Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 22, 2016
Document Release Date: 
June 9, 2010
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
June 1, 1980
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP90-00845R000100190004-3.pdf3.38 MB
Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Number 9 ? June 1980 SPECIAL TECHNOLOGY ISSUE $2.00 J IN~'ORIVIATION BLTf t FI'iN Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Editorial Las t issue we noted that no CIA charter at all would be better than the one then working its way through Congress. It now seems that pressures from the right and left and the complexities of election year politics in the United States have ;tll combined to achieve this result. At the time of the Church Committee Report in 1976, there were calls for massive intelligence reforms and ser- ious restrictions on the CIA. By a sophisticated mixture of stalling, stonewalling? and deal-making, the CIA and its supporters managed, in three years, to reverse the trend completely. There were demands to "unleash" the CIA. A first draft charter proposed some new restrictions and re- laxed some existing ones. The Administration, guided by the CTA, attacked all the restrictions. The Attorney Gener- al criticized "unnecessary restrictions," and hoped that "reason and good sense will prevail." Tht: Administration insisted on the removal of all the laws which the CIA found inconvenient. This led to a new versien of the charter, discussed last issue, which was de- signed to exempt the CIA substantially, if not completely, from t he Freedom of Information Act; to repeal the Hughes -Ryan Amendment, which required prior notice of covert actions to Congress; to criminalize disclosure of intelli- gence officers, agents and sources by both former em- ploye~;s and private citizens; and to authorize specifically a wide range of covert operations at home and abroad, in- cluding those directed at U.S. citizens. Overplaying Its Hand Perhaps the CIA overplayed its hand. Bolstered by events in Iran and Afghanistan the Agency was not content to accept a "mixed" charter. By the beginning of 1980 journalists were convinced that no restrictions would pass. Accountability, suggested Los Angeles Times writer Robert Toth, would remain minimal and uncodified, and "Congress, responding to the crisis atmosphere during a short election-year session, will set aside the complex legal issues in the proposed charter while ending key restraints on the CIA Znd other intelligence agencies." It now seems that Toth was 100% wrong. The Disappearing Moral Issue The major public debate involved prior notice. Should Congress be notified of major covert operations before they occurred? The cynicism of this focus has two facets. First of all, to a large extent the debate was fatuous. The CIA has always ignored reporting requirements whenever it felt it was necessary. Admiral Turner even told Congress this, angering Senate Majority Leader Byrd. More importantly, the discussion of >1~hen to report co- vert actions ignored the moral issue of rt~hether to under- takecovert operations at all, or in what circumstances. We have taken the position that in nearly any conceivable circumstance, covert actions are morally wrong. They in- volve the manipulation of events in other countries, events CONTENTS Editorial 2 Cameras in Jamaica 23 Sur~teillance in Norway 4 Hmong to Caribbean 24 The CTlomar Explorer 10 News Notes 25 Mind Control Research 15 Naming Names 29 NS~~ Notes 22 Sources and Methods 36 The Cover: an ACE HIGH Communications Relay in Norway, photographed as a Norwegian Air Force fighter executed a mock bombing/ strafing run. Covert.4ction Information Bulletin, Number 9, June 1980, published by Covert Action Publications, Inc., a District of Columbia Nonprofit Corporation, P. O. Box 50272, Washington, DC 20004. Telephone: (202) 265-3904. All rights reserved; copyright ?1980, by Covert Action Publications, Inc. Typography by Art for People, Washington, DC; printing by Faculty Press, Brooklyn, NY. Washington staff: Ellen Ray, William Schaap, Louis Wolf. E'~oard of Advisors: Philip Agee, Ken Lawrence, Karl Van Meter, Elsie Wilcott, Jim Wilcott. The CovertAction Information Bulletin is available at many bookstores around the world. Write or call for the store nearest you. Inquiries from distributors and subscription services welcome. Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 which should be left to the people of those countries to decide. There is little Congressional support for this view, and no discussion of it. The Specifics As the CIA pressed for its "wish list," every proposal, fortunately, had its opponents. The FOIA exemption was supported by the Justice Department, but editorially the press fought this move, understanding the effects it would have on journalistic and historical research. The Anti-Agee bill was pressed, but some columnists, such as Tom Wicker of the New York Times, noted that journalists, even if not covered by the law, would be subject to grand jury har- assment to discover the sources of leaks. The debate over the use of journalists, academics, and clergy was heated. Admiral Turner, speaking before a gathering of the nation's major editors, shocked his au- dience by insisting that "in unusual circumstances" it was entirely proper for the CIA to use journalists as agents. He even announced that he had approved plans to use journal- ists three times in the recent past, contrary to assurances given publicly several years earlier by William Colby. To justify the use of clergy, the CIA used its supporters from the far right. Ernest W. Lefever of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, co-author of "The CIA and the American Ethic,"argued that "a garbage mechanic, a poli- tician, and a preacher should all have an equal right to be patriotic." He said with a straight face that "giving infor- mation to the CIA is like reporting a fire, the presence of a suspicious person, or a crime in one's neighborhood."Once again the hamhanded approach backfired, and the Nation- alCouncil of Churches and other religious groups attacked the proposed use of the clergy. Senator Moynihan coun- tered by announcing his intention to introduce a flat prohi- bition against such activity. government spying. The Campaign for Political Rights (to which CAIB belongs), the Center for National Security Studies, the American Civil Liberties Union, all gathered support against the charter. Many professional associa- tions were educated and convinced of the dangers to their work from the charter. The struggle, to the surprise of many, began to have results. By April, the charter was "dead." By mid-April it was clear that a comprehensive charter could not get through Congress. Senator Huddleston, chairman of the charter drafting, subcommittee, announced that it was being abandoned. The Committee was to work on a short bill which included only Congressional over- sight, the Anti-Agee bill, the repeal of Hughes-Ryan, and the FOIA exemption. It looked like the CIA's tactics had worked. Everything it wanted, and nothing else, would pass. But observers failed to realize that the same forces which had made a charter impossible were also likely to doom such piecemeal legislation. Awatered-down version of prior notice and oversight was approved with ambigu- ous language which meant different things to different people. Prior notice of "significant anticipated intelligence activity"("special activities," the new name for covert ac- tion), must be given to the intelligence committees, but disclosures are only "to the extent consistent with due regard for the protection from unauthorized disclosure of classified information and information relating to intelli- gence sources and methods." When it came to the other provisions, however, disunity was apparent. When Senator Chaffee said that he wanted the Anti-Agee bill added, Senator Moynihan indicated he wanted the prohibition against journalists. When the FOIA exemption was brought up, there was objection. Finally, Senator Bayh stated that the only bill which had any chance of passage was the oversight law with no amendments whatsoever. Sen~rtor Chaffee withdrew his motion when he was assured that the leadership of the Committee and the Senate would oppose any amendments on the floor. Anything is possible on the floor of Congress, of course, but it appears that the threat to the continuation of the Bu!/etin has been averted, at least for the time being. Per- hapscontinued exposure of CIA abuses and our insistence that the Agency has not been refo[med, will generate more movement in the proper direction. Throughout this debate, considerable and effective pres- sures were brought to bear by the organized opposition to Number 9 (June 1980) ~ D ~B~ COMMITTEE Of SMAII MAGAZINE EDITORS AND VU ALISHE~S !OY ,o] SAN EIEANC15l O. CA pA,oi Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 The Norwegian Connection: NORWAY, (UN)WILLING SPY FOR THE U.S. by F.G. Samia* "Civil servants in the ministries of defense and foreign affairs and members of the defense staff misled both the government and the Storting [Parliament] in connection with the establishment of radio-navigation stations of the type Loran C and Omega on the coast of northern Norway in the years 1958 and 1965-66. Both projects were built to pro- vide American nuclear submarines with navigational data." With these words of introduction Arbeiderbladet [Work~.r"s Daily], the national paper of the governing La- bor P~.rty, initiated on February 8, 1975 the so-called Hellebust case. Information for the article came from a the- sis written by Army Intelligence Captain Aders Hellebust, that traced the development of Norway's military infra- structure. For the first time Norwegians heard the names Loran C and Omega, and the claim that these two secrecy- shrouded systems were in direct violation of Norway's 3-point basic non-aggression policy, and jeopardizing their independence and safety. Hellebust's revelations were only the tip of the Nordic iceberg however. Over the next three years more and more of it was explored and charted and its composition re- vealed, including: A massive secret electronic spy network operated by Norwegians for U.S. strategic purposes; com- plicity rind deceit by government officials and the military; Gordon Liddy-type spy stories ofCIA-financed Norwegian- trained skiing Finnish spies in James Bond chases with Russian patrols; arms caches for CIA-organized guerrilla That is: No nuclear weapons, no foreign troops quartered permanently and no fc reign bases on its soil, and no military exercises further east than the 24th parallel-a sort of demilitarized zone with the Soviet Union. Norway, while permitting no NATO forces there either, has had only a token of its own forces in the 250 kilometer area between it and the U.S.S.R. known as Finnmark, since this policy was adopted in 1949 when Norway joined NATO. ?F. G. Ssimia is a free-lance journalist who has lived in Scandinavia for several years. groups, hidden in the wine cellars of millionaires in the employ of the Defense Ministry; secret agreements be- tweenthe U.S. and Norwegian governments, and the delib- erate misleading of scientists and researchers by the mil- itary and its U.S. liaisons; a "defense" system which created more dangers than it can deflect; CIA infiltration of Norway's Secret Service and government; and, most alarming of all, Norway's unwitting contribution to the new thinking in the Pentagon and other parts of official Washington that the, U.S. could "win" a nuclear war. As a result of the public debate sparked by Hellebust's case, a commission of inquiry was appointed by the Parli- ament, and its conclusions, known as the Schei Report (after the professor who chaired the commission) were classified secret and only a summary about half the length of the original was made public. The secret report was sent to the Parliament which one year and a half later, con- cluded that there was no reason to criticize any of the political authorities or the actions instrumental in the in- stallation of the Loran C and Omega systems in Norway. The Left Socialist Party and a handful of ruling Labor Party members however, opposed this opinion, seeing an in-depth investigation as more important than parliamen- tary procedure. Leaks to the press in April 1976 and June 1977 gave details of the secret report as well as information from the secret Parliament meetings. And a rapid string of seemingly unrelated admissions and revelations during the summer of 1977 began to hint at the size and seriousness of the affair. The Short Hot Summer & Spooks in the Telephone Book When Major Sven Blindheim stepped forward to con- firmthe claim made in an article published by Nv Tid [New Times] newspaper in July, 1977, that Norway had trained and equipped Finns who regularly crossed the Russian border from both Norway and Finland in the early 1950's Number 9 (June 1980) Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 for the purpose of spying, he was promptly arrested. This caused no little stir in itself, even among those who doubted the veracity of the report, since Blindheim is Norway's most decorated soldier and a national hero of the resistance against the Nazi occupation during W W II. Blindheim said he wasn't sure but thought that the money for this opera- tionhad come from the U.S. and NATO. The very next day Christen Christensen, editor of the arch-conservative newspaper Morgenhladet [Morning Paper] and a former member of the Security Service, said that he also had participated in this training, though defending it along with any other means of containment against the Soviet Union. Christensen corrected Blindheim in one area, however, saying that NATO was not involved in the funding. He, like Blindheim, was promptly arrested for breach of secrecy. Loran C Transmitter near Bo, Norway At nearly the same time in Finland, Esa Anttala was publishing a bookz on his exploits as just such a spy. Written as a novel, it details his experiences including the training received in Norway, several day flights on skis from Russian Army patrols (and the bullet holes in his knapsack), the type of information he was asked to get, and contacts with CIA operatives. The impact from all this had hardly been absorbed when the next wave broke over the Norwegian people. Ivar Johansen, a free-lance journalist and peace activist, had begun as far back as 1972 to reasearch on his own, and with rather unorthodox yet surprisingly effective methods, the existence of a chain of electronic super-spy stations in Norway directed against the U.S.S.R. Public knowledge- at least in those areas where the installations were lo- cated had it that these were something more than "de- fense radio stations" or "communications research sta- tions" as the occasional sign would proclaim. The official position was that nothing of the sort existed. Johansen, using public information sources such as union files, civil service records, automobile registrations and even telephone directories, located and identified seven of the installations, several of which were located in Finn- mark or the "neutral" area, and catalogued the names of people working at them. In Vadso, a small fjord town just above the Artic Circle, no less than 1500 of the 5000 living there worked at the huge listening station, and were only half jokingly referred to as "spooks" by the rest of the townspeople.? While preparing articles to document his findings, Johansen was arrested along with some assistants and all his material and files were confiscated. Together with two journalists from NI' Tid, he is currently facing trial for "endangering the national security" of Norway. September added its special degrees to a summer already made hot by other than meterological events, when the liberal daily paper Daghladet [The Daily] published an interview with former CIA operative Victor Marchetti. Marchetti not only confirmed the existence of this exten- sive electronic spy network but described its nature as being strategic as opposed to tactical. He said that the National Security Agency (NSA) had erected and operated these listening and intercept stations with the cooperation of the Norwegian Security Service; that CIA and NSA personnel were regularly on assignment at them; and, in a parenthetical confirmation, that the CIA had in fact pro- vided the funds for the training of the Finnish spies by the Norwegians. Standard "Company" operating procedure, Marchetti said further, included the infiltration of every Western government and intelligence service, Norway be- ing no exception. A little more than one year later, in November 1978, local police, while looking for illegal distilleries, discovered a huge arms cache in a secret room of a villa outside Oslo belonging to Hans Otto Meyer, a wealthy retired ship owner. Meyer unraveled a story that had even police au- thorities shaking their heads in disbelief. He claimed to be an agent working for the Norwegian Secret Service and that the arms, cached with the full knowledge and consent of the Defense Ministry, were intended to supply "anti- communist" commando groups in the event that Norway were occupied by the Soviet Union. Any mirth was short- lived, however, because the Defense Ministry soon issued a statement that, while dismissing Meyer as an active agent (he was "retired"as "uncontrollable" in 1964), admitted the establishment of the so-called E-grupper (from Etterre- tingstjenesten-Norwegian intelligence agency) during the cold-war years of the late 40's-early 50's, and their purpose z Yli rautaesiripun, 1977; ARenter kn~ser grensen (Norwegian edition) (in English: "Agents Cross the Border"), Pax Forlag, Oslo, 1978. ?Also known as "NATO rabbits," in reference to their markedly higher reproduction rate-the result, speculation has it, of their attempts to counter long boring hours spent in mechanical company. Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 as "behind the lines" guerilla fighters. The groups were disbanded in the early 60's, they claimed, and the weapons -or at least most of them-were turned in. That these groups were established without either the consent or knowl~;dge of the Parliiament precipitated an ongoing de- bate a~~ to their constitutionality. Parliament members and citizens were upset enough with the discovery of quasi-nationalistic armed bands in their midst, when someone got hold of ex-CIA chief- Williain Colby's memoirs published earlier in the year in the United States. In them, Colby reminisced about his long involvement with Scandinavia, citing among other things a parachute jump he made over Norway during World Vb'ar II, operations he carried out as a young politi- cal Attache at the American Embassy in Stockholm nearly 30 years ago, and his part in establishing "resistance cells" in Norway at the beginning of the 1950's. Another flood- gate wars opened. Major Sven Blindheim, still under threat of prosecution for his revelations on the Finland case, acknowledged his participation in meetings held in Lon- don to set up the E-groups, with representatives of the British intelligence service. MI 6, and the CIA. Louis C. Sherer, the CIA's West: European chief at the time, repre- sented that organization in the operation financed under the code-name TRIPARTITE. The continued existence of these groups, though i.n altered form, was also now re- vealed, and new consideration was given to earlier "radi- cal" analyses that their possible real purpose was to carry out a coup in the event that an anti-NATO govenment came to power during the 1950's, which, at the time, was a very diatinct possibility. And the debate over constitution- ality escalated to take in the existence, structure and pur- pose o1' the present-day groups. That Norway, as the only other NATO land besides Turkey with a common border to the Soviet Union, is being used by the United States, and at grave risk to itself, is underscored by the nature of the spying. Tactical intelli- gence gat,heringfor the defense of Norway and to fulfill its NATO role can be and is justified within bounds (see below, ~4, "Types of Spying"). The long-term eclectic and penetratir-g strategic Intelligence gathering which provides continuous data to U.S. long-range military planning, however, which has nog defensive relevance to Norways, and wh ich in fact contravenes itsfundamental policies, can not. In Turkey, the identical kinds of activity are carried out dirf~ctly and openly by NSA personnel, whereas some Norwegian installations are so "secret" that no signs can be posted ~~eclaring them so-a definite advantage for peace researchers since, conversely, there can be no prohibitions such as photographing them. And even if eventually these installa:io~ns were officially acknowledged, the U.S. would never d;rre to promote a similar status for them as for some of its Pacific bases; Okinawa and the Phillipines, for exam- SThe Om:ga navigation system illustrates this point well. The U.S. origi- nally claimed that it would be of local benefit in its arguments with Norwegi~ n authorities-for example as an aid to coastal shipping-but the nature of Omega's VLF (very low frequency) propagation makes it unusable within a radius of 600 miles. ple, where signs warn, "Guards in this area use live ammu- nition."The freedom and nature-loving Norwegians would never stand for that. The theory often defensively used by NATO strategists that the U.S.S.R. wants (or would want) to occupy Finn- mark is erroneous and misleading, say concerned Norwe- gians. Finnmark is militarily inhospitable terrain-though not completely so. Preventing the type of spying that is currently being done from northern Norway, to forestall a NATO and/or U.S. attack (against the submarine base at Murmansk, for example) based upon the information be- ing gathered is more the reality that might provoke the Soviets. (These listening and intercept stations, remember, are in addtion to the 100 or so acknowledged tactical instal- lations emplaced in Norway as part of the NATO system.) Norway's unequalled strategic value lies in its geogra- phical position, to be sure, but in a way that also makes it highly vulnerable and, in the worst of situations, probably unavoidably expendable. In an attack on the U.S.S.R. by the U.S., a goodly portion of those missiles launched from the U.S., its non-mainland bases and missile-carrying submarines, by virtue of the earth's shape and the laws of telemetry, will go over the pole, not across the Atlantic, and thus over Norway and much of Scandinavia. The missile- triangulating and aiming stations located there then be- come crucial, as do other types of equipment such as those that "listen" to the blasts of detonating ICBMs to deter- mine if they're targeted, possible duds, etc. Types of Spying This description, far from complete or comprehensive, was compiled by peace researchers in Scandinavia, and lists the kinds of secret spying being done by Norwegians for the U.S., the interrelated systems, and some of the equipment used, and the locations of some of the installations. LCOMINT-Communications Intelligence. The interception of radio communications. One of the most usual activities of the NSA, which operates perhaps 2000 such intercept stations world-wide. Usually operated under pure military cover at military communications bases. This is not possible in Norway because the U.S. does not have any overt bases there. Norwegian Military Intelli- gence carries out this function with nearly 5000 of its own people employed in operating radio receivers and in decod- ingand translating the messages monitored. Large circular ground plan antenna arrays of high frequency, manufac- tured by Plessey, a British firm, are used. 2. FLINT Electronic Intelligence. Gathering information about all (the enemy's) electronic capabilities, including communications and radars. The antennae and surveillance receivers used operate in the very high and ultra-high frequencies (VHF & UHF), are very sophisticated and determine such characteristics as frequencies and location of communications equipment, and operating patterns, pulse rates, shapes and lengths of 6 Cove~tAction Number 9 (June 1980) Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 radars, and so forth. Since radars are capable of frequently varying these characteristics and do so, ELINT is a good example of a long-term strategic intelligence gathering activity.' Radar is usually thought of as a purely defensive system, but the NADGE (NATO Air Defense Ground Environ- ment) array is much more. NADGE ray domes stretch from eastern Turkey to northern Norway, where their 500 kilometer reach rules out a solely defensive posture. It was NADGE Radar Domes in Northern Norway learned, for example, that NADGE in Norway regularly watches the scrambling of Soviet fighters from their base at Murmansk during defense exercises. This is direct spying on a defensive activit t' and the information obtained, such as how fast the fighters are scrambled, etc., is of use only if an intrusion of Soviet air space was being contemplated F-111's or B-52's against Murmansk, for example. The anxious Norwegian general who spilled the beans about tracking that wayward Korean airliner until it went down well behind Murmansk, a good 300 kilometers from the NADGE station, underscored this capability. And in all likelihood, the infamous Red Flag Squadrons designs its behavior according to NADGE-supplied data. ^B-52 bombers carry jamming and "spoofing" equipment aboard which puts out fake signals and generates a false image on (enemy) radar screens. Any missiles sent up at this image will explode harmlessly far away from the B-52. The design information for this equipment comes from such electronic intelligence. 'A USAF squadron of MIG fighter look-alikes, replete with Soviet mark- ings. This squadron tours air bases in the U.S. "engaging" U.S. fighterand bomber pilots in mock air battles using Soviet Air Force tactics. These are fighrer.r, not bombers, and their purpose is to simulate the response of Soviet air defenses reacting to an intrusion of their territory. The Soviet Union has lodged official complaints against the Red Flag Squadron. The interception of Russian missile telemetry -that is, all of the data that is relayed back during a missile launch and flight-is another instance of an intelligence activity that has no direct relevance to Norway's security, since Norway is not primarily threatened by Soviet ICBMs. However, since this information provides a way to measure Russian advances in missile technology and, ultimately, aids the definition of the state of the global arms race, analysts believe it to be somewhat legitimate. They would ask only that this activity, which is directed against the military satellite launching and test site at Plesetsk near Archangel, and the submarine missile-launching test sites in the Barents and White Seas, be acknowledged, as it is in Turkey, where similar stations record data from Russian satellite bases on the other side of the Caspian Sea. The detection of nuclear explosions is an instance of an activity and technique that has multiple methods and pur- poses, and illustrates, along with seismic monitoring (see #8 below), the difficulty involved in exposing the complete and true nature of these activir.ies. And why even well- meaning professional people are often taken in and their scientific expertise and contributions perverted. The detection of nuclear explosions by Infrasound is one of the most reliable methods aning of a covership Seascope, which mined for man- ganese nodules. Among the still secret participants in Pro- ject Jennifer, according to the affidavit of Ernest J. Zellmer, Associate Deputy Director of the CIA (Science and Technology), is an agency of the U.S. government whose '`mere identity" is too sensitive to disclose. consideraton of the case. The Judge felt compromised, "made fun of by the agency" when the Justice Department/ CIA suddenly reversed its position and, under directions from the National Security Council admitted CIA involve- ment in Project Jennifer. Judge Gesell said he no longer could accept the representation of those witnesses (gov- ernment) who appeared before him and who "cut their heart out about the secrecy here."(Transcript of proceed- ings, June 28, 1977.) The Judge then read into the record a part of his secret opinion that he had locked away eight months before: The Court: For instance, I say: "The capabilities of our Government in the area, the methods used to finance and conceal the project and the amounts which the U.S. was willing to commit to the venture are all matters vital to the security of the country." Why such information is vital to our nation's security and not vital to those who, under penalty of imprisonment, must finance such activities, i.e. taxpayers, has never been explained satisfactorily. The secret agency may have been one reason that the respected Judge Gerhart Gesell of the Federal District Courtin 'Washington dismissed MAP's complaint for "rea- sonsthat were secret"in October 1976. Upon remand from the Court of Appeals Gesell recused himself from further ?Fritzi Cohen is the Director of the Military Audit Project in Washing- ton, D.C. IviAP is anon-profit tax-exempt research organization focusing on the le;;al implications which result from activities of the military-indus- trial con' plex. Contributions for their general work, or earmarked for the case discussed in this article could be sent to MAP through CA/B. One of the three companies the CIA has acknowledged as participating, Global Marine, contracted with the U.S. to manage Project Jennifer in 1970. Summa Corporation, formerly Hughes Tool, joined the project in December 1972, perhaps only coincidentally, five weeks after How- ard Hughes made an emergency contribution of $100,000 to Nixon's reelection campaign, as reported in the New York Times. Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 To date in the course of litigation the Government has released certain documents involving Summa and Global Marine. Although the documents were liberally sanitized of dollar figures, names and task descriptions (except for certain deep sea mining activities) they do convey a sense of the project's monstrous proportions in both technical and monetary terms. For example, numerous vouchers docu- menting billings reveal that the U.S. arrrangement with Summa and Globa: Marine was a cost plus a percentage of cost basis, a method of contracting prohibited under Title 10, sec. 230 (g) of the U.S. Code. Overhead percentage rates frequently seemed outrageously inflated and overruns nu- merous to MAP's staff. The government also filed court affidavits from- Stansfield Turner, Brent Scowcroft, Cyrus Vance and two high level CIA officials all of which claimed that additional releases of information would seriously jeopardize the na- tional security. The affidavits on which Judge Gesell made his secret opinion however, remain under seal. constructing the Hughes Glomar Explorer? A. To provide a viable tool that could accomplish thejob of the United States Government that they wanted accomplished. Q. Did Global Marine contract with the U.S. Government to design the Hughes Glomar Explorer? A. Yes, sir. Q. When was that contract executed'? A. Well it has been a series of contracts and letter agreements starting in what would have been 1970.... The contract was between Global Marine and Mechanics Research, Inc.. . To my recollection, that contract started out to review and criticize approaches to solving a problem that the federal government had.... 1 do not remember as to when we started into the next phase of it; at which time it then became more definite; something that eventually turned into the design of the Hughes Glomar Explorer. [Throughout the deposition McCarthy systematically ob- jected to Launer's questions that tried to elicit descriptions of the "problem," "job," or "mission" on the ground that the answers would be classified.] One very curious aspect of the CIA's posture has been the continued stonewalling of questions regarding Lock- heed's involvement in Project Jennifer. Curious because Lockheed's participation is a matter of common know- ledge. For one thing the company boasted about it in its company newspaper, Southern Star, "published for the people of Lockheed Georgia, Co." "Some details of the world's largest submersible-the Hughes Mining Barge (HMB-I) were disclosed by two Lockheed engineers," it was reported on Dec. 1, 1977 "in a technical paper present- ed in Los Angeles at the Oceans '77 Conference. Larger than a football field, the HMB-l was designed by Lock- heed Missiles and Space Co. as a submersible transfer vehicle for a ocean floor work system." The Southern Star article was sumbitted to the Court along with several other official documents identifying Lockheed as a participant, but there has been no sign that it has had any impact on the court's current rationale, which can be best described as a rubber stamp of whatever expla- nation the government comes up with. A later submission by MAP, depositions taken in United States v. Count v of Los Angeles (1976), provides further proof of Lockheed's involvement. Interestingly this tes- timonywas taken in the presence of John J. McCarthy, tax division, Justice Department, and David Toy, lawyer for the witnesses. Toy had previously represented himself to county tax authorities as working for the CIA. Neither Toy nor McCarthy objected to the line of questioning of the county's lawyer which would reveal corporate participants. Following are excerpts taken from the deposition of Curtis Crooke, Vice-President of Global Marine and Pres- ident of Global Marine Development Corporation. Larry Launer, representing the Los Angeles County Tax Office: What party or parties originally conceived the idea to design and construct the Hughes Glomar Explorer? A. Global Marine. Number 9 (June 1980) Q. Was Global Marine involved in a contract of that nature involving subcomponents and what not? A. Yes.... It would have started in 1970 (corrected to 1971) with people like Minneapolis Honeywell, General Motors, Western Gear, Nordberg Engines, General Electric, Cooper- Bessemer, Fag Bearings in Germany. Hughes Tool and the Government were not parties to these contracts. Q. Mr. Toy: .lust for the sake of clarification are you talking about a single agreement with all of those parties you mentioned? Q. Launer: The contracts entered into ...were those con- tracts classified? Q. Now, due to my ignorance, at this stage where we are talking about these contracts in 1971, would it be correct to state that you were still concern~:d with the design stage of the Hughes Glomar Explorer, or had you moved onto getting the parts for the construction? A. They go hand in hand with each other. Q. Let's look to the construction of the vessel itself. Were there any contracts that Global Marine entered into which called for the construction of the Glomar Explorer? A. Yes, sir. Between Global Marine and Sun Shipbuilding and Drydock Co. Q. When was that contract entered into`? A. April, 1971. Q. ...When did construction commence on the vessel itself? A. In April of '71. [After a bit of confusion as to the actual launching date it was finally agreed that the Glomar was ready to set sail by Nov. 1972.] Q. Now are you familiar, sir, with the barge [hat I have been told is used in connection with the operations of the Hughes Glomar Explorer? Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Q~. Was Global Marine involved in any contract with any party which contract called for the design and construction oFthatbarge? A . Not other than our overall role of Systems Engineering Technical Direction. Q. [ am concerned, sir, with the contract or contracts wherein Global Marine was a party, which contracts dealt with the design andconstructionof the HMB-l. Can you tell m e which contract or contracts were involved with the barge? A. .Some things we were directly responsible for and o~:hers, the suppliers had direct contracts with the United Sates Government., as far as I know. And we had an overall monitoring responsibility in terms of engineering capability, cost, and schedule. Q. ...You were also, at that time, [time of original contract, J~.n. 1970] concerned ...with the design and construction of the barge? A. In the 1970 contract we were concerned with an overall system that would do a particular job for the United States Government.... It evolved into including the barge. Q Who handled the construction responsibilities for the ba rge? A Lockheed Missiles and Space division; something like that. Q. All right. If they had the construction responsibility for the barge, did Global Marine have a part or all of the respon- sibility for the design of the barge? A. For monitoring atnd approving the design; yes. Detailing and day-to-day engineering, no.... The barge in this pro- gram has served two functions. It has been a construction and assembly facility for certain pieces of underwater equipment, which equipment eventually has to be wound up; which is both too heavy and too large to put in over the deck or with a crane. Therefore, it is placed into the ship by submerging the HMB to the ocean floor, driving the HMB over the top of it, opening up the well gates, lowering the docking lines down into the HMB and retreiving that all back up into the center well of the HGE. A. In essence, the government contract, as far as 1 know, records and documents generated are basically the property of the federal government. Certainly those records are herein this building. Other records exist in the program office. Q. Now, 1 would like to ask you a hypothetical question, if 1 could. Assume that a knowledgable person with experience in exploration for oil and mineral deposits on the ocean floor were to go and inspect the Hughes Glomar Explorer. Do you know if that knowledgable person could be led to believe that that vessel was not designed or equipped for exploration for oil or mineral deposits? A. First, start off with oil. Anyone who has knowledge in the offshore drilling oil business would look at that piece of equipment and say that certain portions of it would certainly be nice. But obviously it is not made or does it accomplish any job. In offshore drilling you have your generators, living quarters, many dynamic things. And here it lacks so much that a knowledgeable person would not look at it and say, "Gee, here's an oil rig." Q. How about exploration for mineral deposits'' A. That again, in my opinion, becomes an interesting ques- tion. Quite obviously when one is looking for a cover, if the government interest is behind you, immediately you pick up the idea of offshore mining because there is no expert on what an offshore mining rig looks like. I dare say 1 can take anybody and 1 can convince them either way, because there's no background; nothing established. Q. Sir, if you had no involvement with the Hughes Glomar Explorer and you went on that vessel in the latter part of 1973 or early 1974, do you think you would have concluded that that vessel was not designed and or equipped for the explo- ration on the ocean floor of oil or mineral deposits? A. Oil deposits, you would conclude it was not designed for that. Mineral deposits, I would say you could convince anybody. For years, people were convinced it was. It had been photographed. You asked me for my opinion. It has obviously been photographed. It had been looked at. It had been walked on. It had been sailed around in, and there is no way for somebody to tell at that stage in the development of the industry whether that was designed for mining or not. Q. And has it so functioned only during operations concern- ing; the secret government mission? A. Y"es sir; to the best of my knowledge. Q. Where is the barge now? A. As far as 1 know, tied up at Redwood City or tied up in Pier E in Long Beach. Q. [Re the contract of Dec. 5, 1972] "The contractor agrees to maintain books, records, documents, and other evidence pe rta fining to the cost, et cetera of the contract." ... Do you know where those records are presently maintained? A. 1 would imagine they're maintained in their entirety and complete form in the program office. Q. Where is that program office located? A. [to government attorney] Is that classified? M ?. McCarthy: Program office, that would be classified information. Witness: That was my opinion. Mr. McCarthy: It's an interface facility between the U.S. Government and the contractor. Q. By Mr. Launer: Sir, do you know who has custody of the books, records and documents which are called for ...which related to cost incurred by Global Marine? Following is Mr. McCarthy's examination of the witness: Q. I believe, you stated earlier that the HGE did not extract any mineral deposits from the ocean floor; is that correct? Q. Now, in this program, did your company at any time collect any nodules from the ocean floor? A. That would be-must have been during the summer, fall of '71.... We chartered the vessel SEASCOPE in Santa Barbara from Kenny Elmes and outfitted it for cover pur- poses, to go out and survey and look for legitimate-looking nodule deposits to have the ship at sea sail through areas and have radio communication and establish the fact that the Summa Corporation was interested in the offshore mining business. Q. Do you recall approximately how many nodules were collected? Q. Do you know how much the nodules are worth per ton, approximately? Number 9 (June 1980) Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 A. $20 or $30 a ton. 1 guess the price has fluctuated by now. Q. 1 believe you stated that your company created the con- cept of the HGE? Q. And presented it to the government, and the government accepted your concept? joints. And so that contract was laid off economically and it was the responsibility of the Hughes Tool Company to place the subcontracts for the manufacture of that piece; again under Global Marine. Q. What was the precise purpose for which Global Marine chartered the SEASCOPE to clo this operation? A. To exactly go out and survey, for bathymetric surveys, and to dredge up manganese nodules. Q. When did you present that concept to the government, approximately? Q. After you had conceived the concept of the HGE, pre- sented it to the government, and the government had ap- proved your concept? A. Yes, sir. It was also after having tried to generate the mining as a cover. Q. Did Summa Corporation join the project after you had? A. After that work had been done. Q. Do you know what happened to those nodules that were collected? A. Some of them went into some research lab. The govern- ment has custody of the rest of them, as far as I know; outside of some momentos, as far as I know, none of them were released to any of the contractors. Q. In building the pipestring, what role did the Summa Corporation or the Hughes Tool Company play? A. Basically, the pipestring, the design of the pipestring again, was started before Hughes Tool Company got into the contract. Other pipe manufacturers had been contacted about the matter. Q. By whom? A. By Global Marine; when obviously Summa agreed to take over for the government in this contract. Again it would make no sense to the general public for Hughes Tool Com- pany to be building pipe and having it fabricated by some- body else. Their prime business is manufacturing tool Q. Why was GM interested in nodules? A. Global Marine obviously was not interested in nodules because GM never had their hands on the nodules. Global Marine was interested in establishing a posture in the field. Summa was interested in the nodules. Q. What, if you know, were the hopes of either the U.S. Government or Global Marine' when they embarked upon this operation with the SEASCOPE to remove the nodules? A. To convince the general public that the project was truly a deep sea mining project. Q. So what additional gain would be made by chartering the SEASCOPE and having that g;o out and removing nodules from the floor, as related to the general public? A. Well, you don't go out and build yourself a great big iron-ore smelter unless you have gotten out and done your- self acertain amount of scoring and pitting and looking to see if you have a good deposit to mine. As to the Summa Corporation spending money in developing a deep sea min- ing vessel, they have not gotten their feet wet; they don't know what the bottom conditions are. How do you build a system if you don't make an attempt to get basic data? Q. When did you become aware of the secret government mission involved with the HGfi? A. I first became aware of a secret government mission in November of 1969. Q. And who told you, sir? A. United States Government. Q. Who from the United States Government? Mr. McCarthy: That's classified, and 1 instruct the witness not to answer. Mr. Launer: Okay. Nothing further. Curtis Crooke's testimony raises many provocative questions. Let me mention just two. The first: What about Roy Ash's role, unknown to date, in Project Jennifer? Ash was in a unique position to serve his own interest as a director of Global Marine and to influence the U.S. executive branch. Global Marine re- ceived $35.5 million for its work on the Glomar, retaining almost 30% of that amount or $10.8 million as before-tax operating profit. Ash headed President Nixon's Advisory Counsel on Executive reorganization in 1969 and in 1970, the year of the first contracts between the U.S. and Global Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Marine. In 1972, Ash became head of Office of Manage- ment ;ind Budget, the office through which all U.S. finan- cial transactions pass--including those that are top-secret. Ash currently, in addition to presiding over Addresso- graph 1 nc., is also a director of Systems Development Corporation, the successor to Mechansi Research Inc., identiFied early in Crooke's testimony as a major partic.pant in the formation stage of Project Jennifer. Second: Is the Soviet sub story only a cover for the Glom~ir's real mission? Planning, designing and building a sizable seagoing vessel is complex and the four year period between the sinking of the Soviet sub (1968) and the Ex- plorer's launching (1972) seems unrealistically short to those farniliar with the nature of shipbuilding. Thus there is the logical suspicion that, whoever conceptualized Project Jennif?r., planning and design work at least was probably begun well before 1968. Wh;~t is the real story behind Project Jennifer? Was it a billion dollar boondoggle a floating Spruce Goose, or as suggested by Tom Wicker (Nex~ York Times, 1975) "a clandestine enterprise at a time of international dispute on the law of the sea that. could potentially give the U.S. or participating contractors an enormous, if not exactly proper advantage in undersea mining techniques." We'd like the answers to these questions and more. And we resent being bludgeoned into believing that security for the intelligence apparatus is synonymous with the real security of our nation. Our immediate struggle however is to survive the Government's attempt to abort any further inquiry. If the CIA has its way and is exempted from the Freedom of Information Act, this lawsuit, MA P ~~. Turner, may be the last shot for a long time at a corporate profile of the intelligence bureaucracy. SPECIAL NOTE: Next issue CA/B will present an in- depth interview with two former intelligence techni- cians on thcsubject of broad- beammicrowave interception. DEBUGGING QUIZ: There are 19 bugs hidden in this picture. How many can you Bnd? Answer on page 2g. Number 9 (June 1980) Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 MIND CONTROL: The Story of Mankind Research Unlimited, Inc. By A.J. Weberman* Various branches of the United States government-cer- tainlythe U.S. Navy and probably the Central Intelligence Agency are spending millions of dollars to finance an obscure District of Columbia corporation called Mankind Research Unlimited, Inc. (MRU). The personnel of this bizarre company and its affiliates and subsidiaries include some of the most frightening scientists the government has at its disposal. Its goal -despite the multisyllabic jargon of its brochures- is mind control. 1 first learned of MRU in 1972 from a young friend who knew Dr. Stanley Krippner, Chief Researcher at the "Dream Laboratory" of Maimonides Hospital in Brook- lyn, and Vice-President of the Soviet-American Associa- tion for Psychotronic Research. Dr. Krippner told my friend that he had returned from the Soviet Union with a schematic drawing fora "Kirlian Device"given to him by a colleague there. A "Kirlian Device" reportedly photo- graphs "electrochemiluminescence," an as yet undefined energy field which surrounds living matter-sometimes refered to as the "human aura." According to Krippner, "The U.S. government had information on Kirlian photo- graphy in 1959, ...but released it only to the CIA, Rand, the Air Force, etc. It wasn't until ... I went to the U.S.S.R. and brought back the blueprints personally that this in- formation was made available to the general public." Krippner gave a copy of the schematic to my friend, who then assembled such a camera and began some experi- mentswith it. Shortly thereafter, he stopped by my office to tell me that he had been contacted by a very strange outfit. "They call themselves Mankind Research Unlimited. Whoever they are they want my schematic and they want it bad." The man who wanted the schematic was Paul Sauvin, who, we later learned, was MRU's expert "specializing in the detection and analysis of `life energy emissions," in the words of M RU's brochure. Sauvin was an electromechani- calengineer and inventor who had worked in the aerospace ? A.J. Weberman, a writer and researcher, and president of Independent Research Associates in Manhattan, is co-author of "Coup D'F.tat in America: The CIA and the Assassination of John Kennedy,"Third Press: 1975. Number 9 (June 1980) industry for thirteen years before moving to the National Institute for Rehabilitation Engineering at St. Joseph's Hospital, Patterson, New Jersev. Sauvin was investigating the possibility of a "Bionic Mar." Icing before the TV show was around. According to the M RU materials his research "has also included investigations of the High Frequency `Kirlian Effect' photography, thought-controlled devices, and psycho-kinetic switches." Although the MRU bro- chure indicates that this research is directed towards the development of prosthetic devices for the Beverly disabled, the military's interest in a trigger which could be actuated by thinking the command to fire is obvious. My friend and I agreed that he should find out more about MRU. He met with Sauvin, indicated his interest, and hinted at his willingness to part with the Kirlian sche- matic, but asked if he could visit MRU's headquarters in Washington. Sauvin agreed, and in early 1973 my friend drove to Washington and went late in the afternoon to see MRU Director Carl Schleicher. Without much difficulty my friend succeeded in spending some time alone in the offices, during which he "inspected" the available files and made off with a number of documents, all of which he subsequently showed me. They tell a frightening story of government efforts to develop expertise in the art of psy- chic warfare. MRU's "Brochure" begins with an explanation of the company's background. It is a District of Columbia corpor- ation, awholly-owned subsidiary of SystemsConsultants, Inc. (SCI). SCI, according to it~~ Brochure, was founded in 1966 and has participated in programs concerned with "aircraft systems, ship and craft armament systems and analysis and integration of airbprne and shipboard data processing systems. In short, Systems Consultants, Inc. has had extensive experience in planning, organizing and eval- uating avariety of governmental projects.... A perman- ent, professional staff of 250 has concentrated on problem solving in the areas of intelligence electronic warfare, sen- sor technology and applications." SCI had offices in Washington, with branch offices in McLean, Falls Church, and Arlington, Virginia-the sites, co-incidentally enough, of the CIA and the Pentagon. Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 MRU's Carl Schleicher worked for SCI as late as 1972. According to documc;nts obtained by my resourceful friend, Schleicher was cleared to receive and to hold-and did so -classified Navy publications with such titles as "Ship Exercises," "Anti-Air Warfare," and "Air and AAW Exercises." SCI received most of its funding from the United States Navy-although it is quite possible that much o}~ this was CIA funds, laundered through the Navy. (This has been clone before; at least a half million dollars of "Navy Research funds" were used, according to Sea Technology magazine, in the Glomar Explorer ven- ture-in fact the CIA's attempt to raise a sunken Soviet submarine. [See the article on the Glomar project in this issue of CAIB.] A New York magazine article by William K. Stu~;ky, "Psychic Power: The Next Superweapon," re- ported that funding for the Stanford Research Institute's psychic; warfare think tank comes from the Navy Electron- ics Sys~:erns Command.) SCI's "sales" grew from $250,000 in 1967 to $6,500,000 in 1971. A fe.v years ago I visited SCI's Georgetown office and inquired about aposition as acomputer-programmer. The Security Director, Eugene D. Pasztor, took me into his office, locked the door, and asked me how I had become aware of SCI. I had a copy of a page from "Who's Who in Systems Consulting" with a reference to SCI, which I showed to Pasztor. He checked my copy with an original in his files, a nd, finding thc; two to be identical, gave me a copy of the ,3C'I brochure and his card. Then he unlocked the door and let me out. MR1J is less overtly militaristic than its parent SCI, but equally, if not more bizarre. MRIJ's; brochure summarizes the "Philosophy and Pur- pose" of the organization, which rests on the assumption "That they biological effects of environment can be modi- fied by the action of energies, or biological force fields, either t~~ enhance or thrc;aten mankind's well-being.... The U.S.S.It. has more than twenty centers for the study of biocom munications (the Soviet term for parapsychology) and rel;~ted phenomena., with an annual budget estimated to be over 12 million rubles ($13 million) for 1967 and as high as $21 million for 1970.... These figures are not matched in the United States, where only insignificant sums hive been spent for this kind of research. This indi- cates that. the U.S.S.R. is more aware of the benefits and applications of biocomrnunication research. Mankind Re- search popes to counter and reverse this trend so that the full fruits and benefits derived from this research are also made available to the United States." The brochure goes or- to reveal that MRU's "capability and experience" is divided into four fields. The first is "bioph~~sics," which includes "Biological Effects of Mag- netic Fields;" "Research in Magneto-fluid Dynamics" (the effects of low level magnetic fields on water and the subse- quent effects on living organisms that ingest the water); "Planetary Electro-Hydro-Dynamics" (efforts to change the nature of the magnetic field present in large bodies of water); and "Geo-pathic Efforts on Living Organisms" (attemF~ts to induce illness by changing the magnetic nature of the geography). MRU's second field of interest maybe geared to produce a device that emits waves which cause mental confusion. Termed "Biocybernetics," this area encompasses "Reac- tions to Stress"and "Psychodynamic Experiments in Tele- pathy," as well as "ErroFs in Human Perception," "Bio- Feedback"and "Biologically Generated Fields." MRU's third field of interest is "Behavioral Science." This includes "Metapsychiatry and the Ultraconscious Mind" (telepathic mind control); "Behavioral Neuropsy- chiatry," "Analysis and Measurement of Human Subjec- tive States"(computer analyzed EEG's, biofeedback, etc.), and "Human Unconscious Behavioral Patterns." Finally MRU's fourth field of interest is "Psychophys- ics."This includes "Bioluminescent Applications," (MUR claims to be "the first organization to obtain a government grant to explore the use of Kirlian photography as a diag- nostic technique"); "Radiesthesia Research in the Soviet Union" (wave-induced anesthesia); "Dowsing Introduced to the US Armed Forces;""Dowsing as a Tunnel Detection Device;" and "Correlation of Magnetic Field Gradients with Dowsing Reaction Zones." MRU's facilities are located in seven states; in Mountain View, Los Altos, California, MRU scientists studying Ad- vanced Sensor Technology have tested psycho-accoustical transmitters that produce sound-patterns termed "infra and ultrasonic" that interact with brain cells and "wipe them clean" of all information. In Miami, Florida, MRU Number 9 (June 1980) Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 scientists are hard at work studying the physiological and biological effects of magnetic fields. In Washington, D.C., MRU psychologists study "Psycho-technology Research and Biocybernetics"--brain control through subcutaneous electronic devices-and "Biochemical and Physio-Chemical Research"-brain control through pharmacological substances. MRU lists in its Company Capabilities "brain and mind control" and admits "acquiring on a daily basis, a large amount of unique bio-cybernetics data from Eastern Europe: Some of this original data has been translated and to our knowledge these reports have not been previously made available within the United States." The most interesting part of the Mankind brochure is the "Selected Resumes of Personnel." The Research and De- velopment Director of Mankind Research is Carl Schleicher. Schleicher studied electrical engineering at the United States Naval Academy. He received his M.A. from the University of Cologne and did graduate work at the Uni- versity ofBonn (Germany). While at SCI, Schleicher designed "state-of-the-art technological forecasting and assessment systems for the evaluation and selection of multi-million dollar Research and Development projects. Some of the methods used in this system included interacting explora- tory and normative forecasting sub-routines, decision ta- bles and optimization algorithms." Schleicher used his unique abilities to develop special softwave systems "to record, evaluate and document biological effects of special environmental factors on plants, animals and humans." His partner in mental mayhem is Christopher Bird, des- cribed in M RUliterature ashaving "worked for a classified government agency," and, who is in fact, a former CIA employee (see the Baltimore News-American, January 3l, 1975). During his youth, Bird lived with a family of White Russian emigres and learned to speak fluent Russian. He studied Chinese for three years at Harvard and Yale and has a working knowledge of French, Spanish, German and Serbo-Croatian. After graduation Bird worked for the CIA in Japan. He served in the U.S. Army, specializing in psychological warfare and prepared a course of study in that subject for the Divisional Staff of the South Vietnam- ese Army. After his military service Bird became the Wash- ington representative of the Rand Development Corpora- tion. Rand Development, like the Society for the Investiga- tion of Human Ecology, Inc., was one of the spiritual precursors of outfits like MRU. It was headed by Dr. H.J. Rand, son of the founder of Sperry-Rand, the giant muni- tions manufacturer. Sperry-Rand provided initial funding for the Rand Corporation-the right-wing think tank with many intelligence connections. Rand Development's Vice- President was George H. Bookbinder, a former OSS offic- er. Rand Development's CIA ties were made public as the result of an Interior Department expense inquiry reported in the New York Times; SIHE's links with the CIA were mentioned in a report in the Daily World, September 6, 1975. Rand Development was one of the first "private corpo- rations" to undertake negotiations with the Soviet Union for the exchange and purchase of technological informa- tion. During this period Bird attended the Pugwash meet- ing on Atomic, Chemical and Biological Warfare as an assistant to the late Cyrus Eaton. Bird went on to work for Time magazine as a "correspondent" in Yugoslavia. In 1967 he received a Ph.D. in Russian Area Studies from American University. Bird has lectured on the evils of Communism to members of .John Hopkins University's School for Advanced International Studies. In 1972 Bird co-authored the book "The Secret Life of Plants" (Harper & Row, }973), along with Peter Tomp- kins, an ex-OSS Agent. Bird and Tompkins discuss the work of Clive Backster, a lie detector technician who at- tached agalvanometer to a leaf and noted changes in resistance that allegedly correlated with his thoughts. Backster's work was published in the Reader's and he appeared on Long John Nebel's radio show on numerous occasions. Backster and his potted geraniums appeared on national television and caused a minor sensation. Hundreds of thousands of Americans began talking to their plants, yet no practical use ever evolved from Backster's experiments. Researchers at Cornell University veterinary college were unable to duplicate "the Backster Effect." Paul Sauvin, on the other hand, had great success. Sauvin, who was working for ITT at the time, found that his plants reacted to aself-administered electric shock, etc. Bird describes Sauvin, who is "ordained" as a minister of the Psychic Science Temple of Metaphysics, as "a strong pacifist, abhorrent of the use of thought controlled weapons ... thoug}c he has taken out business certificates on such devices which put him on record as the owner." Although the "Backster Effect" was "discovered" in the mid-1960's, in 1972 MRU did not show much of an interest in it, and the possibility exists that the "Backster Effect" and "Secret Life of Plants" were part of a CIA-disinforma- tion campaign. Only the Soviets know how many rubles were spent investigating this "phenomenon." Bird is listed as the "Biocommunications Editor/ Rus- sian Translator" of "Mankind Research." Bird's work has been published by the Rand Corporation and in 1958 he was granted an interview with Ngo Dinh Diem, then "Pres- ident" of South Vietnam. Chris Bird is not the only member of MRU dedicated to destroying the Soviet Union. Stefan T. Possony, America's most ubiquitous Russian exile, is also a member of MRU. Possony left Russia after the 1'117 Revolution, was exiled in France, and served as an :-dvisor to the French Air Ministry prior to and during thc; early stages of World War II. After this OSS assignment, he came to the United States and held a post as a Carnegie Research Fellow at the OSS-linked Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey. During World War II, Possony was a psychological warfare specialist at the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI). Beginning in 1946, he served as a Special Advisor to the Assistant Chief of Staff, Intelligence, USAF, while serving as a Professor of International Politics, Georgetown Uni- versity. In 1956 Possony became Director of Research for Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Lije magazine's "Russian Revolution"project. In 1961 he becamr, Director of the International Studies Program at the Hoover Institutior- on War, Revolution and Peace, where he is now a Senior Fellow. Fou~ided in 1919 by Herbert Hoover to "demonstrate the evils of Marxism,"the Institution houses the files of the Czarist secret police and the personal diary of Nazi propa- gandise. Joseph Goebbels. Hoover's Senior Fellows include Aleksander Solzhenitsyn and Dimitri DeMohrenschildt, the brother of George DeMohrenschildt, Lee Harvey Os- wald's ~~losest friend in Dallas, Texas. Coincidentally, Pos- sony is a subscriber toy the "lone assassin" theory of the Kenneiiy assassination and has written several articles to this effect. He is also the author of dozens of books, many of whi~~h have been translated into German. The titles include-"Tomorrow's War-It's Planning Management and Costs," "The Economy of Total War," and "Strategy for An erican Victory.'" Possoriy is on the I3oard of Directors of many CIA "front'' groups, including the American Security Council. Other Council members include a former Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, a former Commander of the Strategic Air Command, a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a former Chief of Counter-Intelligence for the CIA, and Dr. Laszlo Pasztor (a Nazi collaborator appointed to a high post in the Republican Party by the Nixon Administration) and Major General John K. Sing- laub. Possony is also a member of the American Chilean Council, which is registered as a foreign representative of the fascist Chilean Junta. MRIJ member Skaidvite Maliks Fallah was, according to the PrIRU brochure, "raised and educated in the Baltic state of Latvia prior to the Soviet take-over in 1945." Prior to the end of W WII, in fact, Latvia was, for a time, a Nazi puppet state. In 1962 Mrs. Fallah received her MA in International Relations (Latin American Area Studies) from Johns Hopkins University. After traveling to Vene- zuelaand Peru, she worked as a Senior Research Associate in the Cultural Information Analysis Center (CINFAC). CINFA C is a division of the Center for Research in Social Systems (CRESS) which at the time was under contract to the U.S. ,Army Research Office. CRESS is a well-known CIA front. Mrs. Fallah's selected bibliography includes "A Selected Bibliography on Urban Insurgency and Urban Unrest In Latin America and Other Areas," and "Training of Military Advisors-An Annotated Bibliography." George Schepak, MRU's Russian TechnicalTrans1ator/ Biocybernetics Researcher was born and educated in Russia. E[e also studied in Germany. Schepak designed computers for several space programs, holds a Defense Contractor security caearance and is an expert in "geomagnetism." Several MRU scientists are very concerned about the Soviet'' utilization of electromagnetism. Paul E.T. Jensen managed the Air Defense Task Force of the Army's "Elec- tronic ~Va rfare 1975" study and also the "Electromagnetic Threat to the Army-19$5." Jensen is a physicist, mathe- matician ,and engineer who specializes in intelligence re- search and analysis. In 1959 Jensen became "a company" representative at the U.S. Army Electronic Proving Ground, Fort Huachuca, Arizona. This base also happens to be the home of U.S. Army Military Intelligence. In 1960 Jensen became manager of research development at the Electronic Proving Ground and began studying "Eurasian Communist Research and Technology programs." He has been especially interested in new communication tech- niquessuch astelepathy, combat surveillance systems, and long range technological forecasts relating to these pro- grams. The results of his studies appear in classified publications. Working with Jensen is Richard. B. LaTondre. LaTon- dre is currently employed as project engineer for "The Enemy Electromagnetic Threat" (CD-107-EW), a study being conducted for the CIA. LaTondre is primarily re- sponsible for the planning and implementation of the elec- tronic warfare effectiveness analysis effort as related to the update and publication of the "Enemy Electromagnetic Threat-1975." LaTondre also participated in "The Ene- my Electromagnetic Threat to Friendly Tactical Aircraft in South Vietnam." LaTondre studied at the U.S. Army Language School and at the National Security Agency. He served as an Electronics Warfare Officer and has received extensive formal training in combat intelligence, guerrilla warfare, photo-imagery, hydrography and analytical analysis. Dr. Charles R. Buffler is another MRU magnetologist with fifteen years of research behind him. Dr. Buffler's latest work is on the effect of weak or near zero magnetic fields on humans. Buffler is attempting to formulate a biomagnetic explanation for dowsing and psychokinesis. Buffler's mentor, Dr. Jim Carstow, is also employed by MRU. Dr. Carstow studied in pre-communist Romania. In 1949 Carstow came to the United States and in 1955 he joined the aerospace industry. In 1959 he began conducting Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 Approved For Release 2010/06/09 :CIA-RDP90-008458000100190004-3 experiments in magneto-fluid dynamics which probed the mysteries of shock-wave propagation in the presence of a magnetic field and radio and magnetohydrodynamic wave interaction. In 1961 Carstow conducted research on the earth's interior and its magnetism, the electrodynamic properties of sea water (with possible application to com- munication between and detection of submerged subma- rines). Further research has included the study of the bio- logical effects (in terms of health status, accident rates, behavior patterns, etc.) on humans of variations of elec- tromagnetic, magnetic and gravitational fields. Several prominent physicians and psychologists are members of MRU. Dr. James C. Aller graduated from the United States Naval Academy in 1942. From 1942-1962 Aller served as a Naval Officer. In this capacity he served as a Fleet Electronic Warfare Officer and Missile Range De- tector. In 1968 Aller began teaching Biomedical Engineer- ing at the Naval War College. The distinguished surgeon, E. Stanton Maxey is also a member of MRU. Maxey has conducted extensive studies in sleep research and human unconscious behavior pat- terns. Through the use of sophisiticated sensors, he is at- tempting to determine the effects of external phenomena on dreams. An innovative feature of this research is the use of electromagnetic recording of EEGs, ultraviolet and in- fra-red sensors, precise weight analysis and the correlation of these technical factors with electromagnetic field, moon and planetary positions, barometric changes, etc. The MRU psychiatric and psychological team includes Stanley R. Dean, originator of the theory of the "Ultra- conscious;" Norman Korobow, who conducted research on military leadership at the United States Marine Acade- my at West Point. This work involved the analysis of identifiable personality variables associated with graded leadership behavior. Korobow is the author of several research papers for the Bureau of Naval Weapons, all of which have been classified "Secret." Another MRU psy- chologist, Arthur Marcus, is simultaneously involved in two major military electronic system efforts the SHORT- STOP system and the AIR Combat Maneuvering Range System. Marcus had provided support to numerous other military System Program Offices and currently holds a "SECRET" clearance. Berthold Eric Schwarz, M.D. is also a member of M RU. Schwarz is the author of "You Can Raise Decent Child- ren,"published by theconservativepub1isher Arlington House. A former member of the "perversion project" at the Mayo clinic, Schwarz is an expert on the effects of LSD on hypnotically-induced seizures. Other assorted MRU scientists include John E. Laur- ance, who co-ordinated the support of basic research pro- grams for the Office of Naval Research, in Washington, D.C. In 1969 Mr. Laurance became Vice-President and General Manager of a new corporation established to pro- vide new technologies to developing countries. Laurance has had an interest in the paranormal since the 1930's. In 1969 Laurance established "Life Energies Research, Inc.," a non-profit organization which conducts scientific inves- tigations of unusual and little known properties of human energy systems. Mankind Research has a Czech defector working for them named Milan Ryzl who was a pioneer in the applica- tion of scientific method to the study of parapsychology. My friend was able to liberate two "Technical Papers" from MRU. The first, dated 31 March 1972, is entitled "Measuring, Selecting and Training For Unique/Special Performance Capability Requirements." "This new ap- proach is well adapted to the sele