"The Visual Watergate Book" (C) Copyright Carl Glassberg 2011-2017 All Rights Reserved-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
With reference to one of the mysteries alluded to by John W. Dean, on his blog at FindLaw, we will attempt an answer to: What did Mark Felt mean by "offensive security?" According to Woodward and Bernstein's Washington Post article of 10-10-1972, "FBI Finds Nixon Aides Sabotaged Democrats," the phrase "offensive security" meant "political spying and sabotage." The phrase "offensive security" is a compression, possibly made in error, of the 2 phrases "offensive intelligence" and "defensive security", found in John Caulfield's Operation Sandwedge memo. The words dropped, one from each of the 2 phrases, are "intelligence" and "defensive" respectively: Sandwedge memo: "offensive intelligence" >>>>> a) penetration \ b) black bag \ c) surveillance \ d) derogatory information >>>>>>> "offensive security" ? e) other / / "defensive security" >>>>>>>>>> ... See "Appendix To: Why The Revelation of the Identity Of Deep Throat Has Only Created Another Mystery" By JOHN W. DEAN Friday, June 3, 2005 http://supreme.findlaw.com/legal-commentary/appendix-to-why-the-revelation-of-the-identity-of-deep-throat-as-only-created-another-mystery.html ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sandwedge's "offensive intelligence" = "campaign intelligence" ? John J. ("Jack") Caulfield, before the Senate Watergate Committee [SWC Hearings, page 9728], was asked to define "offensive intelligence" used in his Operation Sandwedge memo: ["offensive intelligence" is] "Information which would be of value during the course of the political campaign." We can conclude that "campaign intelligence" = "offensive intelligence" ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- SANDWEDGE v. GEMSTONE III comparison ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sandwedge GEMSTONE III: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "offensive intelligence" "campaign intelligence" 1. "political intelligence" 2. "demonstration intelligence" 3. "covert activities" [Dean: SWC, Blind Ambition, inferred] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ["demonstration intelligence" Diamond: "demonstration intelligence" is not an explicit capability (paid [private?] informants to in the Sandwedge memo.] infiltrate anti-war groups) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- a) penetration (infiltration) Ruby (including Sedan Chair) ["political intelligence" component] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- b) black-bag Opal: surreptitious entry for 1. Topaz: documents (photography) (electronic surveillance:) 2. Crystal: wiretapping/bugging [NOTE: electronic surveillance was "implicit" in "Opal" break-ins, see WH taped conversation Nr. ...transcript, Nixon/Haldeman?] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- c) surveillance: (physical surveillance:) "Democratic primaries, convention, Segretti spies ?; meetings, etc." Rietz "kiddy corps" ?; Baldwin/McCord ?; Caulfield/Ulasewicz ? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- d) derogatory information: 1.) implied by the other categories; "...investigative capability, world-wide." 2.) possible access to information from "sensitive government files" [See below.] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- e) other: "Any other offensive Sapphire: prostitutes [no boat] requirement deemed advisable." ["political intelligence" component] Garnet: counter-demonstrations and disruptions (hippies); Segretti: dirty-tricks ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTES: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Paid informants for Operation Diamond Liddy was given 100,000 USD to "organize a spy network, including recruitment of college-aged informers, to monitor anti-war plans for the [Republican] convention." [See Magruder/Liddy trial, January 1973?] See "Law Agencies Discount McCord's Convention Fears" Paul W. Valentine "The Washington Post", May 24, 1973, p. A14 That article did not know if the network became operational. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- c) Surveillance of Democratic convention, Miami Before a federal grand jury, Howard Hunt testified that he and Liddy went to Miami in December 1971 "to set up a vast spy mission against the Democrats." This was how Anderson characterized Hunt's testimony. According to Anderson, their objective was political intelligence with "nearly total knowledge of the opposition," including spying on those with links to radicals. They even wanted to know "where all the Democratic candidates were at all times." See "Watergate Called Part of Vast Plan" Jack Anderson "The Washington Post", Apr 18, 1973, page D1 It is not known if this network became operational. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Was there overlap between political and demonstration intelligence? Protester or demonstration information was often sought as a product of the "political intelligence" operations. Senator Lowell P. Weiker said, after interviewing Alfred C. Baldwin III, that Baldwin had been paid, by James W. McCord Jr., "... to conduct surveillance" "on persons that were going in and out of the offices" ... "of nine Republican and Democratic critics of the Nixon administration" ... "to determine if any antiwar demonstrators were visiting the offices." Baldwin said that "... he was conducting surveillance on Capitol Hill to check on demonstrators ... entering and leaving the offices of antiwar legislators." "The surveillance was directed at the demonstrators and not the congressmen." The Capitol Hill offices targeted were those of Senators Edward M. Kennedy, Edmund S. Muskie, Mike Gravel, Charles H. Percy, William Proxmire, Jacob K. Javits, and Represenatives Shirley Chisholm, Paul N. McCloskey Jr., and Edward I. Koch. See "Weicker Calls On Haldeman to Testify," Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward, "Washington Post", Apr 2, 1973, page A1 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sandwedge "offensive intelligence" component: d) "derogatory information" In Sandwedge, "derogatory information" can be seen as just another source of campaign intelligence, 1 of 5 capabilities, a) through e). But nowhere does "derogatory intelligence" appear explicitly in GEMSTONE as an independent capability. Rather, a) b) c) and e) are assumed to produce "derogatory information" as a goal. The production of "derogatory information" from a) b) c) and e) was far from certain. In many cases, useless information was obtained. If Caulfield saw "derogatory information" as a separate capability d), not just a product of a) b) c) and e), then we ask, what was that capability? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Derogatory information from files Other Caulfield testimony before the SWC suggests, perhaps, that category d) "derogatory information" included access to "sensitive government files." If not physical access to the file itself, then informal access to the information the file contained was possible. This informal access was through conversations with people in the know, some still employed in the government but apparently available to Caulfield, who might meet them casually at some social function. Other sources of derogatory information could be "undercover" informants. Information from informants, and sometimes their complete written report, would be added to a file. Often newspaper and magazine clippings formed part of the derogatory information gathering effort. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- How was "derogatory information" used? Derogatory information was ideal for political purposes, because the obtained information could be leaked to selected news reporters who could then publish the planted stories. ... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- GEMSTONE Approval
GEMSTONE I
GEMSTONE III information gathering
Sandwedge v. Gemstone I
Sandwedge v. Gemstone III
----------------------------------------------------------------------------- The above visuals, graphs, charts, figures, text, etc., that either depict the structure of Operation Sandwedge and GEMSTONE and other related Watergate-era events, or discuss various unresolved Watergate leads or mysteries, are inferred from G. Gordon Liddy's "Will," John W. Dean's "Blind Ambition," Hearings before the Senate Watergate Committee and other references cited herein. Quotations, if used, are from their respective texts, which are copyright their respective holders. I will be improving the citations as soon as possible by adding page numbers and full citations. The content of this website/on-line book is based on interpretation of events and language terms and phrases. I will try to correct any of my errors and omissions as soon as I learn of them, if it is reasonably possible to do so. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------(C) Copyright Carl Glassberg 2011-2014 All Rights Reserved
Short portions of text in the above site, as presented in quotes, are
borrowed from the respective works cited herein and are not claimed
by me. Any copyright to those short extracts belongs to the respective
copyright holder.
Carl Glassberg
Send Mail
Privacy policy: I do not collect personal information on any visitors to my site
----------------------------------------------------------------------
