It was never our intention to inflict damage upon the
Intelligence Community.
"It is even more important not to reveal methods as these
potentially can be applied to multiple sources."
We were being 'lectured' by an unnamed Senior Intelligence
Official about an investigation series we had titled "Exempt
from Legal Recourse: Spies, Lies and Polygraph Tape."
Our stories were an attempt to alert the public to government
interest in the UFO community and, if we were lucky, explain a
few mysterious discrepancies between accounts sourced from
various government employees, both past and present.
At the heart of the investigation was an alleged government
secret identified only as "The Core Story."
We never named our government sources. The most sensitive
information remained on background. We did manage to obtain
confirmation from private individuals of more than one nation.
We knew we were in danger of trafficking in rumor. The "core
story" festered an agenda that reeked of counterintelligence.
In case you ever wonder about your tax dollars, and how they
are spent for counterintelligence, we suggest a brief virtual
trip to the Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive
at
http://www.ncix.gov/index.html
where you can download free motivational messages in the form
of posters and calendars.
One poster featured at the site depicts a stop sign emblazed
with "Spies, Terrorists, Thieves, Saboteurs, Cheats, Hackers." A
caption next to the poster provides this explanation:
"Reckless drivers won't obey stop signs if they think they
won't get caught. Neither will spies, terrorists, or others who
would steal our nations secrets or harm our society. Our new
poster reminds us that practicing sound counterintelligence and
implementing proven safeguards--physical, electronic, and
procedural--will make our enemies think twice before attempting
their treachery."
Speaking of treachery, we were asked about our national
loyalties by a representative of a DARPA contractor. We were
also told by another source that the exposure of the "core
story" had registered loud and clear on someone's
'counterintelligence' radar, at least to the extent that we were
suspected us of being plants. A well known private investigator
with three-letter agency ties questioned the motivation behind
our activities.
There was never a shortage of paranoia in the fertile valley
of disinformation we uncovered. When a close source was accused
of being an agent of a foreign power, albeit a friendly foreign
power, we mused about the conundrum of journalists investigating
spies, and spies posing as journalists.
If you aren't confused at this point, you should be. We
certainly are.
"The Consequences of Permissive Neglect," an article featured
in the CIA's "Studies in Intelligence," written by James B.
Bruce, blames the media for complicity in the leaking of
classified information.
"The principle sources of intelligence information for U.S.
newspapers, magazines, television, books, and the Internet are
unauthorized disclosures of classified information. Press leaks
reveal, individually and cumulatively, much about how secret
intelligence works. And by implication, how to defeat it."
The Bruce article made a strong case for "gaining better
control over unauthorized disclosures that appear in the press."
According to Bruce, "Nearly all of the compelling evidence in
support of the argument that leaks are causing serious damage is
available only in the classified domain."
From the point of view of our on-going investigation, aimed
at exposing the incestuous relationship between the Intelligence
Community and UFO believers, this clearly presented a problem.
How can we move an investigation forward when we cannot be
certain whether or not our efforts are under scrutiny for
legitimate reasons -- involving the exposure of sources and
methods -- when there is little chance of being offered
'official' evidence?
President George W. Bush had told the press, "Any sources and
methods of intelligence will remain guarded in secret. My
administration will not talk about how we gather intelligence,
if we gather intelligence, and what the intelligence says."
We were not alone in feeling the pressure. Journalists across
the nation were convinced they had come under fire from the Bush
Administration.
James Bruce had admonished the Intelligence Community,
warning, "The press has become a major source for sensitive
information for our adversaries about U.S. intelligence -- what
it knows, what it does, and how it does it ... Foreign
intelligence services and terrorists are close and voracious
readers of the U.S. press."
We wondered why an investigation of the imaginary realm
inhabited by believers in extraterrestrial technology had been
viewed as a threat to real intelligence, defined as substantive
content, activities, operations, and sources and methods.
One item that did have potential 'threat value' for the
Intelligence Community was our reporting of FBI interest in the
Internet activities commonly called "the soap opera."
At the end of the day -- once we had thrown out anything
related to the UFO community, extraterrestrial secrets, tales of
human and alien exchange programs, and other science fiction
tales better paraded before the public on the Art Bell Show --
we were left with a handful of old CIA documents and a group of
present and former intelligence officers interacting with
citizens digging for state secrets.
One unnamed source confirmed that the "core story" -- a
plastic narrative that morphed with every hand willing to carry
the message -- had been discussed at the highest levels of the
Intelligence Community.
Never mind that the "core story" -- if it really existed --
would certainly have been a national secret.
James Bruce had been clear as day about why national secrets
could not be passed into the hands of journalists:
"Classified intelligence disclosed in the press is the
effective equivalent of intelligence gathered through foreign
espionage ... The public exposure of significant intelligence
often damages intelligence effectiveness by compromising
valuable U.S. sources and methods."
Pulitzer prize winning reporter Dana Priest of the Washington
Post was asked by a PBS Frontline Special titled "News Wars"
about withholding information that might cause "serious damage
to national security."
"We don't do this frivolously," Priest replied, "And as much
as I hate having information myself that I am not going to
publish, because that is so antithetical to how I've thought of
myself since I became a journalist, that's life ... We tried to
figure out a way to get as much information to the public as we
could without damaging national security."
It would appear that we are now being placed in a similar
position. Unless, of course, we are spies.
--- to be continued ---
Copyright (c) 2007 Gary S. Bekkum and Starstream Research.
All rights reserved.
