Disinfo History of the CIA
Review: Tim Weiner, Legacy of Ashes: The History of the CIA
According to most of the reviewers, the main reason for which
Legacy of Ashes is the definitive history of the CIA
is because the book is based on more than 50,000 documents --
most of them from the secret archives of the CIA itself –
and more than two thousand interviews (the term “oral history”
is highly misleading) with ex-CIA officers, including ten ex-CIA
In the Author’s Note introducting the book, Weiner affirms
that “It is the first history of the CIA compiled entirely
from first hand reporting and primary documents,” to which
he adds that “… to the best of my ability, it is nothing
but the truth.”
Weiners’s claims, however, only show that he has no clear
idea of what the buisness of intelligence and espionage is about.
Moreover, he shows a supine ignorance of the most elementary rudiments
of the trade.
For example, in the very second paragraph of his Author’s
Note, he gives his own definition of intelligece as “Intelligence
is secret action aimed at understanding or changing what goes
on abroad.” I don’t know where he got that idea, which
differs considerably from the mostaccepted one as intelligence
is information that has been validated.
Actually, intelligence has nothing to do with “action”
or “changing what goes abroad.” This is in fact the
aberration that has undermined the CIA from its very creation,
when it was authorized to incur in covert operations – an
activity that has more to do with gangsterism than with the profession
Even more, the fac that Weiner consulted so many thousand CIA
“documents,” and interviwed several thousand ex-CIA
officers, including ten ex-CIA directors, guarantees that most
of what he has written in this book is pure hogwash. Let me explain
this in detail.
In the first place, Weiner mentions thousands of CIA doucuments.
Does this meant that he was alloed access to the CIA’s secret
files, where he choose what documents to read? Of course not.
He was provided with thousands of photocopies of heavily deleted
pages of what he was told were true and exact copies of documents
in the CIA’s secret archives. Therefore, these “documents”
never passed the normal process to verify the true value of an
alleged document; that is, authentication by experts.
So, Mr. Weiner accepted this pieces of paper with heavily deleted
photocopies as true documents from an organization whose main
role is lying and that has a whole department solely devoted to
the falsification of documents. This fact shows that Mr. Weiner
is a very gullible person – a disqualifying trait for anybody
dealing with intelligence and espionage.
Also, he prides himself about having interviewed several ex-employees
of an organization which, before retirement, exacts from his employees
a written promise that they will never tell anything about their
former employer. The fact that he even interviewed ten of the
main liars themselves tells us about the wide limits of Mr. Wiener’s
Moreover, because of the principles of need-to-know and compartmentation,
no single CIA employee knows what really goes on in this organization.
Their vision is by force limited, and their knowledge about it
is distorted. Therefore, asking a honest CIA employee about the
Agency is like asking a bling man abot the elephant.
The fact that the main source of Weiner’s information is
the CIA itself, explains why the Bogotazo, the first successful
psychological warfare operation carried out by the CIA against
the American and Latin American peoples, is not even mentioned
in his book. For the same reason, he does not mention that the
proto-CIA began as a private intelligence organization directed
by Allen Dulles from a secret office at the Harold Pratt House
in Manhattan, the headquarters of the Council on Foreign Relations.
In his book Weiner mentions over and over some CIA “failures”.
But, he never explains what criteria he uses to determine why
he calls them failures. He simply accepts the CIA’s criteria.
But, being an organization whose main goal is lying (and this
applies to all intelligence agencies, like the KGB, the Mossad,
the MI6, etc.), one has to be a liitle cautious in accepting its
claims at face value.
Usually, the so-called CIA “failures” have been those
cases in which the Agency has failed to protect the interest of
the American people – the ones who foot the bill. But the
problem with this is that, since its very creation in 1947, the
CIA has never worked to protect the interests of the American
people. Therefore, there is a possibiity that some of its “failures”
may have been big successes. Lets see.
According to the accepted lore, the CIA failed catastrophically
in its atempts to assassinate Fidel Castro. But the only sources
given to accept this are Fidel Castro himself and the CIA –
both of them very unreliable sources for that matter. Like most
politician Castro is not only a liar, but a liar who has confessed
a posteriory his lies – don’t forget his claims that
he was not a Communist followed by his claims that he had always
been a Communist (both claims are lies). And the CIA, as I mentioned
before, is an organization devoted to lying.
Even more, some anti-Castro Cubans resent the fact that, when
they really tried to assassinate Castro on their own, the CIA
turned agains them, to avoid it at all costs. Very strange. But
don’t forget the fact that in intelligence and espionage
things are never what they seem.
Probably the most known CIA failure is the debacle at the Bay
of Pigs. But, what if the true goal of the invasion was not to
overtrow Castro, but to consolidate him in power? Well, that was
exactly the direct result of the Bay of Pigs “failure”—which
most anti-Castro Cubans now realize it was actually a betrayal.
Before the Bay of Pigs invasion there were more than a dozen anti-Castro
organizations in Florida, a widespread anti-Castro clandestine
movement in the main Cuban cities, and guerrillas have been successfully
fighting Castro’s army in the countryside, mainly in the
Escambray mountain in the central part of Cuba. Then the CIA consolidated
all anti-Castro organizations into one, which destroyed after
the invasion, in the months previous to invasion stopped supplying
the guerrillas with guns and ammo, and left the urban clandestine
movement in the dark about the invasion – which Castro used
to his advantage to destroy it.
Now, why does the CIA (or. better expressed, the people who control
the CIA), wanted to consolidate Castro in power. Well, before
the Bay of Pigs the Soviets had serious doubts about Castro. In
a book about his father, Sergei Khrushchev mentioned the fact
that he overheard his father Nikita talking with other Politburo
members about his suspicions that Castro was a CIA agent. But
Castro’s victory at the Bay of Pigs quickly dissipated these
suspicions. Of course, contray to Weiner, Nikita Khrushchev was
not a gullible man.
A simple analysis of the CIA’s intelligence “failures”
shows that they seamlessly dovetail with some people’s successes.
As a matter of fact, most of the international political goals
of these people have been reached thanks to CIA’s alleged
“failures.” This explains why after every alleged
“failure,” nobody at the CIA is ever disciplined,
let alone fired, and the CIA’s budget is raised. The exception
was Allen Dulles, and we know what happened to President Kennedy
after he fired him – Dulles’s revenge was having a
key role in the comission that investigated the Kennedy assassination.
I am not saying that all CIA employees have betrayed America.
On the contrary, most of them – particularly the ones not
working in the Directorate of Operation -- have worked hard to
defend America. But most of them never realized that they had
been recruited under a false flag, and they were just the cover,
the smoke screen to hide the CIA’s true work on behalf of
America’s domestic enemies.
On page 316 Weiner repeats a leftist mantra: “Allende killed
himself with an automatic rifle, a gift from Fidel Castro.”
What he does not mention, however, is that the four bullets found
in Allende’s body were 9 mm. I imagine Mr. Kalashnikov scratching
his head trying to figure out how the rifle he designed was able
to fire that type of ammo.
The CIA is the bastard daughter of an illegal union between Wall
Street bankers and oil tranationals. It crookedness is congenital,
not adquired. There is nothing we can do to change or correct.
If the people who created it to advance their own interest --
which never coincide with the interests of the American people
-- have decide to orphan the CIA, it is only because they have
gained control of a better organization to carry out their plans:
the U.S. Army.
Finally, it is interesting to notice that this “anti-CIA”
book written by an obvious leftist, appears right on time; precisely
when the conspirators of the most reactionary right who created
the CIA, don’t have any further use for the it. ¿Coincidence?
Perhaps, but one must keep in mind that intelligence officers
don’t believe in coincidences.
Allen Dulles once mentioned that, because of its inherent characteristics
of need-to-know and compartmentation, the CIA was the most suitable
organization to run a conspiracy. He was right, because conspiring
is precisely what intelligence and espionage organizations do:
their main job consist in lying, disinforming, obfuscating, espying
and conspiring to carry out their secret plans.