Their Hidden Agenda, The Story of a Chinese-American FBI Agent

By Robert Woo, Sr

It is every boy's dream to become an FBI agent, a career filled with adventures and excitement as shown on TV, but for Robert Woo, a former FBI Special Agent, there's something else to the package: betrayal.

Their Hidden Agenda: The Story of a Chinese-American FBI Agent is a story about Woo's twenty-one year employment with the FBI and his struggle to start over after he was unjustifiably fired

• Language: English
• Publisher: Robert Woo, Sr
• Release date: Jan 11, 2009
• ISBN: 9781452306308

Robert Woo, Sr

My father, Hu Zhiming (deceased) was born in Nanjing, China into a wealthy family aligned with a powerful warlord in the southern part of China, during the two decade period known as "The Warlord Era" in the early 20th Century. He immigrated to America in the late 1930s, at the time that Nanjing, China was under siege by the Japanese. He met my mother, Lucrecia Rozo Gaitan, who was from Colombia, South America in 1945 and they married in May 1946, and had three sons of mixed ethnicity. My dad (unknown to us) supported his family in China by virtue of his success as a restaurateur, and maintained contact with them throughout the 3 decades from the time he departed China until his return in 1974. I am the middle son, Robert. We had a typical American upbringing within the framework of the Catholic faith (mom's Catholic roots), and I eventually entered the US Naval Academy and graduated in 1970, and served two deployments in the Viet Nam conflict. I fulfilled my 5 year service obligation and was honorably discharged and entered government service as an FBI agent in 1976, due to my background, education and language capability, or so I thought. My career as an FBI agent was at times exciting, fulfilling, and perplexing, but mostly stressful, as a result of the fact that the FBI had maintained a national security file on my father, even before I entered the agency, based upon his family in China and his contacts with officials of the Chinese government. Eventually some of his family were also able to immigrate to the US, as a result of his efforts, as well as numerous other Chinese immigrants, who without my father's assistance would never have been able to come to America. He basically interceded on their behalf on numerous occasions with high level US officials, whom my dad had befriended, while he was in the restaurant business. My dad estimated that he helped more than two hundred families immigrate to America. In 1987, I was interviewed by the FBI about my father's contacts with the communist Chinese and I became increasingly paranoid about my career, and that combined with a repressed form of PTSD (post traumatic stress disorder) from my Vietnam experience, I unwittingly became a compulsive gambler, and I entered a dark period in my life. In 1994, the FBI charged me with criminal offenses (a result of a well orchestrated plan they implemented to set me up using my "weakness"), and I was suspended for more than 2 years. I was reinstated with the charges dropped but after less than 6 months back at work, they decided to end my career in 1997, using trumped up charges, and just 7 weeks within my eligibility for retirement. Fortunately, I had begun attending GA (gambler's anonymous) meetings, at the urging of my family, while on administrative leave, and developed the emotional and spiritual strength to arrest this devastating illness, notwithstanding The FBI's relentless efforts to destroy my career, reputation and spirit. However, somehow I managed to persevere, and to get my story published. In November 2009, I received new information from documents which I had in my possession since I was discharged by the FBI, that there were two sets of documents which were used to make the decision to first suspend me for more than two years (July 1994 - August 1996), then ultimately to fire me. I did not have access to these files which were kept in storage, however, a close associate of mine carefully analyzed them and came to the conclusion that not only were different documents maintained on practically identical facts (suggesting that the other set of documents were used to make it easier to fire me by headquarters officials). However, based on this fact, it appeared that certain key officials who were instrumental in having me fired, also committed perjury while under oath, based upon what actually occurred in the context of the facts surrounding my alleged wrongdoing, and their testimony about these facts. On my way back this Christmas (2013) from my daughter's home in southern California, I stopped with my family at a gas station and met a family from Nanjing, and when I told them my father's name, they said he is still quite "famous" in the city of Nanjing, a testimony to his lasting legacy not just in America but abroad, as well.

Book preview

Foreword

My name is Robert A. Woo Sr., and I am a former FBI Agent (April 1976 – November 1997). This is my story, and not your typical story of the FBI, as I offer the reader, my own experiences, under the unvarnished prism of truth, as an FBI agent for nearly 22 years. My story illustrates, that sometimes no matter what you do, in a positive sense, or how diligently you work, if for some reason, you come under suspicion, whether warranted or not, then those in power over you, can make an issue of even your very existence, and who brought you into this world. However, my story also details the resiliency of the human spirit and how perseverance can overcome any obstacles. This supposition of why I was hired and eventually the reasons for my being fired within weeks of my retirement is the foundation of this, my first book, and will be the common thread throughout this work, as I set about to bring all of the pieces of the puzzle together, and illustrate in a cohesive way, how in the larger scheme of things, the FBI is potentially one of the most dangerous agencies in our government. However, in the present context of the Trump administration, this does not mean that they do not also conduct investigations, for the good of our country and our survival as a democracy.

My career clearly demonstrates how, in the end, despite serving my country honorably, and with distinction, I was the target of overreaching, ignorant, and biased bureaucrats, writing this book in the context of having received verification, from an FOIPA – freedom of information/privacy act request, in March 2000, from my former employer, the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation), that they did, in fact, maintain a national security dossier on my father, Chih Ming Woo, also known as, C.M. Woo, Hu Zhiming. The documents that I received were heavily redacted, and in my belief, only cover a small portion of the volumes of information that they must in actuality possess, concerning my father, which were probably initiated by the CIA (Central Intelligence Agency).

The information I received was in my opinion meant to mislead as to the true nature of their concerns and suspicions. Based upon my experience working for the government for more than 30 years, it is also my belief, that this file in all likelihood began sometime during the mid to late 1960s, during the height of the Cultural Revolution in mainland China, when members of my father’s family still living in China were subjected to persecution, harassment, and shortages of basic items such as food, water and clothing.

The reason they were persecuted was because these family members for the most part had been well educated and successful business people, which at that time, in the 1960s, all of those who had been in this class of people, after the communist takeover in 1949, were viewed with suspicion and subjected to loss of property, displacement of family members, persecution, and death by the Red Guard, a communist youth league comprised mostly of students. This scenario, the Cultural Revolution, had been instigated by the leader of China at that time, Mao Zedong, along with his wife, Jiang Jing, and the notorious Gang of Four, who basically let this mob loose upon Chinese society and devastated China for years to come, vis-à-vis its growth culturally, educationally, and economically.

I believe that a national security dossier was initiated on my Father because during that time period, China was viewed by the US government as an adversary, because of their substantial support, i.e. material, logistical, and financial, etc., to the North Vietnamese government, which was our avowed enemy in the Vietnam Conflict. However, this is not the primary reason why they decided to monitor my father’s activities but more so in the context of his ability to have strategic contacts of his, based in Hong Kong at the time, provide supplies that his family members in China needed. Not many people living in the US, and Chinese expatriates in particular at that time, had the wherewithal to accomplish what my father did, in supplying the necessities of life, to his family members under communist rule in China, which as I suggest, did not escape the apparent scrutiny of U.S. intelligence.

One must also understand that all of this activity on my father’s part, in terms of assistance he provided over the years to his family members in China was done without our knowledge, the family he had established in the United States, including myself. We were left completely in the dark about the fact that my father still had family members in China, and was continuing to support them monetarily or otherwise, over the years. Thus, for example, when my father traveled back to China for the first time in 1974, since he left there in 1938, I was by then a US Navy Officer on active duty stationed on the island of Guam, Marianas Islands. This was while the Vietnam Conflict was still ongoing, which may, in part, explain why my career in the US Navy never flourished because of the existence of an intelligence dossier about my father.

Many of the conclusions which I make in this book are the result of careful analysis of the actions of my superiors and when one views the sum total of years of what one might categorize as being mistreatment, a clear pattern of behavior emerges, which is consistent with many of the assertions I engender, in the larger context of a story about two countries, one an established superpower, the US, and the other a nascent superpower on the world stage, China. Thus, my story is indeed a tale of two countries, and how I inadvertently got caught up in the politics of this reality, and in the end analysis, became nothing more than an unwitting pawn, in a game of international politics.

Prologue

This book is dedicated primarily to the memory of my father, who was diagnosed several years ago, with an advanced stage of prostate cancer, and passed away on June 10, 2006. I also dedicate this book to the memory of all Chinese and other immigrants who have made their way, like my father, and are still immigrating, to the United States from China and places like Central America. In recent times, there are those who lost their lives during transit to America, aboard overburdened vessels under harsh conditions, and in the care of unscrupulous criminals. Not to mention those who seek asylum here, only to be turned away or unjustly imprisoned, after being separated from their children, and yet with little or no accountability.

I dedicate this book to those others who have attempted to enter this country, yet were subsequently arrested and put into detention centers, by the former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service), languishing in American prisons, for years. Their only crime being the wish for a better life, for them and their families, most of who still remain in China. Finally, I devote this book, in particular, to my fellow Chinese Americans who have felt the sting of discrimination and like myself, lost their rights, freedoms, livelihoods or pensions, over some hidden agenda, by the US government.

Following through on what I noted in the Foreword, the government’s motives in the case of my father and I were originally based upon nothing more than exactly the same mindset which occurred shortly after December 7, 1941, when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and thousands of innocent Japanese Americans were involuntarily rounded up and placed into relocation camps. History has proven and the government has even acknowledged its error, in the case of WWII internees of Japanese descent, with reparations, that these acts were wrong and immoral.

As I have already stated, the father chose to maintain family ties with China, which would raise the shadow of suspicion on the part of the US government. In this context, the story of my family illustrates perfectly, how America dealt with this cauldron of political change and perceived threat, which then profoundly affected how they would react to both the father and the son. However, the government’s actual motives, planning, and decisions have always been done in a covert manner, originating in secrecy and implemented behind a veil of shadows, deceit, and obfuscation.

Up to this point in time; however, it appears, based upon the process of deduction and certain revelations made to me in the past two decades, that the actual motivation to eventually have me removed from my employment and further access to relevant information, involved the Campaign Finance Scandal of 1996, vis-à-vis, the re-election campaign of then President Clinton. It appears that my superiors’ actions were based upon political considerations and cover-up, stemming from corruption, both within the FBI itself and even higher up in the Executive Branch.

In other words, I apparently got too close to the truth, about the 1996 Presidential Campaign, in terms of illegal campaign donations, made from countries, with vested political interests, such as Taiwan and likewise communist China. In an LA Times article a few years back, it was revealed that former Taiwan President Lee Tenghui, kept a secret slush fund to be used for such things as the presidential elections and influence buying. Could he have attempted to influence the American presidential election process in 1996, when he was the leader of the Republic of China? Moreover, did the communist regime also attempt to purchase influence by funneling cash donations through operatives?

One of the FBI scandals a few years back, concerning the two retired FBI counter-intelligence agents, who in the past, operated a woman accused of being a double agent working on behalf of China, has a connection to the Campaign Finance Scandal (CFS), since the agent who was arrested, along with the woman, interviewed one of the main figures of this scandal. It is also alleged that she may have been the conduit for secret cash donations from a foreign Asian businessman, Ted Chung, into the 1996 Presidential Campaign. This allegation more than anything else, may have a nexus and therefore an impact on my case, in terms of a plausible motive for having me removed, as I will further discuss, in the context of how political issues more often than not, provide the basis for personnel decisions being made and implemented.

However, I would be naïve to discount the possibility that I was simply retaliated against for raising issues in the context of blowing the whistle on the conduct of the managers who were instrumental in having me fired. I have learned that there seems to be a handbook for management in how to deal with employees who blow the whistle, in the course of their official employment, with agencies such as the FBI. I have also in the past, been a member of the NSWBC (National Security Whistleblowers Coalition), where I learned of such tactics on the part of the government.

Our family experiences in many respects are a reflection not only of the greatness of America but in many ways, also what is wrong with our country, as for example regarding political contributions and how our politicians are elected and strive to remain in office, as seen from a unique vantage point. The Gubernatorial recall election of 2003 in California is a perfect example of a political system gone awry and badly in need of correction, as evidenced by the influx of donations from special interest groups in California to the various candidates. However, my story does not focus on this issue and only touches the tip of the iceberg, in terms of the dark underside of the entire issue of political patronage and illicit campaign donations. This process taints not only our way of government but undermines the principles inherent in our Constitution.

This is the milieu in which my story takes place and how nefarious influences could prevent me from doing my job in searching for the truth, while setting me up and eventually firing me, depriving me of my retirement. My story focuses more on the extent to which the FBI apparently went to cover-up and protect the previous Administration in this instance, as well as protecting some of the very same individuals who were instrumental in initially having me removed and ultimately fired. Many of these individuals who were engaged in activities far more egregious than what I was charged with, even before the Campaign Finance Scandal became an issue.

This story details how high level officials within the government could shape official policy and in the end, deprive the public of a dedicated public servant willing to sacrifice his health, well being, and even retirement for the good of the country while attempting to root out corruption at the highest levels of our government. My story sheds light on a powerful government agency, the FBI, which fosters a culture of discrimination, favoritism, patronage, and almost exclusively operates under the aegis of political expediency, oftentimes as I have already stated, to the detriment of this agency’s ability to accomplish its mission to protect the American public.

Although a congressional investigation at the end of 2003, concluded that there was evidence that such a double standard existed only later to provide contradictory statements that they did not find such a standard. It appears that the Bureau still exerts great influence on how supposedly impartial finders of fact make their conclusions, which is something that the late Director, J. Edgar Hoover was renowned for, i.e. holding undue influence over many members of Congress, by virtue of his secret files.

I still believe this is the greatest country on earth; however, it is so only by the grace of God, combined with the sacrifices of ordinary citizens and military personnel, many of whom have paid and continue to pay the ultimate price as in Operation Iraqi Freedom, as well as the present campaign in Afghanistan, with their lives, in defending our freedoms, throughout our history. However, if we are to survive as one nation under God with the concept that all men are created equal and have certain inalienable rights towards the pursuit of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, then we must always safeguard those principles in which our forefathers based the Constitution. A perfect example of the erosion of individual rights is the implementation of the Patriot Act, following the 911-terror attack, in terms of how it has been applied.

An article from the San Antonio Business Journal, dated October 14, 2003, provides a specific example of the erosion of these rights. The article cites the October 10, 2003 order by a Federal District Judge in Sacramento, CA, to seal previously public records in the case of a former FBI agent of Chinese ethnic background, who like me, was the victim of discrimination, was fired, and ultimately chose to fight back. He had actually worked overseas in a dangerous undercover capacity for the Bureau, and should have been lauded for his efforts, not terminated. His case actually progressed far beyond mine, in terms of his filing a wrongful termination lawsuit against the Bureau and the Department of Justice. The federal judge assigned the case recently dismissed this suit but the case provides a rare glimpse into the actions and mentality of the Bureau and the Justice Department. Subsequently, motions were filed to sanction the Bureau based on its actions in the case; however, as expected in this day and age, the same judge denied all the motions.

Is the government saying we are kept secure because the FBI, not the CIA, has someone spying in China? It’s not a legitimate government secret if half of what this man (Lau) is saying is true." The issue here is not only what the FBI is doing working undercover in China but why are they trying to suppress information that was previously public? Are they trying to cover up information, which would prove embarrassing to them, as I assert throughout the body of this work? These actions are the basis for the motion for sanctions noted above.

Moreover, as I will explain, it now appears that even before my friend was preparing for his deep cover assignment in China, his true identity was already being compromised. From recent news articles published by one of the prominent Sacramento newspapers, the FBI told my friend that someone who was privy to this agent’s identity and undercover role on behalf of the FBI, in 1987, had compromised his identity. The question then should be asked is who would do such a thing? Could it have been the recently exposed double agent, Katrina Leung, whom some have compared to Mata Hari?

This incident also brings into question how this kind of duplicity may have also affected us, my family and me, in the long run, in terms of the FBI’s eventual actions to remove me and then terminate my employment based upon possible disinformation provided by someone like Leung to the Bureau, as perhaps concerned my father. The timeframe of 1987 also is coincidentally about the same time the FBI came to question me about my father’s activities as concerned the People’s Republic of China (PRC), and more importantly the FOIPA files I obtained from the FBI dealt only with this specific time period.

The Patriot Act in my belief is used as a thinly veiled excuse to provide an agency such as the FBI with unprecedented powers to spy on and conduct surveillance on ordinary citizens, who may simply disagree with the manner in which the government conducts its business. Another example is the unprecedented outing of a CIA analyst, by the previous White House, in retaliation for her husband’s, Joseph Wilson IV, a career diplomat, criticism of the former Administration and its rationale for entering the War in Iraq. One need to go no farther than a fairly recent example of government censorship in the matter involving former FBI translator, Sibel D. Edmunds, who’s firing and subsequent appeals denied were upheld by the judicial system, however, she vowed to take her case all the way to the Supreme Court, which eventually refused to hear her case.

According to an October 15, 2003 Los Angeles Times article, attorneys for the Wilson family were watching closely the results of a lawsuit filed by former Los Alamos scientist, Wen Ho Lee against the Justice Department and the FBI, in which the judge handling this matter has ordered five journalists, to include a journalist for the LA Times, to identify government sources that Dr. Lee alleges illegally violated his privacy, when these sources leaked personal information about him to the press. This case was settled a few years ago in favor of Dr. Lee who received about $1.6 million from the government and a group of newspapers who printed the leaked misinformation originally.

It would come as no surprise to me that the identity of one of these sources turns out to be a former supervisor of mine, who was later, promoted to be head of counter intelligence for the entire FBI. This individual was interviewed February of 2004 by reporter Leslie Stahl, aired again in August of that year,on 60 Minutes, as the one ultimately responsible for the misguided efforts to find the mole who eventually was revealed as Robert Hanssen.

In terms of acknowledgments, I would like to thank my immediate family, my wife, Janice, my daughter Jena, and son Rob. I also thank my two precious grandchildren, Trent and Skye, who gave me a reason for living and a renewed sense of purpose. I would also like to thank my parents, Chih Ming, God rest his soul and Lucrecia Woo, my brothers George and especially William and his family who took me in when I had nowhere to go, as well as all of my cousins, particularly Richard Huang. I thank my Naval Academy classmates, Bill O’Brien (deceased), Tim Martel, Ron Marchetti, Nick Williams, Bob Michael, Lucian Acuff, and Dick Powers. I also acknowledge Trinxue better known as Kathy Xue, Xue Daming’s eldest child who graduated from the University of Maryland where she had an academic scholarship, for her assistance in providing family background information.

In addition, I thank those agents and employees, past and present, such as Lou Alfeld, Fred Whitehurst, George Lok T. Lau, Ben Tran, Randy Leben, Manny Johnson, Paul De Flores, Denise Woo, Colleen Rowley, Jane Turner, Sibel D. Edmonds, Rosemary Dew, Manny Johnson, Mike German, Robert Wright, John Vincent, Gene Glenn, Mike Paresa, I.C. Smith, William B. McGrath, Bassem Youssef, and others , had the courage to stand up to the bureaucracy and fight wrongdoing, abuse, hypocrisy, retaliation, and discrimination. These people, like me were victims of an FBI bureaucracy and culture, which does not tolerate whistleblowers or for that matter, anyone who challenges the Bureau.

It appears now that my firing was just the beginning of a campaign by the FBI to rid itself of perceived security risks of Chinese ancestry, due in my belief, in large part because of the growing influence of China on the world stage. Also, I would not have been able to tell my story without the love, support, guidance and patience of my friends and family, without which, I would not have been able to grow and to realize the truth and to share it with others.

I also thank my good friend and mentor, Jon Sacchetti and his family, whose love and Christian way of living inspired me to renew my Faith. I owe a special debt of gratitude to the Northern California chapter of Gamblers Anonymous as well as Los Angeles area GA and in particular the Roxbury meeting, without whose support and guidance, I would not have been able to survive, especially when I was most vulnerable, from an emotional standpoint. My gratitude also extends to the National Center for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), located in Menlo Park, California.

Chapter One

I began writing this story, after it became clear to me, in the millennium year of 2000, why I had been hired by an agency of the government, the FBI, which ostensibly hired me on the basis of my military background, academic credentials and language ability, in April 1976. In actuality, I learned much later in my career that this same agency had either initiated an investigative file or more likely were supplied portions of a file by some other intelligence agency (perhaps the CIA), on my father in the mid 1970s, or earlier, when he returned to China for the first time in over thirty years, just prior to my discharge from the US Navy and maintained that file for almost three decades and even to this day. I had always had this issue in the back of my mind as something, which could eventually cause me problems but kept it blocked from my consciousness. However, this book is the product of my carefully deliberated decision to confront these issues head on, despite the potential consequences.

I received a portion of this file in March 2000 upon my request, which was marked Secret, albeit heavily redacted and incomplete, in my belief to mislead as to the true nature of their concerns and objectives, about my father and I, over the course of my career, with the FBI. However, the salient point is that their actions are and have always been consistent with their true motives, in terms of the manner in which they chose to treat me. Much of the basis for the conclusions and observations, which I have drawn in this book, consists largely of not so much what was said or written about me in official documents, at least those that were made available, but how my superiors dealt with me which shows a clear pattern of discrimination and more importantly, the ever present issue of political expediency, in their thoughts, words and deeds. An agency as powerful as the FBI can be a force for evil as easily as a force for good, depending upon how politicized it allows itself to become and what I will attempt to do in this work is to carefully detail how such a thing could occur.

When I simultaneously requested my own files from the Freedom of Information/Privacy Act Section, numbering in excess of 1,500 pages, by the FOIPA section’s own admission, I eventually received only about half of those files as of August 28, 2002, over two and a half years after I requested them and dealing only with innocuous data concerning my employment with the FBI, and no mention whatsoever of any reason for my being interviewed about my father, circa 1987, or why they were concerned about my father and his activities. Could the missing files have some bearing on their true and hidden agenda? Everything that I report in this work, in terms of my firsthand experiences, is the truth; however, I will leave it to the reader to form his or her own conclusions.

With respect to the importance of corroborating information, on April 26, 2003, I spoke at length with my cousin, Richard, whose mother, Christina, now deceased, and God rest her soul, was my mother’s younger sister, and was married to Dick Huang who also passed in April 2007. Mr. Huang spent a career in the government as an engineer developing missile technology for the US Army, and who had access to classified information. His son, Richard, is also a career government employee, and he confirmed many of my suspicions about the scrutiny which my father was under. Richard stated that circa 1998, when he was applying for an internship with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), he spent at least eight hours being interviewed while being attached to a polygraph machine, which he voluntarily submitted to, in the hopes that eventually, the CIA would hire him. Richard stated that many of the questions revolved around my father and what sort of relationship both he and his father had with my father.

Richard added that despite the fact that he had never had his loyalty in question or any untoward incident, working for the US government, he was, in effect, being questioned about his loyalty to the United States and felt that rather than applying for a job with the CIA, he was instead a subject of investigation, based upon the fact that he was in the same extended family as both myself and my father. The end result of this interrogation was that Richard did not get the job and is considering reapplying for a job with the CIA. I told him not to get his hopes up too high, based upon political reality. However, I also realize that in reapplying, we would have further evidence of the extent of the government’s continued interest in my family.

The question of whether or not any additional information concerning the Campaign Finance Scandal of 1996 will come out remains uncertain. However, in a lead article in the Los Angeles Times published on Sunday, April 27, 2003, Senator Joseph Lieberman, made a statement that he hoped that as a result of the espionage arrests of Katrina Leung and her handler, James Smith, that new information about influence peddling and illegal campaign funds would be disclosed.

This statement referred to funds that were allegedly funneled through an Asian contact, Ted Chung, the Senator cited in a 1997 Times article, in which Leung dismissed allegations that an Indonesian businessman, Chung, she knew might be a Beijing political operative. Naturally, any new information concerning this matter would be of interest to my case, since it is my contention that I was removed from my employment, because I apparently stumbled upon certain key but as yet unspecified information about this Scandal.

The point being that the Bureau, in trying to protect their valued source, Ms. Leung, would go to great lengths to cover-up her role in the 1996 Scandal and shield her from unwanted investigation, even if it meant compromising the integrity of the probe itself. Apparently, this motive may have also played a role in the case of another agent of Chinese ethnicity, Denise Woo, assigned to the Los Angeles Office. She had been on administrative leave from the Bureau, at last count for more than five years by the Bureau and then formally indicted in federal court for the matter for which she was suspended, however, the matter was resolved in a plea agreement in which she agreed to plead guilty to one count of revealing classified information for which she was sentenced on October 30, 2006.

This occurred seven years after she was suspended for allegedly disclosing classified material to a suspected Chinese spy, to probation and a $1000 fine. I learned from a reliable source that one of the reasons this agent was placed on administrative leave was because the agent had knowledge of James J. Smith, and his illicit relationship with accused double agent Katrina Leung. Smith’s affair was apparently common knowledge within the office, and she had contemplated blowing the whistle. I also found out, once again from reliable sources, that apparently Smith was behind another separate investigation of a family friend of this agent, which resulted in a FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) wiretap on this individual. Apparently the agent in question later warned this individual, and the agent was subsequently placed on paid leave, more than seven years ago. The question that remains is why would the Bureau keep this agent on their employment rolls for so long?

This question about the influence of the Katrina Leung matter in my case and perhaps that of other agents of Chinese ethnicity will perhaps go unanswered, which only serves to further corroborate my belief, that decisions were made about both my father and I, absent my knowledge, throughout my career, which had a bearing on what would eventually happen to me. For example, one of the entries I read was a notation, within the file that I had resigned sometime in June 1996, which I note, is patently false. If this were the case, then there should have been a letter of resignation in the file but there was no such letter, because I never resigned as they falsely documented.

In point of fact, in August of 1996, I was reinstated, albeit for only a brief time, until they could complete their plans as concerned me, which in my belief, were formulated sometime in the early 1990s but not formalized until events contemporaneous with that time period, occurred. I am unable to comprehend why they would include such a blatant falsehood, into my official record; however, it clearly demonstrates that even as to an official record, they are unable to get the facts straight or properly documented. This leads me to believe that other facts have either been destroyed or altered, as I will further discuss, to somehow fit into their account of what happened in my case.

My story in many respects is evidence of the true state of affairs within the Bureau, and could not have been timelier, in terms of the spate of recent and continuing embarrassments by the once vaunted Bureau, the latest being the story carried on the CBS program, 60 Minutes, on Sunday, May 22, 2011; about now retired agent Lyn Devecchio, formerly assigned as a supervisor for two organized crime squads in New York, New York. He had actually been indicted a few years back, by the district attorney of Manhattan, New York, allegedly for his involvement in operating a top echelon informant (Gregory Scarpa), who continued to commit murders while under the employ of the FBI. The DA concluded that Devechhio had made a deal with the devil. This informant apparently used his relationship with Devecchio, to glean confidential information from Bureau files, which was then used in the commission of contract murders, of individuals that this informant was tasked to kill. In addition, Devecchio was charged with tipping off the informant’s son, who was also about to be arrested, for his mafia related criminal activities, which allowed him to avoid arrest. Devecchio proclaimed unabashedly that he was friends with this informant.

Devecchio’s case was later dropped due to insufficient evidence, and he was allowed to retire with his full retirement (unlike me). He also wrote a book recently, apparently to defend his actions, and at least the appearance of impropriety. He rationalized (rather cavalierly, i might add) that if he did not approach this informant, the Bureau would never have broken the back of the New York mob families, in which three of out of five heads of the lCN (la costra nostra) in New York, were charged, indicted and sentenced to lenghty prison sentences. This is another example of The ends justifies the means mentality, and another example of the glaring disparity within the disciplinary regime (or lack thereof) of the FBI, when comparing Devecchio’s case to mine.

Another story (carried on national new media outlets, dated October 17, 2010) is as follows: "Yasir Afifi, a 20-year-old computer salesman and community colleges student who had taken his car in for oil change October of last year and his mechanic spotted an odd wire hanging from the undercarriage. The wire was attached to a strange magnetic device that puzzled Afifi and the mechanic. They freed it from the car and posted images of it online, asking for help in identifying it.

Two days later, FBI agents arrived at Afifi's Santa Clara apartment and demanded the return of their property — a global positioning system tracking device now at the center of a raging legal debate over privacy rights. One federal judge wrote that the widespread use of the device was straight out of George Orwell's novel, 1984.

By holding that this kind of surveillance doesn't impair an individual's reasonable expectation of privacy, the panel hands the government the power to track the movements of every one of us, every day of our lives, wrote Alex Kozinski, the chief judge of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a blistering dissent in which a three-judge panel from his court ruled that search warrants weren't necessary for GPS tracking. But other federal and state courts have come to the opposite conclusion. Law enforcement advocates for the devices say GPS can eliminate time-consuming stakeouts and old-fashioned tails with unmarked police cars. The technology had a starring role in the HBO cops-and-robbers series The Wire and police use it to track every type of suspect — from terrorist to thieves stealing copper from air conditioners.

The fact that investigators don't need a warrant to use GPS tracking devices, in California, troubles privacy advocates, technophiles, criminal defense attorneys and others. The federal appeals court based in Washington D.C. said in August that investigators must obtain a warrant for GPS in tossing out the conviction and life sentence of Antoine Jones, a nightclub owner convicted of operating a cocaine distribution ring. That court concluded that the accumulation of four weeks’ worth of data collected from a GPS on Jones' Jeep amounted to a government search that required a search warrant.

Judge Douglas Ginsburg said watching Jones' Jeep for an entire month rather than trailing him on one trip made all the difference between surveilling a suspect on public property and a search needing court approval.

First, unlike one's movements during a single journey, the whole of one's movements over the course of a month is not actually exposed to the public because the likelihood anyone will observe all those movements is effectively nil, Ginsburg wrote. The state high courts of New York, Washington and Oregon have ruled similarly.

The Obama administration at the time asked the D.C. federal appeals court to change its ruling, calling the decision vague and unworkable and arguing that investigators will lose access to a tool they now use with great frequency. After the D.C. appeals court decision, the 9th Circuit refused to revisit its opposite ruling. The panel had concluded that agents could have gathered the same information by following Juan Pineda-Moreno, who was convicted of marijuana distribution after a GPS device placed by agents suggested he was leaving a suspected growth site.

The only information the agents obtained from the tracking devices was a log of the locations where Pineda-Moreno's car traveled, information the agents could have obtained by following the car, Judge Diarmuid O'Scannlain wrote for the three-judge panel. Two other federal appeals court has ruled similarly.

In his dissent, Chief Judge Kozinski noted that GPS technology is far different from tailing a suspect on a public road, which requires the active participation of investigators. The devices create a permanent electronic record that can be compared, contrasted and coordinated to deduce all manner of private information about individuals, Kozinksi wrote. Legal scholars predict the U.S. Supreme Court will ultimately resolve the issue since so many courts disagree.

George Washington University law professor Orin Kerr said the issue boils down to public vs. private. As long as the GPS devices are attached to vehicles on public roads, Kerr believes the U.S. Supreme Court will decide no warrant is needed. To decide otherwise, he said, would ignore a long line of previous 4th Amendment decisions allowing for warrantless searches as long as they're conducted on public property. The historic line is that public surveillance is not covered by the 4th Amendment, Kerr said.

All of which makes Afifi's lawyer pessimistic that he has much of a chance to file a successful lawsuit challenging the FBI's actions. Afifi is represented by Zahra Billoo of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the country's largest Islamic civil rights group. Afifi declined comment after spending last week fielding myriad media inquiries after wired.com posted the story of his routine oil change and it went viral on the Internet.

Still, Billoo hopes the discovered GPS tracking device will help publicize in dramatic (and which also happens in other ethnic communities, as my story indicates).

She said Afifi was targeted because of his extensive ties to the Middle East, which include supporting two brothers who live in Egypt and making frequent overseas trips. His father was a well-known Islamic-American community leader who died last year in Egypt. Yasir hasn't done anything to warrant that kind of surveillance, Billoo said. This was a blatant example of profiling."

Another scandal is the cheating controversy back at FBI training headquarters in Quantico, Virginia, in October 2010, wherein several agents were caught up in a cheating scandal. There was no word, however, if any of these agents were expelled or what action came about as a result of this latest scandal. Also an admission by the FBI Director earlier in 2010 that there were problems as to how the Patriot Act was abused, utilizing National Security letters to request information from companies without in many cases probable cause of knowledge that any crime had been or was going to be committed. To make matters worse, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey (under the Bush Administration) petitioned congress to expand surveillance powers for the FBI, creating added concerns for privacy issues.

Also, it was disclosed in 2008 that the Bureau would have ongoing wiretaps disconnected by various telephone companies due to failure on the Bureau’s part to pay their bills on time; however, the Director claimed that no information was lost as a result. However, in a lead article in the Business Section of the Washington Post on May 8, 2008, it appears that the Bureau withdrew a secret administrative order seeking the name, address, and online activity of a patron of the Internet Archive after the San Francisco based digital library filed suit to block the action. It appears that progress has been made after all, after the Bureau was chastened in their earlier efforts.

In addition, a NSWBC member happened to be an agent who was assigned to the NY office in the past few years, blew the whistle on a plan by NY office management officials, the former head of which was one of those responsible for setting me up, which resulted in my being fired, to inappropriately utilize an informant in a high profile public corruption case involving an elected official. Could this have had any connection to the Elliot Spitzer scandal?

Of interest in the China spy scandal a few years back is that one of the two men involved was my co-worker who was formerly assigned as a supervisor in the San Francisco Office, and had been noted in this book even before the latest scandal became public. The article also noted that my former co-worker had resigned his post as head of security for the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL), and that he had purchased a home in Monterey, California for one million dollars a few years ago. The other man, as alluded to in the LA Times article, had operated this woman as a prized informant, up until recently and used her to acquire information on Chinese intelligence activities but also domestic matters, such as the Campaign Finance Scandal of 1996.

My San Francisco colleague had as early as 1991 in a now well publicized meeting which occurred back at FBI headquarters and about the same time that I assert my superiors began conspiring in earnest against me, warned the FBI hierarchy of unauthorized contacts between the asset and Chinese officials. Moreover, even though it had also been noted that there were inconsistencies in what she had reported, and a polygraph examination had been recommended, no such exam ever occurred. It appears that my former colleague’s warnings went unheeded as well, and that he apparently took that as a signal that it was appropriate to have an affair with her.

The other agent, James Smith, had even received special recognition in the form of a cash award, from FBI headquarters for his work with this woman. These latest scandals epitomize the disparity and indeed evidence of corruption within the FBI, wherein cases damaging to our national security not to mention criminal conduct, could occur, when trusted employees abuse their positions of power, while at the same time, they can justify removing people who dedicate their lives to public service, honestly, without hidden agenda, and beholden to no one, except the American taxpayer. Once again the question needs to be asked, why was this matter, with a plethora of red flags not dealt with earlier?

Another incident involved the decision by Director Mueller, in early 2003 to allow a $20,000 cash award given to a senior official at headquarters to stand. Who also coincidentally was the same official who would not allow the confiscation or search of the computer owned by the so called twentieth hijacker, Zacarias Moussaoui, to be searched, after overwhelming evidence to the contrary, suggesting that a full investigation be conducted. The Director went ahead with this controversial cash award, even after severe criticism from members of Congress charged to oversee the Bureau, as well as the media, about the money being given, in the first place. Director Mueller’s only comment, in response to all of the criticism was that the award was appropriate.

This incident followed on the heels of the red flag alert concerning five alleged terrorists who reportedly entered the US through Canada to perpetrate a terrorist incident during the 2002 Holidays, however, the source of the information was later found to have lied to the FBI. This latter incident seems to be a case of the boy who cried wolf and why anything the Bureau announces these days is subject to skepticism based upon their very public errors in failing to prevent 911 from occurring as well as other high profile cases. A few years back, the FBI took the rather odd tactic of acknowledging in the media, that they are unable to infiltrate the Al Qaeda Terrorist network. This strategy may presume ahead of another terrorist incident that the FBI would not be able to prevent another major terror incident from occurring with US borders.

An article in 2001 from the Washington Post newspaper focused attention on some of the practices of the Bureau hierarchy, which demonstrates that I was not the only one who was disciplined, based not only on flawed assumptions but also for my having challenged management (as others did). This article noted that agents who were called to testify before a senate judiciary hearing, stated that while assigned to a 1999 follow-up investigation to the Ruby Ridge matter, they were also mistreated and their livelihoods threatened, because they concluded that senior managers who had been involved in this matter, received deferential treatment, i.e. they were not disciplined, despite evidence of serious misconduct.

As I note in my own experience, this appears to be a common practice within the Bureau when faced with the prospect of the truth coming out. These examples as well as at the time, inexplicable, but predictable, behavior on the part of my superiors throughout the 1990s, as I will carefully delineate, were only a harbinger of what was to come in my case, in terms of their actual motivation for having me removed.

The actual reason I was hired in 1976, in my belief, was for them to have a living and breathing litmus test in myself as to whether or not their initial concerns about my father were justified. The story of father and me in the context of these concerns was a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy, which never was fulfilled, i.e. nothing adverse ever happened to the security of this country, from anything that we did or failed to do. In contrast, the discovery that an agent who entered the FBI about the same time that I did, who was actively engaged in spying on behalf of the former Soviet Union and then for Russia, for over twenty years, provides a stark contrast, in terms of how this man and his traitorous activities were allowed to flourish within the Bureau culture, while I simultaneously encountered systemic discrimination over the course of my career.

This disparate treatment demonstrates just how flawed the Bureau’s collective judgment was and is, not to mention the inherent culture in which these events were allowed to occur, and just how disconnected the Bureau has become, in terms of their important mission to serve this great country and its vital national interests, notwithstanding the events of September 11, 2001.

Moreover, as has already been noted, it now appears that the Bureau could well have prevented the events of September 11th, had there been cooperation and a sense of urgency about clear signals that cataclysmic events were about to occur within our borders, months and perhaps even years, before the attack, notwithstanding a recent report by the Justice Department’s Inspector General, Glenn Fine, that there was no intent to allow the events of 911 to occur. I doubt that this conclusion brought any comfort to grieving family members, who had lost loved ones who perished in the attacks. The cash award example noted above, given to the same official who prevented the search of the suspect‘s computer, only serves to further damage the reputation and credibility of the Bureau.

The one exception I note in this work, a case which could have actually affected our national security, an apparent result of a clear-cut case of gross dereliction of duty on the part of the FBI, was irrefutable evidence of a Chinese American couple engaged in espionage on behalf of China, which I uncovered in the early 1980s, while I was working on behalf of my government and warnings that I made and documented which went unheeded by my superiors but nevertheless came true and in dramatic fashion, most notably with the latest counterintelligence scandal, involving Katrina Leung.

Despite the compelling evidence, as this case progressed, in hindsight, it is quite possible that this entire operation was a false flag, parlance for an undercover or sting operation, in the counterintelligence field, operation on the part of the Bureau against me, and my father, to justify the Bureau’s initial conclusions, about my family. However, I have my doubts that the Bureau