Today's Article
Why won't the CIA
allow a former agent
with Middle East
experience to
discuss declassified
material?
allow a former agent
with Middle East
experience to
discuss declassified
material?
The American Spark
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Is the CIA Muzzling Whistleblower To Hide Inborn 'Recipe For
Disaster'?
By Cliff Montgomery - Apr. 18th, 2007
The Mar. 5th, 2007 complaint which Franz Boening issued in the United States District Court in Washington,
DC against the CIA--if true--could become a bombshell. We offer quotes below:
COMPLAINT
"Plaintiff, and federal whistleblower, Franz Boening brings this action against defendant Central Intelligence
Agency (“CIA”) for injunctive and declaratory relief pursuant to the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.
C. § 2201, the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 701 et seq., the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651, the
CIA’s internal regulations and the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
"The CIA has unlawfully imposed a prior restraint upon Franz Boening by obstructing and infringing on his right
to disseminate unclassified information concerning his efforts to expose the CIA’s illegal relationship with a
foreign national, for which the Agency retaliated against him.
"Additionally, the CIA deliberately interfered with Boening’s efforts to properly challenge the CIA’s classification
actions before the Interagency Security Appeals Panel, an intra-governmental entity coordinated by the
Information Security Oversight Office of the National Archives & Records Administration.
"Plaintiff Franz Boening (“Boening”) was formerly employed by the Central Intelligence Agency from 1980-
2005. After learning Arabic in the early 1980s, he spent nearly one dozen years in agent operations, primarily in
the Middle East. He worked declassification issues from 1995-1999, and ultimately retired from the Agency
after working at the Foreign Broadcast Information Service where he handled Internet exploitation and
training. He has held a Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented security clearance for nearly 25 years.
"He is required by virtue of a secrecy agreement to submit most personal writings for pre-publication review. As
a result of the matters addressed herein Boening became a whistleblower and suffered employment retaliation
to include not being sent to Foreign Country “A” despite his having volunteered and possessing needed
language skills.
"By memorandum dated November 22, 2004, Boening submitted to the CIA’s Publication Review Board
(“PRB”) four documents for classification review for the purposes of potential public dissemination. These
were: (a) May 10, 2001, Whistleblower Complaint and addendums dealing with [Individual’s name]; (b) March
24, 2003, Whistleblower Complaint alleging retaliation; (c) May 20, 2004, Whistleblower Complaint alleging
retaliation; and (d) January 16, 2003, Grievance Against FBIS managers.
"It was noted that (a) through (c) were considered classified by the CIA, and that the CIA was not permitting
review of (b) or (c). Documents (b) and (c) were later declassified and are not at issue in this litigation.
"Boening’s May 10, 2001, memorandum sought to detail perceived violations of the law committed by the CIA.
It was drafted for the consumption of the Director, CIA, and numerous senior CIA officials. It specifically
alleged that the:
"CIA may have violated US laws during its 10+ year relationship with [NAME REDACTED](paragraph five); CIA’
s professional behavior was so scandalous that it seriously damaged American prestige and credibility
(paragraph six); relationship continued because of an egregious counterintelligence failure (paragraph eight).
"It is Boening’s contention that the CIA maintained a special relationship with a foreign individual who
committed unlawful human rights violations and criminal acts with the knowledge of the CIA, and that despite
other federal agencies expressing interest in seeing this person arrested the CIA preferred that such action
not take place...
"Although the entire analysis and factual recitation of the CIA’s involvement with this individual that was drafted
by Boening was based purely on publicly available non-governmental (including newspaper articles) and
unclassified government websites, including from FBIS, the CIA 'classified' more than a dozen pages of
publicly available newspaper, radio, and television information--a practice that was commonly assumed to have
been discontinued by the CIA years ago.
"Additional, the CIA not only deleted all references to the foreign individual’s name but also Boening’s personal
assessment of this individual. Yet, Boening had never once read any classified CIA document pertaining to this
individual...
"As he noted in his still partially classified memorandum of May 10, 2001:
'In an effort to combat drug traffickers, CIA deluded itself into believing--despite a mountain of freely
available, contrary evidence--that [NAME REDACTED] was sincerely helping to further USG policy goals.
What it didn’t take into account is that men like [NAME REDACTED] if fundamentally misunderstood, can
subvert whole aspects of US foreign policy. The counterintelligence failure was exacerbated and prolonged by
CIA’s hubris and apparent tendency towards secrecy, even with USG colleagues.
'CIA’s hubris, secretiveness, disinclination to accept contrary assessments and evidence, its lax
management, and its desire to avoid embarrassment, all proved to be a smoldering recipe for disaster.'
(emphasis original)
"Despite significant internal efforts by Boening he was unable to persuade the CIA to declassify the
information of concern. Indeed, William McNair, then CIA’s Information Review Officer, Directorate of
Operations, told Boening in May 2002:
“Look, Franz, do you think I care about [Foreign Individual’s name]? This is not about ‘source protection,’ this is
about CIA’s reputation. We don’t want you to have any credibility.”
Disaster'?
By Cliff Montgomery - Apr. 18th, 2007
The Mar. 5th, 2007 complaint which Franz Boening issued in the United States District Court in Washington,
DC against the CIA--if true--could become a bombshell. We offer quotes below:
COMPLAINT
"Plaintiff, and federal whistleblower, Franz Boening brings this action against defendant Central Intelligence
Agency (“CIA”) for injunctive and declaratory relief pursuant to the Federal Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.
C. § 2201, the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 701 et seq., the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651, the
CIA’s internal regulations and the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
"The CIA has unlawfully imposed a prior restraint upon Franz Boening by obstructing and infringing on his right
to disseminate unclassified information concerning his efforts to expose the CIA’s illegal relationship with a
foreign national, for which the Agency retaliated against him.
"Additionally, the CIA deliberately interfered with Boening’s efforts to properly challenge the CIA’s classification
actions before the Interagency Security Appeals Panel, an intra-governmental entity coordinated by the
Information Security Oversight Office of the National Archives & Records Administration.
"Plaintiff Franz Boening (“Boening”) was formerly employed by the Central Intelligence Agency from 1980-
2005. After learning Arabic in the early 1980s, he spent nearly one dozen years in agent operations, primarily in
the Middle East. He worked declassification issues from 1995-1999, and ultimately retired from the Agency
after working at the Foreign Broadcast Information Service where he handled Internet exploitation and
training. He has held a Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented security clearance for nearly 25 years.
"He is required by virtue of a secrecy agreement to submit most personal writings for pre-publication review. As
a result of the matters addressed herein Boening became a whistleblower and suffered employment retaliation
to include not being sent to Foreign Country “A” despite his having volunteered and possessing needed
language skills.
"By memorandum dated November 22, 2004, Boening submitted to the CIA’s Publication Review Board
(“PRB”) four documents for classification review for the purposes of potential public dissemination. These
were: (a) May 10, 2001, Whistleblower Complaint and addendums dealing with [Individual’s name]; (b) March
24, 2003, Whistleblower Complaint alleging retaliation; (c) May 20, 2004, Whistleblower Complaint alleging
retaliation; and (d) January 16, 2003, Grievance Against FBIS managers.
"It was noted that (a) through (c) were considered classified by the CIA, and that the CIA was not permitting
review of (b) or (c). Documents (b) and (c) were later declassified and are not at issue in this litigation.
"Boening’s May 10, 2001, memorandum sought to detail perceived violations of the law committed by the CIA.
It was drafted for the consumption of the Director, CIA, and numerous senior CIA officials. It specifically
alleged that the:
"CIA may have violated US laws during its 10+ year relationship with [NAME REDACTED](paragraph five); CIA’
s professional behavior was so scandalous that it seriously damaged American prestige and credibility
(paragraph six); relationship continued because of an egregious counterintelligence failure (paragraph eight).
"It is Boening’s contention that the CIA maintained a special relationship with a foreign individual who
committed unlawful human rights violations and criminal acts with the knowledge of the CIA, and that despite
other federal agencies expressing interest in seeing this person arrested the CIA preferred that such action
not take place...
"Although the entire analysis and factual recitation of the CIA’s involvement with this individual that was drafted
by Boening was based purely on publicly available non-governmental (including newspaper articles) and
unclassified government websites, including from FBIS, the CIA 'classified' more than a dozen pages of
publicly available newspaper, radio, and television information--a practice that was commonly assumed to have
been discontinued by the CIA years ago.
"Additional, the CIA not only deleted all references to the foreign individual’s name but also Boening’s personal
assessment of this individual. Yet, Boening had never once read any classified CIA document pertaining to this
individual...
"As he noted in his still partially classified memorandum of May 10, 2001:
'In an effort to combat drug traffickers, CIA deluded itself into believing--despite a mountain of freely
available, contrary evidence--that [NAME REDACTED] was sincerely helping to further USG policy goals.
What it didn’t take into account is that men like [NAME REDACTED] if fundamentally misunderstood, can
subvert whole aspects of US foreign policy. The counterintelligence failure was exacerbated and prolonged by
CIA’s hubris and apparent tendency towards secrecy, even with USG colleagues.
'CIA’s hubris, secretiveness, disinclination to accept contrary assessments and evidence, its lax
management, and its desire to avoid embarrassment, all proved to be a smoldering recipe for disaster.'
(emphasis original)
"Despite significant internal efforts by Boening he was unable to persuade the CIA to declassify the
information of concern. Indeed, William McNair, then CIA’s Information Review Officer, Directorate of
Operations, told Boening in May 2002:
“Look, Franz, do you think I care about [Foreign Individual’s name]? This is not about ‘source protection,’ this is
about CIA’s reputation. We don’t want you to have any credibility.”