DOCSLIB.ORG

Cia Admits to Deal with Justice Department to Obstruct Justice

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Cia Admits to Deal with Justice Department to Obstruct Justice I was a 25 year veteran, highly decorated international deep cover agent, who witnessed, first hand, how the CIA, State Department and the Department of Justice teamed up to kill every major international drug case I was involved in, for political and economic reasons. At the same time our politicians and bureaucrats lied to the American people and taxed them hundreds of billions of dollars to fight drugs. I was a witness to the highest kind of treason imaginable committed by our government's covert agencies, politicians and bureaucrats, against their own people. After my brother, a heroin addict for 25 years, committed suicide and my son, a highly decorated New York City police officer was killed by crack addicts during a holdup, I had experienced enough. I decided I would use whatever talents God gave me and training the government gave me, against the criminals responsible for the immense and deadly fraud known as "The War on Drugs." You can read the truth in my books, my articles and hear it on my radio show - Mike Levine www.expertwitnessradio.com CIA ADMITS TO DEAL WITH JUSTICE DEPARTMENT TO OBSTRUCT JUSTICE. Michael Levine & Laura Kavanau-Levine THE EXPERT WITNESS radio show March 24, 1998 As an ex DEA agent I found the complete lack of coverage by mainstream media of what I saw last night during the congressional hearings into CIA Drug Trafficking, on CNN both depressing and frightening. I sat gape-mouthed as I heard the CIA Inspector General, testify that there has existed a secret agreement between CIA and the Justice Department, wherein "during the years 1982 to 1995, CIA did not have to report the drug trafficking its assets did to the Justice Department." (This is the agreement, by the way, that lead directly to events described in our non-fiction books, The Big White Lie and Deep Cover. Those many who have read the books will know instantly what I am talking about). To a trained DEA agent this literally means that the CIA had been granted a license to obstruct justice in our so-called war on drugs; a license that lasted-so CIA claims-from 1982 to 1995, a time during which Americans paid almost $150 billion in taxes to "fight" drugs. Of course the evidence indicates that they did not stop obstructing justice in 1995 either, but that I suppose is going to be another congressional hearing. As far as the current hearings go this Catch 22 "revelation" means that all the present hearings are for nothing; that-if they are caught violating the drug laws-they had been given "secret" license to do so by our Justice Department. This might also explain Janet Reno's recent and unprecedented move in blocking the release of a Justice Department investigation into CIA drug trafficking. God, with friends like these, who needs enemies? It is now clear that this agreement began with the events described in THE BIG WHITE LIE; that the top drug traffickers in Bolivia, then supplying virtually all the world's cocaine-including Sonia Atala-were CIA assets that had to be protected from our deep cover probe. Laura and I still have the proof of this that we used to back up the publication THE BIG WHITE LIE. The same proof was later incorporated into other data backing up the publications of DEEP COVER and TRIANGLE OF DEATH. Our evidence-which congress has been craning its neck not to see- for instance, shows clearly that during Operation Hun (the story in The Big White Lie), secret meetings were held with CIA and Justice Department wherein all indictments of top government officials in Bolivia were blocked. We now believe this agreement began because of Operation Hun. CIA had to hide the fact that they were supporting the people manufacturing virtually all the cocaine being produced in the world, at that time. In Deep Cover we showed that, during Operation Trifecta-a highly successful deep cover probe into the top of the drug world in three countries (Panama, Bolivia and Mexico) -Attorney General of the US Ed Meese found it necessary to warn the Attorney General of Mexico about DEA's case. We, (undercover DEA agents and Customs agents), found links between top US government officials and the people who murdered DEA agent Kiki Camarena, that to this day go unexamined by our congress or anyone else. In "TRIANGLE OF DEATH, a work of "faction" we showed CIA's real-life involvement in the protection and creation of one of the most murderous criminal organizations to ever plague America, an organization created by escaped Nazi fugitives under CIA protection-events occurring long before this alleged CIA Justice agreement. And so the dance continues. If anyone watched the CNN show you cannot have helped but notice the snickering on the part of Congressional chairman Porter Goss (an ex CIA officer), as congresswoman Maxine Waters spoke. Now here's the reason why: Sources of mine, who speak to me from inside this veil of secrecy out of conscience and because I am cheaper and more reliable than a psychiatrist, have already told me the following: 1. There is secret communication between CIA and members of the Congressional staff- one must keep in mind that Porter Goss, the chairman, is an ex CIA official- indicating that the whole hearing is just a smoke and mirror show so that the American people-particularly the Black community- can "blow off some steam" without doing any damage to CIA. The CIA has been assured that nothing real will be done, other than some embarrassing questions being asked. 2. That the hearings will result in the CIA receiving even a larger budget than the current $26 billion that they admit to. One of the most distressing things for me, a 25 year veteran of this business, to listen to was when Congresswoman Waters said that the hearings were not about CIA officers being indicted and going to jail. "That is not going to happen," she said. Almost in the same breath she spoke of a recent case in Miami wherein a Venezuelan National Guard general was caught by Customs agents smuggling more than a ton of cocaine into the US. Despite named CIA officers being involved in the plot, as Congresswoman Waters stated, the Justice Department will not tell her anything about the case because of "secrecy laws." No wonder chairman Goss was snickering. She could not have played more neatly into CIA hands than to surrender before the battle was engaged. For the entire existence of CIA they have gotten away with doing more damage to the American people than all our traditional enemies combined, precisely because no one was ever prosecuted. From the CIA protection of Nazi criminals from war crimes prosecution as they set up criminal organizations that preyed on America (Triangle of Death), to their lies to President Kennedy that dragged us into Bay of Pigs, to their lies to President Johnson that dragged us into the Vietnam War, to their creation of a pan Arab army of American hating, drug trafficking terrorists during the Afghan War, to the Church Commission hearings, to MK-Ultra, to the Bolivian Cocaine Coup ("The Big White Lie"), to their protection of the world's top cocaine traffickers as they laid waste to American streets (Deep cover) , the CIA has acted exactly as Senator Frank Church once described them: "a runaway rogue elephant...completely unresponsive to Congress...they (the CIA) have not only been unproductive, they have been contra productive. they have brought great shame on America." And the dance continues. Is Anyone Apologizing To Gary Webb? THE EXPERT WITNESS RADIO SHOW WBAI 99.5 FM New York City, New York Tuesdays 7-8pm 212-209 2800 - Voice 2970 Host: Michael Levine, 25 year veteran federal agent and author of NY Times best seller DEEP COVER, (soon to be a movie) THE BIG WHITE LIE and (now in paperback) TRIANGLE OF DEATH. Web Sites: www.radio4all.org/expert IS ANYONE APOLOGIZING TO GARY WEBB? by Michael Levine Gary Webb, just in case you've already forgotten him, was the journalist who, in a well researched, understated article entitled "The Dark Alliance," linked the CIA supported Contras to cocaine and weapons being sold to a California street gang and ended up literally being hounded out of journalism by every mainstream news peddling organization in the Yellow Pages. Even his own employer, The San Jose Mercury piled on for the kill. And guess what? The CIA finally admitted, yesterday, in the New York Times no less, that they, in fact, did "work with" the Nicaraguan Contras while they had information that they were involved in cocaine trafficking to the United States. An action known to us court qualified experts and federal agents as Conspiracy to Import and Distribute Cocaine—a federal felony punishable by up to life in prison. To illustrate how us regular walking around, non CIA types are treated when we violate this law, while I was serving as a DEA supervisor in New York City, I put two New York City police officers in a federal prison for Conspiracy to distribute Cocaine when they looked the other way at their friend's drug dealing. We could not prove they earned a nickel nor that they helped their friend in any way, they merely did not do their duty by reporting him. They were sentenced to 10 and 12 years respectively, and one of them, I was recently told, had committed suicide. I have spent three decades as a court qualified expert and federal agent and am not aware of any class of American Citizen having special permission to violate the law that we have been taxed over $1 trillion in the past two decades to enforce; the law that every politician, bureaucrat and media pundit keeps telling us protects us against the most serious danger to American security in our history.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2009 Zmagazine – Fearful Symmetry in Bolivia
    http://www.zmag.org/zmag/viewArticlePrint/22736 Print Fearful Symmetry in Bolivia By James McEnteer McEnteer's ZSpace page In August, artists from Skid Row Los Angeles teamed with Bolivian actors to perform a play throughout Bolivia about the "war on drugs." Drug issues have strained relations between the U.S. and Bolivia and the "war" against drugs has claimed many victims in both countries. The idea of the tour was to see if the play might stimulate citizens of the two countries to find common ground and create a more constructive dialog than their governments. Bolivian President Evo Morales, the first indigenous leader of any South American country, has been for many years, and remains, head of the federation of coca growers. The Bush administration accused Morales of failing to stem the tide of cocaine production and distribution. In turn, Morales accused the U.S. of meddling in Bolivian affairs and plotting with his political enemies to overthrow his government. Both countries expelled each other's ambassadors. The U.S. ended its preferential trade terms with Bolivia, citing the country's lack of drug enforcement cooperation. In retaliation, Bolivia threw out U.S. government employees of the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), and the Peace Corps. Morales and some U.S. officials have expressed a cautious optimism that relations between the two countries may improve in the Obama era, but recently the Bolivian president accused the U.S. of complicity in the Honduras military coup. The California group—named the Los Angeles Poverty Department (LAPD)—has been performing radical street theater for 25 years.
    [Show full text]
  • Federalism and Drug Control Michael M
    Marquette University Law School Marquette Law Scholarly Commons Faculty Publications Faculty Scholarship 1-1-2004 Federalism and Drug Control Michael M. O'Hear Marquette University Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/facpub Part of the Law Commons Publication Information Michael M. O’Hear, Federalism and Drug Control, 57 Vand. L. Rev. 783 (2004) Repository Citation O'Hear, Michael M., "Federalism and Drug Control" (2004). Faculty Publications. Paper 179. http://scholarship.law.marquette.edu/facpub/179 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Faculty Scholarship at Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of Marquette Law Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Federalism and Drug Control Michael M O'Hear* 1. A SURVEY OF THE CONCEPTUAL TERRAIN ........................... 789 A. Four Leading Paradigmsof Drug Control Policy ... 789 B. A Note on Terminology ............................................ 792 II. THE EVOLUTION OF FEDERAL DRUG POLICY ....................... 793 A. 1914-1968: The Other Prohibition........................... 794 B. 1969-1980: Making War on Drugs........................... 797 C. 1981-2000: Escalating the War-The Triumph of E nforcem ent ......................................................... 799 D. FederalPolicy in the Twenty-First Century ............ 802 E . L esson s ....................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Weakest Link: the Dire Consequences of a Weak Link in the Informant Handling and Covert Operations Chain-Of-Command
    The Weakest Link: The Dire Consequences of a Weak Link in the Informant Handling and Covert Operations Chain-of-Command Michael Levine, Police Training and Trial Consultant “Trust but verify.” –Russian proverb and motto of the KGB Law enforcement agencies call them CIs (Cooperating Individuals, Confidential Informants, and/or Criminal Informants). Cops who use them call them stoolpigeons, stools, rats, chotas, etc. Intelligence agencies (Central Intelligence Agency [CIA], Defense Intelligence Agency [DIA], etc.) call them “assets” or the more confusing “agents.” Whatever they are called, 99.9999% of them have one thing in common: they are traitorous information whores who betray friendships, relatives, business and/or criminal associates, nations, and even terrorist organizations. They are criminals and conmen who use their insider positions of trust to steal and barter information that can and often does destroy those who most trust them. A good police instructor with real first-hand experience will always tell you “Never trust an informant.” A prosecutor who wants to win his case at all costs will always tell a jury “Trust this informant.” If you’re assigned to a narcotics and/or an anti-terror unit, both of which overlap mightily these days, and you believe the prosecutor, do yourself a favor and grab a transfer to the Traffic Division. You’re a danger to yourself and to your community. I’m not going to talk about the alleged 1% of informants who risk their lives in this very dirty and dangerous game and who training manuals refer to as “good citizens” or people motivated to inform on other people as a result of “ideological motivation” mainly because in my now 44 years of training and experience encompassing the close association with more than 10,000 CIs,2 I’ve yet to meet one I would trust enough to give my home phone, except when I was stationed overseas and had no choice.
    [Show full text]
  • Stopping Traffic: an In-Depth Analysis of the Controversial New Film and What It Says About the United States' War on Drugs
    Stopping Traffic: An In-depth Analysis of the Controversial New Film and What It Says about the United States' War on Drugs The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Stopping Traffic: An In-depth Analysis of the Controversial New Film and What It Says about the United States' War on Drugs (2001 Third Year Paper) Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:8846815 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA Steven Soderbergh's Traffic is a remarkable film that takes an in-depth look at the \war on drugs" in the United States, and does so in a way that is meant to \provoke and upset nearly everyone who sees it."1Indeed, rarely in the Hollywood system does a film as controversial as Traffic get made, and rarer still is such a thought-provoking, politically-charged film a commercial success. Yet Traffic has been nominated for five Golden Globe Awards, and for five Academy Awards, including a nomination for best picture of the year.2The film has also grossed more than seventy-five million dollars in the first eight weeks of its release.3 The purpose of this paper, however, is not to examine the merits of the film from a cinematic perspective, nor from an economic one.
    [Show full text]
  • M I C H a E L L E V I
    M I C H A E L L E V I N E CURRICULUM VITAE Michael Levine, Consultant & Investigator NY PI License: 11000084000 PO Box 533 Stone Ridge, New York, 12484 Tel: 845-687-9642 Fax: 845-687-4916 Cell: 845-430-3930 [email protected] www.policetrialexpert.com PROFESSIONAL SUMMARY I am a US Law Enforcement Procedure Expert with over 50 years of courtroom experience (civil & criminal) as a Trial consultant and Expert Witness, including 25 years of service with DEA, Customs, BATF, and the IRS Criminal Investigations Division. I am currently serving as a consultant and reviewer of Police-Involved Shootings (homicides) as well as related areas pertaining to arrest and investigative procedures for both the Atlanta and the Dekalb County Georgia District Attorneys Offices. I regularly take part in the investigation of questionable police-involved shootings and related arrest and investigative procedures as well as provide expert testimony for criminal grand juries in those districts. My peer review journal articles on police procedures and manual on Undercover Tactics and Informant Handling (and related Arrest & Security Procedures) have been published by Academia.edu and are currently in the top .01% of global downloads by police departments and researchers. I am also currently working on a contractual basis as a police instructor primarily lecturing on Undercover Tactics and Informant Handling, which includes an intense focus on use-of-force and related arrest and security issues. LANGUAGES English (fluent), Spanish (bilingual), Italian (conversant) EXPERIENCE Expert Witness – Trial Consultant 1990-Present Since 1990, as a civilian, I have been retained as a trial consultant and/or testifying expert in more than 500 criminal and civil matters relating to the below topics with 90% of cases resulting in out-of-court resolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Crisis Bureaucracy: Homeland Security and the Political Design of Legal Mandates
    Volume 59, Issue 3 Page 673 Stanford Law Review CRISIS BUREAUCRACY: HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE POLITICAL DESIGN OF LEGAL MANDATES Dara Kay Cohen Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar Barry R. Weingast © 2006 by the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University, from the Stanford Law Review at 59 STAN. L. REV. 673 (2006). For information visit http://lawreview.stanford.edu. CRISIS BUREAUCRACY: HOMELAND SECURITY AND THE POLITICAL DESIGN OF LEGAL MANDATES Dara Kay Cohen,* Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar,** and *** Barry R. Weingast Policymakers fight over bureaucratic structure because it helps shape the legal interpretations and regulatory decisions of agencies through which modern governments operate. In this Article, we update positive political theories of bureaucratic structure to encompass two new issues with important implications for lawyers and political scientists: the significance of legislative responses to a crisis and the uncertainty surrounding major bureaucratic reorganizations. The resulting perspective affords a better understanding of how agencies interpret their legal mandates and deploy their administrative discretion. We apply the theory to the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. Two principal questions surrounding this creation are (1) why the President changed from opposing the creation of a new department to supporting it and (2) why his plan for such a department was far beyond the scope of any other existing proposal. We argue that the President changed his mind in part because he did not want to be on the losing side of a major legislative battle. But more significantly, the President supported the massive new Department in part to further domestic policy priorities unrelated to homeland security.
    [Show full text]
  • Intelligence and Migration: Cases from North America Michael
    1 Intelligence and Migration: Cases from North America Michael Andregg (University of St. Thomas, St. Paul, Minnesota, USA, March 4, 2017) Introduction The USA and Canada receive migrants from every part of the world. Many are legal immigrants and some are illegal or undocumented immigrants (about 11 million in the USA of a population of about 324 million, or ~ 3.4% of the total US population in 2016). Syrians, North Africans, Afghans and Iraqi refugees are the biggest immigration demographics in Europe and each occur here but in North America other ethnicities predominate, especially Latin Americans and Asians. 21st century terrorism has increased concerns about immigrants, especially undocumented or illegal immigrants. There is a long history of such concerns in North America beginning with Native American fears of the tidal wave of Europeans entering after 1492. What happened to them is one lesson security professionals must consider. The natives were nearly wiped out over a period of centuries, often by direct aggression, but more by disease and exile to harsh and barren lands. That lesson is that if large numbers of immigrants with aggressive birth rates come, they can take over entire continents in just a few centuries. But our vigorous and interesting continent has also been “built by immigrants” who remain very important to national economies today. Immigrant populations of special interest to modern US intelligence services include: Cubans (who enjoy a special immigration status and intelligence significance). Somalians (targeted for recruitment for foreign wars by Al Shabaab and ISIS). Colombians (and other South and Central Americans, of special interest in drug wars).
    [Show full text]
  • Gangs, Drugs and Violence Prevention
    Law Enforcement Executive FORUM Gangs, Drugs and Violence Prevention March 2007 Law Enforcement Executive Forum Illinois Law Enforcement Training and Standards Board Executive Institute Western Illinois University 1 University Circle Macomb, IL 61455 Senior Editor Thomas J. Jurkanin, PhD Editor Vladimir A. Sergevnin, PhD Associate Editors Jennifer Allen, PhD Department of Law Enforcement and Justice Administration Western Illinois University Barry Anderson, JD Department of Law Enforcement and Justice Administration Western Illinois University Tony Barringer, EdD Division of Justice Studies Florida Gulf Coast University Lewis Bender, PhD Department of Public Administration and Policy Analysis Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville Michael Bolton, PhD Chair, Department of Criminal Justice and Sociology Marymount University Dennis Bowman, PhD Department of Law Enforcement and Justice Administration Western Illinois University Oliver Clark Chief of Police, University of Illinois Police Department Weysan Dun Special Agent-in-Charge, FBI, Springfield Division Kenneth Durkin, PhD Department of Law Enforcement and Justice Administration Western Illinois University Thomas Ellsworth, PhD Chair, Department of Criminal Justice Sciences Illinois State University Larry Hoover, PhD Director, Police Research Center Sam Houston State University William McCamey, PhD Department of Law Enforcement and Justice Administration Western Illinois University John Millner State Senator of 28th District, Illinois General Assembly Michael J. Palmiotto Wichita
    [Show full text]