Edward" or
perhaps "Mr. Ed." 6
According to reliable sources and published accounts, the CIA code name
for the Bay of Pigs invasion was Operation Zapata, and the plan was so
referred to by Richard Bissell of the CIA, one of the plan's promoters,
in a briefing to President Kennedy in the Cabinet Room on March 29,
1961. 7 Does Operation Zapata have anything to do with Zapata Offshore?
The run-of-the-mill Bushman might respond that Emiliano Zapata, after
all, had been a public figure in his own right, and the subject of a
recent Hollywood movies starring Marlon Brando. As J. Hugh Liedtke had
observed, he was the classic figure for the revolutionary-cum-bandit. A
more knowledgeable Bushman might argue that the main landing beach, the
Playa Giron, is located south of the city of Cienfuegos on the Zapata
Peninula, on the south coast of Cuba.
Then there is the question of the Brigade 2506 landing fleet, which was
composed of five older freighters bought or chartered from the Garcia
Steamship Lines, bearing the names of Houston, Rio Esondido, Caribe,
Atlantic, and Lake Charles. In addition to these vessels, which were
outfitted as transport ships, there were two somewhat better armed fire
support ships, the Blagar and the Barbara. (In some sources Barbara J.)
8 The Barbara was originally an LCI (Landing Craft Infantry) of earlier
vintage. Our attention is attracted at once to the Barbara and the
Houston, in the first case because we have seen George Bush's habit of
naming his combat aircraft after his wife, and, in the second case,
because Bush was at this time a resident, booster, and Republican
activist of Houston, Texas. But of course, the appearance of names
like "Zapata," Barbara, and Houston can by itself only arouse
suspicion, and proves nothing.
After the ignominious defeat of the Bay of Pigs invasion, there was
great animosity against Kennedy among the survivors of Brigade 2506,
some of whom eventually made their way back to Miami after being
released from Castro's prisoner of war camps. There was also great
animosity against Kennedy on the part of the JM/WAVE personnel.
During the early 1950's, E. Howard Hunt had been the CIA station chief
in Mexico City. As David Atlee Phillips (another embittered JM/WAVE
veteran) tells us in his autobiographical account, The Night Watch,
Howard Hunt had been the immediate superior of a young CIA recruit
named William F. Buckley, the Yale graduate and Skull and Bones member
who later founded the National Review. In his autobiographical account
written during the days of the Watergate scandal, Hunt includes the
following tirade about the Bay of Pigs:
No event since the communization of China in 1949 has had such a
profound effect on the United States and its allies as the defeat of
the US-trained Cuban invasion brigade at the Bay of Pigs in April 1961.
Out of that humiliation grew the Berlin Wall, the missile crisis,
guerrilla warfare throughout Latin American and Africa, and our
Dominican Republic intervention. Castros' beachhead triumph opened a
bottomless Pandora's box of difficulties that affected not only the
United States, but most of its allies in the Free World. These bloody
and subversive events would not have taken place had Castro been
toppled. Instead of standing firm, our government pyramided crucially
wrong decisions and allowed Brigade 2506 to be destroyed. The Kennedy
administration yielded Castro all the excuse he needed to gain a
tighter grip on the island of Jose Marti, then moved shamefacedly into
the shadows and hoped the Cuban issue would simply melt away.9
Hunt was typical of the opinion that the debacle had been Kennedy's
fault, and not the responsibility of men like Allen Dulles and Richard
Bissell, who had designed it and recommended it. After the embarrassing
failure of the invasion, which never evoked the hoped-for spontaneous
anti-Castro insurrection, Kennedy fired Allen Dulles, his Harrimanite
deputy Bissell, and CIA deputy Director Charles Cabell (whose brother
was the mayor of Dallas at the time Kennedy was shot).
During the days after the Bay of Pigs debacle, Kennedy was deeply
suspicious of the intelligence community and of proposals for military
escalation in general, including in places like South Vietnam. Kennedy
sought to procure an outside, expert opinion on military matters. For
this he turned to the former commander in chief of the Southwest
Pacific Theatre during World War II, General Douglas MacArthur. Almost
ten years ago, a reliable source shared with one of the authors an
account of a meeting between Kennedy and MacArthur in which the veteran
general warned the young president that there were elements inside the
US government who emphatically did not share his patriotic motives, and
who were seeking to destroy his administration from within. MacArthur's
warned that the forces bent on destroying Kennedy were centered in the
Wall Street financial community and its various tentacles in the
intelligence community.
It is a matter of public record that Kennedy met with MacArthur in the
latter part of April, 1961, after the Bay of Pigs. According to Kennedy
aide Theodore Sorenson, MacArthur told Kennedy, "The chickens are
coming home to roost, and you happen to have just moved into the
chicken house." 10 At the same meeting, according to Sorenson,
MacArthur "warned [Kennedy] against the committment of American foot
soldiers on the Asian mainland, and the President never forgot this
advice." 11 This point is grudgingly confirmed by Arthur M.
Schlesinger, a Kennedy aide who had a vested interest in vilifying
MacArthur, who wrote that "MacArthur expressed his old view that anyone
wanting to commit American ground forces to the mainland [of Asia]
should have his head examined." 12 MacArthur restated this advice
during a second meeting with Kennedy when the General returned from his
last trip to the Far East in July, 1961.
Kennedy valued MacArthur's professional military opinion highly, and
used it to keep at arms length those advisers who were arguing for
escalation in Laos, Vietnam, and elsewhere. He repeatedly invited those
who proposed to send land forces to Asia to convince MacArthur that
this would as good idea. If they could convince MacArthur, then he,
Kennedy, might also go along. At this time, the group proposing
escalation in Vietnam (as well as preparing the assassination of
President Diem) had a heavy Brown Brothers, Harriman/Skull and Bones
overtone: the hawks of 1961-63 were Harriman, McGeorge Bundy, William
Bundy, Henry Cabot Lodge, and some key London oligarchs and
theoreticians of counterinsurgency wars. And of course, George Bush
during these years was calling for escalation in Vietnam and
challenging Kennedy to "muster the courage" to try a second invasion of
Cuba. In the meantime, the JM/WAVE-Miami station complex was growing
rapidly to become the largest of Langley's many satellites. Its center
was at the former Richmond Naval Air Station south of Miami, which had
been a base for antisubmarine blimps during World War II. During the
years after the failure of the Bay of Pigs, this complex had as many as
3,000 Cuban agents and subagents, with a small army of case officers to
direct and look after each one. According to one account, there were at
least 55 dummy corporations to provide employment, cover, and
commercial disguise for all these operatives. There were detective
bureaus, gun stores, real estate brokerages, boat repair shops, and
party boats for fishing and other entertainments. There was the
clandestine Radio Swan, later renamed Radio Americas. There were fleets
of specially modified boats based at Homestead Marina, and at other
marinas throughout the Florida Keys. Agents were assigned to the
University of Miami and other educational institutions.
The raison d'être of the massive capability commanded by Theodore
Shackley was now Operation Mongoose, a program for sabotage raids and
assassinations to be conducted on Cuban territory, with a special
effort to eliminate Fidel Castro personally. In order to run these
operations from US territory, flagrant and extensive violation of
federal and state laws was the order of the day. Documents regarding
the incorporation of businesses were falsified. Income tax returns were
faked. FAA regulations were violated by planes taking off for Cuba or
for forward bases in the Bahamas and elsewhere. Explosives moved across
highways that were full of civilian traffic. The Munitions Act, the
Neutrality Act, the customs and immigrations laws were routinely
flaunted. 13 Above all, the drug laws were massively violated as the
gallant anti-communist fighters filled their planes and boats with
illegal narcotics to be smuggled back into the US when they returned
from their missions. By 1963, the drug-running activities of the covert
operatives were beginning to attract attention. JM/WAVE, in sum,
accelerated the slide of south Florida towards the status of drug and
murder capital of the United States it achieved during the 1980's, when
it became as notorious as Chicago during Prohibition.
It cannot be the task of this study to even begin to treat the reasons
for which certain leading elements of the Anglo-American financial
oligarchy, perhaps acting with certain kinds of support from
continental European aristocratic and neofascist networks, ordered the
murder of John F. Kennedy. The British and the Harrimanites wanted
escalation in Vietnam; by the time of his assassination Kennedy was
committed to a pullout of US forces. Kennedy, as shown by his American
University speech of 1963, was also interested in seeking a more stable
path of war avoidance with the Soviets, using the US military
superiority demonstrated during the Cuban missile crisis to convince
Moscow to accept a policy of world peace through economic development.
Kennedy was interested in the possibilities of anti-missile strategic
defense to put an end to that nightmare of mutually assured destruction
which appealed to Henry Kissinger, a disgruntled former employee of the
Kennedy administration whom the president had denounced as a madman.
Kennedy was considering moves to limit or perhaps abolish the
usurpation of authority over the national currency by the Wall Street
and London interests controlling the Federal Reserve System. If re-
elected to a second term, Kennedy was likely to have re-asserted
presidential control, as distinct from Wall Street control, over the
intelligence community. There is good reason to believe that Kennedy
would have ousted J. Edgar Hoover from his self-appointed life tenure
at the FBI, subjecting that agency to presidential control for the
first time in many years. Kennedy was committed to a vigorous expansion
of the space program, the cultural impact of which was beginning to
alarm the finance oligarchs. Above all, Kennedy was acting like a man
who thought he was president of the United States, violating the
collegiality of oligarchical trusteeship of that office that had been
in force
since the final days of Roosevelt. Kennedy furthermore had two younger
brothers who might succeed him, putting a strong presidency beyond the
control of the Eastern Anglophile Liberal Establishment for decades.
George Bush joined in the Harrimanite opposition to Kennedy on all of
these points.
After Kennedy was killed in Dallas on November 22, 1963, it was alleged
that E. Howard Hunt and Frank Sturgis had both been present, possibly
together, in Dallas on the day of the shooting, although the truth of
these allegations has never been finally established. Both Hunt and
Sturgis were of course Bay of Pigs veterans who would later appear
center stage in Watergate. There were also allegations that Hunt and
Sturgis were among a group of six to eight derelicts who were found in
boxcars sitting on the railroad tracks behind the grassy knoll near
Dealey Plaza, and who were rounded up and taken in for questioning by
the Dallas police on the day of the assassination. Some suspected that
Hunt and Sturgis had participated in the assassination. Some of these
allegations were at the center of the celebrated 1985 defamation case
of Hunt v. Liberty Lobby, in which a Florida federal jury found against
Hunt. But, since the Dallas Police Department and County Sheriff never
photographed or fingerprinted the "derelicts" in question, it has so
far proven impossible definitively to resolve this question. But these
allegations and theories about the possible presence and activities of
Hunt and Sturgis in Dallas were sufficiently widespread so as to compel
the Commission on CIA Activities Within the United States (the
Rockefeller Commission) to attempt to refute them in its 1975 report. 14
According to George Bush's official biography, he was during 1963 a
well-to-do businessman residing in Houston, the busy president of
Zapata Offshore and the chairman of the Harris County Republican
Organization, supporting Barry Goldwater as the GOP's likely 1964
presidential candidate, while at the same time actively preparing his
own 1964 bid for the US Senate. But during that same period of time,
Bush may have shared some common acquaintances with Lee Harvey Oswald.
Between October, 1962 and April, 1963, Lee Harvey Oswald and his
Russian wife Marina were in frequent contact with a Russian emigré
couple living in Dallas: these were George de Mohrenschildt and his
wife Jeanne. During the Warren Commission investigation of the Kennedy
assassination, de Mohrenschildt was interviewed at length about his
contacts with Oswald. When, in the spring of 1977, the discrediting of
the Warren Commission report as a blatant coverup had made public
pressure for a new investigation of the Kennedy assassination
irresistible, the House Assassinations Committee planned to interview
de Mohrenschildt once again. But in March, 1977, just before de
Mohrenschildt was scheduled to be interviewed by Gaeton Fonzi of the
House committee's staff, he was found dead in Palm Beach, Florida. His
death was quickly ruled a suicide. One of the last people to see him
alive was Edward Jay Epstein, who was also interviewing de
Mohrenschildt about the Kennedy assassination for an upcoming book.
Epstein is one of the writers on the Kennedy assassination who enjoyed
excellent relations with the late James Angleton of the CIA. If de
Mohrenschildt were alive today, he might be able to enlighten us about
his relations with George Bush, and perhaps afford us some insight into
Bush's activities during this epoch.
Jeanne de Mohrenschildt rejected the finding of suicide in her
husband's death. "He was eliminated before he got to that committee,"
the widow told a journalist in 1978, "because someone did not want him
to get to it." She also maintained that George de Mohrenschildt had
been surreptitiously injected with mind-altering drugs. 15 After de
Mohrenschildt's death, his personal address book was located, and it
contained this entry: "Bush, George H.W. (Poppy) 1412 W. Ohio also
Zapata Petroleum Midland." There is of course the problem of dating
this reference. George Bush had moved his office and home from Midland
to Houston in 1959, when Zapata Offshore was constituted, so perhaps
this reference goes back to some time before 1959. There is also the
number: "4-6355." There are, of course, numerous other entries,
including one W.F. Buckley of the Buckley brothers of New York City,
William S. Paley of CBS, plus many oil men, stock brokers, and the
like. 16
George de Mohrenschildt recounted a number of different versions of his
life, so it is very difficult to establish the facts about him.
According to one version he was the Russian Count Sergei de
Mohrenschildt, but when he arrived in the United States in 1938 he
carried a Polish passport identifying him as Jerzy Sergius von
Mohrenschildt, born in Mozyr, Russia in 1911. He may in fact have been
a Polish officer, or a correspondent for the Polish News Service, or
none of these. He worked for a time for the Polish embassy in
Washington DC. Some say that de Mohrenschildt met the Chairman of
Humble Oil, Blaffer, and that Blaffer procured him a job. Other sources
say that during this time de Mohrenschildt was affiliated with the War
Department. According to some accounts, he later went to work for the
French Deuxième Bureau, which wanted to know about petroleum exports
from the United States to Europe.
De Mohrenschildt in 1941 became associated with a certain Baron
Konstantin von Maydell in a public affairs venture called "Facts and
Film." Maydell was considered a Nazi agent by the FBI, and in September
1942 he was sent to North Dakota for an internment that would last four
years. De Mohrenschildt was also reportedly in contact with Japanese
networks at this time. In June, 1941, de Mohrenschildt was questioned
by police at Port Arthur, Texas, on the suspicion of espionage after he
was found making sketches of port facilities. During 1941 de
Mohrenschildt applied for a post in the US Office of Strategic Services
(OSS). According to the official account, he was not hired. Soon after
he made the application, he went to Mexico where he stayed until 1944.
In the latter year he established his name as de Mohrenschildt,
jettisoning the German version of von Mohrenschildt, and began study
for a master's degree in petroleum engineering at the University of
Texas. According to some accounts, during this period de Mohrenschildt
was investigated by the Office of Naval Intelligence because of alleged
communist sympathies. After the war, de Mohrenschildt worked as a
petroleum engineer in Cuba and Venezuela, and in Caracas he had several
meetings with the Soviet ambassador. During the postwar years he also
worked in the Rangely oil field in Colorado. During the 1950's, after
having married Winifred Sharpless, the daughter of an oil millionaire,
de Mohrenschildt was active as an independent oil entrepreneur.
In 1957, de Mohrenschildt was approved by the CIA Office of Security to
be hired as a US government geologist for a mission to Yugoslavia. Upon
his return he was interviewed by one J. Walter Moore of the CIA's
Domestic Contact Service, with whom he remained in contact. During
1958, de Morhenschildt visited Ghana, Togo, Dahomey; during 1959 he
visited Africa again and returned by way of Poland. In 1959 he married
Jeanne, his fourth wife, a former ballet dancer and dress designer who
had been born in Manchuria, where her father had been one of the
directors of the Chinese Eastern Railroad. During the summer of 1960,
George and Jeanne de Mohrenschildt told their friends that they were
going to embark on a walking tour of 11,000 miles along Indian trails
from Mexico to Central America. One of their principal destinations was
Guatemala City, where they were staying at the time of the Bay of Pigs
invasion in April, 1961, after which they made their way home by way of
Panama and Haiti. After two months in Haiti, the Mohrenschildts
returned to Dallas, where they came into contact with Lee Harvey
Oswald, who had come back to the United States from his sojourn in the
Soviet Union in June, 1962. By this time de Mohrenschildt was also
frequenting Admiral Henry C. Bruton and his wife, to whom he introduced
the Oswalds. Admiral Bruton was the former director of naval
communications, and had superintended a comprehensive modernization and
reorganization of the navy's means of keeping in touch with ships,
planes, missiles, submarines, and the like.
It is established that between October, 1962 and late April, 1963, de
Mohrenschildt was a very important figure in the life of Oswald and his
Russian wife. Despite Oswald's lack of social graces, de Mohrenschildt
introduced him into Dallas society, took him to parties, assisted him
in finding employment, and much more. It was through de Mohrenschildt
that Oswald met a certain Volkmar Schmidt, a young German geologist who
had studied with Professor Wilhelm Kuetemeyer, an expert in
psychosomatic medicine and religious philosophy at the University of
Heidelberg, who compiled a detailed psychological profile of Oswald.
Jeanne and George helped Marina move her belongings during one of her
many estrangements from Oswald. According to some accounts, de
Mohrenschildt's influence on Oswald was so great during this period
that he could virtually dictate important decisions to the young ex-
marine simply by making suggestions. Oswald was in awe of de
Mohrenschildt, according to some.
According to some versions, de Mohrenschildt was aware of Oswald's
alleged April 10, 1963 attempt to assassinate the well-known right-wing
General Edwin Walker. According to Marina, de Mohrenschildt once asked
Oswald, "Lee, how did you miss General Walker?" On April 19, George and
Jeanne de Mohrenschildt went to New York City, and on April 29 the CIA
Office of Security found that it had no objection to de Mohrenschildt's
acceptance of a contract with the Duvalier regime of Haiti in the field
of natural resource development. De Mohrenschildt appears to have
departed for Haiti on May 1, 1963. In the meantime Oswald had left
Dallas and traveled to New Orleans.
According to Mark Lane, "there is evidence that de Mohrenschildt served
as a CIA control officer who directed Oswald's actions." Much of the
extensive published literature on de Mohrenschildt converges on the
idea that he was a baby sitter, handler, case officer, or control agent
for Oswald on behalf of some intelligence agency. 17 De Mohrenschildt's
pedigree evokes haunting parallels to the typical figures of the
PERMINDEX networks of Georges Mandel, Ferenc Nagy, Max Hagerman, Max
Seligman, Carlo d'Amelio, Lewis Mortimer Bloomfield, and Clay Shaw, to
which public attention was called during the investigations of New
Orleans district attorney James Garrison.
It is therefore highly interesting that George Bush's name turned up in
the personal address book of George de Mohrenschildt. The Warren
Commission went to absurd lengths to cover up the fact that George de
Mohrenschildt was a denizen of the world of the intelligence agencies.
This included ignoring the well-developed paper trial on de
Mohrenschildt as Nazi and communist sympathizer, and later as a US
asset abroad. The Warren Commission concluded:
The Commission's investigation has developed no signs of subversive or
disloyal conduct on the part of either of the de Mohrenschildts.
Neither the FBI, CIA, nor any witnesses contacted by the Commission has
provided any information linking the de Mohrenschildts to subversive or
extremist organizations. Nor has there been any evidence linking them
in any way with the assassination of President Kennedy. 18
On the day of the Kennedy assassination, FBI records show George Bush
as reporting a right-wing member of the Houston Young Republicans for
making threatening comments about President Kennedy. According to FBI
documents released under the Freedom of Information Act,
On November 22, 1963 Mr. GEORGE H.W. BUSH, 5525 Briar, Houston, Texas,
telephonically advised that he wanted to relate some hear say that he
had heard in recent weeks, date and source unknown. He advised that one
JAMES PARROTT had been talking of killing the President when he comes
to Houston.
PARROTT is possibly a student at the University of Houston and is
active in politics in the Houston area.
According to related FBI documentation, "a check with Secret Service at
Houston, Texas revealed that agency had a report that PARROTT stated in
1961 he would kill President Kennedy if he got near him." Here Bush is
described as "a reputable businessman." FBI agents were sent to
interrogate Parrott's mother, and later James Milton Parrott himself.
Parrott had been discharged from the US Air Force for psychiatric
reasons in 1959. Parrott had an alibi for the time of the Dallas
shootings; he had been in the company of another Republican activist.
According to press accounts, Parrott was a member of the right-wing
faction of the Houston GOP which was oriented towards the John Birch
Society and which opposed Bush's chairmanship. 19 According to the San
Francisco Examiner, Bush's press office in August, 1988 first said that
Bush had not made any such call, and challenged the authenticity of the
FBI documents. Several days later Bush's spokesman said that the
candidate "does not recall" placing the call.
One day later after he reported Parrott to the FBI, Bush received a
highly sensitive, high-level briefing from the Bureau:
Date: November 29, 1963
To: Director
Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Department of State
From: John Edgar Hoover, Director
Subject: ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY NOVEMBER 22, 1963
Our Miami, Florida, Office on November 23, 1963 advised that the Office
of Coordinator of Cuban Affairs in Miami advised that the Department of
State feels some misguided anti-Castro group might capitalize on the
present situation and undertake an unauthorized raid against Cuba,
believing that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy might
herald a change in US policy, which is not true.
Our sources and informants familiar with Cuban matters in the Miami
area advise that the general feeling in the anti-Castro Cuban community
is one of stunned disbelief and, even among those who did not entirely
agree with the President's policy concerning Cuba, the feeling is that
the President's death represents a great loss not only to the US but to
all Latin America. These sources know of no plans for unauthorized
action against Cuba.
An informant who has furnished reliable information in the past and who
is close to a small pro-Castro group in Miami has advised that those
individuals are afraid that the assassination of the President may
result in strong repressive measures being taken against them and,
although pro-Castro in their feelings, regret the assassination.
The substance of the foregoing information was orally furnished to Mr.
George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency and Captain William
Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency on November 23, 1963, by Mr.
W.T. Forsyth of this Bureau.
William T. Forsyth, since deceased, was an official of the FBI's
Washington headquarters; during the time he was attached to the
Bureau's subversive control section, he ran the investigation of Rev.
Martin Luther King. Was he also a part of the FBI's harassment of Dr.
King? The efforts of journalists to locate Captain Edwards have not
been successful.
This FBI document identifying George Bush as a CIA agent in November,
1963 was first published by Joseph McBride in The Nation in July, 1988,
just before Bush received the Republican nomination for president.
McBride's source observed: "I know [Bush] was involved in the
Caribbean. I know he
was involved in the suppression of things after the Kennedy
assassination. There was a very definite worry that some Cuban groups
were going to move against Castro and attempt to blame it on the CIA."
20 When pressed for confirmation or denial, Bush's spokesman Stephen
Hart commented: "Must be another George Bush." Within a short time the
CIA itself would peddle the same damage control line. On July 19, 1988
in the wake of wide public attention to the report published in The
Nation, CIA spokeswoman Sharron Basso departed from the normal CIA
policy of refusing to confirm or deny reports that any person is or was
a CIA employee. CIA spokeswoman Basso told the Associated press that
the CIA believed that "the record should be clarified." She said that
the FBI document "apparently" referred to a George William Bush who had
worked in 1963 on the night shift at CIA headquarters, and that "would
have been the appropriate place to have received such an FBI report."
According to her account, the George William Bush in question had left
the CIA to join the Defense Intelligence Agency in 1964.
For the CIA to volunteer the name of one of its former employees to the
press was a shocking violation of traditional methods, which are
supposedly designed to keep such names a closely guarded secret. This
revelation may have constituted a violation of federal law. But no
exertions were too great when it came to damage control for George
Bush.
George William Bush had indeed worked for the CIA, the DIA, and the
Alexandria, Virginia Department of Public Welfare before joining the
Social Security Administration, in whose Arlington, Virginia office he
was employed as a claims representative in 1988. George William Bush
told The Nation that while at the CIA he was "just a lowly researcher
and analyst" who worked with documents and photos and never received
interagency briefings. He had never met Forsyth of the FBI or Captain
Edwards of the DIA. "So it wasn't me," said George William Bush. 21
Later, George William Bush formalized his denial in a sworn statement
to a federal court in Washington, DC. The affidavit acknowledges that
while working at CIA headquarters between September 1963 and February
1964, George William Bush was the junior person on a three to four man
watch shift which was on duty when Kennedy was shot. But, as George
William Bush goes on to say,
I have carefully reviewed the FBI memorandum to the Director, Bureau of
Intelligence and Research, Department of State dated November 29, 1963
which mentions a Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence
Agency....I do not recognize the contents of the memorandum as
information furnished to me orally or otherwise during the time I was
at the CIA. In fact, during my time at the CIA. I did not receive any
oral communications from any government agency of any nature
whatsoever. I did not receive any information relating to the Kennedy
assassination during my time at the CIA from the FBI.
Based on the above, it is my conclusion that I am not the Mr. George
Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency referred to in the memorandum.
22
So we are left with the strong suspicion that the "Mr. George Bush of
the CIA" referred to by the FBI is our own George Herbert Walker Bush,
who, in addition to his possible contact with Lee Harvey Oswald's
controller, may thus also join the ranks of the Kennedy assassination
cover-up. It makes perfect sense for George Bush to be called in on a
matter involving the Cuban community in Miami, since that is a place
where George has traditionally had a constituency. George inherited it
from his father, Prescott Bush of Jupiter Island, and later passed it
on to his own son, Jeb.
NOTES
1- Joseph McBride, "'George Bush,' CIA Operative," The Nation, July 16,
1988.
2- Georgie Anne Geyer, Guerilla Prince (Boston: Little, Brown, 1991).
3- Felix Rogriquez, Shadow Warrior (New York: Simon and Shuster, 1989).
4- On Pluto, see the East German study by Guenter Schumacher, Operation
Pluto (Berlin, Deutscher Militaerverlag, 1964).
5- E. Howard Hunt, Give Us This Day (New Rochelle: Arlington House,
1973), p. 214.
6- Secret Agenda.
7- For Operation Zapata, see Michael R. Beschloss, The Crisis Years:
Kennedy and Khrushchev, 1960-63 (New York: Edward Burlingame Books,
1991), p. 89.
8- For the names of the ships at the Bay of Pigs, see Quintin Pino
Machado, La Batalla de Giron (La Habana: Editorial de Ciencias
Sociales, 1983), pp. 79-80. This source quotes one ship as the Barbara
J." See also Schumacher, Operation Pluto, pp. 98-99. See also Peter
Wyden, Bay of Pigs, The Untold Story (New York: Simon and Shuster,
1979), which also has the Barbara J. According to Quintin Pino macahdo,
the Houston had been given the new name of Aguja (Swordfish) and the
Barbara that of Barracuda for the purposes of this operation.
9- Howard Hunt, Give Us This Day, pp. 13-14.
10- Theodore Sorenson, Kennedy (New York: Bantam, 1966), p. 329.
11- Sorenson, Kennedy, p. 723.
12- Arthur M. Schlesinger, A Thousand Days (Boston, 1965), p. 339.
13- See Warren Hinckle and William W. Turner, The Fish is Red (New
York: Harper and Row, 1981), p. 112 ff.
14- Report to the President by the Commission on CIA Activities Within
the United States (Washington: US Goverment Printing Office, 1975), pp.
251-267.
15- Jim Marrs, "Widow disputes suicide," Fort Worth Evening Star-
Telegram, May 11, 1978
16- A photocopy of George de Mohrenschildt's personal address book is
preserved at the Assassination Archives and Research Center,
Washington, DC. The Bush entry is also cited in Mark Lane, Plausible
Denial (New York: Thunder's Mouth Press, 1991), p. 332.
17- For de Mohrenschildt, see Mark Lane, Plausible Denial, Edward Jay
Epstein, Legend: The Secret World of Lee Harvey Oswald (London:
Hutchinson, 1978); C. Robert Blakey and Richard N. Billings, The Plot
to Kill the President (New York: Times Books, 1981); and Robert Sam
Anson, "They've Killed The President!" (New York: Bantam, 1975).
18- Report of the Warren Commission on the Assassination of President
Kennedy (New York: Bantam, 1964), p. 262.
19- Miguel Acoca, "FBI: 'Bush' called about JFK killing," San Francisco
Examiner, August 25, 1988.
20- Joseph McBride, "'George Bush,' CIA Operative," The Nation, July
16/23, 1988, p. 42
21- Joseph McBride, "Where Was George?", The Nation, August 13/20,
1988, p. 117.
22- United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Civil
Action 88-2600 GHR, Archives and Research Center v. Central
Intelligence Agency, Affidavit of George William Bush, September 21,
1988.
George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography
by Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin
Chive Mynde
Posted on 04/27/2000 12:28:50 PDT by Michael Rivero
Are our elections truly fair, or are they simply an illusion that the
public approves of whatever despot has cheated his or her way to power?
Chive Mynde
Anton Chaitkin
Chapter - II - The Hitler Project, Part 1
Bush Property Seized--Trading with the Enemy
In October 1942, ten months after entering World War II, America was
preparing its first assault against Nazi military forces. Prescott Bush
was managing partner of Brown Brothers Harriman. His 18-year-old son
George, the future U.S. President, had just begun training to become a
naval pilot. On Oct. 20, 1942, the U.S. government ordered the seizure
of Nazi German banking operations in New York City which were being
conducted by Prescott Bush.
Under the Trading with the Enemy Act, the government took over the
Union Banking Corporation, in which Bush was a director. The U.S. Alien
Property Custodian seized Union Banking Corp.'s stock shares, all of
which were owned by Prescott Bush, E. Roland `` Bunny '' Harriman,
three Nazi executives, and two other associates of Bush.@s1
The order seizing the bank `` vests '' (seizes) `` all of the capital
stock of Union Banking Corporation, a New York corporation, '' and
names the holders of its shares as:
`` E. Roland Harriman--3991 shares ''
[chairman and director of Union Banking Corp. (UBC); this is ``
Bunny '' Harriman, described by Prescott Bush as a place holder who
didn't get much into banking affairs; Prescott managed his personal
investments]
`` Cornelis Lievense--4 shares ''
[president and director of UBC; New York resident banking functionary
for the Nazis]
`` Harold D. Pennington--1 share ''
[treasurer and director of UBC; an office manager employed by Bush at
Brown Brothers Harriman]
`` Ray Morris--1 share ''
[director of UBC; partner of Bush and the Harrimans]
`` Prescott S. Bush--1 share ''
[director of UBC, which was co-founded and sponsored by his father-in-
law George Walker; senior managing partner for E. Roland Harriman and
Averell Harriman]
`` H.J. Kouwenhoven--1 share ''
[director of UBC; organized UBC as the emissary of Fritz Thyssen in
negotiations with George Walker and Averell Harriman; managing director
of UBC's Netherlands affiliate under Nazi occupation; industrial
executive in Nazi Germany; director and chief foreign financial
executive of the German Steel Trust]
`` Johann G. Groeninger--1 share ''
[director of UBC and of its Netherlands affiliate; industrial executive
in Nazi Germany]
`` all of which shares are held for the benefit of ... members of the
Thyssen family, [and] is property of nationals ... of a designated
enemy country.... ''
By Oct. 26, 1942, U.S. troops were under way for North Africa. On Oct.
28, the government issued orders seizing two Nazi front organizations
run by the Bush-Harriman bank: the Holland-American Trading Corporation
and the Seamless Steel Equipment Corporation.@s2
U.S. forces landed under fire near Algiers on Nov. 8, 1942; heavy
combat raged throughout November. Nazi interests in the Silesian-
American Corporation, long managed by Prescott Bush and his father-in-
law George Herbert Walker, were seized under the Trading with the Enemy
Act on Nov. 17, 1942. In this action, the government announced that it
was seizing only the Nazi interests, leaving the Nazis' U.S. partners
to carry on the business.@s3
These and other actions taken by the U.S. government in wartime were,
tragically, too little and too late. President Bush's family had
already played a central role in financing and arming Adolf Hitler for
his takeover of Germany; in financing and managing the buildup of Nazi
war industries for the conquest of Europe and war against the U.S.A.;
and in the development of Nazi genocide theories and racial propaganda,
with their well-known results.
The facts presented here must be known, and their implications
reflected upon, for a proper understanding of President George Herbert
Walker Bush and of the danger to mankind that he represents. The
President's family fortune was largely a result of the Hitler project.
The powerful Anglo-American family associations, which later boosted
him into the Central Intelligence Agency and up to the White House,
were his father's partners in the Hitler project.
President Franklin Roosevelt's Alien Property Custodian, Leo T.
Crowley, signed Vesting Order Number 248 seizing the property of
Prescott Bush under the Trading with the Enemy Act. The order,
published in obscure government record books and kept out of the
news,@s4 explained nothing about the Nazis involved; only that the
Union Banking Corporation was run for the `` Thyssen family '' of ``
Germany and/or Hungary ''--`` nationals ... of a designated enemy
country. ''
By deciding that Prescott Bush and the other directors of the Union
Banking Corp. were legally front men for the Nazis, the government
avoided the more important historical issue: In what way were Hitler's
Nazis themselves hired, armed and instructed by the New York and London
clique of which Prescott Bush was an executive manager? Let us examine
the Harriman-Bush Hitler project from the 1920s until it was partially
broken up, to seek an answer for that question.
Origin and Extent of the Project
Fritz Thyssen and his business partners are universally recognized as
the most important German financiers of Adolf Hitler's takeover of
Germany. At the time of the order seizing the Thyssen family's Union
Banking Corp., Mr. Fritz Thyssen had already published his famous book,
I Paid Hitler,@s5 admitting that he had financed Adolf Hitler and the
Nazi movement since October 1923. Thyssen's role as the leading early
backer of Hitler's grab for power in Germany had been noted by U.S.
diplomats in Berlin in 1932.@s6 The order seizing the Bush-Thyssen bank
was curiously quiet and modest about the identity of the perpetrators
who had been nailed.
But two weeks before the official order, government investigators had
reported secretly that `` W. Averell Harriman was in Europe sometime
prior to 1924 and at that time became acquainted with Fritz Thyssen,
the German industrialist. '' Harriman and Thyssen agreed to set up a
bank for Thyssen in New York. `` [C]ertain of [Harriman's] associates
would serve as directors.... '' Thyssen agent `` H. J. Kouwenhoven ...
came to the United States ... prior to 1924 for conferences with the
Harriman Company in this connection.... ''@s7
When exactly was `` Harriman in Europe sometime prior to 1924 ''? In
fact, he was in Berlin in 1922 to set up the Berlin branch of W.A.
Harriman & Co. under George Walker's presidency.
The Union Banking Corporation was established formally in 1924, as a
unit in the Manhattan offices of W.A. Harriman & Co., interlocking with
the Thyssen-owned Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart (BHS) in the
Netherlands. The investigators concluded that `` the Union Banking
Corporation has since its inception handled funds chiefly supplied to
it through the Dutch bank by the Thyssen interests for American
investment. ''
Thus by personal agreement between Averell Harriman and Fritz Thyssen
in 1922, W.A. Harriman & Co. (alias Union Banking Corporation) would be
transferring funds back and forth between New York and the `` Thyssen
interests '' in Germany. By putting up about $400,000, the Harriman
organization would be joint owner and manager of Thyssen's banking
operations outside of Germany.
How important was the Nazi enterprise for which President Bush's father
was the New York banker?
The 1942 U.S. government investigative report said that Bush's Nazi-
front bank was an interlocking concern with the Vereinigte Stahlwerke
(United Steel Works Corporation or German Steel Trust) led by Fritz
Thyssen and his two brothers. After the war, Congressional
investigators probed the Thyssen interests, Union Banking Corp. and
related Nazi units. The investigation showed that the Vereinigte
Stahlwerke had produced the following approximate proportions of total
German national output:
50.8% of Nazi Germany's pig iron
41.4% of Nazi Germany's universal plate
36.0% of Nazi Germany's heavy plate
38.5% of Nazi Germany's galvanized sheet
45.5% of Nazi Germany's pipes and tubes
22.1% of Nazi Germany's wire
35.0% of Nazi Germany's explosives.@s8
Prescott Bush became vice president of W.A. Harriman & Co. in 1926.
That same year, a friend of Harriman and Bush set up a giant new
organization for their client Fritz Thyssen, prime sponsor of
politician Adolf Hitler. The new German Steel Trust, Germany's largest
industrial corporation, was organized in 1926 by Wall Street banker
Clarence Dillon. Dillon was the old comrade of Prescott Bush's father
Sam Bush from the `` Merchants of Death '' bureau in World War I.
In return for putting up $70 million to create his organization,
majority owner Thyssen gave the Dillon Read company two or more
representatives on the board of the new Steel Trust.@s9
Thus there is a division of labor: Thyssen's own confidential accounts,
for political and related purposes, were run through the Walker-Bush
organization; the German Steel Trust did its corporate banking through
Dillon Read.
The Walker-Bush firm's banking activities were not just politically
neutral money-making ventures which happened to coincide with the aims
of German Nazis. All of the firm's European business in those days was
organized around anti-democratic political forces.
In 1927, criticism of their support for totalitarianism drew this
retort from Bert Walker, written from Kennebunkport to Averell
Harriman: `` It seems to me that the suggestion in connection with Lord
Bearsted's views that we withdraw from Russia smacks somewhat of the
impertinent.... I think that we have drawn our line and should hew to
it. ''@s1@s0
Averell Harriman met with Italy's fascist dictator, Benito Mussolini. A
representative of the firm subsequently telegraphed good news back to
his chief executive Bert Walker: `` ... During these last days ...
Mussolini ... has examined and approved our c[o]ntract 15
June. ''@s1@s1
The great financial collapse of 1929-31 shook America, Germany and
Britain, weakening all governments. It also made the hard-pressed
Prescott Bush even more willing to do whatever was necessary to retain
his new place in the world. It was in this crisis that certain Anglo-
Americans determined on the installation of a Hitler regime in Germany.
W.A. Harriman & Co., well-positioned for this enterprise and rich in
assets from their German and Russian business, merged with the British-
American investment house, Brown Brothers, on January 1, 1931. Bert
Walker retired to his own G.H. Walker & Co. This left the Harriman
brothers, Prescott Bush and Thatcher M. Brown as the senior partners of
the new Brown Brothers Harriman firm. (The London, England branch of
the Brown family firm continued operating under its historic name--
Brown, Shipley.)
Robert A. Lovett also came over as a partner from Brown Brothers. His
father, E.H. Harriman's lawyer and railroad chief, had been on the War
Industries Board with Prescott's father. Though he remained a partner
in Brown Brothers Harriman, the junior Lovett soon replaced his father
as chief executive of Union Pacific Railroad.
Brown Brothers had a racial tradition that fitted it well for the
Hitler project! American patriots had cursed its name back in U.S.
Civil War days. Brown Brothers, with offices in the U.S.A. and in
England, had carried on their ships fully 75 percent of the slave
cotton from the American South over to British mill owners. Now in
1931, the virtual dictator of world finance, Bank of England Governor
Montagu Collet Norman, was a former Brown Brothers partner, whose
grandfather had been boss of Brown Brothers during the U.S. Civil War.
Montagu Norman was known as the most avid of Hitler's supporters within
British ruling circles, and Norman's intimacy with this firm was
essential to his management of the Hitler project.
In 1931, while Prescott Bush ran the New York office of Brown Brothers
Harriman, Prescott's partner was Montagu Norman's intimate friend
Thatcher Brown. The Bank of England chief always stayed at the home of
Prescott's partner on his hush-hush trips to New York. Prescott Bush
concentrated on the firm's German activities, and Thatcher Brown saw to
their business in old England, under the guidance of his mentor Montagu
Norman.@s1@s2
Hitler's Ladder to Power
Adolf Hitler became Chancellor of Germany January 30, 1933, and
absolute dictator in March 1933, after two years of expensive and
violent lobbying and electioneering. Two affiliates of the Bush-
Harriman organization played great parts in this criminal undertaking:
Thyssen's German Steel Trust; and the Hamburg-Amerika Line and several
of its executives.@s1@s3
Let us look more closely at the Bush family's German partners.
Fritz Thyssen told Allied interrogators after the war about some of his
financial support for the Nazi Party: `` In 1930 or 1931 ... I told
[Hitler's deputy Rudolph] Hess ... I would arrange a credit for him
with a Dutch bank in Rotterdam, the Bank fu@aur Handel und Schiff [i.e.
Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart (BHS), the Harriman-Bush affiliate]. I
arranged the credit ... he would pay it back in three years.... I chose
a Dutch bank because I did not want to be mixed up with German banks in
my position, and because I thought it was better to do business with a
Dutch bank, and I thought I would have the Nazis a little more in my
hands... .
`` The credit was about 250-300,000 [gold] marks--about the sum I had
given before. The loan has been repaid in part to the Dutch bank, but I
think some money is still owing on it.... ''@s1@s4
The overall total of Thyssen's political donations and loans to the
Nazis was well over a million dollars, including funds he raised from
others--in a period of terrible money shortage in Germany.
Friedrich Flick was the major co-owner of the German Steel Trust with
Fritz Thyssen, Thyssen's long-time collaborator and occasional
competitor. In preparation for the war crimes tribunal at Nuremberg,
the U.S. government said that Flick was `` one of leading financiers
and industrialists who from 1932 contributed large sums to the Nazi
Party ... member of `Circle of Friends' of Himmler who contributed
large sums to the SS. ''@s1@s5
Flick, like Thyssen, financed the Nazis to maintain their private
armies called Schutzstaffel (S.S. or Black Shirts) and Sturmabteilung
(S.A., storm troops or Brown Shirts).
The Flick-Harriman partnership was directly supervised by Prescott
Bush, President Bush's father, and by George Walker, President Bush's
grandfather.
The Harriman-Walker Union Banking Corp. arrangements for the German
Steel Trust had made them bankers for Flick and his vast operations in
Germany by no later than 1926.
The Harriman Fifteen Corporation (George Walker, president, Prescott
Bush and Averell Harriman, sole directors) held a substantial stake in
the Silesian Holding Co. at the time of the merger with Brown Brothers,
Jan. 1, 1931. This holding correlated to Averell Harriman's
chairmanship of the Consolidated Silesian Steel Corporation, the
American group owning one-third of a complex of steel-making, coal-
mining and zinc-mining activities in Germany and Poland, in which
Friedrich Flick owned two-thirds.@s1@s6
The Nuremberg prosecutor characterized Flick as follows:
`` Proprietor and head of a large group of industrial enterprises (coal
and iron mines, steel producing and fabricating plants) ...
`Wehrwirtschaftsfuh@aurer', 1938 [title awarded to prominent
industrialists for merit in armaments drive--`Military Economy
Leader'].... ''@s1@s7
For this buildup of the Hitler war machine with coal, steel and arms
production, using slave laborers, the Nazi Flick was condemned to seven
years in prison at the Nuremberg trials; he served three years. With
friends in New York and London, however, Flick lived into the 1970s and
died a billionaire.
On March 19, 1934, Prescott Bush--then director of the German Steel
Trust's Union Banking Corporation--initiated an alert to the absent
Averell Harriman about a problem which had developed in the Flick
partnership.@s1@s8 Bush sent Harriman a clipping from the New York
Times of that day, which reported that the Polish government was
fighting back against American and German stockholders who controlled
`` Poland's largest industrial unit, the Upper Silesian Coal and Steel
Company.... ''
The Times article continued: `` The company has long been accused of
mismanagement, excessive borrowing, fictitious bookkeeping and gambling
in securities. Warrants were issued in December for several directors
accused of tax evasions. They were German citizens and they fled. They
were replaced by Poles. Herr Flick, regarding this as an attempt to
make the company's board entirely Polish, retaliated by restricting
credits until the new Polish directors were unable to pay the workmen
regularly. ''
The Times noted that the company's mines and mills `` employ 25,000 men
and account for 45 percent of Poland's total steel output and 12
percent of her coal production. Two-thirds of the company's stock is
owned by Friedrich Flick, a leading German steel industrialist, and the
remainder is owned by interests in the United States. ''
In view of the fact that a great deal of Polish output was being
exported to Hitler Germany under depression conditions, the Polish
government thought that Prescott Bush, Harriman and their Nazi partners
should at least pay full taxes on their Polish holdings. The U.S. and
Nazi owners responded with a lockout. The letter to Harriman in
Washington reported a cable from their European representative: `` Have
undertaken new steps London Berlin ... please establish friendly
relations with Polish Ambassador [in Washington]. ''
A 1935 Harriman Fifteen Corporation memo from George Walker announced
an agreement had been made `` in Berlin '' to sell an 8,000 block of
their shares in Consolidated Silesian Steel.@s1@s9 But the dispute with
Poland did not deter the Bush family from continuing its partnership
with Flick.
Nazi tanks and bombs `` settled '' this dispute in September, 1939 with
the invasion of Poland, beginning World War II. The Nazi army had been
equipped by Flick, Harriman, Walker and Bush, with materials
essentially stolen from Poland.
There were probably few people at the time who could appreciate the
irony, that when the Soviets also attacked and invaded Poland from the
East, their vehicles were fueled by oil pumped from Baku wells revived
by the Harriman/Walker/Bush enterprise.
Three years later, nearly a year after the Japanese attack on Pearl
Harbor, the U.S. government ordered the seizure of the Nazis' share in
the Silesian-American Corporation under the Trading with the Enemy Act.
Enemy nationals were said to own 49 percent of the common stock and
41.67 percent of the preferred stock of the company.
The order characterized the company as a `` business enterprise within
the United States, owned by [a front company in] Zurich, Switzerland,
and held for the benefit of Bergwerksgesellschaft George von Giesche's
Erben, a German corporation.... ''@s2@s0
Bert Walker was still the senior director of the company, which he had
founded back in 1926 simultaneously with the creation of the German
Steel Trust. Ray Morris, Prescott's partner from Union Banking Corp.
and Brown Brothers Harriman, was also a director.
The investigative report prior to the government crackdown explained
the `` NATURE OF BUSINESS: The subject corporation is an American
holding company for German and Polish subsidiaries, which own large and
valuable coal and zinc mines in Silesia, Poland and Germany. Since
September 1939, these properties have been in the possession of and
have been operated by the German government and have undoubtedly been
of considerable assistance to that country in its war effort. ''@s2@s1
The report noted that the American stockholders hoped to regain control
of the European properties after the war.
Control of Nazi Commerce
Bert Walker had arranged the credits Harriman needed to take control of
the Hamburg-Amerika Line back in 1920. Walker had organized the
American Ship and Commerce Corp. as a unit of the W.A. Harriman & Co.,
with contractual power over Hamburg-Amerika's affairs.
As the Hitler project went into high gear, Harriman-Bush shares in
American Ship and Commerce Corp. were held by the Harriman Fifteen
Corp., run by Prescott Bush and Bert Walker.@s2@s2
It was a convenient stroll for the well-tanned, athletic, handsome
Prescott Bush: From the Brown Brothers Harriman skyscraper at 59 Wall
Street--where he was senior managing partner, confidential investments
manager and adviser to Averell and his brother `` Bunny ''--he walked
across to the Harriman Fifteen Corporation at One Wall Street,
otherwise known as G.H. Walker & Co.--and around the corner to his
subsidiary offices at 39 Broadway, former home of the old W.A. Harriman
& Co., and still the offices for American Ship and Commerce Corp., and
of the Union Banking Corporation.
In many ways, Bush's Hamburg-Amerika Line was the pivot for the entire
Hitler project.
Averell Harriman and Bert Walker had gained control over the steamship
company in 1920 in negotiations with its post-World War I chief
executive, Wilhelm Cuno, and with the line's bankers, M.M. Warburg.
Cuno was thereafter completely dependent on the Anglo-Americans, and
became a member of the Anglo-German Friendship Society. In the 1930-32
drive for a Hitler dictatorship, Wilhelm Cuno contributed important
sums to the Nazi Party.@s2@s3
Albert Voegler was chief executive of the Thyssen-Flick German Steel
Trust for which Bush's Union Banking Corp. was the New York office. He
was a director of the Bush-affiliate BHS Bank in Rotterdam, and a
director of the Harriman-Bush Hamburg-Amerika Line. Voegler joined
Thyssen and Flick in their heavy 1930-33 Nazi contributions, and helped
organize the final Nazi leap into national power.@s2@s4
The Schroeder family of bankers was a linchpin for the Nazi activities
of Harriman and Prescott Bush, closely tied to their lawyers Allen and
John Foster Dulles.
Baron Kurt von Schroeder was co-director of the massive Thyssen-
Hu@autte foundry along with Johann Groeninger, Prescott Bush's New York
bank partner. Kurt von Schroeder was treasurer of the support
organization for the Nazi Party's private armies, to which Friedrich
Flick contributed. Kurt von Schroeder and Montagu Norman's
prote@aage@aa Hjalmar Schacht together made the final arrangements for
Hitler to enter the government.@s2@s5
Baron Rudolph von Schroeder was vice president and director of the
Hamburg-Amerika Line. Long an intimate contact of Averell Harriman's in
Germany, Baron Rudolph sent his grandson Baron Johann Rudolph for a
tour of Prescott Bush's Brown Brothers Harriman offices in New York
City in December 1932--on the eve of their Hitler-triumph.@s2@s6
Certain actions taken directly by the Harriman-Bush shipping line in
1932 must be ranked among the gravest acts of treason in this century.
The U.S. embassy in Berlin reported back to Washington that the ``
costly election campaigns '' and `` the cost of maintaining a private
army of 300,000 to 400,000 men '' had raised questions as to the Nazis'
financial backers. The constitutional government of the German republic
moved to defend national freedom by ordering the Nazi Party private
armies disbanded. The U.S. embassy reported that the Hamburg-Amerika
Line was purchasing and distributing propaganda attacks against the
German government, for attempting this last-minute crackdown on
Hitler's forces.@s2@s7
Thousands of German opponents of Hitlerism were shot or intimidated by
privately armed Nazi Brown Shirts. In this connection we note that the
original `` Merchant of Death, '' Samuel Pryor, was a founding director
of both the Union Banking Corp. and the American Ship and Commerce
Corp. Since Mr. Pryor was executive committee chairman of Remington
Arms and a central figure in the world's private arms traffic, his use
to the Hitler project was enhanced as the Bush family's partner in Nazi
Party banking and trans-Atlantic shipping.
The U.S. Senate arms-traffic investigators probed Remington after it
was joined in a cartel agreement on explosives to the Nazi firm I.G.
Farben. Looking at the period leading up to Hitler's seizure of power,
the Senators found that `` German political associations, like the Nazi
and others, are nearly all armed with American ... guns.... Arms of all
kinds coming from America are transshipped in the Scheldt to river
barges before the vessels arrive in Antwerp. They then can be carried
through Holland without police inspection or interference. The
Hitlerists and Communists are presumed to get arms in this manner. The
principal arms coming from America are Thompson submachine guns and
revolvers. The number is great. ''@s2@s8
Go to part 2
Chive Mynde
Anton Chaitkin
Chapter - II - The Hitler Project, Part 2
The beginning of the Hitler regime brought some bizarre changes to the
Hamburg-Amerika Line--and more betrayals.
Prescott Bush's American Ship and Commerce Corp. notified Max Warburg
of Hamburg, Germany, on March 7, 1933, that Warburg was to be the
corporation's official, designated representative on the board of
Hamburg-Amerika.@s2@s9
Max Warburg replied on March 27, 1933, assuring his American sponsors
that the Hitler government was good for Germany: `` For the last few
years business was considerably better than we had anticipated, but a
reaction is making itself felt for some months. We are actually
suffering also under the very active propaganda against Germany, caused
by some unpleasant circumstances. These occurrences were the natural
consequence of the very excited election campaign, but were
extraordinarily exaggerated in the foreign press. The Government is
firmly resolved to maintain public peace and order in Germany, and I
feel perfectly convinced in this respect that there is no cause for any
alarm whatsoever. ''@s3@s0
This seal of approval for Hitler, coming from a famous Jew, was just
what Harriman and Bush required, for they anticipated rather serious ``
alarm '' inside the U.S.A. against their Nazi operations.
On March 29, 1933, two days after Max's letter to Harriman, Max's son,
Erich Warburg, sent a cable to his cousin Frederick M. Warburg, a
director of the Harriman railroad system. He asked Frederick to `` use
all your influence '' to stop all anti-Nazi activity in America,
including `` atrocity news and unfriendly propaganda in foreign press,
mass meetings, etc. '' Frederick cabled back to Erich: `` No
responsible groups here [are] urging [a] boycott [of] German goods[,]
merely excited individuals. '' Two days after that, On March 31, 1933,
the American-Jewish Committee, controlled by the Warburgs, and the
B'nai B'rith, heavily influenced by the Sulzbergers (New York Times),
issued a formal, official joint statement of the two organizations,
counseling `` that no American boycott against Germany be
encouraged, '' and advising `` that no further mass meetings be held or
similar forms of agitation be employed. ''@s3@s1
The American Jewish Committee and the B'nai B'rith (mother of the ``
Anti-Defamation League '') continued with this hardline, no-attack-on-
Hitler stance all through the 1930s, blunting the fight mounted by many
Jews and other anti-fascists.
Thus the decisive interchange reproduced above, taking place entirely
within the orbit of the Harriman/Bush firm, may explain something of
the relationship of George Bush to American Jewish and Zionist leaders.
Some of them, in close cooperation with his family, played an ugly part
in the drama of Naziism. Is this why `` professional Nazi-hunters ''
have never discovered how the Bush family made its money?
The executive board of the Hamburg Amerika Line (Hapag) met jointly
with the North German Lloyd Company board in Hamburg on Sept. 5, 1933.
Under official Nazi supervision, the two firms were merged. Prescott
Bush's American Ship and Commerce Corp. installed Christian J. Beck, a
long-time Harriman executive, as manager of freight and operations in
North America for the new joint Nazi shipping lines (Hapag-Lloyd) on
Nov. 4, 1933.
According to testimony of officials of the companies before Congress in
1934, a supervisor from the Nazi Labor Front rode with every ship of
the Harriman-Bush line; employees of the New York offices were directly
organized into the Nazi Labor Front organization; Hamburg-Amerika
provided free passage to individuals going abroad for Nazi propaganda
purposes; and the line subsidized pro-Nazi newspapers in the U.S.A., as
it had done in Germany against the constitutional German
government.@s3@s2
In mid-1936, Prescott Bush's American Ship and Commerce Corp. cabled
M.M. Warburg, asking Warburg to represent the company's heavy share
interest at the forthcoming Hamburg-Amerika stockholders meeting. The
Warburg office replied with the information that `` we represented
you '' at the stockholders meeting and `` exercised on your behalf your
voting power for Rm [gold marks] 3,509,600 Hapag stock deposited with
us. ''
The Warburgs transmitted a letter received from Emil Helfferich, German
chief executive of both Hapag-Lloyd and of the Standard Oil subsidiary
in Nazi Germany: `` It is the intention to continue the relations with
Mr. Harriman on the same basis as heretofore.... '' In a colorful
gesture, Hapag's Nazi chairman Helfferich sent the line's president
across the Atlantic on a Zeppelin to confer with their New York string-
pullers.
After the meeting with the Zeppelin passenger, the Harriman-Bush office
replied: `` I am glad to learn that Mr. Hellferich [sic] has stated
that relations between the Hamburg American Line and ourselves will be
continued on the same basis as heretofore. ''@s3@s3
Two months before moving against Prescott Bush's Union Banking
Corporation, the U. S. government ordered the seizure of all property
of the Hamburg-Amerika Line and North German Lloyd, under the Trading
with the Enemy Act. The investigators noted in the pre-seizure report
that Christian J. Beck was still acting as an attorney representing the
Nazi firm.@s3@s4
In May 1933, just after the Hitler regime was consolidated, an
agreement was reached in Berlin for the coordination of all Nazi
commerce with the U.S.A. The Harriman International Co., led by Averell
Harriman's first cousin Oliver, was to head a syndicate of 150 firms
and individuals, to conduct all exports from Hitler Germany to the
United States.@s3@s5
This pact had been negotiated in Berlin between Hitler's economics
minister, Hjalmar Schacht, and John Foster Dulles, international
attorney for dozens of Nazi enterprises, with the counsel of Max
Warburg and Kurt von Schroeder.
John Foster Dulles would later be U.S. Secretary of State, and the
great power in the Republican Party of the 1950s. Foster's friendship
and that of his brother Allen (head of the Central Intelligence
Agency), greatly aided Prescott Bush to become the Republican U.S.
Senator from Connecticut. And it was to be of inestimable value to
George Bush, in his ascent to the heights of `` covert action
government, '' that both of these Dulles brothers were the lawyers for
the Bush family's far-flung enterprise.
Throughout the 1930s, John Foster Dulles arranged debt restructuring
for German firms under a series of decrees issued by Adolf Hitler. In
these deals, Dulles struck a balance between the interest owed to
selected, larger investors, and the needs of the growing Nazi war-
making apparatus for producing tanks, poison gas, etc.
Dulles wrote to Prescott Bush in 1937 concerning one such arrangement.
The German-Atlantic Cable Company, owning Nazi Germany's only telegraph
channel to the United States, had made debt and management agreements
with the Walker-Harriman bank during the 1920s. A new decree would now
void those agreements, which had originally been reached with non-Nazi
corporate officials. Dulles asked Bush, who managed these affairs for
Averell Harriman, to get Averell's signature on a letter to Nazi
officials, agreeing to the changes. Dulles wrote:
Sept. 22, 1937
Mr. Prescott S. Bush
59 Wall Street, New York, N.Y.
Dear Press,
I have looked over the letter of the German-American [sic] Cable
Company to Averell Harriman.... It would appear that the only rights in
the matter are those which inure in the bankers and that no legal
embarrassment would result, so far as the bondholders are concerned, by
your acquiescence in the modification of the bankers' agreement.
Sincerely yours,
John Foster Dulles
Dulles enclosed a proposed draft reply, Bush got Harriman's signature,
and the changes went through.@s3@s6
In conjunction with these arrangements, the German Atlantic Cable
Company attempted to stop payment on its debts to smaller American
bondholders. The money was to be used instead for arming the Nazi
state, under a decree of the Hitler government.
Despite the busy efforts of Bush and Dulles, a New York court decided
that this particular Hitler `` law '' was invalid in the United States;
small bondholders, not parties to deals between the bankers and the
Nazis, were entitled to get paid.@s3@s7
In this and a few other of the attempted swindles, the intended victims
came out with their money. But the Nazi financial and political
reorganization went ahead to its tragic climax.
For his part in the Hitler revolution, Prescott Bush was paid a
fortune.
This is the legacy he left to his son, President George Bush.
An Important Historical Note:
How the Harrimans Hired Hitler
It was not inevitable that millions would be slaughtered under fascism
and in World War II. At certain moments of crisis, crucial pro-Nazi
decisions were made outside of Germany. These decisions for pro-Nazi
actions were more aggressive than the mere `` appeasement '' which
Anglo-American historians later preferred to discuss.
Private armies of 300,000 to 400,000 terrorists aided the Nazis' rise
to power. W.A. Harriman's Hamburg-Amerika Line intervened against
Germany's 1932 attempt to break them up.
The 1929-31 economic collapse bankrupted the Wall-Street-backed German
Steel Trust. When the German government took over the Trust's stock
shares, interests associated with Konrad Adenauer and the anti-Nazi
Catholic Center Party attempted to acquire the shares. But the Anglo-
Americans--Montagu Norman, and the Harriman-Bush bank--made sure that
their Nazi puppet Fritz Thyssen regained control over the shares and
the Trust. Thyssen's bankrolling of Hitler could then continue
unhindered.
Unpayable debts crushed Germany in the 1920s, reparations required by
the Versailles agreements. Germany was looted by the London-New York
banking system, and Hitler's propaganda exploited this German debt
burden.
But immediately after Germany came under Hitler's dictatorship, the
Anglo-American financiers granted debt relief, which freed funds to be
used for arming the Nazi state.
The North German Lloyd steamship line, which was merged with Hamburg-
Amerika Line, was one of the companies which stopped debt payments
under a Hitler decree arranged by John Foster Dulles and Hjalmar
Schacht.
Kuhn Loeb and Co.'s Felix Warburg carried out the Hitler finance plan
in New York. Kuhn Loeb asked North German Lloyd bondholders to accept
new lower interest steamship bonds, issued by Kuhn Loeb, in place of
the better pre-Hitler bonds.
The Opposition
New York attorney Jacob Chaitkin, father of coauthor Anton Chaitkin,
took the cases of many different bondholders who rejected the swindle
by Harriman, Bush, Warburg, and Hitler. Representing a women who was
owed $30 on an old steamship bond--and opposing John Foster Dulles in
New York municipal court--Chaitkin threatened a writ from the sheriff,
tying up the 30,000 ton transatlantic liner Europa until the client
received her $30. (New York Times, January 10, 1934, p. 31 col. 3).
The American Jewish Congress hired Jacob Chaitkin as the legal director
of the boycott against Nazi Germany. The American Federation of Labor
cooperated with Jewish and other groups in the anti-import boycott. On
the other side, virtually all the Nazi trade with the United States was
under the supervision of the Harriman interests and functionaries such
as Prescott Bush, father of President George Bush.
Meanwhile, the Warburgs demanded that American Jews not `` agitate ''
against the Hitler government, or join the organized boycott. The
Warburgs' decision was carried out by the American Jewish Committee and
the B'nai B'rith, who opposed the boycott as the Nazi military state
grew increasingly powerful.
The historical coverup on these events is so tight that virtually the
only expose@aa of the Warburgs came in journalist John L. Spivak's ``
Wall Street's Fascist Conspiracy, '' in the pro-communist New Masses
periodical (Jan. 29 and Feb. 5, 1934). Spivak pointed out that the
Warburgs controlled the American Jewish Committee, which opposed the
anti-Nazi boycott, while their Kuhn Loeb and Co. had underwritten Nazi
shipping; and he exposed the financing of pro-fascist political
activities by the Warburgs and their partners and allies, many of whom
were bigwigs in the American Jewish Committee and B'nai B'rith.
Given where the Spivak piece appeared, it is not surprising that Spivak
called Warburg an ally of the Morgan Bank, but made no mention of
Averell Harriman. Mr. Harriman, after all, was a permanent hero of the
Soviet Union.
John L. Spivak later underwent a curious transformation, himself
joining the coverup. In 1967, he wrote an autobiography (A Man in His
Time, New York: Horizon Press), which praises the American Jewish
Committee. The pro-fascism of the Warburgs does not appear in the book.
The former `` rebel '' Spivak also praises the action arm of the B'nai
B'rith, the Anti-Defamation League. Pathetically, he comments favorably
that the League has spy files on the American populace which it shares
with government agencies.
Thus is history erased; and those decisions, which direct history into
one course or another, are lost to the knowledge of the current
generation.
NOTES:
1. Office of Alien Property Custodian, Vesting Order No. 248. The order
was signed by Leo T. Crowley, Alien Property Custodian, executed
October 20, 1942; F.R. Doc. 42-11568; Filed, November 6, 1942, 11:31
A.M.; 7 Fed. Reg. 9097 (Nov. 7, 1942). See also the New York City
Directory of Directors (available at the Library of Congress). The
volumes for the 1930s and 1940s list Prescott Bush as a director of
Union Banking Corporation for the years 1934 through 1943.
2. Alien Property Custodian Vesting Order No. 259: Seamless Steel
Equipment Corporation; Vesting Order No. 261: Holland-American Trading
Corp.
3. Alien Property Custodian Vesting Order No. 370: Silesian-American
Corp.
4. The New York Times on December 16, 1944, ran a five-paragraph page
25 article on actions of the New York State Banking Department. Only
the last sentence refers to the Nazi bank, as follows: `` The Union
Banking Corporation, 39 Broadway, New York, has received authority to
change its principal place of business to 120 Broadway. ''
The Times omitted the fact that the Union Banking Corporation had been
seized by the government for trading with the enemy, and even the fact
that 120 Broadway was the address of the government's Alien Property
Custodian.
5. Fritz Thyssen, I Paid Hitler, 1941, reprinted in (Port Washington,
N.Y.: Kennikat Press, 1972), p. 133. Thyssen says his contributions
began with 100,000 marks given in October 1923, for Hitler's attempted
`` putsch '' against the constitutional government.
6. Confidential memorandum from U.S. embassy, Berlin, to the U.S.
Secretary of State, April 20, 1932, on microfilm in Confidential
Reports of U.S. State Dept., 1930s, Germany, at major U.S. libraries.
7. Oct. 5, 1942, Memorandum to the Executive Committee of the Office of
Alien Property Custodian, stamped CONFIDENTIAL, from the Division of
Investigation and Research, Homer Jones, Chief. Now declassified in
United States National Archives, Suitland, Maryland annex. See Record
Group 131, Alien Property Custodian, investigative reports, in file box
relating to Vesting Order No. 248.
8. Elimination of German Resources for War: Hearings Before a
Subcommittee of the Committee on Military Affairs, United States
Senate, Seventy-Ninth Congress; Part 5, Testimony of [the United
States] Treasury Department, July 2, 1945. P. 507: Table of Vereinigte
Stahlwerke output, figures are percent of German total as of 1938;
Thyssen organization including Union Banking Corporation pp. 727-31.
9. Robert Sobel, The Life and Times of Dillon Read (New York: Dutton-
Penguin, 1991), pp. 92-111. The Dillon Read firm cooperated in the
development of Sobel's book.
10. George Walker to Averell Harriman, Aug. 11, 1927, in the W. Averell
Harriman papers at the Library of Congress (designated hereafter WAH
papers).
11. `` Iaccarino '' to G. H. Walker, RCA Radiogram Sept. 12, 1927. The
specific nature of their business with Mussolini is not explained in
correspondence available for public access.
12. Andrew Boyle, Montagu Norman (London: Cassell, 1967).
Sir Henry Clay, Lord Norman (London, MacMillan & Co., 1957), pp. 18,
57, 70-71.
John A. Kouwenhouven, Partners in Banking ... Brown Brothers Harriman
(Garden City: Doubleday & Co., 1969).
13. Coordination of much of the Hitler project took place at a single
New York address. The Union Banking Corporation had been set up by
George Walker at 39 Broadway. Management of the Hamburg-Amerika Line,
carried out through Harriman's American Ship and Commerce Corp., was
also set up by George Walker at 39 Broadway.
14. Interrogation of Fritz Thyssen, EF/Me/1 of Sept. 4, 1945 in U.S.
Control Council records, photostat on page 167 in Anthony Sutton, An
Introduction to The Order (Billings, Mt.: Liberty House Press, 1986).
15. Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression--Supplement B, by the Office of
United States Chief of Counsel for Prosecution of Axis Criminality,
United States Government Printing Office, (Washington: 1948), pp. 1597,
1686.
16. `` Consolidated Silesian Steel Corporation - [minutes of the]
Meeting of Board of Directors, '' Oct. 31, 1930 (Harriman papers,
Library of Congress), shows Averell Harriman as Chairman of the Board.
Prescott Bush to W.A. Harriman, Memorandum Dec. 19, 1930 on their
Harriman Fifteen Corp.
Annual Report of United Konigs and Laura Steel and Iron Works for the
year 1930 (Harriman papers, Library of Congress) lists `` Dr. Friedrich
Flick ... Berlin '' and `` William Averell Harriman ... New York '' on
the Board of Directors.
`` Harriman Fifteen Corporation Securities Position February 28,
1931, '' Harriman papers, Library of Congress. This report shows
Harriman Fifteen Corporation holding 32,576 shares in Silesian Holding
Co. V.T.C. worth (in scarce depression dollars) $1,628,800, just over
half the value of the Harriman Fifteen Corporation's total holdings.
The New York City Directory of Directors volumes for the 1930s
(available at the Library of Congress) show Prescott Sheldon Bush and
W. Averell Harriman as the directors of Harriman Fifteen Corp.
`` Appointments, '' (three typed pages) marked `` Noted May 18 1931
W.A.H., '' (among the papers from Prescott Bush's New York Office of
Brown Brothers Harriman, Harriman papers, Library of Congress), lists a
meeting between Averell Harriman and Friedrich Flick in Berlin at 4:00
P.M., Wednesday April 22, 1931. This was followed immediately by a
meeting with Wilhelm Cuno, chief executive of the Hamburg-Amerika Line.
The `` Report To the Stockholders of the Harriman Fifteen
Corporation, '' Oct. 19, 1933 (in the Harriman papers, Library of
Congress) names G.H. Walker as president of the corporation. It shows
the Harriman Fifteen Corporation's address as 1 Wall Street--the
location of G.H. Walker and Co.
17. Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression--Supplement B, op. cit., p. 1686.
18. Jim Flaherty (a BBH manager, Prescott Bush's employee), March 19,
1934 to W.A. Harriman.
`` Dear Averell:
In Roland's absence Pres[cott] thought it advisable for me to let you
know that we received the following cable from [our European
representative] Rossi dated March 17th [relating to conflict with the
Polish government]....''
19. Harriman Fifteen Corporation notice to stockholders Jan. 7, 1935,
under the name of George Walker, President.
20. Order No. 370: Silesian-American Corp. Executed Nov. 17, 1942.
Signed by Leo T. Crowley, Alien Property Custodian. F.R. Doc. 42-14183;
Filed Dec. 31, 1942, 11:28 A.M.; 8 Fed. Reg. 33 (Jan. 1, 1943).
The order confiscated the Nazis' holdings of 98,000 shares of common
and 50,000 shares of preferred stock in Silesian-American.
The Nazi parent company in Breslau, Germany wrote directly to Averell
Harriman at 59 Wall St. on Aug. 5, 1940, with `` an invitation to take
part in the regular meeting of the members of the Bergwerksgesellsc[h]
aft Georg von Giesche's Erben.... '' WAH papers.
21. Sept. 25, 1942, Memorandum To the Executive Committee of the Office
of Alien Property Custodian, stamped CONFIDENTIAL, from the Division of
Investigation and Research, Homer Jones, Chief. Now declassified in
United States National Archives, Suitland, Maryland annex. See Record
Group 131, Alien Property Custodian, investigative reports, in file box
relating to Vesting Order No. 370.
22. George Walker was a director of American Ship and Commerce from its
organization through 1928. Consult New York City Directory of
Directors.
`` Harriman Fifteen Corporation Securities Position February 28,
1931, '' op. cit. The report lists 46,861 shares in the American Ship &
Commerce Corp.
See `` Message from Mr. Bullfin, '' Aug. 30, 1934 (Harriman Fifteen
section, Harriman papers, Library of Congress) for the joint
supervision of Bush and Walker, respectively director and president of
the corporation.
23. Cuno was later exposed by Walter Funk, Third Reich Press Chief and
Under Secretary of Propaganda, in Funk's postwar jail cell at
Nuremberg; but Cuno had died just as Hitler was taking power. William
L. Shirer, The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (New York: Simon and
Schuster, 1960), p. 144. Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression--Supplement B,
op. cit., p. 1688.
24. See `` Elimination of German Resources for War, '' op. cit., pp.
881-82 on Voegler.
See Annual Report of the (Hamburg-Amerikanische-Packetfahrt-Aktien-
Gesellschaft (Hapag or Hamburg-Amerika Line), March 1931, for the board
of directors. A copy is in the New York Public Library Annex at 11th
Avenue, Manhattan.
25. Nazi Conspiracy and Aggression--Supplement B, op. cit., pp. 1178,
1453-54, 1597, 1599.
See `` Elimination of German Resources for War, '' op. cit., pp. 870-72
on Schroeder; p. 730 on Groeninger.
26. Annual Report of Hamburg-Amerika, op. cit.
Baron Rudolph Schroeder, Sr. to Averell Harriman, Nov. 14, 1932. K
[night] W[ooley] handwritten note and draft reply letter, Dec. 9, 1932.
In his letter, Baron Rudolph refers to the family's American affiliate,
J. Henry Schroder [name anglicized], of which Allen Dulles was a
director, and his brother John Foster Dulles was the principal
attorney.
Baron Bruno Schroder of the British branch was adviser to Bank of
England Governor Montagu Norman, and Baron Bruno's partner Frank Cyril
Tiarks was Norman's co-director of the Bank of England throughout
Norman's career. Kurt von Schroeder was Hjalmar Schacht's delegate to
the Bank for International Settlements in Geneva, where many of the
financial arrangements for the Nazi regime were made by Montagu Norman,
Schacht and the Schroeders for several years of the Hitler regime right
up to the outbreak of World War II.
27. Confidential memorandum from U.S. embassy, Berlin, op. cit.
28. U.S. Senate `` Nye Committee '' hearings, Sept. 14, 1934, pp. 1197-
98, extracts from letters of Col. William N. Taylor, dated June 27,
1932 and Jan. 9, 1933.
29. American Ship and Commerce Corporation to Dr. Max Warburg, March 7,
1933.
Max Warburg had brokered the sale of Hamburg-Amerika to Harriman and
Walker in 1920. Max's brothers controlled the Kuhn Loeb investment
banking house in New York, the firm which had staked old E.H. Harriman
to his 1890s buyout of the giant Union Pacific Railroad.
Max Warburg had long worked with Lord Milner and others of the
racialist British Round Table concerning joint projects in Africa and
Eastern Europe. He was an advisor to Hjalmar Schacht for several
decades and was a top executive of Hitler's Reichsbank. The reader may
consult David Farrer, The Warburgs: The Story of A Family (New York:
Stein and Day, 1975).
30. Max Warburg, at M.M. Warburg and Co., Hamburg, to Averill [sic]
Harriman, c/o Messrs. Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., 59 Wall Street,
New York, N.Y., March 27, 1933.
31. This correspondence, and the joint statement of the Jewish
organizations, are reproduced in Moshe R. Gottlieb, American Anti-Nazi
Resistance, 1933-41: An Historical Analysis (New York: Ktav Publishing
House, 1982).
32. Investigation of Nazi Propaganda Activities and Investigation of
Certain Other Propaganda Activities: Public Hearings before A
Subcommittee of the Special Committee on Un-American Activities, United
States House of Representatives, Seventy Third Congress, New York City,
July 9-12, 1934--Hearings No. 73-NY-7 (Washington: U.S. Govt. Printing
Office, 1934). See testimony of Capt. Frederick C. Mensing, John
Schroeder, Paul von Lilienfeld-Toal, and summaries by Committee
members.
See New York Times, July 16, 1933, p. 12, for organizing of Nazi Labor
Front at North German Lloyd, leading to Hamburg-Amerika after merger.
33. American Ship and Commerce Corporation telegram to Rudolph
Brinckmann at M.M. Warburg, June 12, 1936.
Rudolph Brinckmann to Averell Harriman at 59 Wall St., June 20, 1936,
with enclosed note transmitting Helfferich's letter.
Reply to Dr. Rudolph Brinckmann c/o M.M. Warburg and Co, July 6, 1936,
in the Harriman papers at the Library of Congress. The file copy of
this letter carries no signature, but is presumably from Averell
Harriman.
34. Office of Alien Property Custodian, Vesting Order No. 126. Signed
by Leo T. Crowley, Alien Property Custodian, executed August 28, 1942.
F.R. Doc. 42-8774; Filed September 4, 1942, 10:55 A.M.; 7 F.R. 7061
(No. 176, Sept. 5, 1942.) July 18, 1942, Memorandum To the Executive
Committee of the Office of Alien Property Custodian, stamped
CONFIDENTIAL, from the Division of Investigation and Research, Homer
Jones, Chief. Now declassified in United States National Archives,
Suitland, Maryland annex. See Record Group 131, Alien Property
Custodian, investigative reports, in file box relating to Vesting Order
No. 126.
35. New York Times, May 20, 1933. Leading up to this agreement is a
telegram which somehow escaped the shredder and may be seen in the
Harriman papers in the Library of Congress. It is addressed to Nazi
official Hjalmar Schacht at the Mayflower Hotel, Washington, dated May
11, 1933: `` Much disappointed to have missed seeing you Tuesday
afternoon.... I hope to see you either in Washington or New York before
you sail.
with my regards W.A. Harriman ''
36. Dulles to Bush letter and draft reply in WAH papers.
37. New York Times, Jan. 19, 1938.
Phil Hays
> Are you a paid disinformation agent Phil?
Perhaps you should look at:
http://www.deja.com/qs.xp?QRY=spampostmaster%40sprynet.com&OP=dnquery.xp
And decide for yourself.
Of course, if I was Chive, I might have reposted everything in dejanews's
archive.
--
Phil Hays
BirdTribe
REALLY wanted to save bandwidth you would not have even posted a second
post to the thread. Considering the sensitive nature of the information
you attempted to delete and paint as ramblings at this time I would
definitely say that you have an agenda beyond what you claim to have.. I
also recall the same sort of agenda from you when I posted over at AFAB.
I think your cute little title is a wonderful prestidigitation Phil.
So.. Phil what would cause you to be on a multiyear discreditation of
sensitive information, which BTW alot of could be backed up by
documentation as with the Bush/Nazi connections. What are your interests
in discrediting this type of info? As far as I am concerned your answer
below was not an answer but a prevaricated sleight to draw the issue at
hand..your status as a paid disinformation agent..out of the light and
back into the shadows.. I frankly, as a Wiccan, Pagan and child of The
Universe am getting fed up of you clowns playing mind games on the net..
Let's rock junior.. Your soul is immature and the tentacle of usury is
firmly planted between your buttocks.
The Mighty BirdTribe
Phil Hays wrote:
>
> BirdTribe wrote:
>
> > Are you a paid disinformation agent Phil?
>
> Perhaps you should look at:
>
> http://www.deja.com/qs.xp?QRY=spampostmaster%40sprynet.com&OP=dnquery.xp
>
> And decide for yourself.
>
> Of course, if I was Chive, I might have reposted everything in dejanews's
> archive.
>
Chive Mynde
Anton Chaitkin
Chapter -XV- CIA DIRECTOR, Part 1
In late 1975, as a result in particular of his role in Watergate,
Bush's confirmation as CIA Director was not automatic. And though the
debate at his confirmation was superificial, some senators, including
in particular the late Frank Church of Idaho, made some observations
about the dangers inherent in the Bush nomination that have turned out
in retrospect to be useful.
The political scene on the homefront from which Bush had been so
anxious to be absent during 1975 was the so-called "Year of
Intelligence," in that it had been a year of intense scrutiny of the
illegal activities and abuses of the intelligence community, including
CIA domestic and covert operations. On December 22, 1974 the New York
Times published the first of a series of articles by Seymour M. Hersh
which relied on leaked reports of CIA activities assembled by Director
James Rodney Schlesinger to expose alleged misdeeds by the agency.
It was widely recognized at the time that the Hersh articles were a
self-exposure by the CIA that was designed to set the agenda for the
Ford-appointed Rockefeller Commission, which was set up a few days
later, on January 4, 1975. The Rockefeller Commission members included
John T. Connor, C. Douglas Dillon, Erwin N. Griswold, Lane Kirkland,
Lyman Lemnitzer, Ronald Reagan, and Edgar F. Shannon, Jr. The
Rockefeller Commission was supposed to examine the malfeasance of the
intelligence agencies and make recommendations about how they could be
reorganized and reformed. In reality, the Rockefeller Commission
proposals would reflect the transition from the structures of the cold
war towards the growing totalitarian tendencies of the 1980's.
While the Rockefeller Commission was a tightly controlled vehicle of
the Eastern Anglophile liberal establishment, Congressional
investigating committees were empaneled during 1975 whose proceedings
were somewhat less rigidly controlled. These included the Senate
Intelligence Committee, known as the Church Committee, and the
corresponding House committee, first chaired by Rep. Lucien Nedzi (who
had previously chaired one of the principal Watergate-era probes) and
then (after July) by Rep. Otis Pike. One example was the Pike
Committee's issuance of a contempt of Congress citation against Henry
Kissinger for his refusal to provide documentation of covert operations
in November, 1975. Another was Church's role in leading the opposition
to the Bush nomination.
The Church Committee launched an investigation of the use of covert
operations for the purpose of assassinating foreign leaders. By the
nature of things, this probe was lead to grapple with the problem of
whether covert operations sanctioned to eliminate foreign leaders had
been re-targetted against domestic political figures. The obvious case
was the Kennedy assassination.
Church was especially diligent in attacking CIA covert operations,
which Bush would be anxious to defend. The CIA's covert branch, Church
thought, was a "self-serving apparatus." "It's a bureaucracy which
feeds on itself, and those involved are constantly sitting around
thinking up schemes for [foreign] intervention which will win them
promotions and justify further additions to the staff...It self-
generates interventions that otherwise never would be thought of, let
alone authorized." [fn 1]
It will be seen that at the beginning of Bush's tenure at the CIA, the
Congressional committees were on the offensive against the intelligence
agencies. By the time that Bush departed Langley, the tables were
turned, and it was the Congress which was the focus of scandals,
including Koreagate. Soon thereafter, the Congress would undergo the
assault of Abscam.
Preparation for what was to become the Halloween massacre began in the
Ford White House during the summer of 1975. The Ford Library in Ann
Arbor, Michigan preserves a memo from Donald Rumsfeld to Ford dated
July 10, 1975, which deals with an array of possible choices for CIA
Director. Rumsfeld had polled a number of White House and
administration officials and asked them to express preferences
among "outsiders to the CIA." [fn 2]
Among the officials polled by Cheney was Henry Kissinger, who suggested
C. Douglas Dillon, Howard Baker, Galvin, and Robert Roosa. Dick Cheney
of the White House staff proposed Robert Bork, followed by Bush and Lee
Iacocca. Nelson Rockefeller was also for C. Douglas Dillon, followed by
Howard Baker, Conner, and James R. Schlesinger. Rumsfeld himself listed
Bork, Dillon, Iacoca, Stanley Resor, and Walter Wriston, but not Bush.
The only officials putting Bush on their "possible" lists other than
Cheney were Jack O. Marsh, a White House counselor to Ford, and David
Packard. When it came time for Rumsfeld to sum up the aggregate number
of times each person was mentioned, minus one point for each time a
person had been recommended against, the list was as follows:
Robert Bork [rejected in 1987 for the Supreme Court] White McGee Foster
[John S. Foster of PFIAB, formerly of the Department of Defense] Dillon
Resor Roosa Hauge
It will be seen that Bush was not among the leading candidates, perhaps
because his networks were convinced that he was going to make another
attempt for the vice-presidency and that therefore the Commerce
Department or some similar post would be more suitable. The summary
profile of Bush sent to Ford by Rumsfeld found that Bush
had "experience in government and diplomacy" and was "generally
familiar with components of the intelligence community and their
missions" while having management experience." Under "Cons" Rumsfeld
noted: "RNC post lends undesirable political cast."
As we have seen, the CIA post was finally offered by Ford to Edward
Bennett Williams, perhaps with an eye on building a bipartisan bridge
towards a powerful faction of the intelligence community. But Williams
did not want the job. Bush, originally slated for the Department of
Commerce, was given the CIA appointment.
The announcement of Bush's nomination occasioned a storm of criticism,
whose themes included the inadvisability of choosing a Watergate figure
for such a sensitive post so soon after that scandal had finally begun
to subside. References were made to Bush's receipt of financial
largesse from Nixon's Townhouse fund and related operations. There was
also the question of whether the domestic CIA appparatus would get
mixed up in Bush's expected campaign for the vice presidency. These
themes were developed in editorials during the month of November, 1976,
while Bush was kept in Beijing by the requirements of preparing the
Ford-Mao meetings of early December. To some degree, Bush was just
hanging there and slowly, slowly twisting in the wind. The slow-witted
Ford soon realized that he had been inept in summarily firing Colby,
since Bush would have to remain in China for some weeks and then return
to face confirmation hearings. Ford had to ask Colby to stay on in a
caretaker capacity until Bush took office. The delay allowed opposition
against Bush to crystallize to some degree, but his own network was
also quick to spring to his defense.
Former CIA officer Tom Braden, writing in the Fort Lauderdale News,
noted that the Bush appointment to the CIA looked bad, and looked bad
at a time when public confidence in the CIA was so low that everything
about the agency desperately needed to look good. Braden's column was
entitled "George Bush, Bad Choice for CIA Job."
Roland Evans and Robert Novak, writing in the Washington Post,
commented that "the Bush nomination is regarded by some intelligence
experts as another grave morale deflator. They reason that any
identified politician, no matter how resolved to be politically pure,
would aggravate the CIA's credibility gap. Instead of an identifed
politician like Bush...what is needed, they feel, is a respected non-
politician, perhaps from business or the academic world." Evans and
Novak conceded that "not all experts agree. One former CIA official
wants the CIA placed under political leadership capable of working
closely with Congress. But even that distinctly minority position
rebels against any Presidential scenario that looks to the CIA as
possible stepping-stone to the Vice-Presidential nomination."
The Washington Post came out against Bush in an editorial entitled "The
Bush Appointment." Here the reasoning was that this position "should
not be regarded as a political parking spot," and that public
confidence in the CIA had to be restored after the recent revelations
of wrongdoing.
After a long-winded argument, George Will came to the conclusion that
Ambassador Bush at the CIA would be "the wrong kind of guy at the wrong
place at the worst possible time."
Senator Church viewed the Bush appointment in the context of a letter
sent to him by Ford on October 31, 1975, demanding that the committee's
report on US assassination plots against foreign leaders be kept
secret. In Church's opinion, these two developments were part of a
pattern, and amounted to a new stonewalling defense by what Church had
called "the rogue elephant." Church issued a press statement in
response to Ford's letter attempting to impose a blackout on the
assassination report. "I am astonished that President Ford wants to
suppress the committee's report on assassination and keep it concealed
from the American people," said Church. Then, on November 3, Church was
approached by reporters outside of his Senate hearing room and asked by
Daniel Schorr about the firing of Colby and his likely replacement by
Bush. Church responded with a voice that was trembling with
anger. "There is no question in my mind but that concealment is the new
order of the day," he said. "Hiding evil is the trademark of a
totalitarian government." [fn 3]. Schorr said that he had never seen
Church so upset.
The following day, November 4, Church read Leslie Gelb's column in the
New York Times suggesting that Colby had been fired, among other
things, "for not doing a good job containing the Congressional
investigations." George Bush, Gelb thought, "would be able to go to
Congress and ask for a grace period before pressing their
investigations further. A Washington Star headline of this period
summed up this argument: "CIA NEEDS BUSH'S PR TALENT." Church talked
with his staff that day about what he saw as an ominous pattern of
events. He told reporters: "First came the very determined
administration effort to prevent any revelations concerning NSA, their
stonewalling of public hearings. Then came the president's letter. Now
comes the firing of Colby, Mr. Schlesinger, and the general belief that
Secretary Kissinger is behind these latest developments." For
Church, "clearly a pattern has emerged now to try and disrupt this
[Senate Intelligence Committee] investigation. As far as I'm concerned,
it won't be disrupted," said Church grimly.
One of Church's former aides, speech-writer Loch K. Johnson, describes
how he worked with Church to prepare a speech scheduled for delivery on
November 11, 1975 in which Church would stake out a position opposing
the Bush nomination:
The nomination of George Bush to succeed Colby disturbed him and he
wanted to wind up the speech by opposing the nomination. [...] He hoped
to influence Senate opinion on the nomination on the eve of Armed
Services Committee hearings to confirm Bush.
I rapidly jotted down notes as Church discussed the lines he would like
to take against the nomination. "Once they used to give former national
party chairmen [as Bush had been under President Nixon] postmaster
generalships--the most political and least sensitive job in
government," he said. "Now they have given this former party chairman
the most sensitive and least political agency." Church wanted me to
stress how Bush "might compromise the independence of the CIA--the
agency could be politicized."
Some days later Church appeared on the CBS program Face the Nation, he
was asked by George Herman if his opposition to Bush would mean that
anyone with political experience would be a priori unacceptable for
such a post? Church replied: "I think that whoever is chosen should be
one who has demonstrated a capacity for indpendence, who has shown that
he can stand up to the many pressures." Church hinted that Bush had
never stood up for principle at the cost of political office.
Moreover, "a man whose background is as partisan as a past chairman of
the Republican party does serious damage to the agency and its intended
purposes." [fn 4]
The Brown Brothers, Harriman/Skull and Bones crowd counterattacked in
favor of Bush, mobilizing some significant resources. One was none
other than Leon Jaworski, the former Watergate special prosecutor.
Jaworski's mission for the Bush network appears to have been to get the
Townhouse and related Nixon slushfund issues off the table of the
public debate and confirmation hearings. Jaworski, speaking at a
convention of former FBI Special Agents meeting in Houston, defended
Bush against charges that he had accepted illegal or improper payments
from Nixon and CREEP operatives. "This was investigated by me when I
served as Watergate special prosecutor. I found no involvement of
George Bush and gave him full clearance. I hope that in the interest of
fairness, the matter will not be bandied about unless something new has
appeared on the horizon." Jaworski, who by then was back in Houston
working for his law firm of Fulbright and Jaworski, sent a copy of the
Houston Post article reporting this statement to Ford's White House
counselor Philip Buchen. [fn 5]
Saul Kohler of the Newhouse News Service offered the Ford White House
an all-purpose refutation of the arguments advanced by the opponents of
Bush during November and into December. "And now," wrote
Kohler, "President Ford is catching all sorts of heat from a lot of
people for appointing Bush to the non-political sensitive CIA because
he once served as Chairman of the Republican national Committee." How
unfair, thought Kohler, "for of all the appointments Ford made last
weekend, the nomination of Bush was the best." For one thing, "you'd
have to go a long way to find a man with less guile than George Bush."
Bush had been great at the RNC- "he managed to keep the RNC away from
the expletive deleted of that dark chapter in American political
history." "Not only did he keep the party apparatus clean, he kept his
own image clean..." And then: "Was Cordell Hull less distinguished a
Secretary of State because he had headed the Democratic National
Committee?," and so forth. Kohler quoted a White House official
commenting on the Bush nomination: "The gag line around here ever since
The Boss announced George for the CIA is that spying is going to be a
bore from now on because George is such a clean guy." [fn 6]
In the meantime, Bush got ready for his second meeting with Mao and
prepared the documentation for his conflict of interest and background
checks. In a letter to John C. Stennis, the chairman of the Senate
Armed Services Committee, which would hold the hearings on his
nomination, Bush stated that his only organizational affiliations were
as a trustee of Philips Academy in Andover, Massachusetts, and as a
member of the Board of the Episcopal Church Foundation in New York
City. In this letter, Bush refers to the "Bush Children Trust" he had
created for his five children, and "funded by a diversified portfolio"
which might put him into conflicts of interest. He told Stennis that if
confirmed, he would resign as trustee of the Bush Children Fund and
direct the other trustees to stop disclosing to him any details of the
operations of the Bush Children Trust. Otherwise Bush said that he was
not serving as officer, director, or partner of any corporation,
although he had a lump-sum retirement benefit from Zapata Corporation
in the amount of $40,000. According to his own account, he owned a home
in Washington DC, his summer house at Kennebunkport, a small
residential lot in Houston, plus some bank accounts and life insurance
policies. He had a securities portfolio managed by T. Rowe Price in
Baltimore, and he assured Stennis he would be willing to divest any
shares that might pose conflict of interest problems. [fn 7]
Congressional reaction reaching the White House before Bush's hearings
was not enthusiastic. Dick Cheney of the White House staff advised Ford
to call Senator John Stennis on November 3, noting that
Stennis "controls confirmation process for CIA and DOD." Ford replied
shortly after, "I did." [fn 8] A few days later Ford had a telephone
conversation with Senator Mike Mansfield, the Democratic majority
leader, and one of his notations was "Geo Bush--for him but he must say
no politics." [fn 9]
Negative mail from both houses of Congress was also coming in to the
White House. On November 12, Ford received a singular note from GOP
Congressman James M. Collins of Dallas, Texas. Collins wrote to
Ford: "I hope you will reconsider the appointment of George Bush to the
CIA. At this time it seems to me that it would be a greater service for
the country for George to continue his service in China. He is not the
right man for the CIA," wrote Collins, who had been willing to support
Bush for the vice presidency back in 1974. "Yesterday," wrote
Collins, "I sat next to my friend Dale Milford who is the only friendly
Democrat on Pike's Committee. He strenuously questioned why Bush was
being put in charge of the CIA. He likes George but he is convinced
that the Liberals will contend from now to Doomsday that George is a
partisan Republican voice. They are going to sing this song about
Republican Chairmen and let the liberal press beat it out in headlines
every day. I have heard this same story from many on the Hill who stand
with you. Please use George in some other way. They are going to
crucify him on this job and Senator Church will lead the procession. I
hope you find an urgent need to keep Bush in China," wrote Collins, a
Republican and a Texan, to Ford. [fn 10]
There was also a letter to Ford from Democratic Congressman Lucien
Nedzi of Michigan, who had been the chairman of one of the principal
House Watergate investigating committees. Nedzi wrote as follows:
The purpose of my letter is to express deep concern over the announced
appointment of George Bush as the new Director of the Central
Intelligence Agency.
As Chairman of the Special Subcommittee on Intelligence of the House
Armed Services Committee since 1971, I have had the obligation and
opportunity to closely observe the CIA, the other intelligence
agencies, the executive and legislative relationships of these
agencies, and vice-versa. We are at a critical juncture.
After reassuring Ford that he had no personal animus against Bush,
Nedzi went on:
However, his proposed appointment would bring with it inevitable
complications for the intelligence community. Mr. Bush is a man with a
recent partisan political past and a probable near-term partisan
political future. This is a burden neither the Agency, nor the
legislative oversight committee, nor the Executive should have to bear
as the CIA enters perhaps the most difficult period of its history.
The Director of the CIA must be unfettered by any doubts as to his
politics. He must be free of the appearance, as well as the substance,
that he is acting, or not acting, with partisan political
considerations in mind.
In my judgment, as one buffeted by the winds of the CIA controversy of
the last few years, I agree that a man of stature is needed, but a non-
political man.
Accordingly, I respectfully urge that you reconsider your appointment
of Mr. Bush to this most sensitive of positions. [fn 11]
Senator William V. Roth of Delaware sent Bush a letter on November 20
which made a related point:
Dear George:
It is my deep conviction that the security of this nation depends upon
an effective viable Central Intelligence Agency. This depends in part
upon the intelligence agency being involved in no way in domestic
politics, especially in the aftermath of Watergate. For that reason, I
believe you have no choice but to withdraw your name unequivocally from
consideration for the Vice Presidency, if you desire to become Director
of the CIA. [...]
If Bush still wanted to pursue national office, wrote Roth, "then I
believe the wise decision is for you to ask the President to withdraw
your nomination for the CIA Directorship." [fn 12] Roth sent a copy of
the same letter to Ford.
Through Jack Marsh at the White House, Bush also received a letter of
advice from Tex McCrary, the New York television and radio personality
who was also an eminence grise of Skull&Bones. "Old Tex" urged Bush
to "hold a press conference in Peking while the President is there, or
from Pearl Harbor on December 7, and take yourself out of the Vice
Presidential sweepstakes for '76." McCrary's communication shows that
he was a warm supporter of Bush's confirmation. [fn 13]
Within just a couple of days of making Bush's nomination public, the
Ford White House was aware that it had a significant public relations
problem. To get re-elected, Ford had to appear as a reformer, breaking
decisively with the bad old days of Nixon and the Plumbers. But with
the Bush nomination, Ford was putting a former party chairman and
future candidate for national office at the head of the entire
intelligence community. Ford's staff began to marshal attempted
rebuttals for the attacks on Bush. On November 5, Jim Connor of Ford's
staff had some trite boiler-plate inserted into Ford's Briefing Book in
case he were asked if the advent of Bush represented a move to obstruct
the Church and Pike committees. Ford was told to answer that he "has
asked Director Colby to cooperate fully with the Committee"
and "expects Ambassador Bush to do likewise once he becomes Director.
As you are aware, the work of both the Church and Pike Committees is
slated to wind up shortly." [fn 14] In case he were asked about Bush
politicizing the CIA, Ford was to answer:" "I believe that Republicans
and Democrats who know George Bush and have worked with him know that
he does not let politics and partisanship interfere with the
performance of public duty." That was a mouthful. "Nearly all of the
men and women in this and preceeding Administrations have had partisan
identities and have held partisan party posts." "George Bush is a part
of that American tradition and he will demonstrate this when he assumes
his new duties."
But when Ford, in an appearance on a Sunday talk show, was asked if he
were ready to exclude Bush as a possible vice-presidential candidate,
he refused to do so, answering "I don't think people of talent ought to
be excluded from any field of public service." At a press conference,
Ford said, "I don't think he's eliminated from consideration by
anybody, the delegates or the convention or myself.
In the meantime, Bush was in touch with the Ford White House about his
impending return to Washington. On November 27 he wrote to Max L.
Friedersdorf, an assistant to Ford: "We'll be back there in mid-
December. It looks like I am walking into the midst of a real
whirlwind, but all I know to do is to give it my all and be direct with
the Committee." Then, pencilled in by hand: "Max- I will be there in
EOB on the 10th--Jennifer Fitzgerald with me now in China will be
setting up a schedule for me a day or so in advance," and would
Fridersdorf please cooperate with Bush's girl Friday. [fn 15]
Ford's lobbying operation went into high gear. Inside the White House,
Max Friedersdorf wrote a memo to William Kendall on November 6, sending
along the useful fact that "I understand that Senator Howard Baker is
most anxious to assist in the confirmation of George Bush at the CIA."
Mike Duval wrote to Jack Marsh on November 18 that "[Rep.] Sonny
Montgomery (a close friend of Bush) should contact Senator Stennis."
Duval also related his findings that "Senators McGee and Bellmon will
be most supportive," while "Senator Stieger can advise you what House
members would be most useful in talking to their own Senators, if that
is needed." [fn 16] It was.
Bush's confirmation hearings got under way on December 15, 1975. Even
judged by Bush's standards of today, they constitute a landmark
exercise in sanctimonious hypocrisy so astounding as to defy
comprehension. If Bush were ever to try an acting career, he might be
best cast in the role of Moliere's Tartuffe.
Bush's sponsor was GOP Senator Strom Thurmond of South Carolina, the
ranking Republican on Senator John Stennis's Senate Armed Services
Committee. Later, in 1988, it was to be Thurmond's political protege,
Lee Atwater, cunning in the ways of the GOP "southern strategy," who
ran Bush's presidential campaign. Thurmond unloaded a mawkish panegyric
in favor of Bush: "I think all of this shows an interest on your part
in humanity, in civic development, love of your country, and
willingness to serve your fellow man." Could the aide writing that,
even if it was Lee Atwater, have kept a straight face?
Bush's opening statement was also in the main a tissue of banality and
cliches. He indicated his support for the Rockefeller Commission report
without having mastered its contents in detail. He pointed out that he
had attended Cabinet meetings from 1971 to 1974, without mentioning who
the president was in those days. Everybody was waiting for this
consummate pontificator to get to the issue of whether he was going to
attempt the vice-presidency in 1976. Readers of Bush's propaganda
biographies know that he never decides on his own to run for office,
but always responds to the urging of his friends. Within those limits,
his answer was that he was available for the second spot on the ticket.
More remarkably, he indicated that he had a hereditary right to it--it
was, as he said, his "birthright."
Would Bush accept a draft? "I cannot in all honesty tell you that I
would not accept, and I do not think, gentlemen, that any American
should be asked to say he would not accept, and to my knowledge, no one
in the history of this Republic has been asked to renounce his
political birthright as the price of confirmation for any office. And I
can tell you that I will not seek any office while I hold the job of
CIA Director. I will put politics wholly out of my sphere of
activities." Even more, Bush argued, his willingness to serve at the
CIA reflected his sense of noblesse oblige. Friends had asked him why
he wanted to go to Langley at all, "with all the controversy swirling
around the CIA, with its obvious barriers to political future?"
Magnanimously Bush replied to his own rhetorical question: "My answer
is simple. First, the work is desperately important to the survival of
this country, and to the survival of freedom around the world. And
second, old fashioned as it may seem to some, it is my duty to serve my
country. And I did not seek this job but I want to do it and I will do
my very best." [fn 17]
Stennis responded with a joke that sounds eerie in retrospect: "If I
though that you were seeking the Vice Presidential nomination or
Presidential nomination by way of the route of being Director of the
CIA, I would question you judgment most severely." There was laughter
in the committee room.
Senators Goldwater and Stuart Symington made clear that they would give
Bush a free ride not only out of deference to Ford, but also out of
regard for the late Prescott Bush, with whom they had both started out
in the Senate in 1952. Senator McIntyre was more demanding, and raised
the issue of enemies' list operations, a notorious abuse of the Nixon
(and subsequent) administratio ns:
"What if you get a call from the President, next July or August,
saying 'George, I would like to see you.' You go in the White House. He
takes you over in the corner and says, 'look, things are not going too
well in my campaign. This Reagan is gaining on me all the time. Now, he
is a movie star of some renown and has traveled with the fast set. He
was a Holywood star. I want you to get any dirt you can on this guy
because I need it."
What would Bush do ? "I do not think that is difficult, sir," intoned
Bush. "I would simply say that it gets back to character and it gets
back to integrity; and furthermore, I cannot conceive of the incumbent
doing that sort of thing. But if I were put into that kind of position
where you had a clear moral issue, I would simply say "no," because you
see I think, and maybe-- I have the advantages as everyone on this
committee of 20-20 hindsight, that this agency must stay in the foreign
intelligence business and must not harass American citizens, like in
Operation Chaos, and that these kinds of things have no business in the
foreign intelligence business." This was the same Bush whose 1980
campaign was heavily staffed by CIA veterans, some retired, some on
active service and in flagrant violation of the Hatch Act. This is the
vice-president who ran Iran-contra out of his own private office, and
so forth.
Gary Hart also had a few questions. How did Bush feel about
assassinations? Bush "found them morally offensive and I am pleased the
President has made that position very, very clear to the Intelligence
Committee..." How about "coups d'etat in various countries around the
world," Hart wanted to know?
"You mean in the covert field," replied Bush. "Yes." "I would want to
have full benefit of all the intelligence. I would want to have full
benefit of how these matters were taking place but I cannot tell you,
and I do not think I should, that there would never be any support for
a coup d'etat; in other words, I cannot tell you I cannot conceive of a
situation where I would not support such action." In retrospect, this
was a moment of refreshing candor.
Gary Hart knew where at least one of Bush's bodies was buried:
Senator Hart: You raised the question of getting the CIA out of
domestic areas totally. Let us hypthesize a situation where a President
has stepped over the bounds. Let us say the FBI is investigating some
people who are involved, and they go right to the White House. There is
some possible CIA interest. The President calls you and says, I want
you as Director of the CIA to call the Director of the FBI to tell him
to call off this operation because it may jeopardize some CIA
activities.
Mr. Bush. Well, generally speaking, and I think you are hypothecating a
case without spelling it out in enough detail to know if there is any
real legitimate foreign intelligence aspect... [...]
There it was: the smoking gun tape again, the notorious Bush-Lietdtke-
Mosbacher-Pennzoil contribution to the CREEP again, the money that had
been found in the pockets of Bernard Barker and the Plumbers after the
Watergate break-in. But Hart did not mention it overtly, only in this
oblique, Byzantine manner. Hart went on: "I am hypothesizing a case
that actually happened in June, 1972. There might have been some
tangential CIA interest in something in Mexico. Funds were laundered
and so forth."
Mr. Bush. Using a 50-50 hindsight on that case, I hope I would have
said the CIA is not going to get involved in that if we are talking
about the same one.
Senator Hart. We are.
Senator Leahy. Are there others?
Bush was on the edge of having his entire Watergate past come out in
the wash, but the liberal Democrats were already far too devoted to the
one-party state to grill Bush seriously. In a few seconds, responding
to another question from Hart, Bush was off the hook, droning on about
plausible deniability, of all things:"...and though I understand the
need for plausible deniability, I think it is extremely difficult."
In his next go-round, Hart asked Bush about the impact of the cuthroat
atmosphere of the Cold War and its impact on American values. Bush
responded: "I am not going to sit here and say we need to match
ruthlessness with ruthlessness. I do feel we need a covert capability
and I hope that it can minimize these problems that offend our
Americans. We are living in a very complicated, difficult world." This
note of support for covert operations would come up again and again.
Indicative of Bush's thinking was his response to a query from Hart
about whether he would support a US version of the British Official
Secrets Act, which defines as a state secret any official information
which has not been formally released to the public, with stiff criminal
penalties for those who divulge or print it. In the era of FOIA, Bush
did not hesitate: "Well, I understand that was one of the
recommendations of the Rockefeller Commission. Certainly I would give
it some serious attention." Which reeks of totalitarianism.
The next day, December 16, 1975, Church, appearing as a witness,
delivered his phillipic against Bush. After citing evidence of
widespread public concern about the renewed intrusion of the CIA in
domestic politics under Bush, Church reviewed the situation:
So here we stand. Need we find or look to higher places than the
Presidency and the nominee himself to confirm the fact that this door
[of the Vice Presidency in 1976] is left open and that he remains under
active consideration for the ticket in 1976? We stand in this position
in the close wake of Watergate, and this committee has before it a
candidate for Director of the CIA, a man of strong partisan political
background and a beckoning political future. Under these cirumstances I
find the appointment astonishing. Now, as never before, the Director of
the CIA must be completely above political suspicion. At the very least
this committee, I believe, should insist that the nominee disavow any
place on the 1976 Presidential ticket. [...] I believe that this
committee should insist that the nominee disavow any place on the 1976
Presidential ticket. Otherwise his position as CIA Director would be
hoplessly compromised. [...] Mr. Chairman, let us not make a travesty
out of our efforts to reform the CIA. The Senate and the people we
represent have the right to insist upon a Central Intelligence Agency
which is politically neutral and totally professional. It is strange
that I should have to come before this of all committees to make that
argument.[...]
If Ambassador Bush wants to be Director of the CIA, he should seek that
position. If he wants to be Vice President, then that ought to be his
goal. It is wrong for him to want both positions, even in a
Bicentennial year.
Go to Part 2
Chive Mynde
Anton Chaitkin
Chapter -XV- CIA DIRECTOR, Part 2
It was an argument that conceded far too much to Bush in the effort to
be fair. Bush was incompetent for the post, and the argument should
have ended there. Church's unwillingness to demand the unqualified
rejection of such a nominee no matter what future goodies he was
willing temporarily to renounce has cast long shadows over subsequent
American history. But even so, Bush was in trouble. The other senators
questioned Church. Thurmond was a bullying partisan for Bush, demanding
that Church certify George for the GOP ticket in 1976, which Church was
unwisely willing to do. Senator Tower wanted to know about Church's own
presidential ambitions, and brought up that the press corps called the
Senate Intelligence Committee the "Church for President" committee. Why
didn't Church renounce his presidential ambitions so as to give his
criticism more credibility? Goldwater spun out a mitigating defense of
Bush. Church fought back with what we may consider the predecessor of
the "wimp" argument, that Bush was always the yes-man of his patrons:
if you were going to put a pol into Langley, he argued, "then I think
that it ought to be a man who has demonstrated in his political career
that he can and is willing to stand up and take the heat even where it
courts the displeasure of his own President." "But I do not think that
Mr. Bush's political record has been of that character."
Church was at his ironic best when he compared Bush to a recent
chairman of the Democratic national Committee: "...if a Democrat were
President, Mr. Larry O'Brien ought not to be nominated to be Director
of the CIA. Of all times to do it, this is the worst, right at a time
when it is obvious that public confidence needs to be restored in the
professional, impartial, and nonpolitical character of the agency. So,
we have the worst of all possible worlds." Church tellingly underlined
that "Bush's birthright does not include being Director of the CIA. It
includes the right to run for public office, to be sure, but that is
quite a different matter than confirming him now for this particular
position."
Church said he would under no circumstance vote for Bush, but that if
the latter renounced the 76 ticket, he would refrain from attempting to
canvass other votes against Bush. It was an ambiguous position.
While still reeling from Church's philippic, Bush also had to absorb a
statement from Senator Culver, who announced that he also would vote
against Bush.
Bush came back to the witness chair in an unmistakeable whining mood.
He was offended above all by the comparison of his august self to the
upstart Larry O'Brien: "I think there is some difference in the
qualifications," said Bush in a hyperthyroid rage. "Larry O'Brien did
not serve in the Congress of the United States for 4 years. Larry
O'Brien did not serve, with no partisanship, at the United Nations for
2 years. Larry O'Brien did not serve as the Chief of the US Liaison
Office in the People's Republic of China." Not only Bush but his whole
cursus honorum were insulted! "I will never apologize," said Bush a few
second later, referring to his own record. Then Bush pulled out
his "you must resign" letter to Nixon: "Now, I submit that for the
record that that is demonstrable independence. I did not do it by
calling the newspapers and saying, 'Look, I am having a press
conference. Here is a sensational statement to make me, to separate me
from a President in great agony.'"
Bush recovered somewhat under questioning by Hugh Scott of
Pennsylvania, a reliable ally. Senator Symington urged Bush to committ
to serve at the CIA for at least two years; Bush was non-committal, but
the pressure was becoming unbearable. After some sparring between Bush
and Gary Hart, Henry Jackson of Washington came in for the first time.
Jackson's constant refrain was that the maladroit and bumbling Ford had
put Bush in a very awkward and unfair position by nominating him:
To be very candid about it, it seems to me that the President has put
you in a very awkward position. The need here is really to save the
CIA. I do not need to recite what the Agency has gone through. It has
been a very rough period. And it seems to me that the judgment of the
President in this matter is at best imposing a terrible burden on the
CIA and on you. It raises a problem here of nominating someone, who is
a potential candidate, for service of less than a year. This is what
really troubles me because I have the highest regard and personal
respect for your ability and above all, your integrity. Mr. Chairman,
it seems to me that the President should assure this committee that he
will not ask Ambassador Bush to be on the ticket.
Jackson, a former chairman of the Democratic national Committee, had
turned down an offer from Nixon to be Secretary of Defense, and had
cited his party post as a reason for declining. While George squirmed,
Jackson kept repeating his litany that "Ambassador Bush is in an
awkward position." Bush asked for the opportunity to reply, saying that
he would make it "brief and strong." He began citing James Schlesinger
serving a few months at the CIA before going on to the Pentagon, a
lamentable comparison all around. With Bush red-faced and whining,
knowing that the day was going very badly indeed, Stennis tried to put
him out of his misery by ending the session. But even this was not
vouchsafed to poor, tormented George. He still had to endure Senator
Leahy explaining why he, too, would vote against the Bush nomination.
Bush whined in reply "Senator, I know you have arrived at your
conclusion honestly and I would only say I think it is unfortunate that
you can say I have the character and I have the integrity, the
perception, but that the way it is looked at by somebody else overrides
that." A candidate for the CIA was in mortal peril, but a public wimp
was born.
Bush had been savaged in the hearings, and his nomination was now in
grave danger of being rejected by the committee, and then by the full
Senate. Later in the afternoon of November 16, a damage control party
met at the White House to assess the situation for Ford. [fn 18]
According to Patrick O'Donnell of Ford's Congressional Relations
Office, the most Bush could hope for was a bare majority of 9 out of 16
votes on the Stennis committee. This represented the committee
Republicans, plus Stennis, Harry Byrd of Virginia, and Stuart
Symington. But that was paper thin, thought O'Donnell: "This gives is a
bare majority and will, of course, lead to an active floor fight which
will bring the rank and file Democrats together in a vote which will
embarrass the President and badly tarnish, if not destroy, one of his
brightest stars." O'Donnell was much concerned that Jackson had "called
for the President to pulicly remove George Bush from the vice
presidential race." Senator Cannon had not attended the hearings, and
was hard to judge. Senator McIntyre obviously had serious reservations,
and Culver, Leahy, and Gary Hart were all sure to vote no. A possible
additional Democratic vote for Bush was that of Sam Nunn of Georgia,
whom O'Donnell described as "also very hesitant but strongly respects
George and has stated that a favorable vote would only be because of
the personal relationship." O'Donnell urge Ford to call both Cannon and
Nunn.
LBJ had observed that Ford was so dull that he was incapable of walking
and chewing gum at the same time. But now even Ford knew he was facing
the shipwreck of one of his most politically sensitive nominations,
important in his efforts to dissociate himself from the intelligence
community mayhem of the recent past.
Ford was inclined to give the senators what they wanted, and exclude
Bush a priori from the vice presidential contest. When Ford called
George over to the Oval Office on December 18, he already had the text
of a letter to Stennis announcing that Bush was summarily ruled off the
ticket if Ford were the candidate (which was anything but certain).
Ford showed Bush the letter. We do not know what whining may have been
heard in the White House that day from a senatorial patrician deprived
(for the moment) of his birthright. Ford could not yield; it would have
thrown his entire election campaign into acute embarrassment just as he
was trying to get it off the ground under the likes of Bo Callaway.
When George saw that Ford was obdurate, he proposed that the letter be
amended to make it look as if the initiative to rule him out as a
running mate had originated with Bush. The fateful letter:
Dear Mr. Chairman:
As we both know, the nation must have a strong and effective foreign
intelligence capability. Just over two weeks ago, on December 7 while
in Pearl Habor, I said that we must never drop our guard nor
unilaterally dismantle our defenses. The Central Intelligence Agency is
essential to maintaining our national security.
I nominated Ambassador George Bush to be CIA Director so we can now get
on with appropriate decisions concerning the intelligence community. I
need-- and the nation needs-- his leadership at CIA as we rebuild and
strengthen the foreign intelligence community in a manner which earns
the confidence of the American people.
Ambassador Bush and I agree that the Nation's immediate foreign
intelligence needs must take precedence over other considerations and
there should be continuity in his CIA leadership. Therefore, if
Ambassador Bush is confirmed by the Senate as Director of Central
Intelligence, I will not consider him as my Vice Presidential running
mate in 1976.
He and I have discussed this in detail. In fact, he urged that I make
this decision. This says something about the man and about his desire
to do this job for the nation. [...]
On December 19, this letter was received by Stennis, who announced its
contents to his committee. This committe promptly approved the Bush
appointment by a vote of 12 to 4, with Gary Hart, Leahy, Culver, and
McIntyre voting against him. Bush's name could now be sent to the
floor, where a recrudescence of anti-Bush sentiment was not likely, but
could not be ruled out.
Bush, true to form, sent a hand-written note to Kendall and O'Donnell
on December 18. "You guys were great to me in all this whirlwind,"
wrote Bush. "Thank you for your help--and for your understanding. I
have never been in one quite like this before and it helped to have a
couple of guys who seemed to care and want to help. Thanks, men--Thank
Max, [Friedersdorf] too -George" [fn 19]
But underneath his usual network-tending habits, Bush was now engulfed
by a profound rage. He had fought to get elected to the Senate twice,
in 1964 and 1970, and failed both times. He had tried for the vice
presidency in 1968, in 1972, had been passed over by Nixon in late 1973
when Ford was chosen, in 1974, and was now out of the running in 1976.
This was simply intolerable for a senatorial patrician, and that was
indeed Bush's concept of his own "birthright."
Bush gave the lie to Aristotle's theory of the humors: neither blood
nor phlegm nor black nor even the yellow bile of rage moved him, but
hyperthyroid transports of a manic rage that went beyond the merely
bilious. George Bush had already had enough of the Stennis Committee,
enough of the Church Committee, enough of the Pike Committee. Years
later, on the campaign trail in 1988, he vomited out his rage against
his tormentors of 1975. Bush said that he had gone to the CIA "at a
very difficult time. I went in there when it had been demoralized by
the attacks of a bunch of little untutored squirts from Capitol Hill,
going out there, looking at these confidential documents without one
simple iota of concern for the legitimate national security interests
of this country. And I stood up for the CIA then, and I stand up for it
now. And defend it. So let the liberals wring their hands and consider
it a liability. I consider it a strength."
But in 1975 there was no doubt that George Bush was in a towering rage.
As Christmas approached, no visions of sugarplums danced in Bush's
head. He dreamed of a single triumphant stroke that would send Church
and all the rest of his tormentors reeling in dismay, and give the new
CIA Director a dignified and perhaps triumphant inauguration.
Then, two days before Christmas, the CIA chief in Athens, Richard Welch
was gunned down in front of his home by masked assassins as he returned
home with his wife from a Christmas party. A group calling itself
the "November 19 Organization" later claimed credit for the killing.
Certain networks immediately began to use the Welch assassination as a
bludgeon against the Church and Pike committees. An example came from
columnist Charles Bartlett writing in the old Washington Star: "The
assassination of the CIA Station Chief, Richard Welch, in Athens is a
direct consequence of the stagey hearings of the Church Committee.
Spies traditionally function in a gray world of immunity from such
crudities. But the Committee's prolonged focus on CIA activities in
Greece left agents there exposed to random vengeance." [fn 20] Staffers
of the Church committee pointed out that the Church committee had never
said a word about Greece or mentioned the name of Welch.
CIA Director Colby first blamed the death of Welch on Counterspy
magazine, which had published the name of Welch some months before. The
next day Colby backed off, blaming a more general climate of hysteria
regarding the CIA which had led to the assassination of Welch. In his
book, Honorable Men, published some years later, Colby continued to
attribute the killing to the "sensational and hysterical way the CIA
investigations had been handled and trumpeted around the world."
The Ford White House resolved to exploit this tragic incident to the
limit. Liberals raised a hue and cry in response. Les Aspin later
recalled that "the air transport plane carrying [Welch's] body circled
Andrews Air Force Base for three-quarters of an hour in order to land
live on the 'Today' Show." Ford waived restrictions in order to allow
interrment at Arlington Cemetery. The funeral on January 7 was
described by the Washington Post as "a show of pomp usually reserved
for the nation's most renowned military heroes." Anthony Lewis of the
New York Times described the funeral as "a political device" with
ceremonies "being manipulated in order to arouse a political backlash
against legitimate criticism." Norman Kempster in the Washington Star
found that "only a few hours after the CIA's Athens station chief was
gunned down in front of his home, the agency began a subtle campaign
intended to persuade Americans that his death was the indirect result
of congressional investigations and the direct result of an article in
an obscure magazine." Here, in the words of a Washington Star headline,
was "one CIA effort that worked."
Between Christmas and New Year's in Kennbunkport, looking forward to
the decisive floor vote on his confrimation, Bush was at work tending
and mobilizing key parts of his network. One of these was a certain Leo
Cherne.
Leo Cherne is not a household word, but he has been a powerful figure
in the US intelligence community over the period since World War II.
Leo Cherne was to be one of Bush's most important allies when he was
CIA Director and throughout Bush's subsequent career, so it is worth
taking a moment to get to know Cherne better.
Cherne's parents were both printers who came to the US from Romania. In
his youth he was a champion orator of the American Zionist Association,
and he has remained a part of B'nai B'rith all his life. He was trained
as an attorney, and he joined the Research Institute of America, a
publisher of business books, in 1936. He claims to have helped to draft
the army and navy industrial mobilization plans for World War II, and
at the end of the war he was an economic advisor to Gen. Douglas
MacArthur in Japan. During that time he worked for "the dismantling of
the pervasive control over Japanese society which had been maintained
by the Zaibnatsu families," [fn 21] and devised a new Japanese tax
structure. Cherne built up a long association with the Industrial
College of the Armed Forces.
Cherne was typical of the so-called"neoconservatives" who have been
prominent in government and policy circles under Reagan-Bush, and Bush.
Cherne was the founder of the International Rescue Committee, which
according to Cherne's own blurb "came into existence one week after
Hitler came to power to assist those who would have to flee from Nazi
Germany...In the years since, we have helped thousands of Jews who have
fled from the Iron Curtain countries, all of them, and have worked to
assist in the re-settlement of Jews in Europe and the United States who
have left the Soviet Union."
Cherne's IRC was clearly a conduit for neo-Bukharinite operations
between east and west in the Cold War, and it was also reputedly a CIA
front organization. CIA funding for the IRC came through the J.M.
Kaplan Fund, a known CIA conduit, and also through the Norman
Foundation, according to Frank A. Cappell's Review of the News (March
17, 1976). IRC operations in Bangladesh included the conduiting of CIA
money to groups of intellectuals. Capell noted that Cherne had "close
ties to the leftist element in the CIA." Cherne was also on good terms
with Sir Percy Craddock, the British intelligence coordinator, and Sir
Leonard Hooper.
Cherne was a raving hawk during the Vietnam war, when he was associated
with the as yet unreconstructed Kissinger clone Morton Halperin in the
American Friends of Vietnam. Along with John Connally, Cherne was a co-
chair of Democrats for Nixon in 1972. He had been a founding member of
Herman Kahn's Hudson Institute, a school for Kissingerian Strangeloves,
and has always been a leader of New York's Freedom House. Cherne was
also big on Robert O. Anderson's National Commission on Coping with
Interdependence and on Nelson Rockefeller's Third Century Corporation.
Cherne was a close friend of William Casey, who was working in the
Nixon Administration as Undersecretary of State for Economic Affairs in
mid-1973. That was when Cherne was named to the president's Foreign
Intelligence Advisory Board (PFIAB) by Nixon. On March 15, 1976, Cherne
became the chairman of this body, which specializes in conduiting the
demands of financier and related interests into the intelligence
community. Cherne, as we will see, would be along with Bush a leading
beneficiary of Ford's spring, 1976 intelligence re-organization.
To top it all off, Cherne has always been something of a megalomaniac.
His self-serving RIA biographical sketch culminates: "Political
scientist, economist, sculptor, lawyer, foreign affairs specialist--
any one and all of these descriptions fit Leo Cherne. A Renaissance man
born in the 20th century, he is equally at home in fields of fine arts,
public affairs, industry, economics, or foreign policy."
Bush's correspondence with Cherne leaves no doubt that theirs was a
very special relationship. Cherne represented for Bush a strengthening
of his links to the Zionist-neoconservative milieu, with options for
backchanneling into the Soviet block. So on New Year's Eve Bush's
thoughts, perhaps stimulated by his awareness of what help the Zionist
lobby could give to his still embattled nomination, went out to Leo
Cherne in one of his celebrated handwritten notes: "I read your
testimony with keen interest and appreciation. I am really looking
forward to meeting you and working with you in connection with your
PFIAB chores. Have a wonderful 1976," Bush wrote.
January 1976 was not auspicious for Bush. He had to wait until almost
the end of the month for his confirmation vote, hanging there, slowly
twisting in the wind. In the meantime, the Pike Committee report was
approaching completion, after months of probing and haggling, and was
sent to the Government Printing Office on January 23, despite
continuing arguments from the White House and from the GOP that the
committee could not reveal confidential and secret material provided by
the executive branch. On Sunday January 25, a copy of the report was
leaked to Daniel Schorr of CBS News, and was exhibited on television
that evening. The following morning, the New York Times published an
extensive summary of the entire Pike Committee report, which this
newspaper had also received.
Despite all this exposure, the House voted on January 29 that the Pike
Committee report could not be released. A few days later it was
published in full in the Village Voice, and CBS corrspondent Daniel
Schorr was held responsible for its appearance. The Pike Committee
report attacked Henry Kissinger "whose comments," it said "are at
variance with the facts." In the midst of his imperial regency over the
United States, an unamused Kissinger responded that "we are facing a
new version of McCarthyism." A few days later Kissinger said of the
Pike Committee: "I think they have used classified information in a
reckless way, and the version of covert operations they have leaked to
the press has the cumulative effect of being totally untrue and
damaging to the nation." [fn 22]
Thus, as Bush's confirmation vote approached, the Ford White House on
the one hand and the Pike and Church committees on the other were close
to "open political warfare," as the Washington Post put it at the time.
One explanation of the leaking of the Pike report was offered by Otis
Pike himself on February 11: "A copy was sent to the CIA. It would be
to their advantage to leak it for publication." By now Ford was raving
about mobilizing the FBI to find out how the report had been leaked.
On January 19, George Bush was present in the Executive Gallery of the
House of Representatives, seated close to the unfortunate Betty Ford,
for the President's State of the Union Address. This was a photo
opportunity so that Ford's CIA candidate could get on television for a
cameo appearance that might boost his standing on the eve of
confirmation. The invitation was handled by Jim Connor of the White
House staff, who duly received a hand-written note of thanks from the
aspiring DCI.
Senate floor debate was underway on January 26, and Senator McIntyre
lashed out at the Bush nomination as "an insensitive affront to the
American people." The New Hampshire Democrat argued: "It is clearly
evident that this collapse of confidence in the CIA was brought on not
only by the exposure of CIA misdeeds, but by the painful realization
that some of those misdeeds were encouraged by political leaders who
sought not an intelligence advantage over a foreign adversary, but a
political advantage over their domestic critics and the opposition
party."
McIntyre went on: "And who can look at the history of political
subordination of the CIA and expect the people to give an agency
director so clearly identified with politics their full faith and
confidence? To me it is a transparent absurdity that given the
sensitivity of the issue, President Ford could not find another nominee
of equal ability--and less suspect credentials--than the former
national chairman of the president's political party."
In further debate on the day of the vote, January 27, Senator Biden
joined other Democrats in assailing Bush as "the wrong appointment for
the wrong job at the wrong time." Church also continued his attack,
branding Bush "an individual whose past record of political activism
and partisan ties to the president contradict the very purpose of
impartiality and objectivity for which the agency was created." Church
appealed to the Senate to reject Bush, a man "too deeply embroiled in
partisan politics and too intertwined with the political destiny of the
president himself" to be able to lead the CIA. Goldwater, Tower, Percy,
Howard Baker, and Clifford Case all spoke up for Bush. Bush's floor
leader was Strom Thurmond, who supported Bush by attacking the Church
and Pike Committees. "That is where the public concern lies, on
disclosures which are tearing down the CIA," orated Thurmond, "not upon
the selection of this highly competent man to repair the damage of this
over-exposure."
Finally it came to a roll call and Bush passed by a vote of 64-27, with
Lowell Weicker of Connecticut voting present. Those voting against Bush
were: Abourezk, Biden, Bumpers, Church, Clark, Cranston, Culver,
Durkin, Ford, Gary Hart, Philip Hart, Haskell, Helms [the lone GOP
opponent], Huddleston, Inouye, Johnston, Kennedy, Leahy, Magnuson,
McIntyre, Metcalf, Mondale, Morgan, Nelson, Proxmire, Stone, and
Williams. Church's staff felt they had failed lamentably, having gotten
only liberal Democrats and the single Republican vote of Jesse Helms.
[fn 23.
It was the day after Bush's confirmation that the House Rules committee
voted 9 to 7 to block the publication of the Pike Committee report. The
issue then went to the full House on January 29, which voted, 146 to
124, that the Pike Committee must submit its report to censorship by
the White House and thus by the CIA. At almost the same time, Senator
Howard Baker joined Tower and Goldwater in opposing the principal final
recommendation of the Church Committee, such as it was, the
establishment of a permanent intelligence oversight committee.
Pike found that the attempt to censor his report had made "a complete
travesty of the whole doctrine of separation of powers." In the view of
a staffer of the Church committee, "all within two days, the House
Intelligence Committee had ground to a halt, and the Senate
Intelligence Committee had split asunder over the centerpiece of its
recommendations. The White House must have rejoiced; the Welch death
and leaks from the Pike committee report had produced, at last, a
backlash against the congressional investigations." [fn 24]
Riding the crest of that wave of backlash was George Bush. The
constellation of events around his confirmation prefigures the wretched
state of Congress today: a rubber stamp parliament in a totalitarian
state, incapable of overriding even one of Bush's 22 vetoes.
On Friday, January 30, Ford and Bush were joined at the CIA auditorium
for Bush's swearing in ceremony before a large gathering of agency
employees. Colby was also there: some said he had been fired primarily
because Kissinger thought that he was divulging too much to the
Congressional committees, but Kissinger later told Colby that the
latter's stratagems had been correct. Colby opened the ceremony with a
few brief words: "Mr. President, and Mr. Bush, I have the great honor
to present you to an organization of dedicated professionals. Despite
the turmoil and tumult of the last year, they continue to produce the
best intelligence in the world." This was met by a burst of applause.
[fn 25] Ford's line was: "We cannot improve this agency by destroying
it." Bush promised to make "CIA an instrument of peace and an object of
pride for all our people." Bush went on to say: "I will not turn my
back from the past. We've learned a lot about what an intelligence
agency must do to maintain the confidence of the people in an open
society. But the emphasis will now be on the future. I'm determined to
protect those things that must be kept secret. And I am more determined
to protect those unselfish and patriotic people who with total
dedication serve their country, often putting thjeir lives on the line,
only to have some people bent on destroying this agency expose their
names." A number of senators were invited, with Stennis, Thurmond,
Tower, Goldwater, Baker and Brooke leading the pack; others had been
added by the White House after checking by telephone with Jennifer
Fitzgerald.
Before proceding, let us take a loom at Bush's team of associates at
the CIA, since we will find them in many of his later political
campaigns and office staffs.
When Bush became DCI, his principal deputy was General Vernon Walters,
a former army lieutenant general. This is the same Gen. Vernon Walters
who was mentioned by Haldeman and Nixon in the notorious "smoking gun"
tape already discussed, but who of course denied that he ever did any
of the things that Haldeman and Ehrlichman said that he had promised to
do. Walters had been at the CIA as DDCI since May, 1972--a Nixon
appointee who had been with Nixon when the then vice president's car
was stoned in Caracas, Venezuela way back when. Ever since then Nixon
had seen him as part of the old guard. Walters left to become a private
consultant in July, 1976.
To replace Walters, Bush picked Enno Henry Knoche, who had joined CIA
in 1953 as an intelligence analyst specializing in Far Eastern
political and military affairs. Knoche came from the navy and knew
Chinese. From 1962 to 1967 he had been the chief of the National
Photographic Interpretation Center. In 1969, he had become deputy
director of planning and budegting, and chaired the internal CIA
committee in charge of computerization. (This emphasis was reflected
during the Bush tenure by heavy emphasis on satellites and SIGINT
communications monitoring.) Knoche was then deputy director of the
Office of Current Intelligence, which produces ongoing assessments of
international events for the President and the NSC. After 1972, Knoche
headed the Intelligence Directorate's Office of Strategic Research,
charged with evaluating strategic threats to the US. In 1975, Knoche
had been a special liaison between Colby and the Rockefeller
Commission, as well as with the Church and Pike Committees. This was a
very sensitive post, and Bush clearly looked to Knoche to help him deal
with continuing challenges coming from the Congress. In the fall of
1975, Knoche had become the number two on Colby's staff for the
coordination and management of the intelligence community. According to
some, Knoche was to function as Bush's "Indian guide" through the
secrets of Langley; he knew "where the bodies were buiried." Otherwise,
Knoche was known for his love of tennis.
Knoche was highly critical of Colby's policy of handing over limited
amounts of classified material to the Pike and Church committees, while
fighting to save the core of covert operations. Knoche told a group of
friends during this period: "There is no counterintelligence any more."
This implies a condemnation of the Congressional committees with whom
Knoche had served as liaison, and can also be read as a lament for the
ousting of James Jesus Angleton, chief of the CIA's Counterintelligence
operations until 1975 and director of the mail-opening operation that
had been exposed by various probers. [fn 26]
Here was a deputy who could protect Bush's flank with his Congressional
tormentors, who would call Bush to the Hill more than fifty times
during his approximately one year of CIA tenure. He would also appear
to have had enough administrative experience to run things, shielding
Bush from the defect that Governor Scranton had pointed out years
before- the lack of administrative ability. Nevertheless, Woodward and
Pincus [fn 27] portray the Knoche appointment as getting mixed reviews
within the CIA, and quote Admiral Daniel J. Murphy's view that the
Knoche nomination was "not popular." For Woodward and Pincus Knoche
was "a personable, tennis-playing giant of a man."
The Admiral Daniel J. Murphy just mentioned was Bush's deputy director
for the intelligence community, and later became Bush's chief of staff
during his first term as vice president. Much later, in November, 1987,
Murphy visited Panama in the company of South Korean businessman and
intelligence operative Tongsun Park, and met with Gen. Manuel Antonio
Noriega. Murphy was later obliged to testify to the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee about his meeting with Noriega. Murphy claimed that
he was only in Panama to "make a buck," but there are indications that
he was carrying messages to Noriega from Bush. Tongsun Park, Murphy's
ostensible business associate, will soon turn out to have been the
central figure of the Koreagate scandal of 1976, a very important
development on Bush's CIA watch. [fn 28]
Other names on the Bush flow chart included holdover Edward Proctor and
then Bush appointee Sayre Stevens in the slot of Deputy Director for
Intelligence; holdover Carl Duckett and then Bush appointee Leslie
Dirks as Deputy Director for Science and Technology; John Blake,
holdover as Deputy Director for Administration; and holdover William
Nelson, followed by Bush appointee William Wells, Deputy Director for
Operations .
William Wells as Deputy Director for Operations was a very significant
choice. He was a career covert operations specialist who had graduated
from Yale a few years before Bush. Wells soon acquired his own deputy,
recommended by him and approved by Bush: this was the infamous Theodore
Shackley, whose title thus became Associate Deputy Director for Covert
Operations. Shackley later emerged as one of the central figures of the
Iran-contra scandal of the 1980's. He is reputedly one of the dominant
personalities of a CIA old boys' network known as The Enterprise, which
was at the heart of Iran-contra and the other illegal covert operations
of the Reagan-Bush years.
During the early 1960's, after the Bay of Pigs, Theodore Shackley had
been the head of the CIA Miami Station during the years in which
Operation Mongoose was at its peak. This was the Howard Hunt and
Watergate Cubans crowd, circles familiar to Felix Rodriguez (Max
Gomez), who in the 1980's supervised gun-running and drug-running out
of Bush's vice presidential office.
Later, Shackley was reportedly the chief of the CIA station in
Vientiane, Laos, between July 1966 and December 1968. Some time after
that he moved on to become the CIA station chief in Saigon, where he
had directed the implementation of the Civilian Operations and Rural
Development Support (CORDS) progra, better known as Operation Phoenix,
a genocidal crime against humanity which killed tens of thousands of
Vietnamese civilians because they were suspected of working for the
Vietcong, or sometimes simply because they were able to read and write.
As for Shackley, there are also reports that he worked for a time in
the late 1960's in Rome, during the period when the CIA's GLADIO
capabilities were being used to launch a wave of terrorism in that
country. Such was the man that Bush chose to appoint to a position of
reponsibility in the CIA. Later, Shackley will turn up as a "speech
writer" for Bush during the 1979-80 campaign.
Along with Shackley came his associate and former Miami station second
in command, Thomas Clines, a partner of General Richard Secord and
Albert Hakkim during the Iran-contra operation, convicted in September
1990 on four felony tax counts for not reporting his ill-gotten gains,
and sentenced to 16 months in prison and a fine of $40,000.
During Bush's tenure Shackley's circles were mightliy remoralized. In
particular Ed Wilson, a veteran of Shackley's Miami station, now a
retired CIA officer who worked closely with serving CIA personnel to
organize gun running, sex operatives, and other activities, plied his
trade undisturbed. The Wilson scandal, which had grown up on Bush's
watch, would begin to explode only during the tenure of Stansfield
Turner, under Carter.
Another career covert operations man, John Waller, became the Inspector
General, the officer who was supposed to keep track of illegal
operations. For legal advice, Bush turned first to holdover General
Counsel Mitchell Rogovin, who had in December 1975 theorized that
intelligence activities belonged to the "inherent powers" of the
Presidency, and that no special Congressional egislation was required
to permit such things as covert operations to go on. Later Bush
appointed Anthony Lapham, Yale '58, as CIA General Counsel. Lapham was
the scion of an old San Francisco banking family, and his brother was
Lewis Lapham, the editor of Harper's Magazine. Lapham would take a
leading role in the CIA coverup of the Letelier assassination case. [fn
29]
Typical of the broad section of CIA officers who were delighted with
their new boss from Brown Brothers, Harriman/Skull and Bones was Cord
Meyer, who had most recently been the station chief in London from 1973
on, a wild and wooly time in the tight little island, as we will see.
Meyer, a covert action veteran and Watergate operative, writes at
length in his autobiography about his enthusiasm for the Bush regime at
CIA, which induced him to prolong his own career there:
I again seriously thought of retiring from the Agency but the new
atmosphere in CIA's Langley headquarters changed my mind. George Bush
had been appointed by President Ford to succeed Colby as DCI in
January, and by the time of my return he had completely dispelled the
fears that had been aroused by his former political connections. Having
served in the Congress as a Republican representative from Texas and
having recently been chairman of the Republican National Committee, he
was initially viewed with suspicion as an ambitious politician who
might try to use the Agency for partisan purposes. However, he quickly
proved by his performance that he was prepared to put politics aside
and to devote all his considerable ability and enthusiasm to restoring
the morale of an institution that had been battered enough by sucessive
investigations. Instead of reaching outside for defeated Republican
candidates to fill key jobs, he chose from within the organization
among men who had demonstrated their competence through long careers in
intelligence work. He leaned over backward to protect the objectivity
and independence of the Agency's estimates and to avoid slanting the
results to fit some preconceived notion of what the President wanted to
hear.
On the other hand, his close relationship to Ford [Bush was a regular
tennis doubles partner with Ford] and the trust that the President
obviously had in him gave Bush an access to the White House and an
influence in the wider Washington bureaucracy that Colby had never
enjoyed. Not only did morale improve as a result, but through Bush the
Agency's views carried new weight and influence in the top reaches of
the Ford Administration. In effect, I found on my return that the
working environment at the Agency was far better than I had imagined it
to be from my exposed position abroad and I determined to stay on for a
period before retiring. Bush and "Hank" Knoche, the newly appointed
deputy director, asked me to serve as a special assistant, and gave me
as first assignment the task of reviewing the entire structure of the
intelligence community to determine the adequacy of the arrangements
for providing strategic warning against an attack on the United States
and for handling major international crises. [fn 30]
This all sounds like a Bush campaign brochure, but it is typical of the
intelligence community forces loyal to Bush; as for Cord Meyer, it may
be that he developed the design for the Special Situation Group which
Bush chaired from March, 1981 to January, 1989, through which Bush ran
Iran-Contra and all of the other significant covert operations and
coups of the entire Reagan era.
And what did other CIA officers, such as intelligence analysts, think
of Bush? A common impression is that he was a superficial lightweight
with no serious interest in intelligence. Deputy Director for Science
and technology Carl Duckett, who was ousted by Bush after three months,
commented that he "never saw George Bush feel he had to understand the
depth of something....[he] is not a man tremendously dedicated to a
cause or ideas. He's not fervent. He goes with the flow, looking for
how it will play politically." According to Maurice Ernst, the head of
the CIA's office of economic research from 1970 to 1980, "George Bush
doesn't like to get into the middle of an intellectual debate...he
liked to delegate it. I never really had a serious discussion with him
on economics." Another former CIA aide to Bush who wanted to remain
anonymous observed that "it was an approach remarkably similar to what
a younger, more active Ronald Reagan might have done." Hans Heymann was
Bush's National Intelligence Officer for Economics, and he remembers
having been impressed by Bush's Phi Beta Kappa Yale degree in
economics. As Heymann later recalled Bush's response, "He looked at me
in horror and said, 'I don't remember a thing. It was so long ago, so
I'm going to have to rely on you.'" [fn 31]
Other CIA employees remember Bush as a manager who would not grapple
with concepts, but who rather saw himself as a problem solver and
consensus builder who would try to resolve difficulties by getting
people into a room to find a compromise basis of agreement. In reality,
much of this was also a calculated pose. No one has ever accused Bush
of profundity on any subject, except perhaps race hatred, but his
disengaged stance appears as an elaborate deception to conceal his real
views from the official chain of command.
In the meantime, the scuttlebut around Langley and the Pentagon was,
according to a high CIA official, that "the CIA and DOD will love
George Bush and Don Rumsfeld more than they hated or feared Bill Colby
and Jim Schlesinger because neither will make any real waves." One
writer summed up Bush's superficial public profile during this period
as "not altogether incompetent." [fn 32]
During the first few weeks of Bush's tenure, the Ford administration
was gripped by a "first strike" pyschosis. This had nothing to do with
the Soviet Union, but was rather Ford's desire to pre-empt any
proposals for reform of the intelligence agencies coming out of the
Pike or Church committees with a pseudo-reform of his own, premissed on
his own in-house study, the Rockefeller report, which recommended an
increase of secrecy for covert operations and classified information.
Since about the time of the Bush nomination, an interagency task force
armed with the Rockefeller commission recommendations had been meeting
under the chairmanship of Ford's counselor Jack O. Marsh. This was the
Intelligence Coordinating Group, which included delegates of the
intelligence agencies, plus NSC, OMB, and others. This group worked up
a series of final recommendations that were given to Ford to study on
his Christmas vacation in Vail, Colorado. At this point Ford was
inclined to "go slow and work with Congress."
But on January 10 Marsh and the intelligence agency bosses met again
with Ford, and the strategy began to shift towards pre-empting
Congress. On January 30, Ford and Bush came back from their appearance
at the CIA auditorium swearing in session and met with other officials
in the Cabinet Room. Attending besides Ford and Bush were Secretary of
State Kissinger, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld, Attorney General Levi,
Jack Marsh, Phil Buchen, Brent Scowcroft, Mike Duval, and Peter
Wallison representing Vice President Rockefeller, who was out of town
that day. [fn 33] Here Ford presented his tentative conclusions for
further discussion. The general line was to pre-empt the Congress, not
to cooperate with it, to increase secrecy, and to increase
authoritarian tendencies.
Ford scheduled a White House press conference for the evening of
February 17. In an atmosphere of intense last-minute haggling over
bureaucratic prerogative, Bush was careful to meet with Leo Cherne to
consolidate his relations with both Cherne and PFIAB. Cherne's memo of
February 6 shows that he asked Bush to "make sure that we on the board
are not surprised." Cherne stressed the need to know as much as
possible about changes in the Sino-Soviet relationship and the need to
upgrade economic intelligence, which, he lamented, was becoming
flabbier as the oil crisis and the accompanying shocks to the
international monetary system receded. Cherne was for declassifying
whatever could be declassified, a bureaucratic posture that could not
go wrong. Cherne thought that the "Pike Commission has a poor staff,
issued a dreadful final report, but it did in the course of its inquiry
ask the right questions." These, Cherne told Bush, should be answered.
Cherne also wanted to set up "non-punitive regular monitoring" to
evaluate the successes and failures of the intelligence community. This
proposal should be noted, for here we have the germinal idea for Team
B, which Bush set up a few months later to evaluate the agency's record
in judging the strategic intentions and capabilities of the USSR. [fn
34]
In his press conference of February 17, Ford scooped the Congress and
touted his bureaucratic reshuffle of the intelligence agencies as the
most sweeping reform and reorganization of the United States
intelligence agencies since the passage of the National Security Act of
1947. "I will not be a party to the dismantling of the CIA or other
intelligence agencies," he intoned. He repeated that the intelligence
community had to function under the direction of the National Security
Council as if that were something earth-shaking and new; from the
perspective of Oliver North and Admiral Poindexter we can see in
retrospect that it guaranteed nothing. A new NSC committee chaired by
Bush was entrusted with the task of giving greater central coordination
to the intelligence community as a whole. This committee was to consist
of Bush, Kissinger clone William Hyland of the National Security
Council Staff, and Robert Ellsworth, the assistant secretary of Defense
for Intelligence. This committee was jointly to formulate the budget of
the intelligence community and allocate its resources to the various
tasks.
The 40 Committee, which had overseen covert operations, was now to be
called the Operations Advisory Group, with its membership reshuffled to
include Scowcroft of NSC, Kissinger, Rumsfeld, Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff George Brown, plus observers from the Attorney General
and the Office of Mangement and Budget.
An innovation was the creation of the Intelligence Oversight Board (in
addition to the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board), which
was chaired by Ambassador Robert D. Murphy, the old adversary of
Charles deGaulle during World War II. The IOB was supposed to be a
watchdog to prevent new abuses from coming out of the intelligence
community. Also on this board were Stephen Ailes, who had been
Undersecretary of Defense for Kennedy and Secretary of the Army for
LBJ. The third figure on this IOB was Leo Cherne, who was soon to be
promoted chairman of PFIAB as well. The increasingly complicit
relationship of Cherne to Bush meant that all alleged oversight by the
IOB was a mockery. The average age of the IOB was about 70, leading
Carl Rowan to joke that it was a case of Rip Van Winkle guarding the
CIA. None of the IOB members, Rowan pointed out, was young, poor, or
black.
Believe it or not, Ford also wanted a version of the Official Secrets
Act which we have seen Bush supporting: he called for "special
legislation to guard critical intelligence secrets. This legislation
would make it a crime for a government employee who has access to
certain highly classified information to reveal that information
improperly." Which would have made the Washington leak game rather more
dicey than it is at present.
The Official Secrets Act would have to be passed by Congress, but most
of the rest of what Ford announced was embodied in Executive Order
11905. Church thought that this was overreaching, since it amounted to
changing some provisions of the National Security Act by presidential
fiat. But this was now the new temper of the times.
As for the CIA, Executive Order 11905 authorized it "to conduct foreign
counterintelligence activities...in the United States," which opened
the door to many things. Apart from restrictions on physical searches
and electronic bugging, it was still open season on Americans abroad.
The FBI was promised the Levi guidelines, and other agencies would get
charters written for them. In the interim, the power of the FBI to
combat various "subversive" activities was reaffirmed. Political
assassination was banned, but there were no limitations or regulations
placed on covert operations, and there was nothing about measures to
improve the intelligence and analytical product of the agencies.
In the view of the New York Times, the big winner was Bush: "From a
management point of view, Mr. Ford tonight centralized more power in
the hands of the Director of Central Intelligence than any had had
since the creation of the CIA. The director has always been the nominal
head of the intelligence community, but in fact has had little power
over the other agencies, particularly the Department of Defense." Bush
was now de facto intelligence czar. [fn 35]
Go to part 3
Chive Mynde
Anton Chaitkin
Chapter -XV- CIA DIRECTOR, Part 3
Poor Ford was unable to realize that his interest was to be seen as a
reformer, not as someone who wanted to re-impose secrecy. When he was
asked if his Official Secrets Act could not be used to deter whistle-
blowers on future bureaucratic abuses, Ford responded that all federal
employees would be made to sign a statement pledging that they would
not divulge classified information, and that they could expect
draconian punishment if they ever did so.
Congressman Pike said that Ford's reorganization was bent "largely on
preserving all of the secrets in the executive branch and very little
on guaranteeing a lack of any further abuses." Church commented that
what Ford was really after was "to give the CIA a bigger shield and a
longer sword with which to stab about."
An incident of those days reveals something of what was going on.
Daniel Schorr of CBS, whose name had popped up on the Nixon enemies'
list during the Watergate hearings, had obtained a copy of the Pike
Committe report and passed it on to the Village Voice. Schorr had
attended Ford's press conference, and listened as Ford denounced the
leaking of the Pike report. The next day, covering Capitol Hill, Schorr
encountered Bush while the new CIA boss was on his way to testify
before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. A wirephoto of an angry
Bush gesticulating at Schorr wound up on the front page of the
Washington Star under the headline: "Another Confrontation." With that,
Schorr's twenty-year career with CBS was over, and he was soon to face
a witchhunt by the House Ethics Committee. Other reporters soon caught
on that under the new Bush regime, political opponents would be
slammed. (Schorr later speculated about CIA links to CBS owner William
Paley; there was no need to look any further than the fact that
Harriman had helped to create CBS and that Prescott Bush had been a CBS
director during the 1950's, giving the Bushman network a firm presence
there.
During these days, the Department of Justice announced that it would
not prosecute former CIA Director Richard Helms for his role in an
illegal break-in at a photographic studio in Fairfax, Virginia during
1971. The rationale was from the National Security Act of 1947: "the
director of central intelligence shall be responsible for protecting
intelligence sources and methods from unauthorized disclosure," even if
it meant breaking the law to do it. Bush would become a past master of
this "sources and methods" clause, which could be used to cover up
almost anyuthing.
The Church Committee was still functioning, and was looking into
journalists controlled by the CIA, which some senators wanted to expose
by name. On the same day as Ford's press conference, Senators
Huddleston and Mathias drove out to Langley to confront Bush and demand
that he divulge the names of these CIA media assets. The CIA was "not
at liberty to reveal the names," Bush told the two senators. Instead,
Bush offered documents that generally described the CIA's use of
reporters and scholars over the years, but with no names. Senators
Baker, Hart, and Mondale then called Bush and urged that the names be
made public. Bush refused.
Bush pointed to his statement, made on February 12 as the first public
act of his CIA career, removing all "full-time or part-time news
correspondents accredited by any US news service, newspaper,
periodicals, radio or TV network or station" from the CIA payroll. He
also claimed that there were no clergymen or missionaries on the CIA
payroll at all. As far as the journalists were concerned, in April the
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Acitivities announced that they
had already caught Bush lying, and that at least 25 journalists and
reporters were still on the CIA payroll, and the CIA was determined to
keep them there. Bush had quibbled on the word "accredited." This
limited the purge to accredited correspondents issued news credentials.
But this excluded free lance reporters, editors, news executives, and
foreign news organizations at all levels. When dealing with Bush, it
pays to read the fine print.
The Bush-Kissinger-Ford counteroffensive against the Congressional
committtes went forward. On March 5 the CIA leaked the story that the
Pike Committee had lost more than 232 secret documents which had been
turned over from the files of the executive branch. Pike said that this
was another classic CIA provocation designed to discredit his
committee, which had ceased its activity. Bush denied that he had
engineered the leak: "The CIA did not do any such thing. Nothing of
that nature at all," Bush told a reporter to whom he had placed a call
to whine out his denial. "My whole purpose was to avoid an argument
with him," said Bush, although he said that "Pike was the cause of this
whole problem under great pressure."
In March Bush had to take action in the wake of the leaking of a CIA
report showing that Israel had between 10 and 20 nuclear bombs; the
report was published by Arthur Kranish, the editor of Science Trends
Magazine. Church, who had Zionist lobby ties of his own and who was in
the midst of a bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, demanded
an investigation: "Can you imagine how a leak of that kind would have
been treated if it had come out of the Congress of the United States!"
In retrospect, the report may have been some timely window-dressing for
Israeli prowess in a Ford regime in which Israel's military value as an
ally was hotly contested; a little later Gen. George Brown, the
chairman of the joint chiefs, was quoted to be the effect that Israeli
and its armed forces had "got to be considered a burden" for the United
States.
In April, Bush told the American Society of Newspaper Editors that he
was just back from a secret visit to three countries in Europe, which
he refused to name, during which he conceded that he "might or might
not" have met with Frank Sinatra. (Brother Jonathan Bush had said in
February that Sinatra had offered his services to the new CIA boss.)
Bush praised the CIA in his speech: "It is a fantastic reservoir of
discipline in the CIA. Our personnel people say the quality of
appplications is up. This is an expression of confidence in the agency.
Morale is A-one." There was speculation that Bush might have gone to
Italy, where terrorist activity was increasing and the Italian
Communist Party, profiting from the vogue of "Euro-communism," was
rapidly increasing its vote share during 1975-76.
In May, FBI Director Clarence Kelley apologized to the American people
for the abuses committed by his secret police. Kelley said that he
was "truly sorry" for past abuses of power, all of which were neatly
laid at the door of the deceased former director, J. Edgar Hoover.
Bush, for his part, aggressively refused to apologize. Bush conceded
that he felt "outrage" at the illegal CIA domestic operations of the
Watergate era, but that "that's all I'm going to say about it...you can
interpret it any way you want." Bush's line was that all abuses had
already been halted under Colby by the latter's "administrative
dictum," and that the issue now was the implementation of the
Rockefeller Commission report, to which Bush once again pledged fealty.
Bush had no comment on the Lockheed scandal, which had begun to
destabilize the Japanese, German, Italian, and Netherlands governments.
The advance of the Italian communists and the Panama canal treaties
were all "policy questions for the White House" in his view. Although
China was being rocked by the "democracy wall" movement and the first
Tien An Men massacre of 1976, Bush, ever loyal to his Chinese communist
cronies, found that all that did not add up to anything "dramatically
different."
A visit to the Texas Breakfast Club on May 27 found Bush trying to
burnish his image as a good guy by talking about the existential
dilemmas of a good man in any imperfect world, while pleading for more
covert opoerations all the time. "I know in a limited way there are
conflicts of conscience," Bush told the breakfasters. "But we're not
living in a particularly moral world. We're living in a world that's
not pure black or pure white. We're living in a world where [the US]
has to have a covert capability." On the other hand, Bush was "not
unconcerned about the constitutional questions that the excesses of the
past have raised." "I'm not going to defend the things that were done
but I'm not going to dwell on them either." "I'm happy to say I think
things are moving away from the more sensational revelations of the
past," leaving the CIA as an institution "intact." Necessity,
pontificated Bush, sometimes demands "compromise with the purity of
moral decisions."
On June 3, the Houston Post touted Bush as a good vice presidential
candidate after all, moderate and southern, no matter what Ford had
promised to the senate to get Bush confirmed. Bush was mum.
A few days later Bush paid tribute to the Israeli Defense Forces, who
had just rescued a group of hostages at Entebbe. Bush denigrated US
capabilities in comparison with those of Israel, saying that the US
could not match what Israel was able to do: "We do have a very
important role in furnishing intelligence to policy makers and our
friends on the movement of international terrorists, but to indicate
that we have that kind of action capability--the answer is very frankly
no." Bush said that his policy on this matter was to fight terrorism
with better intelligence, for "the more the American people understand
this, the more support the CIA will have." Yet, Bush was unable to stop
a terrorist murder in Washington DC, despite the fact that he had
personally received a telergam informing him that the assassins were
coming to visit him-- scarcely a good example of using intelligence to
fight terrorism.
By September, Bush could boast in public that he had won the immediate
engagement: his adversaries in the Congressional investigating
committees were defeated. "The CIA," Bush announced, "has weathered the
storm." "The mood in Congress has changed," he crowed. "No one is
campaigning against strong intelligence. The adversary thing, how we
can ferret out corruption, has given way to the more serious question
how we can have better intelligence."
As Bush never tired of repeating, that meant more covert operations. In
the middle of October, Bush spoke once again on this matter to the
Texas Mid-Continent Oil and Gas Association: "We would be stupid to
give up covert operations and we are not going to do it as long as I
have anything to say about it." Bush claimed that covert operations
consumed only 2% of the entire CIA budget but that such operations were
necessary because "not everybody is going to play by Marquis of
Queensbury rules."
Such was the public profile of Bush's CIA tenure up until about the
time of the November, 1976 elections. If this had been the whole story,
then we might accept the usual talk about Bush's period of uneventful
rebuilding and morale boosting while he was at Langley. We might share
the conclusions of one author that "Bush was picked because he could be
trusted to provide no surprises. Amiable and well-liked by old CIA
hands, he sincerely believed in the agency and its mission. Bush
soothed Congress, tried to restore confidence and morale and Langley,
and avoided delving too deeply into the agency's darker recesses." [fn
36] Or, we might acceptthe following edifying summary: '[Bush] had a
fundamental loyalty to the agency and its people even though he was an
outsider. He was a man with a strong sense of obligation downward.
Under him the people of the CIA soon realized that they were not going
to be served up piecemeal. He probably did more for agency morale and
standing in Congress than any DCI since Allen Dulles. Unlike Colby, who
was loyal to the ideal of the CIA rather than to the people, Bush was
committed to both. He was a genuine conservative in his politics and
his approach, conveying no touch of originality, and was not a man to
take initiatives. People knew exactly where they stood with him. He was
a classic custodian, and it was this quality that Ford had recognized
in him. For Bush being DCI was 'the best job in Washington.'" [fn 37]
The spirit of the red Studebaker school of idolatry, we see, had
followed Bush to Langley and thence into many standard histories of the
CIA.
Reality looked different. The administration Bush served had Ford as
its titular head, but most of the real power, especially in foreign
affairs, was in the hands of Kissinger. Bush was more than willing to
play along with the Kissinger agenda.
The first priority was to put an end to such episodes as contempt
citations for Henry Kissinger. Thanks to the presence of Don Gregg as
CIA station chief in Seoul, South Korea, that was easy to arrange. This
was the same Don Gregg of the CIA who would later serve as Bush's
national security advisor during the second vice presidential term, and
who would manage decisive parts of the Iran-contra operations from
Bush's own office. Gregg knew of an agent of the Korean CIA, Tongsun
Park, who had for a number of years been making large payments to
members of Congress, above all to Democratic members of the House of
Representatives, in order to secure their suppport for legislation that
was of interest to Park Chung Hee, the South Korean leader. It was
therefore a simple matter to blow the lid off this story, causing a
wave of hysteria among the literally hundreds of members of Congress
who had attended parties organized by Tongsun Park, who had become the
Perle Mesta of the 1970's when it came to entertaining Congressional
bigwigs. Tongsun Park also had a stable of call girls available, and
could provide other services. The US Ambassador to the Republic of
Korea during this period was Richard Sneider.
The Koreagate headlines began to appear a few days after Bush had taken
over at Langley. In February there was a story by Maxine Cheshire of
the Washington Post reporting that the Department of Justice was
investigating Congressmen Bob Leggett and Joseph Addabbo for allegedly
accepting bribes from the Korean government. Both men were linked to
Suzi Park Thomson, who had been hosting parties of the Korean Embassy.
Later it turned out that Speaker of the House Carl Albert had kept Suzi
Park Thomson on his payroll for all of the six years that he had been
Speaker. Congressmen Hanna, Gallagher, Broomfield, Hugh Carey, and
Lester Wolf were all implicated. The names of Tip O'Neill, Brademas,
and McFall also came up. The New York Times estimated that as many as
115 Congressmen were involved.
In reality the number was much lower, but former Watergate Special
Prosecutor Leon Jaworski was brought back from Houston to become
special prosecutor for this case as well. This underlined the press
line that "the Democrats' Watergate" had finally arrived. It was
embarrassing to the Bush CIA when Tongsun Park's official agency file
disappeared for several months, and finally tuned up shorn of key
information on the CIA officers who had been working most closely with
Park. Eventually Congressman Hanna was convicted and sent to jail,
while Congressman Otto Passman of Louisiana was acquitted, largely
because he had had the presence of mind to secure a venue in his own
state. A number of other congressmen quit, and it is thought that the
principal reason for the decision by Democratic Speaker of the House
Carl Albert to retire at the end of 1976 was the fact that he had been
touched by the breath of this scandal, which would go into the
chronicles as "Koreagate." With this, most of the Congress was brought
to heel. We note in passing that when George Bush takes a step up the
ladder in Washington, the Speaker of the House is likely to be ousted.
Ask Jim Wright.
An interesting sidelight of Koreagate involves then Congressman Edward
Derwinksi, today Bush's Secretary of Veteran's Affairs. An article in
the Wall Street Journal during this period alleged that federal
investigators suspected Derwinksi of informing the Korean CIA that one
of their officers was about to defect to the US for the purpose of
cooperating with the Koregate investigations. Derwinski denied the
accusations, and he was never prosecuted. [fn 38]
With that, the Congress was terrorized and brought to heel. In this
atmosphere, Bush moved to reach a secret foreign policy consensus with
key Congressional leaders of both parties of the one-party state.
According to two senior government officials involved, limited covert
operations in such places as Angola were continued under the pretext
that they were necessary for phasing out the earlier, larger, and more
expensive operations. Bush's secret deal was especially successful with
the post-Church Senate Intelligence Committee. Because of the climate
of restoration that prevailed, a number of Democrats on this committee
concluded that they must break off their aggressive inquiries ("the
adversary thing") and make peace with Bush, according to reports of
remarks by two senior members of the committee staff. The result was an
interregnum during which the Senate committee would neither set
specific reporting requirements, nor attempt to pass any binding
legislation to restrict CIA covert and related activity. In return,
Bush would pretend to make a few disclosures to create a veneer of
cooperation. [fn 39] These 1976 deals set the stage for many of the
foreign intelligence monstrosities of the Jimmy Carter era. Ever since,
the pretense of Congressional oversight over the intelligence community
has been a mockery.
One theatre of covert operations in which Bush became involved was
Angola. Here a civil war had erupted in 1974 with the end of Portuguese
colonial rule, pitting the US-backed UNITA of Jonas Savimbi and the
FNLA of Holden Roberto against the Marxist MPLA. In December, 1975 the
Senate passed the Clark Amendment, designed to cut off US funding for
the military factions. The Clark Amendment passed the House, and a ban
on CIA operations in Angola became law on February 9, 1976. The chief
of the CIA Angola task force, John Stockwell, later wrote that after
February 9, the CIA kept sending planeloads of weapons from Zaire to
UNITA forces in Angola, despite the fact that this was now illegal.
There were at least 22 of such flights. Also in February, the Bush CIA
began making large cash payoffs "to anyone who had been associated with
our side of the Angolan war." This meant that President Mobutu of Zaire
got $2 million which he was supposed to give to pro-western guerilla
factions; Mobutu simply kept the money, and the CIA's guerillas "were
left starving," said Stockwell. The Congress found out about Bush's
illegal largesse, and subjected him to a series of hostile committe
hearings in which full disclosure was demanded. The House
Appropriations Committee placed a team of auditors in CIA headquarters
to review accounting on the Angola program, which was code named
IAFEATURE. On March 12 Bush sent a cable to all CIA stations ordering
that no funds be spent on IAFEATURE. One day later, an uninsured cargo
plane was shot down inside Angola. Despite this ignominious conclusion,
Bush ordered awards and commendations for the 100 CIA personnel who had
worked on the program. [ fn 40]
During Bush's first months in Langley, the CIA under orders from Henry
Kissinger launched a campaign of destabilization of Jamaica for the
purpose of preventing the re-election of Prime Minister Michael Manley.
This included a large-scale campaign to foment violence during the
election, and large amounts of illegal arms were shipped into the
island. $10 million was spent on the attempt to overthrow Manley, and
at least three assassination attempts took place with the connivance of
the CIA. [fn 41]
The Bush CIA also continued a program in Iran which went under the name
of IBEX. This aimed at building and operating a $500 miilion electronic
and photographic capability to cover the entire region, including parts
of the USSR. On August 28, 1976, three Americans working on the project
were assassinated in Teheran. According to a Washington Post account by
Bob Woodward, a month before these killings the former CIA Director and
then current US Ambassador to Iran, Richard Helms, sent Bush a note
complaining about abuses connected with the project, and in particular
demanding that Bush investigation corrupt practices which Helms
suspected were involved with the project. Helms apparently wanted to be
spared more embarrassment in case IBEX were to become the object of a
new scandal. [fn 42]
During Bush's CIA tenure, the CIA was found to have conducted
electronic suveillance against the representatives of Micronesia, a UN
Trusteeship territory in the Pacific that had been administered by the
United States, and which was then about to become independent. In a
story by Bob Woodward, the Washington Post alleged that the CIA had
been bugging the Micronesian government over a four year period with a
view to acquiring details of their negotiating strategy in talks with
the State Department concerning relations with the United States after
independence. The CIA's rebuttal seems to have been that while it would
indeed have been illegal to bug the Micronesians if they were US
citizens, they were now foreigners, and such bugging had never been
restricted.
During Bush's time at the CIA, a series of governments around the world
were destabilized by the Lockheed bribery scandal, the greatest
multinational scandal of the 1970's. This scandal grew out of hearings
before a Senate subcommittee chaired by Frank Church, although separate
from the Intelligence Committee mentioned above. A number of Lockheed
executives testified that they had systematically bribed officials of
allied governments to secure contracts the sale of their military
aircraft. This system of unreported payments eventually implicated such
figures as former Japanese Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka, the leader of
the most important faction in the Liberal Democratric Party, and Franz
Josef Strauss, a former Federal German Defense Minister, Prime Minister
of Bavaria, and the leader of the Christian Social Union, then a part
of the opposition in the Bundestag in Bonn. Also implicated were a
series of Italian Christian Democratic and Social Democratic political
leaders, including the then Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti, the
President of the Italian Republic Giovanni Leone, and former Defense
Ministers Mario Tanassi of the PSDI and Luigi Gui of the DC. In the
Netherlands, Prince Bernhard, the consort of Queen Juliana, was
implicated, and virtually no NATO country was spared. The Lockheed
scandal, coming as it did out of a mileu full of military intelligence
connections, was coherent with a long-term Anglo-American design of
destabilizing and weakening allied governments and the political forces
that constituted those governments.
Those who have witnessed the ghoulish public love affair between George
Bush and the fascist "Iron Lady" of Great Britain, Margaret Thatcher,
may be interested in indications that CIA Director Bush helped to bring
Mrs. Thatcher to power. At the beginning of Bush's tenure, the British
Prime Minister was Harold Wilson of the Labor Party, who had won two
general elections during 1974 and whose term would normally have ended
in 1978. But Wilson was destabilized and forced out of office. Although
his immediate successor was James Callaghan, also of the Labor Party,
Callaghan's cabinet was merely the prelude to the advent of Thatcher,
who would remain in power for more than 11 years, until late in 1990.
[fn 43]
Bush's implication in the matter is beyond any doubt. Shortly after
Bush had arrived at Langley, Prime Minister Wilson despatched his close
friend Lord Weidenfeld to the United States with a confidential letter
to be given to Senator Hubert Humphrey. Wilson and Weidenfeld met on
February 10, 1976. The letter enumerated the names of a number of MI-5
and MI-6 officers of whom Wilson was suspicious. Wilson's letter
requested that Humphrey go to Bush and aks him whether the CIA knew
anything about these British counter-intelligence and intelligence
officers. Was it possible, Wilson wanted to know, that those named in
the letter were actually working with or for the CIA? Were the British
officials in league with a CIA faction that was carrying out eletronic
or other surveillance of Wilson, including in his office in 10 Downing
Street? Implied was the further question: was the CIA part of an
operation to destabilize Wilson and bring him down?
It is known that Bush took Wilson's letter quite seriously, so
seriously that he flew to London to talk to Wilson and assured him that
the CIA had not been responsible for any surveillance of the PM. But by
the time Bush reached London, Wilson had already resigned in a surprise
announcement made on March 16, 1976. What role had the CIA actually
played?
The transition from Harold Wilson to Margaret Thatcher amounts to the
replacement of Lord Victor Rothschild's favorite puppet politician of
the 1960's with Lord Victor Rothschild's preferred choice for the
1980's. The pretext used to harrass Wilson out of office was Wilson's
well-known close ties to communists and to the Soviet block, but all of
that had been well known back in 1964 when he had come to power for the
first time. The pretext appears in all of its irony when we recall that
Lord Victor Rothschild was himself the leading candidate to be named as
the legendary "Fifth Man" of the KGB-SIS spy team of Philby, Maclean,
Burgess, and Blunt.
A leading purveyor of the argument that Wilson was a Soviet asset was
James Jesus Angleton, like Bush a Yale graduate. Angleton had been the
counterintelligence director of the CIA until 1975, but he had not been
very successful. Angleton had always been obsessed by the presence of
high-level CIA moles in the US government and his own agency. Angleton
was in touch with Peter Wright of MI-5. Wright was also bitterly
opposed to Wilson, whom he characterized as a "Soviet-Zionist agent,"
which was perfectly accurate as far as it went. But again, all that had
been clear back in 1964 and even much earlier. Wright had provided
Chapman Pincher, a right-wing British journalist and also an asset of
Lord Victor, with the material for the book Their Trade is Treachery,
a "limited hangout" which provided many interesting facts about the
Soviet pentration of British intelligence, but which was mainly
designed to keep Lord Victor out of the spotlight. Later Wright's own
book, Spycatcher, succeeded even better in protecting Lord Victor by
becoming an international succes de scandale that allowed Lord Victor
to die a natural death without ever having been apprehended by British
authorities. The crowning irony is that Philby's old pal Lord Victor,
Wright, and the obsessive Angleton were all in a strange united front
to villify Wilson for his links to Soviet intelligence, which were of
course massive but which had been well known all along.
The CIA's specific contributions to the destabilization of Wilson
included the agency's sponsorship of a book written by a Czech defector
named Josef Frolik. This tome accused John Stonehouse, the Postmaster
General in Wilson's cabinet, of being an east bloc agent. Stonehouse
later attempted to go underground in Australia after feigning suicide.
Stonehouse was later found and brought back, although he still asserts
his innocence of espionage charges. This affair, complete with a
fugitive cabinet minister, was a colossal embarrassment to Wilson.
Wilson, as indicated, was convinced that he was being bugged, possibly
with CIA participation. According to Chapman Pincher, "whether this
surveillance extended to independent bugging by the CIA and NSA is
unknown, although the CIA has denied it. Under the Anglo-American
agreeement dating back to 1947, there had long been an exchange of
suveillance information, including cable and letter intercepts, but it
is not impossible that the Americans agencies occasionally undertook
activities denied, by writ or circumstances, to the British." [fn 44]
In other words, it was easier for the Anglo-American establishment to
have the CIA handle the bugging in London, since this was not illegal
under the CIA's regulations. Was there reciprocity in this respect?
Part of the destabilization of Wilson was run through Private Eye
magazine. Another likely participant was Tory activist Airey Neave, who
had wanted to replace former Prime Minister Edward Heath with Thatcher
when Heath fell in 1974. Ultimately, Thatcher would be the leading
beneficiary of the fall of Wilson.
Another government destabilized through the CIA during the same period
was the Gough Whitlam Labor Party government of Australia. Whitlam
threatened to deprive the CIA of its key Pine Gap electronic listening
post after he discovered that the Austrialian intelligence services had
been working with the CIA to bring down Allende. On November 8, 1975,
with Bush's likely advent at the CIA already public knowledge, Theodore
Shackley despatched a telegram to the Australian intelligence services
threatening to cut off all exchanges, hanging the Australians out to
dry. On November 11, in a highly unusual action, the Royal Governor
General dismissed Whitlam as Prime Minister, bringing Malcolm Frase and
the conservatives back to power. When Whitlam's Labor Party majority in
the lower housr responded by voting no confidence in Fraser, the Royal
Governor General dissolved the lower house and called a election. It
was a coup ordered directly by Queen Elizabeth II, and carried out with
Bush's help. In the background of this affair is the Nugan Hand bank,
an Anglo-American intelligence proprietary involved with drug money
laundering.
One of the most spectacular scandals of Bush's tenure at the CIA was
the assassination in Washington DC of the Chilean exile leader Orlando
Letelier, who had been a minister in the government of Salvador Allende
Gossens, who had been overthrown by Kissinger in 1973. Letelier along
with Ronnie Moffitt of the Washington Institute for Policy Studies died
on September 21, 1976 in the explosion of a car bomb on Sheridan
Circle, in the heart of Washington's Embassy Row district along
Massachusetts Avenue.
Relatively few cases of international terrorism have taken place on the
territory of the United States, but this was certainly an exception.
Bush's activities before and after this assassination amount to one of
the most bizarre episodes in the annals of secret intelligence
operations.
One of the assassins of Letelier was unquestionably one Michael Vernon
Townley, a CIA agent who had worked for David Atlee Philips in Chile.
After the overthrow of Allende and the advent of the Pinochet
ditatorship, David Atlee Philips had become the director of the CIA's
western hemipshere operations. In 1975 Phillips founded AFIO, the
Association of Former Intelligence Officers, which has supported George
Bush in every campaign he has ever waged since that time. Townley, as
a "former" CIA agent, had gone to work for the DINA, the Chilean secret
police, and had been assigned by the DINA as its liaison man with a
group called CORU. CORU was the acronym for Command of United
Revolutionary Organizations, a united front of four anti-Castro Cuban
organizations based primarily in the neighborhood of Miami called
Little Havana. With CORU, we are back in the milieu of Miami anti-
Castro Cubans whose political godfather George Bush had been since very
early in the 1960's. CORU was at that time working together with the
intelligence services of Chile's Pinochet, Paraguay's Alfredo
Stroessner, and Nicaragua's Somoza for operations against common
enemies, including Chilean left-wing emigres and Castro assets. Soon
after the foundation of CORU, bombs began to go off at the Cuban
Mission to the United Nations in New York.
During this period a Miami doctor named Orlando Bosch was arrested,
allegedly because he had been planning to assassinate Henry Kissinger,
and that ostensibly because of Kissinger's concessions to Castro.
During the same period, the Chilean DINA was mounting its so-called
Operation Condor, a plan to assassinate emigre opponents of the
Pinochet dictatorship and its Milton Friedman, Chicago school economic
policies. [fn 45]
It was under these circumstances that the US Ambassador to Chile,
George Landau, sent a cable to the State Department with the singular
request that two agents of the DINA be allowed to enter the United
States with Paraguayan passports. One of these agents is likely to have
been Townley. The cable also indicated that the two DINA agents also
wanted to meet with Gen. Vernon Walters, the outgoing Deputy Director
of Central Intelligence, and so the cable also went to Langley. Here
the cable was read by Walters, and also passed into the hands of
Director George Bush. Bush not only had this cable in his hands; Bush
and Walters discussed the contents of the cable and what to do about
it, including whether Walters ought to meet with the DINA agents. The
cable also reached the desk of Henry Kissinger. One of Landau's
questions appears to have been whether the mission of the DINA men had
been approved in advance by Langley; his cable was accompanied by
photocopies of the Paraguayan passports. (Later on, in 1980, Bush
denied that he had ever seen this cable; he had not just been out of
the loop, he claims; he had been in China. (The red Studebaker hacks,
including Bush himself in his campaign autobiography, do not bother
denying anything about the Letelier case; they simply omit it. [fn 46]
On August 4, on the basis of the conversations between Bush and
Walters, the CIA sent a reply from Walters to Landau stating that the
former "was unaware of the visit and that his Agency did not desire to
have any contact with the Chileans." Landau responded by revoking the
visas that he had already granted and telling the Immigration and
Naturalization Service to put the two DINA men on their watch list to
be picked up if they tried to enter the US. The two DINA men entered
the US anyway on August 22, with no apparent difficulty. The DINA men
reached Washington, and it is clear that they were hardly traveling
incognito: they appear to have asked a Chilean embassy official call
the CIA to repeat their request for a meeting. According to other
reports, the DINA men met with New York Senator James Buckley, the
brother of conservative columnist William Buckley of Skull and Bones.
It is also said that the DINA men met with Frank Terpil, a close
associate of Ed Wilson, and no stranger to the operations of the
Shackley-Clines Enterprise. According to one such version, "Townley met
with Frank Terpil one week before the Letelier murder, on the same day
that he met with Senator James Buckley and aides in New York City. The
explosives sent to the United States on Chilean airlines were to
replace explosives supplied by Edwin Wilson, according to a source
close to the office of Assistant US Attorney Lawrence Barcella." [fn
47] The bomb that killed Letelier and Moffitt was of the same type that
the FBI believed that Ed Wilson was selling, with the same timer
mechanism.
Bush therefore had plenty of warning that a DINA operation was about to
take place in Washington, and it was no secret that it would be
wetwork. As Dinges and Landau point out, when the DINA hitmen airrived
in Washington they "alerted the CIA by having a Chilean embassy
employee call General Walters' office at the CIA's Langley
headquarters. It is quite beyond belief that the CIA is so lax in its
counterespionage functions that it would simply have ignored a
clandestine operation by a foreign intelligence service in Washington
DC, or anywhere in the United States. It is equally implausible that
Bush, Walters, Landau and other officials were unaware of the chain of
international assassinations that had been attributed to DINA." [fn 48]
One might say that Bush had been an accessory before the fact.
Bush's complicity deepens when we turn to the post-assassination
coverup. The prosecutor in the Letelier-Moffitt murders was Assistant
US Attorney Eugene M. Propper. Nine days after the assassinations,
Propper was trying without success to get some cooperation from the
CIA, since it was obvious enough to anyone that the Chilean regime was
the prime suspect in the killing of one of its most prominent political
opponents. The CIA had been crudely stonewalling Propper. He had even
been unable to secure the requisite security clearance to see documents
in the case. Then Propper received a telephone call from Stanley
Pottinger, Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Civil Rights
Division of the Justice Department. Pottinger said that he had been in
contact with members of the Institute for Policy Studies who had argued
that the Civil Rights Division ought to take over the Letelier case
because of its clear political implications. Propper argued that he
should keep control of the case since the Protection of Foreign
Officials Act gave him jurisdiction. Pottinger agreed that Propper was
right, and that he ought to keep the case. When Pottinger offered to be
of help in any possible way, Propper asked if Pottinger could expedite
cooperation with the CIA.
Go to Part 4
Chive Mynde
Anton Chaitkin
Chapter -XV- CIA DIRECTOR, Part 4
As Propper later recounted this conversation:
Instant, warm confidence shot through the telphone line. The assistant
attorney general replied that he happened to be a personal friend of
the CIA director himself, George Bush. Pottinger called him "George."
For him, the CIA Director was only a phone call away. Would Propper
like an appointment? By that afternoon he, [an FBI agent working on the
case], and Pottinger were scheduled for lunch with Director Bush at CIA
headquarters on Monday. A Justice Department limousine would pick them
up at noon. Propper whistled to himself. This was known in Washintgton
as access. [fn 49]
At CIA headquarters, "Pottinger introduced Propper to Director Bush,
and Bush introduced the two lawyers to Tony Lapham, his general
counsel. Then, graciously, the Director said, 'Would you gentlmen care
for some sherry?" An old butler in a white coat served sherry and
cheese hors d'oeuvres. Then the group moved into the Director's private
dining room, where an elegant table was laid on white linen."
There was some polite conversation. Then,
when finally called on to state his business, Propper said that the
Letelier-Moffitt murders were more than likely political
assassinations, and that the investigation would probably move outside
the United States into the Agency's realm of foreign intelligence.
Therefore, Propper wanted CIA cooperation in the form of reports from
within Chile, reports on assassins, reports on foreign operatives
entering the United States, and the like. He wanted anything he could
get that might bear upon the murders.
If Bush had wanted to be candid, he could have informed Propper that he
had been informed of the coming of the DINA team twice, once before
they left South America and once when they had arrived in Washington.
But Bush never volunteered this highly pertinent information. Instead,
he went into a sophisticated stonewall routine:
"Look," said Bush, "I'm appalled by the bombing. Obviously we can't
allow people to come right here into the capital and kill foreign
diplomats and American citizens like this. It would be a hideous
precedent. So, as Director, I want to help you. As an American citizen,
I want to help. But, as director, I also know that the Agency can't
help in a lot of situations like this. We've got some problems. Tony,
tell him what they are."
Lapham's argument went like this, with Bush looking on:
The first problem is that every time we've tried to help Justice in the
past, they've screwed us. They always promise us that if we give them
this assistance of that assistance, they'll just use it for background,
but the next thing we know, they're trying to make a witness out of our
source. They're trying to put him in court. We can't attract and hold
sources if they're afraid they'll get slapped into court.
"Well, that sounds legitimate to me," said Propper, "but I'm sure we
can figure out a way to work around it."
"That's not all," said Lapham. "We got torn to pieces last year for
domestic intelligence, so now everybody over here is gun-shy about rep]
orting on Americans or any activities in this country. We can't do it.
That's strictly out. The liberals don't like some things we do and the
conservatives don't like others, and the way the rule book is now, we
stay clean by keeping out of criminal stuff and domestic stuff. You've
got a murder here in the states. That's both. That makes it tough."
"I see," said Propper. "But I can't believe there's not some way for
you to get into this case. There has to be a way. If somebody comes
into the country from overseas and assassinates people here in
Washington, that's got to be your kind of work. They might do it again.
Who else will stop it?"
"Sure," said Lapham. "That's a security matter. That's ours. But we
don't know this is a security matter yet, and we'd have to investigate
a crime to find out." [fn 50]
Notice the consummate Aristotelian obfuscation by Lapham, who is
propounding a chicken and egg paradox of law and administration. Apart
from such sophists, everyone knew that Pinochet was a prime suspect.
Lapham and Propper finally agreed that they could handle the matter
best through an exchange of letters between the CIA Director and
Attorney General Levi. George Bush summed up: "If you two come up with
something that Tony thinks will protect us, we'll be all right." The
date was October 4, 1976.
Contrary to that pledge, Bush and the CIA began actively to sabotage
Propper's investigation in public as well as behind the scenes. By
Saturday the Washington Post was reporting many details of Propper's
arrangement with the CIA. Even more interesting was the following item
in the "Periscope" column of Newsweek magazine of October 11:
After studying FBI and other field investigations, the CIA has
concluded that the Chilean secret police were not involved in the death
of Orlando Letelier....The agency reached its decision because the bomb
was too crude to be the work of experts and because the murder, coming
while Chile's rulers were wooing US support, could only damage the
Santiago regime."
According to the New York Times of October 12: *
[Ford Administration] intelligence officials said it appeared that the
FBI and the Central Intelligence Agency had virtually ruled out the
idea that Mr. Letelier was killed by agents of the Chilean military
junta....[They] said they understood DINA was firmly under the control
of the government of Gen. Augusto Pincohet and that killing Mr.
Letelier could not have served the junta's purposes....The intelligence
officials said a parallel investigation was pursuing the possibility
that Mr. Letelier had been assassinated by Chilean left-wing extremists
as a means of disrupting United States relations with the military
junta.
On November 1. the Washington Post reported a leak from Bush
personally:
CIA officials say...they believe that operatives of the present Chilean
military junta did not take part in Letelier's killing. According to
informed sources, CIA Director Bush expressed this view in a
conversation last week with Secretary of State Kissinger, the sources
said. What evidence the CIA has obtained to support this initial
conclusion was not disclosed. *
Most remarkably, Bush is reported to have flown to Miami on November 8
with the purpose or pretext of taking "a walking tour of little
Havana." As author Donald Freed tells it, "Actually [Bush] met with the
Miami FBI Special Agent in Charge Julius Matson and the chief of the
anti-Castro terrorism squad. According to a source close to the meeting
Bush warned the FBI against allowing the investigation to go any
further than the lowest level Cubans." [fn 51]
In a meeting presided over by Pottinger, Propper was only able to get
Lapham to agree that the Justice Department could ask the CIA to report
any information on the Letelier murder that might relate to the
security of the United States against foreign intervention. It was two
years before any word of the July-August cables was divulged.
Ultimately some low-level Cubans were convicted in a trial that saw
Townley cop a plea bargain and get off with a lighter sentence than the
rest. Material about Townley under his various aliases strangley
disappeared from the INS files, and records of the July-August cable
traffic with Walters (and Bush) was expunged. No doubt that there had
been obstruction of justice, no doubt there had been a cover-up.
On October 6, bombs destroyed a Cubana Airlines DC-8 flying from
Kingston, Jamaica to Havana, killing 73 passangers and crew, including
the Cuban national fencing team which was returning from Venezuela.
Anonymous callers to newspapers and radio stations claimed
responsibility for CORU and Operation Condor, while Fidel Castro
immediately blamed the CIA. Venezuelan police arrested CORU leaders
Orlando Bosch (freed from jail in the US) and Luis Posada Carriles,
whom we will later see as an associate of Bush operative Felix
Rodriguez in Iran-contra.
During 1976, Ed Wilson, officially retired, had been working with CIA
officials on a project to deliver explosives, timers, weapons, and
ultimately Redeye missles to Qaddafi of Libya. Wilson was receiving
assistance from active duty CIA agents, including William Weisenburger
and from Scientific Communications, a CIA front company. Wilson was
working with Clines, who was still on the CIA payroll. CIA man Kevin
Mulcahy had reported to Theodore Shackley about Wilson's activities,
and Shackley had informed deputy director William Wells, who in turned
had passed the hot potato on to Inspector General John Waller. The
result of this round was a probe of Mulcahy's report under Thomas Cox
of Wallers' staff, assisted by Thomas Clines, of all people. On the
basis of this in-house investigation, Bush on September 17 decided to
pass the entire case on to the FBI.
Another aspect of Wilson's skullduggery was reported to Clines by
Rafael "Chi Chi" Quintero, another fixture of the Enterprise, who
complained that Wilson was trying to recruit him for an assassination
attempt against "Carlos," the fabled international terrorist. Years
later Wilson was given a long jail sentence, while his sidekick Frank
Terpil went underground. What is essential here is that under Bush's
administration, the CIA and its associated Enterprise and other old
boys networks began to run amok along paths that lead us towards the
Iran-contra affair and the other great covert action secret wars of the
1980's and 1990's.
During the last days of the Ford Administration, Attorney General
Edward Levi had occasion to assert that the CIA's policy of refusing to
turn documents and other evidence over to the Justice
Department "smacked of a Watergate cover-up." This was in connection
with the prosecution of one Edwin Gibbons Moore, who was allegedly
trying to sell secret papers to the Soviet Embassy. The Bush CIA had
refused to turn over various documents germane to this strange case.
During the Reagan years, Bush was given a much-publicized assignment as
head of the South Florida Task Force and related efforts that were
billed as part of a "war on drugs." In 1975, President Ford had ordered
the CIA to collect intelligence on narcotics trafficking overseas, and
also to "covertly influence" foreign offocials to help US anti-drug
activities. How well did Bush carry out this critical part of his
responsibilities?
Poorly, according to a Justice Department "Report on Inquiry into CIA-
Related Electronic Surveillance Activities," which was compiled in
1976, but which has only partly come into the public domain. What
emerges is a systematic pattern of coverup that recalls Lapham's
spurious arguments in the Leletier case. Using the notorious stonewall
that the first responsibility of the CIA was to shield its own "methods
and sources" from being exposed, the agency expressed fear "that the
confidentiality of CIA's overseas collection methods and sources would
be in jeopardy should discovery proceedings require disclosure of the
CIA's electronic surveillance activities." [fn 52] This caused "several
narcotics invesitgations and'or prosecutions...to be terminated."
It was during 1976 that Bush met the Panamanian leader Manuel Antonio
Noriega. According to Don Gregg, this meeting took place on the edges
of a luncheon conference with several other visiting Panamanian
officials.
This all makes an impressive catalogue of debacles in the area of
covert operations. But what about the intelligence product of the CIA,
in particular the National Intelligence Estimates that are the
centerpiece of the CIA's work. Here Bush was to oversee a maneuver
markedly to enhance the influence of the pro-Zionist wing of the
intelligence community.
As we have already seen, the idea of new procedures allegedly designed
to evaluate the CIA's track record in intelligence analysis had been
kicking around in Leo Cherne's PFIAB for some time. In June, 1976, Bush
accepted a proposal from Leo Cherne to carry out an experiment
in "competitive analysis" in the area of National Intelligence
Estimates of Soviet air defenses, Soviet missle accuracy, and overall
Soviet strategic objectives. Bush and Cherne decided to conduct the
competitive analysis by commissioning two separate groups, each of
which would present and argue for its own conclusions. On the one, Team
A would be the CIA's own National Intelligence Officers and their
staffs. But there would also be a separate Team B, a group of
ostensibly independent outside experts.
The group leader of Team B was Harvard history professor Richard Pipes,
who was working in the British Museum in London when he was appointed
by Bush and Cherne. Pipes had enjoyed support for his work from the
office of Senator Henry Jackson, which had been one of the principal
incubators of a generation of whiz kids and think tankers whose entire
strategic outlook revolved around the stated or unstated premiss of the
absolute primacy of supporting Israel in every imaginable excess or
adventure, while frequently sacrificing vital US interests in the
process.
The liason between Pipes' Team B and Team A, the official CIA, was
provided by John Paisley, who had earlier served as the liaison between
Langley and the McCord-Hunt-Liddy Plumbers. In this sense Paisley
served as the staff director of the Team A-Team B experiment. Pipes
then began choosing the members of Team B. First he selected from a
list provided by the CIA two military men, Lieutenant General John Vogt
and Brigadier General Jasper Welch, Jr., both of the Air Force. Pipes
the added seven additional members: Paul Nitze, Gen. Daniel Graham, the
retiring head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Professor William van
Cleave of the University of Southern California, former US Ambassador
to Moscow Foy Kohler, Paul Wolfowitz of the Arms Control and
Disarmament Agency, Thomas Wolfe of the RAND Corporation, and Seymour
Weiss, a former top State Department official. Two other choices by
Pipes were rejected by Bush.
Team B began meeting during late August of 1976. Paisley and Don Suda
provided Team B with the same raw intelligence being used by National
Intelligence Officer Howard Stoertz's Team A. Team B's basic conclusion
was that the Soviet military preparations were not exclusively
defensive, but rather represented the attempt to acquire a first-strike
capability that would allow the USSR to unleash and prevail in
thermonculear war. The US would face a window of vulnerability during
the 1980's. But it is clear from Pipes' own discussion of the debate
that Team B [fn 53] was less interested in the Soviet Union and its
capabilities than in seizing hegemony in the intelligence and think
tank community in preparation for seizing the key posts in the
Republican administration that might follow Carter in 1980. Pipes was
livid when, at the final Team A-Team B meeting, he was not allowed to
sit at Bush's table for lunch. The argument in Team B quarters was that
since the Soviets were turning aggressive once again, the US must do
everything possible to strengthen the only staunch and reliable
American ally in the Middle East or possibly anywhere in the world,
Israel. This meant not just that Israel had to be financed without
stint, but that Israel had to be brought into central America, the Far
East, and Africa. There was even a design for a new NATO constructed
around Israel, while junking the old NATO because it was absorbing
vital US resources needed by Israel.
By contrast, Team B supporters like Richard Perle, who served as
Assistant Secretary of Defense under Reagan, were later bitterly
hostile to the Strategic Defense Initiative, which was plainly the only
rational response to the Soviet buildup, which was very real indeed.
The "window of vulnerability" argument had merit, but the policy
conclusions favored by Team B had none, since their idea of responding
to the Soviet threat was, once again, to subordinate everything to
Israeli requirements.
Team A and Team B were supposed to be secret, but leaks appeared in the
Boston Globe in October. Pipes was surprised to find an even more
detailed account of Team B and its grim estimate of Soviet intent in
the New York Times shortly after Christmas, but Paisley told him that
Bush and CIA official Richard Lehman had already been leaking to the
press, and urged Pipes to begin to offer some interviews of his own.
[fn 54]
Typically enough, Bush appeared on Face the Nation early in the new
year to say that he was "appalled" by the leaks of Team B's
conclusions. Bush confessed that "outside expertise has enormous appeal
to me." He refused to discuss the Team B conclusions themselves, but
did say that he wanted to "gun down" speculation that the CIA had
leaked a tough estimate of the USSR's military buildup in order to stop
Carter from cutting the defense budget. That speculation "just couldn't
be further from the truth," said Bush, who was thus caught lying
neither for the first nor last time in his existence. As if by
compulsive association, Bush went on: "That gets to the integrity of
the process. And I am here to defend the integrity of the intelligence
process. The CIA has great integrity. It would never take directions
from a policymaker-- me or anybody else--in order to come up with
conclusions to force a President-elect's hand or a President's hand,"
pontificated Bush with Olympian hypocrisy.
For his part, Henry Kissinger, within a year or two, in an interview
with the London Economist, embraced key aspects of the Team B position.
Congress soon got into the act, and George Bush testified at a closed
hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on January 18, 1977.
It turned out that Team B and its "worst-case" scenario enjoyed strong
support from Hubert Humphrey, Clifford Case, and Jacob Javits. Later it
also became clear that Adlai Stevenson, the chiarman of the Senate
Intelligence Committee Subcommittee on Collection, Production, and
Quality of Intelligence was also supportive of Team B, along with many
other senators such as Moynihan and Wallop. Gary Hart was hostile, but
Percy was open to dialogue with Team B.
After the Team B conclusions had been bruited around the world, Pipes
became a leading member of the Committee on the Present Danger, where
his fellow Team B veteran Paul Nitze was already ensconced, along with
Eugene V. Rostow, Dean Rusk, Lane Kirkland, Max Kampelman, Richard
Allen, David Packard, and Henry Fowler. About 30 members of the
Committee on the Present danger went on to become high officials of the
Reagan Administration.
Ronald Reagan himself embracedthe "window of vulerability" thesis,
which worked as well for him as the bomber gap and missle gap arguments
had worked in previous elections. When the Reagan Administration was
being assembled, Bush and James Baker had a lot to say about who got
what appointments. Bush was the founder of Team B, and that is the
fundamental reason which such pro-Zionist neoconservatives as Max
Kampelman, Richard Perle, Steven Bryen, Noel Koch, Paul Wolfowitz and
Dov Zakem showed up in the Reagan Administration. For in one of his
many ideological reincarnations, George Bush is also a neoconservative
himself. What counted for Team B was to occupy the offices, and to
dominate the debate. Team B greatly influenced the strategic
assumptions and rhetoric of the first Reagan Administration; their one
outstanding defeat was the launching of the SDI.
In a grim postlude to the Team B exercise, Bush's hand-picked staff
director for the operation, John Paisley, the Soviet analyst (Paisley
was the former deputy director of the CIA's Office of Strategic
Research) and CIA liaison to the Plumbers, disappeared on September 24,
1978 while sailing on Chesapeake Bay in his sloop, the Brillig. Several
days later a body was found floating in the bay in an advanced state of
decomposition, and with a gun shot wound behind the left ear. The
corpse was weighed down by two sets of ponderous diving belts. The body
was four inches shorter than Paisley's own height, and Paisley's wife
later asserted that the body found was not that of her husband. Despite
all this, the body was positively identified as Paisley's, the death
summarily ruled a suicide, and the body quickly cremated at a funeral
home approved by the Office of Security. Paisley had been involved
along with Angleton in the debriefing and managing of Soviet defectors
like Nosenko and Nikolai Artamonov/"Shadrin," and various aspects of
this case show that the Bush-Cherne Team B had not really ceased its
operations after 1976-77, but had continued to function. Some have
attempted to identify Paisley as Deep Throat. Others have suggested
that he was a KGB mole. Either story, if true, might lead to highly
embarrassing consequences for George Bush. [fn 55]
The Shadrin case just mentioned allows us to follow Bush a few steps
further into the world of Soviet defectors, exchanges, kidnappings,
murders, and other grisly rites of the cold war. Nicolai Artamonov
alias Nick Shadrin was a Soviet naval officer who had defected to the
west in the 1950's, and who worked for the Defense Intelligence Agency.
There are indications that Shadrin was encouraged by his US handlers to
let himself be contacted by the Soviets so that he could become a
double agent. In December, 1975 Shadrin was sent to Vienna by the CIA,
where he disappeared. According to some versions, he had been a Soviet
agent all along, and went back to Moscow under the orders of the KGB.
According to other versions, Shadrin was cynically delivered up by his
CIA handlers to certain death at the hands of the KGB within the
framework of a dirty operation to enhance the career of another KGB
agent who had secretly gone to work for the CIA while remaining with
the KGB. [fn 56]
The handling of defectors such as Shadrin represented that part of CIA
operations where James Jesus Angleton spun his web, so were are moving
through an obfuscated wilderness of mirrors in broaching this subject.
But it seems well established that Bush acquired a personal role in the
Shadrin affair through his deception of Shadrin's wife, Eva Shadrin,
who was desperately seeking to find out what had happened to her
husband. With the help of friends, Eva Shadrin appealed for assistance
to Senators John Sparkman, and James Eastland, to Speaker of the House
Carl Albert, to Pentagon officials and to PFIAB. On February 5, Mrs.
Shadrin received a call from Brent Scowcroft saying that the case had
been brought to his attention. The same day Gen. Vernon Walters called
to say that Scowcroft was meeting with him at that very hour to see
what could be done. Bush then appointed CIA Counterintelligence Chief
George Kalaris to oversee cooperation with Mrs. Sadrin and her lawyer,
Richard Copaken. Kalaris is accused in one published account of this
story of having helped to delivered Shadrin into the hands of the KGB.
Later, on October 8, 1976 Mrs. Shadrin and Copaken were received by
Bush at Langley in a meeting also attended by Kalaris and former CIA
employee Chester Cooper. Various possibilities for forcing an exchange
of Shadrin were brought up by Mrs. Shadrin, but were ruled out by Bush.
Bush also refused to say whether or not Shadrin was on a secret mission
for the CIA. Bush did agree to set up a meeting for Mrs. Shadrin with
President Ford.
On November 5, Ford received Mrs. Shadrin at the White House. Mrs.
Shadrin recalled Ford as "cold and austere," a man whose "eyes seemed
glazed over like a bullfrog's while I talked." Ford was unwilling to
make any committment on behalf of Shadrin. In the meantime, Bush had
allowed Copaken to interview several CIA clandestine officers,
including the last CIA contact to see Shadrin, one Cynthia Hausmann.
This was considered a highly unusual favor by the DCI, even though
Hausmann's cover had already been blown by Philip Agee. But in the end,
Mrs. Shadrin concluded that her husband had been set up by the CIA, and
that "she had been a fool to believe anything told her by George
Bush...." [fn 57]
Related dimensions of Bush's intrigues at the CIA can only be hinted
at. There is for example the case of Ralph Joseph Sigler, an army
segreant who worked as a double agent with the east bloc until he was
found brutally murdered by electrocution in a motel in April, 1976.
Among Sigler's belongings was a photograph of himself together with CIA
Director Bush. [fn 58]
The question raised by these cases was almost universally dodged during
the 1988 election campaign: "Do the American people really want to
elect a former director of the CIA as their President," as Tom Wicker
posed it in the New York Times of April 29, 1988. "That's hardly been
discussed so far; but it seems obvious that a CIA chief might well be
privy to the kind of 'black' secrets that could later make him-- as a
public figure--subject to blackmail." Here is one area where we can be
sure that we have only scratched the surface.
As he managed the formidable world-wide capabilities of the CIA during
1976, Bush was laying the groundwork for his personal advancement to
higher office and greater power in the 1980's. As we have seen, there
was some intermittent speculation during the year that, in spite of
what Ford had promised the Senate, Bush might show up as Ford's running
mate after all. But, at the Republican convention, Ford chose Kansas
Senator Bob Dole for vice-president. If Ford had won the election, Bush
would certainly have attempted to secure a further promotion, perhaps
to Secretary of State, Defense, or Treasury as a springboard for a new
presidential bid of his own in 1980. But if Carter won the election,
Bush would attempt to raise the banner of the non-political status of
the CIA in order to convince Carter to let him stay at Langley during
the period 1977-81 as a "non-partisan" administrator.
Carter and Bush were not destined to get along. Carter wore the mask of
the cult of Dionysios, demanding that the secrets of the inner temple
be thrown open to the plebs for which he pretended to act as tribune.
Bush wore the mask of the temple of Apollo, and argued in public for
the sanctity of state secrets and the priority of covert operations
while he secretly deployed his own irregular armies. Carter had
implicitly attacked Bush during the early phases of the presidential
campaign in an August 12 speech in which the Georgian had denigrated
the Ford Administration as a "dumping ground for unsuccessful
candidates, faithful political partisans, out-of-favor White House
aides and representatives of the special interests." That day, Bush had
travelled to Plains, Geergia to provide Carter with a five-hour
intelligence briefing. Reporters asked Bush about Carter's comments,
which elicited a fit of apoplexy from our hero: "That's very
interesting," said Bush. We came down here to do a professional job.
The President directed me to brief him on intelligence matters.
Everything went very well." Carter backed off a day later, saying "I
happen to think a lot of George Bush."
In the close 1976 election, Carter prevailed by vote fraud in New York,
Ohio, and other states, but Ford was convinced by Nelson and Happy
Rockefeller, as well as by his own distraught wife Betty, that he must
concede in order to preserve the work of "healing" that he had
accomplished since Watergate. Carter would therefore enter the White
House.
Bush prepared to make his bid for continuity at the CIA. Shortly after
the election, he was scheduled to journey to Plains to brief Carter
once again with the help of his deputy Henry Knoche. Early in the
morning Bush and Knoche stopped off at the Old Executive Office
Building to talk to Budget Director Robert Lynn in order to secure a
cash infusion for the CIA, which was facing a budgetary crunch. Bush
then dropped in on Vice President Nelson Rockefeller, and also went
into the Oval Office to talk to Ford.
The critical meeting with Carter went very badly indeed. Bush took
Carter aside and argued that in 1960 and 1968, CIA Directors were
retained during presidential transitions, and that it would make Carter
look good if he did the same. Carter signalled that he wasn't
interested. Then Bush lamely stammered that if Carter wanted his own
man in Langley, Bush would be willing to resign. which is of course
standard procedure for all agency heads when a new president takes
office. Carter said that that was indeed exactly what he wanted, and
that he would have his own new DCI ready by January 21, 1977. Bush and
Knoche then briefed Carter and his people for some six hours. Carter
insiders told the press that Bush's briefing had been
a "disaster." "Jimmy just wasn't impressed with Bush," said a key
Carter staffer. [fn 59]
Bush and Knoche then flew back to Washington, and on the plane Bush
wrote a memo for Henry Kissinger describing his exchanges with Carter.
At midnight, Bush drove to Kissinger's home and briefed him for an
hour.
Knoche said later that he was mightily impressed by Bush's long day of
meeting the budget director, the president, the vice president, the
president-elect and the secretary of state, all on the same day, even
if the result had been that Bush was fired. At Bush's 9:30 AM staff
meeting in Langley the next day, Knoche and a group of other
officialsawarded Bush the Intelligence Medal of Merit. "It was a very
touching day," said Knoche.
Carter first attempted to make Theodore Sorenson, the former Kennedy
intimate, his new CIA Director. It soon became clear that certain
circles were determined to block this nomination. The Sorenson
nomination was soon torpedoed by a series of leaks, including
revelations that Sorenson had been a conscientious objector during
World War II, plus accusations that he had taken classified documents
with him when he had left the government in 1964. Carter tried to get
NATO General Bernard Rogers for the post, but finally had to settle for
Navy Admiral Stansfield Turner from his own class at Annapolis.
An important internal CIA issue that arose during Turner's time in
Langley was the question of personnel cuts, especially in the
operations directorate. To understand Bush's infl;uence on this topic,
we must go back to the Watergate era.
During the Schlesinger-Colby period, about 2,000 CIA personnel,
representing about 15% of the CIA manpower complement, were dismissed.
The method of these firings appears to have been heavily influenced by
Shackley and his faction, who argued that CIA personnel who were in
danger of being exposed by Philip Agee should be pre-emptively
terminated. There is therefore much reason to think that Shackley and
Agee were in cahoots. This purge touched many important posts, which
could then be filled by Shackley loyalists. A description of the
process is offered by retired CIA agent Joseph Burkholder Smith, who
served in the Western Hemisphere division:
A defensive operation was started immediately and every activity,
agent, and officer was scrutinized to determine if Agee had already
blown them or if he would write about them in his book. A Shackley
henchman was installed as chief of operations [was this William
Nelson?] and a cryptonym, the Agency's badge of security significance,
was assigned to the task of getting rid of the division's operations
and much of its office staff-- the pre-Shackley staff, some were quick
to point out. They doubted whether so much destruction was necessary,
especially since Shackley had a reputation for ruthlessness and for
filling key jobs with his favorites.
Whether or not such a vast amount of house cleaning was really
necessary, I could not decide. All I knew was that it was dismal work.
[...]
Nevertheless, I was disturbed to have to dismiss so many loyal men and
upset to have the defenses I kept putting up to try to salvage
something of their old lives summarily dismissed by the Star Chamber
conducting the purge in Washington. When Agee's book finally appeared,
not one of the people I was ordered to fire was mentioned. [fn 60]
All of the CIA's divisions were purged, with justifications offered
that ranged from the threat of denunciation by Agee to budget
constraints to poor performance to the need to make room for new blood.
Schlesinger, who fired 630 officers in five months, was said to be
accompanied by bodyguards during this period for fear that some
disgruntled covert warrior might exact a horrible revenge.
During Bush's tenure, the same William Nelson apparently mentioned by
Smith seems to have suggested that the administrative purge had not
gone far enough. In the spring of 1976, when he was about to be
replaced by William Wells, Nelson again raised the issue of operations
directorate personnel. "There were a lot of people in the DO
[Directorate of Operations] who were marginal performers," said Nelson
in a 1988 interview. "The low middle. We needed quality, not quantity.
I told [Bush] that the lower 25 per cent should be identified and
should be encouraged to seek other employment....I said we owed these
people a lot but not a lifetime job. He [Bush] put it in his pocket and
said he would think about it." [fn 61]
This new round of firings was relegated to Turner, who reportedly was
told by Knoche on arriving at the CIA that the agency was "top-heavy."
There was the case of Cord Meyer, Knoche said, who had too much rank
for the work he was doing. As Turner later recalled, "It was at this
point that I learned about a study the espionage [operations] branch
itself had done on its personnel situation in mid 1976, while George
Bush was DCI. It called for a reduction in the size of the branch by
1350 positions over a five-year period. No action had been taken. Bush
had not rejected it, but neither had he faced up to it." [fn 62] Turner
then proceeded to abolish 820 jobs, which he claims was accomplished
through attrition. Other estimates of the Turner firings range between
820 and 2,800.
The plan Turner implemented was thus according to some the Nelson-
Shackley-Bush plan. Certain activities of the intelligence community
were being privatized and farmed out to such organisms as the National
Endowment for Democracy and other such quasi-autonomous non-
governmental organizations of Project Democracy. Under Reagan, this
privatization of intelligence operations and their increasing
assignment to non-governmental organizations was made offocial through
Executive Order 12333.
Otherwise, George Bush used his last days at the CIA for his lifelong
passtime, servicing his network. On December 16, he appeared at an
awards ceremony in the Bubble at Langley to present a medal to Juanita
Moody of the National Security Agency Product Organization staff. [fn
63]
During his year at Langley, Bush was especially forthcoming towards
Wall Street, above all towards the family firm. On at least one
occasion, Bush gave an exclusive private briefing, including forecasts
on the future development of the world energy market, for partners and
executives of Brown Brothers, Harriman. Such an incident, it is
superfluous to point out, entails the gravest questions of conflict of
interest. On another occasion, Bush gave a similar briefing to the
board of directors of the Chase Manhattan Bank. [fn 64]
As always, Bush had special attention for Leo Cherne, the source of so
much of the policy he implemented at the CIA. On November 8, Bush had
called Cherne's attention to a small item in US News and World Report
which suggested that "US assessments have so underrated Russia's
strategic buildup that a top-secret study is under way to decide
whether to strip the CIA of responsibility for the estimates and give
it to an independent office answerable directly to the President."
Another leak on Team B! Bush told Cherne that "the attached is the kind
of publicity that I am sure you would agree is very damaging. I really
don't think there is much we can do about it at this point, but I worry
about it."
Bush left Langley with Carter's inauguration, leaving Knoche to serve a
couple of months as acting DCI. In early February Bush wrote again to
Leo Cherne, with whom he was now on a first-name basis:
Thanks for that lovely letter you sent me on Feb. 2nd. I already miss
our contacts a lot. I will be leaving for Houston a week from today.
[...]
Should you get down that way it would be great to see you. I am joining
a couple of Boards that will bring me East from time to time. I hope to
keep up my interest in foreign affairs and in national politics. It is
quite unclear at the moment how to do these things.
The past has been fantastic; but now I am determined to look to the
future. I know it will be full of challenge. I hope it holds frequent
contacts with Leo Cherne.
I will follow with interest the President's decisions on PFIAB. Holler
if I can ever be of help to you. I value our friendship.
Sincerely, George [fn 65]
Carter abolished PFIAB and fired Cherne from the IOB. George Bush now
turned to his family business of international banking.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
Return to the Table of Contents
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
NOTES:
1. Nathan Miller, Spying for America, (New York, 1989), p. 399.
2. Gerald R. Ford Library, Richard B. Cheney Files, Box 5.
3. See Loch K. Johnson, A Season of Inquiry:The Senate Intelligence
Investigation (University Press of Kentucky, 1985), pp. 108-109.
4. Johnson, A Season of Inquiry, pp. 115-116.
5. Gerald R. Ford Library, Philip Buchen Files, Box 24. Article is from
Houston Post, November 8, 1975.
6. Newhouse News Service article by Saul Kohler, November, 1975, with
letter from Ford's press secretary Ron Nessen, at Gerald R. Ford
Library, William T. kendall Files, Box 7.
7. Letter from Bush to Stennis, December 12, 1975 in Ford Library,
Philip W. Buchen Files, Box 37.
8. Ford Library, Presidential Handwriting File, Box 9.
9. Ford Library, Presidential Handwriting File, Box 9.
10. Collins to Ford, November 12, 1975, Ford Library, John O. Marsh
Files, Box 1.
11. Nedzi to Ford, December 12, 1975, Ford Library, John O. Marsh
Files, Box 1.
12. Roth to Bush, November 20, 1975, Ford Library, John O. Marsh Files,
Box 1.
13. Ford Library, William T. Kendall Files, Box 7
14. Ford Library, William T. Kendall Files, Box 7.
15. Ford Library, William T. Kendall Files, Box 7.
16. Ford Library, William T. Kendall Files, Box 7.
17. US Senate, Committee on Armed Services, Nomination of George Bush
to be Director of Central Intelligence, December 15-16, 1975, p. 10.
18. Memo of December 16, 1975 from O'Donnell to Marsh through
Friedersdorf on the likely vote in the Stennis Senate Armed Services
Committee. Ford Library, William T. Kendall Files, Box 7.
19. Ford Library, William T. Kendall Files, Box 7.
20. For an account of the explitation of the Welch incident by the Ford
Administration, see Loch K. Johnson, A Season of Inquiry (University
Press of Kentucky, 1985), pp. 161-162.
21. Ford Library, Leo Cherne Papers, Box 8.
22. For an account of the leaking of the Pike Committee report and the
situation in late January and February, 1976, see Daniel Schorr,
Clearing the Air (Boston, 1977) especially pp. 179-207, and Loch K.
Johnson, A Season of Inquiry, pp. 172-191.
23. A Season of Inquiry, p. 180.
24. A Season of Inquiry, p. 182.
25. Thomas Powers, The Man Who Kept the Secrets (New York, 1987), p.
12.
26. William Colby, Honorable Men (New York, 1978), p. 452.
27. Bob Woodward and Walter Pincus, "At CIA, a Rebuilder 'Goes With the
Flow,'" Washington Post, August 10, 1988. The biographical information
on Knoche is also drawn from a 1-page summary in the Ford Library,
William T. Kendall Files, Box 9.
28. On Murphy and Noriega, see Frank McNeil, War and Peace in Central
America, (New York, Scribner), p. 278.
29. Cord Meyer, Facing Reality: From World Federalism to the CIA
(University Press of America, 1982), pp. 225-226.
30. See John Prados, Presidents' Secret Wars (New York, ), Thomas
Powers, The Man Who Kept the Secrets: Richard Helms and the CIA (New
York, 1987), and John Ranelagh, The Agency: The Rise and Decline of the
CIA (New York, 1987).
31. Washington Post, August 10, 1988.
32. William R. Corson, The Armies of Ignorance (New York, Dial Press),
p. 446.
33. Ford Library, Philip W. Buchen Files, Box 2.
34. Memo by Leo Cherne, February 6, 1976, in Ford Library Leo Cherne
Papers, Box 1.
35. For Ford's reorganization, see Loch K. Johnson, A Season of
Inquiry, pp. 194-197, and New York Times, February 18, 1976.
36. For Koregate, see Robert B. Boettcher, Gifts of Deceit (New York,
Holt Rinheart and Winston, 1980).
37. Nathan Miller, Spying For America: The Hidden History of US
Intelligence (New York, Paragon House, 1989), pp. 402-403.
38. Ranelagh, The Agency, p. 632.
39. Scott Armstrong and Jeff Nason, "Company Man," Mother Jones,
October, 1988.
40. John Stockwell, In Search of Enemies, (New York, 1978).
41. David Corn, "The Same Old Dirty Tricks," The Nation, August 23,
1988.
42. David Corn, "The Same Old Dirty Tricks," The Nation, August 23,
1988.
43. Chapman Pincher, The Spycatcher Affair(New York, 1988), p. 147.
44. For the CIA-Harold Wilson affair, see: David Leigh, The Wilson Plot
(New York, 1988); Philip Knightley, The Second Oldest Profession (New
York, Norton); Richard Deacon, The British Connection (London, Hamish
Hamilton); and Chapman Pincher, The Spycatcher Affair (New York, 1988).
Tom Mangold, Cold Warrior (New York, 1991) joins the red Studebaker
school of historiography on Bush in the Angleton-Wilson affair.
45. Accounts of the Letelier Affairs include John Dinges and Saul
Landau, Assassination on Embassy Row (New York, 1980); Donald Freed,
Death in Washington (Westport, Connecticut, 1980), and Scott Armstrong
and Jeff Nason, "Company Man," Mother Jones, October 1988.
46. See Armstrong and Nason, p. 43.
47. Freed, p. 174.
48. Dinges and Landau, p. 384.
49. Taylor Branch and Eugene M. Propper, Labyrinth (New York, 1982), p.
72.
50. Labyrinth, pp. 74-75.
51. Freed, Death in Washington, p. 174.
52. Jefferson Morley, "Bush's Drug Problem- and Ours," The Nation,
August 27, 1988.
53. Richard Pipes, "Team B: The Reality Behind the Myth," Commentary,
October 1986.
55. Pipes, "Team B," Commentary, October, 1986, p. 34. Pipes makes
clear that it was Bush and Richard Lehman who both leaked to David
Binder of the New York Times. Lehman also encouraged Pipes to leak. The
verson offered by William R. Corson et al. in Widows (New York, 1989),
namely that Paisley did the leaking, may also be true, but will not
exonerate Bush. The authors of Widows are in grave danger of being
banished to the red Studebaker school of coverup in that they ignore
Pipes' account and its included fingering of Bush as the lead leaker.
55. See William R. Corson, Susan B. Trento, Joseph J. Trento, Widows.
56. See Willaim R. Corson et al., Widows, and Henry Hurt, Shadrin: The
Spy Who Never Came Back.
57. Henry Hurt, Shadrin, p. 260.
58. Corson, Widows, p. 301.
59. Evans and Novak column, Houston Post, December 1, 1976. For the pro-
Bush account of these events, see Nicholas King, George Bush, pp. 109-
110.
60. Joseph Burkholder Smith, Portrait of a Cold Warrior (New York,
Putnam), p. 12.
61. Washington Post, August 10, 1988.
62. Admiral Stansfield Turner, Secrecy and Democracy (Boston, 1985), p.
196.
63. James Bamford, The Puzzle Palace, p. 250.
64. Washington Post, August 10, 1988.
65. Ford Library, Leo Cherne Papers, Box 1.
Chive Mynde
1970-1989
"Who shall stand guard to the guards themselves?"
— Juvenal
THE PREMISE
Votescam asserts the unthinkable.
It is a strange and frightening true detective story. It contains fact,
film, documents and visions seldom seen by the public. It is a
troubling look at the corruption of the American vote that most
Americans cannot bear to believe is even partly true.
The authors assert, and back it up with daring reporting, that your
vote and mine may now be a meaningless bit of energy directed by
preprogrammed computers — which can be fixed to select certain pre-
ordained candidates and leave no footprints or paper trail.
In short, computers are covertly stealing your vote.
• For almost three decades the American vote has been subject to
government-sponsored electronic theft.
• The vote has been stolen from you by a cartel of federal "national
security" bureaucrats, who include higher-ups in the Central
Intelligence Agency, political party leaders, Congressmen, co-opted
journalists — and the owners and managers of the major Establishment
news media, who have decided in concert that how America's votes are
counted, by whom they are counted and how the results are verified and
delivered to the public is, as one of them put it, "Not a proper area
of inquiry."
• By means of an unofficial private corporation named News Election
Service (NES), the Establishment press has actual physical control of
the counting and dissemination of the vote, and it refuses to let the
public know how it is done.
This book also contends that the theft of your vote or Votescam, is
part of a supposedly patriotic "collaboration" between federal
officials and the news media that began shortly after the assassination
of John F. Kennedy in 1963, when the "responsible" American press was
persuaded by American intelligence services to hide from the American
people the actual implications of the Kennedy murder.
My brothers, Jim and Ken Collier, report this story as if the "hounds
of hell," as Ken used to put it, were snapping at their journalistic
heels.
I, too, am a journalist and editor by profession, and a skeptic by
training. Yet, as hard as I have tried not to, I now believe they were
actually holding the tail of an elephantine conspiracy that they
uncovered, inch by heart-rending inch.
After reading Votescam, the impatient citizen may well ask: "Why if
there is truth in the charges, are there no indictments?"
That question is one of many provoked by Votescam's reporting, and if
Americans actually value their vote then there will be indictments
based on this book's data and documentation.
My brothers peeked behind Oz's curtain and into a voting booth where
people of power had secret hold of all the levers — as well as all the
keys on the computer keyboard.
Yes, that's one hell of a conspiracy and it — as Jim and Ken uncorked
it — doesn't stop there. You may be shocked, annoyed, angry astounded
or alarmed to find out where and how deep my brothers feel it
penetrates.
Votescam is one of the weirdest trips 1990s Americans may take. My hope
is that you will suspend disbelief for a while and read it with an open
mind. If it raises questions you will demand answers.
Answers to "improper inquiries" is what this book is about. It's what
excellent journalism, in its best days, is also about.
Barnard L. Collier
New York City 1992
http://www.votescam.com/frame.html
Chive Mynde
ELECTRONIC HOODWINK
"We can now speak the most majestic words a democracy can offer:
'The people have spoken'..."
First words spoken by
President-elect, George Bush,
November 8, 1988 victory speech
in Houston, Texas, 11:30 PM EST
"Once, during the time when days were darker, I made a promise. Thanks,
New Hampshire!"
Same speech, final words.
It was not "the People" of the United States of America who did "the
speaking" on that election day, although most of them believed it was,
and still believe so.
In fact, the People did not speak at all, and George Bush may have
known it or, at least, strongly suspected it.
The voices most of us really heard that day were the voices of
computers — strong, loud, authoritative, unquestioned in their
electronic finality. The computers counted more than 55 million
American votes in 1988 — more than enough to swing election after
election across the nation. In that election, a difference of just
535,000 or so votes would have put Dukakis into the White House.
The computers that spoke in November 1988 held in their inner .workings
small boxes that contained secret codes that only the sellers of the
computers could read. The programs, or "source codes," were regarded
as "trade secrets," The sellers of the vote-counting software zealously
guarded their programs from the public, from election officials, from
everyone — on the dubious grounds that competitors could steal their
ideas if the source codes were open to inspection.
You may ask: What "ideas" does it require to count something as simple
as ballots?
Can the "ideas" be much more complex than, let's say, a supermarket
computerized cash register or an automatic bank teller machine?
The computer voting machines do not have to do anything complicated at
all; they simply must be able to register votes for the correct
candidate or party or proposal, tabulate them, count them up, and
deliver arithmetically correct additions. People with no formal
training, even children, used to do it all the time.
So why can't the public know what those secret source codes instruct
the computers to do? It only makes common sense that every gear, every
mechanism, every nook and cranny of every part of the voting process
ought to be in the sunlight, wide open to public view.
How else can the public be reasonably assured that they are
participating in an unrigged election where their vote actually means
something?
Yet one of the most mysterious, low-profile, covert, shadowy,
questionable mechanisms of American democracy is the American vote
count.
There is so profound a public despair about keeping the vote system
honest that a man with immaculate academic credentials can sound the
alarm on Dan Rather's CBS Evening News — charging that America's
elections are being compromised by computer felons — and still get only
three calls about it.
Dr. Howard Strauss, a Princeton computer sciences professor and a
member of a tiny nationwide group of worried citizens who call
themselves "Election Watch," says:
"The presidential election of 1992, without too much difficulty and
with little chance of the felons getting caught, could be stolen by
computers for one candidate or another. The candidate who can win by
computer has worked jar enough ahead to rig the election by getting
his 'consultants' to write the software that runs thousands of vote-
counting computers from coast to coast. There are so many computers
that use the same software now that a presidential election can be
tampered with- in fact, may already be tampered with. Because of the
trade secrecy, nobody can be the wiser."
Computers in voting machines are effectively immune from checking and
rechecking. If they are fixed, you cannot know it, and you cannot be at
all sure of an honest tally.
In the 1988 Republican primary in New Hampshire, there was no panel of
computer experts who worked for the people and thoroughly examined the
source codes before and after the voting. It is likely that a
notoriously riggable collection of "Shouptronic"
computers "preordained" voting results to give George Bush his "Hail
Mary" victory in New Hampshire.
Nobody save a small group of computer engineers, like John Sununu, the
state's Republican governor, would be the wiser.
If you think back carefully to November 8, 1988, it may strike you that
your belief in who won at the polls was not formed as the result of
openly voiced "ayes" or "nays" in a public forum.
Nor was your perception of who won or lost based on the honest and
visible marks on paper ballots that were checked and rechecked by all
concerned parties or their chosen representatives.
The truth, if you recall it clearly, is that you learned about George
Bush's astounding victory in New Hampshire from a television program or
newspaper, which supposedly learned about it from a computer center
into which other computers fed information.
You learned the "predicted outcome" within minutes after the polls in
New Hampshire closed, and by and large you believed what you heard
because you had no cause, it seemed, to be skeptical or suspicious.
If you had any doubts about how the vote was counted, you probably
dismissed them after asking yourself questions like:
1) Why would the computer people lie?
2) How could they lie? There must be public checks and balances.
3) If they lie, how can they get away with it? The losers will surely
raise hell.
Because you, and most of us, dismiss the possibility that the American
vote is routinely stolen, distorted or otherwise monkeyed with by
corrupt computer wizards, you resist questioning further and dismiss as
crackpots or fanatics those who do.
Yet, not long ago, Robert Flaherty, the president of News Election
Services (NES), the private company that compiles voting results and
feeds them to the major media, was asked to make it clear how the NES
system works.
As usual when asked about how NES counts and disseminates the vote, he
replied:
"This is not a proper area of inquiry."
Can it be that the methods used to accept, tally and broadcast the
results of the American vote are improper areas for questioning?
"Yes," says Mr. Flaherty, "that is a proprietary matter not open to the
public."
We will describe the operations of the secretive NES later on, although
it is noteworthy here to mention that this corporation, which
fanatically guards its people and processes from the public view, is a
consortium of the three major television networks: ABC, NBC and CBS,
plus the Associated Press wire service, CNN, the New York Times, the
Washington Post and other news-gathering organizations.
These "First Amendment" institutions each raise the cry
of "impropriety" and "improper inquiry" when asked about their unspoken
role in the American vote count.
Actually, the major news organizations foster the illusion that the
American press competes to get the correct vote count to the public,
and they imply by omission that "ballots" are counted in the
traditional, accountable ways that once fostered confidence and a sense
of fairness in the hearts and minds of the American voter.
However the American voter has grown steadily more apathetic in both
presidential and off-year elections, with sometimes less than 25
percent of those eligible taking the opportunity to cast a ballot The
press blames this on the politicians and the public itself, but the
public may be aware, if only vaguely that in some unfathomable way
their vote counts for little or nothing.
There have been too many odd coincidences and peculiar results over the
past quarter century, and the decline in voter participation in
national elections over the past two decades is directly proportional
to the rise of computerized voting.
The People are naive about computer voting and somewhat less than
entirely computer literate. They do intuit, however, that it is a
mistake to put much faith in the integrity of computerized voting
systems. Except in matters spiritual, intelligent people tend not to
place much faith in what they cannot see. They could see paper ballots
marked and placed into a slot in ballot boxes, and except for certain
infamous precincts in Chicago, people generally trusted the American
voting process. They could see it, touch it, and their vote left a
paper trail that could be followed if there was a need for
verification. That can no longer be said.
The instant after a voter chooses his or her ballot selection on a
computer, the electronic impulse that is triggered either records that
vote or it does not. Either way, the computer program immediately
erases all record of the transaction except for the result, which is
subject to an infinite variety of switching, column jumping,
multiplication, division, subtraction, addition and erasure.
All these operations take place in the electronic universe within the
computer and are entirely under the direction of the program or "source
code" It is impossible to go back to the original event, like you can
with a paper ballot, and start over again in case fraud is suspected.
With computer voting the results are virtually final, and, in all
cases, hatched in the electronic dark. No human eye can watch or
protect your vote once it is cast in a computer voting machine.
People who mistrust the voting process cannot, in the traditional
American way, accept the defeat of their candidates gracefully and work
loyally with the winners. Instead, more and more American voters are
feeling "had," "scammed," "hoodwinked" by the voting system. Trust has
almost departed. There is the nagging, unproven, yet pervasive feeling
that the "experts," the "spin doctors," the "covert operators" and
the "private interests" have put their technicians and consultants in
absolute control of the national vote count, and that in any selected
situation these computer wizards can and will program the vote as their
masters wish.
All over the United States of America there are people who listen to
the facts about computer voting and then tell horror stories of
candidates, who didn't have a prayer before election day, then slip
into office by an uncheckable computer vote. Most common is the story
of the computer that "breaks down" when one candidate is securely in
the lead, and after the computer is "fixed," the losing candidate pulls
ahead and wins. The evil feelings left behind by such shenanigans are
festering across America.
Among the wickedest recent examples of possible computerized vote
fraud, of the sort that has disillusioned millions of Americans, is the
1988 New Hampshire primary that saved George Bush from getting knocked
out of the race to the White House.
Was the New Hampshire Primary scenario a modern classic in computerized
vote manipulation? Here is the gist of it.
The Bush campaign of 1988, as historians have since recollected it, was
filled with CIA-type disinformation operations and deceptions of the
sort that America used in Viet Nam, Chile and the Soviet Union. Since
George Bush was one of the most admired CIA directors in the history of
the organization, this was not so surprising.
Yet George Bush stood to lose the Republican Party nomination if he was
beaten by Sen. Robert Dole in the snows of New Hampshire. He had
suffered a terrible political wound when Dole won big by a show of
hands in an unriggable Iowa caucus. Bush came to New Hampshire with all
the earmarks of a loser whom the press had come to identify as a "wimp."
Political observers were downbeat in their observations of Bush's
chances in the face of Dole's Iowa momentum. Virtually every television
and newspaper poll had Bush losing by up to eight points just hours
before the balloting.
Desperate times require desperate measures. Perhaps that's what it
required for "steps to be taken," and phone calls to be made. Then came
a widely reported promise made by Bush to his campaign manager, Gov.
Sununu. It happens that Sununu's computer engineering skills
approach "genius" on the tests. If Sununu could "deliver" New
Hampshire, and Bush didn't care how and didn't want to know how — then
Sununu would become his chief of staff in the White House.
When election day was over the following headline appeared in the
Washington Post:
NEW HAMPSHIRE CONFOUNDED MOST POLLSTERS
Voters Were a Step Ahead of Tracking Measurements
By Lloyd Grove
Washington Post Staff Writer
For Vice President Bush and his supporters, Tuesday's 9-percentage-
point victory over Sen. Robert J. Dole (R-Kan.) in New Hampshire was a
delightful surprise; for Andrew Kohut, it was a horror story.
Kohut is president of the Gallup poll, whose final New Hampshire survey
was wrong by 17 points: it had put Dole ahead by 8; Bush won by 9. "I
was dismayed," Kohut acknowledged yesterday.
This New Hampshire primary was perhaps the most polled primary election
in American history, and in the end, the Republican voters in the state
confounded the predictions of nearly every published survey of voter
opinion.
Gallup's glaring error and the miscalls of other polling organizations
once again raise questions about the accuracy of polls, their use by
the media and the impact they have on voters' choices and the public
perception of elections. In New Hampshire this year, news
organizations' use of "tracking polls" to try to follow the movement of
public opinion night after night came to dominate news accounts of the
campaigning and the thinking of the campaigns themselves.
Tracking polls usually survey a relatively small number of voters every
night: 150 to 400 in each party, in the case of The Post-ABC poll. The
results are averaged over several days. See POLLS, A11, Col. 1
Had the terms of Bush's "promise" to Sununu been met?
Whatever magic Sununu was able to conjure up during those final hours
preceding the overnight resurrection of the Bush campaign, it worked.
There are those who believe that such a wild reversal of form would
have been subject to an immediate inquiry by the stewards if it had
happened in the Kentucky Derby. Any horseplayer would have nodded
sagely, put a finger up to his eye, pulled down the lower lid, and
signaled: "Fix."
Yet in New Hampshire, there was some wonderment expressed in the press,
and little more. There was no rechecking of the computerized voting
machines, no inquiry into the path of the vote from the voting machines
to the central tallying place, no public scrutiny of the mechanisms of
the mighty peculiar vote that saved George Bush's career and
leapfrogged the relatively obscure Sununu into the White House.
Nothing was said in the press about the secretly programmed computer
chips inside the "Shouptronic" Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting
machines in Manchester, the state's largest city.
These 200-pound systems were so easily tampered with that the integrity
of the results they gave — and George Bush was the beneficiary of their
tallies — will forever be in doubt. Consider these points:
1. The "Shouptronic" was purchased directly from a company whose owner,
Ransom Shoup, had been twice convicted of vote fraud in Philadelphia.
2. It bristled with telephone lines that made it possible for
instructions from the outside to be telephoned into the machine without
anyone's dear knowledge.
3. It completely lacked an "audit trail," an independent record that
could be checked in case the machine "broke down" or its results were
challenged.
4. Roy G. Saltman, of the federal Institute for Computer Sciences and
Technology, called the Shouptronic "much more risky" than any other
computerized tabulation system because "You are fundamentally required
to accept the logical operation of the machine, there is no way to do
an independent check."
A year later, in June of 1989, Robert J. Naegele, who had investigated
all computerized voting systems for New York State, warned: "The DRE
(which the Shouptronic was) is still at least a year and possibly two
away from what I would consider a marketable product. The hardware
problems are relatively minor, but the software problems are conceptual
and really major".
A source close to Gov. Sununu insists that Sununu knew from his
perspective as a politician, and his expertise as a computer engineer,
that the Shouptronic was prime for tampering.
How could such an offense against the United States electoral process
have been carried out under the gaze of professionals from the nation's
TV networks, newspapers and wire services?
There are lawyers who will argue that the party primary election is
essentially an intra-party matter over which "outsiders" have no legal
rights. That, in fact, if a political party wants to rig its elections,
it can do so without violation of federal, state or local laws.
As long as men and women in charge of the vote count are on the take,
or can be persuaded that tampering is "good for the party," that one
candidate should win no matter what the vote count is — then wholesale
vote rigging throughout America can be accomplished quite easily. It is
a sick and vicious way to operate within the two-party system, and
there is reason to believe that it is epidemic on a national scale.
The concept is clear, simple and it works. Computerized voting gives
the power of selection, without fear of discovery, to whomever controls
the computer.
Of course, there are problems about getting control of more and more
computers, and that problem has been brilliantly solved with the help,
and in some cases the unwitting collaboration, of the major news-
gathering organizations.
Over the past generation, when television news became an unstoppable
force in America's political life, competition grew between the major
networks to be "first" with the voting results — proving they had
better reporters, better contacts, better organizations than the
opposition.
At first, the race to call the winners was sportsmanlike and played
much like print journalism played "scoops." Then, almost imperceptibly,
the networks' urge to "give the public timely results" crossed over the
line into territory more sinister.
The early position taken by network spokesmen was that slow vote counts
increased the likelihood of vote fraud, and besides, the American
people had a "right" to know as soon as possible how their candidates
fared.
You may ask: Why all the rush?
In a fair election, how does the passage of a reasonable amount of
time, less than a day or two, say, negatively affect the outcome of the
election or the people's perception of it? In the early days of the
nation it required months to find out who was elected president, since
the electoral college met in January to cast their votes.
Clearly, democracy can survive without immediate election results.
Yet the media's clamor for speed went on, encouraged by inventors who
had early knowledge of computers and knew how to use them to accelerate
the processes of ordinary life. It became possible, with fast counters
developed by International Business Machine Corporation, to use punch
cards, with rows of small, rectangular holes, as ballots. These old
cards could be counted at the rate of thousands per minute by an IBM
sorting machine hooked up with a photoelectric cell and a computerized
tabulator. It seemed like progress at the time. Vote counting got a lot
faster in a big hurry.
But after several years, IBM realized that the Vote-amatic voting
machine, the patents on which IBM had bought from its inventor, T. K.
Harris, was actually a Pandora's box. IBM, following several disturbing
public relations problems brought about by both incompetent and
malicious "mishaps" during elections, took its name off the product.
IBM eventually sold its rights in the company after IBM's president,
Thomas Watson, read an article that implied he might be trying to
install IBM voting machines in enough precincts to win him the first
electronically rigged election for President of the United States.
Watson had no ambitions to become a U.S. president and was mortified
that his computers would be implicated in antidemocratic functions.
With the crusty, impeccable IBM out of the business, the scramble to
produce new, improved, less scrupulous voting hardware and software
began in earnest. Entrepreneurs made fortunes peddling the early
computerized counters to towns and cities across America. They sold the
machines as the "patriotic," "progressive" thing to do for American
voters.
Newspaper and broadcast media seldom bothered to look into the voting
machine industry and, in fact, took advantage of the speed the new
machines offered in counting. The press did not investigate the
accuracy, or lack of it, of the final tallies.
All of the computerized machines, from the earliest versions on, were
peculiarly susceptible to vote fraud despite the ingenuous claims made
by the manufacturers. The issue of "speed" in counting actually meant
little or nothing to the voting public, except as it was staged as a
competition by the press. Yes, the computers offered speed on the one
hand, but on the other hand they all, without exception, did their
operations in the electronic dark where ordinary citizens, who had
previously taken the responsibility for a fair and accurate vote, could
never venture.
Most Americans did not realize that such an anti-democratic virus had
infected their vote. Most do not realize it today. If you ask your
friends to describe how their vote (if they cast a vote) is counted,
they are unlikely to get much further than the polling booth and the
rudimentary requirements to operate the machine. Beyond that they are
probably ignorant. Most people expect that the Democrat and Republican
poll watchers will watch out for their interests, and if not them, the
Board of Elections or some federal elections commission will keep the
fraud down to manageable proportions.
Naturally, in the vacuum of ethics and in the depths of ignorance about
computerized voting, the opportunists arrived on the scene. It was
already clear that IBM considered the business too dirty to mess with.
Yet salesmen had placed the machines, along with service contracts and
consulting fees, in thousands of America's precincts.
All over the nation the local election boards were taking delivery of
Trojan horses that could be programmed to bide their time and then,
when the proper moment came, to mistabulate election results on
command. Computer experts with even the most vestigial imaginations
figured out dozens of ways to compromise a vote, many of them so
elegant that getting caught was almost impossible.
During a little-publicized court trial in West Virginia, it was
revealed that there were ways to stop the computers during a count,
while everyone watched. Simply fiddle with a few switches, turn the
computer back on again, and thereby alter the entire vote, or parts of
it. If anyone asked questions, the fixers could make any number of
plausible excuses. Mostly all they had to say was "just checking that
everything's running okay," and that was satisfactory.
With voting machines attached to telephone lines it was possible to
meddle with the actual vote from a telephone miles away. Getting caught
was not possible. "Deniability" and "untrackability" were built into
the secret source codes that animated the machines.
It was possible to rig elections electronically in separate communities
across the country, but until 1964 it was not considered possible to
rig a national election. Then, in August 1964, News Election Service
was created.
Perhaps the most important piece of history uncovered during the
Votescam probe is a potently candid study of the U.S. electoral system
conducted in 1980 by the CIA-linked Air Command and Staff College in
cooperation with the University of New Mexico. It establishes the TV
corporate networks' interest in NES. The study was commissioned by the
CIA and published in the International Journal of Public Administration
that was distributed to selected government agencies. We discovered a
copy in the Library of Congress.
It is safe to say that almost nobody in America is aware of the
activities of NES on election night. The on-air scripts of each TV
network during the years since the founding of NES have seldom, if
ever, mentioned its existence. The silence smacks of collusion among
press "competitors" to keep NES away from public scrutiny A portion of
the study read:
"The United States government has no elections office and does not
attempt to administer congressional elections. The responsibility for
the administration of elections and certification of winners in the
United States national election rests with a consortium of private
entities, including 111,000 members of the national League of Women
Voters. The formal structure of election administration in the United
States is not capable of providing the major TV networks with timely
results of the presidential and congressional elections. In the case of
counting actual ballots on national election night, public officials
have abdicated responsibility of aggregation of election night vote
totals to a private organization, News Election Service of New York
(NES). NES is a wholly-owned subsidiary joint-venture of national
television networks ABC, CBS and NBC and the press wire-services AP and
UPI. This private organization performs without a contract: without
supervision by public officials. It makes decisions concerning its
duties according to its own criteria. The question and accountability
of News Election Service has not arisen in the nation's press because
the responsibility NES now has in counting the nation's votes was
assumed gradually over a lengthy period without ever being evaluated as
an item on the public agenda. (Underlined for emphasis. Ed.)
This privately owned vote counting cartel (NES) uses the vast
membership of the network-subsidized League of Women Voters as field
personnel whose exclusive job is to phone in unofficial vote totals to
NES on election night. NES also operates a "master computer" in New
York City, located on 34th Street. (Because the League of Women Voters
has about it a perfume of volunteerism and do-goodism, the fact that it
is actually a political club with a political agenda and a hungry
treasury is shrouded by the false myth that it is a reliable election-
day watchdog.)
The NES mainframe computer has the capability, via telephone lines,
of "talking" back and forth with county and state government
mainframes. During the important 60-day certification period after an
election, the counts in the county and state mainframes can still be
manipulated by outsiders to conform to earlier TV "projections."
Without this capability of using the NES mainframe to "balance the
books " between initial network projections of Bush as "winner" and the
final official totals published two months later, Bush may have lost
the election to Dukakis.
It is the prescription for the covert stealing of America.
Chive Mynde
THE SILENT PRESS
"For those who govern, the first thing required is indifference to
newspapers."
— Thiers
The sudden death of our book deal, we reasoned, was the first sure sign
that our efforts and instigations had made waves outside the Miami area.
The fourteen months between April 23, 1971, when we sent the telegram
to President Nixon, and June 17, 1972, when President
Nixon's "plumbers" were captured in the Watergate, was a period in
Miami when a good deal of noise was made about the vote fraud issue.
The first above-ground story about rigged elections in Miami appeared
on August 29, 1971 in the Miami Beach Reporter under the byline of its
old and respected editor-publisher, Paul M. Bruun.
Bruun was the last independent editor in Dade County. He didn't owe
much to anybody. His word was respected and his opinion carried weight
among both Jews and Gentiles on Miami Beach. He was tall, elegant, in
his seventies, a man with snowy white hair and moustache. He flourished
a cane, had a rich, deep, rumbling voice, and a big Basset hound named
Caesar led him about on a leash. He was a world-class gossip and a bon
vivant. Most important, he was wealthy and hard to corrupt. His column
titled "Bruun Over Miami" was famous among the postwar settlers,
especially on the Beach.
We ghostwrote "The Great Dade Election Rig Continues" story for him as
a factual account of the voting controversy based on the Channel 7
computer readouts. He told us that he would put his byline on the story
only if his own independent checking verified every fact and allegation.
As a hedge against libel suits, Bruun sent a copy of the story to all
whose names were mentioned. He advised them that they could "exercise
veto power over the story" if they could demonstrate a fault in its
factual underpinning. When no objections were raised, the following
story appeared in the Reporter beneath a headline which read:
THE GREAT VOTE-FORECASTING MYSTERY — AND SOME QUESTIONS...
by Paul M. Bruun, Publisher
Introduction
For months I have hoped that some, whom I am willing to admit know far
more about such electronic computations than I do, would answer some
very pertinent questions.
Nothing has been printed or broadcast by anybody which in any manner
answered any of the questions that have been really bugging me. Read
this carefully and see whether you agree there are many that bother you.
Though this is basically a story about Channels 4 and 7, I have sought
in vain to find out exactly why television station WPLG, Channel 10,
did not broadcast this all-important election, though I understand that
elaborate plans had been made by the Post-Newsweek subsidiary to do so.
What happened that two out of three supposedly competing TV news
departments had the broadcasting of projected election results all to
themselves?
In all fairness, I sent a copy of this story to Channels 4, 7 and 10,
to the Miami News, to the Miami Herald, to Professors Beiler, Shipley
and Wood of the University of Miami Political Science Department with a
copy to U. M. President, Dr. Henry King Stanford.
In my vault I have the material from which this story was written. I
think it is news. The daily press in Miami obviously doesn't think this
is news. Why? Here goes, with all the facts that I can present..."
The story then went on to recount the election night TV coverage on
Channels 4 and 7 featuring the "miracle" projections. It asked the
question:
"Was the election rigged?"
Bruun also interviewed Dr. Beiler, who said:
"Oh, let's say even at this point I've had very little experience with
computers. You see, what I've always done is simply write the
specifications and the programmer programs."
When Bruun questioned the computer-programmer employed by Channel 7 to
provide computerized "projections based on results phoned in from so-
called sample precincts" he was told:
"...ask Dr. Beiler about it. I only put in those machines whatever he
tells me."
Paul Bruun expressed his amazement in the article which continues:
"So here we have the two men responsible for the odds-defying feat of
projecting with near-perfect accuracy the detailed outcome of a lengthy
election ballot on the basis of phoned-in unofficial returns from the
solitary voting machine — and yet each man denies any detailed
knowledge of how it was done.
"Radio station WKAT revealed that an investigation is now underway,
conducted by one of the losing candidates, to determine if the election
itself could have been rigged "by a Dade County Machine in absolute
control of local establishment mass media." The U.S. Justice Department
has been engaged in accepting information pertinent to this case
through the Miami field office of the FBI.
"Martin Braterman, Dade County elections supervisor at the time of the
election, resigned in November 1970 after serving for five years. His
resignation came just after Dr. Beiler provided our investigations with
the Channel 7 computer read-outs. Braterman told this newspaper's
publisher: 'Whatever happens at the TV stations on election night has
nothing to do with the results of the election. How could it?'
Following are some examples of the amazing accuracy of the 7:24 p.m.
projections.
......TOTAL VOTES.......................CAST TOTAL VOTES CAST
......Projection........................Official totals
Governor...........141,387..............141,866
Sen....#43..........45,696...............45,881
House..#98..........97,031...............96,499
House..#104.........67,940...............68,491
House..#107.........81,802...............81,539
The Big Three television stations are network affiliates of ABC, CBS
and NBC. The ownership of Channels 4 and 7 has been based in Dade
County since the advent of television in 1949. Washington-based Post-
Newsweek has owned and operated Channel 10 (whose call-letters WPLG
stand for the late Phillip L. Graham, husband of Katharine Graham of
the Washington Post communications empire) for less than two years.
Both Miami-based stations televised continuous coverage from the moment
the polls dosed. But Washington Post-controlled Channel 10, WPLG,
suddenly cancelled elaborately planned coverage which was to have
featured the polling techniques of Irwin Premack Associates, a Tampa
firm which had been paid $27,000 to provide commentary. At the last
minute WPLG's rented computer at its location in the First National
Bank Building "broke down," according to WPLG news director Carl
Zedell. A movie was run instead. The so-called "blackout" on reports to
the public of ACTUAL OFFICIAL VOTES from the Dade County Courthouse is
evidenced by two documented facts:
1. The computer read-outs used as the on-air script for Dr. Beiler at
Channel 7 show that no actual votes had been received by the station
until 11:15 p.m., four hours and fifteen minutes after the beginning of
televised election coverage.
2. After the supposed computer breakdown, newscasters Ralph Renick,
V.P. News Department, Channel 4 and George Crolius, of Channel 7,
repeatedly told the public they would use a high-speed computer
analysis to project the outcome based on returns from phoned-in sample
precincts. The "condition" of the Dade County computer, however, was at
all times contrary to what the public was being told by TV newspeople.
According to an official press release from Dade data processing chief
Leonard White, "The county computer at the courthouse was never down
and it was never slow."
Professor Tom Wood, Beiler's associate on Channel 7 election analysis
offered the Reporter this comment: "It looks like we hit the lucky
machine. I guess it was right in the middle of things."
This newspaper challenges both Miami TV stations (4 and 7) and/or the
political science professors at the University of Miami to demonstrate
the manner in which all of the foregoing was accomplished.
And where exactly is the single voting machine which served as
bellwether for the balance of 1,647 voting machines active that night?
Are we to seriously believe that any relative handful of votes can
be "projected" to be "typical" of us all? Would the people who voted on
that single machine be Black, White, Hispanic, Jewish, Italian, Irish,
Blue collar, White-collar, Upper-Middle-Lower class models of the way
an entire county thinks? Or is the existence of that mystery voting
machine a myth?
If, as seems indicated by the foregoing, the election should turn out
to have been rigged, then this story will be a catalyst in bringing
about its ultimate exposure."
Paul was the kind of man who chortled about stories like this. He knew
damned well how uncomfortable he was going to make some very
pretentious people, and he loved it. They might be able to say that Jim
and Ken Collier were something near to crackpots, or dangerous, or full
of misinformation, but they did not dare to say that about Paul Bruun,
who was the elder statesman, whose paper was second echelon but who
could rake them over some very hot coals if he wanted it to.
Paul Bruun was not about to back off any issue he agreed to start, and
any press person worth a quarter knew it. So the immediate letters of
denial were pained and defensive, but not insulting.
Here is Channel 7's Corporate reply:
Dear Me Bruun:
I wish to acknowledge receipt of your letter of August 13, 1971, with a
draft of the story that you plan to publish on Sunday August 29.
It appears to me that your primary contention is that by 7:24 p.m. on
September 8, 1970, the local television stations accurately projected
all races based "solely on the returns from one solitary voting
machine."
I wish to assure you that the premise is untrue and preposterous.
Further, the implication of wrong doing and conspiracy is ridiculous.
Sincerely
Edmund N. Ansin,
Executive Vice President and General Manager
Sunbeam Television Corporation Channel 7
WCKT
Channel 4's Corporate reply:
Dear Paul:
I am happy you have given us the opportunity to comment on the story
you planned to run in the Reporter concerning election coverage by the
Miami TV stations. From my own knowledge, I know a great deal of the
information which has been given to you on this subject is incorrect
and I want to put forth the facts as I know them for you to be able to
make a responsible journalistic judgement.
... The implication that there was collaboration between the two
stations in the projecting of results and the "withholding" of actual
information is completely erroneous. I think you know, Paul, that the
various Miami TV operations are, on the contrary quite competitive.
... There is no secrecy with respect to the readouts which our computer
produced during the course of the evening or such data which we have
retained concerning the actual information transferred from the
Courthouse. You are welcome to look at this material, although anyone
not familiar with computers would need some substantial interpretation
to understand the data. (Emphasis added.)
... This station does not claim to have projected perfect percentages
on each candidate in every race by 7:04 p.m.; in fact, in several of
the races we were unable to "call" a winner by the end of our election
coverage because our projections showed the races to be too close to
declare one man definitely the winner.
... It is clear that computers employed by television stations do not
decide on an election. They merely provide a means by which actual
votes cast in selected representative precincts may be projected in
order to give an estimate of the winner. The winning candidate
obviously is decided by the voter at the ballot box.
... Ralph Renick (v.p. News) and I will be pleased to go over this
matter with you in person. The story as presently written, at least as
pertains to this station, contains a great deal of erroneous
information and presents a totally misleading picture of the procedures
which we employ in reporting election results.
... Being in the news business ourselves, we realize that it is
sometimes difficult to track down the true facts; I hope that the
information I have outlined above goes some distance in providing you
with the data concerning the tight standards of WTVJ practices.
... We are quite proud of the competence which we have developed in the
projection of election results through the utilization of sample
precincts and we have no desire to hide from you or anyone else the
care with which we program our computers to achieve reliable estimates
at the earliest moment.
Sincerely
WR. Brazzil, V.P. in Charge
WTVJ Channel 4
Miami, Florida
Next, one of the University of Miami professors who appeared on Channel
7 the night of the elections:,
Dear Mr. Bruun:
Thank you for your recent letter enclosing a copy of the story you
propose to publish. To my mind, there is no need to comment on a tale
so preposterous.
Sincerely yours,
Dr. Thomas J. Wood
Department of Politics and Public Affairs
University of Miami
Also, a letter from the editor of the Miami News.
Dear Paul,
I am interested largely by the accuracy of the computer... The votes
had already been cast and the election decided before the computer
results were broadcast. While the accuracy of the projections was
amazing, I do not see what effect they had on the outcome of the
elections. Nor do I see what the stations have to gain with anything
other than accuracy. If indeed, they used only one voting machine to
make the projections, the risk of being wrong was theirs.
I do not know of a "Dade County Machine" in absolute control of local
mass media. Nobody is in control of me. I don't see any evidence that
anybody but you is in control of you.
Sincerely,
Sylvan Meyer
Editor, The Miami News
Finally, a letter from the chief executive of the University of Miami.
Dear Paul:
Your note and a copy of the article regarding those voting machine
projections arrived yesterday I simply have not had time to read it
carefully enough to comment. I will look it over within the next few
days and let you have my comments, if any. I have great confidence in
these professors.
Sincerely yours,
Henry King Stanford
U. of M. President
We needed more answers to questions like: How was the fraud
accomplished in the field where votes were tallied by 4,000 precinct
officials countywide? Who was in a position to do it? How many people
would have had to be in on the scheme? Why would any plotters go to the
trouble? What part, if any, did the League of Women Voters play?
"We've got to keep up the pressure," Jim kept repeating.
And we did.
On September 24, 1971, the University of Miami student newspaper, The
Hurricane, chose an eye-opening headline to debut its version of the
story:
PROFESSORS IMPLICATED IN LOCAL ELECTION RIGGING
We were pleased with the pugnacious tone of the headline, though
purists suggested it was libelous. The Hurricane's editor-in-chief,
Scott Bressler, stood by the story and wrote the following editorial
that accompanied it:
ELECTION RIGGING QUESTIONS MUST HAVE ANSWERS
The alleged rigging of last year's Dade County election as presented by
the Miami Beach Reporter... has been written off by most as totally
absurd. Indeed the charges leveled are fantastic by any stretch of the
imagination. Charges of countywide election fraud sound like they
belong in a Humphrey Bogart movie. The only catch, however, is that too
many questions have been left unanswered.
One voting machine (out of 1,648) was used to accurately project the
entire election involving some 40 races and more than 250 candidates.
Which machine was it?
What was the formula used by the TV stations to accurately project the
entire election at 7:24 p.m. before any official votes had been
reported?
Why were there no actual votes reported until 11:15? Some say the
computer broke down. Others say it didn't. What is the correct answer?
Why have the three television stations and the Miami Herald and the
Miami News completely ignored this story? They may claim that it's not
true, but can they deny its news value?
We feel that these questions must be answered. The Hurricane certainly
does not feel that three of its professors were involved in an election
fraud but we do feel the necessity to find the answers and restore the
public's faith in Dade County's electoral process.
Within a week, on October 1, 1971, The Hurricane revived the issue once
again by printing a Letter to the Editor from Miami News editor Sylvan
Meyer, who steadfastly refused to use his own columns in Miami's second
largest daily to air the controversy he was helping to create.
NEWS EDITOR COMMENTS ON ELECTION STORY
To the Editor:
Permit me to make a few comments about your news story and editorial.
I concede the vote projection was remarkably accurate. Unfortunately,
computers are reflecting this sort of accuracy all over the country.
The question of computer projections is not a new one and has been the
subject of national debate for several years.
There is no way to prevent people from projecting, by guess or by
computer, the results of elections and I am not sure I would try to
prevent them from doing so if it were within my power.
The Miami News did not run a story when shown this material because we
do not feel it is a story. It was an issue originally raised by the
Collier brothers, two men I would not trust under any circumstances.
They have their own political thing and that's okay, but their
information in this matter is not news, it is a "so what?"
I do not believe the story to be true, in that it certainly does not
establish either a motive nor a result contrary to the public interest.
(Emphasis added.) I do not believe it has news value because it is
entirely speculative and maligns the reputation of otherwise honorable
men without cause and without justification.
Your editorial implies that there has been a loss of faith in the
integrity of Dade County's electoral process. If this is true, I am not
aware of it and I certainly do not believe that the information
gathered by Paul Bruun, the Colliers, et al, has resulted in such a
loss of faith.
On October 29, 1971, Bressler reported:
CONCERNED DEMOCRATS INVESTIGATE ALLEGED DADE ELECTION RIGGING
The story of an alleged election rigging involving three UM professors
will be investigated by the Concerned Democrats, a coalition of liberal
groups in Dade County and statewide. The group, after listening to the
evidence presented by one of its own members in a closed-door session
last Tuesday night, voted to go ahead with the inquiry.
Presentation of pertinent evidence in the case was made by Alvin Entin,
a lawyer in the Miami area, who told the Hurricane, "I'm not saying
that any of the charges are true, but there was found to be enough
probable cause to look into it further. From what we've seen there are
questions which have to be answered. A lot of people are saying the
Colliers are crazy, but you cannot dismiss the evidence just by calling
names.
Why won't Dr. Beiler clear this up or tell us anything? If he did, I
would be willing to believe him since I don't think he's crazy.
The Concerned Democrats plan to send letters to the three professors,
the three TV networks, the two Miami daily newspapers and the local TV
news departments to help get to the bottom of this. "We have a
responsibility to look into this. Personally, I'm scared to death. I
believe in the system and all I can say is. God forbid that this is
true," Entin said.
In October, this letter appeared in The Hurricane:
BEILER SCOLDS 'CANE EDITOR FOR IRRESPONSIBILITY
To the Editor:
To determine whether election results are real or fraudulent is fairly
easy. Some 340 precincts returned reports called Canvass Sheets signed
by at least ten election officials in each precinct. These and the
physical counting-wheels in the voting machines themselves which were
available for re-checking within a certain time period prescribed by
law, constitute the guarantee that any dishonesty would have to be at
the individual polling places themselves. Do you honestly believe that
3,400 election officials were in on the so-called "rigging"?
I am amazed at your ignorance and your lack of investigating enterprise
when faced with the products of totally irresponsible journalism. You
merely copy it. You are fully as bad at The Planet and the Reporter.
You should learn now, so that you do not get sued if you ever go into
journalism on a responsible paper or channel.
Of course, I have no interest in "laying to rest" such hare-
brained "journalism," which condemns itself on its face. The Colliers
wasted a great deal of my time with this nonsense. I am certainly not
going to let you do the same. As little as I think of your behavior in
this matter, I don't think you have their problem.
Ross C. Beiler
On November 11, 1971, The Daily Planet, Miami's underground newspaper,
ran the following treatment by editor Buzz Kilman:
THE SILENT PRESS (THE ELECTION NOBODY EVER HEARD OF...)
When is a story not a story?
Several weeks ago the Miami Beach Reporter broke with a story that the
1970 Dade County election was rigged.
Impossible?
Maybe, but a lot of impossible things happened on the night of
September 8, 1970 that either have not or cannot be explained by those
who accomplished them.
Since Publisher Bruun printed the story in the Reporter, The Daily
Planet, the South Miami News, the Hialeah Home News and the UM
Hurricane have run followups.
Throughout the local media uproar, not a word of the mess has been
printed in Miami's two dailys, the News and the Herald.
Why?
As time goes on, this question becomes almost as interesting as the
original charge that the elections were rigged. Although both of
Miami's dailies have privately dismissed the notion that an election
rigging took place, they have failed to explain, privately or in their
own newspapers, why they are ignoring what is obviously an outrageously
intriguing story.
The Colliers devoutly believe that some sort of conspiracy was
culminated on the evening of September 8, 1970 — and this is a line of
thought too overwhelming for even the most enthusiastic reporter... and
yet, it's not inconceivable as it wouldn't be the first election to be
rigged.
Privately, however, the Colliers' obsession has been considered more
carefully — and has been the object of much off-the-record discussion
among area newsmen. I have personally talked with several, among them
Bill Byer of Channel 10, the Post-Newsweek subsidiary, and Pat Murphy,
editor of the Coral Gables Times, a Herald-owned newspaper, who have
expressed at least a degree of bewilderment on the subject, although
they have not been moved to inquire further. In a telephone
conversation, Byer termed the issue "serious" and added that it was —
and I quote — "a sick, sad, sorry situation."
Every newsperson in the city and probably the state knows about the
charges. A great many of them, responsible, establishment reporters,
have expressed to me concern over the implications for future elections
if computers and the media ever do take over the election system. The
most chilling aspect of the entire affair is the ominous and
unexplainable silence of the Establishment media in the face of
undeniable controversy. What is so special about this case?
And that was that.
It wasn't as if the press was entirely a pussycat then. In 1971 there
was a maelstrom of "investigative reporting" going on all over the
country, to the extent that one investigation (with many dubious and
unanswered motives) eventually resulted in the resignation of Richard
Nixon and a new balance of power between the government and the press.
To recall history:
In the autumn of 1971 President Nixon was enraged by Daniel Ellsberg's
activities in the "Pentagon Papers" affair.
To Nixon, the fact that Ellsberg, a low-level, very wealthy civilian in
the Defense Department, turned over Pentagon secrets to The New York
Times and The Washington Post was deeply disturbing: unpatriotic,
perhaps traitorous. Worse, was the US. Supreme Court's refusal to issue
a restraining order preventing the Ellsberg information from becoming
public.
The primary revelation Nixon felt ought to be kept secret was the
material that proved the "Gulf of Tonkin" incident was a total ruse
concocted by the Executive Branch to stampede the U.S. Congress into
voting the President unrestricted war powers in Southeast Asia.
Apparently, the 1964 naval encounter in the Gulf of Tonkin, where a
U.S. cruiser was supposedly fired on by North Vietnamese boats, simply
never occurred.
Championing Ellsberg, however, was Nixon's harshest critic, Katharine
Graham, publisher of The Washington Post, whose First Amendment rights
to publish the information were upheld by the high court. Smarting from
the Ellsberg case, Nixon, through his Attorney General, John Mitchell,
started investigating Mrs. Graham and all her holdings in an effort to
find evidence that could jeopardize her empire, including her newly-
acquired FCC license for television station WPLG, Miami. WPLG was
purchased in 1969 for $20 million. (By 1989 it was estimated to be
worth just under $900 million).
In the heirarchy [sic] of Miami's press barons, "Kate" Graham was a
queen and her family held imperial power in Florida, as well as in and
around Washington. Her brother-in-law, Robert, was elected to the
Florida legislature on September 8, 1970. He went on to serve two
elected terms as Florida governor and then rose to fill a US. Senate
seat.
Whenever the media leaders of Miami called a conference, Mrs. Graham
would chair the function. Such meetings took place at the University of
Miami. Channel 7 was owned by the university itself. Channel 4 was
owned by Wometco Enterprises, an entertainment and vending machine
company.
When Katharine Graham took her place at the head of the conference
table, she was flanked by Miami Herald lawyer Dan Paul and UM president
Henry King Stanford. Further along the table in a prescribed order of
rank were the president of the local chapter of the League of Women
Voters (LWV); .the Dade County Manager; the chief circuit court judge;
the liaison from the Chamber of Commerce; assorted lawyers representing
Channels 4 and 7.
Mrs. Graham, as she was to prove during the Watergate revelations of
the Washington Post, had the balls of a Picasso goat. If she had to
take on Richard Nixon to get his attention and respect, she would risk
her realm to do it. In the Miami area, her power over the press and
politicians was unchallenged.
Freedom of the press was a battle cry at the time, and Richard Nixon
was on one side and Mrs. Graham and occasionally the Sulzbergers of the
New York Times were on the other.
That was the political atmosphere we were operating in, and it seemed
that most things were possible and that corruption was being rooted out
by crusading, gutsy publishers and editors even at the highest levels.
Then why we wondered, was vote fraud such a special case?
In a private conversation with Jim, Henry King Stanford, the University
of Miami's president, gave his perspective on the problem.
"It's such an explosive issue," he said, "that your proof must be
incontrovertable [sic]. Frankly, there are holes in the story that
you've got to close before you can demand that the big papers take you
seriously If you don't come up with a plausible way to explain how
4,000 poll workers' signatures could be circumvented in such a
conspiracy, then your theory will die of its own weight."
That was a tall, tall order and we knew he was right. But how the hell
could we go about explaining those thousands of corroborating
signatures?
Chive Mynde
BALLOTS NOT BULLETS
"Ballots are the rightful and peaceful successors to bullets"
— Abraham Lincoln
Accept the idea for a few hours that your vote is, in fact, being
stolen before your eyes. Put aside your beliefs or disbeliefs in the
rectitude of the federal, state and local governments. Journey back to
a time just a year after "Woodstock," when today's new grandfathers
were in their twenties and both Jimi Hendrix and Jim Morrison were
still alive.
We are two brothers from Michigan at play in Miami in 1970. The Cuban
refugees have not yet taken political control. We have shared
professions as rock and roll empresarios, drug store owners, suntan
lotion manufacturers and journalists.
When Jim Morrison of "The Doors" executed his notorious simulated jerk-
off jump from the stage into the crowd,, and set in motion the chain of
events that plagued him until his death in Paris, it was us, Jim and
Ken Collier, who promoted that historic show. We also swallowed the
financial consequences after Morrison and "The Doors" left town.
It is after "The Doors" hysteria that we are in Miami trying to decide
what to do next. We want to do something that just might raise eyebrows
and blood pressure in a Richard Nixon world. We decide to write a book.
We could write two books about rock and roll and the actual life
backstage, but we have a lot of friends in the music business, and if
we tell the truth we alienate most of them. The idea of combining a
book with running for public office comes up.
"It seems like a good idea," Ken says.
"It's a great idea. You going to run, or me?"
We went to Dell Publishing in New York and sold the idea that Tom
Hayden, Jerry Rubin, Abbie Hoffman and all the hippies against the
system had all overlooked an intriguing possibility - to use the system
and see if things that needed to get done actually could get done
without revolution. Ken would run for Congress and scrupulously work
within the system to find out. We titled the book: Running Through the
System: Ballots Not Bullets. The editors agreed that it was a good idea
and paid us $3,500 as an advance.
Winning the congressional seat was not a requirement of Dell. They also
agreed that we would not ask for contributions. The campaign would be
as "grass roots" as possible, based on the theory that even the poorest
person in America can run for office by merely knocking on every door,
shaking every hand and giving speeches at every political club or
church. Whatever percentage of the vote we managed to get at the end of
the campaign trail would depend strictly on whether the people believed
in us.
Ken was already the front man at our rock club, Thee Image, and he had
that Sixties need to see things change. From the time he was a teenager
he had a burning desire to be a Congressman, a profession he considered
idealistic and romantic. He had been buying ad space on the back page
of the University of Miami Hurricane student newspaper (Jim had been
The Hurricane managing editor in 1959) in the name of Thee Image to
write essays on the political upheavals of the time: against the Viet
Nam war, for freedom of speech, against imprisonment of political
radicals.
Now Ken closed his eyes and put the possibilities together. His
imagination was tweaked by the potential for high drama. At 29 years
old, a romantic poet, Ken was brazen, impulsive, Tom Wolfe-like in his
stature, over six feet of it, big hands, big head, big shoes, big
dreams.
"We can do it," Jim said.
Two years older than Ken, Jim was quiet and private. Nothing intrigued
him more than orchestrating scenes from behind the scenes.
"I'll be your campaign manager."
"Who do we run against?" Ken asked.
"Hmmmmmm."
Claude Pepper was a lusty old Harvard man with a face like an overripe
tomato. He was known as "The Father of Social Security" He was also the
incumbent in the House of Representatives. Pepper was a cosmopolitan,
and he was happy to be in Washington where his talents as a speaker and
a storyteller were recognized and appreciated.
Pepper was on the board of the bank that held the lease on the building
that housed Thee Image. The bank had refused to renew the lease
after "The Doors" concert, using the controversy in the press as an
excuse. Rock and roll, they said, was an unsavory influence on the
community, even though parents, police and prosecutors were invited
into the club without charge, at any time, to see that the kids were
not subjected to drug dealing.
"Let's run for Congress against Claude Pepper," Jim said.
It was decided that Ken would run as a Democrat ($2,100 was paid for
the filing fee and it came from a Ted Nugent concert we held at the
Miami Jai-Alai Fronton). Neither of us were Nixon Republicans and to
run as an independent would have been decidedly outside the system.
On July 21, 1970 the grass roots campaign began.
We talked at every possible church. We went into public housing in
Liberty City and Overtown, which were black innercity areas. We passed
out leaflets and talked some more. In the Jewish sections of Miami
Beach there were public meetings held in banks and on South Beach (now
the art deco revival section). The old people were charmed by Ken, who
swapped stories with World War II vets about his paratrooper jumps.
We campaigned 42 days, 18 hours-a-day every day.
When the U.S. Congress recessed in August, Claude Pepper returned home
to Dade County Prior to his showing up we had almost convinced leaders
of the black community, which included newspaper editors, civic
activists and HUD executives, that Ken's ideas were the wave of the
future, the hope of the next generation.
In August, with the recess in Congress, Claude Pepper returned to the
area and the atmosphere abruptly changed. At a black church in Liberty
City, we attended an obligatory political breakfast. Five-minute
speeches were scheduled by all the candidates. Pepper, who was nearly
70-years old, gave his speech in his usual mush-mouthed way He sat down
and Ken got up to speak. But the moderator pointedly ignored him. When
Ken realized that he wasn't going to get equal time, he asked: "Does
anybody care to hear me speak?"
Pepper nodded his head at two very serious guys. They approached Ken
from both sides, grabbed his arms, and dragged him out like a fish.
We called the cops on a pay phone. Alcee Hastings, who eventually
became the first black federal judge in the area, rushed outside.
"Don't go back in there," he warned. "They'll beat you up next time.
It's dangerous."
We called the television stations and told them how a candidate got
dragged out of a political breakfast. Only Channel 4's reporter came
and took pictures of the purple bruises on Ken's arms. But at the
studio, the news director didn't even look at the tape. "This isn't
going to air," he told the reporter.
And that was that.
One of the theories of the Dell book Running Through The System, was
that we use the system whenever possible. So instead of merely going
back in and shooting the old bastard, we swore out a warrant for
Pepper's arrest for ordering the assault. Not one word in the media. We
couldn't get even a second on television. We sent a telegram to the
Federal Communications Commission and complained, within the system,
that we couldn't get any television time. The FCC wrote back to the
local stations and said, unspecifically, "Give them time."
One station gave us 18 seconds.
Pepper went to Texas avoiding arrest, while his lawyers visited a judge
without our knowledge (ex parte) and had the warrant quashed.
They might have been irked by the garbage incident.
We had to make a clear statement about our candidacy One that would
show that Pepper was basically a hypocrite who didn't care about anyone
but the richest segment, white or black. Our opportunity came when we
walked through the streets of the black areas and saw the results of a
political project that black leaders called "Teen Clean."
The idea was to clean up houses, gutters, streets, lawns of all the
garbage that had turned the area into a slum. The teens turned out with
great enthusiasm and they piled coconuts, palm fronds, broken glass,
toilet seats, rusty old refrigerators, and mattresses in heaps on the
street, some as high as six feet. The Metro garbage trucks were
supposed to pick it all up, but although most of the drivers were
black, their white bosses refused to let them go. The reason: "We
didn't expect hundreds of piles of Teen Clean garbage and we don't have
the budget for it." People in the community were angry, and they felt
betrayed. Rats and roaches, however, loved the stuff.
"Look," Jim suggested, "let's rent a pick-up truck, pick a load of that
shit up and get some press at the same time."
So one hot August afternoon, we appeared in Liberty City in a half-ton
truck and loaded it up. We had the enthusiastic help of about 100 local
kids. Then Ken drove east across the 36th Street Causeway to pristine
Miami Beach. Had any alert cop seen us heading east with a load of
garbage, he would surely have stopped us. Nobody brings garbage to
Miami Beach.
Once across the bay we headed for the bank on 17th street, where we
backed the truck up to the front door, pulled the hydraulic handle, and
watched as a half ton of unsavory objects built a monument to the
Pepper campaign. Just before we drove away, Jim grabbed a cardboard
sign that read, "This is a Teen Clean Project" and jammed it into the
top of the heap like the flag at Iwo Jima.
Later we drove by the bank, on whose board Pepper sat, and watched as
hired black men scooped up the garbage into a truck and then headed
back west across the causeway.
We parked the truck in front of our townhouses and waited. Two Miami
Beach detectives eventually knocked on Ken's door.
"We not only did it," Jim assured them, "but were going to do it again
tomorrow."
We did go back into Liberty City the next day for a repeat performance,
but all the garbage was being picked up by a fleet of Metro trucks. And
although there were photographers, police and reporters who saw the
garbage pile in front of the bank, not a word was mentioned in the
media, not even in the black-owned newspaper.
The remainder of the campaign was waged mainly in the streets. Miami in
August can be a sticky mixture of sun, squalls and stifling heat. All
day we trudged the streets, putting fliers in doors of houses, talking
to people who were home, some giving us a cold drink.
Pepper bought TV time and seldom left his home. Then, in the last two
days before the vote, as we made our last up-this -street-down-that-
street run, we saw Pepper's face everywhere. He had used county
employees to nail his campaign posters on hundreds of telephone poles
in the black communities. He put none on the Beach.
"That's illegal," Ken said, ripping one down. "He can't put his posters
on public property."
That night we drove the convertible along each street, Jim standing on
the trunk, and we ripped every poster down. It took four hours, but
that night we slept great.
On election evening we were at Ken's house to watch the returns on
television. The numbers were flashed on the screen about every 20
minutes and our percentage of the vote remained consistent at 16
percent. Channels 4 and 7 were giving the election full coverage but
Channel 10, for the first time in its history, ran a movie instead of
voting results. Sometime after 9 p.m. our vote percentage jumped to 31
percent.
"Hey, we just doubled our vote!" Ken was excited.
"If it holds we'll have enough strength to run again in 72," Jim said.
Suddenly the news director came on the air and announced that the
election "computer has broken down." Instead of giving official returns
from the courthouse, the station would instead broadcast returns based
on its "projections."
When the next "projection" was flashed 20 minutes later, Ken's vote had
fallen back to 16 percent. No other vote had fluctuated, only ours.
We didn't know it at the time, but across the country in the 1970s and
1980s, that sequence of events was a phenomenon that became rather
common. 1) A candidate is ahead, the good guy, the one who wanted the
city audit, the one who'll make a difference. 2) Television
announcement: "The computer has broken down at the courthouse and
official votes will no longer be forthcoming." 3) When the computer
comes back, your guy is behind again, and there he or she remains.
By the 11 p.m. news it was over. We hadn't expected to win; after all,
we spent so little money, we bought no television time and we were new
at political campaigns. But what was that 31 percent we got at about
9:30?
The next day we drove to the Board of Elections in Miami, and after
watching a while, we asked Election Supervisor Martin Braterman if we
could look at the canvass sheets we saw stored in an open vault. He
escorted us to the vault and Jim started flipping the sheets, trying to
get a quick visual grasp of the entire stack. He had never seen a
canvass sheet before so he had no idea of what he was looking at, much
less what he was looking for.
"I'm not sure," he said. "but it looks like there are more votes cast
than people who voted."
Ken, who was still surveying the room, moved in closer. "Where?... show
me."
"Get out," Braterman ordered, "you guys are nuisances."
"This is public information," Ken said. "Are you telling us that we are
not entitled to examine public information about the electoral process?"
"This is not the right time. We're certifying the vote here."
Ken persisted. "We want to see them now because something looks very
wrong with the sheets. Let us look at them before something happens to
them. It's evidence."
There was more heated dialogue. Ken sat on the counter and refused to
go until he could examine the canvass sheets.
Braterman picked up the phone: "We got a disturbance here. Send a cop."
A few minutes later a young policeman asked Ken what he was doing.
"Just checking out the system," Ken grinned. The policeman laughed, Ken
laughed. Then he booked Ken on a misdemeanor. Jim bailed him out.
The next day, with a call to the election division, we got a full
explanation of what a canvass sheet was: the official, hand-written
record of the voting machine tallies. There are rules written on the
flip-side of the sheet. The official rules state: At 7 a.m. the
precinct captains must open up the back of the voting machine and
certify that all candidate counters are set with zeroes showing. They
sign their names to those sheets swearing that they actually saw the
zeroes.
Then the machine is closed and locked for the day while voting goes on.
At 7 p.m., after the voting ends, the back is again opened with keys,
and representatives from each party call out the numbers to the
precinct people who fill in the front side of each canvass sheet. Three
canvass sheets are filled out per machine One sheet is to be posted on
the wall after the election for the public. One goes to the Elections
Department. One is sent to the County Judge's office.
Once we knew what it was we were looking for we returned to the
Elections Department where Braterman, still grumpy from the day before,
again refused an examination of the records. Not wanting to get busted
again we walked over to the County Judge's office where copies of the
sheets were already bound in a book. The clerk there permitted closer
examination.
"What are we looking for?" Ken asked.
"Look for a pattern."
The sheets were three feet wide and two feet high. On the front there
were a lot of squares corresponding to each candidate, and there were
numbers in most of the squares in the handwriting, it seemed, of just
the one person who filled out each sheet. On the back were from ten to
twelve signatures of workers who swore they saw all zeroes in the
morning and final numbers at night.
As we turned the pages Jim was puzzled: "There's a kind of uniform
grayness about all these sheets. Look here." He flipped the pages like
one would do to a cartoon layout. "Except for these few precincts —
look." He pointed to a page of scrawly looking numbers. "See?"
Ken could see it immediately. The handwriting on about five of the
pages was messy and broken... and real looking. "But the rest of this
stack is too neat, isn't it? All of these appear to be written by the
same hand!"
"You think these might be forgeries?"
"Let's find a handwriting expert."
The Yellow Pages listed only one handwriting expert, Robert Lynch. We
telephoned him and made an appointment to meet at the courthouse the
next morning.
Lynch turned out to be a man in his fifties. He wore glasses but he
only needed one flip through the bound stack before making his
pronouncement.
"These are not forgeries."
We had absolutely no reason to believe that Lynch was anything other
than your honest neighborhood handwriting expert. If he said they
weren't forgeries, what was the use in chasing rabbits down that hole?
With our forgery suspicion gone, the election investigation appeared to
be over. We went back to shooting pool, learning Short Goju karate,
sailing catamarans and racing Pontiac and Chevy 427's. We were also
busy selling our local newspaper, The Daily Planet, on street comers.
"The question that still bugs me," Jim said, "is how did we get that 31
percent? I mean, why that momentary thrill? Was it an error?"
"Maybe it was real," Ken answered. "Maybe somehow they let the true
vote through. When they saw what it was, they cut it off."
"That's a possibility."
Soon after the November election, in which Claude Pepper was confirmed
as Congressman, we went to the local television stations to ask them
for copies of the on-air computer "readouts" used during the primary
election count.
Both TV stations said that they no longer had possession of the
readouts. They were now held by Professor Ross Beiler, in the political
science department of the University of Miami. We immediately went to
Better's office on the Coral Gables campus. It was just a 10-foot by 10-
foot cubicle off a loggia, and the door was open.
We walked in and there, scattered in disarray on his desk, were the
readouts we wanted. They were big, about the same size as the canvass
sheets, with the dark and light green lines of IBM standard computer
paper.
They showed vote totals and the times the totals were tallied. There
were the names of the stations on them: WCKT (4) and WTVJ (7). Plus
some notes and signatures.
"Grab those," Ken whispered.
Jim scooped up a handful of the sheets and turned to walk out. At that
instant. Professor Beiler walked in the door. He was a tall, hayseedy
looking man. He grabbed Jim, who was a black belt in karate, by the
back of the neck and said: "Put those back."
"Exactly what were you going to do with these?" Ken asked.
"I'm going to Washington on a sabbatical. I was going to destroy them."
"Destroy them? You can't do that."
"They belong to me."
"We need them for an investigation." Ken picked up a few papers.
"Put those down."
"All right," Ken said, dropping them back on the desk, "let's put them
in the safe in the office of the dean of students."
The professor hesitated.
"Professor, it would be the legally proper thing to do."
"Just for six months," he agreed, "and you can't look at them during
that time."
"Let's type up an agreement."
As Beiler sat at the typewriter, with his back to the room, Jim seized
the moment and stuffed about ten readout pages under his shirt and
slipped unnoticed out the door. He ran to the car, where he jammed the
papers in the trunk.
Acouple of hours later we excitedly spread the contraband on the pool
table in Jim's living room.
"Look at this," Jim pointed to one of the columns on the sheet. "The
first report is at 7:24 p.m.... just 24 minutes after the polls
closed." He scanned the sheet... he knew the future was coming. "It
shows the first vote totals are based on," he found the
column... "returns from Pepper's Congressional district... see?... it
called our race so it's gotta be in our district. This column says
ACTUAL VOTES. There's a zero here. No actual votes. And..." his finger
moved to the next column, "here it says PROJECTED VOTES... 7,100 for us
and... 46,000 for Pepper."
"So?"
"Under 'MACHINES REPORTING'... one machine."
"Lemme see."
We checked the green computer readouts which we arranged in neat piles
under the pool table light. In one of the vertical columns
labeled "MACHINES REPORTING" the number "1" appeared.
Jim grinned. "They used one machine's totals to predict how many votes
250 candidates would get?"
He scrambled quickly through the papers until he found the 9:21 p.m.
readout. There it was, the 31 percent that had flashed on the
screen. "We're not crazy" Jim said.
Ken looked at the numbers.
The documents showed that no actual votes were being reported from 7
p.m. until the 11 p.m. news. We had assumed that the computer had
broken down at the time they announced it, 9:21 p.m., but these
readouts indicated that the TV stations were not getting official votes
from the opening bell.
"They must have relied on information from their reporters at the
precincts," Ken said.
"Maybe," Jim answered, "but 99 percent of the vote was counted by 11
p.m. They would have needed at least 340 reporters to cover the 340
precincts."
We checked the sheets closer and found that the on-air reporting times
were set at every 20 minutes throughout the evening. The last report
was at 11:15 p.m.
"Ninety-nine percent of the precincts were reported by the time people
had to go to bed," Ken mused. "That's very neat."
"If they weren't getting actual votes all night, from 7 p.m. on, and
they predicted the final outcome in 24 minutes using one voting
machine, maybe they knew they were going to have a blackout all along,"
Jim said.
"So it was a cover story."
"Gotta be."
"Could they have blacked it out on purpose so they could project
winners?"
But the most puzzling question, if we were to believe that the election
wasn't rigged, was how Channel 7 could have predicted the exact outcome
of 40 races with 250 candidates altogether on the basis of information
from just one voting machine located somewhere in Claude Pepper's
district. And how could they do it in just 24 minutes?
That 24 minutes rang and rerang and re-re-rerang inside our heads. We
talked all night trying to make the pieces of the puzzle fit. By
morning we still thought that something was rotten in the count.
There are no tests to determine when the last rock on the ledge of life
slips and plunges you into the crater of causes. Suddenly police
stations become grossly familiar. So do the courtrooms of various
judges. The offices of lawyers are not avoided anymore. Organizations
like the CIA and the FBI keep their ears open when you come around.
Your home may at times become mobile and the sky becomes your roof.
Fear that your cause may be lost ceaselessly batters your confidence.
Your relationship with others is more or less determined by the extent
to which they will tolerate your cause, which for some of your loved
ones may be less attractive than maggot soup.
For us, the last rock fell when we discovered that all the predictions
made within 24 minutes after the polls closed were based on results
called in from one single voting machine.
We decided to get mad.
In those days it was easy to become involved in causes. The Sierra Club
was just starting then and it was a loud, strident, articulate toddler.
The anti-nukers and pro-abortionists were beginning to set up chapters
all over the world and get their messages out by means of concerts and
LP records. Richard Nixon was taking hold of power in Washington and if
he behaved anything like he had when he lived on Key Biscayne with his
friend, Bebe Rebozo, then Nixon was destined for historic trouble. Yes,
this was before Watergate, before Nixon resigned, when his attention
was turned mostly toward China.
So instead of organizing a group called something like "Victims of
Tampered Elections" (VOTE), getting members to pay $15 annual dues
($300,000) to join the cause, put out Votescam newsletters, get our
collective voices heard on Capitol Hill, we took up the pen feather and
challenged the sword.
Years later with bloodied pen feather in hand, we would understand that
people with great illusions are destined to die in the desert, sucking
on their sneaker, while waiting for the water truck to come.
All we had to do now was track down that one magic machine.
How did they decide in which precinct that machine would be placed?
Pepper's district was spread from east to west across the center of
Dade County — from the ocean on the east to the Everglades on the west.
The neighborhoods were generally segregated into black, Jewish and
WASP. During the campaign we walked down every street in those
neighborhoods. None of them could possibly be so typical of us all that
the votes coming from just one of its machines could be projected to
predict exact final vote totals.
Jim asked: "How did channel 7 and 4 get those numbers? Did people call
them in from, the precincts? Did they have a reporter in each of 340
precincts?"
"And what about the computer program?" Ken added.
"Do they have a formula, or, let's say a multiplier of some sort that
they use to project those numbers from the precincts?" Jim wondered.
He scrawled figures on a piece of paper.
"If we figure that everything Beiler knew before 7 p.m. is listed under
the letter "A"...," he wrote the letter "A" on the paper. "The
letter "A" would have to represent his formula, or his program. I mean,
he couldn't just take the votes off that one machine and magically
project them to get a final result without some sort of program.
"Now, let's call the vote totals he got from that one machine "B" Jim
wrote "B" on the paper. "To make it easy we'll say you got 10 votes on
that machine" He wrote "10" under the letter "B" "So what would that
mean?"
"Well," Ken answered, "he'd either have to multiply that "10" or he'd
have to add something to the "10" to get a final number."
"Could he do anything else?"
"I don't know anything about computers, but he can't change the laws of
mathematics... he can only multiply that "10" to get a final number...
or he can add something to that "10"... I don't care how sophisticated
a computer is, all it can do is multiply or add, period."
It seemed so simple. An A x B=C formula. A (Multiplier) x B (Actual
votes)=C (The total). And it's the only formula possible no matter how
bright a programmer you are. If you use an A x B=C formula, you must
also always know two of the numbers in advance to calculate the third.
But if you know two out of three of those numbers in advance, you've
rigged the election.
In the green pile of documents we found the Channel 4 readout, the
first report showing only vote percentages (not final totals) was
broadcast at 7:04 p.m. Channel 4 projected the outcome for 250
candidates in just 4 minutes!
Hell, you can't even boil a three minute egg in four minutes.
We had a 427-horsepower red Pontiac convertible which the Dade County
highway patrol had come to know and respect over the years. The next
morning it took us to look for answers. We drove up to the state
capitol at Tallahassee, a lushly green southern city in the hills of
the Florida Panhandle about 400 miles north of Miami. From the
Secretary of State's office we got the final vote totals for every
candidate in the three elections held in Dade County in 1970. We copied
them and brought them back home.
The first thing we did was to lay out the Tallahassee sheets on the
pool table and divide them into piles. September primary, October
runoff and November final election. Then we arranged the television
readouts in time sequence in order to compare the numbers that the
state eventually registered as official against the projections from
the television stations.
We checked the totals in the Governor's race and found that an
aggregate of 141,000 votes were cast on September 8th. Then we checked
the runoff election held a month later and the exact same figure —
141,000 votes were cast again!
"How is that possible?" Ken asked, and then he answered himself, "It
isn't. The losing candidates dropped out of the race, and whenever that
happens the vote drops, too."
So we checked the final election in November and found once again that
141,000 votes were cast in the Governor's race.
In hockey they call that a hat trick. In politics we call it a fix.
"This is the Stepford vote," Jim said, hardly able to contain his
glee. "These bastards didn't have time to change the numbers in the 30
days between elections, so they just ran the same numbers even though
all but two of the candidates were out of the race."
Ken was already looking for the figures on the Senate race.
"It was a five-person contest in the primary and 122,000 votes were
cast in total," he said. "Look at this! There's 122,000 votes cast in
the runoff, and..." he flipped the sheets to the finals. "Well, what do
you know... 122,000."
Jim picked up the cue stick and smashed the white ball into the rack.
He was angry and yet he marvelled at the sheer audacity of the scheme
He pointed the cue at Ken.
"Do you think the Secretary of State is involved?"
"Hell, what about the press?" Ken threw back.
"If the press knew these numbers and never questioned them, then
they're either stupid or collaborators."
It was an intriguing thought. We knew the press was capable of keeping
candidates who didn't spend advertising dollars from getting publicity
but was it possible they would actually protect the people who were
pulling this off?
"What do you think would happen if we went to the Herald with this
story?" Jim asked.
"You think they'd touch it?"
"Let's push it."
Then we compared the Tallahassee final totals with the numbers on the
September 8th readouts from Channel 7.
"Holy shit! Look at this." Ken was doing a dance on one foot.
"What?"
"Compare Channel 7's readouts... this is their unofficial projections
of what the final totals will be At 9:31... the projection in the
unofficial vote total column reads 96,499 votes. That's what they
predict the final outcome will be." Then he shifted to the Tallahassee
official totals. "And in these official returns, read what it says:
96,499. That's one-hundred percent perfect! They called a perfect race.
I'd like to see that computer program."
Jim paced around the table. "They took four minutes on Channel 4 to
predict percentages for 250 candidates. You can't even read that many
numbers off the back of the machines in four minutes, much less read
them... run to a phone... call the TV stations... re-read them to an
operator who has to punch them onto IBM cards and then run them through
a computer for broadcast to the public. You just can't do that in four
minutes."
"And what about precincts?" Ken asked. "Did both stations use the same
precincts? Did they use the same reporters or were 680 people out
there, on payrolls from both stations, calling back votes?" Jim shook
his head in disbelief We sat and contemplated the possibilities. Ken
said: "Maybe this goes on all the time and we were too out of the
action to notice, like most people are. Who thinks about how votes are
counted anyway? Nobody pays attention. We didn't. We just expected a
clean, open election like they taught us in Civics 101 at Royal Oak
High School."
"So if you find out that there's a rigged vote with the television
stations in on it, who do you go to to complain?" Jim asked.
The next move was to get back to Beiler and find out about his super-
amazing computer program. Ken called the University of Miami and got
Beiler's telephone number in Washington at the American University. In
a taped conversation he went right to the point.
"What kind of program could you have devised where the information from
one machine was used to predict the results of all the races within one
percent of perfect?"
"I didn't do it," Beiler replied. "It'd be a million-to-one odds that
anyone could do that. I was just the on-air analyst but I didn't
program it. I don't know how to program."
"Who did it, then?"
"It's a fellow named Elton Davis, who works on computers for a land
sales company He's the one who did it for Channel 7."
"Thank you, sir."
A solid lead. We had to pay Mr. Davis a visit where he worked at
Cavanaugh Land Sales, which sold West Coast Florida swampland for
development. The office was across the 79th Street Causeway from
Channel 7's studios. We made an appointment.
The next day we sat across from a chunky, muscular man in a small and
cluttered office. There was a chalk board on the wall.
"Professor Beiler says you programmed the Channel 7 computer," Ken
began. "What was the formula you used that could predict 100 percent
correct final totals with just one machine reporting?"
Davis stood and walked a few feet to the blackboard. He picked up the
chalk in the tray, stood on his tip-toes, and reached up as if to begin
to write.
Now, Ken thought, we're going to get the magic algorithm.
Then Davis slowly put the chalk back down, turned to us and in an icy
voice, said:
"You'll never prove it. Now, get out."
We couldn't believe it. He opened the door and pointed outside. Ken
tried to ask another question but Davis was mute. There was nothing
more he was going to say.
It was time to call the FBI. We now knew for sure that the man who was
supposed to have written the computer vote-count program had something
sinister to hide.
The FBI offices were on Biscayne Boulevard just north of the downtown
business area. We were escorted into a small office and then asked if
we would agree to be photographed. If we said no, maybe they would
refuse to listen. So we put our heads in one of those neck-holders,
like the old New England stocks, and a clerk snapped a picture. They
didn't request fingerprints.
"We want to make a statement, but we want a stenographer to take it
down. We'll sign it and take a copy," Jim said.
The agent, in the government-issue blue suit, agreed.
The statement was twelve pages long and all of what we knew was in it,
with as little supposition as we were capable of. We told of
Beiler's "million-to-one" statement, the virtually impossible accuracy
of a one-machine perfect projection, and Davis' warning that
we'd "never prove it." We asked that the FBI interview Beiler and Davis
about possible vote fraud in a federal election.
Then it was time to track down that one miracle machine.
Ken telephoned the news director at Channel 7 and asked "who had called
in the information from the precincts with the raw vote totals from the
machines?" He told us that members of the League of Women Voters, not
reporters, had been hired to work in precincts selected by Beiler.
"You mean there weren't people in all precincts?" Ken asked.
"No," the news director said, "just in some sample precincts."
"Then how could you have shown 99 percent of the vote counted by 11
p.m. if you only had a few people in a few sample precincts... in light
of the fact that you weren't getting any actual votes from the
courthouse?"
There was a long pause.
"Call Joyce Deiffenderfer. She's the president of the League."
In early December, we kept an appointment at Joyce Deiffenderfer's home
in a section of Coral Gables known for manicured lawns, lush tropical
foliage and big-mortgage houses. She answered the door. Deiffenderfer
was tall, about six feet, austere, unsmiling, and bordering on
uncordial. She had a friend with her; a woman, who looked as if she was
there to be a witness.
Jim explained the mystery of the one-machine projection and
asked: "Were you told there was a specific machine that was going to be
used to extrapolate a projection?"
"No," she answered.
"Can you give me a list of the people from the League who worked that
night in the precincts?"
"There is no list." She began to look uncomfortable. "There were no
League women in the precincts that night."
That was a puzzling surprise.
"Channel 7 says the League gave them returns."
She saw the drift. "There was no such thing," she repeated. She started
to speak again, changed her mind, and then blurted out: "I don't want
to get caught in this thing." She began to weep. Her female companion
watched without uttering a word.
We were almost sympathetic. She had just admitted that nobody was in
the precincts that night, there was no magic machine, ergo, there could
not have been any projected reporting by the television stations based
on information supplied by the League.
"Will you go to the. press and make a statement?" Jim asked quietly.
"Yes, I will," she said.
We shook hands all round and departed.
We were, in a word, ecstatic. Jim rushed over to The Daily Planet to
file the story.
When the lease had been pulled on Thee Image, our "bully pulpit" was
dismantled. So we bought half of the Miami Free Press from a guy named
Jerry Powers and changed its name to The Daily Planet.
With the Planet as our new bullhorn we could fight for the causes of
the Sixties, created mostly by Nixon's miasma, without begging some
local whipped newspaper editor for permission.
One of our first Planet stories was about Tom Hayden. Hayden was
another buddy of our youth in Royal Oak, Michigan, where we edited the
high school paper together. Ken was the photographer who miraculously
kept getting photos of record-breaking sports events. Jim and Tom
edited the paper. The three of us also created a campus humor paper,
The Daily Smirker, way back then which still survives today.
Tom had ended the Sixties with that Chicago Seven flourish which landed
him in jail for the last time.
So when he told us that nobody but Joan Baez had given a nickel to the
Seven's defense fund, we headlined it in the Planet. The Underground
Press Service picked up the story and distributed it to every other
underground paper in the nation, including the college press. The
Seven's defense fund swelled mightily soon after.
It was winter and the Sixties were over.
But the Planetwas still there for us to run the story about Joyce
Deiffenderfer. It appeared under the headline: "I DON'T WANT TO GET
CAUGHT IN THIS THING."
We also went to the FBI, made another statement, and asked them to talk
to Joyce Deiffenderfer.
Christmas passed, then came New Year 1971. We had the evidence, but
there was no move on the part of the press to give it a milligram of
ink or air time. Here was a major story that was being absolutely
ignored by the Miami Herald, the Miami News, and every TV station. The
frustration was galling.
"It's like kicking a marshmallow," Jim said.
We called the FBI to see how its investigation was progressing and one
agent or another would always say: "Sorry, it's not our job to tell you
anything."
Then we called our editor at Dell to tell him what we'd found, the
state of the story, the ramifications of what we'd experienced. As we
waited on the line, a strong, authoritative woman's voice came on.
"This is Helen Meyer," she said. She was the outright owner and
publisher of Dell in those days, and for a wild moment we expected her
to congratulate us on our book idea, maybe even invite us to a
publisher's cocktail party. Instead she said: "I'm cancelling your
contract as of today. This book will not be printed."*
It was as if we had just fallen out of a Zeppelin. Why the high-level
hostility the lack of explanation? We hadn't been in touch with her or
Dell for a year. After that telephone call everybody at Dell was out to
lunch or in a meeting. We had the $3,500, but was the investigation we
found so intriguing really over?
"Where are we?" Ken asked.
"Dead in the water."
There was some wallowing in self-pity and some crying in our beer.
Then, two days later on Ken's thirtieth birthday a new idea popped up
to get Votescam off zero. Ken got the brainstorm to send a telegram to
Richard Nixon.
The act of composing and sending a telegram to the President of the
United States is like dipping a toe into contemporary history. There
are advantages and drawbacks, depending on the tenor of the times and
the subject matter. It is akin to sending a rocket ship into the void —
you don't know what it's going to hit or how far it will go.
But on that day, as we sent the telegram via Western Union, we just
thought it was a hell of a way to blow out the birthday candles.
*We later discovered that Ms. Meyer was a long time friend of
Washington Post publisher Katharine Graham, a fact that will be better
understood later in this book.
TELEGRAM
White House, 23 April 1971 Washington, DC
Dear Mr. President,
For the past several months we have pieced together documentation and
theory regarding a Federal-State-Local election in Dade County
September 8, 1970.
Evidence indicates major vote fraud was perpetrated. Television
coverage on Channels 4 and 7 (WTVJ, WCKT) featured
computer "projections" of voter turnout and final vote totals by 7:24
p.m. Projections made by Channel 7 were based on returns from only one
voting machine. We questioned persons involved and believe election
results were pre-arranged by all three TV news departments acting to
promote the deception that official returns from the Dade County
courthouse would be delayed due to a "computer breakdown." We are
providing documentation to Miami FBI, and urgently request that your
office direct U.S. Attorney General to investigate.
Kenneth Collier
James Collier
Chive Mynde
IT TAKES A THIEF
"The major fact about history is that a large part of it appears to be
criminal."
— Anonymous
Our quest looked insanely futile but we stubbornly refused to quit
until we were as dead as our theories seemed to be. We worried about
being too far out, too intuitive, seeing connections where there were
none. The word was that we had gotten "too extreme," and that
we'd "lost balance."
Yet the story never faded. We would wander the beaches and wonder about
the possible ramifications of what we had dug up. Nonetheless, we
decided to pursue it. Jim was the hottest after it. As an avid chess
player, he was intrigued by the complexity of it all. Ken kept getting
married and having children, and his children's mothers were never too
thrilled about the quest. That slowed him down, but it never stopped
him.
We needed somebody wise and credible with whom we could talk on the
local scene, to validate or reject our conclusions. The agents at the
FBI said that U.S. Attorney Robert W. Rust was a good listener.
He was, but he was consistently noncommittal about the use, if any, his
superiors in the Justice Department were making of our field work. We
never saw the man. He was reachable only by telephone, and our phone
conversations were probably recorded.
Because Rust would willingly spend twenty minutes at a time on the
phone discussing the implications of our theories, we assumed the jury
in the Justice Department was still open minded about the case.
We found ourselves in accord with Rust on two points. If the elections
in Dade County were being systematically rigged, it had to be
accomplished and/or by:
1) Massive tampering with the voting machines;
2) Massive forgery in the certificates attested to by the signature of
poll workers.
Both possibilities seemed far fetched, illogical or impossible.
The 1,648 machines would have to have been pre-set with vote totals
without poll workers finding out. The poll workers' duties included
visually checking the mechanical counters in back of the machines
before allowing voting on election morning.
If forgery was the method, it would appear to be a Houdini-like trick.
Each of the 1,648 machines' certificates of canvass were signed in
triplicate by at least ten poll-workers per precinct, twice a day,
adding up to roughly 32,960 separate signatures.
As impossible as either of those two possibilities sounded, we didn't
discount them entirely because of Dade County's track record
of "polecat" elections. Polecat elections stink to high heaven.
Our skepticism was founded in the lore of Dade County polecat politics,
circa 1959, when perhaps the most important election ever held in the
region took place. It was a county-wide referendum in which each of the
27 separate municipalities in Dade County were asked to give up their
power to govern themselves autonomously. They were being asked instead
to turn over self-governing power to the proposed "Metropolitan
Government," or Metro, for short.
Opposition to the "power grab" was fierce and the debate dominated the
press for months before the balloting. The Miami Herald strongly backed
the proposition. The Metro Charter, a set of rules defining the powers
of Metro-Dade, was written by Miami Herald lawyer Dan Paul. The Charter
was a product of many consultations with the insiders, who met
regularly in the UM boardroom, under the twin chairmanship of Herald
publisher John S. Knight and U.M. President Henry King Stanford.
The voluntary divestiture of power by Dade's cluster of independent
cities would bring about a whole new way of governing, tax collecting,
public servicing, public contracting and election administration.
Billions of dollars in commercial and property futures were at stake.
The Fifties were drawing to a close. The architects of regional
government viewed their new model of governance by "experts" as a new
era. No longer would there be dependence on charismatic publicly
elected officials, whose credentials to lead often consisted of no more
than a willingness to shake every hand in the neighborhood.
Elite planners sought to diminish the power of mayors, chiefs of police
and local heroes of one kind or another who influence public policy.
In their place, operating largely behind-the-scenes with no
accountability to the public , would be Public Administration Service
(PAS) graduates, trained to be loyal to the Charter. More often than
not the county manager came from a different part of the country. It
was to be government by "grid," so that personnel from PAS could be
nimbly interchanged throughout the United States, without fanfare, to
fill advisory "slots," such as county manager.
As the 1959 Metro referendum drew near, citizens who preferred the old-
fashioned way of governing banded together with such vigor that a Miami
News poll conducted by houndstooth-clean editor Bill Baggs showed Metro
was headed for a kick in the ass and down to defeat. (The News was
still independent in those days.) Baggs commented that it would be
surprising if the forces for Metro mustered any backing at all beyond
the elite, special-interest voters who stood to benefit financially.
Then, on election night, the electoral reality-quake struck.
Metro won, according to the votes counted on Dade's carefully tended
Automatic Voting Machines. And while there was some head shaking and
muttering after the results were in, the discontent was scantily
reported and soon forgotten. Talk radio was a mere glitter in Larry
King's eyes then.
But as years passed, old-timers began wondering aloud on the early talk
radio programs if something fishy hadn't occurred back in 1959 when
Metro was voted in. In 1971, a caller mentioned a group known as "the
warehouse gang" as the ones most likely to be behind the original Metro
election victory.
The caller hinted mysteriously of a cadre of "good old boys" who had
long been in charge of the county's voting machines, which were stored
between elections at a warehouse in Opa Locka, Dade's most rural
backwater municipality located on the edge of the Everglades.
There, it was rumored, a flourishing criminal enterprise had evolved
over the years. The manipulators in county politics came to depend on
the voting machine mechanics to guarantee the outcome of multimillion
dollar bond issues and other controversial measures. It was common
knowledge, one informant told us, that, "Those guys can make a
mechanical voting machine whistle Dixie."
The Opa Locka warehouse at the Opa-Locka Airport is a big World War Two-
type hangar. The airport is a vast expanse of concrete at the edge of
black swamp water. It's flat and the trees are very low and Jim learned
to fly Cessna 150s and 172s out there.
Frank Vickery, a big, old, taciturn "cracker," was in charge of the
warehouse. He didn't have much to do out in the swamp all day and he
was bored. So he was happy to accept the court order we handed him
giving us permission to examine documents. He liked to talk and show
people around. So he led and we listened.
Inside the hangar were 1,648 gray-green voting machines with levers,
plus a lot of extras, all lined up in rows. They were made by the
Automatic Voting Machine Company of Jamestown, New York..
"Can you show us the candidate counters and the wheels inside?" Jim
asked.
He led us to a nearby machine and opened up the back with a key. There
were a lot of plastic, wheels, three-digit counters underneath a black
grid. The insides looked pretty simple.
"How can you rig this thing?" Ken asked.
"One of the best ways," Frank chuckled, "is to put decals over the
counters so that when you see them in the morning it says "000" but
underneath it says maybe "090," which in any precinct is a pretty good
bonus."
"What else?"
"There's such a thing as a predetermined counter. It's already set up
before the election... by shaving the plastic wheel inside so that it
slips ahead 100 or 200 or 300 votes. Any good mechanic can do it with a
razor blade" He took us to his office and reached into his desk,
bringing out one of the counter wheels in his big rough hands.
"This is a shaved predetermined counter," he said.
"Can we keep one?"
"Sure, take it."
Jim put the wheel in his pocket.
"Who works on these machines?"
"They're worked on by the mechanics for Wometco. They have vending
machines and movie houses. They can make those suckers sing."
We shook hands with Frank and said goodbye. Ken walked outside
whistling the tune to:
"Way down south in the land of cotton,
good times there are not forgotten...
Lookaway! Lookaway! Lookaway
Dixieland."
Within a week the photograph of the shaved wheel on the counter was on
the front page of the Planet.
Then Jim called Ellis Rubin, a Miami Beach lawyer whose tactic was to
get as much publicity as possible for his clients and causes. Rubin was
a tall, lanky, good looking guy in his mid thirties. He had run for
Congress as a Republican and lost. We didn't know it at the time, but
Rubin's campaign manager had been U.S. Attorney Robert Rust. We didn't
know, either, that Rubin was thick as cold grits with the CIA and other
intelligence-gathering outfits.
We told him the whole story, or as much as we could get into an hour or
so. There was a charisma about Rubin, an intellectual intensity that we
liked. He might be able to break the silence in the press because he
had chutzpah, brains and the ear of a lot of reporters who liked his
style.
He said he'd do what he could, pro bono, and we believed him. He was
one of the few characters we encountered who was always as good as his
word.
After that trip to Opa Locka, we figured there must be some documents
out at the hangar that we didn't get to see. We had to go back. We
decided that we as American citizens had the right to know everything
involved with our so-called free and fair vote.
On a bright, sunny January morning we drove back to the Opa-Locka
warehouse and parked in front of the door. As soon as we walked in we
saw, about fifty feet ahead of us, a set of wooden steps going up to a
loft suspended from the ceiling.
"What are you guys doing here?" It was Vickery.
"We want to check that loft over there," Jim said.
"I got a court order here that says you guys aren't allowed back in
here." ;
He showed us a piece of paper signed by circuit court chief judge,
Henry Balaban.
"You can tell Balaban what to do with his order," Ken said. Vickery
headed for his office.
"He's probably going to call the cops."
We didn't waste any time. We sprinted up the steps and into the loft.
Before us were boxes and boxes of documents that obviously pertained to
the 1970 elections.
"I can't believe it!" Jim breathed.
"Falling into shit."
"Where do we start?"
"Just look and grab."
We took as many papers as we thought were significant from different
boxes with a millisecond or so to decide, and we stuffed them under our
shirts, smoothing them down so they showed as little as possible. Then
we headed out of the loft and back to the car.
But as we were coming down the ladder, we saw three men coming toward
us, with the ex-supervisor of elections, Martin Braterman, leading the
way. He was dressed in a black overcoat and broadbrimmed black fedora.
His appearance in the garb of a traditional "bad guy" was almost
surrealistic, given the precarious legal position we found ourselves in.
"What are you guys doing here?" he demanded. "This is County property.
Get out or I'll have you arrested."
We didn't say a word. We brushed past him and his two associates and
walked to the car as fast as we could, with as much dignity as we could
muster. Ken theatrically burned rubber getting away.
Every mile we put between ourselves and the warehouse buoyed our
spirits. Within a few minutes on the open road we were making plans to
return to the loft.
Once more we spread out the contraband on Jim's pool table.
It was a smorgasbord of stuff.
We had:
1) IBM computer cards with the candidate's name typed on each and hand-
written numbers on them.
2) What appeared to be crib sheets that had handwritten numbers that
included a time of day, and then other numbers, also in pencil, in the
same handwriting.
3) Mimeographed, stapled-together sheets that showed the handouts that
were given to the press. It was a workup model, handprinted with a red
pencil. On the front of it were the words: "Machine Totals Before
Correction." (What did before correction mean? )
4) A press release from Leonard White, who ran the computer for the
courthouse during the primary His job was to feed the actual votes over
the telephone line, called the "A" line, to the Herald and the
television stations. It said, "Misinformation" had been given out by
the news media on September 8th about the courthouse computer's alleged
breakdown. It said that due to careful programming the computer "was
never slow and never down."
5) A letter to all precinct workers telling them that they had to be at
a "schooling" session two weeks in advance of the election, and they
all had to sign in and give their true signatures, otherwise they would
not be paid.
Then there was a ream or so of other papers a little less outstanding
but certainly fascinating.
"Man, I want to tell you, this is a hell of a haul," Jim said.
"We could have gotten this same stuff, of course, if we had followed
the system," Ken said dryly.
"Okay," Jim took a deep breath, "let's see if it makes sense. Old
Martin Braterman resigned. Now he turns up at the warehouse to protect
this cache of documents."
"Right," Ken said, "and we now have documents that show there was a way
to procure the true signatures from the precinct workers two weeks
ahead of the election. Plus, the television stations lied about the
computer at the courthouse breaking down and the press release is
evidence of that."
"They just needed an excuse to go on the air with their projections. We
know that a lot of numbers, handwritten before the election, turned out
to be final totals after the election was official."
"Back to the FBI?"
"Yup."
We gave the FBI agents originals and copies of the evidence, including
the press release, the computer cards, the workup sheets and the letter
from Braterman asking for the signatures.
"Does this disappear into the void, too?" Jim asked.
"Yes," the agent smiled.
We sent much of the same material to Richard Gerstein, the State
Attorney. He told us we had violated a court order to get the material
and he refused to deal with it.
Jim called US. Attorney Rust.
"It's time for a meeting with the Justice Department in Washington."
Rust was his usual vague self.
"Goddamit, we deserve it," Jim's anger spilled over. "We've got the
evidence and we want somebody to look at it."
Rust scheduled it for the end of March with Craig C. Donsanto, a
Justice Department attorney.
Jim drove to Washington, while Ken stayed in Miami with his wife and
daughter.
The afternoon of the meeting, Jim walked to the Justice Department on
Pennsylvania Avenue and found his way to Donsanto's office. It wasn't a
corner office, and it wasn't a cubicle either, but a middle of the
corridor mid-sized office. Donsanto was in his late twenties and he had
a melon-shaped head.
Jim told his story and handed him the shaved candidate counter and
other significant documents in a manila envelope.
"I want an investigation," Jim told him.
"I'll look into it," Donsanto said. "Thanks for coming."
Jim pushed for a more specific deadline, but Donsanto refused to give
it.
"These things take time," he said, smiling woodenly.
And that was that.
Back in Florida, we tried to pinpoint where we were.
We put together packets of "evidence" in manila envelopes and gave them
to the local press. We saw Jack Anderson, the columnist, at the
Americana Hotel in Bal Harbor. He took a packet and thanked us and we
never heard from him again.
Katharine Graham was at a meeting at the University of Miami when Jim
handed the packet to her She took it and didn't say a word.
And that was that.
In May, Jim drove back to Washington. He took a shot and went
unannounced to Jack Anderson's red brick townhouse on Vermont Avenue,
but Anderson refused to see him.
Then Jim walked through the glass doors into the offices of the
Democratic National Committee in the Watergate Office Building. He
found the office of Larry O'Brien, the head of the DNC, and left a
Votescam packet on his desk.*
* A few weeks later, on June 17, 1972, a second break-in by "plumbers"
at the DNC resulted la their arrest for what Richard Nixon later
called "a third-rate burglary." At this stage of the game, we hadn't
the slightest inkling that what took place on June 17th could possibly
relate to our investigation. Only Justice Department documents we found
years later while rummaging through the system would suggest a
connection between Watergate and Votescam.
The off-year primary election rolled around in September and we decided
to watch it closely on television at Jim's house As happened two years
earlier, Channel 10 wasn't broadcasting returns but instead was running
a movie.
It was, in Yogi Berra's words, deja vu all over again, only there was
an eerie feeling about it this time.
Not long after the polls closed. Channels 7 and 4 put their
commentators on the air. After a little while the anchor people came on
and announced that the courthouse computer had broken down and instead
of official results, the station would broadcast projections.
"Who computed the program this time?" Ken asked.
"Let's find out."
The next day Jim called Channel 7 and asked the news director who
programmed the computers.
"Eastern Airlines," he said.
The next call was to Eastern.
"I'd like to talk to the computer programmer who did the election," Jim
told the operator.
"Oh, that's John," she said. She put Jim through.
John was not happy about talking on the telephone to a reporter and
when Jim asked the first question, "What was the program you used to
call it so close?" the man hung up.
At the Planet the editor, Buzz, called John, too.
He wrote in the next edition: "Every time I asked the guy a question,
the phone fell out of his hands."
Judge Balaban's latest court order, denying us access to public
records, was a definite setback. But it also proved to us that we were
on the right track.
Public documents relating to elections were singled out by Florida
statute as being open to the public "without exception." The only
recourse was to get a circuit court hearing where we could attempt to
get Judge Balaban to reverse himself.
That brought up the problem of whether or not to get a lawyer. We did
have the option of petitioning the Court on our own, acting pro se, but
we figured that we'd get whipped in court.
Finally it dawned on us that the only sure way to maneuver ourselves
into court, without paying any lawyer or being beholden to a partisan
organization, was to call upon the American Civil Liberties Union. The
ACLU was the perfect way to fight Balaban for denying us unrestricted
access to public voting records.
At the ACLU's next executive session in a big law firm's office with a
lot of local lawyers around the table, we took turns telling how our
constitutional rights had been violated by being kept away from public
election documents, and we warned how the American vote was in danger.
"I'll take the case," offered Shya Estrumpsa, a dark, quiet man. He
said that he felt he was on solid legal ground in fighting the
restraining order, and that he couldn't imagine what the counter
argument might be.
He planned to get Judge Balaban to lift his order in circuit court, and
if that failed, to go into federal court for relief based on
constitutional grounds.
"We've got a lawyer now, and it's certified that we aren't paying him,"
Ken said.
Our poetic limitation in Votescam was never to pay a lawyer. If you pay
a lawyer, he's got to be your advocate, right or wrong. Just paying a
lawyer doesn't make you right. If a lawyer takes your anti-
Establishment case pro bono publico, he usually feels he's sticking his
neck out but that he has a winnable case.
We also asked Ellis Rubin what he thought, but we didn't ask him to
take the case. Rubin assured us that he would help ferret out the truth.
He thought we were doing something worthwhile and important, and we
couldn't help liking him for that.
At a hearing a week later in Balaban's chambers, the ACLU lawyer did
his best. But instead of allowing us to dig deeper in the warehouse,
the judge simply impounded all the evidence and refused to lift his
order.
We didn't want to bother with the long procedure of going through
federal court to challenge Balaban's orders. Realizing that Balaban was
not a man to be trusted, and that he kept a secret political agenda, we
decided to take another tack. Jim left a message at Rubin's office that
said: "We are going to ask Balaban to appoint you as Ombudsman for Vote
Fraud in Dade County, and you can be the guardian for vote fraud
evidence. Will you accept?"
Ken called Judge Balaban's office at the courthouse and through his
secretary left a message: "Will you appoint Ellis Rubin ombudsman for
vote fraud in Dade County?"
A few hours later, Balaban passed Rubin in the courthouse corridor and
cryptically said:
"You got it," and strided on.
Rubin, totally puzzled, said to himself: "Got what?"
When he returned to his office, he was able to put it together. Rubin
was now an ombudsman.
Chive Mynde
A TANGLED WEB
"The handwriting on the wall may well be a forgery"
— Hodgson
When we found out that all the poll workers in Florida, and probably in
other states, as well, submitted their true signatures two weeks in
advance of the election to their "teachers" in the election school, it
seemed to follow that anybody collecting those signatures would have a
leg up on forging them.
On a cold, rainy afternoon in the spring of 1973, Jim opened the door
to his townhouse and there on the pool table were two piles of large
paper.
Ken was standing over them with a huge grin on his face.
"Wait'll you see these," he said.
"Where'd you get them?"
"I ripped off the Dade County Courthouse."
"You stole the canvass sheets?"
"Yeah. I walked into the clerk's office where they keep them, and I saw
these sheets here... sheets with blank backs." He grabbed the top sheet
off the pile. "Look, there's no ink on it at all," he said, pointing
from corner to corner. "No laws written on it. Blank."
"Wow!"
"There's no printing on these, nothing to certify."
"This is fantastic," Jim whooped. "What made you take them?"
"I realized once I found these with blank backs, that if I didn't take
them they could destroy them, especially if we got a court order to
look for them. So I took a whole armful of the blank backs and
signature ones, and I walked out of the courthouse. Nobody said a word."
"Nobody saw you?"
"Just grab and walk, don't look around guiltily... just move on."
Jim marveled at the gall of it. To go into the courthouse and steal
public documents under the clerks' noses was a third degree felony. It
was certainly the most radical thing that was done up-to-date in the
whole investigation.
Ken felt as if he had finally carpe'd the diem and made a move.
"We have them by the balls with this," he said.
"What races do they cover?"
"It's the non partisan races in the 1972 election. There's a machine
that stands over in the corner in all of the precincts. The election
supervisor never tells you about it. They call it the non partisan
machine. That's all the judges, the schoolboard and the state attorney."
"What's it doing over on the side?"
"They don't send anybody over there. Most people don't care about
anything except the big races. They're satisfied and don't ask where
the other little races are. So the non partisan machines don't get
voted on unless somebody asks in particular. Nobody's in charge and
nobody reads the numbers off after the election."
"Then that means," Jim said, "that the judges and the state attorney
are the two groups that prosecute vote fraud, yet their election is
patently rigged and uncertified."
"Still, they're the ones you have to go to if you claim there's fraud."
"Only in America."
"We're starting to get to the point where there are no benign
explanations," Ken said. "This is vote fraud on a massive, arrogant,
amazing scale. At least to me."
"Me, too."
"Do we have them now?" Ken asked.
"Yeah. We've got 'em."
"How are they going to get around no certification? It's one thing to
confound people with the signatures, it's another to take those
signatures away entirely."
"We'll go to Rubin. Rubin can call a press conference, show these
uncertified canvass sheets, and we won't be 'crazy' anymore," Jim said.
"Then we'll go to the FBI."
"If they printed one canvass sheet per machine," Ken
calculated, "there'd be 1,648 canvass sheets. If we find out they
printed more, that means there must be duplicates floating around
somewhere. We've got to find out who ordered these canvass sheets
printed, and who ordered that no certification be put on them. Right?"
"Right!"
Aclerk in the election division told Ken the name of the printer:
Franklin Press in Miami, a big, rich printing company with many
government contracts.
Jim, who identified himself as a reporter, called Franklin Press'
president and asked:
"How many canvass sheets did you print for the election?"
"We printed about 4,000."
"Do they have certification on the back?"
"Yes."
"How about the non partisan race? Is there certification on the back of
those, too?"
"Yes."
"We have sheets here that are blank on the back. Can we come down and
show them to you?"
The president left the line for a minute and then returned:
"We didn't print certifications on some of those sheets on the
instructions of William Miller, the elections supervisor," he said.
"Thanks, we'll get back to you."
"Iwant to try my hand at it," Jim said. "What?"
"Stealing the canvass sheets." "Let's go."
We drove to Ft. Lauderdale up U.S. 1, through Hollywood, past pistachio-
green South Broward High School, which looked the same as when Jim was
a Broward Bulldog and devoured the sloppy Joes in the cafeteria at
lunch. We drove by the Ft. Lauderdale airport and the conch shell
vendors and fruit shippers and orange juice sellers in their low white
buildings. We passed "Bet-a-Million Gates" million-dollar banyan tree,
which was lusciously green and shade-making. Mr. Bet-a-Million was a
Detroiter who would bet on almost anything. In the 1930s, he bet a
million dollars that nobody could move that particular banyan tree to
his club in Chicago. Its roots spread out forty feet and into the pores
of the coral substrata. And huge limbs reached out sixty feet, with
dozens of roots falling from each limb and back into the soil. Nobody
ever collected on the bet, but once they heard the banyan-tree story,
people talked about it for days... the possibilities of how you'd move
the damned thing anywhere, much less up North, and get it to live. For
a million dollars people are willing to get creative.
Into the Broward County courthouse we went, dressed in jeans. We walked
into the clerk's office and asked to see the canvass sheets.
"Of course," the clerk agreed. She brought them out in tall stacks.
Jim looked around and saw that none of the clerks were paying them any
attention. He took one stack, held it under his arm like laundry and
walked out of the courthouse. Ken, unburdened by purloined documents,
was right behind.
We took off in the green Maverick, and headed back to Jim's townhouse
where we dumped the load.
Then we got back in the Maverick and drove to West Palm Beach. This
time we passed Ft. Lauderdale and got to Deerfield Beach, a sleepy
little town, and Boca Raton, small, undiscovered yet by the hoi-polloi.
Then came West Palm Beach. This is not Palm Beach. This is middle to
lower class folks who live on the wrong side of the Intercoastal
Waterway. It's a bunch of squatty stucco buildings that look like
architectural renegades from Los Angeles. They are inhabited by a
volatile mixture of black people and rednecks, a lot of whom worked for
the rich people on Palm Beach as bartenders, maids, gardeners, garbage
collectors, small shopkeepers. The further west you went the swampier
it got, until you hit the Everglades.
Into the Palm Beach County courthouse. We ask for canvass sheets. They
bring them. This time clerks were watching us.
"Stare them down," Ken whispered.
We each stared at whoever was looking at us until they looked away Then
Ken grabbed a pile, and we walked out, got in the car and headed home.
It was a long day.
At home, we spread our loot out on the green felt. Jim studied the
similarities among the different piles.
"They look a lot like the ones in Dade County These are all sort of
gray... the numbers are written in by hand... when you flip them,
see... there's a consistent grayness... the handwriting has the same
emotional level, it's all neat... no broken or thick pencil marks.
Pencils wear down and break off... in a real sheet, you've got to see
all those different strokes, but look at these, man... there's none of
it. It's uniformly gray with thin lines, in all of the writing."
"So what do you think?" Ken asked. "This is getting too big to handle.
Nobody's going to believe this. We've got this huge fucker by the tail
and nobody's going to believe it."
"Is it possible that the people who fill out canvass sheets all over
the state have identical handwriting?"
Jim laughed as he walked over to the refrigerator and pulled out his
frozen glass mug from the freezer. "Yeah, right. There must be some
kind of kindred spirit that precinct workers share, they all got the
same handwriting." He snapped the top off a can of root beer and poured
it into the icy mug. "Now we've got three counties and all of the
signatures look almost exactly the same in emotional content from
morning until night, twelve hours later."
"Yeah, I know. From morning when they signed them, while they were
fresh, to night when the signatures all look just like they did in the
morning," Ken counted off points: " no alteration of mood, no emotional
content, no different slant, no extra pressure."
Jim nodded. "And too much exactness as to where they sign on the line.
If a signature is indented in the morning, it's indented almost exactly
the same way at night. That's not the way it would be if something is
human about it."
"Remember those five messy canvass sheets we saw with Lynch?"
"Yes."
"They looked real, sloppy enough. There was a certain illiteracy about
them. Some of the writing was heavy and black, and obviously made by
pencils that were nubs. Not all crisp and sharp like these."
Jim flipped through the stack.
"This is forged, it's the same Stepford effect that we saw in Dade
County."
"But how the hell could Lynch, our friendly handwriting expert, say
they weren't forged?"
"It's a conundrum."
About nine o'clock the next morning. Ken called the sheriff of Broward
County.
"I stole all the canvass sheets from the courthouse," Ken said in his
coolest, matter-of-fact way "Arrest me."
The sheriff laughed.
"Keep me out of this," he said. "I don't want any part of it."
Then he called the sheriff of Palm Beach County and told him the same
thing.
"Good luck," the sheriff said.
Not only couldn't we garner any publicity, we literally couldn't get
arrested.
Next day we visited the FBI.
We met with agent Ed Putz, a very Gary Cooperish guy. We showed him the
canvass sheets. He spread them out on a table, shuffled them, looked at
them from a standing position, and said:
"These are forgeries."
He gave them a dismissive push and disappeared behind a door. We made
our statement to someone else, and left some canvass sheets as evidence.
"How did Putz know they were forged?" Ken asked that night, while he
racked the fifteen balls for a game of eight ball. We were at the Bingo
Bar — headquarters on the Beach for some of the nation's brightest pool
shooters.
"I don't know. He disappeared too fast to find out."
The next day we took sample sheets over to the Organized Crime Bureau
of Dade County. Sgt. Walter Blue, a crime lab technician, took us into
a room lit by red lights. There were five or six different types of
microscopes and lots of chemicals.
He told us that he would put the canvass sheets under the microscope to
examine the fibers and ink.
"I'm going to look for broken fibers... "he explained. "All paper, when
you magnify it, is made up of what appears to be thick threads, or
fibers, criss-crossing each other. So when you write on it, you have to
eventually break one of those fibers — especially with all those
signatures. Also, the pencils used by the county are those little hard
sharp things, you know..."
"The ones they use at race tracks?" Ken offered.
He nodded. "And when most people press down on the paper they make pin
point holes. They also indent the paper... so I'll be looking for ridge
lines on the backside of the writing. You should be able to feel them
with your finger, in some cases, but under a microscope, they'll look
like the Grand Tetons."
"How long is this going to take?" Jim asked.
"I'll call you when I'm done."
When we were in the suntan business everybody advised us as to the best
way to promote Sunscrene. They always asked the same thing: "Have you
ever thought of those little packages they give away when you fly to
Florida? Get it on airplanes!"
And in our Votescam investigation, the question almost everybody asked
was: "Aren't you guys afraid of getting killed?"
The second question was invariably: "Have you guys gone to '60
Minutes'?"
No, "60 Minutes" came to us.
One day we got a call from Florida State Senator Alan Becker. Becker
was a lawyer known as "The Mink Cub." He wore exquisite European-styled
vested suits, hankerchief [sic] in the pocket. He was perfect. But
the "Mink Cub" moniker was due to his hair — slicked back and jet black.
"Mike Wallace is coming over to do a story on me being a condominium
advocate," Becker told Jim. "You want to meet him?"
An hour later we were in his office. Wallace was interviewing Becker,
and when he finished he turned his attention to us.
"What have you got?" he asked.
We laid out four years of evidence for Wallace and his crew Wallace
appeared flabbergasted, but he put nothing on tape. However, he said
that he was headed right back to New York to get approval from his
bosses to do our story. In fact, freelance investigative reporter
Gaeton Fonzi, wrote a piece about Wallace having the Votescam story in
his pocket.
MIAMI MAGAZINE
JULY, 1974 MIAMI, FLORIDA
THE GREAT DADE ELECTION RIG CONTINUES
by Gaeton Fonzi
Just recently, Channel 7 television reporter Brian Ross happened to be
returning to Miami from New York on the same plane as CBS-TV newsman
Mike Wallace. With his number one network show, "60 Minutes", Wallace
has earned a reputation as a top investigative journalist who goes
after the big stories. Chatting with Ross, Wallace told him that he was
coming back to Miami for two specific reasons: one of which was to film
an interview with a show business personality appearing on Miami Beach.
The other reason, he said, was much more important: to look into what
he had been told might be the most shocking vote fraud scandal ever to
rock the nation. And, confided Wallace, it involved a conspiracy
between major local media and key figures in Miami's power structure.
The Great Dade Election Rig continues.
After four years. Four years! In spite of numerous interments, the
amazing story has surfaced anew. Finally it appears to be in the sight
of network television. It is the "Loch Ness Monster" of Miami
journalism.
For whatever reasons, what Mike Wallace did in Miami on that return
trip, we never found out what it was. Most likely, he shot tape and
interviewed some people. It appeared obvious from Fonzi's lead sentence
that Wallace had gone back to New York, had discussions with
associates, and was returning to Miami to follow up on the story.
Nothing appeared on the air.*
Meanwhile, while waiting for the handwriting analysis, life in the
tropics returned to a steady hum. It was relieved only by trying to
figure out our next strategy in the investigation.
Rock was dying and disco was coming in. Disc jockeys played plastic
records for people who shook their booty. These booty-shakers grew up
to be yuppies. There were still some good drugs out there, mostly
derivitives [sic] of nutmeg. They started with the initials DM, like
DMA. It was a form of speed, with all the euphoria of cocaine but
without the valley. It was the beginning of the designer drugs, and
they were called "nice," because everybody who ever took them would
say, "Oh, this is nice, man."
"Hello."
"Jim, this is Sgt. Walter Blue."
Jim immediately motioned Ken to pick up the other phone.
"These canvass sheets you brought me are forgeries. Why isn't anyone
doing anything about this?"
"I don't know, I'm doing my damndest to get somebody to do something"
Jim said.
"This is what I found. There are no fibers broken. That means that none
of the people who wrote those signatures pressed hard enough to indent
the paper or break the fiber. There's not a number big enough to tell
you the odds against no breaks with hundreds of signatures involved.
Plus the pencil lines all have a uniform flow without breaks in the
flow. That's impossible if the signatures are genuine."
"How can that be accomplished?" Jim asked, amazed.
"I don't know, but it bothers me that this is going on. I'm concerned."
"We're doing our best," Jim said.
Now we were pissed. Lynch!
Lynch was the handwriting expert who told us the canvass sheet
signatures were genuine. We took him at his word. Now we had an FBI
agent and a police specialist who swore they were forgeries.
We called Lynch and told him that we had to see him immediately, and
that we'd explain when we got there. He lived in Plantation, which is
near the Everglades west of Ft. Lauderdale. It was open cattle and
citrus land, with thick black soil, cockleburrs [sic], coral snakes and
canals planted with mile-long borders of pine trees.
Lynch lived in a stucco subdivision house with a Florida grass lawn, a
palm tree, a carport. He met us at the door and led us into a well-
equipped home laboratory in the back.
"Let's see these under the microscope." Jim handed Lynch a single
canvass sheet.
"Okay."
We waited.
Lynch was peering into the eyepiece and seemed very calm.
"These are not forgeries," he repeated.
Jim took a look. Now he knew what to look for. He saw the
letters "floating" on top of the paper fibers. There were no breaks,
penpoints, smudges, nothing dissimilar.
"Look," Jim stepped aside so that Ken could see, "not a fiber is
broken."
Ken looked, then erupted.
"Hey, what are you saying?" he asked Lynch. 'The ink floats on the
surface, there's no breaks, and we've been told twice now that these
are forgeries."
While Ken was talking, Jim walked out into the anteroom and examined
the books on the shelves. He wanted an idea of who this man was. He saw
that he had a technical book selection consistent with all that
equipment.
Then, on the coffee table, he spotted an opened magazine. It was on
display the same way anyone would leave a "vanity piece" to be admired.
Jim walked over and picked it up. It was turned to a page that had the
headline: "How to Forge Documents with a Bank Rapidograph."
Jim read it twice.
He read it again and it said the same thing.
He looked at who wrote it. It was by Robert Lynch!
For the first time in this investigation, the hair on the back of Jim's
neck stood up.
He took the magazine to Ken and stuffed it in his hand.
"Look, this guy's got a story in Police Magazine, May '72 about forging
documents with a bank Rapidograph."
Lynch stood quietly.
Jim heard a rustling in the hall. A flash of paranoia swept over him.
The scene rang through his mind of Lynch's wife, with a shotgun,
shooting them as intruders. Nobody would have doubted it or cared less.
"Let's get the fuck out of here," Jim said.
In the car heading back home, Jim explained to Ken that he had only
glanced at the article.
"So what did you see?"
"It's a thing called a bank Rapidograph. Apparently it's an instrument
that you can trace a signature with. It copies the signature with one
pencil and another pencil or pen is attached on some kind of a swing
arm — it traces the exact movement on another piece of paper."
"So if Lynch used a Rapidograph on these canvass sheets he could trace
it off the signatures he got at the schooling session two weeks in
advance, and repeat them on unsigned canvass sheets."
"Right."
"Then there would be a set of canvass sheets that could be substituted
for the originals and nobody would know the difference. Unless they
happened, like we did, to stumble across those five, where the
handwriting was real."
Jim watched the heavy rain as it hammered the hood. "Well, I think that
answers Henry King Stanford's question," he smiled.
"We can't prove Lynch did it."
"But we know how it's done, he wrote the article on how to do it, and
now he denies that what he saw under the microscope was forgery when
two experts say it is," Jim reasoned. "If the fucker quacks like a
duck, shoot it."
We headed for Rubin's office on Miami Beach.
The office was in a wing of a baronial mansion from the 1930s with
stained glass windows and exotic woods. It felt expensively medieval.
Rubin listened to the story and read the material.
He laughed. He loved this kind of intrigue, especially if it gave him a
shot at the Democratic war lords who controlled the county.
"Will you call a press conference?" Ken asked.
"Yes."
The next day all the media showed up at Rubin's office, as they always
did, and still do. There was a lot of excitement in the air. Rubin had
prepared himself for this conference with a singular focus. His plan
was to follow up with a visit to the state attorney's office, to
present the evidence and demand an investigation.
At the appointed time, Rubin strode into the scene.
"Ladies and Gentlemen of the press," his voice was compelling, "I've
called you here today to offer you what I consider shocking and
sickening, but undeniable, admissable and conclusive proof, that
elections in this county have been massively tampered with for at least
the last six years — and probably well before that."
Rubin held up the blank-backed canvass sheets and the forged
certifications and told the press what it all meant. With that opener,
he then began exhibiting examples of forgery on canvass sheets from
Dade County to Palm Beach. He told the media that the Organized Crime
Bureau had confirmed that signatures on every sample were not those of
poll workers, but had been affixed by other means.
"Desperate measures by desperate men," hissed a Channel 7
representative. He stalked out.
The Miami News ran the story on the front page, with a photograph of
Rubin holding up a forged canvass sheet. The Miami Herald ran a front-
page photograph and a story inside.
A few days later, William Miller, who took over when Braterman quit,
also resigned as election supervisor.
Two down.
Joyce Deiffenderfer, the woman from the League of Women Voters who wept
and cried that she did not want to "get caught in this thing," was
named election supervisor.
There was no followup in the press.
And that was that.
One day Jim got a call at The Planet from somebody at the Dade County
election division. The hushed female voice said:
"The Metro commission has voted millions of dollars to send all the
voting machines up to the Carolinas to get them retrofitted with
Printomatic devices. Meanwhile, they'll gut the machines and crush all
the old parts. That gets rid of any evidence of shaved wheels."
What's a Printomatic device?
In early September 1974 the primaries arrived again. At 7 a.m. we drove
to a precinct on Biscayne Boulevard in North Miami. It was in Howard's
Trailer Camp, four square blocks of mobile homes. What we found shocked
and elated us at the same time.
First, the keys to the backs of the new Printomatic-equipped voting
machines, for the first time ever, had not been issued to the precinct
captains. They could no longer open the backs and see the numbers
inside. Instead, they were told to crank a handle that had been
implanted into the back of the machine up there in Carolina. They were
assured it would make a roller run across the paper, which had been
treated so that numbers would appear when impressed by the raised
counters. After the roller rumbled across the paper from left to right,
one of two pieces of paper would slide out of a slot at the bottom. On
it would be numbers. For a virgin, un-voted-on machine, it was supposed
to show all zeroes. But none of the captains nor anyone else in the
precinct actually got to look at the counters themselves.
Jim called Joyce Dieffenderfer from a pay phone.
"Where are the keys to these machines?" he asked.
"They're locked in Jack Wert's desk. He's my assistant."
"Okay."
A call to Wert:
"Yeah, they're locked in my desk because they've got the Printomatic,
they don't need keys anymore."
Jim hurried back to the precinct just in time to see two stocky men in
dark suits opening the back of a machine.
Ken motioned to Jim: "The roller system isn't working. It's jammed up.
They called these guys the troubleshooters." Then he pointed outside to
a white Cadillac with Kentucky plates. "That's theirs."
"These guys are decidedly strangers," Jim said.
We watched.
They opened the back door of the machine with a key and took out the
Printomatic paper. It was about two feet by three feet, as big as the
back of the machine. When they pulled it out, you could see the piece
of paper was bunched up in the middle where the roller had wrinkled it.
Apparently, that's what had hung it up. The two guys tried to hustle
the paper away quickly. One grabbed it to his chest and turned to walk
out, calling over his shoulder:
"The machine's out of order until further notice."
In a flash Ken grabbed the paper and yanked it out of the guy's arms.
The stranger was momentarily stunned. Then Ken whipped around and
spread the paper on the nearest table, smoothing it out. At least ten
precinct workers were bug-eyed as they watched.
What we all saw was a wrinkled piece of paper with zeroes corresponding
to the candidate counters filling the entire sheet — even where the
roller hadn't touched.
"Hey, these have been preprinted." Jim said loudly "The pressure roller
only went half-way across before it wrinkled the paper."
A loud barnyard hubub went up from the workers.
"It's fixed!"
"We're not going to sign anything."
The surprised troubleshooter lunged over to grab the paper off the
table and walked quickly back to the Cadillac.
The precinct workers were clearly angry. The newfangled crankhandle was
actually a vote scam, a decoy. The Printomatic didn't do anything but
make people think it imprinted true counter numbers.
"I quit." A worker walked out.
"They want us to certify that!" Another followed him.
One by one, every worker walked out of the precinct until in ten
minutes it was empty.
The new crank handles and rollers didn't work in most of the other
precincts across the county that day either, and the scam was also
revealed to precinct workers when troubleshooters came to unstick the
rollers. Many of the workers walked out.
The next day. The Miami Herald, carried a story about the poll workers'
walkout which said that, due to some "snafu," thousands of precinct
workers throughout the county left their jobs and were replaced by
Metro police and firemen.
The story neglected to say what the snafu was, or why the workers had
walked off.
And that was that.
A day later, in the black-soil "redlands" area south of Miami where
they truck-farmed celery tomatoes, strawberries, limes and Ponderosa
lemons, about 200 citizens from all over the county met near the
settlement of Perrine on a moonless night.
It was at Clark and Dotty Merrill's place. They were well-known civic
activists. Clark worked for the City of Miami as an engineer, and he
had a kind of tenure that made it difficult to fire him for voicing his
opinions or making waves. Dotty was from Boston, and she was loud and
funny, with a marked Bahston accent. They'd gotten the word out on
radio and through fliers about the Printomatic fraud. A lot of precinct
workers had called them when they realized nothing was going to be said
about it in the newspapers. We called them, too.
We parked among a lot of cars and went into the Merrill's lived-in
stucco house. The house was filled to the gunwhales [sic] with people,
mostly in their thirties and up, a lot of municipal employees,
merchants and workers. Everybody but lawyers. You couldn't buy a lawyer
in that house. Dotty led the town meeting. Clark was a big man who'd
rather listen than talk.
"We've seen it with our own eyes, now," a precinct worker said. "And
it's a fraud. But the election came off on schedule."
"You should have seen the hysteria when everyone left our precinct and
people kept coming in to vote, but there was nobody to sign them in."
"It took Joyce a couple of hours to round up the cops to fill in."
"Why did the Herald lie that it was just a snafu? It was a downright
rigging and they know it."
Dottie motioned for them to quiet down.
"According to the Colliers here," she said, "the media is involved in
all this up to its cajones. We've got to put pressure on the Herald to
print the truth."
The group debated all night, and finally decided to send a mission to
The Miami Herald and The Miami News to get them to do vote fraud
stories.
A delegation was also sent to the State Attorney.
By the time the third meeting at the Merrill's house came around, there
were reports that nobody was going to do anything. No exposes were
going to appear in the News or the Herald. Editors told the delegation
that it was a "non story." A "non issue." The charges were "impossible
to prove," and so on. Editors routinely dismissed the messengers as
crackpots.
The State Attorney refused to investigate.
And that was that.
On September 9, Ellis Rubin held a standing-room-only press conference.
He had gone to the trouble of having a blackboard set up in the
conference room, and now he used it to describe in detail the "Missing
Keys Scam." Then he walked over to a Printomatic voting machine set up
in the corner He showed how the device denied poll workers their
mandate to visually eyeball the zeroes in the backs of the machines by
not giving them the keys to look inside and see the alignment of the
counter wheels.
Reporters took notes and video cameras hummed away.
"What are you going to do about it, Ellis?" a reporter asked.
"I intend to present this and other supporting evidence to the State
Attorney's office."
"Do you expect any prosecutions... and, if so, who would be the
targets?"
"It would be improper for me to speculate," Ellis replied calmly, "but
I certainly expect the State Attorney's office to do its duty."
The next day the major newspapers were awash in material about the
press conference. Front page headline in the Miami News boomed:
MASSIVE VOTE FRAUD CHARGED IN DADE ELECTIONS
That afternoon Rubin went with Ken to the office of Janet Reno, the
tall, rawboned daughter of big, rawboned Hank Reno, the best police
reporter in Miami, bar none. Janet Reno was an assistant State
Attorney.
Rubin intended to ask Reno to accept the blank-backed canvass sheets,
make a full investigation and go to the grand jury to have them indict
somebody for tampering with the 1972 election. Ken and Rubin signed a
waiver of immunity in order to make a statement about vote fraud for
the record. The waiver meant they were entirely responsible for their
testimony, even if it meant a lot of personal trouble. If they hadn't
signed the waiver it would have looked suspicious.
The press was waiting by the score outside Reno's office.
We were sure that Rubin would come out and announce that Reno was going
to take the evidence to the grand jury, or appoint a special prosecutor.
Instead, when Rubin finally emerged from behind the closed doors of
that inner sanctum, he was literally ashen-faced, downcast, and
crestfallen all in one. We had never seen him like this.
The lights and cameras all came on.
Rubin walked to the bank of microphones. "Miss Reno has asked me to
inform you that she has examined the evidence and as far as any
prosecutions are concerned, the statute of limitations has expired."
With that barebones statement still hanging in the air, Rubin bolted to
a nearby escalator and charged down its stairs to avoid any questions
from the press, or from us.
We didn't let it go at that.
In the extreme tension of the moment we saw four years of research
trashed by Reno. We took the stairs three at a time and chased our
former paladin out of the Metro Justice Building. We caught up with him
just as his antique red convertible was pulling away from the curb.
Ken jumped on the running board and leaned over. He looked into Rubin's
eyes for a split second. Then he jumped off as Rubin gunned the motor
and sped away.
"What did he say?" Jim asked.
"Nothing, he just stared straight ahead."
"What was his expression?"
"Fear."
"No." Jim was dumbfounded. "Not Ellis Rubin... lawyer for the Watergate
burglars... the man who visits Richard Nixon at his home... asshole
buddies with the CIA and the FBI and and Naval Intelligence and
probably the Mossad! So what the hell could Janet Reno have said to
scare him?"
We wouldn't know that answer until we met up with him in the future,
eight years later.
* Within a month of Fonzi's article appearing in Miami Magazine, Miami
News editor, Sylvan Meyer, purchased that magazine and permanently
stopped any followup articles from being written on the Votescam story.
http://www.votescam.com/frame.html
Chive Mynde
As of this writing, Votescam is entering its third printing.
Since its publication eight years ago, the major bookstores have
banned its display, it has been removed from the index of the Library
of Congress, and falsely rumored to be out of print. What Votescam has
not been is refuted, discredited, or for that matter, denied. In fact,
it has been read by well over 30,000 people who continue to circulate
the book by word of mouth. It is, without a doubt, one of the most
dangerous and important books still in circulation in America.
As usual, the silence on the part of the accused is deafening. To
ignore this book is their only line of defense, and an effective one at
that, when coupled with a total Media blackout. For the record, there
has also been no Federal investigation into the charges of vote fraud
brought forth in Votescam, or into the evidence of vote fraud currently
being compiled by citizens.
But after you read "Votescam," this will not surprise you.
My father, James Collier, and my uncle, Kenneth Collier, were
America's lead investigators into vote fraud for twenty five years. No
longer. They have both died, leaving all of us with the legacy of this
book, and the questions raised by their unfinished investigation.
Most Americans are at least partially aware of the myriad of ways
our elections system is currently corrupted; from the obvious
inequities of campaign financing, to jerrymandering, minority
intimidation at the polls, absentee ballot fraud and the numerous twist
and turns on the path where a ballot can be ambushed in secret. And
certainly none of us are blind to the spectacle of bald-faced election-
year lying, now standard strategy for the successful Establishment
politician. It seems that nothing has rendered the competition for
public office more meaningless than the candidates themselves.
The tawdry parade of an American election is fast becoming
tiresome to most of us, with its worn-out floats, plastic candidates,
and hollow patriotism. But we follow it anyway, because its the only
parade in town which ends at the threshold of the voting booth.
The fact that we can do this one thing--cast a vote--is, for better
or worse, what keeps this entire country from exploding into chaos.
This single act defines our politics, whether we show up to do it or
not, and many of us don't anymore. Just the fact that it is allowed,
even encouraged, is enough to soothe us, assuage us, and convince us
that indeed this is a Democracy. It also assures us that all mistakes
made in Washington are really our own, and can be traced back to We the
People. That keeps the brewing frustration and anger safely on the
streets and in the homes, where the government wants it.
But of course, this is not a Democracy. And we know that, even if
some of us only sense it intuitively. When we rest our eyes upon
Washington, we all feel a little sick. We all feel the need to turn
away. It's why so many of us don't vote anymore, even though they're
begging us to. We might not know why, exactly, but we feel that it just
doesn't matter whether we vote or not. And of course, this is true.
Let's take a lesson from Stalin who said, "Those who cast the vote
decide nothing, those who count the vote decide everything." Who counts
your vote?
Democrat, Republican, Third Party, Green Party--it doesn't matter.
Once the vote is cast, it is delivered, untraceable, into the hands of
the faceless corporations running America's complex political machine.
Whatever corruption takes place after that is better concealed than the
voters themselves behind their curtains.
The questions that Votescam asks begin there.
Why was control of the national American vote abdicated by the
Senate and secretly transferred to a little known private company? Why
are American citizens denied key information on how their vote is
counted? Is there an answer that might absolve of wrongdoing all who
have played a part in this transfer of power? Or is Votescam's premise
really true, and the entire electoral process in this country is no
more than a charade, a tired script written and performed only by
people with varying levels of criminal complicity?
We can assume that not every person involved in politics,
especially at the lower levels, understands the extent to which our
vote is corrupted. The mechanics of the electoral process differ from
state to state and often appear to be deliberately confusing. Many of
the people employed by the system are likely ignorant as to how it's
supposed to work, let alone how it's manipulated, and by whom.
But, as Votescam illustrates, complicity can be found in unlikely
places. The villains are not always lurking in the alley, often they're
smiling at you from a respectable desk. Nor is complicity always
sinister. It doesn't take a psychologist to understand how easy it is
to motivate someone to rig a high-stake game, given the opportunity.
Especially if they've convinced themselves it's in everyone's best
interest. Particularly their own.
So, the significant question remains: Who knows what, and when did
they know it? Who exactly , within the vast elections complex, are the
culpable individuals? Who can explain what has been done to our system?
Who must be brought to justice?
As Jim and Ken discovered, we can count on the Establishment
Media to never, ever ask those questions.
That leaves it up to us, the tax paying citizens of America. Who
among us will do it? Who is courageous enough? Who cares enough? Whose
sense of justice is so deeply ingrained that they won't hesitate to
stand up and demand honesty from their own government, their own people?
It's not so easy. We're tired, we're busy, and we're scared. We're
afraid of our government. We feel powerless, and with good reason. But
most of all, we don't want to be called crazy.
Jim and Ken weren't immune to any of this. They were scared, and
they were vilified, and sometimes they lost hope. And sometimes they
lost more than that.
In 1988 Ken was already nearly paralyzed with cancer. His wife had
left him, taken their daughter, and moved to Australia to escape the
trauma and danger of his political crusade. But the crusade had reaped
no rewards. The vote fraud investigation had led him only deeper into
Washington's dark labyrinth, a lonely, thankless journey, apparently
leading nowhere.
He had already lost his family to his cause, and it looked like the
cause was lost, too. Dozens of boxes filled his room. They were stuffed
full of government files, bureaucratic memo's, court documents,
newspaper articles--twenty years worth of investigation, desperation,
and betrayal--all he and Jim had left.
Ken was deep in depression, and he knew he was dying. Often it was
hard to tell if he was paralyzed by the disease or the despair. It was
a deep, black pit.
Jim nursed him, swearing to him that it wasn't over. There was
still one more move to make--the book, Votescam, had to be written. Jim
stared deep into his brothers eyes and warned him, with no mercy, that
unless he completed this one final task, he would die with nothing. He
would never be vindicated in this life. The investigation, the
sacrifices, the past twenty years, would amount to a total loss, and
the boys in the White House wouldn't even bother to laugh last.
Jim wanted to write the book. For him, the fight wasn't over, and
Votescam was his only move. But he knew that without Ken's great
talent, his fine literary mind, his poetry, Votescam would read like an
FBI file. He also hoped that writing the book would fuel Ken's fire,
lift him out of the pit, keep him alive. And it did.
Ken knew that Jim was right. There had to be a testament, the story
of their investigation had to be told. He was no fool, he knew nobody
with anything to lose would ever publish it. But he also knew that the
power of a book, once unleashed, had a life of it's own. Whether
Votescam would become the catalyst of revolution and change the course
of history, or fall through the cracks and disappear, was a matter of
destiny. Who reads the book, when, and why, would inevitably decide its
course. It might sweep through the political world immediately, like a
sudden wild fire. Or it might lie dormant for years, only to be taken
up as a sword by a new generation of furious, disenfranchised
Americans.
He could not control that game of chance, he could only get it
started. But first, they had to sort through all of those boxes.
Ken died in 1990, leaving Jim with a 500 page rough draft of a
story probably nobody would ever believe, and without a partner for the
first time in over 40 years.
I was with Jim when he got the news. We were sitting in a Chinese
restaurant on the west side of New York City. I was 14 years old, I had
never been to New York, and I was wide-eyed, my nose pressed to the
plate glass window. I turned to Jim and was shocked to see him sitting
quietly and calm, as he usually did, but with tears rolling down his
face. He never cried.
That was our first day in New York. We had just pulled into town,
after driving cross-country from California for fifteen days. He had
called Ken to tell him we made it, but Ken was gone.
Votescam was born in a little apartment on the 37th floor of a
skyscraper in Manhattan, with a view of the World Trade Center, the
Harbor and the Statue of Liberty. Jim and my mother, Phylis, struggled
to edit Ken's manuscript, working long hours into the night, writing,
arguing, rewriting. In the end, the decision was made to write the
whole story, including their personal lives, which Jim understood was a
risk considering how radical he and Ken had been during those years.
Their presence in the book drove the story forward and added a personal
dimension that is not only entertaining, but warranted.
Jim was proud of the book. He and Phylis created Victoria House
Press to publish it, and watched triumphantly as it was accepted into
the major chain bookstores, all the newspaper and magazine stands in
New York City, and Trovers bookstore in Washington D.C. where, along
with Barnes and Noble in NYC's East Village, it was given a window
display. Then, when word reached the higher levels of authority that
Votescam was on the stands, Jim and Phylis watched as their book
suddenly disappeared--off the shelf, out of the window. Gone.
Well, Jim hadn't come this far for nothing. Victoria House Press
continued to make Votescam available, and America's alternative media
advertised it. In that way, the word spread. For six years Jim manned
the talk radio lines and navigated speaking tours across the country,
sometimes meeting in the homes of working-class activists who had
gathered in the traditional "grange" fashion to discuss what to do
about their besieged democracy.
Votescam's readers have been for the most part educated, hard-
working, blue and white-collar, patriotic Americans--angry members of a
dwindling class of people who still believe in the Constitution, salute
the flag, and haven't forgotten that eternal vigilance is the price of
liberty. But working is the price of living, and they don't have much
time left to start a revolution. They looked to Jim for that.
Jim decided to start the revolution where the story began. In 1998
he moved back to Miami, the home of his nemesis Janet Reno who had him
arrested all those years before. Much to the excitement of local
activists, he had resurrected the well-known newspaper the Miami News
and planned to use it as a weapon against infamous Miami corruption.
It's likely that this kind of bold attack right in the belly of the
beast would have gotten him into more danger than he had been in yet.
His two front page stories were devastating political timebombs, with a
wealth of insider information.
But the newspaper never hit the stands. Jim fell suddenly ill,
days before going to print. Unable to eat, rushed to the hospital, he
was operated on and diagnosed with advanced, incurable, pancreatic
cancer.
Jim was a blackbelt and a master chess player, he never backed down
from a challenge. But this particular opponent was fast and furious,
took all the low shots, and was always one move ahead. Jim couldn't
beat it. After five months, he bowed out of the ring, and went to meet
up again with Ken. And, as they said in Votescam, that was that.
Or so I thought.
Suddenly our phone was ringing, and continued to ring as the news
of his death spread. I didn't know it, but to many people, Jim was more
than just a knowledgeable investigator. He was a hero.
I hadn't expected to find myself comforting strangers over the
telephone. I knew how difficult the years of investigation had been,
and the vilification he had faced every step of the way, but I didn't
know my father had been so respected for his work, how deeply he had
impressed so many by endangering himself to expose the truth. It was
never anything extraordinary for him. Like all dedicated activists, his
sense of justice came naturally, he defended it without hesitation.
I was touched, and moved deeply by the phone calls. I had been
mourning Jim as my father for so long, I had forgotten his other role
in the world. In fact, I had been caring for Jim for all those months
and I had forgotten the world altogether. But the world was about to
make a come-back.
Two months after he died, our phone began to ring again, this time
with anxious, ecstatic citizens searching for Jim, asking if he had
seen the ABC Web-site. Apparently ABC had posted the results of the off-
year election on their Homepage-- the day before the election.
It was like that wild-fire Ken had dreamed of. The people were
furious. Was the work of a whistle-blower? Talk-show telephones were
ringing, the Internet was besieged with demands for an explanation.
Finally, Sam Donaldson announced he would be presiding over a live chat
that evening to discuss what ABC was already calling a definite mistake.
I was in the chat room that night as Donaldson explained that the
page of posted results was a sample page, just to see how the vote
results would look on their Website the next day. Got that?
The people were incredulous, and I immediately began inserting
information about Votescam, but my comments were soon censored. I
couldn't get one word on that screen. In short order, Donaldson
directed the conversation neatly away from the matter at hand and onto
the election in general.
Citizens who kept track of ABC's "test" results and compared them
with the next day's "real" results, reported that ABC had called each
race perfectly, over 90% of the time. Some of the numbers, of course,
they had changed, for appearances.
And that was that.
Jim and Ken were not the first to discover an important fact,
namely that Democracy in America works fine, as long as you don't
challenge the status quo. American citizens are free to vote in an
election, as long as they don't demand to know how their vote is
counted, or whether it serves as anything beside demographics for the
people who are already in power.
My father and uncle joined the long list of Americans who have
encountered, in various forms, the entrenched nature of our power
structure. The System, as we call it. This System is more than willing
to persecute its own citizens if necessary, to kill them when there is
no other choice, or when it simply needs to get the message across
clearly: The People are not in control.
But let's be honest with ourselves, it has always been this way!
Things aren't really getting worse, Democracy is not dead by any means.
It has simply never existed in this country. The only thing that has
existed is our right to demand it, to fight for it, to die for it, to
protect the ideal. That we believe it is a guarantee is already our
biggest mistake. We are raising a whole new generation of Americans who
believe a lie. Will they know how to stand up for the truth when the
time comes?
More than ever before, we are in the position to fulfill the real
American dream--not the consumer nightmare that we're being sold now,
but the dream of a rich and free country of healthy and educated people
living in peace, with each other and the land. People who elect their
leaders thoughtfully, and remove them promptly when they fail them.
Simple? Yes. Impossible? Right now. But we can change that. First
we need to be educated, then we need to continue asking questions and
demanding answers. We absolutely cannot be afraid to expose the truth.
Ibis
It wouldn't be hard to run things better then they.
Ibis
Bear Bottoms
and brother-in-law. See what Russell Welch has to say about
Terry Reed and testimony from all of the proven top level
players in the Seal arena at my website:
http://www.sit-rep.com/BearBottoms.htm
Bear Bottoms
and brother-in-law. See what Russell Welch has to say about
Terry Reed and testimony from all of the proven top level
players in the Seal arena at my website:
http://www.sit-rep.com/BearBottoms.htm
DocZhivago
this one Bird Tribe. The ideas are more important than the individuals.
It's a good thing when you can over look Chive's personality quirks to
recognize that his documentation (in this instance) is worth taking
seriously. For my part, I wouldn't even have noticed this Phil Hayes guy,
if you hadn't made an issue of him. But for the record, I think you called
this one right. I'd be careful of getting in bed with Chive though.....
BirdTribe <bt20...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3A0CD18B...@mindspring.com...
> no hidden fees - http://www.mosthost.net
BirdTribe
DocZhivago wrote:
>
> I consider Chive to be a "Torquemada".... a tyrant.
Chive frequently simply copies and pastes. Frankly if he had not put up
the paragraphs I would not have read the stuff but the first paragraph
or two caught my eye..
> Yet I agree with you on
> this one Bird Tribe. The ideas are more important than the individuals.
> It's a good thing when you can over look Chive's personality quirks to
> recognize that his documentation (in this instance) is worth taking
> seriously.
I hope people can do the same for me.. I have personality quirks too..
You didn't notice?
> For my part, I wouldn't even have noticed this Phil Hayes guy,
> if you hadn't made an issue of him. But for the record, I think you called
> this one right. I'd be careful of getting in bed with Chive though.....
I am in bed with the Universe..It knows HOW to make love..
Yer Pal
BirdTribe
Phil Hays
> If you REALLY wanted to save bandwidth you would not have even posted
> a second post to the thread.
Good point. This will be my last post on this subject.
--
Phil Hays
Lorrill Buyens
On Fri, 10 Nov 2000 23:56:46 -0500, BirdTribe
<bt20...@mindspring.com> died and went to heaven, and on their
tombstone was carved:
>I don't give a fuck about your supposed title. I know this.. If you
>REALLY wanted to save bandwidth you would not have even posted a second
>post to the thread.
Phil was apparently attempting to convince the moron Chivey to
use pointers to things instead of wasting bandwidth with off-topic,
multigroup articles hundreds of lines in length - a lost cause, IMO,
but a noble one.
>Considering the sensitive nature of the information
>you attempted to delete and paint as ramblings at this time I would
>definitely say that you have an agenda beyond what you claim to have.
Asking someone to post a pointer instead of the *whole fucking
article* != deletion in any universe but yours, Nipplechips...
>back into the shadows.. I frankly, as a Wiccan, Pagan and child of The
>Universe am getting fed up of you clowns playing mind games on the net..
As a Wiccan and a skeptic, I'm getting fed up with your "conspiracy
theory" bullshit. And your top-posting.
>Phil Hays wrote:
>> BirdTribe wrote:
>>
>> > Are you a paid disinformation agent Phil?
>>
>> Perhaps you should look at:
>>
>> http://www.deja.com/qs.xp?QRY=spampostmaster%40sprynet.com&OP=dnquery.xp
>>
>> And decide for yourself.
>>
>> Of course, if I was Chive, I might have reposted everything in dejanews's
>> archive.
--
| Doctor Fraud |Always believe six|
|Mad Inventor & Purveyor of Pseudopsychology |impossible things |
| Weird Science at Bargain Rates |before breakfast. |
Support the Jayne Hitchcock HELP Fund
http://www.geocities.com/hollywood/6172/helpjane.htm