Next: Bolivian Blood on Eduardo Gamarra's Hands?

The relationship between the mainstream media and U.S. intelligence agencies is long and incestuous -- and always clandestine in nature. I recently became aware of one example, though, in which that covert media/intelligence gathering relationship -- which is often dysfunctional at its core -- nearly cost the life of an intelligence operative.

That this relationship exists I expect is of little surprise to readers of Narco News. However, the following account of how it works, at least in one case example, is useful in getting at what might motivate a journalist to play that game – and also go a long way in explaining why some play it so badly.

Andrew Grice writes the following concerning the relationship between Juan Forero of the New York Times and Eduardo Gamarra, the director of Latin American Studies at Florida International University in Miami:

I can't verify which ones went into the hard copy New York Times, but a quick search reveals four Juan Forero stories in a row quoting Eduardo Gamarra.  

... And what kind of institution is Florida International University?  Let's see if FIU themselves offer us a hint with their press release from just a few days ago:

http://news.fiu.edu/releases/2005/03-09_ia.htm

MIAMI, Fla. (March 9, 2005) - A consortium of intelligence gathering agencies in Washington, D.C., has selected Florida International University to lead in the development of academic programs that will produce well trained and more diverse intelligence analysts.

In October 2003, I wrote a column for Commondreams.org that began as follows:

Evidence has surfaced recently that the FBI has been spying on foreign nations for years.
The revelation is so sensitive that in the wake of the secret surfacing, the FBI has embarked on a mad scramble to cover up the evidence. The Bureau has gone as far as to pressure a federal judge into sealing previously public court records that open a window on the FBI's overseas spying mission.

In addition, with the help of the U.S. Attorney's Office (John Ashcroft's Justice Department) the FBI also sought, through a proposed court order, to seize any computer anywhere that the Bureau suspected might have contained the sensitive court pleadings.

The controversy stems from a civil rights case filed in federal court in Sacramento, Calif., by former FBI agent Lok Thye Lau. In his case, Lau filed a Declaration in late September that detailed his FBI career and the fact that he was engaged as a spy in a dangerous undercover assignment that required him to "work against hostile and aggressive foreign powers for years."

Although he is precluded from discussing specifics about that assignment due to national security concerns, the public record available on his case indicates that the likely target country was China.

Following is an excerpt from Lau’s Declaration:

I Made In Roads In My UC Assignment

49. In July of 1986 , the subjects of my deep undercover assignment began to trust and task me with missions of such proportions that these actions were both puzzling and gratifying to the FBI senior management. Indeed, there were great tensions between the leadership in the FBI Field Division in Chicago and FBI Headquarters as to how best to take advantage of the sudden or quick penetration into the camp of the subjects by me.
50. In October of 1986, I was unexpectedly provided with a chance of a lifetime to accomplish something for the bureau and my country -- it was an invitation to go overseas. This was the ultimate goal of the undercover assignment. Management advised me that I was a few years ahead of schedule. However, the Assistant Directors at headquarters were skeptical of the opportunity at hand. I was surprised by the lack of courage to take chances by the decision-makers at the FBIHQ. After all, it would be my life at stake should anything was to go wrong. Strangely enough, there were suggestions at the top that I be polygraphed to ascertain the truth of my reporting. Management was afraid that I might set them up for 'an international incident! I was devastated. Finally, it was decided that I be polygraph upon my return on my overseas trip….
51. In November of 1987, on the eve of historic overseas trip, FBI management advised me that one of FBI's highly placed assets had betrayed me to the subjects concerning my true identity as a FBI agent. I did not cancel my trip for it would confirm asset's allegation. During this trip, stress and fear were constant companions.
52. During November of 1987, the historic trip turned out to be very stressful with subjects giving me enhanced scrutiny during the visit, personnel armed with machine-guns were a constant reminder to me of my fate if something went wrong, and there were frequent roadblocks on my route of travel. I anticipated death on several occasions, but I somehow survived it all.
53. In December of 1987, I completed my trip. The success of my historic overseas trip and my accomplishments had exceeded all expectations. The skeptics made me undergo an extensive polygraph test to ascertain my loyalty and accomplishments. When the electrode- examination was over, the skeptics were shamed, and I wondered if I had won more friends than foes at FBI Headquarters.

Lau alleges that a “highly placed” FBI asset – or informant – betrayed him prior to his spying trip to China. Recently, I was made aware that the person who sold out Lau to the Chinese was in fact a reporter on the payroll of the FBI.

Lau confirmed the information as well.

“Some people are bought and paid for,” Lau says. “The source that compromised me, he was a reporter for a foreign newspaper and he worked for the Bureau. This journalist worked for a big paper that also publishes in the United States, and he was well-known. That’s why nothing was done. He was being paid by the FBI as an informant.”

Lau contends that his mission represented a threat to the FBI’s man inside the media, and the reporter didn’t want to give up his spying gig for the Bureau.

“When I came into the picture, I represented competition, and he (the journalist) didn’t want his sources not to go to him because of me,” Lau says. “Wouldn’t it be good if that competition got torpedoed, and I was his competition (in the spying game). He didn’t want to lose his informant’s pay.”

Lau adds: “That’s one of the reasons it’s often hard to break into the open with a big story, because the FBI does have journalists on its payroll. I’m amazed that no one in the media picks up on that. Money talks, and they (the FBI and U.S. intelligence agencies) pay off (or in other ways seduce) journalists.”

I’m sure the CIA and FBI would deny Lau’s claims and write him off as a flaked-out former agent. But the only way to know for sure is to demand that our political leaders come clean on this subject. In the mean time, we will have to continue to read stories in the "papers of record" with an eye toward the possibility that the journalist might have other covert objectives -- and that is a major credibility buster for the mainstream media.