House Passes Intelligence Appropriations Bill

House Passes Intelligence Appropriations Bill

Measure Contains Provisions Destroying First Amendment, More Money For Intelligence - Oh Yes… and an Amendment by Maxine Waters Prohibiting the Agency from Engaging in Drug Trafficking

On May 14, 1999 the House of Representatives passed the 1999 Intelligence Authorization Bill by a voice vote and without objection or debate. As reported in Reuters and noted by Sam Smith's The Progressive Review, the measure contains some distressing provisions. It also contains an amendment, read into the record by Maxine Waters, which specifically prohibits the CIA (and other intelligence agencies) from engaging in drug

trafficking. As to the later provision, From The Wilderness picked it up from Reuters just about an hour before receiving a Press Release from Waters' office announcing passage of the Amendment.

The Death of Free Speech

In strengthening previous restrictions against revealing the names of current CIA agents, the new measure made it a crime, with a mandatory five-year prison sentence, to reveal identities of former CIA agents and operatives. Under this provision it would likely be a crime to discuss the fact that George Bush had been CIA connected for years before becoming Director. It would be illegal to state that Bill Clinton had worked for the Agency while at Oxford or that Porter Goss, Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence is a retired CIA case officer. And I would do a mandatory five years for mentioning that U.S. District Court Judge Stanley Sporkin is a retired CIA General Counsel. To name, as Sam Smith put it, "any of the 400 mainstream journalists who once worked for CIA" or to discuss CIA agents involved in drug trafficking could result in instant jail time.

Just think, on the basis of the February issue of From The Wilderness alone, where I name more than 100 CIA agents connected to Iran-Contra era drug smuggling, I could spend more than five centuries in jail. Gary Webb could be imprisoned for a two or three hundred years in his own right. More prison labor! Why am I chagrined if Maxine Waters and the 434 other members of the House failed to speak up for the First Amendment?

I'll bet this bill is passed by the Senate in two weeks and signed by the President before the month of June is half over.

The Waters Amendment

The Press Release from Maxine Waters' office reads in part as follows:

"Representative Maxine Waters' drug trafficking amendment to 'The Intelligence Authorization Bill' entitled 'Prohibition on Drug Trafficking by Employees of The Intelligence Community,' was passed today by the House of Representatives without opposition.

"Representative Waters' amendment effectively prohibits the Central Intelligence Agency, other intelligence agencies, their employees and agents from participating in drug trafficking activities, including the manufacture, purchase sale, transport, distribution of an conspiracy to traffic in illegal drugs. Rep. Waters' amendment also requires CIA employees and covert agents to report known or suspected drug trafficking activities to the appropriate authorities."

The press release included a fairly eloquent ten-paragraph statement expressing both outrage and concern over an incompletely given history of CIA drug trafficking.

The Ruppert Map

Before From The Wilderness offers its opinions about the bill and what it means it is necessary to clearly inform the reader that, according to the map I have made and follow, it is impossible for Congress, as presently constituted, to do anything at all about

CIA's involvement in the drug trade. There is not sufficient popular will to elect members with that mandate and all of the members currently in Congress are either compromised by party obligations and liabilities, controlled via blackmail or monetary means, corrupt, or cowardly. I have said it before and, for the record, I will repeat it: Of all the members of Congress, both Houses, past and present, Maxine Waters has done more than any other member to bring this issue to a head. John Kerry is, in my opinion, a very close second.

But, according to my map, for Maxine Waters or John Kerry to actually stop or, as her press release offensively puts it "effectively prohibit" CIA from engaging in drug trafficking is about as laughable as someone reading a Spanish map from the early 1700's and sailing from the coast of "New" Mexico to the east coast of California.

A Second Opinion

From The Wilderness is proud to count among its loyal readers Members of Congress, college professors, published authors, award-winning journalists and several network level news producers - some of whom have won Emmy awards. One of those producers, on condition of strict anonymity, made the following observations regarding the Intelligence Funding Bill available to From The Wilderness. The anonymity request was made expressly because of fear of termination or persecution from New York for telling the truth.

"They can pass all the damned bills they want. These guys are still gonna do what they do; however they want to do it, no matter what.

"As a matter of fact, passing bills is a great smokescreen. People paying attention might heave a sigh of relief and think the whole matter is taken care of. As a matter of fact, public pronouncements and congressional moving and shaking on shady issues have always created incredibly sturdy smokescreens. All at taxpayers' expense of course. That's the most painful part. These people use our own money to blow smoke up our asses. Remember Watergate and every other damned 'gate' you can think of.

"Bigger things need to be asked of these people. I think what we really should demand is some kind of public accounting from the CIA. Isn’t there some kind of law that says if a bunch of us pay for something we should damned well have the right to know what we're getting for our money - especially when plenty of evidence exists showing that out funds have been grossly misused and other funds misappropriated at huge social and physical cost to large groups of American citizenry? Why the hell shouldn't we know what their budget is? Who the hell are these people to tell us we don't have a right to know anything about the services we pay them to render?…

"All this ugly stuff carried out in the name of national security is actually causing a great deal of national and international INSECURITY. And if they don't want to tell us what's going on, we're just gonna have to find a way to find it all out and get everyone to raise hell. We have a right to know how much privacy we've lost, how much danger we're in, etc. etc. But I tell you Mike, I am not impressed by the passing of bills or big speeches on the Hill."

Add the following to my map: A great many high level people in the media are very aware and very offended.

[ Home ]