Replies

Evidently you don't know who Penkovsky and Polyakov were. They were executed.

I know who they are. I am talking about the other defectors...who turned out to be plants and disinformants. Golitsyn is not a plant. As far as coincidence...that was not compelling at all. Goltsyn's message is corroborated. Over and over and over and over again. 94% of his predictions panned out.

Show me ONE thing Golytsin was accurate on. ONE. There are none.

You want proof of ONE THING? There are hundreds of things that were corroborated. Little things. And Big Things. Like massive infiltration of the CIA...which he corroborated by repeating almost word for word classified CIA documents he had memorized...that he could not have possibly had any other way than from an extremely highly placed mole. And Philby would not have had access to.

One of the simplest things to be aware of is that there are massive secret cells and communist structures lurking. It is indeed reasonable to suppose that the massive "Russian Mafia" was no such thing. Its our old 'friends.' One of the predictions, that they would make a show of disarmament...was confirmed. The Mobile SS-23's found in violation of treaty found secreted long after the Fall of Communiism...still ready for use and waiting in deep bunker hiding and neither declared nor destroyed. How many more lurk? How much else remains successfully hidden and tucked out of sight and CIA awareness?

Or is it your position that the former Warsaw PAct countries, including those now in NATO, are plotting against us?

The only one I would be confident in right now is Poland. They did a more thorough house-cleaning than the FSB expected. And note the very real enmity Putin has for Poland.

Is it your position that the Russian military isn't suffering from low morale, rusting equipment, and a conscript force that is killing each other?

So how does that undercut the existence of an ulterior plan and objective? And note the sudden re-emphasis by Russia on military expenditures, drastically increasing funding...when no one threatens them. Your imputation of paranoia is simply nuts. If we wanted to have taken them on, that would have been long ago...before we dismantled 75% of our nuclear deterrent, and 65% of our tactical. This ALONE debunks you...and every single other Golitsyn "debunker." Wm F. Buckley has proven to be a piker, and his smugness will result in blood on his hands. He has been drinking too much of the wine in his cellar. As W continues the pell-mell strategic and tactical disarmament we are in mortal peril.

I will always remain skeptical, but particularly skeptical of the Golitsyn debunkers such as Martin. Face it, you have fallen for the grand deception. You're dupes. The sudden obviously forced departure of Yeltsin proves it. The Apartment Terrorism that put Putin into power proves it. His program of stomping out the flowers of free speech and thinking proves it. The FSB proves it. The Shanghai Cooperation Pact proves it. The continued stonewalling on allowing any inspection of the vast underground site built into the Ural Mountains, known as Yamantau...proves it.

I believe JR Nyquist is closer to the mark than the debunkers. And the former Czech general named Jan Sejna's corroboration of the same plan, in his 1982 book, We Will Bury You, is noted by him here:

The Wilderness of Mirrors Revisited: How I got here J.R. Nyquist 08.15.01

Twenty years ago I was browsing in a book store for something different to read. As chance would have it, I happened upon David C. Martin's "Wilderness of Mirrors." It was about James J. Angleton, head of CIA counterintelligence and a KGB defector named Golitsyn.

Here was something worth knowing about. The subject touched on the essentials of spycraft, global strategy and leadership. The title was intriguing. So I bought the book and read it cover to cover. It was easier to follow than I thought, given the intricate subject matter. Obviously, Martin was deeply skeptical of Angleton and his favorite KGB defector, Major Anatoliy Golitsyn. Golitsyn had defected to the West in December 1961 bringing dark news of high level Soviet agents (i.e., "moles") inside NATO and the CIA.

Golitsyn had worked in Soviet counterintelligence. It was obvious that he had memorized many top secret NATO documents. How could he have seen these documents? Simply put, the West was thoroughly penetrated by communist bloc agents. That was the obvious answer, but a politically unacceptable one.

To make matters worse, it seems that Golitsyn did not show proper respect for the CIA's sophomoric methods. This did not win friends and influence people. The first public personification of Golitsyn offered to Americans adds color to this picture. Alfred Hitchcock's movie, entitled "Topaz," was based on Golitsyn's defection. Golitsyn is quite negatively portrayed in Hitchcock's movie as contemptuous and arrogant.

As I read Martin's book I did not think so much of Angleton's misjudgments and missteps, or Golitsyn's contagious paranoia. These epiphenomena are no doubt produced by longstanding emersion in intelligence work. I had no reason to distrust Martin's points about too much suspicion in the wrong place. What bothered me was the dismissive attitude toward Golitsyn.

Imagine a police detective without feelings of suspicion. How could he do his job? The same applies to counterintelligence officers. Certainly, some allowances must be made, and some attempt is long overdue to come to grips with the reality of Russian/communist penetration of American institutions. Martin seemingly had little sympathy in regarding those concerned with a real threat. I was intrigued that in his view, the danger came from the CIA, from men like Angleton. Okay, yes, there is some truth here. But one must go further, I thought.

As an example of the way Martin treated Angleton, consider the following passage: "Whether or not the KGB ever succeeded in penetrating the CIA, it had at the very least infiltrated Angleton's mind. Hadn't two of his chief mentors been Kim Philby and Anatoli Golitsyn?"

Kim Philby had defected from the West to East, Golitsyn had defected from East to West. It was somewhat clever of Martin to bring these contrary elements together. But it wasn't altogether honest.

Such was the tenor of Martin's writings about Angleton and Golitsyn. Martin took a negative view of Angleton for believing -- rather than suspecting -- there was a mole high up in the CIA. Martin said that Angleton "had taken suspicion and turned it into reality."

Surely there was more to the story than this. I did not trust Martin's judgments because of the heavy handed anti-Angleton rhetoric. As a general rule I prefer to read the words of people involved directly in historical matters. Never dismiss someone entirely without giving them a full hearing. And never dismiss somebody because they are flawed or imperfect. That would leave us all in the position of dismissing everyone.

Three years after I read Martin's book I stumbled upon Anatoliy Golitsyn's book, "New Lies for Old." Finally, I could read the other side of the story and form my own opinion.

Golitsyn's book is actually about strategy, psychological warfare and how to organize the implements of deception (of higher, intellectual warfare). Various tricks are discussed in the book. One trick is that of pretending to be at odds with those you are secretly allied with. Another trick is to reorganize your society and declare your own defeat in order to disarm an opponent. These tricks are thoroughly discussed by Golitsyn, who is blessed with analytical and strategical understanding.

After reading Golitsyn's portrayal of Soviet long range deception strategy I did not believe, even for a minute, that the Russians could successfully execute such elaborate strategies as Golitsyn described. As fascinating as the book was, as full of vital ideas, I did not think that any secret strategy could survive without exposure. Even if the West did not believe in a long range Soviet deception plan, once Soviet history began to move in the direction outlined by Golitsyn everyone would do a double-take, think back to Golitsyn's writings, and say to themselves: "Someone told us all about this years ago."

The fact that Golitsyn had predicted a fake Soviet collapse, the fall of the Berlin Wall, the communists giving up power in the Soviet Union, would make it clear to the Russian strategists that any such plan would be recognized and thwarted.

But three years after reading Golitsyn's book, in 1987, I was jolted into a new awareness. As a graduate student in political science I was reading through the defector literature. I was thinking of specializing in this area, and was working under a professor who later ran for president of a former Soviet republic. At this moment I happened upon a book, published in England in 1982, entitled "We Will Bury You." It was written by a Czech general named Jan Sejna, who had also worked closely with KGB General Dmitri Mironov, named by Golitsyn as one of the chief architects of Russia's long range deception plan. What made me sit bolt upright in my chair, was the fact that Sejna offered comfirmation of the existence of a long range communist bloc strategy.

According to Sejna the Russian strategists were thinking of dissolving the communist bloc alliance in order to lull the West into a false sense of security. On page 108 of Sejna's book he wrote: "To this end we envisaged that it might be necessary to dissolve the Warsaw Pact, in which event we had already prepared a web of bilateral defence arrangements, to be supervised by secret committees of comecon."

Having sat for a year in graduate seminars, listening to people who would soon work at the Rand Corporation presenting papers on the spread of communism, I suddenly realized that I'd been listening to a slew of young duffers. I'd heard so many judgments from scholars and "experts" that flew in the face of logic and reason I began to suspect human rationality itself. Had they not read this books? Had they not investigated this important point of corroboration between two defectors from differenent communist countries? If Golitsyn was right (and here he was confirmed by another defector in one part of his story), then there was a long range Soviet plan and, to the bargain, it was an article of faith -- pure and positive -- on the part of my academic brethren that no such plan could exist or did exist.

One must always be a little afraid of smug certainties.

It was this sudden merging of direct experience of our political science elite and defector testimony that jolted me out of my smug and very American frame of mind. I then became determined to read everything, consider every angle in order to test Golitsyn's overall thesis regarding a Soviet long range strategy to deceive and conquer the West. I had to know if there was something more out there to back this up.

That was more than two years before 94 percent of Golitsyn's 1984 predictions about the communist bloc came true.

Perhaps, with Angleton, I too am lost in the Wilderness of Mirrors. You may think so. You may even shake your head at me. Perhaps I am a crank, as many would say. One must always remain open-minded, since truth is difficult and we are poor observers and philosophers of it. That is my ultimate position. No mere mortal has a lock on truth

I will write more of this fascinating subject, and where it led me, in my next column.

and here

This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=24362

Thursday, September 6, 2001

The grand deception

Posted: September 6, 2001
1:00 a.m. Eastern

By J.R. Nyquist

Those who fear Russia are easily mocked. "The Russians Are Coming, the Russians Are Coming," is on video. Watch it and laugh. Concern about communist subversion is also mocked. All you have to do is remember what a bad egg Joseph McCarthy was, if you remember at all. To allay any lingering doubt or fear, go to Russia and take the KGB tour. See all the rusting submarines and missile boats you want. You can even see rusty signs in front of Russia's ABM radar at Sofrino.

If you subscribed to "National Review" when it was still under the influence of Whittaker Chambers and James Burnham, you may remember a completely different magazine than exists today. It's funny how vigilance and a sense of danger can be turned into smug self-satisfaction over time.

Twenty years ago, a Russian KGB defector named Anatoliy Golitsyn went to see William F. Buckley, the editor of "National Review." Golitsyn needed help on writing a book with the title "New Lies for Old." It was about Russia's strategy of faking the collapse of communism in Eastern Europe. As it happened, Buckley showed Golitsyn the door.

After the "patron saint of American conservatives" closed the door on the truth about communist strategy, few would have the courage to look back and say that Golitsyn was right. The changes in Eastern Europe have been deceptive, orchestrated and calculated from on high. The strategy has been to disarm the West and get communist bloc countries inside NATO – to subvert the alliance from within.

Consider the Czech Republic as an example. Having entered NATO, it is yet controlled by the old communists who are waiting for a signal from Moscow. That's all it will take for them to reverse the changes that have taken place since 1989. Yesterday, I received a letter from a politically active Czech citizen, Hana Catalanova. "I know how hard this is to make people see," she wrote. "You might think it is better over here ... no, it is not!"

The big lie of 1989, the grand deception, was cynically calculated to take advantage of modern apathy and ignorance: "... we are actually living our lives in such lies, and people don't care," wrote Catalanova. "What about the next generation, our kids?"

Hana worries about freedom and the truth. Explaining how the communists retained control after the Velvet Revolution of 1989, she noted, "The problem here is that too many people were involved and engaged in shady deals with the secret police and corruption ... betraying their friends, fellow workers, next door neighbors. And this is such a small country."

America has a different excuse for turning its back on freedom and the truth. As I once told a leading Russian military defector who asked about America's unpatriotic attitudes, "They're too busy shopping and having fun."

The Czechs have another problem. "In towns and villages everyone knows everyone," explained Catalanova, "They are hiding their past behind the silence. They stay deaf to everything that doesn't concern them, because if they speak up, somebody might tell who they were before. I can tell you, it is all very depressing."

Hana Catalanova has written an important essay on the imprisonment of Captain Vladimir Hucin, a Czech official who has uncovered the truth about secret communist structures controlling important public institutions. "The whole world must know that communism is not dead," wrote Catalanova. "It is very much alive and threatens to overthrow the world democracies."

People here in America look around and wonder why the environmentalists are so strong, why business is under assault and rural property rights are no longer secure. They wonder why so many are teaching Marxist propaganda in schools and universities. Some of us cannot understand why our political leaders keep insisting on further military cutbacks as they continue to do business with the gangsters in Beijing and Moscow.

The short answer is: We've been subverted, infiltrated, duped and manipulated by communists and leftists. We have been too busy shopping and having fun to notice their "long march" through our institutions. We have been too absorbed in our careers and personal satisfactions. And now our country has its own hidden (or not so hidden) communist structures. As Russia and China prepare new missiles against us, our own state system allows itself to be unthinkingly nudged toward self-dissolution.

The danger is real, despite all the ridicule that comes to mind about "communists under every bush." Have you talked to your daughter's social studies teacher? Have you any idea where all this political correctness ultimately comes from?

If I joined the present chorus writing about shark attacks, the response to my column would be huge. But since I write about the advance of communism, about evidence that our Cold War enemy has been playing a trick on us, I get hardly any response at all. Americans have lost their sense of self preservation, their sense of history.

Do you really think that an enemy of more than four decades simply ran up the white flag because he couldn't "pay the bills"?

Of course, that's what you want to believe to keep your peace of mind. But this peace of mind is for fools. Give it up and get with the facts and testimony. The superficial reports on Russia, Chechnya, Eastern Europe and the collapse of communism are laced with falsehood and distortion. Such reports do not convey a real understanding of events.

French journalist Anne Nivat's book on the Chechin war has recently been translated into English. It deserves to be widely read, though few will understand its importance. Nivat disguised herself as a Chechin refugee and watched events close up. Many of the Chechins she interviewed felt the war was a Kremlin puppet show. "I'm ashamed for Western Europe, where you live in a world of lies," an elderly Chechin told Navat. "We are all victims, manipulated by the politicians in Moscow."

The same could be said for America.

Nyquist's rants on this subject doing nothing to prove Golytsin's validity.

"I know who they are. I am talking about the other defectors...who turned out to be plants and disinformants. Golitsyn is not a plant. As far as coincidence...that was not compelling at all. Goltsyn's message is corroborated. Over and over and over and over again. 94% of his predictions panned out."

Name the plants and disinformants - Nosenko? Already proven by qualified intelligence professionals that he was bismirched wrongly by Golytsin and his treatment damaged our ability to use his information. While Nosenko did lie on some issues, his credibility in the long run was proven.

" Like massive infiltration of the CIA...which he corroborated by repeating almost word for word classified CIA documents he had memorized...that he could not have possibly had any other way than from an extremely highly placed mole. And Philby would not have had access to. "

Golytsin was given access to the personal files of CIA members by Angleton - that helped him immensely in his real mission and was a complete security violation by a man entrusted to ensure foreign agents didn't get ahold of such materials.

"So how does that undercut the existence of an ulterior plan and objective? And note the sudden re-emphasis by Russia on military expenditures, drastically increasing funding...when no one threatens them. Your imputation of paranoia is simply nuts. If we wanted to have taken them on, that would have been long ago...before we dismantled 75% of our nuclear deterrent, and 65% of our tactical. This ALONE debunks you...and every single other Golitsyn "debunker." Wm F. Buckley has proven to be a piker, and his smugness will result in blood on his hands. He has been drinking too much of the wine in his cellar. As W continues the pell-mell strategic and tactical disarmament we are in mortal peril."

Rubbish - evidence actually proves otherwise. How many of those "destruction of WMD" missions have you been on? Have you seen the state of the Russian military first hand? Have you visited a Russian military base? Have you spoken with Russian military members and seen how they live? Have you seen their equipment? Have you kept track of their failure rate in military operations? Etc., etc., etc.

"And the former Czech general named Jan Sejna's corroboration of the same plan, in his 1982 book, We Will Bury You, is noted by him here:"

I didn't think it would be too long before the Golytsinites trotted out another phoney! Jan Sejna is a fraud and was an opportunist:

"The Claims of MG Jan Sejna: Crafted Nonsense

Summary. In the early 1990s, during the tenure of the Senate Select Committee on POW-MIAs, a witness appeared who told a story about US POWs from the Korean and Vietnam Wars. Major General Jan Sejna, a defector who had fled from Czechoslovakia to the US in 1968, claimed that he knew of a program whereby US POWs from Korea and Vietnam were used in medical experiments in Korea, Russia, and Czechoslovakia. Sejna's story was made more believable by the fact that he had served for years as a consultant to the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), a position he still held when he made his claims. His revelations are a major element of the MIA "activists' " gospel.

Sejna's story is a fabrication. Carefully crafted, skillfully presented, but a fabrication nonetheless. The Sejna saga started just after his defection when he was asked by the CIA if he had any knowledge of American POWs. His response was that he knew nothing about US POWs. He was asked the same question in different forms at different times, each time with the same response.

As with most other things related to the MIA issue, Sejna's story is not simple. I will compress it to a few facts and considerations here.

Sejna's Story
I will not relate all of Sejna's story here. If you wish to search for it, it can be found at various home pages and websites run by MIA "activists" and "activist organizations." Simply stated, Sejna claimed that he observed US POWs from Vietnam as they were moved through safe houses and other locations controlled by Czech intelligence on their way to the Soviet Union where they were the subject of medical experiments. He also claimed that he knew of similar activities carried out with US POWs from Korea.

To support his story, he provided details intended to add credibility. He named Czech and Soviet intelligence officers who were involved in this business. He described safe houses and other locations where US POWs were kept or passed through.

More to the Story
There are a couple of more things you need to know about Sejna. First, he was employed by the Defense Intelligence Agency as a consultant before and during the time he was telling this tale. Second, Sejna had a long and close association with an individual in the Washington, DC, area, Mr. Joseph Douglass. Douglass is a writer who produced a book entitled Red Cocaine that purports to lay bare the facts of a vast worldwide narcotics trafficking network that was controlled by the Soviets. Would you believe that Sejna was Douglass' main source for Red Cocaine?

Sejna and DIA
When Sejna defected in 1968, he was debriefed by the CIA. Afterwards, he needed some form of livelihood. As a Czech general officer, and at his age, there was not much for him to do. So, as happened with a lot of folks like Sejna, he was signed up as a "consultant" to one of the US intelligence agencies. Because of his experience in the Czech military and because of his connections with Czech leaders, his insights were important to US analysis of Czechoslovakian, Warsaw Pact, and Soviet affairs.

Sejna and Douglass
I do not know Mr. Douglass and have never read his book, Red Cocaine. All I know of him and of the book is what I have heard from a couple of people close to the case. Red Cocaine describes a network that moves cocaine and other drugs around the world into the US and the other western democracies. The book claims that this network is run by the Soviets and it is part of their grand scheme to lay low the United States. The main source for the book is Sejna.

One would expect that such revelations would have caused a huge stir in Washington and lead to major disruptions in US - USSR relations. Nothing of the sort happened because analysis determined that the book was flawed and that most of its claims could not be substantiated.

Douglass was also a promoter of Sejna's story about US POWs. Sejna did not testify publicly before the SSC; he provided a deposition. Later, Sejna testified publicly in hearings held by Congressman Robert Dornan.

Enough. Let's Examine the Story
"No. No, I have not heard anyone talking about it."
After Sejna fled Czechoslovakia in 1968 ( just before the Soviet invasion to put an end to the Prague Spring democracy movement ), he was debriefed extensively by US intelligence. This exchange is quoted from Sejna's March 23, 1968 debriefing:

Debriefer: Have you heard about our prisoners who are there in Vietnam? How many are there and where are they?
Sejna: No. No, I have not heard anyone talking about it. (Ja jsem neslysel nikoho o tom hovorit.)

(( Page 2, declassified US government memorandum, Subject: Jan Sejna, November 4, 1992, Records of the Senate Select Committee on POW/MIA Affairs, RG46/Zwenig/No. 4, declassified 13/12/92. ))

So, in the midst of the Vietnam War, immediately after he defected, when his knowledge of activities inside the Soviet empire would be fresh, Sejna stated unequivocally that he knew nothing about US POWs.

Sejna's Storytelling Method
I have read the version of Sejna's story that is posted on the WWW and it is a coherent, believable story. However, when he was telling the story, it was an entirely different matter.

First, of course, is Sejna's statement in his 1968 debriefing in which he denied any knowledge of US POWs. Then, when he started telling his story, an pattern developed. I was present at only one of Sejna's debriefings but I have had extensive conversations with the analysts who debriefed him and who worked to analyze and investigate his claims.

Sejna's story grew by stages. When he first told his story, it was simple with a lot of holes and blank spaces. Initially, he had only heard some rumors of US POWs from Korea and medical experiments. When analysts told him that there were some parts of his story that did not check out, he filled in the holes and each time the story became more and more complete.

Sejna would be debriefed; in his debriefing he would describe all sorts of events, people, and places. US analysts would check out the story in various ways. We would compare what he told us to facts that we had verified previously. We would have US personnel in Czechoslovakia check out locations he had described. In doing this, we would find big holes and errors in the story. Debriefers would confront Sejna with these errors in his story and he would tell another story, correcting the errors or explaining them away.

Through this process of Sejna telling the story, US intelligence checking it out and challenging him, Sejna refining his story, his claims developed to their finished form. He went from his 1968 denials, to a simple story about having heard rumors, to detailed knowledge of activities, people, and places. In every subsequent debriefing, his story became more and more complete as he refined it to correct the flaws on which he had been challenged.

Thus, the story that Sejna finally told, the one that he related to the Dornan hearings and the one that is on the "activist" network, is a carefully crafted fabrication that Sejna perfected after several months of practice.

Why Would Sejna Lie?
Simple. To keep his job. Consider the following.

Sejna was not, as is claimed by the "activists," a Czech intelligence officer. Instead, he was a political officer -- a Communist Party hack -- attached to the Czech General Staff. During his 1968 debriefing, he stated that he knew nothing about intelligence matters. (( Page 1, memorandum cited above. )) His specialty was Communist party affairs. (( No one has ever proved it, but this position probably gave him prior warning that the Soviets were preparing to invade Czechoslovakia in 1968 -- just enough warning for him to get out. ))

Sejna was hired by DIA as a consultant because his position wold have given him insights into how things worked within Czechoslovakia, the Warsaw Pact, and the Soviet Union. He would have had some value in providing assistance to analysts who were wrestling with such matters.

However, consider what happened over time. As time passed, Sejna's insider information -- which ended in 1968 -- would have become more and more dated. The people whom he knew, the organizations he understood, all would have changed. Thus, after several years, he is not of much value. What is an old Commie to do for a living?

I am just cynical enough to figure that what he does is create something that makes him valuable. Could this explain Red Cocaine? What better way to make yourself important to the US government -- again -- than by spilling the beans on the Evil Empire's drug trafficking?

Then comes the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the Warsaw Pact, and the whole Soviet Empire. The Communist government in Czechoslovakia is replaced by a fairly democratic anti-Communist government and Sejna's information is worthless.

Now, he really has a problem. No sweat. Just become an expert on US POWs and he's back on the payroll. (( Actually, he was always on the payroll. DIA kept him on because, well, they did not want to throw the old guy out. ))

We should not overlook the fact that Sejna maintains a close association with a "writer" -- who looks a lot like many others who are trying to be the next Woodward or Bernstein. (( Is this cynicism or what? ))

One of Sejna's Stories
I will not go into chapter and verse of Sejna's stories here but there is one tale that I would like to share with you. In telling of how US POWs from Vietnam were moved into and through Czechoslovakia, Sejna described a Czech intelligence safe house in Prague where US POWs would reside temporarily. He described the place in some detail -- the address, the exterior, even the paneling on the walls inside.

The US has an embassy in Prague. In each embassy there is a US Defense Attaché Office that is filled with military intelligence folks and there are rumors that each embassy has a CIA station. Probably just rumors.

Personnel in the attaché office live in rented homes, on the local economy. Because the defense attaché office is a legal intelligence operation, there are certain counterintelligence actions that are taken to protect attaché personnel. One thing that the counterintell folks do is keep track of what is going on in buildings that surround official residences. Simply put, we want to make certain that no one is using a building across the street from the attaché's home as an eavesdropping center.

The safe house that Sejna described -- the one that he claimed was a transit point for US POWs being hauled through Prague -- is located right next door to the US Defense Attaché's official residence. As such, that building would have been under considerable scrutiny by US counterintelligence and there simply is no way that US POWs would have transited that building unobserved.

This is one of the most egregious of the many major flaws in Sejna's story. It is not the only one -- his tales are replete with similar foolishness.

A Few More Questions
Why Wait So Long?
Sejna departed Czechoslovakia in 1968 and came directly to the US. If he really did have information about US POWs from Vietnam or Korea, why did he not say so during his initial debriefings? After all, this was the height of the Vietnam War -- it was in all the newspapers -- and he would have to have known that the US government was interested in all aspects of the war. He was asked specifically if he knew anything about US POWs from Vietnam. He denied any knowledge.

Sejna was a consultant to DIA in 1973 when the war ended and the US POWs came home. This was a major social event and he could not have missed it. Why did he not say something then? He was in DIA, he could have brought up the topic with his co-workers. He said nothing.

Jan Sejna had several opportunities to reveal his knowledge -- if he had any. He took none of those opportunities. He waited until his career was at an end, when he had no value of any kind to US intelligence. Then he brought up what he hoped would be his meal ticket.

What About the Czechs?
Let's not forget some other important actors in this affair -- the past and current Czech governments. Remember, in the collapse of the Evil Empire, the Communist governments of Eastern Europe were replaced with governments that may not have been Jeffersonian democrats but they sure as hell were anti-Communist. The West was, and in some cases still is, treated to all sorts of revelations about the evils done by the bad guys who were in charge. US TV was filled with special tours of formerly secret places, presented by the new governments to show just how crooked and evil the Commies were.

If the Czech communist government had been involved in medical experiments on US POWs, just how valuable would that information be to the new government? Revealing this fact, and cooperating with the US would solidify our friendship. The new Czech government could help identify the US POWs who were involved, thereby ending the uncertainty of their families. Be revealing this dastardly program, the new Czech government had everything to gain and nothing to lose. In fact, the new and current Czech government cooperated with US MIA investigators.

Yet, in spite of continuing US - Czech investigations into the matter, there is nothing there. Why not? Because there is nothing there.

Defectors
Let us now turn our attention to the subject of defectors.

I assume that most readers recall the years of the Cold War. We were the Good Guys and the Soviet Union, with its East European "satellites" was the Evil Empire. It had almost religious overtones. Everything about Them was evil. Everything about Us was good.

When an official from Their side saw the light and defected to Our side, it was as though the individual had come to Jesus. The popular media welcomed defectors as saved souls who threw off the chains that bound them to the Great Evil and came to the altar of democracy.

Fortunately US intelligence has a different view of defectors. Don't ever forget that this person whom we call a defector is, to the country from which he fled, a traitor. How do we feel about Americans, Brits, and others from the Western democracies who defected to the Evil Empire? You get the picture.

The fact is that a defector, no matter which direction he or she fled, has proven, by the simple act of defecting, that he/she is capable of great treachery. During the Cold War the defector frequently was a senior official from one of the Communist states. Here you have a person who benefited from the best his system had to offer -- as a party member, he could shop in special stores and shops, could travel, his children went to better schools, and he had access to apartments and hospitals that the common folks did not have. Yet, for some reason, this person turned his back on the system that nurtured him, and he betrayed that system. Now, because he came in our direction, we figure he is a good guy. But, we should not lose sight of the fact that this guy has proven what he is capable of and it ain't pretty.

Now, folks, you may be put off by what I have just said but remember one thing. In the intelligence business, we are dealing with serious matters. A defector may give us information that goes directly to the senior decision makers and that information may be used in making vital decisions. There is no room for error at this level so you had best keep your bullsh*t filter finely tuned.

Sejna was a defector. He fled Prague, leaving behind his friends and associates, just before Soviet tanks rumbled into town. As a Communist political officer, he may have known what was coming. He had proven what he was capable of doing. I believe, that in telling his POW story, he did it again -- he ran to save himself.

Conclusion
At this point, I do not need to wind your watch for you. I really believe most folks can figure it out. General Jan Sejna's tale about US POWs from Korea and Vietnam being taken to the Soviet Union, or to anywhere else for that matter, is a fabrication. Sejna revealed everything he knew about US POWs in his 1968 debriefing: nothing. "

That's what so frustrating to me - seeing Americans falling for the lies told by opportunists, plants, and phonies. On one hand you trot out the Russians (KGB) and their allies aren't to be trusted then you put all your faith in people who have no sense of loyalty, were personally involved in corruption, had motives to lie, and betrayed their country of birth. Such people will do anything for their own personal gain. End of story. Golytsin, unlike Penkovsky and Polyakov, refused to consider working as a double agent for us. He insisted he needed to defect immediately. That is the trait of a man with questionable motives and smacks of KGB infiltration.

I know I'll never be able to convince people like you of the peril of believing people like Golytsin, Sejnov, Litvienko, etc. But, know this, you have put your faith in people who only care about one thing - their own personal gratification and enrichment. Full Stop.