Los Alamos Whistleblower Severely Beaten (Updated)

According to several news reports, auditor Tommy Hook was violently attacked by three or four anonymous assailants, who allegedly ordered him to keep quiet.

Hook was scheduled to testify before Congress later this month, but is now in the hospital.

On Saturday night, Hook went to a Santa Fe bar, ostensibly to meet a person claiming to be a fellow Los Alamos whistleblower, who called that night.

In the parking lot, he was yanked out of his car and beaten so badly by three or four men that he had to be taken to intensive care at a local emergency room.

Reportedly, Hook did not provoke these men. The men concentrated on kicking his head, and Hook's family feels that the men would have killed him if a club employee hadn't run from the club and stopped the beating.

Congressional staff members were set to arrive Tuesday in Los Alamos to investigate Hook's allegations of malfeasance at the lab.

Hook and another whistleblower sued the University of California, which manages Los Alamos, in March, alleging that after they uncovered management failures, university and lab managers tried to make their jobs miserable so they would quit.

Tommy Hook remains hospitalized with severe trauma to his face and head, including a fractured jaw, and a herniated disk.

The FBI has been called in to investigate the attack, and Hook is currently under close protective custody.

Last March, Danielle Brian, executive director of the Project On Government Oversight (POGO), testified before the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations regarding a review of security initiatives at DOE nuclear weapons facilities.

"I would be remiss if I did not report to the Committee that, while not a part of former Secretary Abraham's initiatives, the treatment of whistleblowers throughout the complex remains abysmal. Retaliation remains the norm, not the exception, as can be seen in the case of Tommy Hook and Chuck Montano, who have both worked at Los Alamos for decades.

"After the Committee's three hearings on financial fraud at Los Alamos, the University of California was telling the public that all was resolved, while at the same time retaliating against these two men who knew otherwise. Hook and Montano were responsible for providing audit support for UC and uncovered ongoing irregularities and outright misconduct amounting to millions of taxpayer dollars.

"Their audit reports were withheld from DOE. Their treatment? Their work was taken away from them, they were given no work for nine months, and now they are only being handed menial assignments. Even the head of the Los Alamos Site Office tried to intervene on Tommy Hook's behalf, only to be rebuffed by an arrogant University of California."

According to a report in GovExec.com, Susan Hook, the victim's wife, Bob Rothstein, his attorney, and Montano confirmed that Hook was at the club to meet with another employee who claimed to have information that would support charges of wrongdoing.

Susan Hook and Montano further alleged that the assault was absolutely connected to Tommy Hook's impending testimony:

"When they were beating him up, they were telling him ... 'If you know what is good for you, you will keep your mouth shut,'" said Susan Hook.

Rothstein recalled that a person claiming to be an auditor from Los Alamos had contacted Hook a week before and had offered to share information about financial issues at the laboratory.

Rothstein said that one meeting had already fallen through, but the second was arranged for Saturday night at the strip club.

The nightclub's doorman ran into the parking lot and broke up the attack, according to a club employee who witnessed the beating. The employee said Hook was assaulted by a group of men.

Called to the scene, FBI Special Agent Bill Elwell confirmed that federal agents are investigating with Santa Fe police officers.

He said they are "still trying to figure out" what happened at the nightclub. "We are looking into the allegations made by Mr. Hook," Elwell said.

"The University of California and the laboratory are outraged that a laboratory employee was the victim of a weekend assault in Santa Fe. Director [Robert] Kuckuck was made aware of the attack this morning and expressed his hope that the individual will make a quick recovery."

"Director Kuckuck, the University of California and the laboratory believe that any form of physical violence toward an individual is unacceptable. The laboratory is in contact with the Santa Fe Police Department and is providing the laboratory's full support and cooperation with the ongoing investigation."

Susan Hooks said that neither her husband's wallet, cell phone nor car were taken.

If you noticed, I pinged ntrulock. Mr. Trulock was, and still seems, to be a registered FReeper.

Here's a little background info on this brave and illustrious man....

Notra Trulock is the Associate Editor of the Accuracy in Media Report, the Director of Media Relations at Free Congress Foundation, the former Director of the Office of Intelligence for the U.S. Department of Energy and Chief of Counter Intelligence from 1994 to 1998.

Trulock came to public notice in 1999 in a NY Times article headlined: "Breach at Los Alamos: A Special Report; China Stole Nuclear Secrets For Bombs, U.S. Aides Say." The article mentioned a "Chinese American" working at the lab. Two days later, the Taiwan-born Lee, a U.S. citizen, was fired. The source of this claim, according to the Times, was Trulock, who was the key witness before a secret congressional committee headed by Rep. Christopher Cox (R-Newport Beach). Trulock was instrumental in alerting Congress to potential espionage at the nuclear labs.

He is the author of Code Name KINDRED SPIRIT: Inside the Chinese Nuclear Espionage Scandal.

I'm not sure he is still with AIM...can't find him listed.

The Ongoing National Labs Scandal

Notra Trulock

Friday, Feb. 6, 2004

Last November, Vanity Fair magazine ran an expose on security vulnerabilities at Los Alamos National Laboratory and other Energy Department facilities around the nation. Based on disclosures by Energy whistleblowers, the article charged that mock “terrorists” have repeatedly defeated security forces during exercises of the lab’s security system. The whistleblowers said that the “terrorists” penetrated lab security and then got away undetected.

The worry is that real terrorists could steal substantial amounts of the plutonium or highly enriched uranium stored at these facilities. If true, this would be more than enough for an improvised nuclear device that Homeland Security officials say is their worst nightmare.

Energy Department officials categorically rejected these allegations, but a 1999 government report found that security problems are endemic at the labs – and long-standing. In particular, the report raised concerns about the security of significant amounts of fissile materials held in facilities “never intended for use as storage.” These concerns linger despite the expenditure of literally hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on guards, gates and guns over the years.

Security forces at a nuclear plant in Oak Ridge, Tenn., however, have found a way to avoid all the bad publicity arising from such failures. They cheated.

An internal Energy Department report recently revealed that members of the guard force got advance looks at the test questions for upcoming exercises. The guard force knew in advance which buildings “mock terrorists” would be attacking, down to the exact wall they would try to penetrate. Guards were also told whether the attackers would employ “diversionary tactics” in advance of the exercise assault.

That knowledge enabled the guard force to prepare for the mock assault; security managers ensured that the best-trained personnel were on-hand to repel the mock terrorists, and other countermeasures were put in place to ensure success. They also disabled electronic devices on their weapons so their “deaths” at the hands of the terrorists would not be registered.

The internal report concluded that the results of these tests of the plant’s security force were tainted and unreliable.

Wackenhut, the security contractor, denied the allegations and claimed “security today is much better than it has been.” But inspectors were told that this cheating has been going on at Oak Ridge since at least the mid-1980s. The whistleblowers in the Vanity Fair article also alleged that guard forces at Los Alamos and elsewhere were often warned in advance of upcoming exercise events.

So, why did they cheat? That’s easy – money. Last September, Wackenhut received over $3 million in fees as a reward for its “outstanding” performance on security. That gave the inspectors heartburn, and they recommended that the department pay close attention to their findings when it next evaluates Wackenhut’s performance.

But this is the second time in recent months that the department’s federal oversight appears to have broken down. The last such incident involved security vulnerabilities resulting from the loss or theft of master keys and key cards at Livermore National Lab in California.

Moreover, none of this was supposed to happen on the Bush administration’s watch. In response to the public outcry over China’s theft of nuclear secrets and the mysterious loss of classified computer hard drives, congressional Republicans pushed through a restructuring of the Energy Department late in the Clinton years.

They created a new, semi-autonomous agency within the department that is specifically tasked to ensure the security and safety of the nation’s nuclear weapons laboratories. They were also harshly critical of the Clinton-appointed leadership of the department and vowed that, given the opportunity, they would ensure that future secretaries would have solid national security and intelligence credentials.

But the new administration failed to clean out the Clinton holdovers; former security officials reported that the “same old faces” occupy the new agency’s top security positions.

And it is increasingly evident that lab security has fared no better under the new agency than before. If the labs’ past history is any guide, lost master keys, missing computer disks and lost or stolen computers containing classified data, “fudged” security tests, and misappropriated taxpayer funds are only the tip of the security iceberg.

And, as before, the new agency crushes anyone who dares voice concerns about security failures. After 9/11, everything was supposed to have changed, but the labs and their federal masters in Washington apparently didn’t get the message.

THIS is some scary stuff, considering the WOT.

More on Lost Keys at Security Labs

Notra Trulock

Monday, Jan. 19,2004

Another day, another report of a security scandal from inside the nation's nuclear weapons laboratories. On Jan. 1, CBS Evening News reported that hundreds of keys were missing at several Energy Department nuclear facilities around the nation. CBS correspondent Sharyl Attkisson told viewers that some of the keys controlled access to laboratory buildings that contain classified or sensitive materials and information.

Her report was triggered by revelations that 200 keys have turned up missing at the Y-12 nuclear plant in Oak Ridge, Tenn. Y-12 was set up during World War II to produce highly enriched uranium (HEU) for nuclear warheads. Today, Y-12 refurbishes nuclear warheads and serves as a major storage facility for HEU.

Attkisson said that some of the missing keys controlled access to sensitive areas at the plant. Energy Department spokesmen tried to stonewall her and sent security guards out to harass her when she did a standup in front of the headquarters building in Washington, D.C.

Plant spokesmen dismissed concerns about the vulnerability of sensitive information and materials. One told the media that most of the keys were to “administrative, non-sensitive functions.” He did admit that a “relatively small number of keys” were for what the plant considers “medium security” buildings. But all of these facilities have already been rekeyed, according the spokesman. Another shrugged off the lost keys and pointed to reports about similar problems at other labs in California and New Mexico.

Attkisson said these references were to reports earlier this year about the loss of keys at Livermore National Lab in California and Sandia National Lab in New Mexico. At Sandia, she reported, a set of master keys had gone missing for more than a week. The potential security breach went unreported and no one bothered to change the locks.

She also reported on a more serious security problem at Livermore. In early November, an internal Energy Department report found that more than 100,000 locks will have to be changed at the California lab as a result of lost master keys and master-key cards. The estimated cost to taxpayers will be $1.7 million.

The internal report warned that some of the missing keys opened locks leading to “some of the most sensitive areas of the lab.” Moreover, in some cases, the lab had experienced a “double failure.” That means that the two primary types of security locks protecting the same area are compromised at the same time. But Livermore responded that there was no evidence that classified materials had been jeopardized.

The report also criticizes the lab for failing to report the losses in a timely fashion and also for failing to recognize the potential security vulnerability. After Attkisson’s CBS News report, the Energy Department announced that it was set to launch a “lock and key inventory” at all the nation’s nuclear labs.

That was the second time Attkisson's reporting prodded the department to review security at its labs. Last year, her stories about fraud and mismanagement at Los Alamos led to firings and reassignments of top lab managers. I don't know if this made FReeper headlines. At the time of this article/report, we were 'homeless' after someone burned our house down. So, I lost a LOT of FR news/etc.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.