Nexus - 0703 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

AGAINST BEAST THE HIGH-LEVEL DRUG RUNNING A number of whistleblowers are suing the CIA and other US Government officials to expose their complicity in drug-trafficking operations and cover-ups. Part 2 of 2 IV. CIA/DoJ COLLUSION IN DRUG TRAFFICKING/COVER-UP Class Action Lawsuit Alleges Federal Statute Violations espite documented evidence by government whistleblowers, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Department of Justice (DoJ) have never been held accountable for their collusion in and/or acquiescence to drug traf- ficking. On March 15, 1999, however, class action lawsuits were filed by attor- neys Katya Komisaruk, William M. Simpich and Kenneth Frucht on behalf of Rosemary Lyons and Olivia Woods in northern California and Donna J. Warren and Berlina M. Doss in southern California (Case No. 99-02603). The suit names the Central Intelligence Agency, the United States Department of Justice, Estate of William Casey, Robert Gates, John Deutch, George Tenet, Estate of William French Smith, Edwin Meese, Richard Thornburgh, Janet Reno and others as Defendants, alleging that these US Government agencies and employees were responsible for the 1980s crack cocaine epidemic and the resulting social and economic devastation of inner city communities. According to the Statement of Facts: "On March 16, 1998, CIA Inspector-General Frederick Hitz appeared before the House Intelligence Committee to report on his investi- gation of the CIA, the Contras and crack cocaine. Hitz testified that, beginning in 1982, the CIA entered into an undisclosed agreement with the Department of Justice, allowing CIA officers to refrain from reporting drug trafficking by its ‘agents, assets and non-staff employees’. Hitz admitted that 'there are instances where the CIA did not, in an expedi- tious or consistent fashion, cut off relationships with individuals supporting the Contra program, who were alleged to have engaged in drug trafficking activity, or take action to resolve the allegation’. "When asked by Congressman Norman Dicks of Washington, 'Did any of these allega- tions involve trafficking in the United States?', Hitz's answer was 'Yes'. Hitz acknowl- edged that the CIA knew of drug trafficking allegations ‘regarding dozens of individuals and a number of companies connected in some fashion to the Contra program or the Contra movement’. "Hitz recounts in Volume II of the Inspector-General's Report dated 10/9/98 that through the secret agreement, the CIA and DoJ attempted to exempt the CIA from report- ing about the drug trafficking of persons employed by, assigned to, or acting for an agency within the intelligence community." Since the CIA itself admitted to having knowledge of its own "assets" being involved in illegal activities, the argument seems to be indisputable. "Plaintiff claims that the CLA/DoJ agreement violated a federal statute, 28 USC §535," the lawsuit alleges, "which imposes a duty on every department and agency in the Executive Branch to report promptly to the Attorney General any information, allegations or complaints relating to possible violations of [criminal law] by officers and employees of the government." In other words, if federal agency employees are aware of violations, these must also be reported. There is another category of criminal code violation called "misprision of felony", which refers to the offence of concealing knowledge of a felony by one who has not participated in it. CIA officials could be charged with this as well. "The private CIA/DoJ agreement attempted to get around this federal law by redefining the term ‘employee’ to mean only full-time career officials—as opposed to persons ‘employed by, assigned to, or acting for an agency within the intelligence community’. In Part 2 of 2 by Uri Dowbenko © 1999, 2000 PO Box 43 Pray, Montana 59065 USA Email: u.dowbenko@mailcity.com by Uri Dowbenko © 1999, 2000 APRIL — MAY 2000 NEXUS - 43