Thursday February 22, 2018
News Feeds:

Allegations regarding "Butch" Merritt, Watergate, Intelligence Agencies and "Crimson Rose, " Vol. VII

By Kris Millegan

The Dynamics of Sophistication – Part Two

Lord, you know, everybody they tells me
That somebody done hoodooed the hoodoo man.
                                        — Junior Wells


I’d like to state some reasons why Watergate and all of this is relevant for today, call your attention to a recent interview by “Butch” Merritt, and wet our feet in the psy-op puddle.

First off, the “manipulations” are still going on today. And second, the operation against Nixon greatly affected the abilities of the Office of the President of the United States to govern and lead. The President may live in the White House, but other forces call the tune, making our republic a sham, and future liberties questionable.





“Butch” Merritt was interviewed by Eben Rey on KPFK, early in the morning on Thursday, March 17, 2011. The interview can be heard at  …contained within the show “Something’s Happening with Roy of Hollywood,” Part B.

During the interview, Butch makes some interesting new revelations, and as with all information, these must be weighed and tested. Butch implored listeners to investigate his information themselves, giving all the personal information needed for anyone to implement a FOIA request and get his files.

The most amazing, I thought, were about the instructions he states he received through "cointelpro" (if this was the official FBI or some other counter-intelligence operation is unknown): He was directed by Carl Shoffler to reveal himself as an informant in 1973, and then to continue his role as an informant/disrupter.

Butch said that once he “came out” his targets trusted him more than before, and he was able to get better information for his handlers. This calls into question the roles being played within Merritt’s orbit. Making our story even murkier.


To help understand some basic “ground rules,” an abridgment of the Cointelpro article from Wiki:


COINTELPRO began in 1956 and was designed to "increase factionalism, cause disruption and win defections" inside the Communist Party U.S.A. (CPUSA).


The program was successfully kept secret until 1971… A major investigation was launched in 1976 by the Select Committee to Study Governmental Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities of the United States Senate, commonly referred to as the "Church Committee" for its chairman, Senator Frank Church of Idaho. However, millions of pages of documents remain unreleased, and many released documents have been partly, or entirely, redacted.

In the Final Report of the Select Committee, COINTELPRO was castigated in no uncertain terms:

Many of the techniques used would be intolerable in a democratic society even if all of the targets had been involved in violent activity, but COINTELPRO went far beyond that...the Bureau conducted a sophisticated vigilante operation aimed squarely at preventing the exercise of First Amendment rights of speech and association, on the theory that preventing the growth of dangerous groups and the propagation of dangerous ideas would protect the national security and deter violence.

The Church Committee documented a history of use of the agency for purposes of political repression as far back as World War I, through the 1920s, when agents were charged with rounding up "anarchists and revolutionaries" for deportation, and then building from 1936 through 1976.

The FBI claims that it no longer undertakes COINTELPRO or COINTELPRO-like operations.


According to attorney Brian Glick in his book War at Home, the FBI used four main methods during COINTELPRO:

  1. Infiltration: Agents and informers did not merely spy on political activists. Their main purpose was to discredit and disrupt. Their very presence served to undermine trust and scare off potential supporters. The FBI and police exploited this fear to smear genuine activists as agents.
  2. Psychological Warfare From the Outside: The FBI and police used a myriad of other "dirty tricks" to undermine progressive movements. They planted false media stories and published bogus leaflets and other publications in the name of targeted groups. They forged correspondence, sent anonymous letters, and made anonymous telephone calls. They spread misinformation about meetings and events, set up pseudo movement groups run by government agents, and manipulated or strong-armed parents, employers, landlords, school officials and others to cause trouble for activists.
  3. Harassment Through the Legal System: The FBI and police abused the legal system to harass dissidents and make them appear to be criminals. Officers of the law gave perjured testimony and presented fabricated evidence as a pretext for false arrests and wrongful imprisonment. They discriminatorily enforced tax laws and other government regulations and used conspicuous surveillance, "investigative" interviews, and grand jury subpoenas in an effort to intimidate activists and silence their supporters.
  4. Extralegal Force and Violence: The FBI conspired with local police departments to threaten dissidents; to conduct illegal break-ins in order to search dissident homes; and to commit vandalism, assaults, beatings and assassinations.The object was to frighten, or eliminate, dissidents and disrupt their movements.

The FBI specifically developed tactics intended to heighten tension and hostility between various factions …

The FBI also conspired with the police departments of many U.S. cities (San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, Philadelphia, Chicago.

Hoover ordered preemptive action "to pinpoint potential troublemakers and neutralize them before they exercise their potential for violence."

Illegal surveillance

The final report of the Church Committee concluded:

Too many people have been spied upon by too many Government agencies and too much information has been collected. The Government has often undertaken the secret surveillance of citizens on the basis of their political beliefs, even when those beliefs posed no threat of violence or illegal acts on behalf of a hostile foreign power. The Government, operating primarily through secret informants, but also using other intrusive techniques such as wiretaps, microphone "bugs", surreptitious mail opening, and break-ins, has swept in vast amounts of information about the personal lives, views, and associations of American citizens. Investigations of groups deemed potentially dangerous -- and even of groups suspected of associating with potentially dangerous organizations -- have continued for decades, despite the fact that those groups did not engage in unlawful activity.

Groups and individuals have been harassed and disrupted because of their political views and their lifestyles. Investigations have been based upon vague standards whose breadth made excessive collection inevitable. Unsavory and vicious tactics have been employed -- including anonymous attempts to break up marriages, disrupt meetings, ostracize persons from their professions, and provoke target groups into rivalries that might result in deaths. Intelligence agencies have served the political and personal objectives of presidents and other high officials. While the agencies often committed excesses in response to pressure from high officials in the Executive branch and Congress, they also occasionally initiated improper activities and then concealed them from officials whom they had a duty to inform.

Governmental officials -- including those whose principal duty is to enforce the law --have violated or ignored the law over long periods of time and have advocated and defended their right to break the law.

The Constitutional system of checks and balances has not adequately controlled intelligence activities. Until recently the Executive branch has neither delineated the scope of permissible activities nor established procedures for supervising intelligence agencies. Congress has failed to exercise sufficient oversight, seldom questioning the use to which its appropriations were being put. Most domestic intelligence issues have not reached the courts, and in those cases when they have reached the courts, the judiciary has been reluctant to grapple with them.

COINTELPRO tactics continue

While COINTELPRO was officially terminated in April 1971, continuing FBI actions indicate that post-COINTELPRO reforms did not succeed in ending COINTELPRO tactics.

The FBI improperly opened investigations of American activist groups, even though they were planning nothing more than peaceful civil disobedience, according to a report by the inspector general (IG) of the U.S. Department of Justice.

…authors note that while some conspiracy theories related to COINTELPRO are unfounded, the issue of ongoing government surveillance and repression is nonetheless real


An abridgment of the psychological warfare article from Wiki:

Psychological warfare (PSYWAR), or the basic aspects of modern psychological operations (PSYOP), have been known by many other names or terms, including Psy Ops, Political Warfare, “Hearts and Minds,” and Propaganda.[1] Various techniques are used, by any set of groups, and aimed to influence a target audience's value systems, belief systems, emotions, motives, reasoning, or behavior. It is used to induce confessions or reinforce attitudes and behaviors favorable to the originator's objectives, and are sometimes combined with black operations or false flag tactics. Target audiences can be governments, organizations, groups, and individuals.

The U.S. Department of Defense defines psychological warfare as:

"The planned use of propaganda and other psychological actions having the primary purpose of influencing the opinions, emotions, attitudes, and behavior of hostile foreign groups in such a way as to support the achievement of national objectives."

During World War II the United States Joint Chiefs of Staff defined psychological warfare more broadly stating "Psychological warfare employs any weapon to influence the mind of the enemy. The weapons are psychological only in the effect they produce and not because of the weapons themselves."

United States

See also Psychological Operations (United States) 

The purpose of United States psychological operations is to induce or reinforce attitudes and behaviors favorable to US objectives. The Special Activities Division (SAD) is a division of the Central Intelligence Agency's National Clandestine Service, responsible for Covert Action and "Special Activities". These special activities include covert political influence (which includes psychological operations) and paramilitary operations. SAD's political influence group is the only US unit allowed to conduct these operations covertly and is considered the primary unit in this area.

Dedicated psychological operations units exist in the United States Army. The United States Navy also plans and executes limited PSYOP missions. United States PSYOP units and soldiers of all branches of the military are prohibited by law from targeting U.S. citizens with PSYOP within the borders of the United States(Executive Order S-1233, DOD Directive S-3321.1, and National Security Decision Directive 130.) While United States Army PSYOP units may offer non-PSYOP support to domestic military missions, they can only target foreign audiences. During the Waco Siege, the FBI and BATF conducted psychological operations on the men, women and children inside the Mount Carmel complex. This included using loudspeakers to play sounds of animals being slaughtered, drilling noises and clips from talk shows about how much their leader David Koresh was hated. In addition, very bright, flashing lights were used at night.

The United States ran an extensive program of psychological warfare during the Vietnam War. The Phoenix Program had the dual aim of assassinating Viet Cong personnel and terrorizing any potential sympathizers or passive supporters.

When members of the VCI were assassinated, CIA and Special Forces operatives placed playing cards in the mouth of the deceased as a calling card. During the Phoenix Program, over 19,000 Viet Cong supporters were killed.

Categories of psychological warfare

In his book Daniel Lerner divides psychological warfare operations into three categories:

White [Omissions + Emphasis]

Truthful and not strongly biased, where the source of information is acknowledged.

Grey [Omissions + Emphasis + Racial/Ethnic/Religious Bias]

Largely truthful, containing no information that can be proven wrong; the source may or may not be hidden.

Black [Commissions of falsification]

Intended to deceive the enemy.

Mr. Lerner points out that grey and black operations ultimately have a heavy cost, in that the target population sooner or later recognizes them as propaganda and discredits the source. He writes, "This is one of the few dogmas advanced by Sykewarriors that is likely to endure as an axiom of propaganda: Credibility is a condition of persuasion. Before you can make a man do as you say, you must make him believe what you say."

Some history from pre-WWII Europe illustrating the use and effect of psy-ops. From Edmond Tayler’s 1940 book, The Strategy of Terror:

One carried the banner "Democracy," the other "Occidental Civilization." Fundamentally there was no conflict between the two slogans, since neither meant anything concrete. Each one, however, served as the common bond between a number of discordant faiths polarized by the two extreme sects, Communists and Fascists, which it turned out later cared nothing respectively for either democracy or occidental civilization. The dividing line between the two religious groups was the civil war in Spain, and to a lesser degree the late Popular Front regime in France.

This was converted by rival propagandas into a symbolic class struggle, rendered acute by the economic situation in the world. The general decadence of social institutions had become by the spring of 1938 very real and passionate to nearly everyone in Europe who took any interest at all in politics, and to many even who did not. It had reached the stage of intensity where neutrality becomes almost impossible. No matter what particular sect you belonged to, you were dragged into one camp or the other and found yourself sharing enthusiasms and prejudices with men who really were more alien to you than most of the enemy. If you were a self-conscious democrat you became automatically a supporter of the Spanish loyalists and an apologist of communism. If you were a Swiss banker in Basel or an Irish policeman in New York, you became just as automatically a supporter of Franco, an apologist of Naziism and fascism, and if not an anti-Semite at least an apologist of anti-Semitism.

Some day, no doubt, it will be brought to light that propagandists in Moscow and Berlin spent millions of dollars and thousands of kilowatts of psychic energy nourishing this religious controversy for very old-fashioned ends. In fact abundant and precise evidence already exists. However, this is of secondary interest. Once the conflict broke out – and it was determined by forces much deeper than German or Russian propaganda – it did not require great skill or occult devices to exploit it for propaganda purposes. It sufficed for Russia and Germany to pose as champions of rival causes, more noisily than any other champions, to acquire automatically the sympathies and gain control in a degree over the consciences of all attached to those causes. The rest follows according to a basic law of psychology, whereby whenever a representation acquires a sufficient affective charge it charges all the representations associated with it, creating a vast complex. The more powerful the emotion, the wider the ring of associations included in the complex. In 1918 in America hatred of Germany became so strong that sauerkraut had to be called liberty cabbage before it could be eaten. In 1938 hatred of communism became so strong that it begot anti-Semitism because anti-Semitism was associated through Hitler with anti-communism. It did not require great talent or effort to convince an anti-Communist that Jews were allies of Communists. In an emotional situation of this sort propaganda becomes childishly easy. For one thing, you can find honest people who will take money from you to make propaganda for you when their ideal is the same as yours. They do not consider they are being bought in such circumstances. Usually they do not have to be paid. They will spread your propaganda because they believe it to be news or truth. Patriots will attack their own government because they think the foreign government which is not an enemy to them has the true interests of the patriots' land more at heart than their own government, or simply, in their excitement, forget that the slogans have a foreign source.

This may seem exaggerated, but it is exactly what happened in Europe in 1938…

[emphasis added]

Next: Nixon on Drugs


to be continued …


Written by Kris Millegan   

Allegations regarding "Butch" Merritt, Watergate, Intelligence Agencies and "Crimson Rose, " Vol. VI

By Kris Millegan

The Third Rail – Part Three

In the statist world in which we live, there is a very real tendency to accept as fact all that the official organs of propaganda emit.
                       — Alan Milchman



My father, Lloyd S. Millegan, was associated with American intelligence gathering operations from 1936 until he left the CIA in 1959.


On his 18th birthday, in August of 1936 he boarded a ship from Portland, Oregon to spend his sophomore year of college at the University of Shanghai. In August of 1937, he left Shanghai traveling to Vladiviostok to board the Tran-Siberian Railway and journey across the USSR, and Europe, eventually attending the 1937 Oxford Life and Work Conference, along with John Foster Dulles, before going back to Oregon to finish school.

After college, my father was scheduled for graduate studies in 1939 in Switzerland, but finances and the kindling of WWII, sent him instead to Washington, DC. He was soon working in the basement of the Library of Congress under Archibald MacLeish, first as a research analyst for the Library of Congress, then with the Office of the Coordinator of Information, and finally moving on to the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in mid 1942.


Then in August of 1943, my father became involved in what Professor Peter Dale Scott calls “deep politics.” Dad was inducted into the military, given the shortest training available, as a medic, but placed into G-2, and then joined General MacArthur's staff as the personal secretary to Dr. Joseph Hayden, who was MacArthur's Civil Advisor on Philippine Affairs. Part of my father's work was to report back to OSS in Washington about MacArthur and his aide Colonel Willoughby.

Among my father's other duties was working with the Philippine guerrillas. After Dr. Hayden died, my father worked even closer with guerillas. He went into Manila ahead of the American troops to “sequester” the Japanese-puppet governments papers. For that act he was sued by the Japanese government and given the Legion of Merit by the US Army. He had became very friendly with the guerrillas and helped them set up a temporary government. When MacArthur returned, he found that many of the native Filipino oligarchs (who were his friends) had collaborated with the Japanese and been jailed by the guerrillas, who had actually fought the Japanese. MacArthur proceeded to let his friends out of jail, and soon someone came to replace my father, a Lieutenant Ed Lansdale. My father moved on to do research and analysis for the invasion of Japan, and then his final job in the military was to gather information and write a report on the Japanese use of opium and narcotics before and during WWII. This was a months-long project that including traveling and interviewing many political figures as well as the major opium players in East Asia.

My father then came back to Washington, DC, first to work in the State Department and then the Central Intelligence Agency, where he worked overtly until April of 1951, his last position, serving as Branch Chief, Head of East Asia Analysis Office. He then went into “private business,” setting up Pacific Books, Inc., and taking our whole family with him to Indonesia. After about a year we were back in Fairfax, Virginia, outside DC, where my father “worked” in public relations and advertising sales.

The Millegans 1951 passport picture, I'm the toddler.

Then in 1956, my father and mother took a 4-month long trip to East Asia. Us kids were told it was to gather information for a book. He never wrote the book. Late in 1957, he was asked to serve as the vice-president of Scarritt College in Nashville, Tennessee. Then, all of a sudden, in 1959, the president of the school quit, my father was asked to serve as president, he said no, and moved the whole family out to Oregon. He went back to college (as a student), but was soon teaching in a junior high school to earn income. I was ten years old, a kid just following his folks around.

Then in the late 1960's my father asked me what I thought of the Vietnam War, and I gave him a flip teen-age answer, “You have some rice paddies, and a sack of hand grenades. You throw the grenades and win the war for the guys in the white hats.” My father said we had to have a talk. Sometime later, in September of 1969, he said it was time to have that talk. By then I was married, had a young daughter, was a partner in a growing record store, and sponsoring rock and roll dances. On Sept, 21, 1969, the day before my 20th birthday, we had that talk.

It was amazing, even though, I had no idea what was being said. My father seemingly had waited until a friend of his,  Dr. DF Flemming (who was out promoting his new book, The Cold War and its Origins) was in town to participate. My father straight off told me, “The VietNam war is about drugs,” and that there were secret societies involved. I didn't understand, and since it was the late 1960s, and I had long hair, etc. I deduced my father was having a “drug talk” with me. It all seemed so serious, what with some professor and all. So, I proceeded to sit up straight, and got ready to say, “yes, sir,: and was waiting for my dad to tell me not to smoke dope, etc. But that is not what happened. My father continued talking about his intelligence career. He explained, how he had first been debriefed by the State Department, when he was an exchange student, then his service in the OSS, being “sheep-dipped” into G2, and being put on MacArthur's staff. They also talked a bunch about the Viet Nam war. They both felt that “they” (the powers that be) were playing out a “lose scenario,” because of the US actions taken so far. They talked about psychological warfare, about how the news wasn't the real news. That the stuff in the news was “sway pieces,” and that when I had been told he was an advertising/PR salesman, my dad was actually helping to put together a daily high-level briefing. That he had left the CIA in 1959, and was talking to me now because of some paper he had signed, that didn't allow he to reveal anything for ten years.

It soon became apparent that I had no frame of reference, and wasn't truly able to comprehend what they were saying. The meeting was over, and I went on with my life. I had some other conversations, and arguments with my Dad where I learned other things, but one of the most amazing came after he was gone. For even though I hadn't understood the talk, it had inspired me to investigate “CIA-Drugs.”

Going through my father's papers after his death in 1990, I found an itinerary for the 1956 trip and noticed that he had traveled to Chang Mai, Thailand. At that time I was very interested in the history of Chang Mai, because of the role the city has played in the opium/heroin trade. I had been told that the city had grown to a million people from a very small town in the 1950s, and was looking for information. Now, I could simply ask my mother.

So the next time I visited my Mother, I asked her about Chang Mai. She said that, “Yes, it was a small village. The biggest thing in town was the church.” She said she had some pictures in a book up on her bookshelf. I reached up to get the photograph album, and mom made a little aside, “That's when I stopped believing everything I read in the newspaper.”

That pricked up my ears, because I had asked my mother questions before, and she always just brushed them aside, saying she didn't know anything. So, I asked my mom, what did she mean? She said that in 1956 they had been in Vietnam before going to Thailand, and while in Thailand the newspaper reported on a battle in Viet Nam, right where they had been. She said, “There was no battle, we were having a picnic.” I turned back the pages of her photo book from Chang Mai, and there were pictures of my parents, Ed Lansdale and a bunch of soldiers. They were obviously having a picnic.

I borrowed the photo book and photocopied the page. One was a picture of my mother where she was so radiant and vivacious that it was later used during her memorial. Also in that picture you can see Ed Lansdale and others sitting around having a good time – a picnic. The interesting item, is what my mother had written in the margin next to the picture: “Eudora (my mother's name) out from Saigon with Col. Lansdale and North Vietnamese Military leaders.”

North Vietnamese Military leaders? Having a picnic?


Lansdale is the guy sitting with the flattop. And it is in the historical record that he fought fake battles in the Philippines. Could it be that he did something similar in Vietnam? (Fletcher Prouty's JFK: The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy has some amazing revelations about Lansdale's mock and fake battles) What else was going on in Viet Nam at that time?

From Gerald Posner's in Warlord's of Crime:

French intelligence and the CIA became involved in clandestine activities that would seem farfetched in a spy novel but that played a major role in making the Triads and the Golden Triangle the . greatest factors in the narcotics business. French intelligence dealt in narcotics to bankroll their costly war against Ho Chi Minh. The CIA, obsessed with the perceived cold war threat of monolithic communism, assisted criminal empires on the assumption that they would provide a buffer to postwar Communist expansion. The policies of these intelligence agencies transformed the region into the leading heroin-producing and -smuggling center. The French led the way.

When the French government finally banned opium in Indochina, French intelligence (SDECE) took the trade underground. The French military had decided the best way to fight the North Vietnamese Was to employ tens of thousands of mercenaries in counterinsurgency warfare. But the problem was a lack of funds. The Indochinese war was tremendously unpopular in France and the government provided little money. Senior French intelligence operatives decided expediency outweighed legality and "Operation X" was born. From 1951 to 1954 the French developed a sophisticated opium distribution network, a feat which won the loyalty of the hill tribes, the population from which the French hoped to recruit their counterinsurgency army. Each spring SDECE operatives bought opium at competitive prices from the hill tribes. Mountain guerrillas then avoided customs and police controls by flying the illegal drugs to a French military school. From there they were taken by truck to Saigon, where they were turned over to a syndicate of river pirates who worked for the SDECE. The river pirates transformed the raw opium into a smokable version in two large Saigon refineries. Then they distributed some to the city's underground dens and sold the substantial excess 'to Chinese merchants with Triad connections. The river pirates split the enormous profits with French intelligence.

Operation X initially boosted the military efforts with large infusions of money. And the hill tribes rallied to the French cause as long as they received high prices for their opium. But when the SDECE utilized non-highland minorities as middlemen, the hill tribes complained they were being cheated. The French ignored the complaints. As the money to the hill tribes dwindled, so did their support for the French. The intelligence service's opium policy unwittingly helped to end France's role in Indochina. The Meo hill tribes, the backbone of the mercenary army, were so dissatisfied with their opium prices, they allowed the North Vietnamese to infiltrate the surrounding jungles and surprise the French garrison at Dien Bien Phu. Without Meo reinforcements, the French surrendered on May 8, 1954, and signed an armistice two months later.

The entire SDECE opium experience was not lost on the CIA, which monitored the French operation and realized that opium was the key to hill tribe loyalty. In half a dozen years, when the CIA sent agents into the Laotian and Vietnamese hills to organize counterinsurgency armies, they offered the French colonel who created Operation X a senior position. Convinced the CIA would never give him real power, he refused. The SDECE, in financing its Indochina war, made the Southeast Asian narcotics trade international in scope. While some opium was smuggled out of the Golden Triangle before 1950, the sheer bulk restricted the amount exported. But when French intelligence used the air force to move unlimited quantities, they established the foundations for large-scale postwar trafficking. By selling to Chinese merchants with Triad connections, they accelerated a narcotics network that expanded and paralleled the booming Hong Kong Triads.

Although the French signed a 1954 armistice, they merely agreed to withdraw from the northern half of the country and held a nationwide referendum in 1956. The SDECE maintained its partnership with the Saigon river pirates, ensuring immense profits from the opium dens, gambling casinos, and prostitution houses, including the Hall of Mirrors, the largest whorehouse on the globe. The CIA wanted to cancel the referendum since the Communists were likely to win a popular election. The CIA asked French intelligence to abandon its underworld ventures and turn them over to the Americans. The SDECE refused. By early 1955 the French mobilized the river pirates and some Corsican mercenaries into a wartime battalion. In April the CIA, together with the South Vietnamese Army, fought a pitched battle with the SDECE forces. It was the first and last time that two Western intelligence agencies entered open combat. [emphasis added] Colonel Lansdale, the CIA chief, directed operations from the presidential palace, while Captain Antoine Savani, the SDECE chief, moved into the river pirates' headquarters. For six days a savage house-to-house battle raged for Saigon.

The river pirates offered a reward to anyone who brought Colonel Lansdale to their headquarters, where they promised to cut open his stomach and stuff him with dirt. There were no takers. The river pirates had grown soft through a decade of vice and corruption, and the CIA forces pushed them back into the Run Sat swamp. The outnumbered Corsicans withdrew. At the battle's end more than 500 were dead, 2,000 wounded, and 20,000 homeless. Ngo Dinh Diem, the Americans' handpicked choice, was in firm control of Saigon's political machinery and its extensive underworld.

During the next fifteen years the United States allowed the South Vietnamese to become deeply involved in the narcotics trade. The chief of the air force, later Premier and Vice President, Nguyen Cao Ky, became a principal smuggler, disguising his trafficking as intelligence and surveillance forays. His brother-in- law ran the Saigon port and oversaw a massive import and export of drugs. South Vietnamese officials worked closely with a Triad based in Saigon's Chinese suburb, Cholon. The Vietnamese used government planes and trucks to transport opium from the Golden Triangle into Saigon. The Cholon Triad negotiated the price with the Chinese growers in the Triangle, refined the narcotic in jungle labs and then distributed it to Vietnam's addicts and sold the excess to large Hong Kong syndicates. During this time Bangkok became a key transshipment point, a role it retains to this day.

U.S. military files are replete with the names of South Vietnamese government leaders who spent more time dealing in narcotics than in fighting Communists. Money poured into a system held together by corruption. But the United States not only overlooked its allies' illegal activities, it also assisted them. The CIA followed the path?of French intelligence. When operatives went into the Laotian hills to organize counterinsurgency units, CIA agents assisted the Meos in planning maximum harvests.


Posner does leave some of the story out. He lays the blame for the opium smuggling on our “allies,” and the Triads, and leaves out a major player, Corsican Lucien Conein (who we will see plays a role in later events), but the basic history lesson is correct: The US took over the Golden Triangle opium trade from the French in 1955.

The words my father used were, “The Viet Nam War is about drugs. There are these secret societies behind it.” and then, “Communism is all a sham, these same secret societies are behind it. It's all a big game.” And that “they” were playing out a “lose scenario.” Later in a discussion/argument he told me that there was a plan to opiate the boomer generation. I didn't understand what he was saying, but I can now comprehend, somewhat, of how he came to those opinions.

So, why would someone have a “picnic” and tell the world they were having a battle? It is a psychological operation – psy-ops. The action forces people to choose sides, and that's one of the first steps to being manipulated. "They" want you to choose a side, any side, they don't care. Sides can then hardened, and soon there is a “conflict.” Then, American boys and girls are sent to “Hell,” for one year. If they survive that year they get to go home. And a significant number of those boys and girls became addicted, and took their addiction home, where many became dealers to sustain the habit  … and an “infection” began.




This was part of the warm-up for Watergate. But you see this wasn't the only “protected” drug flow. There were several, creating problems for the players.

There was a flow through Texas, that Jack Ruby was involved with. There was one working through Albania, remnants of a “Nazi” network. There was an old one run by the mercantilists, with cover from the State and Justice Department. There were the operations run by Angleton. There was the one run through the old “China hands.” There were Mafia flows: All of these separate operations were causing problems, they were creating separate power centers. Drug trafficking, gathers intelligence and money, which are always a nice commodity to have in one's corner. And with all these separate operations, hidden from each other by need-to-know and other spook and smuggler tricks, they kept on stepping on each others toes. Plus you had new people trying to get into the game.

Where did Nixon get his slush funds? What was all that about Mexican money laundering?

From “Watergate to Whitewater Thrillride” by Daniel Hopsciker:

When the hush money finally gets paid to the arrested Cubans, it comes in the form of Mexican checks, turned over first to Maurice Stans of the CREEP, who transferred them in turn to Watergate burglar Gordon Liddy. Liddy then passed them on to Bernard Barker, one of the Miami station Cubans arrested on the night of the final Watergate break- in. Barker wa s actually carrying some of this "Mexican" cash left over from these checks when he was apprehended.

The money for the Plumbers had come from one of George Bush's intimates, and at the request of Bush, a member of the Nixon Cabinet from February, 1971 on. Just two days before a new law was scheduled to begin making anonymous donations illegal, $700,000 in cash, checks, and securities had been loaded into a briefcase at Pennzoil headquarters and picked up by a company vice president, who boarded a Washington- bound Pennzoil jet and delivered the funds to the Committee to Re-Elect the President at ten o'clock that night.

"A Suggestion From

America’s Last Honest Man"

The U.S. House of Representatives Banking and Currency Committee, chaired by Texas Democrat Wright Patman, soon began a vigorous investigation of the money financing the break-in, large amounts of which were found as cash in the pockets of the burglars. The largest amount had gone into the Miami bank account of Watergate burglar Bernard Barker, a CIA operative since the Bay of Pigs invasion, $100,000 that had been sent in by Texas CREEP chairman William Liedtke, longtime business partner of George Bush.

On the day Nixon resigned the Presidency, Patman wrote to Peter Rodino, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, asking him not to stop investigating Watergate.

Though Patman died in 1976, his advice still holds good…but we won't hold our breath.

How much did George Bush himself know about the activities of the Plumbers, and when did he know it? George Bush? In 1972? Egad! But, apparently, Bush was knee-deep in things, as illustrated by the notorious White House meeting of June 23, 1972, whose exchange between Nixon and Haldeman--even without taking into consideration the unexplained 18-and-a-half minute gap in the same conversation-- provided the coup de grace to the agony of the Nixon regime.

Haldeman says (on the tapes): "Now, on the investigation, you know the Democratic break-in thing, we're back in the problem area because the FBI is not under control, because [FBI chief] Gray doesn't exactly know how to control it and they have --their investigation is leading into some productive areas because they've been able to trace the money--not through the money itself--but through the bank sources--the banker. And, and it goes in some directions we don't want it to go."

To which Nixon's famous answer is, "When you get in-- when you get in (unintelligible) people, say, "Look, the problem is that this tracks back to the Bay of Pigs, the whole problem is that this will open the whole, the whole Bay of Pigs thing and the President just feels that ah, without going into the details--don't, don't lie to them to the extent to say there is no involvement, but just say this is a comedy of errors, without getting into it, the President believes that it is going to open the whole Bay of Pigs thing up again and, ah…they should call the FBI in and (unintelligible) don't go any further into this case period!

Based on Haldeman's later testimony, that Nixon's references to Howard Hunt and the Bay of Pigs are an oblique allusion to the Kennedy assassination, it seems that perhaps Mr. Nixon may have known more about the killing of Jack Kennedy than he was ever held accountable for--doubtlessly placing him in company with scores of others.

There then comes the one historical moment which, more than any other, delineates the character of George Bush. The scene was the Nixon White House during the final days of the Watergate debacle. White House officials, including George Bush, had spent the morning of that Monday, August 5, 1974 absorbing the impact of Nixon's notorious ``smoking gun'' tape, the recorded conversation between Nixon and his chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman, shortly after the original Watergate break-in, which could now no longer be withheld from the public. In that exchange of June 23, 1972, Nixon ordered that the CIA stop the FBI from further investigating how various sums of money found their way from Texas and Minnesota via Mexico City to the coffers of the Committee to Re-Elect th e President (CREEP) and thence into the pockets of the “Plumbers” arrested in the Democratic Party headquarters in the Watergate building.

These revelations were widely interpreted as establishing a {prima facie} case of obstruction of justice against Nixon. That was fine with George, who sincerely wanted his patron and benefactor Nixon to resign. George's great concern was that the smoking gun tape called attention to a money-laundering mechanism which he, together with Bill Liedtke of Pennzoil, and Robert Mosbacher, had helped to set up.

When Nixon, in the “smoking gun” tape, talked about “the Texans” and “some Texas people,” Bush, Liedtke, and Mosbacher were to whom he was referring... The threat to George's political ambitions was great. The White House that morning was gripped by panic. Nixon would be gone before the end of the week. In the midst of the furor, White House Congressional liaison William Timmons wanted to know if everyone who needed to be informed had been briefed about the smoking gun transcript.

In a roomful of officials, some of whom were already sipping Scotch to steady their nerves, Timmons asked Dean Burch, ``Dean, does Bush know about the transcript yet?”

Yes,” responded Burch. “Well, what did he do?” inquired Timmons. “He broke out into assholes and shit himself to death,” replied Burch.

Why would Bush do that? Break out into assholes and shit himself to death? Could Barry Seal's arrest on explosives charges on July 2, 1972, have had something to do with the operations of Bush's Republican Texas money-raising squad of Hugh Liedtke, Pennzoil, and Robert Mosbacher?


Richard Nixon: Drug Kingpin?

Why not? Is anyone still so naive as to believe that the notorious practice of covert operatives "looking the other way" when drug trafficking is afoot began during the Contra Cocaine 80’s? Later in our story, we will even hear some persuasive evidence that Nixon’s buddy Bebe Rebozo had been the "money man" behind top Medellin cartel drug kingpin (and Barry Seal associate) Carlos Ledher.

According to "The Great Heroin Coup," Nixon's antidrug campaign was in reality a bid to establish his own intelligence network. Egil Krogh wanted the White House, instead of the CIA, handling the drug intelligence work, allowing Nixon's staff to decide which drug traffickers to pursue. So they reorganized.

When Howard Hunt told Krogh he could enlist for the office experienced CIA figures, starting with CIA veteran Lucien Conien at its head, it was a ballsy move, since the CIA had just been acutely embarrassed by the discovery that a huge proportion of the smugglers arrested in the big Justice Department Operation Eagle drug bust in 1970 were Cubans, and Bay of Pigs veterans to boot.

When Nixon chose William Sullivan instead, who had once been second to J. Edgar Hoover in the FBI, "the boys down at the Masonic Lodge," as we’ve heard them referred to, could not have been overjoyed. Clearly, the White House was out to gain control of narcotics intelligence at home and abroad. But even that wasn't enough. Nixon's staff also sought to control enforcement itself, and that required effective strike forces.

So in January of 1972 the White House set up the Office For Drug Abuse Law Enforcement (ODALE), according to a plan conceived by Gordon Liddy. Nixon named the soon-to-resign-in-disgrace Myles Ambrose to head of the newly created Drug Enforcement Office, which later became the Drug Enforcement Administration.


There is much more in the article, such as one particular Mexican drug run/cash flow that was rudely interrupted until Nixon was out of office. The full article can found online. The story and more are also in Hopsicker's book, Barry and the “Boy's," The CIA, the Mob and America's Secret History.

And what was Nixon really doing in 1964 out in a Vietnam jungle with a box of gold that was so heavy it took three people to carry?

Watergate is much more than a “third-rate burglary”: at its core, its all about endgame.


to be continued …

Written by Kris Millegan   

Allegations regarding "Butch" Merritt, Watergate, Intelligence Agencies and "Crimson Rose, " Vol. V

By Kris Millegan

The Third Rail – Part Two


Without opium, there would be no empire.
                                                                                  —Carl Trocki, Opium, Empire and the Global Political Empire




How does the drug trade work? Basically, you have mercantilists (drug lords), who: 


    1. Engender “primitives” to grow a plant.
    2. Pay pennies for the crop. (Historically gold/silver has been used as payment, more recently munitions.)
    3. Transport bulk raw plant material to a processing site.
    4. Process the plant material for consumption.
    5. Transport the bulk processed-plant product to marketplace.
    6. Market the product to wholesalers.
    7. Who then market the product to distributors.
    8. Who then market the product to retailers (many are also users).
    9. Who then market the product to users.
    10.  Consumption of product.
    11. Go back to step one

There are numerous dynamics surrounding a contraband trade, a major one is money and its movement: to pay the remote tribes-people, the monies received from the users, and monies distributed for “protection.”

There is a Latin saying: Pecunia non olet - Money has no smell, colloquially known as, “Money doesn't stink,” meaning: it makes no difference where the money comes from. "Easy" money trumps ethics.

So, strategy, empire and easy money trump ethics – and, it seems, the US Constitution.

Just how do these operations get around the Constitution? Emergency powers? Of the executive branch? Of the other two branches? The power of the Commander-in-Chief? Sleight of hand? Just how do “black” projects operate? Is there any oversight or accountability? And absent of accountability, how do they operate?

Generally, it appears, with boots on the ground.


The mercantilist doesn’t smuggle the drugs back himself, unless he is cowboying it, for historically the large, sustaining amounts of contraband have been smuggled within trade goods using general transportation: ships, railroads, trucks and planes. There also appears to be a significant amount of smuggling done under the protection of “diplomatic immunity,” (both by nation-states and elites with access), and there is ample evidence of the involvement of many nation-state’s military/intelligence apparatus, especially the empire superpower, the United States and it’s allies. But to be fair most countries in the world today have a “strategic” involvement in the illegal narcotics trade.

With the involvement of state intelligence and military apparatus, you get “official” secrecy (need-to-know), compartmentalization (boxing) and channeled communication (stove-piping), and other spy-craft tricks: covert front companies (shells), legitimate companies being used (shills), transportation fronts (movers) and money laundering (shakers) among others. The same tricks used by the mercantilist; developed over a centuries-old narcotics smuggling trade.

An earlier essay of mine, “Hon’ble John’s Band” gives my historical view of some the early US mercantile opium smugglers. For now lets just say that one of the best sources of information on early American opium smuggling is found in History and Genealogy of the Cabot Family, 1475-1927 by L. Vernon Briggs (Boston, 1927, and the the Order of Skull and Bones co-founder was William Huntington Russell, scion of (at that time) the family “in-charge” of America’s largest opium-smuggling operation.

Volume 6 of this series will explore the Viet Nam war, and what the history of that war can tell us about the opium business. Plus, before we can truly understand the role “Butch” Merrit plays in US history, we must begin an exploration of another piece of the Watergate puzzle: psy-ops aka Cointelpro (Counter Intelligence Program).



to be continued …

Written by Kris Millegan   

Allegations regarding "Butch" Merritt, Watergate, Intelligence Agencies and "Crimson Rose, " Vol. IV

By Kris Millegan


The Third Rail – Part One

We've surely got trouble!
Right here in River City,
Right here!
Gotta figger out a way
To keep the young ones moral after school!
                                                                                                  — Meridith Wilson, Ya Got Trouble, “The Music Man



Wikipedia states: The phrase third rail is a metaphor in politics to denote an idea or topic that is so "charged" and "untouchable" that any politician or public official who dares to broach the subject would invariably suffer politically.

The subject we are talking about is so charged that it doesn’t even make the list of Wikipedia’s examples of “hot button” issues.

The extraconstitutional importation of narcotics by the CIA, other intelligence agencies, and their “friends.”

Officially, CIA-Drugs doesn’t exist:

"We found absolutely no evidence to indicate that the CIA as an 
organization or its employees were involved in any conspiracy to bring 
drugs into the United States,"

— CIA Inspector General Frederick R. Hitz, March 23, 1998


Alexander Cockburn and Jefferey St.Clair in Whiteout – The CIA, Drugs and the Press, show the manipulation of our system to keep us hoi polloi befuddled and in the dark. As with the crime of blackmail, “strategy” is trumping ethics:

The Uncover-up

Down the decades the CIA has approached perfection in one particular art, which we might term the "uncover-up." This is a process whereby, with all due delay, the Agency first denies with passion, then concedes in profoundly muffled tones, charges leveled against it. Such charges have included the Agency's recruitment of Nazi scientists and SS officers; experiments on unwitting American citizens; efforts to assassinate Fidel Castro; alliances with opium lords in Burma, Thailand and Laos; an assassination program in Vietnam; complicity in the toppling of Salvador Allende in Chile; the arming of opium traffickers and religious fanatics in Afghanistan; the training of murderous police in Guatemala and EI Salvador; and involvement in drugs-and-arms shuttles between Latin America and the US.

The specific techniques of the uncover-up vary from instance to instance, but the paradigm is constant, as far back as Frank Wisner and his "mighty Wurlitzer" of CIA friendlies in the press. Charges are raised against the CIA. The Agency leaks its denials to favored journalists, who hasten to inform the public that after intense self-examination, the Agency has discovered that it has clean hands. Then, when the hubbub has died down, the Agency issues a report in which, after patient excavation, the resolute reader discovers that, yes, the CIA did indeed do more or less exactly what it had been accused of. Publicly, the Agency continues to deny what its report has reluctantly admitted. The accusations are initially referred to in the CIA-friendly press as "unfounded" or "overblown" or "unconfirmed," or - the final twist of the knife - "an old story." After the CIA denials, they become "discredited accusations" and usually, when the fuss has died down, they revert to their initial status of "unfounded" or even "paranoid" charges, put about by "conspiracy -mongers. "

Faithful to the "uncover-up" paradigm, the CIA passionately denied the allegations made by investigators including Gary Webb about the Agency's alliance with drug-smuggling Contras, its sponsorship and protection of their activities in running cocaine into the United States. Then came the solemn pledges of an intense and far-reaching investigation by the CIA's Inspector General. In his 1996 series of denials, CIA director John Deutch had promised that the Agency's Inspector General, Frederick Hitz, would conduct an internal review of all Agency files relevant to the issue and swiftly place the facts before the American people because of "the seriousness of the allegations and the need to resolve definitely any questions in this area."

Inspector General Hitz went to work. At first, Deutch pledged that Hitz would present his findings within three months. Ritz was unable to meet this schedule. For almost a year and a half there was silence, except for intermittent news tidbits in the Washington Post from the CIA's erstwhile apprentice Walter Pincus to the effect that the Inspector General's probe was turning up nothing on Norwin Meneses.

Then, on December 18, 1997, stories in the Washington Post by Walter Pincus and in the New York Times by Tim Weiner appeared simultaneously, both saying the same thing: Inspector General Ritz had finished his investigation. He had found "no direct or indirect" links between the CIA and the cocaine traffickers. As both Pincus and Weiner admitted in their stories, neither of the two journalists had actually seen the report whose conclusions they were purporting to relay to their readers. These two news stories were promptly picked up by the networks, all of which made great play with the news that the CIA was clean. It was at this point that Gary Webb announced that after negotiation, he and his newspaper, the San Jose Mercury News, were parting company.

Then, fully six weeks later, George Tenet, the CIA's new director, declared that he was releasing the Inspector General's report. Anyone listening to Tenet's announcement could have reasonably concluded that Weiner and Pincus had been accurate in their anticipatory news stories. Tenet boasted that "this has been the most extensive investigation ever undertaken by the Inspector General's office, requiring the review of 250,000 pages of documents and interviews with over 365 individuals. I am satisfied that the IG has left no stone unturned in his efforts to uncover the truth. I must admit that my colleagues and I are very concerned that the allegations made have left an indelible impression in many Americans' minds that the CIA was somehow responsible for the scourge of drugs in our inner cities. Unfortunately, no investigations - no matter how exhaustive - will completely erase that false impression or undo the damage that has been done. That is one of the most unfortunate aspects of all of this."

Tenet's assertions were duly reported. The actual report itself, so loudly heralded, received almost no examination. But those who took the time to examine the 149-page document found Inspector General Hitz making one damning admission after another. The report described a cable from the CIA's Directorate of Operations dated October 22,1982, describing a prospective meeting between Contra leaders in Costa Rica for "an exchange in [the US] of narcotics for arms."

The CIA's Directorate of Operations instructed its field office not to look into this imminent arms-for-drugs transaction "in the light of the apparent involvement of US persons throughout." In other words, the CIA knew that the Contras were scheduling a drugs-for-arms exchange, and the Agency was prepared to let the deal proceed. How did the Inspector General handle this cable, which on its face confirmed the central accusation made by investigators going back to Robert Parry, Brian Barger and Leslie Cockburn's first reports? The episode is buried deep in the report, itself written in sedative prose, and the Inspector General triumphantly concludes that the CIA was conducting itself in a proper manner, since any action against US citizens involved in the Costa Rica meeting would have breached the prohibition on activities by the CIA within the United States.


But all this is about the 1980s and ’90s, and we’re supposed to be talking about “Butch” Merritt, Watergate, Intelligence Agencies and “Crimson Rose.”

Drugs, narcotics trafficking, that’s Wategate’s pre-game arena. That and psy-ops, but then they are different sides of the same coin, with many overlapping players and agendas. Of course there were other corruptions swirling around, assassinations, organized crime, honey traps, surveillance, but one causing the most internal strife and turf battles was drugs. It was the secrecy surrounding the drug operations (and the money, too). Secrecy was also the germ of another scandal relevant to Watergate, that’s the Moorer-Radford spy ring, which we will look at later.

Before Watergate there were several quasi-official “sanctioned” drug pipelines, plus a few “cowboys,” and then, after a couple of dance-moves, by the mid-1980s there appears to have been a “consolidation” of certain black-ops. Bringing organizational fortitude, mechanized money laundering, and official deflection.

Here is some earlier CIA-Drug history from author Doug Valentine in an August 19, 2007 interview with Susan Mazur:

Valentine: Angleton was key to understanding the CIA. Weiner hasn’t detailed Angleton’s relationship with the underworld through the Federal Bureau of Narcotics. He hasn’t gotten past CIA 101.

Angleton had his own mysterious agenda, counterintelligence, seeking out enemy agents inside the CIA. He had liaison to the Mafia through Charles Siragusa, a Federal Bureau of Narcotics agent – and Mario Brod, a labor lawyer from Connecticut and New York, who as an Army counterintelligence officer had worked with Angleton at OSS – Office of Strategic Services, the forerunner of the CIA.

As I say in the book [Strength of the Wolf], James Angleton alone possessed the coveted Israeli account. His loyalty was to the Director of Central Intelligence, Allen Dulles – then Richard Helms, who was chief of Clandestine Services and later DCI. Director William Colby was his enemy.

Through Angleton’s relationships with Italian royalty, Tibor Rosenbaum [Mossad agent], Charlie Siragusa [FBN agent], Hank Manfredi [FBN], and Mario Brod, he was certainly aware of Meyer Lansky’s central role as the Mafia’s banker in the Caribbean - where Lansky’s mob associate from Las Vegas, Moe Dalitz, opened an account at Castle Bank - as well as in Mexico, where Angleton’s friend, Winston M. Scott, was station chief, and certainly kept tabs on Lansky’s associate, former Mexican president Miguel Aleman. As ever, Angleton and Lansky were the dark stars of the intelligence and financial aspects of international drug smuggling. Alan Block devotes some pages to this in his book, Masters of Paradise.

Angleton thought William Colby might be a mole. Angleton exposed the divisions within the CIA after 1966, the Colby vs. Helms factions. He also represented the literary sensibility the CIA once had, where finding secrets was like teasing the meaning out of a poem. Now we have sledgehammer spies.


Angleton ran the CIA's narcotics operation, in league with the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, until 1971, when Helms put it under Tom Karamessines at operations; Karamessines was the former CIA Athens chief. [emphasis added]

I know for a fact that Angleton in the counterintelligence division of the CIA was in charge of its relations with law enforcement agencies, including the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, which is one of the reasons organizationally that he ended up having relations with people like Charlie Siragusa, a high ranking official in the FBN. This is how Angleton enters into relationships with Corsican drug traffickers and uses them for counterintelligence operations.

I know this because I interviewed one of the officers who was on Angleton’s staff and who actually was his liaison to the Bureau of Narcotics. And I’ll be talking more about that in my new book, Strength of the Pack. The guy’s name was Jim Ludlum. People say he’s related to Robert Ludlum.

In 1968 the Federal Bureau of Narcotics was abolished and Lyndon Johnson’s administration created the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs. Angleton and the CIA continued to have an official relationship with the BNDD until 1971, at which point Nixon declared narcotics law enforcement a national emergency and made it an issue of national security.

And at that point relations switched from Angleton at counterintelligence to the operations branch of the CIA. That’s incredibly important in understanding the history of the CIA’s involvement with drug trafficking, because now it’s no longer a function of counterintelligence, something deep inside the Agency. Now you actually have CIA chiefs of station all around the world becoming actively involved in collecting intelligence on drug trafficking. It became in 1971 a very, very big business – drug trafficking within the CIA. [emphasis added]

Suzan Mazur: When you say big business, what exactly do you mean?

Doug Valentine: There was a guy at the CIA who worked with the BNDD. Jim Ludlum then gave up his liaison relationship because he was counterintelligence and the new liaison was an operations officer. His name was Seymour Bolton, the father of Joshua Bolton – now a high ranking official in the Bush administration.

What the CIA drug business is, is controlling how the DEA targets foreign drug traffickers. The CIA’s drug business is the management of how the DEA conducts foreign investigations. The CIA reports directly to the president or the national security council and there are issues to consider in going after traffickers that transcend law enforcement and involve national security. Which is why Nixon made that change. Nixon did not want officials going off and investigating Chinese drug traffickers at the same time he was to trying to secretly form diplomatic relations with China. So he had to put the CIA in control of how the DEA mounted its foreign drug investigations.

Suzan Mazur: And what are your thoughts about that arrangement?

Doug Valentine: If you’re going to go about the business of empire, creating an empire around the world, you don’t want to put it in the hands of a law enforcement agency that’s going to bust Salvador Allende yesterday and General Pinochet tomorrow.

You want to make sure they only bust Allende. And that Pinochet gets away with drug trafficking for 20 years.

How the CIA evolved over the past 60 years in all these different ways in relation to narcotics trafficking, to the media, in relation to foreign policy, etc. – has enabled it to consolidate power. It’s far from being out of business or in descent or rising from the ashes. It’s more powerful than it ever was.


A March 11, 1980 affidavit from Colonel Cutulo given while he was the Commanding Officer of the 10th Special Forces Group (Airborne), 1st Special Forces, Fort Devens, Massachusetts:

17. Mr. Edwin Wilson explained that it was considered that Operation Watch Tower might be compromised and become known if politicians, judicial figures, police and religious entities were approached or received word that U.S. Troops had aided in delivering narcotics from Columbia into Panama. Based on that possibility, intense surveillance was undertaken by my office to ensure if Watch Tower became known of, the U.S. government and the Army would have advance warning and could prepare a defense.

Edwin Wilson explained that Operation Watch Tower had to remain secret and gave these reasons: (1) If it became public knowledge it would undermine present governmental interests as well as those in the future. (2) There are similar operations being implemented elsewhere in the world. Wilson named the "Golden Triangle" of Southeast Asia and Pakistan. Wilson stated in both areas of the world the CIA and other intelligence agencies are using the illegal narcotics flow to support forces fighting to overthrow communist governments, or governments that are not friendly towards the U.S.. Wilson named several recognized officials of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Burma, Korea, Thailand and Cambodia as being aware and consenting to these arrangements, similar to the ones in Panama. (3) Wilson cited the military coup in Argentina in 1976, the coup in Peru in 1976, the fall of the Somoza Government in Nicaragua in 1979, and the growing civil war in El Salvador as examples of the need for operations like Watch Tower. As these operations funded the ongoing effort to combat communism and defeat actions directed against the United States or matters concerning the U.S.

73. Edwin Wilson explained that the profit from the sale of narcotics was laundered through a series of banks. Wilson stated that over 70% of the profits were laundered through the banks in Panama. The remaining percentage was funneled through Swiss banks with a small remainder being handled by banks within the U.S. Wilson indicated that a large portion of the profits are brought into the banks of Panama without being checked. I understood that some of the profits in Panamanian banks arrived through Israeli couriers. I became aware of that fact from normal conversations with some of the Embassy personnel assigned to the Embassy in Panama. Wilson also stated that an associate whom I don't know also aided in over seeing the laundering of funds, which was then used to purchase weapons to arm the various factions that the CIA saw as friendly towards the U. S. The associates name is Tom Clines. Wilson indicated that most of Operation Watch Tower was implemented on the authority of Clines.

74. I was notified by Edwin Wilson that the information forwarded to Wash. D.C., was disseminated to private corporations who were developing weapons for the Dept. of Defense. Those private corporations were encouraged to use the sensitive information gathered from surveillance on U.S. Senators and Representatives as leverage to manipulate those Congressmen into approving whatever costs the weapons systems incurred.

75. Edwin Wilson named three weapons systems when he spoke of private corporations receiving information from Operation Orwell. (1) An armored vehicle. (2) An aircraft that is invisible to radar. (3) A weapons system that utilizes kinetic energy. I got the impression this weapon was being developed either for use by Nasa or for CBR purposes. I wrote down what I recalled at the time and it is attached.

76. Edwin Wilson indicated to me during our conversation while entailed the dissemination of Operation Orwell information and the identification of the three weapons systems, that Operation Orwell would be implemented nationwide by 4 July 1980.

77. As of the date of this affidavit, 8,400 police departments, 1,370 churches, and approx. 17,900 citizens have been monitored under Operation Orwell. The major churches targeted have been Catholic and Latter-Day Saints. I have stored certain information gathered by Operation Orwell on Ft. Devens, and pursuant to instructions from Edwin Wilson have forwarded additional information gathered to Wash. D.C.

78. Per orders from Edwin Wilson, I did not discuss the implementation of Operation Orwell with my staff or others outside of the personnel assigned to surveillance. The only matter discussed with Operation Orwell personnel was what the SATs needed to know in order to carry out their mission. Certain information was collected on suspected members of the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg group. Among those that information was collected on were Gerald Ford and President Jimmy Carter. Edwin Wilson indicated that additional surveillance was implemented against former CIA director George Bush, who Wilson named as a member of the Trilateral Commission. I do not have personal knowledge that Ford, Carter or Bush were under surveillance.

79. I spoke to Col. James N. Rowe on 5 March 1980. I specifically requested that Col. Rowe communicate with several contacts he has within the CIA. I asked Col. Rowe to check out Edwin Wilson. I had two concerns. The first was that Edwin Wilson may pose a threat to National Security by disseminating classified information on the CIA's activities to personnel without a clearance or a need to know that information. Edwin Wilson, during his conversations with me, outlined information that was classified and to which I had no need to know. Information that pertained to the activities of the CIA in the U.S. and Latin America. I've related such conversations with Wilson herein. The second concern I had was the issue of his authority and connection to Thomas Clines. I was told repeatedly that Clines was the agent in charge and that Wilson worked with Clines. Col. Rowe indicated that he would make inquiries I requested and would contact me with that information as soon as he had something. Col. Rowe indicated that it would be 60 to 90 days before he would speak to the CIA contact that was most apt to have knowledge of the information I requested. I agreed to meet Col. Rowe on Ft. Bragg the next week in June in the event Col. Rose received documentation relating to the information I sought.

80. On 7 March 1980 Col. Rowe contacted me. During the course of our conversation Col. Rowe informed me that his initial inquiries with CIA contacts confirmed that Edwin Wilson was working for Thomas Clines at the times in question. Col. Rowe indicated that Edwin Wilson was under scrutiny by the CIA at that time but had not been given the details of the circumstances surrounding the events of that matter. Col. Rowe also indicated that there was an Israeli aspect to the matter involving Edwin Wilson and Col. Rowe provided the name of David Kimche as being the Israeli most likely to be involved with Edwin Wilson. In regards to my concerns that Edwin Wilson posed a possible threat to national security or to the inner working of the CIA, Col. Rowe indicated that off the record, that was a concern of several people to whom he had spoken. Col. Rowe also indicated that he would be in receipt of documentation by the first week of June which listed Edwin Wilson's involvement in several operations. I specifically asked Col. Rowe if he had the names of any of those operations at this time and his reply was in the negative. Col. Rowe did indicate that it was his understanding that each operation had basically the same characters involved and Col. Rowe named two other individuals involved with Edwin Wilson. Col. Rowe named Robert Gates and William J. Casey as officials who had been named in the documentation he would acquire prior to our scheduled meeting on June 1980.


We will run into Edwin Wilson again a bit later.

An affidavit from a CIA-operative Gene Tatum:




I could go on and on and on, pages and pages with documents and commentary about the reality of CIA-Drugs.

But, as NY Times Magazine reporter David Suskind wrote (the aide was later identified as Karl Rove):

The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." ... "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."


Creating realities is simply another term for psy-ops.

Empire and strategy trump ethics!

When did the US become an empire?

After Gary Webb was savaged in 1996? Or later in 2004, when he shot himself twice in the head with a ’38?

Cia-Drugs is now a non-subject, a third rail. Something no newspaper or journalist will even broach.

By design or simple happenstance?

Gary Webb


to be continued …

Written by Kris Millegan   
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next > End >>

Page 6 of 7
Copyright © 2018. Water Gate Exposed.