Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Los Alamos Whistleblower Severely Beaten (Updated) ^ | Tuesday, June 7, 2005 | Newsmax

Posted on 06/07/2005 3:28:53 AM PDT by ovrtaxt

Los Alamos Whistleblower Severely Beaten
Tuesday, June 7, 2005
A Los Alamos National Laboratory whistleblower who has uncovered irregularities involving millions of dollars of taxpayer money at the government-backed facility was brutally beaten this past weekend.

According to several news reports, auditor Tommy Hook was violently attacked by three or four anonymous assailants, who allegedly ordered him to keep quiet.

Hook was scheduled to testify before Congress later this month, but is now in the hospital.

Story Continues Below

On Saturday night, Hook went to a Santa Fe bar, ostensibly to meet a person claiming to be a fellow Los Alamos whistleblower, who called that night.

Hook's wife, Susan, said her husband did not frequent bars.

When the person did not show up, Hook left the bar after consuming two drinks.

In the parking lot, he was yanked out of his car and beaten so badly by three or four men that he had to be taken to intensive care at a local emergency room.

Reportedly, Hook did not provoke these men. The men concentrated on kicking his head, and Hook's family feels that the men would have killed him if a club employee hadn't run from the club and stopped the beating.

Congressional staff members were set to arrive Tuesday in Los Alamos to investigate Hook's allegations of malfeasance at the lab.

Hook and another whistleblower sued the University of California, which manages Los Alamos, in March, alleging that after they uncovered management failures, university and lab managers tried to make their jobs miserable so they would quit.

Tommy Hook remains hospitalized with severe trauma to his face and head, including a fractured jaw, and a herniated disk.

The FBI has been called in to investigate the attack, and Hook is currently under close protective custody.

Congress Warned of Ill Treatment of Hook

Last March, Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project On Government Oversight (POGO), testified before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations regarding a review of security initiatives at DOE nuclear weapons facilities.

She especially focused on Hook and another whisterblower:

"I would be remiss if I did not report to the Committee that, while not a part of former Secretary Abraham's initiatives, the treatment of whistleblowers throughout the complex remains abysmal. Retaliation remains the norm, not the exception, as can be seen in the case of Tommy Hook and Chuck Montano, who have both worked at Los Alamos for decades.

"After the Committee's three hearings on financial fraud at Los Alamos, the University of California was telling the public that all was resolved, while at the same time retaliating against these two men who knew otherwise. Hook and Montano were responsible for providing audit support for UC and uncovered ongoing irregularities and outright misconduct amounting to millions of taxpayer dollars.

"Their audit reports were withheld from DOE. Their treatment? Their work was taken away from them, they were given no work for nine months, and now they are only being handed menial assignments. Even the head of the Los Alamos Site Office tried to intervene on Tommy Hook's behalf, only to be rebuffed by an arrogant University of California."

According to a report in, Susan Hook, the victim's wife, Bob Rothstein, his attorney, and Montano confirmed that Hook was at the club to meet with another employee who claimed to have information that would support charges of wrongdoing.

Susan Hook and Montano further alleged that the assault was absolutely connected to Tommy Hook's impending testimony:

"When they were beating him up, they were telling him ... 'If you know what is good for you, you will keep your mouth shut,'" said Susan Hook.

Rothstein recalled that a person claiming to be an auditor from Los Alamos had contacted Hook a week before and had offered to share information about financial issues at the laboratory.

Rothstein said that one meeting had already fallen through, but the second was arranged for Saturday night at the strip club.

The nightclub's doorman ran into the parking lot and broke up the attack, according to a club employee who witnessed the beating. The employee said Hook was assaulted by a group of men.

Joint Investigation

Called to the scene, FBI Special Agent Bill Elwell confirmed that federal agents are investigating with Santa Fe police officers.

He said they are "still trying to figure out" what happened at the nightclub. "We are looking into the allegations made by Mr. Hook," Elwell said.

Los Alamos issued a statement:

"The University of California and the laboratory are outraged that a laboratory employee was the victim of a weekend assault in Santa Fe. Director [Robert] Kuckuck was made aware of the attack this morning and expressed his hope that the individual will make a quick recovery."

"Director Kuckuck, the University of California and the laboratory believe that any form of physical violence toward an individual is unacceptable. The laboratory is in contact with the Santa Fe Police Department and is providing the laboratory's full support and cooperation with the ongoing investigation."

Susan Hooks said that neither her husband's wallet, cell phone nor car were taken.

TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: California; US: New Mexico
KEYWORDS: cary; elwell; hook; losalamos; nationallaboratories; tommyhook
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-109 next last

1 posted on 06/07/2005 3:28:53 AM PDT by ovrtaxt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ScaniaBoy; Cooter; eyespysomething; B4Ranch; Alamo-Girl; Triple; MJY1288; potlatch; Shermy; ...

Do any of you research minded folks know anything about this? Seems those tolerant liberals at the University of California got a little restless over the weekend...

2 posted on 06/07/2005 3:33:52 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (...a sheep in wolf's clothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

You may find this interesting.

3 posted on 06/07/2005 3:36:32 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (...a sheep in wolf's clothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

This is outrageous! I hope this poor man recovers and I hope the people who beat him are found and jailed--forever!

4 posted on 06/07/2005 3:38:09 AM PDT by pepperdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pepperdog

Now they need to go in there and do a thorough investigation on every swinging Richard in that program.

5 posted on 06/07/2005 3:42:15 AM PDT by Americanexpat (A strong democracy through citizen oversight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Americanexpat; pepperdog

Earlier threads have posited a Chinese connection.

Wen Ho Lee ring a bell?

6 posted on 06/07/2005 3:46:02 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (...a sheep in wolf's clothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
....... "Director Kuckuck, the University of California and the laboratory believe that any form of physical violence toward an individual is unacceptable.,....this sounds like it came from Felt's Washington Post....staff?

7 posted on 06/07/2005 3:49:59 AM PDT by maestro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: maestro

Now don't be so hard on Director Kuckuck. It's what a lib SAYS, not what he does, that matters.

8 posted on 06/07/2005 3:53:05 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (...a sheep in wolf's clothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
Wen Ho Lee ring a bell?

No, but Bill Richardson does even though he might not be Chinese.

9 posted on 06/07/2005 3:56:23 AM PDT by nygoose
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
Earlier threads have posited a Chinese connection.

I doubt it. This appears more to be a garden-variety financial mismanagement situation. The lady who 'accidentally' charged a Mustang on a lab credit card comes to mind. I saw a thread earlier this evening on that situation.

10 posted on 06/07/2005 3:59:51 AM PDT by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
It's hard to believe that lab researchers would do this....Who did? Is there another agenda at work here? I hope the FBI is all over this. It's disquieting to have this happen at a place like Los Alamos...


11 posted on 06/07/2005 4:00:24 AM PDT by MichaelP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
Here's the lamestream (AP) version:

Los Alamos Lab Whistleblower Beaten


Jun 6, 10:50 PM (ET)


p {margin:12px 0px 0px 0px;}

SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) - A Los Alamos lab whistleblower scheduled to testify before Congress about alleged financial irregularities was badly beaten outside a bar - an attack his wife and lawyer believe was designed to silence him.

Police and the FBI said that they were investigating the circumstances of the incident which, according to his wife, left Tommy Hook hospitalized Monday with a broken jaw and other injuries.

Police Deputy Chief Eric Johnson said officers found Hook after responding to a reported assault at the Cheeks Night Club about 2 a.m. Sunday. He provided few other details.

"We are working jointly with the FBI, trying to determine what may have happened and what the assault may have stemmed from," Johnson said. FBI spokesman Bill Elwell described the agency's inquiry as preliminary.

Hook's wife, Susan, alleged the assailants told her husband during the attack: "If you know what's good for you, you'll keep your mouth shut."

Tommy Hook and another whistleblower sued the University of California in March, alleging that after they uncovered management failures, university and lab managers tried to make their jobs miserable so they would quit.

Hook, a former internal auditor who now works at another job at the lab, had been scheduled to testify before the House Energy and Commerce Committee later this month.

According to Susan Hook, her husband received a call late Saturday from someone wanting to meet with him at a bar. She said her husband told her the man never showed up, but that as he was leaving the parking lot, a group of men pulled him from his car and beat him.

"They left him in the parking lot for dead," said Tommy Hook's lawyer, Robert Rothstein.

Rothstein said the assailants didn't take Hook's wallet, other personal belongings or car. Without any other motive, it appears the beating was related to his whistleblowing, Rothstein contended.

Susan Hook said her husband did not frequent bars.

Los Alamos lab spokesman Kevin Roark called the beating a "senseless and brutal act and should not be tolerated."

The lab and UC also issued a joint statement decrying the violence. "Director (Robert) Kuckuck, the University of California and the laboratory believe that any form of physical violence toward an individual is unacceptable," the statement read.

12 posted on 06/07/2005 4:04:07 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (...a sheep in wolf's clothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bob

Apparently, UC is in danger of losing the contract for oversight of Los Alamos because of financial mismanagement there, which guys like Hook are exposing. The Chicom penetration there is jeopardized by the change.

13 posted on 06/07/2005 4:06:41 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (...a sheep in wolf's clothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

I wonder if the Arkancide gang was involved.

14 posted on 06/07/2005 4:06:47 AM PDT by dancusa (Appeasement, high taxes and regulation collects in the diapers of bed wetting liberals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nygoose

I think the entire Clinton cabinet is honorary Chinese. ;^)

15 posted on 06/07/2005 4:07:47 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (...a sheep in wolf's clothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
It strikes me that luring this guy to a strip club as opposed to any other public place was no accident. Not only do you get to beat him up, you damage his reputation and credibility at the same time. That is, if you get away with it.

16 posted on 06/07/2005 4:12:22 AM PDT by Nik Naym
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
Apparently, UC is in danger of losing the contract for oversight of Los Alamos because of financial mismanagement there, which guys like Hook are exposing. The Chicom penetration there is jeopardized by the change.

That's certainly a possibility. I was thinking of the more direct link.

17 posted on 06/07/2005 4:14:52 AM PDT by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

Hmmmmm.schwarzenegger has been on the unions lately...

18 posted on 06/07/2005 4:15:55 AM PDT by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

To: maestro; ovrtaxt

Kuckuck is new to Los Alamos...was appointed as interim director in May. He was formerly at Lawrence Livermore Nat'l Lab.

20 posted on 06/07/2005 4:17:50 AM PDT by elli1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Battle Axe

Yeah, well, the FBI's on the case. Nothing to worry about there...

Maybe they should call in the Border Patrol to help.

Yeah, I'm cynical. Sorry.

21 posted on 06/07/2005 4:19:08 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (...a sheep in wolf's clothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
Sorry, Wrong Number At Los Alamos - Employee Buys Mustang Car "By Mistake."
22 posted on 06/07/2005 4:22:25 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (...a sheep in wolf's clothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt; Nita Nupress; Alamo-Girl
I can find bits and pieces of the past L.A. threads. this lab part of the Downside Legacy?

Hate to show my FReeper 'age', but this sure does smell like a klintler crime.

23 posted on 06/07/2005 4:26:04 AM PDT by mommadooo3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt; ntrulock


24 posted on 06/07/2005 4:35:44 AM PDT by mommadooo3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pepperdog
Does anyone know where John Bolton was last weekend?


25 posted on 06/07/2005 4:39:53 AM PDT by Trust but Verify
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

Wow. I hope this guy gets better soon. I thought scientists were gentle logical people, turns out they can get a little Russell Crowe sometimes.

26 posted on 06/07/2005 4:41:26 AM PDT by brwnsuga (Proud, Black, Conservative!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: brwnsuga

I got your logic right here!!

27 posted on 06/07/2005 4:44:43 AM PDT by ovrtaxt (...a sheep in wolf's clothing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

LOL, your'e too much!

28 posted on 06/07/2005 4:46:35 AM PDT by brwnsuga (Proud, Black, Conservative!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
Here's an older news article I found....

Official: Los Alamos Managers Wanted Fraud Report Held by Adam Rankin, Saturday, October 16, 2004

Top Los Alamos National Laboratory managers tried to quash the release of a highly critical internal report highlighting procurement fraud and financial waste, generated in response to congressional inquiries in 2003, according to testimony from a lab whistle-blower. For years, LANL's Tommy Hook, a former senior adviser for audits in the lab's Internal Evaluation Office, said he remained loyal to the weapons research facility where he has worked for 23 years. Then he realized that mechanisms for raising concerns and for protecting workers against management retaliation for speaking out are broken. "It just got to the point where we weren't going to let this go," he said after testifying Friday to the Legislature's Los Alamos National Laboratory Oversight Committee. LANL officials contest the claim and say their whistle-blower procedures in place work well. "The bottom line is... retaliation against whistle-blowers is not tolerated," said LANL spokesman James Rickman. Hook said he was assigned by top lab managers to review procurement procedures after a high-level lab manager in 2003 promised Congress a report on LANL financial problems uncovered in internal and external reviews.

UC and LANL were forced to undergo a series of congressional hearings in 2003 over weaknesses in the laboratory's financial controls that left it susceptible to fraud and waste, according to the reviews. The 12 reports Hook helped prepare and a final Fiscal Year 2003 Procurement Self-Assessment Report "found many more problems than they (lab managers) ever expected," he said, and "we were basically told not to report them." Laboratory officials deny the accusation and say the report was released to federal officials well before the end of 2003. "His claim that they didn't want it out is totally wrong because they did want it out and it is out," Rickman said. "(The National Nuclear Security Administration) has a copy of that report and I guess (Department of Energy) headquarters also has a copy of that report," Rickman said. Chris Harrington, a spokesman for the University of California, which manages LANL for the Energy Department, said university officials are aware of the whistle-blower complaints.

"The University of California is conducting an independent review of the whistle-blower complaints and I cannot comment further on that review," he said. LANL managers had agreed to report whatever the findings were to the DOE, which oversees LANL, Hook said. In the end, he said he wasn't allowed to, so he sought federal whistle-blower protection. "I cannot, in good conscience, stand idly by any longer while (the University of California) management makes misleading public representations with no recourse," Hook told the committee.

"This is a very sad day for me personally," Hook said, because he said he tried to resolve his differences internally with laboratory and UC management for close to a year with no success. Hook was pressed on several occasions by the Journal in 2002 and 2003 to come forward publicly with information he said at the time showed extensive financial waste and abuse, dating back years. He repeatedly declined, saying he had faith that he would be able to resolve any problems with the laboratory internally.

Hook and longtime laboratory employee and critic Chuck Montaño came before the state oversight committee asking the committee to press for congressional hearings on whistle-blower retaliation and abuse at the laboratory. Montaño, a 26-year lab employee and certified auditor, testified to the committee on behalf of the Hispanic Round Table, which has been fighting the laboratory over what it considers inequity in pay involving the laboratory's minority workers. Montaño said LANL managers retaliated against him for speaking out by not assigning him any work for nine months. Hook said he had no work for six months.

Before their testimony, LANL's Rich Marquez, associate director for administration, told the committee that the laboratory and its director, Pete Nanos, remain committed to solving any inequities in pay, however long it takes. He reported that in the last year, LANL has spent $1.75 million to adjust the salaries of 792 employees using a statistical review of pay that showed some Hispanics and female workers were paid less than their white male counterparts. Marquez, who also handles LANL's whistle-blower complaints, told the committee that pay adjustments, after two fixes, ranged from $1 to $10,000.

Asked by committee member and state Rep. Debbie Rodella, D-San Juan Pueblo, about whistle-blower complaints, Marquez said about 80 cases have been reported, 43 of which are still active. He said employees have a number of options for reporting anonymous complaints, most of which get resolved, but that there is "an element of the population who just don't trust the process."

The committee co-chairs, Rep. Roberto J. Gonzales, D-Taos, and Sen. Phil A. Griego, D-San Jose, said they don't have enough evidence to ask Congress for a public hearing, but they are willing to take testimony from lab whistle-blowers at its next meeting, scheduled in mid-December. "I am not opposed to it, but I don't think we have enough to go forward with a formal hearing," Griego said. Gonzales agreed that "we are a little premature."

Originally published by the Albuquerque Journal.

29 posted on 06/07/2005 4:56:34 AM PDT by mommadooo3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
Another older article....

Whistle-blowers share hopes for congressional hearing by Diana Heil, October 27, 2004

POJOAQUE -- In biblical times, lepers were considered dead people. As they passed through the streets, they had to yell out, "Unclean!" so everyone knew their status.

Thousands of years later, Glenn Walp, a Los Alamos National Laboratory employee who was fired for speaking up about corruption, understands what it's like to be a leper.

"In parallel, when you become a whistle-blower, you likewise become among the unclean and people avoid you," he told a gathering Tuesday at the Cities of Gold Casino Hotel.

The lab fired him a few days before Thanksgiving in 2002. Walp, former head of the lab's Office of Security Inquiries, was later reinstated as a lab employee and won $930,000 in a settlement agreement, but the stigma lives on, he said.

Many gathered at the meeting are hoping for a congressional hearing in Washington, D.C., about retaliation against whistle-blowers at national laboratories, including LANL. Eight whistle-blowers were present at the meeting -- and three told their stories.

Other employees in attendance shared some of their experiences. One woman warned: "When you back down, it doesn't matter. The retaliation continues."

The meeting, which was open to the public, was sponsored by the union University Professional and Technical Employees and two national nonprofit watchdog groups, the Government Accountability Project and the Project on Government Oversight.

Staff from U.S. Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., and Rep. Tom Udall, D-N.M., voiced support for the protection of whistle-blowers. (U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., was not invited, according to union president Manny Trujillo, because Trujillo doubted Domenici would send someone from his office.)

Speaking up about safety, security, fraud and waste is risky at many work sites, not just nuclear-weapons labs. Pete Stockton of the Project On Government Oversight in Washington, D.C., said he encourages whistle-blowers to remain anonymous as long as they can while his group checks into problems. He recommended the book, The Art of Anonymous Activism: Serving the Public While Surviving Public Service, as mandatory reading for anyone who is thinking about raising concerns at work.

"You've got to keep your head down, and you simply can't tell people you're doing it," he said.

The Government Accountability Project tells people who are contemplating blowing the whistle, "Don't do this if you care about your career. You probably aren't going to survive this career-wise," said attorney Tom Carpenter, who has represented whistle-blowers at numerous laboratories across the country. "Most people decide to go forward anyway."

Some people don't lose their jobs. Instead, they might be given fewer and fewer assignments at work. Their security clearance might be yanked. They might be sent to a psychologist to have a fitness-for-duty evaluation.

Tommy Hook, another whistle-blower, and Walp said they tried to do their jobs with honesty and integrity, but they allege LANL did not value their efforts. Walp said managers told him, "Your No. 1 job is to protect the lab and the contract."

The contract refers to the University of California, which has a contract with the U.S. Department of Energy to manage LANL. The contract will go out for bid the first time ever late this year or early next year. Walp said LANL's "elite" know the top leaders of LANL will be let go if a new contractor wins.

Hook said he had a similar experience. When he alleged a division leader was covering up fraud, waste and abuse involving the University of California, he said he was told his job was to protect UC, not to damage it. The lab did not send a representative to attend Tuesday's meeting.

Despite all the anguish, Walp has no regrets about the stand he took. "Is it worth it? Yes, it's absolutely, unequivocally worth it, and I would do it again," he said. "I truly believe that some people have lives and others have destinies."

The state of California and the federal government offer whistle-blower-protection programs, but this set of LANL employees says neither approach works.

When a new contract to run the lab is given, they want the contract to include a mechanism, possibly an independent mediation council, to be in place, so people aren't afraid to point out problems.

It's a simple dynamic, Carpenter said. Work sites are not safe unless workers are free to raise concerns without retaliation. Conversely, if someone is fired for speaking up, it suppresses reporting among other employees, Carpenter noted.

Trujillo and Stockton said LANL would not be in its current state of affairs, having spent the months since July focusing on safety and security training at the expense of normal work if management had heeded the warnings of whistle-blowers in the past.

Originally published by The Santa Fe New Mexican

30 posted on 06/07/2005 5:03:44 AM PDT by mommadooo3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt; ntrulock
New Los Alamos Scandal

By Notra Trulock | November 14, 2002

The whistleblowers say that these "unallowable purchases" are only two of more than 70 cases of "major criminal activity" at the lab.

Whistleblowers have revealed a new scandal at the nation's premier nuclear weapons laboratory. As first reported in Energy Daily, unidentified whistleblowers have charged Los Alamos National Laboratory officials with covering up "major criminal activity" at the scandal-plagued New Mexico lab. On the basis of these allegations, the FBI has opened a full field investigation on two employees and are questioning senior lab officials.

The two, whose salaries are reportedly $150,000 and $74,000 respectively, are alleged to have stolen government property worth over $50,000. Lab officials now say that the two made a series of "unallowable purchases" in a buying spree that began in July 2001 and continued into late October 2002. Among the unauthorized purchases: CB radios; camping gear; handheld land and maritime GPS units; television/VCR sets; automatic gate-openers; clothing; Oakey sunglasses; motorcycle helmets; and automotive parts. One purchase invoice documented a one-time delivery of 135 speciality knives. Affidavits submitted by the FBI claim that a number of these items are plainly visible at the homes of the two employees.

The whistleblowers say that these "unallowable purchases" are only two of more than 70 cases of "major criminal activity" at the lab. They cite other lab employees as using government cards and purchase vouchers to buy jewelry, golf clubs and a Ford Mustang. The employee alleged to have purchased the Mustang has a recorded message on her voice mail saying that she will be out of the office "for an extended period."

The two named in the FBI's search warrants hold the nation's highest security and intelligence clearances and were, until recently, employed in the Lab's Nonproliferation and International Security Division. That division houses the lab's intelligence program and other highly sensitive national security activities. The two are alleged to have been storing their loot in bunkers at the far southwestern boundary of the lab, where scientists have recently been developing bio-warfare agent detectors. The Energy Department has thus far refused to comment on the record. One senior official, who requested anonymity, said that espionage has been ruled out.

The whistleblowers charge senior Los Alamos officials with covering up these criminal activities. AIM has learned that the lab unit housing the two employees, named in the search warrants, was transferred out of the national security division on October 1, as the scandal was unfolding. Among the unanswered questions is how the 15-month buying spree escaped detection. But the whistleblowers say that one of the targeted employees gave "presents" to other lab officials, including one in the Assessments and Audits Division, which is supposed to investigate allegations of waste, fraud and abuse. That employee, who has also been transferred, has not returned phone calls or email messages.

Finally, the whistleblowers allege that the lab has refused to cooperate with the FBI or the New Mexico U.S. Attorney's office, and name two senior lab officers who ordered security personnel not to contact the Bureau. Lab officials refused to comment on any aspect of the case, citing the FBI's on-going investigation. Doug Belden, an FBI Albuquerque Field Office spokesman, artfully told AIM that the Bureau had "encountered no interference that impeded the investigation in any significant way."

This new scandal comes on the heels of the 1999 Chinese nuclear-espionage debacle and the 2000 disappearance of computer hard-drives containing classified nuclear-weapons and intelligence data at Los Alamos. The hard-drives mysteriously "reappeared" behind a copy machine inside a taped-off FBI crime scene. Congressional pressure, mostly from New Mexico senator and lab patron Pete Domenici, forced the FBI to abandon its investigation of the missing hard-drives.

Government reports have repeatedly detailed lax security procedures and a staggering lack of accountability within the Energy Department's national laboratories. Earlier this year, yet another blue-ribbon commission found that continuing management dysfunction within the Department is imperiling both science and security throughout the labs, despite the reforms of recent years. The commission charged that the department has yet to implement risk-based security management practices and that its "tools and technologies" for security and counterintelligence are "woefully inadequate." It said that cyber-security remains the labs' most significant vulnerability. This latter finding comes two years after Wen Ho Lee committed what a federal investigation labeled one of the greatest security breaches in the nation's history by storing over 800 megabytes of classified nuclear-weapons secrets on an unclassified Los Alamos computer network and tapes. The tapes have never been recovered. The commission's report was dead on arrival at the Energy Department.

Notra Trulock is Associate Editor of the AIM Report and can be reached at

31 posted on 06/07/2005 5:10:43 AM PDT by mommadooo3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt; Nita Nupress; Alamo-Girl; All
OK....the NEXT article seems off-topic. But COULD it somehow tie in, to this beating?????

China's Theft of Nuclear Secrets

Senator James M. Inhofe March 15, 1999


Senate Floor Statement

March 15, 1999

Mr. President, I want you to listen. I am going to tell you a story of espionage, conspiracy, deception and cover-up–a story with life and death implications for millions of Americans–a story about national security and a President and an administration that deliberately chose to put national security at risk, while telling the people everything was fine.

If it was written in a book, it wouldn’t sell, because no one would believe it. If it was fictionalized in a novel, few could conceive it. But it is true.

Now for the sake of my statement today, I am stating that the President withheld information and covered up the Chinese theft of our technology. But I’m realistic enough to know that a person with the history of deception this president has will have provided himself with some cover in case he gets caught. So I’m sure there is a paper trail that he can allege. The way the President probably covered himself was to include tidbits about this theft buried in briefings on 40 or 50 others items, so the significance of it would not be noticed. But a paper trail would be established.

Anticipating that, I talked to the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Porter Goss, and the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee at the time of the discovery of this information, Sen. Arlen Specter. Neither chairman was notified of the W-88 nuclear warhead technology theft. And these would have been the first to be notified. There can be no doubt that President Clinton engaged in a cover up scheme.

Let me read three paragraphs from last week’s op-ed article by Michael Kelly in the Washington Post, entitled "Lies About China.”

"In April 1996, Energy Department officials informed Samuel Berger, then Clinton’s deputy national security advisor, that Notra Trulock, the department’s chief of intelligence, had uncovered evidence that showed China had learned how to miniaturize nuclear bombs, allowing for smaller, more lethal warheads...” "The Times reports that the House Intelligence Committee asked Trulock for a briefing in July 1998. Trulock asked for permission from Elizabeth Moler, then acting energy secretary. According to Trulock, Moler told him not to brief the committee because the information might be used against Clinton’s China policy...” "The White House’s secret would have remained secret had it not been for a select investigative committee headed by Republican Christopher Cox...”

But even using the President’s fictitious paper trail, the earliest either chairman could have known about it would have been late spring of 1997, years after the Clinton administration learned of it and, of course, after the 1996 elections.

I start, Mr. President, by listing a few things which we now know to be true, factual, incontrovertible...and not classified.

For years, the Clinton administration covered-up China’s theft of top secret U.S. nuclear weapons data. They never informed the Congress or American people about what had happened or its significance to our national security.

Let me tell you what President Clinton did during this period time:

–During this period of time, the President misled the American people on numerous occasions about the threat posed by strategic nuclear missiles in the post cold war era.

–During this period of time, President Clinton made statements on over 130 separate occasions, such as the following: "For the first time since the dawn of the nuclear age, there is not a single solitary nuclear missile pointed at an American child tonight. Not one. Not a single one.”

–During this period of time, he knew that China was targeting up to 18 intercontinental ballistic missiles at American children.

–During this period of time, President Clinton signed export control waivers which allowed his top campaign fundraisers’ aerospace company to transfer sensitive U.S. missile guidance technology to China.

–During this period of time, he shifted the prime satellite export responsibility from the State Department to the Commerce Department, making it easier for China and others to get sensitive military-related U.S. technology .

–During this period of time, President Clinton hosted over 100 White House fundraisers as part of a larger aggressive scheme to raise campaign contributions, many from illegal foreign sources, primarily including sources in China. Among guests permitted to attend these White House fundraisers were a convicted felon and a Chinese arms dealer.

–During this period of time, John Huang, Charlie Trie, Johnny Chung, James Riady and others with strong ties to China were deeply involved, with the President’s knowledge, in raising Chinese-tainted campaign cash for the Clinton campaign.

–During this period of time, John Huang, who had been given a security clearance without a background check, was permitted to receive numerous classified CIA briefings, both during and after his stay at the Commerce Department.

--And during this period of time, President Clinton was successfully stopping the deployment of a national missile defense system, exposing every American life to a missile attack, leaving us with no defense against an intercontinental ballistic missile.

Mr. President, China’s theft of secret data on the so-called "W-88" nuclear warhead may be one of the most serious breaches of national security in our lifetimes.....More serious than Aldrich Ames. Perhaps more serious than the Rosenbergs.

The public needs to understand that this story is true. This is not about partisanship. This is not about some ancient history of some long gone Cold War.

This is about the real world here and now. This is about national security in its most important aspects. This is about protecting our freedom and our existence as a nation. This is ultimately a matter which concerns the life and death of every citizen.

The W-88 is the most advanced nuclear warhead in the U.S. arsenal and is carried on top of Trident SLBMs (submarine-launched ballistic missiles).

This is the cornerstone weapon of our nation’s nuclear deterrent. As many as eight of them can fit atop our submarine-launched missiles. As many as ten can be put atop our largest land-based missiles...or on China’s land based missiles.

We are talking about a miniaturized warhead--Much smaller in size than the Hiroshima atom bomb but ten times more powerful.

As you can see from the chart, which appeared in the NY Times, Mar. 6, 1999, the Hiroshima bomb was huge and unwieldy. It was 10 and a half feet long and weighed over 4 tons–8,900 pounds.

By contrast, the modern W-88 warhead is compact. It is only 2 and a half feet long and weighs only 300 pounds, but is at least 10 times more powerful.

The technology on which it is built is super top secret and represents billions of dollars and years, if not decades, of investment on the part of dedicated scientists and engineers working in the supreme American national interest.

Some might ask why does America have this weapon? Because it is part of our responsibility as a world superpower to have the most advanced, efficient and credible nuclear deterrent, not only to protect our own freedom, but that of our allies as well.

It is part of our policy of "peace through strength”. While we do not intend to ever use nuclear weapons, it is a fact of life in a dangerous world that we must be prepared to deter any potential adversary and any potential weapon any adversary may have.

The W-88 allows for multiple warheads to be placed on one missile. With this technology, China will now be able to put up to ten warheads on a single long range missile. Each warhead targeted at a different city. Each city subject to an explosion 10 times as great as that which destroyed Hiroshima at the end of WWII.

You know, Mr. President, I’m from Oklahoma. In 1995, a 4,800 pound truck bomb exploded outside the Murrah Federal Office Building in Oklahoma City. The building was destroyed, 168 people were killed, and 674 were wounded. This was a horrible event, the worst act of terrorism ever on American soil. That bomb had a force of 1,000 pounds (one-half of one ton) of TNT.

By way of contrast, the Hiroshima atom bomb had an explosive force of 15 kilotons (or 30,000 times as large as the Oklahoma City bomb. The W-88, while smaller in physical size, has a force of 150 kilotons (or 300,000 times as large as the Oklahoma City bomb) And by carrying 10 of these on one missile, 3 million times the force for the Oklahoma City bomb.

The more compact W-88 warhead makes possible what is called MIRV (multiple independent reentry vehicle) technology, something China was thought to be many, many years away from developing on its own. And they stole this technology and President Clinton covered it up.

We also used to think North Korea was many years away from building long range multiple-stage rockets.

Listen, Mr. President: On Aug. 24 last year, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Henry Shelton, wrote me a letter saying he was confident we would have 3 years warning of any new long range missile threat. Seven days later, on Aug. 31, North Korea launched a three-stage Taepo Dong I missile, that scattered a small payload off the coast of Alaska.

All of this only confirms what the Rumsfeld Report explained to us last year. We remember the Rumsfeld Commission which was chaired by former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. This bipartisan commission, appointed jointly by Republicans and Democrats, included nine of the nation’s most distinguished, qualified and informed experts in the field of assessing foreign missile threats. They concluded unanimously that when it comes to advanced missiles and weapons, with countries willing to buy, sell and steal technology, "we live in an environment of little or no warning.” Which means we must immediately be prepared.

Last year, you may remember how it was revealed that the Clinton Administration had changed the approval process for high technology satellite transfers–and how waivers were granted for American companies so they could launch satellites in China. This ultimately resulted in China acquiring advanced US missile guidance technology, making their missiles more accurate and more reliable. President Clinton personally signed the waiver allowing China to acquire this missile technology. Let me repeat, President Clinton personally signed the waiver allowing China to acquire this missile technology.

Executives of these two corporations that benefitted–Loral and Hughes–were among the largest financial contributors to President Clinton’s campaign effort. But this is not important, Mr. President, because the motive for aiding and abetting our adversaries could be money, or it could be some kind of perverted allegiance to these countries, or it could be a total indifference to the security of the lives of Americans. The motive is not important. The fact is President Clinton did it and he knew exactly what he was doing.

Now coupling the transferred missile guidance technology with the stolen nuclear weapon technology, China can threaten US cities with accurate, reliable and horribly destructive multiple warhead nuclear missiles.

This is not science fiction fantasy, Mr. President. Two years ago, a high ranking Chinese official actually said that China was prepared to hit Los Angeles if the US would take steps to defend Taiwan. No American should assume these are idle or impossible threats.

Now by helping China develop their long range missile program, President Clinton was also helping North Korea and other rogue nations with theirs. Let me read three paragraphs from last week’s Washington Times article entitled, "China Assists North Korea Space Launches.”

"China is sharing space technology with North Korea, a move that could boost Pyongyang’s long range missile program, White House and Pentagon officials told The Washington Times...”

"Another Pentagon report on a 1996 Chinese booster that failed to launch a U.S. satellite concluded that ‘U.S. national security was harmed’ by the improper sharing of technology with China by Hughes and another satellite maker, Loral Space & Communications Ltd...”

Keep in mind, President Clinton signed the waiver to give the Chinese this technology. The article concludes: "In 1994, the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency reported that it believed China had helped design the Taepodong 2 missile (this is the North Korean missile) because its first stage diameter is very close in size to China’s CSS-2 intermediate range missiles.” So it is factual to say that President Clinton knew he was giving our missile technology to North Korea as well as China.

I take this moment to remind my colleagues once again that America today has no defense whatsoever against such a threat. The Clinton administration today–despite its rhetoric--opposes to the deployment of any national missile defense system.

It was 16 years ago this month, on March 23, 1983, that President Reagan announced his intention to develop a national missile defense system to protect America. We have come a long way since then. Our technology has improved, we know what to do to meet this challenge.

Had we kept steadily on the course the President Reagan set, we would have a missile defense system deployed right now. Instead, we have an Administration which killed the Reagan-Bush Strategic Defense Initiative program, which vetoed missile defense bills passed by Congress and which is wedded to the outdated ABM Treaty, which Henry Kissinger, the architect of the treaty says has outlived its usefulness.

Clinton today is obsessed with maintaining the philosophy of the old ABM Treaty at all costs. He is locked into the mentality of a world with two lone superpowers–the United States and the Soviet Union.

The theory is that if both sides keep their populations defenseless, then neither side would dare attack out of fear of a devastating retaliation. This is what they call mutual assured destruction (MAD). It is a theory that Dr. Kissinger believes makes no sense in the modern world where many countries are getting their hands on long range missiles and weapons of mass destruction.

President Clinton is solely responsible for the fact that we are totally defenseless against an incoming ICBM from China or anywhere else.

From news reports, this is some of what we know about China’s theft of our nuclear secrets:

Apparently a spy at the Energy Dept’s Los Alamos weapons lab succeeded in transferring data on this highly classified W-88 warhead technology to China in the mid-1980s.

But our government did not find out about it until April 1995. (This is a critical date. We did not know about the theft until April 1995.) Detection came when experts analyzed data from then-recent Chinese underground nuclear tests and saw remarkable similarities to the W-88 U.S. warhead. Later in 1995, secret Chinese government documents confirmed that there had been a security breach at Los Alamos. 1995.

Deputy National Security Advisor Sandy Berger was first briefed about it in 1996. President Clinton did not respond then because he was obviously a little preoccupied with what he considered more important matters at that time.

After all, there were White House fundraisers to host, foreign campaign contributions, satellite transfers to approve, high technology trade with China to promote, and–of course-- an election to be all costs. Mr. Berger was well aware of all this. We know he sat in on all the key campaign strategy meetings in 1996.

This was also the time when President Clinton was running around the country telling audiences that "for the first time since the dawn of the nuclear age, there is not a single, solitary nuclear missile pointed at an American child tonight. Not one. Not a single one.”

Of course, everyone cheered, believing it to be true.

Of all the lies this president has told, this is the most egregious of all.

He repeated this misleading, deceptive lie over 130 times between 1995 and 1997, right at the very time he and his national security advisors knew that this horrible breach of nuclear security had occurred and was under investigation. It was also at that very time that he knew that up to 18 American cities were being targeted by Chinese long range missiles–missiles that had and have the potential of killing millions of Americans.

And during this time he said it 130 times: "For the first time since the dawn of the nuclear age, there is not a single, solitary nuclear missile pointed at an American child tonight. Not one. Not a single one.”

So while the American people consumed his misleading and dishonest public statements--helping to secure his reelection–nothing was done for over a year about the security breach at Los Alamos.

The likely suspect spy was identified in early 1997, and the FBI urged that he at least be transferred to a less sensitive position.

But inexplicably, he was allowed to keep his sensitive job at Los Alamos for another year and a half. This was the spy responsible for the theft and President Clinton kept him in that sensitive job for another year and half. Finally, he was fired by Energy Secretary Richardson last Monday (March 8, 1999), but only after he was publicly identified in news reports as having failed two previous lie detector tests.

In all of this, was Congress ever informed? No. As a member of the Armed Services and Intelligence Committees, I certainly was not. And as I said earlier, I talked to the chairman of both the House Intelligence Committee and the Senate Intelligence Committee and they were not informed.

Did the President ever take the appropriately aggressive and timely steps which should have been taken to protect the national security interest, in the wake of this matter? He did not.

Why? Why the delays? Why the lack of consultation and communication? Why the seeming indifference to this very, very serious breach of national security?

We will be asking some tough questions about this in the days ahead, and I note that the Armed Services Committee will be holding hearings on this issue soon. The Senate Intelligence Committee will hold a closed hearing on Wed. Mar. 17.

The American people need to know what is going on here.

The President’s National Security Advisor, Mr. Berger, has a lot to answer for here. He had better be prepared to answer questions from members of Congress honestly, forthrightly and without intention to deceive, mislead, or change the meaning of words. Otherwise, he should resign now and take the rap for President Clinton.

I am convinced we have not yet scratched the surface of this national security scandal exposed by these most recent revelations.

This administration obviously wanted nothing to interfere with developing good relations with China. While it was soliciting and accepting campaign contributions from China, it was dragging its feet on investigating the most egregious espionage operation China had ever succeeded in pulling off in the U.S., a breach of security which could potentially put the lives of millions of Americans at great risk.

This is without doubt the worst example yet of how this administration has put its own selfish motives above the national security interest of the country and above the protection of American lives.

The American people and the Congress must demand the President be held accountable for this gross dereliction of duty.

I guess the question is, what can we do? I’m not sure there is anything we can do except inform the American people and let public outrage solve the problem. And why are we in Congress so limited in what we can do?

The Founding Fathers never envisioned we would have a president who would do these kinds of things and act in these ways. This is why the Constitution gives the president great latitude of action in carrying out his duties and why he is protected from the other branches of government by the separation of powers.

John Adams, on his first night in the newly constructed White House, wrote to his wife, and spoke of the expectations of all the founders during that time: "May none but honest and wise men rule under this roof,” he wrote.

There was an assumption the American people would always elect presidents with a basic level of morality, honesty and integrity, who out of patriotism would always put the welfare of the country above any personal ambitions for power or glory.

This president knew he was covering up information vital to the safety and well-being of every American–that China had stolen from us the advanced technology which would give them the capability to kill millions of Americans in multiple cities with just one missile. He knew it.

In 1945, World War II was ended when atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Each explosion destroyed an entire city, killing tens of thousands. The death toll at Hiroshima was about 75,000 from that 15 kiloton nuclear bomb.

Just think...that with the technology that the President has transferred to China and what China has stolen and the President has covered up, China is now capable of producing a 150 kiloton bomb small enough to fit ten of them on top of one missile, each bomb targeted at a different American city with accuracy and reliability. Just extrapolating the numbers, that--in theory--is enough destructive power to kill as many as 7,500,000 Americans–with just one missile.

And, due to this president who stopped our national missile defense effort, we have no defense. We have a president who acts as if he doesn’t care...about us.

So finally, Mr. President, let me repeat the six proven incontrovertible facts:

1. President Clinton hosted over 100 campaign fundraisers in the White House, many with Chinese connections.

2. President Clinton used John Huang, Charlie Trie, Johnny Chung, James Riady, and others with strong Chinese ties to raise campaign money.

3. President Clinton signed waivers to allow his top campaign fundraiser’s aerospace company to transfer U.S. missile guidance technology to China.

4. President Clinton covered up the theft of our most valuable nuclear weapons technology.

5. President Clinton lied to the American people over 130 times about our nation’s security while he knew Chinese missiles were aimed at American children.

6. President Clinton single-handedly stopped the deployment of a national missile defense system, exposing every American life to a missile attack, leaving America with no defense whatsoever against an intercontinental ballistic missile.

Again, it doesn’t matter whether President Clinton did these things for Chinese campaign contributions because the motive for aiding and abetting our adversaries is not important. The fact is President Clinton did it and he knew exactly what he was doing.

I’m not a lawyer, Mr. President, but I have to ask, could President Clinton have been tried for impeachment for the wrong crime?

Why am I here telling the truth about the President? Because no one else will. They know this president will lie with such conviction that the American people will continue to believe him and they don’t want to take the risk.

Yesterday at the McLean Bible Church, the sermon was about risk. They all came back from Canaan with reports of certain defeat...except for Kaleb who said we could win. God left the Israelites to languish in the desert and sent Kaleb to the promised land. But with all these lessons we just don’t learn.

Henry Ward Beecher said it a different way. He siad, "I don’t like those cold precise people who in order not to say wrong, say nothing...and in order not to do wrong, do nothing.” So somebody has to tell the truth about this President....We can’t all be appeasers. An appeaser is a guy who throws his friends to the alligator in hopes that the alligator will eat him last.

Hiram Mann said, "No man survives when freedom fails, the best men rot in filthy jails, and those who cry appease, appease are hanged by those they tried to please.”

Truth will ultimately’s just stubborn. Winston Churchill said, "Truth is incontrovertible, ignorance can deride it, panic may resent it, malice may destroy it, but there it is.”

Mr. President, everything I have said during the course of the last 30 minutes is absolutely true. I hope America is listening. We’ve got a nation to save.

32 posted on 06/07/2005 5:26:07 AM PDT by mommadooo3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Thought you'd be interested in posts #29-32.

33 posted on 06/07/2005 5:34:57 AM PDT by mommadooo3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
The FBI and Nat'l Guard need to take over these facilities and secure all records and computer info. Also, all these national labs need to shut down and toss all upper management to the curb with no pay and with instructions they cannot leave the country. Then, investigate all transactions and those involved including DOE heads. After 3 years or so, begin restaffing these facilities with individuals who have received intense background checks and whose work ethics and scientific merits are of the highest caliber.

Sounds to me The Left and the CHICONS are in bed together with this situation.

34 posted on 06/07/2005 5:37:42 AM PDT by RSmithOpt (Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mommadooo3
Thanks for the ping!

The Los Alamos lab is all over the Downside Legacy - the issues were Chinese espionage, lack of security and the Cox/Dicks report.

The inquiry here should probably follow the money. The University of California has a grip on both Los Alamos and Livermore. After the security scandals of the Clinton administration, I had hoped the management would be transferred to a different university. But it was not to be and one must wonder why not and why this.

I've got company coming this afternoon and thus cannot help in your research. Otherwise I'd be looking for UN oil-for-food scandal type connections.

35 posted on 06/07/2005 5:39:39 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: nygoose

No, but Bill Richardson does even though he might not be Chinese.

My first thoughts exactly. The most insidious thing the Clintoons did was accept those Red Army campaign contributions. I'm sure that they'll be pouring cash into Hillary's campaign through some front companies in the near future. I'm sure there will be another trail of Arkancides that the media will quietly report and then ignore.

36 posted on 06/07/2005 5:39:52 AM PDT by gregwest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: mommadooo3

Notra Trulock's home was also broken into, with "things" stolen.

37 posted on 06/07/2005 5:41:47 AM PDT by Alia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: dancusa

My money says yes.

38 posted on 06/07/2005 5:44:25 AM PDT by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Alia

the descriptive phrase "banana republic" comes to mind.

39 posted on 06/07/2005 5:45:03 AM PDT by PaRebel (Self Defense: an unalienable right!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl
Thanks. My first post to you was made while getting kids ready for school and BEFORE coffee. LOL!!!

I'm going to nose around the DSL now.

Have a nice time with your company today!

40 posted on 06/07/2005 5:46:18 AM PDT by mommadooo3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Alia
Oh yeah...I forgot about that.

Maybe Notra will see this and post again.

41 posted on 06/07/2005 5:49:02 AM PDT by mommadooo3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt
Based on my experience of New Mexico, more likely than not this will turn out to be a case of personal vengeance by the family or friends of Los Alamos workers who lost jobs or are under investigation.
42 posted on 06/07/2005 5:51:10 AM PDT by M. Dodge Thomas (More of the same, only with more zeros on the end.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alia
This IS what you're referring to?....

While the FBI was attempting to reassure the public of its trustworthiness and good faith, coincidence (or poor judgment) reared its ugly head to strike a blow at the FBI's credibility. In the same week that the Carnivore fiasco erupted, the FBI chose to harass Notra Trulock. Displaying police state arrogance and banana republic charm, the FBI, without a search warrant, seized Mr. Trulock's computer hard drive.

Notra Trulock, readers will recall, is the former Department of Energy director of counterintelligence who blew the whistle on the lax security at the DOE nuclear weapons research facilities.

On July 14th, two FBI agents showed up at Mr. Trulock's residence. These two agents allegedly told Mr. Trulock's landlady – a Department of Energy employee – that they would break the door down if she didn't cooperate. The landlady claims that the FBI agents did not show, or offer to show her a search warrant. The FBI intrusion came only two days after the latest edition of National Review hit the newsstands. Mr. Trulock had written an article for the National Review critical of the FBI's handling of the various security scandals surrounding the nuclear weapons research facilities. The FBI alleges that the article, or one similar may have contained classified information. Mr. Trulock has retained Judicial Watch as counsel and has filed suit against the FBI and Director Freeh for violating his Constitutional rights.

43 posted on 06/07/2005 5:57:48 AM PDT by mommadooo3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: dancusa

Hardly. NM has its own highly developed underworld.
Ask anyone who deals with state govt..

44 posted on 06/07/2005 5:59:10 AM PDT by rahbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

yuck, I don't think he did this to himself.

45 posted on 06/07/2005 6:09:36 AM PDT by FreeAtlanta (never surrender, this is for the kids)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MichaelP

****I hope the FBI is all over this****

I bet they are. Check the local agent's shoes for blood spatter.

46 posted on 06/07/2005 6:25:25 AM PDT by mercy (never again a patsy for Bill Gates - spyware and viri free for over a year now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: pepperdog

"This is outrageous! I hope this poor man recovers and I hope the people who beat him are found and jailed--forever!"

They're probably back in Washington by now.

47 posted on 06/07/2005 6:33:15 AM PDT by dljordan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt

God be with this man and his family.

48 posted on 06/07/2005 7:24:56 AM PDT by Former MSM Viewer ("Some of our successes will be known only to a few." W 2001)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Former MSM Viewer


49 posted on 06/07/2005 7:29:33 AM PDT by Unicorn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: ovrtaxt; mommadooo3
I wish I could do some work on this, but there are just too many other things on my "To do" list right now. FWIW, my first inclination was that it sounds as if Tommy Hook has some info that may threaten the Chicom-Clinton connection. My second thought was to wonder if this is what Arkansas lawyer Gary Johnson (Jennifer Flowers' neighbor) looked like after he was beaten to an inch of his life.
50 posted on 06/07/2005 7:41:28 AM PDT by Nita Nupress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-109 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson