DARLA JONES: Here was a chance to ask David Kaczynski about his brilliant, eccentric, loving older brother, and what the U.S. government may have done to him and with him.

Since our brief interview with David Kaczynski (July 26, 2005), we’ve looked a trace deeper into MKULTRA. Hence the footnotes and the seemingly forced images in the 10 min. video of this interview (conducted at Chautauqua Institution, Hall of Missions, Department of Religion).

————————————————-

At what point did you experience with Ted any sign of serious psychological abnormality? At what point did that appear?

David Kaczynski: That’s a long story. I remember being maybe nine or ten years old and asking my father one day, ‘Dad, what’s wrong with Ted?’ So even at a very young age I had some sense that he was different. I remember my father saying at that time saying, ‘David, you have to understand. Your brother is very, very brilliant. He doesn’t have a lot of…. a lot in common with other kids his age, but you’ll see; he’ll grow up and mature. Some day he’ll have a family of his own and he’ll find himself.’ [#1]

At one point, I remember my mother sharing with me this story of Ted being in the hospital as a tiny baby. I don’t think that story would have been developed if it wasn’t developed in order to explain something. There’s a kind of accommodation that a family makes over many, many years. You don’t think, ‘Well, that’s a mentally ill person…’ You think, ‘Well, that’s Ted. That’s the way he is.’

I think I really began to get alarmed in the 1980s when some of Ted’s letters to our parents seemed so bizarre. He’d say that they never loved him and cite evidence and seemed to ignore all the nice and loving things all their lives long and I realized at that point that he was looking at the world through a very, very different lens.

Approximately how old was he at that time?

David Kaczynski: Probably around 30 years old. Somewhere in there. Looking back…. Actually, having read some of Ted’s diaries while he was in college I think, he probably was having psychotic breaks as early as his early 20s. He believed, for instance, that he’d been visited by people in his apartment at the University of Michigan who couldn’t possibly have been there. [# 2 ] He would have delusions that other people were talking about him, kind of paranoid delusions. It’s odd because it was really at this point that his brilliance as a mathematician began to blossom. Right around this time….

We later found out that he wouldn’t go to class maybe for an entire semester but then he’d show up on the last day and hand in some piece of original research that blew the professor away and ended up being published. So in some…. because of his academic and his extraordinary success – and absence of any kind of obvious violence in him – you know, I think our family thought he was different, but not necessarily in a bad way.

The reason we pose the question is that since we last spoke with you in Dunkirk, we ran across in Dave McGowan’s book Programmed to Kill: The Politics of Serial Murder. He writes that your brother was a victim of MKULTRA at Harvard.

David Kaczynski: Yes. Something I didn’t know about at all until it was kind of discovered by his defense team [1]and then they began to question our mother about it.

Would you say what it is?

David Kaczynski: Yeah. Well, the MKULTRA program was actually a CIA covert operation within the United States where unwitting suspects [subjects] were made guinea pigs in research about psychotropic drugs, various kinds of psychological pressure. I think there’s pretty clear evidence that was a program at Harvard.

Ted was in a psychological research study run by a psychologist by the name of Henry Murray. Now there’s no clear, unequivocal link that connects that to the MKULTRA program, but it was a fairly abusive research project. It would certainly not pass ethical muster today. [#3]. 

Ted would meet once a week for a conversation with someone about philosophy with someone he thought – was led to believe – was another subject within the research project but actually was a plant. It was a graduate student, and they were actually trying to study how ‘alienated youth’ – and Ted was identified as an alienated youth at Harvard – would respond to having their philosophy of life and their values challenged. 

So for three years, beginning at the age of 17, Ted was in this study…. I’ve read some of the transcripts and they were pretty awful. I mean, they included personal attacks….

So as my brother is trying to make, you know, some kind of philosophical point, his adversary in this debate is making disparaging comments about his appearance, about his maturity, so, you know, an interesting possible connection is that had actually been in the OSS which was the forerunner of the CIA during World War II and the projects he did had to do with debriefing prisoners of war. So we wonder if he used some of the same tactics in sort of probing and poking young, unwitting college students, and don’t know if the CIA was directly involved but it’s certainly not outside the bounds of possibility. 

I don’t think that necessarily created Ted’s mental illness. It might have been a triggering factor. It might have sort of given shape to his belief that there were, you know, conspiracies against him and that, you know, there was something sinister about the technology of psychology and mind manipulation, and so forth. In a sense, he wasn’t paranoid. He was…. He was, in a sense, conspired against.

Did you ever talk to him about his experience in that ‘psychology’ program?

David Kaczynski: No. You know, Mom had remembered it because since Ted was only 17* when he went into this research project, parental consent was needed, and Mom remembered getting a form, you know, Harvard College, asking for her permission for Ted to be in this study and Mom said, ‘Gee, I thought Ted’s…. You know, he’s socially awkward, he doesn’t fit in very well. Maybe being exposed to psychologists could be very helpful to him. Well, little did she know that this study wasn’t conducted with his benefit in mind.

How knowledgeable was Ted’s defense team about MKULTRA?

David Kaczynski: The defense apparently put a lot of research into this. It was going to be at least one of their arguments for mitigation that Ted had been seriously abused in this…. this research program that might have even been funded by the federal government. It was hard to get research, hard to make the connection fully. They [Ted Kaczynski’s legal team] found that numbers of the records had actually been destroyed – not for confidentiality reasons, or something. It was destroyed because there was a congressional investigation of the MKULTRA program and the then director really, uh, in contempt of Congress, destroyed many of the records of that program. They did eventually get to look at some of Murray’s private research papers. That was where some of these transcripts were found. They also were able to track down just a couple of other participants in the study, one of which was, by the way, working at Las Alamos making big bombs. A weird irony of the whole thing.

But as far as we know – and we don’t know much – Ted was the only one who ended up with real serious problems. (6 minutes)

This is amazing. I just quickly searched "MKULTRA" as I want to see if I can find out which schools were involved in this and any names of participants, if possible. It looks like this will be impossible as the records were destroyed but if there is any way to at least find out which schools/institutions were involved, please let us know.

DARLA JONES: Here is the book referenced:

http://www.amazon.com/Programmed-Kill-P … 0595326404

More information:
https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve … ULTRA.html

The Deputy Director of the CIA revealed that over thirty universities and institutions were involved in an "extensive testing and experimentation" program which included covert drug tests on unwitting citizens "at all social levels, high and low, native Americans and foreign." Several of these tests involved the administration of LSD to "unwitting subjects in social situations." At least one death, that of Dr. Olson, resulted from these activities. The Agency itself acknowledged that these tests made little scientific sense. The agents doing the monitoring were not qualified scientific observers.

DARLA JONES: MkUltra Involved Hospitals, Universities and Government Facilities Leaked List
NOVEMBER 10, 2012 BY LISSAKRHUMANELIFE
4
Involved Hospitals, Universities and Government Facilities

The following list is of hospitals, universities, and other facilities and organizations that were, in some way, involved in the hosting, funding, and/or enactment of government-sanctioned human experimentation in the past. This list is not intended to implicate any organizations or individuals connected to them, who neither condoned nor participated in harmful human research.

http://216.104.189.209/MKULTRA%20Research.htm

Aero Medical Laboratory, Directorate of Research, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio
Air Force 657 1st Aeromedical Research Laboratory
Allan Memorial Institute, Canada
American Psychological Association
Boston University School of Medicine, Massachusetts
Army Chemical Corps
Canada’s Defense Research Board
Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
Children’s International Summer Villages, Inc., Maine
Clifton Hospital, York, England
Columbia University
Commission on Viral Infections, Armed Forces Epidemiological Board,
Office of the Surgeon General
Cornell University, Cornell Medical Human Ecology Program
Creedmore State Hospital, Children’s Unit, Queen’s Village, New York
Dugway Proving Ground, Utah
Edgeware Arsenal
Edgewood Arsenal, Edgewood, Maryland
Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia
Florida State University
Fort Benning, Georgia
Fort Sam Houston
Georgetown University Hospital, Washington DC
George Washington University
Geschickter Foundation
Geschickter Fund for Medical Research
Hanford Nuclear Facility, Richmond, Washington
Harvard Medical School, Massachusetts
Hollywood Hospital, Vancouver, Canada
House of the Good Shepherd, New York
Human Ecology Foundation
Ionia State Hospital
Johns Hopkins University
Leler University of Georgia
Los Alamos
Louisiana State Penitentiary
Marlborough day hospital, Wiltshire, England
Massachusetts General Hospital
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
McGill University, Department of Psychiatry, Canada
J. P. Morgan and Co., Inc.
Montana State University
Montreal Neurological Institute, Canada
NASA
New Jersey Neuropsychiatric Institute, Bureau of Neurology and Psychiatry
New Jersey Neuropsychiatric Institute, Clinical Investigative Unit of the Bureau of Research
New Jersey Reformatory at Bordentown
New York State Department of Mental Hygiene
New York State Psychiatric Institute
New York University, New York
New York University School of Medicine Committee on Human Experimentation
Oak Ridge Institute of Nuclear Studies
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Oak Ridge, Tennessee Office of Naval Research
Ohio State Penitentiary at Columbus
Penetang Psychiatric Hospital, Oak Ridge Division, Penetanguishene, Ontario, Canada
Powick Hospital, Malvern, Worcestershire, England Public Health Service
Rand Corporation
Roffey Park, Lincolnshire, England
Rome State School, Rome, New York
Scottish Rite Foundation
Scottish Rite Foundation Schizophrenia Research Foundation
Scottish Rite Research Committee
Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology
Seventh Day Adventist Church
Stanford Research Institute (SRI)
Stanford University
St. John’s Orphan Asylum, New York
Texas Research Institute of Mental Sciences (TRIMS), Houston, Texas
Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana
UCLA Violence Project
University of Denver, Colorado
University of Illinois
University of Indiana
University of Maryland
University of Minnesota, Department of Psychiatry
University of Oklahoma, Department of Psychiatry
University of Pennsylvania
University of Rochester, New York
University of Texas
U.S. Air Force
U.S. Army
U.S. Army Chemical Research and Development Laboratory, Edgeware Arsenal
U.S. Army Medical Research and Development Command
U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases, Fort Detrick, Fredrick, Maryland
U.S. Army Special Operations Division, Fort Detrick, Maryland
U.S. Department of Defense
U.S. Department of Energy
U.S. Federal Penitentiary, Atlanta, Georgia
U.S. Navy
Utica Community Chest, Utica, New York
Vacaville State Prison
Vanderbilt University, Tennessee
Walter Reed Army Medical Center
Wayne State University College of Medicine, Lafayette Clinic, Detroit, Michigan
Willowbrook State School, New York
Worcester Foundation for Experimental Biology, Shrewsbury, Massachusetts
Worcester State Hospital
Yale University

Also:
[page 19] University of California at Berkeley
[page 58] Sandoz, Swiss pharmaceutical firm, source for CIA LSD and for Prozac
[page 60] City College of New York
[page 63] Boston Psychopathic Hospital (Dr. Robert Hyde)
[page 63] Mt. Sinai Hospital NY (Dr. Harold Abramson)
[page 63] Columbia University NY
[page 63] University of Illinois Medical School (Carl Pfeiffer)
[page 63] NIMH-sponsored Addiction Researh Center, Lexington KY
[page 63] University of Rochester NY (Harold Hodge)
[page 63] University of Oklahoma (Dr. Louis Jolyon-West)
[page 63] Josia Macy, Jr. Foundation
[page 63] Geschickter Fund for Medical Research, Washington DC
[page 72] Missouri Institute of Psychiatry
[page 72] Harvard University (Henry Beecher)
[page 72] Massachusetts General Hospital
[page 72] University of Maryland Medical School
[page 72] Baylor University (Neil Burch)
[page 72] New York State Psychiatric Institute (Paul Hoch and James Cattell) [page 72] University of Washington (James Dille)
[page 83] University of Wisconsin (Frank Olson)
[page 118] University of Delaware
[page 129] Veterans Administration Hospital, Palo Alto CA
[page 141] Rockefeller Foundation
[page 142] Allan Memorial Institute – McGill U., Montreal
[page 151] National Institutes of Health, Washington DC
[page 159] Society for the Investigation of Human Ecology
[page 164] University of Nijmegen, Netherlands
[page 165] Ionia State Hospital MI
[page 170] University of London
[page 199] University of Minnesota (Alden Sears)
[page 212] University of Houston TX
[page 215] California [Prison] Medical Facility, Vacaville
[page 215] Emory University
[page 216] Bordentown NJ Reformatory

and Lincoln Technical Institute, East Windsor CT

Holmesburg Prison, Holmesburg, PA

Karen Coleman Wiltshire

Karen Coleman Wiltshire–
John Hopkins Harriet Lane Home for Invalid Children-1961 through 1970

UCLA

California [Prison] Medical Facility, Vacaville
This is right next to Travis Air Force Base. (That is one of the military bases, McClellan AFB is the other, that LE was convinced that EAR/ONS must be stationed. Also, it is really near Vallejo.

Much of the web literature talks about how Ted got abused at Harvard, but from what I have read, Ted voluntarily stayed in the study for three years. There was never an indication from Ted that these did any lasting damage. He talked about his Harvard years in the autobiography and this portion does not mention the experiments at all. If was so terrible, he might have mentioned it early on.Plus, he was writing to himself, I doubt he would leave out something so traumatizing as that.

"At age 16, in Fall of 1958, I went to Harvard. I had had a particular enthusiasm for going there, but once I got there it was a tremendous thing for me. I got something that I had been needing all along without knowing it, mainly, hard work requiring self discipline and strenuous (??) of my abilities. I threw myself into this with great enthusiasm. Not that it was fun, you understand – It was under tremendous pressure and tension. But I thrived on it. I spend most of my time studying, and almost no time on recreation. I forced myself to keep studying long after I should have gone to sleep. I considered myself negligent if I went to bed before 2 AM, and I often stayed up until 3.
I would get by for a month on 6 hours of sleep a night, then overcome by sleepiness, I would flop down and sleep for, maybe, 10 solid hours. I never felt homesick at all. Feeling the strength of my own will, I became enthusiastic about will power. Besides the original physical training sessions, I began doing push ups and other exercises on my own.
Unlike my high school math courses, the calculus courses I took at Harvard paid a good deal of attention to the fine points of the logic underlying calculus. I learned a good deal about (?) thinking in general from these courses, and I became enthusiastic about careful analytic thinking. In high school, getting an A in a course didn’t mean much to me. It was just a matter of grinding out all the busy work. At Harvard, I really has to (?) myself to get an A and that grade gave me a real sense of achievement. There was an atmosphere of excellence at Harvard. Of Course, I had no respect…"

I think that he mentions the experiments here, "Besides the original physical training sessions,". Doesn’t that sound out of place? To me, it sounds like his sessions involve extreme physical exercise.

"I began doing push ups and other exercises on my own." As opposed to not on my own? I don’t think he did any sports in college so he must be referring to these sessions.

Is it possible that Ted actually worked for the CIA long after leaving Harvard? I read the thread and articles about the Judi Bari bombing in Oakland in 1990. That really looks like a Unabomber attack. Apparently, the FBI initially blamed the victims and said that a bomb they were building exploded as they were transporting it. (It was under her car seat. As a side note: That would be a terrible place to put a live bomb to drive it to it’s final location)

Then after they arrested TK they found something that made the FBI contact EarthFirst and tell them they thought that the Unabomber was connected to the 1990 bombing. Earthfirst thought that they were linking the Unabomber to their organization and did not understand that they were saying Ted did it. Judi was not killed in the bombing, but died a few years later 1997 from cancer.

I am going to assume that TK knew who Judi was (and there is some evidence to suggest that Ted was in Oakland at the time of the bombing). There is speculation in the articles that Ted was upset that Judi was having EarthFirst go nonviolent. However, another website claims that it was a hit, and that after Harvard, Ted never lost contact with the CIA and may have been an assassin for them! It’s pretty far fetched, considering how much TK hates LE. The author of the article explains that the Montana hermit thing was just an "act" and he justifies this statement with the evidence that the bus driver from Lincoln to Helena said that when Ted went to the hotel in Helena, before his "missions" in other states, he brought a suit and dress pants. Apparently he cleaned up at the hotel before traveling to Sacramento and Utah.

AK Wilks:

I have seen this theory that TK was a gov agent and its a nonstarter.

Ted had a ball trigger in his cabin. Same type as in Bari bombing. I did research on the Bari case with Ted as a suspect. I will post it in a thread. It may also be related to the Vance case which I am taking a new look at very seriously.

Ted hated Bari who he said was "emasculating" the radical environmental movement.

snooter: if there is any truth to TK emplyeed by the cia than this is lights out for TK going forward..no way will the fbi ever investigate him,,TK may sqeal and we cant risk having him expose us..lets just let him sit in jail and drop any nonsense about him being the Z..

DARLA JONES:
Ted, in the letter to Live Wild or Die (LWOD), mentions COINTELPRO by name.

"CONFIDENTIAL NOTE
Enclosed is a letter that presumably will require general discussion by the LWOD staff. But this confidential note contains material that should be known to as few people as possible. So whichever LWOD person opens this envelope, he or she should hide this note and reveal its existence to no one, except when absolutely necessary. Read the other material in this envelope before reading the rest of this confidential[crossed out] note.

The material in this envelope constitutes evidence in a felony case, so LWOD might get in trouble if it doesn’t [crossed out] turn this stuff over to the FBI. It is always possible that your group may contain an FBI infiltrator who will report our letter to his bosses. And if you do publish our manuscript the FBI will know about it. So LWOD may want to give these documents to the FBI (except this confidential note, which can safely be kept secret).

This creates a possible problem, because the FBI will be able to confuse you or us by sending LWOD a fake manuscript or placing a fake ad in the SF Chronicle or some such COINTELPRO trick. Or the FBI may ask the Chronicle not to print your ad on the grounds that it would contribute to “criminal” activity. To get around that, we should have some completely confidential way of communicating. This can be established as follows.

Place an ad in the classified section of the Los Angeles Times, classification #1660, “Personal messages.” The ad should preferably appear on May 9, 1995, but in any case leave a few days between the time when the Chronicle ad appears and the time when the LA Times ad appears. This ad should begin, “Dear Stargazer, the mystic numbers that control your fate are …” and it should be signed “Numerologist.” In between there will be a sequences of numbers conveying a coded message.

The code works this way. It will be random number code and therefore unbreakable. Use the series of random numbers that we have given on another sheet. Begin by encoding your message according to the following system: For A put 1, for B put 2, for C [crossed out] put 3, etc. up to 26 for Z. For space between two words put 27, for period put 28, for comma put 29, for question mark put 30. When you have your message coded by this system you will have a series of numbers that we can call the basic sequence. You then change the basic sequence by adding to it the numbers of the random sequence. To the first number of the basic sequence add the first number of the random sequence, to the second number of the basic sequence add the second number of the random sequence and so forth. Whenever the sum is greater that 30, subtract 30 from it. The resulting sequence of numbers is what you publish in the LA Times. See example on other sheet.

In your coded ad please give us an address to which we can send you messages with assurance that they will be [crossed out] completely safe and confidential. (We won’t send you any uncoded message that could get you in trouble if it got into the wrong hands.) Also please tell us in your coded ad whether your open ad in SF Chronicle is authentic and can be taken at face value.

Your coded ad probably won’t use up all the numbers of the random sequence. Have the rest of the sequence in case we want it for future use. NEVER USE ANY PART OF THE RANDOM SEQUENCE TWICE. To do so would enable the FBI to decode the message.

We give a separate, confidential identifying number for verification of any messages we may send you: 82771

Legally the FBI can’t open first class mail without a warrant, but there’s always a chance they might have opened the present envelope anyway, so this system of passing confidential messages isn’t 100% secure.

DARLA JONES: Some more connections between CIA and universities:

Kaczynski graduated from Harvard University in 1962, at age 20, and subsequently enrolled at the University of Michigan, where he earned a PhD in mathematics.[16] Kaczynski’s specialty was a branch of complex analysis known as geometric function theory. His professors at Michigan were impressed with his intellect and drive. "He was an unusual person. He was not like the other graduate students", said Dr. Peter Duren, one of Kaczynski’s math professors at Michigan. "He was much more focused about his work. He had a drive to discover mathematical truth." "It is not enough to say he was smart", said Dr. George Piranian, another of his Michigan math professors. Kaczynski earned his PhD with his thesis entitled "Boundary Functions" by solving a problem[20] so difficult that Piranian could not figure it out.[21] Maxwell Reade, a retired math professor who served on Kaczynski’s dissertation committee, also commented on his thesis by noting, "I would guess that maybe 10 or 12 men in the country understood or appreciated it."[22] In 1967, Kaczynski won the University of Michigan’s $100 Sumner B. Myers Prize, which recognized his dissertation as the school’s best in mathematics that year.[22] While a graduate student at Michigan, he held a National Science Foundation fellowship and taught undergraduates for three years. He also published two articles related to his dissertation in mathematical journals, and four more after leaving Michigan.[23]

https://www.si.umich.edu/careers/centra … cy-library

https://www.nsfwcorp.com/dispatch/nsa-w … ummies-ii/

"Ramparts"’ problems with the CIA started in spring 1966, when a whistleblower named Stanley Sheinbaum gave Hinckle and Scheer a bombshell story on how the CIA had been paying Michigan State University to act as the Agency’s front in South Vietnam. There had never been an investigative article quite like this, at least not since the start of the Cold War — exposing a top secret program in America’s war zone, implicating the American intelligentsia in serving the empire (MSU "advisors" trained and armed South Vietnam’s internal security forces, helped write South Vietnam’s Constitution, and provided cover for CIA officers posing as MSU academics, all in violation of UN agreements signed by the United States).

The whistleblower, an MSU Economics professor named Stanley Sheinbaum, first joined the Vietnam Project to advise South Vietnam’s corrupt president Diem in 1955. In 1957, Sheinbaum was promoted to coordinator for the Vietnam Project, where he soon learned the real scope of his work there. One story Sheinbaum told: He and four top Saigon police officials came to the US for a training junket. While in the US, one of the four, the nephew of Diem, pulled Sheinbaum aside and let him in on a secret: They were planning to bump off the eldest of the four Vietnamese guests while in the US, since it would be easier to pull off in the US. Sheinbaum was horrified; he managed to create a diversion and get the intended victim sent to a hospital. A few years later, the target was executed in Vietnam anyway.

Sheinbaum soon learned about all the CIA officers under Michigan State University academic cover. In 1959, feeling used and drawn deeper into an increasingly violent and corrupt situation in Vietnam, Sheinbaum and another professor both quit the program. In the 1960s, Sheinbaum watched the US get sucked deeper and deeper into the war, and it weighed on his conscience. If academics were taking funds from the CIA to do work like keeping inventories on grenade launcher ammo, Browning automatics and .50 caliber machine guns — as MSU had been doing in Vietnam — then "where is the source of serious intellectual criticism that would help us avoid future Vietnams?" Sheinbaum asked.

In early 1966, he went to "Ramparts" and told them what he knew. Right down to the names of CIA agents he provided cover for:

Central Intelligence Agency men were hidden within the ranks of the Michigan State University professors. They were all listed as members of the MSU Project staff and were formally appointed by the University Board of Trustees. Several of the CIA men were given academic rank and were paid by the University Project. The CIA agents’ instructions were to engage in counter-espionage and counter-intelligence.

The head of the "Internal Security Section" … under the Michigan State operation was Raymond Babineau who was in Saigon from the outset of the MSU Project. The other men were hired later by the University and listed on its staff chart as "Police Administration Specialists." All four — Douglas Deed, William Jones, Daniel Smith, and Arthur Stein — gave their previous employment as either "investigator" or "records specialist" in the Department of the Army.
________________________

http://www.namebase.org/campus/witanek.html
The CIA on Campus

by Robert Witanek

Copyright © 1989 by Covert Action Publications, Inc., Washington DC,
and Institute for Media Analysis, Inc., New York NY. All rights reserved.
Professors and CIA operatives with academic cover have worked extensively on campuses around the world. As we will see in this article, they have written books, articles, and reports for U.S. consumption with secret CIA sponsorship and censorship; they have spied on foreign nationals at home and abroad; they have regularly recruited foreign and U.S. students and faculty for the CIA; they have hosted conferences with secret CIA backing under scholarly cover, promoting disinformation; and they have collected data, under the rubric of research, on Third World liberation and other movements opposed to U.S. intervention.1
The nature of the relationship between the CIA and the academic community is best seen in a 1968 memo from Dr. Earl C. Bolton who, while serving as Vice President of the University of California at Berkeley, was secretly consulting for the CIA. The memo, widely circulated among U.S. universities, advises the use of duplicity and deception to hide CIA connection to the campuses. It also suggests lying about CIA involvement in university projects stating, "The real initiative might be with the Agency but the apparent or record launching of the research should, wherever possible, emanate from the campus." The memo continues:

Follow a plan of emphasizing that CIA is a member of the national security community and stress the great number of other agencies with which the agency is allied [and] … stress in recruiting articles and speeches that the agency is really a university without students and not a school for spies. There is as much academic freedom within the walls of the building and among those competent on the subject as on any campus I know. (I haven’t detected the slightest tendency on the part of anyone to resist saying what he thinks.)2
Bolton’s memo also recommended setting up programs with CIA funds "to establish the study of intelligence as a legitimate and important field of inquiry for the academic scholar." Under Bolton’s plan the CIA was to fund one-year post doctoral programs for selected scholars.

Ironically, the memo also stated that doctoral students spending a year at the CIA working on their dissertations "would of course have to recognize the agency’s right to review the finished document for accidental leaks." The contradiction between CIA secrecy and the academic ideal of encouraging the open exchange of information seems to have posed no dilemma for the vice president of one of the country’s most prestigious universities.

A Few Examples

The CIA has a long and sordid history of activity on U.S. university campuses. The examples below list just a few of what are doubtlessly hundreds of CIA operations on college campuses.

From 1955-59, Michigan State University had a $25 million contract with the CIA to provide academic cover to five CIA agents stationed in South Vietnam who performed such jobs as drafting the government’s constitution, and providing police training and weapons to the repressive Diem regime. The constitution included a provision requiring the South Vietnamese to carry voter identification cards. Citizens without such cards were assumed to be supporters of the Vietcong, and faced arrest or worse by the regime’s police.3
In 1956, while the MSU operation was in full swing, the CIA established the Asia Foundation, providing it with approximately $88 million in funding each year. The foundation sponsored research, supported conferences, ran academic exchange programs, funded anti-communist academics in various Asian countries, and recruited foreign agents and new case officers.4 Large numbers of American academics participated in the program.
The CIA started the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Center for International Studies (MIT-CIS) in 1950. By 1952, former Director of the CIA’s Office of National Estimates Max Millikan became director of the center.5 In 1955, the CIA contracted "Project Brushfire" with Millikan to study the political, psychological, economic, and sociological factors leading to "peripheral wars."6
In the mid 1950s, professors at MIT and Cornell launched field projects in Indonesia to train an elite of Indonesian military and economic leaders who later became the impetus behind the coup that brought Suharto to power and left over one million people dead. The elites were trained at the Center for South and Southeast Asian Studies at the University of California at Berkeley by Guy Pauker who had moved there from MIT-Center for International Studies.7

Academics and Africa

The CIA is especially interested in inspiring university African affairs programs. Again, MIT played an important role in promoting CIA interests. In 1956, when former CIA official Max Millikan was director of MIT’s Center for International Studies, he appointed Arnold Rivkin from the State Department to head MIT’s Africa Research Program. Together, the two supervised studies for CIA use.8

That the CIA had a keen interest in academics with expertise in African Studies was evidenced in a Ford Foundation study. In 1958, the Ford Foundation’s Committee of Africanists commenced to "survey the current condition and future prospects of African studies." According to its report, the CIA said it would need "a constant level of … seventy people specializing in the African area; they particularly desire those who have training in economics, geography, or political science."9 Other examples of the CIA’s "academic" interest in Africa include:

In 1965, Rene Lemarchand, a nontenure professor at the University of Florida, returned from a trip to Burundi. Shortly thereafter, Justin Gleischauf, the Miami CIA station chief contacted Lemarchand, asking him for an interview. Manny Dauer, Lemarchand’s department chair, advised him to cooperate fully in answering the questions the CIA had for him. Lemarchand, however, turned down the invitation.10
In 1968, George Rawick, a sociology professor at Oakland University was approached by James R. Hooker, of Michigan State University’s African Studies Center for recruitment into the CIA. Hooker, a professor with a liberal-left reputation, used an interesting argument. Hooker’s rationale for working with the CIA was, "None of us are ever going to get an intelligent approach unless we get trained intelligent people in there to tell us what’s going on. If we rely on yahoos, look what we’re going to get."11

Democracy: Rutgers Style

In 1968, the CIA used the Eagleton Institute for Research at Rutgers University in a plan to influence the outcome of the presidential election in Guyana. Through the Eagleton Institute, the CIA helped amend the Guyanese constitution to allow Guyanese and relatives of Guyanese living abroad to vote by absentee ballot. Then 16,000 votes were manufactured in New York City, giving the CIA’s candidate, Forbes Burnham, a narrow margin over socialist Cheddi Jagan.12

Another operation involving Rutgers University was run by Political Science Department Chair, Professor Richard Mansbach, who used an undergraduate class (without the students’ knowledge) as cover for a CIA project entitled the "European Non-State Actors Project" (ENSAP) in 1984.13

When Europeans were up in arms over U.S. deployment of Pershing II and Cruise missiles in Western Europe, Mansbach assigned his students to each focus on one component of West Europe’s political culture including disarmament, religious, labor, media, left, environmental, and various other groups. They were to produce data-intensive reports to Mansbach who would in turn, and in secret, incorporate the data into a report to the CIA. While the study was initially to result in a book, it is believed to have been abandoned after it was exposed.14

CIA "Scholars" on Campus

The CIA recently initiated an "Officer in Residence" program to increase their presence and prestige in the U.S. academic community. According to a CIA official, "about ten" major universities across the country host CIA "Officers in Residence."15 Stanley M. Moskowitz, chair of the CIA Training Selection Board, wrote that the Resident Officers program, "allows senior-level officers to disengage from their normal duties by fully participating in the academic life, including research and teaching." He also stated that the CIA officer,

will demonstrate the quality of CIA people and [the CIA’s] commitment to providing U.S. leaders with the very best intelligence we can. The program also serves to strengthen our professional ties to a fertile and indispensable source of ideas and technical expertise and to enhance CIA’s recruiting efforts by providing an opportunity for experienced officers to serve as role models, to counsel interested students on career opportunities with the CIA, and to respond to concerns students may have about the agency and the intelligence profession.16
The letter makes no bones about the fact that the CIA is on campus to recruit the "fertile and indispensable source of ideas," namely university professors, and to look for recruits among students as well.

An October 9, 1987 memo from the Office of the Associate Dean at the University of Texas to the faculty shows how eager university officials are to cooperate with the CIA’s Officer in Residence program. The memo describes Resident Officer James McInnis as having "extensive experience in national security policy and international affairs, especially Latin America and the Middle East" and states that "He [McInnis] might prove a valuable resource to you in your teaching and research. I invite and encourage you to seek him out and explore mutual interests [author’s emphasis]."

Recruiting on Campus

Campus recruitment by the CIA is as old as the Agency itself. In the late 1940s, Frank Wisner was director of the CIA’s Office of Policy Coordination (OPC), which was then the CIA’s operational component. He used 500 OSS World War II veterans who had returned to their careers as academicians after the war, as well as other faculty members, to form "selection committees" which became the OPC’s unofficial recruitment arm.17 Known as the OPC’s "P-source," or professor source, these committees provided ideal means for screening potential recruits because they could observe the students over periods of time in a classroom setting.

By early 1950, the program had been expanded to include the recruitment of foreign students attending college in the U.S. to serve as CIA agents in place or moles when they returned to their respective countries.18 The recruitment of foreign students had its roots in earlier programs in the late 1930s and through the 1940s when students of countries friendly to the U.S. were admitted to U.S. military academies. Their services were especially desired by the U.S. as they would return to their countries to become part of the nation’s military elite. Through them, the U.S. hoped to influence events in these countries and to gain information on the inner workings of their governments.

By the late 1970s about 5000 academicians were doing the bidding of the CIA: identifying and recruiting American students and providing fulltime screening committees designed to select 200-300 future CIA operatives from among the 250,000 foreign students who come to the U.S. to be educated each year.19 Around 60 percent of these professors, researchers, and administrators were fully aware of and received direct compensation from the CIA as contract employees or from research grants for their role as covert CIA recruiters.20

In 1975, the CIA attempted to secretly recruit Ahmad Jabbari, an Iranian student working on his Ph.D. in economics at Washington University in St. Louis. At his interview with the CIA agent, which he taped, the recruiter asked him to spy on other Iranian students, offering an immediate $750 payment, and American citizenship, if he proved reliable. Jabbari refused all offers.21

After recruiting a foreign student, the CIA often uses coercion by threatening to expose the student as a CIA agent while demanding his/her continued cooperation. Since 1948, more than 40 foreign agents recruited on American campuses have committed suicide out of fear of exposure.22

In 1977, a federal appeals court ruled that the CIA had no right to secretly investigate Gary Weissman, a former student at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, "for recruitment purposes." Weissman sued the CIA after learning of the investigation.23

In June of 1986, David Wise reported that the CIA had made recruiting of new personnel a key priority. The effort has included the opening of 11 recruiting centers around the U.S. Wise wrote that the effort involved a major advertising campaign and that student inquiries have been steadily rising. John P. Littlejohn, the CIA’s deputy director of personnel, described the recruitment procedure as follows: The recruiter receives resumes in advance, courtesy of the campus placement offices, and selects candidates for a screening interview. The interview usually takes place on campus but some colleges, like Harvard University, require that the interviews occur off campus.24

Potential CIA recruits must complete a 12-page personal history, undergo a lie detector test, and be subject to physical, psychological, and sometimes psychiatric testing, and a background clearance test of at least four months in duration. According to Littlejohn, approximately 150,000 people inquire about jobs each year, 10,000 submit applications, and 1000 employees are hired. Littlejohn estimates that two to three hundred of these become clandestine officers.25

The CIA at Harvard

While information about CIA campus recruitment is a closely guarded secret, these programs are obviously known by college administrators. Details about the CIA’s covert campus recruitment program were presented to eight presidents of America’s most prestigious colleges at a secret meeting in Washington, DC’s Mayflower Hotel in the spring of 1976. The administrators were told that the Senate would not expose these programs but that information would be provided to assist the college administrators in cleaning up their respective colleges. Ironically, none of the presidents requested the additional information.26

Harvard President Derek Bok convened a committee to draft a report on CIA operations at the college and guidelines regulating such activity. In return, the CIA launched a massive campus lobbying effort against the adoption of similar measures. During this effort, from June 1978 through 1979, the CIA held a series of "special briefings" with various University presidents in an attempt to work out secret arrangements for campus recruiting.27

The CIA promised that Harvard’s rules would be ineffective, as the Agency would simply ignore them. To that effect, CIA Director Turner sent a letter to Bok proclaiming the right of every American to assist the CIA as they chose. He also said that "all recruitment for CIA staff employment on campus is overt" conveniently avoiding the topic of its recruitment of "agents" and other CIA "assets" not considered as CIA staff.28

The CIA has kept its promise to violate Harvard’s guidelines, with at least two known cases being recently brought to light. In 1986, professor Nadav Safran resigned as head of Harvard’s Center for Middle Eastern Affairs after revealing that he secretly received payment from the CIA to write a book about Saudi Arabia and to stage a conference about the Middle East at the University.29

In 1985, an official of the Harvard Center for International Affairs was embroiled in a similar controversy when he conducted research secretly funded by the CIA.30

The Bok report documented CIA use of campus "spotters" to provide names to the CIA of prospective CIA recruits. When a spotter finds a potential recruit, the CIA conducts a background investigation of the student. If the CIA decides to approach the student, the spotter is often called upon to make the introduction. Otherwise, the results of the background inquiry go into a permanent dossier on the student without his/her knowledge.

Conclusion

It’s never easy to discover what the CIA is up to, even on our own college campuses. However, many CIA covert academic operations have come to light (usually years after the fact) because of unauthorized leaks, building takeovers resulting in the seizure of documents, or Freedom of Information Act requests.

As it has become clear that university administrators will not keep the CIA off campus, students have once again taken to mass protest to stop CIA activities. All across the country, CIA recruiters have been confronted with angry students and faculty demanding their ouster and an end to university recruiting. At the University of Colorado over 500 students were arrested during several days of anti-CIA recruiting protests.

As more covert CIA academic operations are exposed, the CIA will develop more effective means of protecting its secrecy when it goes to college. Regardless, many dedicated students are seeing to it that the CIA must operate in a campus environment that is less than ideal for the maximum exploitation of its university assets.31 This is a hopeful sign.

AK WILKS:
I think what Murray did to Ted in the Harvard experiments was horrible. It no doubt contributed to his already growing social alienation and mental health issues. The CIA was probably the sponsor of t hose experiments as part of MK-ULTRA. Though we don’t know that for sure since most of the evidence has been destroyed. The whole record of MK- ULTRA is shameful and includes the murder of Frank Olson. I will star a seperate thread for it.

But IMO it is another matter entirely to say Ted was an agent of the CIA. I just don’t see the evidence for that but people are fres to explore it if they wish.

Ted’s code name in the Harvard experiment was, irony of ironies, LAWFUL.

note to self..add DJ to the "do not argue with these persons list" very good write up and background info DJ..
‘

DARLA JONES: I find this idea that TK worked for the CIA as a hit man fascinating. It also ties into a ton of research I did in the past year on CIA’s connections to the ONS murders in Santa Barbara. Santa Barbara was a hot bed of CIA activity and COINTELPRO as well (aka the Burning of the Bank of America building incident).

There is some evidence that the ONS Smith murders in Ventura were a hit. Lyman Smith was partial owner of Maverick Airlines. One of the pilots who flew for Maverick was Morgan Hetrick famous for being a drug/Gun runner for the CIA and being busted with DeLorian. ONS was defiantly the Killer as known through DNA evidence, but was this one a hit or another random murder?

http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/N4430U.html

___

Look what this paranoia website talks about. The Symbionese Liberation Army, like the People’s Temple, was a creation of the CIA. It mentions the Vacaville site, which we just learned was the home of the MK ULTRA experiments. Why does the Zodiac mention the SLA? This information, seemingly connects TK to Zodiac via MK-ULTRA.

STANFORD, SCIENTOLOGY AND THE CIA

"Many of the SRI "empaths" were mustered from L. Ron Hubbard’s Church of Scientology, Harold Puthoff, the Institute’s senior researcher, is a leading Scientologist. Two "remote viewers" from SRI have also held rank in the Church: Ingo Swann, a Class VII Operating Thetan, a founder of the Scientology Center in Los Angeles, and the late Pat Price. Puthoff and Targ’s lab assistant was a Scientologist married to a minister of the church. When Swann joined SRI, he stated openly that fourteen "Clears" participated in the experiments, "more than I would suspect." At the time he denied CIA involvement, but now acknowledges, "it was rather common knowledge all along who the sponsor was, although in documents the identity of the Agency was concealed behind the sobriquet of ’an east-coast scientist.’ The Agency’s interest was quite extensive. A number of agents of the CIA came themselves ultimately to SRI to act as subjects in "remote viewing" experiments, as did some members of Congress."

AK WILKS: IMO Ted was a VICTIM of the Murray experiments, which means that like Frank Olson he very likely was a victim of the CIA MK-ULTRA program. But it is a major leap to go from that to the idea that he was a an agent for the CIA. I just don’t see any evidence for that at all. In fact the CIA, the Defense Dept. and other federal agencies were investors and allies of the Silicon valley computer revolution. So I don’t see why the CIA would want Ted or anyone to kill computer scientists, genetic scientists and lumber industry officials.

I have spent the last few hours reading about the MK ULTRA program. It is shockingly horrific! Especially what went on in Canada.
I’m going to have to agree with AK. Ted was most likely a unwitting victim of the program, and if the results of the training was to "split his personality to turn him into a killing machine", like the literature suggests, they might have just succeeded.

http://books.google.com/books?id=g19YFu … 22&f=false

This book names names.

About Harvard experiments

http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2000/ … on-buried/

I just found an MK-ULTRA article that quotes one of Kaczynski’s bombing victims.

——
http://www.whale.to/b/caul.html
Nine
In mans quest to control the behavior of humans, there was a great breakthrough established by Pavlov, who devised a way to make dogs salivate on cue. He perfected his conditioning response technique by cutting holes in the cheeks of dogs and measured the amount they salivated in response to different stimuli. Pavlov verified that "quality, rate and frequency of the salivation changed depending upon the quality, rate and frequency of the stimuli."

Though Pavlov’s work falls far short of human mind control, it did lay the groundwork for future studies in mind and behavior control of humans. John B. Watson conducted experiments in the United States on an 11-month-old infant. After allowing the infant to establish a rapport with a white rat, Watson began to beat on the floor with an iron bar every time the infant came in contact with the rat. After a time, the infant made the association between the appearance of the rat and the frightening sound, and began to cry every time the rat came into view. Eventually, the infant developed a fear of any type of small animal. Watson was the founder of the behaviorist school of psychology.

"Give me the baby, and I’ll make it climb and use its hands in constructing buildings or stone or wood. I’ll make it a thief, a gunman or a dope fiend. The possibilities of shaping in any direction are almost endless. Even gross differences in anatomical structure limits are far less than you may think. Make him a deaf mute, and I will build you a Helen Keller. Men are built, not born," Watson proclaimed. His psychology did not recognize inner feelings and thoughts as legitimate objects of scientific study, he was only interested in overt behavior.

Though Watson’s work was the beginning of mans attempts to control human actions, the real work was done by B.F. Skinner, the high priest of the behaviorists movement. The key to Skinner’s work was the concept of operant conditioning, which relied on the notion of reinforcement, all behavior which is learned is rooted in either a positive or negative response to that action. There are two corollaries of operant conditioning" Aversion therapy and desensitization.

Aversion therapy uses unpleasant reinforcement to a response which is undesirable. This can take the form of electric shock, exposing the subject to fear producing situations, and the infliction of pain in general. It has been used as a way of "curing" homosexuality, alcoholism and stuttering. Desensitization involves forcing the subject to view disturbing images over and over again until they no longer produce any anxiety, then moving on to more extreme images, and repeating the process over again until no anxiety is produced. Eventually, the subject becomes immune to even the most extreme images. This technique is typically used to treat people’s phobias. Thus, the violence shown on T.V. could be said to have the unsystematic and unintended effect of desensitization.

Skinnerian behaviorism has been accused of attempting to deprive man of his free will, his dignity and his autonomy. It is said to be intolerant of uncertainty in human behavior, and refuses to recognize the private, the ineffable, and the unpredictable. It sees the individual merely as a medical, chemical and mechanistic entity which has no comprehension of its real interests.

Skinner believed that people are going to be manipulated. "I just want them to be manipulated effectively," he said. He measured his success by the absence of resistance and counter control on the part of the person he was manipulating. He thought that his techniques could be perfected to the point that the subject would not even suspect that he was being manipulated.

Dr. James V. McConnel, head of the Department of Mental Health Research at the University of Michigan, said, "The day has come when we can combine sensory deprivation with the use of drugs, hypnosis, and the astute manipulation of reward and punishment to gain almost absolute control over an individual’s behavior. We want to reshape our society drastically."

—-

James V. McConnell
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
James V. McConnell (October 26, 1925 – April 9, 1990) was an American biologist and animal psychologist. He is most known for his research on learning and memory transfer in planarians conducted in the 1950s and 1960s.

Most of McConnell’s academic career was spent in the psychology department at the University of Michigan, where he was a professor from 1963 through his retirement in 1988. He was an unconventional scientist, setting up his own refereed journal, the Journal of Biological Psychology, which was published in tandem with the Worm Runner’s Digest, a planarian-themed humor magazine. His paper Memory transfer through cannibalism in planarians, published in the Journal of Neuropsychiatry, reported that when planarians conditioned to respond to a stimulus were ground up and fed to other planarians, the recipients learned to respond to the stimulus faster than a control group did. McConnell believed that this was evidence of a chemical basis for memory, which he identified as memory RNA. Although well publicized, his findings were not completely reproducible by other scientists and were therefore at the time completely discredited (for review, see Chapouthier, 1973).

However, recently, his research has begun to be seen in a new light in view of independent research with RNA interference, with at least one scientist speculating that McConnell may have been on the right track (Smallheiser, 2001).

He originally published satirical articles and serious scientific articles in the Journal of Biological Psychology but received complaints that it was difficult if not impossible to tell which was which. He decided to publish the satirical Worm Runner’s Digest upside down with its cover as the back of the Journal of Biological Psychology to make it clear which articles were satire. This, he said, created problems with librarians returning the Journal to the publisher with the complaint that it was improperly bound. He was amused by this. He spent many of his evening hours in the 1960s in informal rap sessions with students in their dorms. He was prone to making provocative statements, believed that memory was chemically based and that in the future humanity would be programmed by drugs. He once commented that he would rather be "a programmer than a programmee".

McConnell was one of the targets of Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber. In 1985, he suffered a hearing loss when a bomb, disguised as a manuscript, was opened at his house by his research assistant Nicklaus Suino.

Yes and I think it was those types of comments from McConnell and his experiments that made him a target for Ted. Perhaps in part because of his own victimization in the Harvard experiments, his beliefs in primitivist individualism and his mental illness, Ted reacted strongly to the line of thinking that McConnell represented. Consciously or subconsciously I think the Harvard experiments affected Ted’s philosophy.

Ted once wrote in his journal in the early 1970’s:

"What makes a situation intolerable is the fact that in all probability, the values that I detest, will soon be achieved through science, an utterly complete and permanent victory throughout the whole world, with a total extrication of everything I value. Through super human computers and mind control there simply will be no place for a rebellious person to hide and my kind of people will vanish forever from the earth. It’s not merely the fact that I cannot fit into society that has induced me to rebel, as violently as I have, it is the fact that I can see society made possible by science inexorably imposing on-me."

Here is another article that puts him in close with the MK-Ultra doctors.
http://www.forejustice.org/write/mental … soners.htm

The Mental Torture of American Prisoners

Cheaper Than Lab Rats, Part II

by Hans Sherrer

written in March 1999
Prison Legal News cover article April 1999

The use of prisoners in medical experiments didn’t begin or end with the radiation experiments conducted on them from the 1940’s to the 1970’s. [See: Part I – Can Prisoner’s Glow in the Dark?, PLN, March 1999]. As thinly dis­guised psychological laboratories, supermax prisons and other forms of iso­lating prisoners from the outside world continue the tradition of using prison­ers as "lab rats."
Psychological experimentation on prisoners raises serious cultural, legal, political, and ethical questions for the same reasons that human radiation and biochemical experiments on them did. Also, just as the radiation experiments conducted on prisoners was for the pur­pose of understanding the effects of radiation on military personnel and the general population, psychological experi­ments conducted on prisoners have a larger purpose than finding more effective ways to torment them. One of those pur­poses is to determine how political authorities can affect, manipulate, and/or control the behavior and responses of people in the general population under various conditions.
One of the fathers of today’s mental experimentation on prisoners is M.I.T. psy­chology professor Dr. Edgar Schein. He became one of the western world’s fore­most authorities on psychological coercion by studying the methods used by the Communist Chinese and North Koreans on American prisoners during the Korean War. 1
At a 1962 M.I.T. seminar attended by psychologists and prison wardens from around the country, Dr, Schein explained how physical, psychological, and chemi­cal techniques of coercion inflicted on American prisoners of war, could be used on prisoners of law in American prisons. 2 Dr. Schein told his audience that they shouldn’t be squeamish about using mind control techniques on American prison­ers perfected by the Russians and Communist Chinese because:

“These same techniques in the service of different goals may be quite acceptable to us. … I would like to have you think of brainwashing not in terms of politics, ethics, and morals, but in terms of the deliberate changing of human behavior and attitudes by a group of men who have relatively complete control over the environment in which the captive population lives.” 3

The centerpiece of Dr. Schein’s techniques of coercive manipulation is the psychological isolation of prisoners by the fraying or outright destruction of social bonds and their emotional support structure. This includes relationships between prisoners on the inside, as well as their family and friends on the outside. The reason he keyed on this as a powerful coercive mechanism, is that to varying degrees we all perceive our existence as human beings from what is reflected back to us by those living beings we come into contact with. Psychologist Nathaniel Branden named this phenomenon the Muttnik Principle. 4 In the 1960’s he realized from his response to his dog Muttnik, that all living beings contribute to our mental health who make us feel real by accurately reflecting our treatment of them back to us.
Dr. Schein learned from studying the successful techniques of totalitarian regimes, that isolation and other forms of sensory deprivation, psychological disorientation, and pervasive surveillance have a significantly negative effect on the human psyche. By reducing the sensory feedback that Dr. Branden identified as vital to someone’s well-being, they can be used as a weapon to induce cracks in that person’s mental defense system. Dr. Schein believed this predictable human response to sensory deprivation could be utilized for purposes of affecting the behavior of men and women in American prisons. He thought these mental cracks could be filled with ideas of the government’s choosing.
Some of Dr. Schein’s colleagues went beyond him by identifying the use of powerful psychoactive drugs as a practi­cal way to biochemically isolate prisoners from their normal influences, without the expense of physically isolating them. 5
Beginning in the late 1960s, Dr. Schein’s ideas on human experimentation were put into action and overseen by fed­eral prison psychiatrist Dr. Martin Groder. He was instrumental in the transfer of "agitators, suspected militants, writ-writ­ers, and other troublemakers" to remote prisons in an effort to sever family ties by making visits difficult. 6 After being moved, these prisoners were put in isola­tion and deprived of mail and other sensory stimulations. Every effort was made to weaken their internal defenses and heighten their susceptibility to influ­ences controlled by prison authorities. If a prisoner responded by abandoning his attitude of individuality, he was granted privileges. If not, his psychological tor­ture continued indefinitely.
University of Michigan psychologist Dr. James V McConnell was an enthusi­astic supporter of Dr. Groder’s work. In an April 1970 Psychology Today article entitled: Criminals Can Be Brainwashed – Now, Dr. McConnell favorably com­pared the human psyche to that of rats and flatworms. 7 He even thought people could be manipulated with behavioral techniques he perfected while training flatworms to navigate a maze.
Harvard psychologist B. F. Skinner tried to resolve the ethical concerns that arose from the scientific treatment of the human mind like a pliable blob of Play-­Doh in his 1971 book -Beyond Freedom and Dignity. However, he chose to do so in a book with a title that neatly sums up the twisted Orwellian attitude of every­one involved in experimenting on prisoners and other human beings.
Make no mistake about it, the millions of prisoners who have been subject in various ways to sensory deprivation and isolation techniques are viewed by the scientific and correctional community as human guinea pigs. They are “lab rats” who only differ in the type of experiments they are subjected to, from the inmates poked, prodded, and zapped during the radiation and hormone experiments that occurred from the 1940’s until the 1970’s.
Dr. James V Bennett, who was then the director of the U. S. Bureau of Pris­ons, made this crystal clear at the same 1962 conference where Dr. Schein made his presentation. He made the observation that the federal prison system presented “a tremendous opportunity to carry on some of the experimenting to which the various panelists have alluded.” 8 He wasn’t idly talking. In July 1972, prisoners at Marion Federal Penitentiary smuggled out details to U. N. emissaries of psychological experiments that were being conducted on them. 9 The use of psychological torture techniques in prisons was already widesspread enough in the early 1970’s, that Jessica Mitford wrote about them in a remarkable August 1973, Harper’s magazine article entitled: The Torture Cure: In Some, American Prisons, It Is Already 1984. Among other things, the revelations in that article are credited with contributing to the end of the radiation and hormone experiments on prisoners in Oregon. 10 However, Ms. Mitford’s main thrust was exposing the use of prisoners as “lab rats” testing the effectiveness of sophisticated forms of mental coercion and powerful psychoactive drugs. In her article she wrote about the results of a laboratory experiment designed to test the effects of isolation on the human mind:

“The exciting potential of sensory deprivation as a behavior modifier was revealed through an experiment in which students were paid $20 a day to live in tiny, solitary cubicles with nothing to do. The experiment was supposed to last at least six weeks, but none of the stu­dents could take it for more than a few days: Many experienced vivid hallucinations – one student in particular insisted that a tiny spaceship had got into the chamber and was buzzing around shooting pellets at him. While they were in this condition, the experimenter fed the students propaganda messages: No matter how poorly it was presented or how illogical it sounded, the propaganda had a marked effect on the students’ attitudes – an effect that lasted for at least a year after they came out of the deprivation chambers.” 11

Ms. Mitford expanded on her Harper’s article in Kind and Usual Pun­ishment: the Prison Business (1973). In the chapter detailing psychological ex­periments on prisoners, she quotes a 1970 prophecy Dr. Bennett made about prisons in the year 2000 AD: “In my judgment the prison system will increasingly be valued, and used, as a laboratory and workshop of social change.” 12
Supermax prisons and other experi­mental forms of mind control exercised on prisoners are a part of today’s reality that Dr. Bennett envisioned almost thirty years ago.
Remarkably, authorities in the federal government recently let the cat out of the bag they are aware of their potential li­ability for conducting psychological experiments on prisoners. This was re­vealed in The Prison Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) enacted in 1996. Its provi­sions contribute to the legal disenfranchisement of prisoners by effec­tively limiting their ability to redress wrongs and grievances through the fed­eral court system. One of its provisions specifically prevents prisoners from suc­cessfully suing prison officials for “mental or emotional harm unless they can also prove physical injury.” 13 Almost diabolical in its design, this provision of the PLRA effectively prohibits lawsuits stemming from the psychological torture rampant in America’s prisons.
It is significant that isolation experi­ments involving prisoners at Dachau were among the vivisection experiments conducted by Nazi doctors. 14 Needless to say, the work of these discredited Nazi doctors is being continued daily in the laboratories of physical and mental tor­ture masquerading as American prisons.
Non-consenting prisoners are experi­mented on in many dehumanizing ways. Yet their systematic mistreatment is openly condoned by political, judicial, and bureaucratic authorities in the United States who view them in the same way the Nazis viewed the inmates at Dachau and Auschwitz. They don’t believe they are really people.

END

Endnotes for: The Mental Torture of American Prisoners – Cheaper Than Lab Rats, Part 11. This essay was originally published in Prison Legal News, April 1999, Vol. 10, No. 4., pp. 1-3.

1 “Coercive Persuasion: a Socio-psychological Analysis of the “Brainwashing” of American Civilian Prisoners by the Chinese Communists,” Edgar H. Schein with Inge Schneier and Curtis H. Barker, W. W. Norton, New York, 1961.
2 “The Torture Cure: In some American pris­ons, it is already 1984,” Jessica Mitford, Harper’s, August, 1973, pp. 16-30, 18.
3 Ibid., p. 18 (emphasis added).
4 “The Psychology of Self-Esteem: a new concept of man’s psychological nature,” Nathaniel Branden, Ph.D., Nash Publishing, Los Angeles, 1969, pp. 184-188. Dr. Branden also refers to this principle as psychological visibil­ity.
5 “The Torture Cure,” p. 18.
6 “Kind and Usual Punishment: the Prison Business,” Jessica Mitford, Alfred A Knopf, N. Y. 1973, pp. 123-125.
7 “Criminals Can Be Brainwashed – Now,” Dr. James V. McConnell, Psychology Today, April, 1970, pp. 14-16.
8 “The Torture Cure,” p. 18 [9] ibid., p. 18.
9 Ibid., p. 18.
10 “Psychologist pays price to stop experi­ments,” Karen Dorn Steele, The Spokesman-Review, Spokane, WA, June 19, 1994, p. A8.
11 “The Torture Cure,” p. 25. (emphasis added).
12 “Kind and Usual Punishment,” p. 130, quot­ing Bennett’s book, I Chose Prison (1970).
13 “Criminal Injustice: Confronting the Prison Crisis,” Ed. Elihu Rosenblatt, South End Press,
Boston, 1996, p. 83.
14 Ibid., p. 325. Vivisection is the scientific ritual of experimenting on animals in ways that are known to be painful to them. When human beings are involved, an important part of this ritual is redefining them as a form of non-hu­man animal so they can be mistreated with a clear conscience. For example, the Nazis re­ferred to Jews as lice and rats, because ruthlessly rooting out and exterminating disease carrying vermin is considered to benefit society as a whole. (See: “Dominating Knowledge,” ed. Frederique Apffel Marglin and Stephen A. Marglin, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1990, pp. 163-169.) Similarly, the criminal justice pro­cess in the U.S. is a ritualistic procedure that among other things, serves the function of re­defining someone convicted of a crime as something less than a whole human being. Once officially dehumanized and accorded the legal status approaching that of a 19th century plan­tation slave, men and women labeled as criminals are “legally” permitted to be treated with con­scienceless disregard.

Here is the Joint hearing before select committee on Intelligence, 1977 document that has detailed information on MK-ULTRA.
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/nat … KULTRA.pdf

http://www.newspapers.com/newspage/49385779/

"THE author attributes the’ early progress of the university to the policy of Principal Dawson, who was the first to organize the teaching of scientific subjects. In connection with the support of the university by prominent Montrealersr Mr. Gibbon writes: "It is interesting to note that Sir WUliam Macdonald, Lord Strathcona, Sir Herbert Holt, J. V. McConnell and other donors of large sums were not graduates of McGill, many of them not graduates of any university at all."

This is the letter that was attached to the bomb.
________________________________
Letter to James V. McConnell

[Handwritten:] Carta enviada con el paquete […] exp. 100. La carta estaba en un sobre prendido con cinta al paquete. El sobre […] [See translation below]

[Typed:] Department of History

University of Utah

Salt Lake City, Utah 84112

November 12, 1985

Dr. James V. McConnell

2900 E. Delhi Road

Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103

Dear Dr. McConnell:

I am a doctoral candidate in History at the University of Utah. My field of interest is the history of science, and I am writing my dissertation on the development of the behavioral sciences during the twentieth century.

This dissertation aspires to be more than a mere collection of facts. In it I am attempting to analyse the factors in society at large that tend to promote vigorous development in a given area of science, and especially I am attempting to shed light on the way in which progress in a particular field of research influences the public attitudes toward the field in such a manner as to further accelerate its development, as through research grants, increased interest on the part of the students, and because I believe that they illustrate particularly well my hypotheses concerning the interaction of science and society.

I have now prepared an initial version of the dissertation, but expect to revise it heavily before putting it into final form. Before completing the revisions, I am asking several distinguished researchers in behavioral sciences for their comments on the paper. It is for this purpose that I am sending you herewith a copy of my dissertation on its preliminary form.

Since this dissertation is very long and detailed, I realize that you may not have time to read it in its entirety, but I would appreciate it very much if you could at least look over Chapters 11 and 12, the chapters most closely related to your own field of research, and give me your comments and any corrections you may have. Particularly I would like to know your reaction to the idea outlined in the last three paragraphs of Chapter 12. Of course, any comments that you might care to make on any other part of the dissertation would also be most welcome.

I thank you in advance for your kind assistance.

Very truly yours,

Ralph C. Kloppenburg

[Handwritten:] Letter mailed with package of exp. 100. The letter was in an envelope attached to the package with tape. The envelope had the address, but no [crossed out] postage. The package itself had enough postage for the package and the letter.

"The first bomb, however, was not sent through the mail, but delivered by Kaczynski himself to the University of Illinois Chicago Circle Campus on May 25, 1978. He dropped the package between two parked cars in the lot near the Science and Technology buildings, hoping that a student would pick it up and take it to the post office or else hand deliver it to its addressed target, one E. J. Smith, a professor of rocket science at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, New York. The package was found by Mary Gutierrez who tried to fit it into the mail box but couldn’t, so she sent it back to the return address, which was listed as Professor Buckley Crisp, Jr., a professor of computer science at Northwestern University’s Technological Institute. When he received the package, however, Crisp thought it looked suspicious, so he contacted campus security, who sent Terry Marker to inspect it. When Marker opened the package, it exploded, nearly blowing off his right hand. He then contacted the ATF, who filed a report, destroyed the evidence and proceeded to forget about it. (Chase, 49)"

https://epic.org/privacy/wiretap/nsf_release.html

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
EPIC UNCOVERS MOU BETWEEN NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION AND CIA ON SCIENTIFIC SUPPORT FOR WEB MONITORING
WASHINGTON, DC — As a result of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request submitted by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) to the federally-funded National Science Foundation (NSF), EPIC has uncovered details of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the CIA and the NSF on the joint funding in the areas of mathematics and physical sciences that, among other things, is researching ways to monitor on-line chat rooms for terrorist activities. The joint program is called "Approaches to Combat Terrorism: Opportunities for Basic Research."

EPIC’s FOIA resulted in press reports about a $157,673 grant being awarded by NSF to Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, NY. The grant is for a project called "Surveillance, Analysis and Modeling of Chatroom Communities."

According to the MOU, signed by the CIA on April 14, 2003 and by the NSF on April 16, 2003, the cooperative agreement between the NSF and the Intelligence Community was agreed upon after a joint Intelligence Community/NSF workshop held in November 2002. According to the MOU, the initiative concentrates on Energy Sources, Sensors and Detectors, Image Reconstruction and Analysis, Optical Spectography, and Mathematical Techniques. The MOU states: the initiative sponsors are committed to continuing the initiative beyond Fiscal Year (FY) 2004. According to the MOU, NSF funded $2.50 million in FY2003 and another $2.5 million in FY 2004. The CIA’s total amount is not stated but NSF’s contribution is listed at 70 percent. The MOU states that it was to remain in effect through FY 2004.

A Sept. 17, 2004 memo from the CIA to Dr. Leland M. Jameson, the Program Director for Computational and Applied Mathematics at the NSF, states, "We gratified [sic] that the scientific community wants to help the nation and contribute to the nation’s security in a time of peril." It continues, "As far as what we do with the technology — we have thorough oversight by the US Congress and we strictly follow all applicable laws." The CIA email was in response to a Sept. 17, 2004 article about the chat room monitoring program in "Red Herring" and a request for an interview of Jameson by a reporter in New Jersey. Jameson informs the CIA official that, "I will have to give another interview. I was told the worst thing is for a reporter to write that ‘the NSF refused to comment.’"

On October 16, 2004, the Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), in a letter signed by former recipients of CPSR’s Norbert Wiener Award, expressed their "concern about the significant redirection in science funding toward the development of systems of mass surveillance. It is our view that this research priority could pose a fundamental risk to political freedom, privacy, and Constitutional liberty."

The newly-released NSF documents are available at:

EPIC’s Freedom of Information Act Request (pdf)
NSF’s Memorandum of Understanding (pdf)
Research Proposal to the NSF (pdf)
NSF Award Abstract (pdf)
Approaches to Combat Terrorism: Program Solicitation (pdf)
Press Coverage (pdf)

http://codshit.blogspot.com/2004/02/how … lvage.html

How CIA Operatives Managed to Salvage Deadliest Operations despite Watergate’s Wake
by Trowbridge H. Ford

While it would have been nice if CIA’s independent operations, especially programmed killings by Manchurian Candidates, had ceased with the disappearance of Agency operatives William King Harvey, Richard M. Helms, and E. Howard Hunt, they, unfortunately, resumed as part of its effort to revitalize covert operations, once the fallout from Watergate had been overcome. By then, the Agency had managed to find ways to salvage the capability to create them. It was then just a question of whether conditions would become bad enough, yet safe enough, for it, especially former DCI George Bush, DDO Theodore Shackley, DDI Ray Cline, director of the Office of Security Robert Gambino, veteran agent Thomas Clines, and others to resort to using them again.

During the interim, Hunt was confined for a term in the federal penitentiary in Danbury, Connecticut for managing the break-in, ‘Executive Action’ man Harvey went into a deadly tailspin pursuing his increasingly talkative, former Mafia colleagues, and DCI Helms was appointed American Ambassador to Teheran, the furthest place Nixon could find to exile him to in the hope of saving his Presidency but to no avail. By October 1978, with the passage of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, it was thought naively that the possibilities of creating their replacements had been foreclosed. In fact, by the time Reagan was in the White House, Helms and Hunt even were in the process of making something of a comeback despite appearances to the contrary.

The real problems for the Agency started when William Colby, who had replaced DCI James Schlesinger, began cooperating unprecedentedly with congressional committees investigating Watergate. Schlesinger had immedilately fired 1,500 agents, 1,000 of them from the Operations Directorate, and had ordered DD Colby to prepare a report on CIA’s illegal activities, what became known as the "Family Jewels" (Christopher Andrew, For the President’s Eyes Only, p. 388), hardly what Nixon had envisioned when he appointed him DCI. Nixon then turned to veteran Colby in the hope that he would stop the rot, but he hardly proved more satisfactory, making public during congressional interrogations covert assassination plots, and domestic operations. "He insisted he was trying to save the CIA by showing it to operate under the law and the authority of elected politicians." (Martin Walker, "CIA chief who ‘came clean’ is presumed drowned," The Guardian, April 30, 1996, p. 1)

Actually, it took a bit of doing by Gerald Ford, America’s only non-elected President, to reduce the damage to this level. As soon as Colby leaked information to Seymour Hersh of The New York Times that CI Chief James Angleton had been conducting domestic counterintelligence operations for years, leading to his dismissal, Ford was forced to appoint a commission under Vice President Nelson Rockefeller to investigate CIA activities within the United States. (Mark Riebling, Wedge, p. 323ff.) To counter any unexpected blowback from an examination of the illegal surveillance program MH-CHAOS – what could lead to Operation MK-ULTRA, and Harvey’s assassination program – Ford called Helms back from Iran, in the hope that he could save the Agency. Ford had long been in the Agency’s pocket because of his sexual excesses, especially his paedophilia. (For more, see Cathy O’Brien’s often reprinted TRANCE, p. 82ff.) The President had been softened up for drastic action by a feeble assassination attempt by Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme, a most unrepentant disciple of CIA-connected Charles Manson’s – what would have made Rockefeller President if successful.

The former DCI had done everything he could think of to help before he had gone – e.g., had Sidney Gottlieb of the Technical Services Staff destroy the main records of the mind-control programs, canceled Dr. Stephen Aldrich’s Project OFTEN to find just the right substance to "…simulate a heart attack or stroke in the targeted individual" (Quoted from John Marks, The Search for the ‘Manchurain Candidate’, p. 227), transferred what needed to be preserved of CHAOS to Richard Ober’s International Terrorism Group in the wake of the court injunction against contract agents, especially Victor Marchetti, publishing their complaints about it without Agency approval (Angus Mackenzie, Secret: The CIA’s War at Home, p. 41ff.), and briefed Schlesinger, albeit unsuccessfully, about how to limit the fallout. In fact, Schlesinger was so remiss that he failed to inform Ford of Colby’s report on the "Family Jewels", what his successor hurriedly tried to amend on January 3, 1975.

The next morning at a meeting in the White House, Helms similarly advised Ford, calling for bringing the FBI within the scope of the commission’s inquiry, a focus which would expose its illegal COINTELPRO Operation, and thereby blunt potential criticism: "They overlap," Helms explained deceptively, "and you may as well get to the bottom of it." ("Memorandum of Conversation," Ford papers) Helms had laid the groundwork for making the most of the meeting by having had breakfast with NSA Henry Kissinger, and his deputy General Brent Scowcroft beforehand, as Max Holland explained in a Sept. 18, 1998 article, "Getting Closer to the Truth about the Death of JFK," in The Boston Globe: "Helms said all these stories were just the tip of the iceberg. If they come out, blood will flow. For example, Robert Kennedy personally managed the operation on the assassination of Castro." (A27) Little wonder that Ford responded with every assurance to Helms about containing the scandal’s consequences: "I have only the most admiration for you and for your work. Frankly, we are in a mess. I want you to tell me whatever you want. I believe the CIA is essential to the country. It has to exist and perform its functions." (op. cit.)

Of course, in so advising the President, the former DCI overlooked MK-ULTRA, and cleaned up the origin of the assassination plots. The former had been carried on without the knowledge, or approval of any President before possibly Nixon, and the latter had been instituted behind the backs of Eisenhower and the Kennedys, and had been continued in 1963 against Castro despite the express orders of Attorney General Kennedy to the contrary. (Jonathan Vankin and John Whelan, The 60 Greatest Conspiracies of All Time, p. 3ff.) Moreover, Helms had lied about Agency domestic spying before the National Press Club in 1971, explaining reassuringly, but most dishonestly: "We do not target American citizens. The nation must to a degree take it on faith that we who lead the CIA are honorable men, devoted to the nation’s service." (www. levity.com/aciddreams) Ford was so impressed by such lies that he had greater confidence in Helms, and the Agency serving the national interest than he had in his proposed Blue Ribbon Panel.

In saying this, one must appreciate that CIA has always been more willing to keep Ford informed, and gain his approval than any elected President. While the former Congressman’s inside account of the Warren Commission for the October 4, 1964 issue of Life magazine, and his co-authoring of Protrait of the Assassin, the polemic against Lee Harvey Oswald as JFK’s assassin, come most readily to mind, the Agency had just gotten him to approve of Project Jennifer, the dangerous, $300 million effort to raise a sunken Soviet nuclear submarine from the Pacific Ocean seabed by the Hughes Tool Company-built Glomar Explorer, what could have resulted in another eyeball-to-eyeball confrontation with Moscow, or just disastrous nuclear explosions in the middle of the ocean. No sooner had Ford been confirmed as Vice President than Colby briefed him on the status of the seven-year project (Andrew, p. 399), reminiscent of how CIA had gotten JFK on board for the Bay of Pigs invasion. Nixon apparently had not approved of the former, nor Eisenhower of the latter. The favorite ploy by the Agency to get Presidents behind its projects is to brief successors about what their predecessors are said to have been informed of, and approved.

On January 16, 1975, to reduce the chances of the commission wandering from the straight, and narrow laid out by the former DCI, the President blurted out at a White House luncheon for the NYT’s editorial leadership that the Agency had been carrying out assassinations, and that they had been ordered by previous Presidents – what would "blacken the reputation of every President since Truman" (Quoted from Andrew, p. 405.) – though there is no evidence that he talked to anyone but Helms and Colby about the matter. Since the Commission’s charter concerned domestic operations, the President was engaging in just the kind of rumor-mongering he said he feared, and abhored. Little wonder that the claim soon leaked out, leading CBS’s Daniel Shorr to question ultimately Colby about the targets involved. The CIA had not assassinated anyone within the country, he answered, though he declined to say whether the Agency may have seen to the assassination the Congo’s Patrice Lumumba. In sum, the purpose of this Machiavellian ploy by the President, Colby’s disclaimer notwithstanding, was to change the whole focus of the inquiry from what the Agency independently had done domestically to what Presidents, particularly JFK, allegedly ordered it to do overseas.

The ploy’s success was dramatically demonstrated when DCI Colby testified before the Senate’s Select Committee to Study Government Operations with Respect to Intelligence Activities about its assassination attempts, highlighted by showing the poison dart gun the Agency had developed for Lumumba’s execution – what some critics of the Warren Report were now claiming was used by the so-called ‘Umbrella Man’ in Dealey Plaza to finish off JFK. No one, it seems, had been killed by this means. The Rockefeller Commission, according to its remit only to investigate CIA’s minor transgressions, had dumped the whole question of its "Family Jewels" in Congress’s lap after Colby had acknowledged that the Agency had tested the effect of LSD on unwitting subjects, resulting in the suicide of Dr. Frank Olson, a CIA researcher in biological warfare. (Andrew, p. 404ff.) Then there were revelations about MH-CHAOS, the Agency’s domestic spying operation on anti-war dissidents, and its assistance to the White House Plumbers. The Committee chairman, Senator Frank Church, was soon proclaiming, like Helms, that Olson’s death was only "the tip of the iceberg", and that the Agency "may have been behaving like a rogue elephant on the rampage." (Quoted from p. 411.)

Actually, its prospects were not as bad as they seemed, though, as previous Presidents, and prospective ones were now more on trial than the Agency. Advisers to Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy were hard pressed about what their deceased bosses had ordered, though Harvey, Helms, and former DDP Richard Bissell were obliged to give perfunctory explanations of what they had attempted. Truman, the most outspoken critic of the Agency, had recently conveniently died, and former DCI Allen Dulles had made sure that his outburst against it after the JFK assassination was rendered as benign as possible for posterity by placing, behind his back, reassuring material about operations during his watch in his papers. (See Andrew, p. 171, esp. notes 89, 91 and 92, p. 572.) DCI John McCone testified that he had never heard of any officially sanctioned efforts to assassinate Castro ("Alleged Assassination Plots Involving Foreign Leaders": 94th Congress, lst Session, Report No. 94-465, p. 100), but Agency veterans contended that he had been outside the loop in such matters. All the while, the press was clamoring about Church’s presidential ambitions in making such claims. Needless to say, by the time it was over, people were more apt to suspect that JFK had been killed by the Cuban dictator in retaliation for his alleged efforts against him rather than the Agency had removed him, and others from the political scene.

Since Colby had set the cover up in place, he was dismissed as DCI, once the Church Committee publicly released its report despite Ford’s objections, and was replaced by George H. W. Bush. For cosmetic purposes, he had Ford sign presidential orders prohibiting Agency involvement in unwitting drug experiments, and assassinations, though the President was free to change the policy in any individual case. Shortly afterwards, American mercenary, and former CIA agent Michael Townley of Chile’s secret service (DINA) assassinated former Allende cabinet minister Orlando Letelier, and his American coworker Ronni Moffitt in downtown Washington. (Mary Helen Spooner, Soldiers in a Narrow Land, p. 125ff.) Instead of agreeing to a statute to prevent the subversion of democratically-elected governments, and clandestine support of dictatorial ones by CIA – what the Pike Committee in the House had also supported in its report on Agency institutional excesses – Bush, put on notice by Nixon not to become another Colby (Mackenzie, p. 63), saw to the implementation of secrecy contracts throughout the intelligence community which would guarantee no more devastating leaks – what the Agency conveniently claimed CounterSpy was responsible for by listing Richard Welch’s name in an issue after the Athens station chief had been assassinated.

Actually, Bush was much more concerned about US Navy psychologist Lt. Com. Thomas Narut, while working in a naval hospital in Naples, having informed a NATO conference in Oslo that his work involved training service personnel, even convicted murderers in the stockade, to become "assassins" (Sunday Times, July 6, 1975, p. 1), an allusion too close for comfort, given the career of former Marine Lee Harvey Oswald. The process called for dehumanizing the "enemy", and subjecting candidates to images of people being injured and killed in violent ways.

Narut’s revelation gave credence to conspiracy theorist Mae Brussel’s recent article, "Why Was Patricia Hearst Kidnapped?", indicating that the Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA), from its leader Donald "General Field Marshal Cinque" DeFreeze on down, was just a secret government creation, thanks to contributions by the Vacaville Medical Facility, its Black Cuture Association, the Stanford Research Institute, the US Navy, and others. The SLA, according to Brussell, was not truly Black, revolutionary, or an army. Because of her claims, though, she was subjected to such threats that she was obliged to close down her 11-year talk show on Carmel station KLRB. Her final thoughts about how American covert government had used drugs, especially LSD, to highjack the Beat Generation’s radicalism, and its leadership musicians, especially John Lennon, were reserved for a November 1976, unpublished manuscript, "Operation Chaos".

With the possibility of such operations having gone wrong, it was only a matter of time before the House of Representatives appointed a select committee to investigate the assassinations of JFK and Martin Luther King, Jr., though Helms still tried to stop them, according to federal prosecutor Richard Sprague, by claiming that they would embarrass the Kennedys, an obvious allusion to their alleged efforts against Castro, and for the suspect civil rights leader. The former DCI still helped prevent inquiries into the conspiracies against RFK, and former Alabama governor George Wallace. Of course, by this time, almost all the principals in these conspiracies were beyond the recall, thanks to death, retirement, or amnesia, of any congressional body, though its investigations led to the premature deaths of a few more – e. g., JFK’s leading killer Mafioso Chuckie Nicoletti, Oswald handler George de Mohrenschildt (Anthony Summers, Conspiracy, p. 492), and former Cuban President Carlos Prio.

The committee seemed more interested in investigating every diversion, especially when it came to Helms, and every red-herring, particularly about who murdered MLK, instead of determining who probably conspired to kill them. Rather than question Helms about his relations with Harvey, and what they were attempting at home, and in the Caribbean, the committee was more interested in how the Agency endlessly interrogated defector Yuri Nosenko in the hope of showing that the KGB had still somehow assassinated JFK in retaliation for his alleged efforts against Castro, and in the process avoided questions about MK-ULTRA operations, what Marchetti claimed were still going on. (Marks’ files, National Security Archives, Washington)

In the King case, the committee studiously avoided Harvey’s (aka Bill Boxley and William Wood) infilltration of Jim Garrison’s investigation of the Dallas assassination in order to pursue the wrong people, and to discredit Jules Ricco Kimble aka Raoul (CIA Memorandum, September 7, 1967, "Memorandum #6: Garrison and the Kennedy Assassination"), an operation so sensitive that the District Attorney’s assistant Thomas Bethell stopped keeping his diary of the investigation in order to avoid having to make mention of it. Of course, the committee was unconcerned about more Domestic Contact Service activity when it came time to discredit, and disavow Harvey himself at the end of April 1968 – just before ‘the Fat Man’ went to Toronto to pay off James Earl Ray, and send him on his way to Southern Africa to join white mercenaries, what DCI Helms felt important enough to write Senator Richard Russell, and Representative Mendel Rivers about. ("Garrison Investigator ‘Bill Boxley’," http:mcadams.posc.mu.edu)

Despite, or perhaps also because of the cover ups, morale at the Agency continued to plummet. Helms was finally convicted of lying when he denied to Senator Stuart Symington of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in Febuary 1973 that the Agency had played a role in Allende’s overthrow in Chile, but the chastened Senate settled for a suspended sentence, and a fine which the Association of Foreign Intelligence Officers paid. Of course, by this time DCI Bush had long been replaced by Admiral Stansfield Turner of the Carter administration who sought an Agency which ran on a stricter, more scientific basis, typified by passage of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, much to the horror of Operations Directorate veterans. According to them, Agency propagandist Edward Jay Epstein wrote in a 1985 article for Commentary, "Who Killed the CIA? The Confessions of Stansfield Turner," the former Navy admiral had done it. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and Ayatollah Khomeini’s takeover of the American Embassy in Teheran so demoralized the Agency that its veterans were openly insulting Carter’s DCI. (Riebling, p. 342)

Little wonder that Agency insider Bush then decided to run for the Presidency, and CIA veterans quit its ranks in droves to join his race for the White House. During 1978, Bush set aside time from his oil business in Houston to visit secretly former DCIs (Webster G. Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, George Bush: The Unofficial Biography, David Icke E – Magazine, Chapter 16), the leading one being Helms who had just come back from Teheran, and would soon become a leading contact in the resumption of mind-control operations. The former DCI was the only one who knew how to revive the capability with possible candidates. DDO Shackley became a Bush "speech writer", obviously the cover for covert operations. The "Blond Ghost", Miami station chief when Harvey was running ‘Executive Action’ operations against Castro (ZR/RIFLE), was his ideal replacement in any mind-control operations. Former DDI Cline justified the use of MK-ULTRA operations to meet the allegedly growing Soviet threat. Cline’s son-in-law, Stefan Halper, became Bush’s "muck-raking" staff director, which included former director of the Office of Security, Robert Gambino. He knew everything about security precautions against various individuals as the President travelled around the country. "According to one estimate," Tarpley and Chaitkin have written, "at least 25 former intelligence officials worked directly for the Bush campaign."

In case any "dirty" covert action was needed, Shackley had an ideal candidate, Theodore Kaczynski aka The Unabomber. The maths genuis had been tested by Dr. Henry Murray for the Agency while attending Harvard back in the early ’60s – when Shackley was running the Operation 40 leadership from Miami to topple Castro. Murray used a battery of tests to see if the candidate could stand up to pressure, handle drugs, lie convincingly, read a person’s character by the nature of his clothing, and the like. (Marks, pp. 18-9) No sooner did Kaczynski fail his test than Shackley failed his when JFK was assassinated, moving on to Laos. By June 1969 Kaczynski had deteriorated so psychologically at the University of California at Berkeley because of its cults, drugs, and violent politics that he retired, ultimately to the wilds of Lincoln, Montana in the solitary pursuit of his "social causes".

While at Berkeley, though, a contact for the Agency, James William Kilgore, had apparently tried to recruit Kaczynski to the SLA cause (Vankin & Whelan, pp. 472-4) while working with CIA-connected Colston Westbrook’s Black Cultural Association. No one would suspect that this now twice-tested CIA potential psychopath, once as an agent, and then as an agent provocateur, had been plugged back into The Company, not even conspiracy theorist Brussell – and she never did. (For the growing red-herring that Dr. Murray may have made Kaczynski into a Manchurian Candidate, see the controversy that Alston Chase caused by his article, "Harvard and the Making of the Unabomber," in the June 2000 issue of The Atlantic.) Once Kaczynski allegedly started his bombing campaign, he and Kilgore eluded all law-enforcement efforts to find them for the next 18 years – until after the Oklahoma City bombing which finally forced the FBI’s hand. Recently, Kilgore was found in South Africa, and was extradited to America after a plea-bargain was arranged for commiting forgery, and weapons violations – what prevents a wider examination of his nefarious activities.

On June 23, 1978, after living most of seven years alone, and without bothering anyone except his family back in Illinois, Kaczynski was persuaded by his brother David, who ultimately tipped off the Bureau about his capabilities, to return to civilized life by becoming a press operator at Foam Cutting Engineers outside Chicago. (Court chronology at his trial – the almost totally ignored or distorted period of his life.) David became his supervisor, and had apparently convinced Ted, as he had done after living an anchorite’s life in Texas, that he could finally find a satisfactory female relationship with the plant supervisor, Ellen Tarmichael. In doing so, David became a co-conspirator in the project, as Vankin and Whelan have suggested. (p. 470) No sooner did Ted take up with her than the relationship started falling apart, thanks apparently to too much ingestion of LSD. Ted responded to Ellen’s refusal of his advances by circulating a lewd limerick around the plant about her. On August 23, 1978, David fired Ted, with Tarmichael’s approval. Kaczynski then went into a deadly tailspin, one in which he was apparently stuffed with more LSD.

Others seem to have anticipated this eventuality because even before Kaczynski suffered this most unexpected humiliation, a bomb having all his ultimate hallmarks exploded at Northwestern University, injuring campus security officer Terry Marker when he was obliged to open it. On May 26th, while Kaczynski was still trying to find a university audience for his anti-technology manifesto in the Chicago area, a woman found a package addressed to Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute’s Professor E. J. Smith from Northwestern’s Buckley Crist in a parking lot of the Chicago campus of the University of Illinois, and made an arrangement to have it returned to the apparent sender. Who she is, and what the arrangement was were never clarified. Crist was suspicious of the unknown package, though, resulting in the explosion which seriously injured Marker. Professor Smith later declared that he had never seen the package. It seems that the incident was a set up, probably even including Tarmichael, to help create a false legend about Kaczynski.

Little wonder that when Kaczynski was finally arrested on April 3, 1996, Tarmichael was quick off the mark to exploit prosecution leaks about her relationship with the Unabomber to improve her alibi of not being responsible for anything he did. Two weeks later, an "exasperated" Tarmichael came forward to deny any significant link, especially a romantic one, with the accused. ("Woman downplays any ties to Kaczynski," Minneapolis Star Tribune,April 19, 1996) As for Ted’s alleged reaction to her rejection, she responded disingenuously: "I have never seen these poems, nor have I been informed about their content." With a complete lack of law enforcement interest in how Kaczynski started becoming a mad bomber, it was to be expected that Tarmichael concluded thus: "It should be noted that the first mail bomb attributed to the Unabomber exploded a month before I ever met Ted Kaczynski." ("To attribute" means "to regard as caused by." Whether this was true was never tested in court, as Kaczynski was only charged in the incidents which resulted in death.)

With such hutzpa by apparently another conspirator, it was hardly surprising that the Bureau, which had always thought that the Unabomber originated in the Chicago area, but somehow could not get a line on the controversial Kaczynski for 18 years, took similar liberties with its inquiries, especially the questioning of university colleagues, particularly Northwestern’s Donald Saari. In the spring of 1978, Kaczynski visited his office on several occasions, trying to convince him of his anti-technology views. ("Prisoner of Rage," New York Times, May 26, 1996) Saari urged him to try people at the Chicago campus of the University of Illinois for a more receptive audience. Kaczynski did so, but without success, exclaiming later to Saari: "I’ll get even."

Though this apparently happened on May 26th, neither Saari nor the FBI did anything about his threat despite the fact that he had advertised the need for them in the Saturday Review in 1970. Ted’s threat occurred after the first bomb had already exploded. Moreover, the Unabomber couldn’t bomb straight, as Kaczynski’s threat was against the people who ran the parking lot where the first bomb was found, not at Northwestern. (And how often in the history of the Post Office has a returned package ended up unopened in a parking lot which has no connection with either the sender or receiver? Apparently, some unknown party wanted to make as wide criminal connections as possible with Kaczynski’s alleged threatening behavior.)

When Carter went ahead with plans to sign the SALT-II treaty with the Soviets despite the loss of SIGINT listening stations in Khomeini’s Iran, the Unabomber allegedly placed another bomb on May 9, 1979 at Northwestern, injuring civil engineering student John Harris when he opened the Phillies cigar box containing the crude bomb in a lounge. The following November, right after the American Embassy had been overrun, and the staff taken hostage (Christopher Andrew, For the President’s Eyes Only, p. 449), another Unabomber bomb was found, it seems, and destroyed by the postal system before it could explode. By the middle of the month, when the President’s hopes of a quick release of the hostages, as had occurred the previous February, proved unfounded, Kaczynski apparently put his act together, exploding a bomb on an American Airlines flight bound for Washington from Chicago which caused a fire in the baggage compartment, and 18 passengers suffering smoke inhalation. The Unabomber’s testing as a psychopath had proven most promising.

The reason for these attacks was to convince the White House that terrorism, especially from Teheran, was becoming pervasive, what resulted in Carter overreacting to the threat. He had just set himself up for such overreaction by pardoning the Puerto Rican nationalist Oscar Collazo who had tried to assassinate Truman in 1950, and four others who had shot up the Congress five years later – what intelligence agencies had considered isolated attacks. Instead of the President taking the hostage crisis in stride, he set up a "command post" in the White House to make sure that the hostages were released before election day. As Jeffrey Simon has convincingly shown in The Terrorist Trap, the President handed the election initiative to Reagan by so concentrating on their plight. (p. xff, esp. 128-39.) Carter was boxed into a ‘Rose Garden strategy’ for his re-election, one which almost guaranteed his defeat.

While Bush had hopes of replacing Carter, his campaign seems more like a ‘stalking horse’ to make sure that Reagan, the popular California governor, succeeded the former peanut farmer from Georgia. Reagan was a great defender of America’s national security state, having refused to permit Harvey’s absurd extradition of E. E. Bradley, suspected of being one of the "tramps" in the railway yard beside Dealey Plaza, during Jim Garrison’s investigation; to suspect that Sirhan Sirhan, RFK’s alleged assassin, was anything more than a foreign-born loner; or to participate, though a member, on the Rockefeller Commission to make sure that it got nowhere.

Despite some support among Republican faithfuls, Bush dropped out of the campaign on May 26, 1980, only to be selected as Reagan’s running mate after former President Ford had refused, as expected, at the party convention in July, thanks to his good relationship with Reagan campaign manager, and former OSS officer William Casey. From that moment on, the Republican campaign became obsessed with the possibility that Carter, who was about 10 percentage points behind in the polls, would somehow pull off an "Ocober Surprise" – the release of the 52 American hostages held in Teheran – and steal the election. To make this most unlikely, Bush now had a spy on Carter’s NSC, Donald Gregg, who had worked under Shackley in Saigon, thereby insuring knowing beforehand every possible action by the President. Gregg, as CIA’s liaison with the Pike Committee, had helped discredit its findings, and was thick as flies with its discharged covert operatives, especially Che Guevara’s killers Felix Rodriguez and Gustavo Villoldo.

FOIA Documents