Posted on 06/08/2002 7:22:21 PM PDT by Ivan the Terrible
Question: WAS ANGLETON RIGHT?
What does it say about the state of US intelligence in the late nineteen-eighties and early ninety-nineties that two top counterintellgence officials-- Aldrich Ames in the CIA's anti-Soviet counterintelligence and Robert Phillip Hanssen in the FBI Soviet counterintelligence-- were moles for the Russian Intelligence Service? Under such circumstances, who controlled the recruitments the CIA and FBI were making during this period?
ANSWER:
James Jesus Angleton, the chief of the CIA's counterintelligence staff from in 1953 to 1974, principal concern was not with "moles" per se, but with the inherent vulnerability of intelligence services to systematic deception. To him, "moles" were a means to this end if, and only if, they were in a position to provide timely feedback to an adversary about what channels his intelligence service were monitoring and how it is was interpreting the data it was intercepting. With such a feedback loop in place, he believed perfect deception was possible. Imagine, he suggested, a wife, attempting to deceiving her husband and using his psychiatrist as her feedback source. By bribing the psychiatrist to tell her on an ongoing basis how her husband was interpreting her lies and deceptions, she would be able to modify them, elaborating on those stories which he believed and discarding or altering those stories which he doubted. Through this trial and error process, she could continue to fit her deception perfectly to what her husband believed. "The deceived becomes his own deceiver" in Angleton's example. (You might recall Woody Allen used such a similar device to seduce Julia Roberts in the movie Everyone Says I Love You)
While manipulating a suspicious spouse might require only a bribed shrink, manipulating an entire intelligence service would require a feedback source capable of getting access to secret information that is both compartmentalized and restricted on a "need to know" basis. Angleton held that a penetration able to accomplish this feat would most probably located in the counterintelligence branch, which through its investigative function can access to multiple compartments. Even so, the access of a single mole would be limited by what cases he had been assigned. What would greatly expand the feedback would be two moles, each located in a different counterintelligence branch, for example, CIA counterintelligence and FBI counterintelligence. Such a combination, if efficiently managed, could cosmically expand their access, since each could produce leads for the other to investigate--- leads which would generate a legitimate need to know for each mole. For example, if such a combo existed, Mole A in CIA could inform the FBI through the CIA-FBI liaison that there was suspicion about X. The FBI, charged with investigating all espionage in the US, which turn the case over to its counterintelligence branch, which would give Mole B the access and need to know to delve into the concerning X. Angleton feared that such a dual penetration would allow the KGB to effectively control the assessment of American intelligence Others, including J. Edgar Hoover in the FBI and William Colby in the CIA, did not share Angleton's concern. Hoover threatened to sever its cooperation with Angleton's staff and Colby characterized the likelihood of the Russian intelligence service recruiting moles simultaneously in both the CIA and FBI counterintelligence as preposterous and Angleton as paranoid. Angleton was fired.
Yet, the dual recruitment Angleton feared is precisely happened in the nineteen-eighties when both Aldrich Ames, heading the CIA's anti-Soviet counterintelligence, and Robert Phillip Hanssen, working in the FBI Soviet counterintelligence
Seriously, where IS this guy? You would think a Federal employee would serve at the convenience of Congress but even Senators can't seem to interview him. There's something really odd about his inaccessiblity. And how is it all these investigative journals can find nothing about him other than his name? Has anyone done a bio? They've done a bio on everyone else involved with this mess.
Angleton was correct, in the way, and needed to be discredited.
The Commies could count on their fellow travelers and useful idiots at the NYT.
AmericaUnited: Which tells you the New York Times is tool of Soviet Intelligence.Except that it is no longer the Soviet Union, but now Russia and other Republics. And the president has made points by convincing us and Europe that Russia is now our friend and that he has looked in Putin's soul and sees good things. So, what are you saying?
That nobody believes the New York Times anymore.
An Extensive Expose On International Terrorism
Through the Looking Glass: Angleton and Golitsyn
Would you like an example of what I am speaking of? Let's take the Czech Republic as an example:
SHAMEFUL REALITY BEHIND HAVEL´S DEMOCRACY
Repression in the Czech Republic
Russia's involvement in world terrorism and the Czech connection
Bolshevik Inquisition – Part II Hucin speaks out
Bolshevik Inquisition – Part III The Red Octopus
There. That should keep you busy for a while.
There are examples such as the above going on in EVERY SINGLE former Soviet Republic. Peristroika was and is a deception.
Nothing here to see folks....move along.
bat-boy: With all due respect Mr. Dangerfield, you have no idea what you are talking about. Sure, the Soviet Union split up. However, the same folks are in power. THE SAME FOLKS!!! Every country kept the same people in power! All they did was change the names of their party! It would be no different than the democans changing their name. Does that change their beliefs? NO.I think you miss the point that President Bush is the one who is telling us that Putin and his administration is different and is to be trusted. And he has been congratulated for that often on FreeRepublic. Maybe you should be addressing that rather than looking backward.
The only thing I can figure is that President Bush knows nothing of Golitsyn and his theories/predictions because his "crack" intelligence agencies blew Golitsyn off in favor of Nosenko, who was was nothing but a KGB stooge sent to the U.S. to reduce or eliminate the potential damage of Golitsyn's revelations.
Jeez, I wish I could talk everyone into reading the following books:
The Perestroika Deception : Memoranda to the Central Intelligence Agency by Anatoliy Golitsyn
"New Lies for Old: The Communist Strategy for Deception and Disinformation" - Anatoliy Golitsyn
Origins of the Fourth World War : And the Coming Wars of Mass Destruction - by Jeffrey R. Nyquist
Seeds of Fire: China And The Story Behind The Attack On America -- by Gordon Thomas
We will bury you - by the late Czech General Jan Sejna
As for looking backward, sometimes you have to peer into the past to understand what is happening now and what will happen in the future.
There is nothing I can do to convince Bush to read these books and consider the implications. His advisors will never introduce these books to him, nor the theories found inside. The intelligence and LE establishments of the CIA and FBI have completly disregarded Golitsyn as a crackpot, although one must wonder how a "crackpot" rises to the rank of major inside of the KGB, or how a man rises to the rank of general inside of the Czech army if they are crackpots. There is also the question that if Golitsyn was/is a crackpot, then why is it that out of close to two hundred predictions on what the Soviet Union/Russia would do, he has a 94% rate of accuracy.
The only thing I can do is attempt to get the information I feel is valid and relevent out to the public. If someone listens, good....I say prepare. If people do not listen, then that's fine also. They will die when the time comes because they are not prepared.
Despite the imbecillic ramblings of the likes of Thomas Friedman and Francis Fuki-what's-his-name, history and war have not ended for mankind.
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.