-Caveat Lector- Dave Hartley http://www.Asheville-Computer.com/dave Excerpt of recent Tyrone Power's interview with Tony Brown. Tyrone's website is www.bropowers.com. If Texaco is underwriting Tony Brown doing interviews like this it is a good take on what court orders can do that are useful: ***Transcription of program begins here. >From Tony Brown’s Journal, aired mid-December, 1999 on PBS, Channel 2, Miami (INTRODUCTION INTO PROGRAM) TONY BROWN: Almost one-third of Americans plan to stock up on food and water for Y2K problems. While 66% of Americans expect only minor problems, they’re playing it safe also. Lower income blacks are way behind whites and Asians in computer ownership and access to the internet. But all blacks are way ahead, by about a 2-to-1 ratio, in stocking up food and water for potential problems from the Y2K computer glitch. My take on this is that because blacks have endured centuries of deprivation and marginal survival, they believe a technical and economic crisis can happen in the U.S. on a mass level. This is not a giant leap in reality testing. More privileged groups may find more comfort in denial because the prospect of going without electricity, food, water, and heat, is a distinct possibility, something that happens to people in Asia and Africa. In addition to generations of social conditioning, and, for a few year’s now, militarized local SWAT teams and military maneuvers to combat terrorism in urban areas, has been unnerving to more than a few blacks and Hispanics. But Y2K is more tangible than the belief that the CIA controlled drug distribution in South Central LA and other intercity areas. Rumors of white supremacists exploiting a Y2K crisis are so widespread that the mostly white Michigan Militia Corps Wolverine has offered to work with the FBI to police groups that are plotting to start a racial bloodbath during a Y2K crisis and rioting. That is bad enough. But add to that, the possibility that your own government is plotting against you during Y2 chaos, just because you’re black. A former Special Agent for the FBI says that certain agencies of America’s intelligence community have a special Y2K plan in store for blacks called “Mad Max”. I am Tony Brown. In a moment, race and Y2K. ANNOUNCER: Tony Brown’s Journal is underwritten by Texaco. We are proud to support the intellectual, spiritual, and cultural energy of the African-American community. Texaco-- A world of energy. TONY BROWN: My guest is Dr. Tyrone Powers, the author of “Eyes To My Soul: The Rise Or Decline Of A Black FBI Agent.” He is a former Special Agent for the FBI and he is currently the director of the Institute on Criminal Justice, Law Enforcement, and Legal Services Studies at Ann Arondale (spelling?) Community College in Maryland. Welcome, sir. SPECIAL AGENT TYRONE POWERS: Good to be here. BROWN: You are a Ph.D. doctor. What is your field of specialty? POWERS: Criminal justice issues, justice issues, and sociology. BROWN: Now you were a Special Agent for the FBI for nine years? POWERS: Nine, almost 10 years – 9 years and 9 months. B: And what is your other experience in law enforcement? P: I spent 3-1/2 years as a Maryland State Trooper. B: And did you do that before you were with the FBI? P: Yes, yes. B: Why did you leave the FBI? P: Well, at the time, there were a number of reasons. I had some sickness in my family, I wanted to get back home to spend time with my mother, my brother had died a violent death, and I had had been speaking out on some of the things about what was going on in the FBI and had a raid occur on my mother’s house by some of my colleagues at the time and so she had suffered a third stroke and so there were reasons such as that. 00 Then, I came home and completed my education and went into the education field. B: Now, you are . . . I discovered this from your web site . . . and I made contact with you. This is the first day I had met you. I made contact with you to interview you on my radio program in New York, and you were gracious enough to accept it, and people were, of course, very stimulated by what you say. And I would like today to, of course, have you go over the same information. Now, you allege, and I must use the language “allege”. . . you allege that you were told by, what do you call this source” -- an impeccable source? . . . P: Yes, sir, a reliable source . . . B: A reliable source . . . P. In a position to know . . . . B: In a position to know P. Yes, sir. B: Now, I will not go into who this person is, because it is really none of my business . . . P. Right. B: But, this person, in a position to know, told you what? P. That the intelligence agencies . . . and let me say this . . . let me preface it with this . . . it is really not a surprise to me because I worked intelligence issues during the time I was with the FBI, domestic, international terrorism, and things of this sort, but he told me that the agencies, including the FBI, the Central Intlligence Agency, Navy Intelligence, and the other intelligent agencies, were meaning to prepare for the Y2K catastrophe, that they expect that might happen in January. But, beyond January, they were also preparing for what events Y2K-related events to occur throughout the year 2000. In fact, they were planning for operations as far down in June, when the weather turns warm in certain cities. And he mentioned to me that they had set up case scenarios and response scenarios to each of those cases. The first case scenario was what they considered a brown-out and this is a temporary loss of power, a temporary loss of some of the emenities due to the Y2K computer problem. And then they thought that they would be temporary, it wouldn’t be much of a cause for alarm, people would accept it, power would go out as if it goes out in a storm. The second case scenario they called the blackout. In this case, power would go out for a little longer. People were to again get bothered but it wouldn’t cause chaos in the city or in the streets. In the third scenario, it is what they call “Mad Max”. They expect, in this case scenario, people would begin to riot and loot and specifically they believe this would happen in their urban areas among black citizens. And in this case, they had set up a scenario where they would respond by, first of all, having the president declare martial law. And they had written up a plan for this. And once he declared martial law, then these agencies, along with the HRT team, which is the FBI hostage recovery team, is the name of it, which is kind of a SWAT force, would go in to restore order in these particular places by mounting operations in urban areas, in the city, to what they said was calm down the looting and bring back stability to the urban areas. B: Now, first of all, if the intelligence agencies were not planning for a potential riot or a potential breakdown in civil disturbance . . . if there is a Y2K widespread disaster, they really wouldn’t be doing their jobs, would they? P: Correct. That is the normal (mumbled word) . . . B: I mean . . . what you have just described is just routine. P: Exactly. Except for the . . . the planning is routine . . . except for the type of response they are planning, it is not really routine in this particular instance. For instance, the HRT team, the FBI’s hostage recovery team, do not usually respond to urban riots and looting. They are the group that were used in the case in Waco or the case up on Ruby Ridge, dealing with those organizations, so they have involvement in this . . . They’re response to this kind of a scenario is different than it would be in any other case. B: Is that right? P: Yes, sir. B: Um, hum. All right now, we do know now that the FBI has . . . somebody admitted . . . that there were members of the Delta Team at Waco. P.: Correct. B: They say they were only observors. P: Correct. B: But who knows? The other point that I want to raise is, how could a handful, what do you call HRT . . . P: Yes. B: Hostage Rescue Team . . . what, what impact could they possibly have in New York, for example, you have 3,000,000 black people. What possibly could, in Chicago, and these very populous areas, where you’ve got 1,000,000 or 2,000,000 blacks, and we haven’t gotten to Hispanics yet . . . P. Correct. B: And I am sure they are in this scenario somewhere too . . . P. Correct. B: What, what could possibly a hostage rescue team do if people in those areas were out en masse? P. Well, let me start with this. The hostage recovery team is a very nice name for that particular team in the FBI because it is very acceptable to the public. No one could get angry by the group called the “The Hostage Recovery Team”. . . . the job is to recover hostages. Essentially, they are not trained to recover hostages, though, they are trained to do other things and we saw that at Waco and at Ruby Ridge. They are trained to go in and restore order by any means necessary but they can’t actually call them anything but the hostage recovery team to have them acceptable. But the plans they are laying down, working with other organizations, working with some local organizations, the National Guard, the other intelligence agencies, and intelligence members and the community – in our communities – the FBI has a category which they continue to have and this is what almost amazed me to an extent during my stay in the FBI during the 1980s and into the 1990s, that many of the organizations, or many of the operations that they had during the 60s that we thought were bygone, are still in place. I mean, they still have FOBs, which are “Friends of the Bureau”, which are people they have in media and other organizations which provide them with intelligence information on a regular basis. They have reliable sources, which I talked about earlier. They have the . . . . they have, um . . . what they call “cooperating witnesses. And these are people who are not informants, they don’t talk about a specific crime to the FBI, but they may report on what a specific person is doing. Say, if you were doing something in journalism, they might say, “This is what what Tony Brown does on a regular basis.” These kind of tentacles are still in the community. During the time I was with the FBI, working in the FBI office, one of the supervisors said to me, um, as I began to look at this paperwork, which is so similar to the counterintelligence operations of the 60s, I said, "They are continuing this? This is continuing to go on. (I was relatively new to the FBI). I said, Why would they continue this?” and his question to me was, “It was so effective. Why would we stop it?? The name has changed. It is a new name to the same operation. So, now, if you file under the Freedom of Information Act to get information on the COINTELPRO program, there is no program that exists. So you now would have to get information on each individual, one by one, it could take you 20 or 30 years. B: Let me tell you about the Freedom of Information. It was in the second book I wrote. I wrote a number of these agencies to ask them if they had a file on me, and they all wrote back and said, “No, but we do now. And here’ s your number.” P: Right. B: And here’s your number. (laughing). P Laughing. B: Now, do you think that they knew that I would be the type of journalist who would interview you. P. Oh, probably. They would probably . . . . they knew that the intelligence in that organization . . . and this is where you can call it as a double edged sword. Intelligence in that organization is really good. They have excellent intelligence. In other words, when they would decide to look at you – and it may not even – and people say, well, why would they look at me? It would have to be a massive investigation – but not really, because of the confidential witnesses and the sources they have in place throughout the different communities, it doesn’t take much to find out what Tony Brown does on a regular basis on a regular day. And so they can properly file on you – properly get information on you – and we knew things during the time I was in the FBI about when people got up, when they went to bed, who was their mistresses, what arrests or warrants he . . . . things of that sort. B: (interrupting) . . . If it is their job to protect of the domestic security, there is really nothing wrong with doing that unless they violate my rights or your rights or somebody’s rights, is it. P: But the question is, the problem is, why would they be looking at Tony Brown? Aren’t they violating your rights. B: If they are looking at me, they’re wasting their time and they’re paranoid. P. That may be so but the fact of the matter is, that’s an intelligence operation. And this is what we have to do when we think about the FBI . . . we think about criminal matters and intelligence matters. If I want information, intelligence information on you . . . let’s say, something is going to happen during Y2K, and in their plan for Y2K, they say this might entail the rounding up of dissidents in the community, which they will define as who is dissendent, to calm things down and stabilize them. Then they can constantly gather intelligence information on you in ways that you may think are totally illegal or unconstitutional. For instance, during the time I was there, we had no problem with bugging hotel rooms or putting microphones in hotel rooms. Now, you would say, well, you can’t use that against me, that’s unconstitutional, you don’t have a search warrant. But intelligence matters are not concerned about taking it to court. So I am not concerned about the constitutionality of that because, in my mind, you will never know . . . B: (interrupting) You wonder what I’m up to? P: . . . there will never be a trial . . . I just want to have that information on that basis. So, I can mount these intelligence operations on a regular basis and I do it based on what I see as a threat. B: Well, now. Let’s get back to these three scenarios. Scenario 1 is a brown out. Scenario 2 . . . the long-term, P. The blackout. B: The blackout. Scenario 3. It is one of their contingencies, is that we will have massive rioting, looting, upheaval. If that happens, and then mostly, based on what your informants told you, they are mostly concerned about urban areas . . . P: Exactly. B: If that happens, what is their plan to do something about it? P: Well, first of all, they intend to go in – and let me say this – as far back as the time I was with the State Police, we had what they call urban assault vehicles, or urban tanks, and this came about right after the riots of the late 1960s. And so they’ve created plans to go in and re-create stability by going out and doing mass arrests and moving people from one location to the other. When you tell people this, except for the agents in the FBI and the people I talk to who are familiar with intelligence operations, they say, oh, that’s amazing. But it’s really not amazing. It is what intelligence agencies and nations do across this world. They prepare to go in and control the public in mass numbers to move them to certain locations. And they have that plan in effect. They have been training for years to do that. We trained during the time that I was in the FBI, of going in these communities. The problem that the Y2K problem presents, it presents a problem and an opportunity. It presents a problem because if, in fact, you lose electricity, and you don’t have lights and things, now you’re talking about making movements under the cover of darkness, movements that don’t occur during the day have to occur at night, under the cover of darkness, and they realize they have an acceptable loss rate, and he told me about that, which is still not a surprise, if you know intelligence organizations and these movements during night, there may be some innocent people who are harmed and shot, but that is accept . . . B: Now, movements on whose part? P: On terms of the agencies that would go in to regain stability, or re-create stability . . . B: What would they do at night? What would they do at night? P: They believe that this is when the mass of the most part of the looting would occur – the breaking in and the looting will occur – after darkness. At pitch dark, you don’t have street lights any more. This is when people would go out. So this is when they are prepared to go, in under the cover of darkness, to arrest these people or to move them to certain locations, or maybe if they have to, use deadly force. B: And they have an acceptable death rate. P: An acceptable loss rate they expect It is no different than any other battle or war. They have an acceptable loss rate where they say, well, this will probably be what will happen. Because we have this operation, because it occurs under the cover of darkness, because of all these scenarios, because the history of these operations, because of the training we have done in the urban areas, knowing what we can see and what we can’t see, we’ ve practice for, this is how many people we will probably lose. However, we need to prepare to be able to justify that, have the proper people in place, whether they are black or white, to come out and say this was a necessary maneuver . . . B: Well, where does race come in to . . . where does race come into all this? P: They expect . . . let me say this. . . let me go back and say this. During the time I was in the FBI working intelligence issues, a report came across my desk and it was in regards to going out and talking to African-Americans, interviewing them about intelligence issues or crimes and things of that sort, and a document came out of the behavior science unit at Quantico Va. And it said that African-Americans, or black in America, were an emotional people but not an intellectual people. And there is nothing wrong with being emotional. We should be emotional. But what they were saying is this: That an issue will come up. They may get angry about it. They may protest, they may hold vigils, they may hold marches, but then they will go away without there being any logical conclusion to it. But based on this analysis, and you have to understand this report that comes out goes to almost all of the intelligence agencies, to the police intelligence agencies, this is the way you deal with African-Americans, this is the way you deal with them whether you are conducting an interview or any other kind of investigation, of if they are holding a protest, or if there is a police brutality shooting, sure they’ll protest for awhile, but let them have their protest and they will go away. Understanding that, and using that same kind of philosophy, and that analysis that comes out of the behavioral science unit, the expectation is that because we are emotional blacks may prepare for the Y2K problem but they won’t prepare a long term. So if it goes beyond the second scenario, the blackout, which is a lower . . . longer event, and to a much longer event, then they will not be prepared and, as not being prepared, the emotions will take over and this is how they will respond to it. B: And “they” meaning the intelligence community would respond with operation Mad Max. P: Operation Mad Max. B: Explain what Operation Mad Max is. P: Operation Mad Max, they took the term ‘Mad Max” from the futuristic movie about total chaos and everything goes wrong and they have to regain control. And in this particular instance, they believe that everything will go wrong. There will be looting and chaos – or, let me say this – this is the perception that they are putting out to every member of the intelligence community. Saying that, I digress to say this. When you go to those particular meetings, which I have attended, not everyone who will go into those meetings have all the intelligence information that the agents who are specifically involved in that operation have. But the FBI will give them that. And so if I give you the perception, you have the statistics that blacks are preparing more than whites. But if I give you the statistics that this is what blacks are going to do and this is what they intend to do when this Mad Max hits, that is what you respond to. You don’t care what else the statistics say, we had the mean at Langley, VA., these are the intelligence agencies, and despite what the journalists say about preparation, I am telling you they are not prepared and this is what you are going to have to do, this is the plan, this is how we are going to handle it, and we have anyone outside, the White House, the members of Congress, who will apply martial law and allow us to do this. And, again, this is not paranoia. It is even not a surprise, if you understand the intelligence community. B: What is Mad Max? What would Mad Max consist of? What did your informant tell you. P: Oh, Mad Max would consist of them going in and restoring order by means of using military force by use of the National Guard, by using HRT intelligence, and the intelligence gathering operation, to me, again, and I have to give these organizations credit for their expertise in this area, details that means the intelligence gathering has to begin maybe a year in advance, or two years in advance. I want to know where the possible dissidents are. I want to know whose preparing for what, where they are, and what time, and how they are preparing. Where they like you to be sleeping. Are the churches preparing? B: Dissidents . . P: Are the (word not understood) preparing?. B: Okay, now what is a dissident. Is that somebody who would wait for Y2K, create some type of military maneuver? What would they consider to be a dissident? P: People who have had long-term disagreements with the way the government operates. Now, you would think, using that scenario, and that veracity, that will have nothing to do with what may happen at Y2K. Because people may respond out of good common sense rather than just being a dissident with the government. But the government believes that it is these people who could actually either calm the situation or create more chaos, as the government moves in. So, in other words, if the government decides that we are going to move in because of the chaos created by Y2K into this community, and there are people in that community who are saying that this is what I have been telling you about all along, the government is moving with it, we’ve got to remove these people who might give that indication as they move to restore order, quote, unquot. B: If you’re saying this, then it follows . . . and I don’t know what your informant told you, of course, but it follows then, that they have to have a real network of operatives already in these communities . . . that they have to have a number of blacks in place who are working with them now. P: No doubt about it. And, to me, it is not surprising . . . maybe it’s not surprising, because of my 9 to 10 years of FBI experience, but the operations, the ability to give informants in the black community and organizations, have never stopped from the 60s. And, again, as the FBI supervisor said, “why would you stop such an effective program? What action, what divine intervention, had happened between the 60s and the 1990s that would make us stop this? The public revelations – that doesn’t stop an operation that is successful. And so – and it is not difficult – and, as I have talked across the country, people say, well, how do you get these informants? -- it is really not difficult. You have to understand that the FBI has unlimited resources in terms of paying an informant. I could go out – during the time I was with the FBI – and pay an informant whatever it takes to get them to do what I wanted them to do. If I wanted a young man to tell on his mother, if his mother had committed a crime, all I had to do was find his price and pay him with real money, as a taxpayer. And so the system of getting informants is not difficult. So to have all these tentacles in the black community, it is not a difficult thing. In fact, every FBI agent is required to have a number of informants in the community. If they don’t, then they are rated low or they may end up at a location they don’t want to be, or they may end up unemployed. That’s the requirement. B: What type of person does the FBI want as an informant? Do they want a person who will create chaos? I remember back in the 60s and 70s, we would have a meeting and talking about helping ourselves and all that kind of stuff, and there was always one guy in the room who wanted us to do something crazy. P: Exactly. B: And we always did, “Now, that has to be an infiltrator.” P: Exactly. B: Is that, for the most part, they try to move a group toward more radical behavior? P: In some cases. And in some cases, they are very quiet. Again, they call them ‘cooperating witnesses’ – people in a position to know, people in a position of power who just furnishes simple information. They are not agent provocateurs – which is what they used to do when they sent the people to start up a reaction that they know would result in chaos – but they still use agent provocateurs in certain meanings. The amazing thing is, and this is amazing to me, is that even with all that knowledge we have of all those operations, all the books that are written, the same kind of operations are effective today. People still come into our organizations, African American organizations, bring this information, and we never ask them, “How did you obtain that information? In other words, I come to you and say that that gentleman over there is an informant. Watch out for him. Now, he may not be the informant. But you begin to look at him . . . B: No, I meant (mumbles) . . . P: about what to me, about how I know that he is the informant. B: Yea. I know one group in the black community and they put out a list and they put every black person who could potentially help the black community on the list and they circulate the list as a list of people who are working in some conspiracy to hurt it. So, in my opinion, I am pretty sure that they work for somebody. Because the guy who is leading it has a background in security somewhere. P; Correct. B: And all of a sudden he doesn’t have a job but he has money and all the rest. So he comes on the suspect list. I want to say two things, one of which is there are some good people in the FBI. P: Oh, no doubt about it. B: Some very good people. P: No doubt about it. B: I know a few. P: Right. B: Number two. What about your personal safety? P: You know, that is asking a great deal. When I first came out, you know, I had a family and things of that sort and we had the, you know, the threats and all of it. The good thing about it is that I realize I understand the organization very well, having worked intelligence matters as well as undercover matters, I understand the organization. In most cases when I travel, when people ask me that question, I try not even to respond to it because the FBI h as a very good psychological trick. In other words, they will put me out . . . I’m on television or I’m in a street somewhere and I’ m saying, “They’re out to get me”, “they’re doing this to me”, “they’re doing that to me” . . B: But you scare the rest of us. P: There is the young man who is sitting there who is saying that he was about to stand up, saying, well, if they did that to you, why you make so . . . I understand the reverse psychology. B: There is a reality, though. P: There is a reality of that. However, I was convinced from the time I got in there from the time I start revealing the information, my relationship with Coleman Young, when they had the operations against him in Detroit. Coleman Young, for instance, the FBI followed that man for 20 years. They infiltrated his inner circle, his mayoral circle, and then he was totally infiltrated so that he didn’t know who was the infiltrator. That kind of psychological problem that they were doing to different people in the community. But I decided a long time ago, when I began to speak up on these issues, even as I was in the FBI, that that was a possibility but if you in earnest, you were willing to suffer the consequencies, whatever they are. B: I want to ask you a question. The people that we traditionally call black leaders, how infiltrated is that group? P: Well, those organizations are certainly infiltrated. I won’t say that all those people we call black leaders are not doing some very positive and progressive things. But their organizations have to be infiltrated. In fac t, that is the task for the charge of the FBI. You have to get into every single organization. One of the young men, while I was speaking in Detroit one time, he said, well, I wanted to join the FBI. So I joined the FBI. I say, yea, we need conscientious people. We need to be everywhere. We need conscientious black people, or conscientious people, in every organization across the nation. And that philosophy is the same philosophy of the FBI. You may think you may have the most radical organization and they will send one of their people to join your organization because you have to be inside to really know what’s going on. I can stand outside of your residence and throw rocks at your window, but unless I am inside, it’s the only way I’m going to have that information. So, and y ou’re right, not every FBI agent is bad. And, in fact, many of them, since I’ve come out and began speaking out, they’d say, “You’re absolutely right. We’re glad you’re bringing this information forward. We hope it changes the people and changes the organization. Program stopped recording at this point. DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
