The Big Picture: Japanese Civil Society, American Foreign Policy, The CIA, and me (Rights of American Citizens Overseas)

Broadly speaking, these are the issues that frame the context in which the particulars exist.

The following speech by the president affirms that he and I share similar views on civil society.

"The Most Important Title is 'Citizen'": President Obama on the Significance of a Civil Society.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2014/09/23/most-important-title-citizen-president-obama-importance-civil-society

 

 A search of “civil society” in my blog will return quite a few hits, and I first mentioned it in an email to CIA case officer Gary Schaefer. I made the following statement in a fax sent when initiating a complaint with the DOJ (posted on this blog at: http://kyoto-inside-out.blogspot.jp/2012/04/non-responsive-doj-new-influx-of-cia.html) 

Civil society is a sphere that is protected under the law from government intervention, and that is the fundamental concept underpinning civil rights, to my understanding. Japan is a democratic state under constitutional rule of law. The people in the intelligence networks that I’m calling to account are in violation of many of the laws of Japan, not to mention the laws of the United States with respect to harassing Americans residing abroad. 

It has become apparent that the types of covert action that can be authorized to be conducted in countries outside the USA include precisely the types of operations aimed at influencing the political processes and disseminating propaganda and disinformation to influence public opinion and perceptions that constitute part of my complaint. The point here is that the CIA attempts to use deception to convince people in other countries to act in a manner that serves the (perceived) interests of the USA as defined by a given administration. Disinformation and propaganda is aimed at portraying American policies in a misleading way to provide American “interests” (i.e., corporations, Wall St., etc.) an advantage operating overseas. I will examine the current issue of the Trans-Pacific Partnership and why the article written by Colin Jones pretty much assured to my mind that he is a CIA officer, not simply an American living abroad.

First, however, it needs to be pointed out that when there is a potential for such activities to adversely impact or actually come into active conflict with the lives and lawful work of Americans overseas, the authorization of covert action is always already problematic, and should probably not even be considered to begin with in many cases. And when someone reports abuses of the rights of Americans overseas, including their 4th, 5th, and 14^th Amendment rights, it is obvious that the covert operations need to be rethought and re-implemented in a manner that does not violate the rights of Americans residing in a given overseas area that has been targeted for covert operations.

TPP

Anyone that follows American politics to any extent will be aware of the recent protracted battle of farm subsidies in the USA with the enactment of the Farm Bill. The vested interests, including big agribusiness and the commodities markets, are so entrenched that, fight hard though he may, the president was not able to implement the badly needed reforms, but compromise is the name of the game. On the other hand, one thing sought by the anti-reform parties was a substantial reduction in the food stamps program at a time when more Americans than at any point in history rely on public assistance for food.

Farm subsidies in the USA have seriously compromised the economic viability of small-scale farming in places like the Mid-West. The coupling of farming to subsidies (i.e., being paid not to produce) has also had the collateral effect of demoralizing the American work ethic, much along the lines of the prescription o produce automobiles with “built-in obsolescence” demoralized American ingenuity in the automotive field.

The TPP basically seeks to open up Japanese markets to American big agribusiness, and threatens to bring about similar types of damage in Japan as has been wrought in the USA with the rise of big agribusiness. The UN has recently issued a report, in fact, pointing to the long-term problems associated with monoculture-focused big agribusiness.

UN REPORT: http://unctad.org/en/pages/PressRelease.aspx?OriginalVersionID=154

Commentary:

http://overgrowthesystem.com/un-report-says-small-scale-organic-farming-only-way-to-feed-the-world/

Other problems with the (secret negotiations of) the TPP include the attempt to proffer advantages to finance interests (i.e., “investors”) against the state itself. Here is a brief critique on Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership#Investor.E2.80.93state_arbitration

Mr. Colin Jones attempts to reverse the negative characterization of the American finance sector and apply it to the Japanese farmers lobby. One problem with that, of course, is that he doesn’t address the American agribusiness lobby or discuss the recent multi-year Farm Bill negotiations. And everyone knows that the American finance sector (along with their British cohorts) are the largest white collar crime organizations in the world, after the CIA itself, of course.

It bears mentioning that the first CIA officer sent against me—Sasha Peterka—was trying to persuade me to leave Kyoto for a job with Goldman Sachs in Tokyo. At that point in time, compared to several years earlier when I lived in Tokyo, the foreigner population had exploded with the finance bubble, before the eventual collapse of Lehman Brothers, where another CIA officer sent against me—Jamie Roughan—had worked before moving on to Mizuho Finance, etc.

Considering that Mr. Jones is basically trying to convince the English language reading public that Japanese agriculture lobby is evil and the American finance sector is good for the economy (“stupid”), while masking the dysfunctional situation in the USA with respect to farm subsidies, he can be characterized as nothing but a propagandist, meaning that he in all likelihood is an officer in the Central Intelligence Agency that is participating in a covert disinformation campaign. Even considering the "ugly American" syndrome, an expat would have to be utterly delusional to rail against the government of his host country and not that of his country of origin in a fair and balanced manner under the circumstances. I wonder what the Japanese students and faculty at Doshisha University thought of the unfairly biased column. 

Naturally, as a long-term American resident of Japan, I do not feel that the TPP is in the interest of my family and Japan. Fortunately, they have a pretty good Constitution in Japan, guaranteeing me the right to “freedom of speech”. One would imagine that CIA officers engaged in disinformation are not operating with tacit approval of the Japanese government under some secret intelligence agreement, but engaged in a covert disinformation operation.

Those of you that have been following this blog will recall that I've exposed at least one other writer for the Japan Times (staff writer Eric Johnston) as a CIA propagandist. Apparently, my exposing them doesn't have much of a chilling effect (though Mr. Johnston's columns are not objectionable as the one I analyzed and for which he was probably just a ghost writer/frontman), because they continually repopulate the same roles with different people and slightly modified modus operandi. Vigilance is not optional...

Now, back to civil society and the CIA overseas with respect to the impact on Americans overseas residing in a given theater where covert operations have been authorized. I have found the following which are extremely interesting and pertinent. I don’t have time to comment on these now, so I’m just provide links to two documents and some excerpts from one.

MOU between DOJ and CIA (revised 1995)

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING:

REPORTING OF INFORMATION CONCERNING FEDERAL CRIMES

http://cryptome.org/2014/07/spy-reporting-federal-crimes.pdf

IV. General Considerations: Allegations of Criminal Acts Committed By

Agency Employees

A. This Agreement requires each employee of the Agency to report to the

General Counsel or IG facts or circumstances that reasonably indicate to

the employee that an employee of an intelligence agency has committed,

is committing, or will commit a violation of federal criminal law.3

B. Except as exempted in Section III, when the General Counsel has

received allegations, complaints or information (hereinafter allegations)

that an employee of the Agency may have violated, may be violating, or

may violate a federal criminal statue, that General Counsel should within

a reasonable period of time determine whether there is a reasonable basis

to believe that a federal crime has been, is being, or will be committed

and that it is a crime which, under this memorandum, must be reported.

The General Counsel may, as set forth in Section V, below, conduct a

preliminary inquiry for this purpose. If a preliminary inquiry reveals that

there is a reasonable basis for the allegations, the General Counsel will

follow the reporting procedures set forth in Section VIII, below. If a

preliminary inquiry reveals that the allegations are without a reasonable

basis, the General Counsel will make a record, as appropriate, of that

finding and no reporting under these procedures is required.

VII. Reportable Offenses by Non-Employees

B. Any conspiracy or attempt to commit a crime reportable under this

section shall be reported if the conspiracy or attempt itself meets the

applicable reporting criteria.

VIII. Procedure For Submitting Special Crimes Reports

A. Where the Agency determines that a matter must be the subject of a

special report to the Department of Justice, it may, consistent with

paragraphs VIII.B and VIII.C, below, make such a report (1) by letter or

other, similar communication from the General Counsel, or (2) by

electronic or courier dissemination of information from operational or

analytical units, provided that in all cases, the subject line and the text of

such communication or dissemination clearly reflects that it is a report of

possible criminal activity. The Department of Justice shall maintain a

record of all special crimes reports received from the Agency.

B. Where the Agency determines that a matter must be the subject of a

special report to the Department of Justice; and where the Agency further

determines that no public disclosure of classified information or

intelligence sources and methods would result from further investigation

or prosecution, and the security of ongoing intelligent operations would

not be jeopardized thereby, the Agency will report the matter to the

federal investigative agency having jurisdiction over the criminal matter.

A copy of that report must also be provided to the AAG, or designated

Deputy AAG, Criminal Division.

C. Where the Agency determines that further investigation or prosecution of

a matter that must be specifically reported may result in a public

disclosure of classified information or intelligence sources or methods or

would jeopardize the security of ongoing intelligence operations, the

Agency shall report the matter to the AAG or designated Deputy AAG,

Criminal Division. A copy of that report must also be provided to the

Assistant Director, Criminal Investigations or National Security VIII. Procedure For Submitting Special Crimes Reports

A. Where the Agency determines that a matter must be the subject of a

special report to the Department of Justice, it may, consistent with

paragraphs VIII.B and VIII.C, below, make such a report (1) by letter or

other, similar communication from the General Counsel, or (2) by

electronic or courier dissemination of information from operational or

analytical units, provided that in all cases, the subject line and the text of

such communication or dissemination clearly reflects that it is a report of

possible criminal activity. The Department of Justice shall maintain a

record of all special crimes reports received from the Agency.

B. Where the Agency determines that a matter must be the subject of a

special report to the Department of Justice; and where the Agency further

determines that no public disclosure of classified information or

intelligence sources and methods would result from further investigation

or prosecution, and the security of ongoing intelligent operations would

not be jeopardized thereby, the Agency will report the matter to the

federal investigative agency having jurisdiction over the criminal matter.

A copy of that report must also be provided to the AAG, or designated

Deputy AAG, Criminal Division.

C. Where the Agency determines that further investigation or prosecution of

a matter that must be specifically reported may result in a public

disclosure of classified information or intelligence sources or methods or

would jeopardize the security of ongoing intelligence operations, the

Agency shall report the matter to the AAG or designated Deputy AAG,

Criminal Division. A copy of that report must also be provided to the

Assistant Director, Criminal Investigations or National Security

Protecting Classified Information and the Rights of Criminal Defendants:

The Classified Information Procedures Act

http://fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/R41742.pdf

Report to State Department Office of Inspector General and Result

The emails/letter following this introduction are presented in reverse chronological order.

After discovering that it had become possible to submit a report to the Department of State's Office of the Inspector General via email, I did so. The reply was prompt, and satisfactory. It simply stated that the matter should be handled by the CIA IG, instead. I consider that to encompass an implicit acknowledgement that Mr. Schaefer is a CIA officer working under diplomatic cover, and not an actual diplomat, or Foreign Service Officer. 

It bears pointing out that conspiracy to commit a crime is in and of itself a separate crime, and conspiracy to cover up a conspiracy is a crime, aside from the substantive criminal acts that are the object of the conspiracy.

At any rate, insofar as there is an implicit acknowledgement in the response I received from the State Department Office of the Inspector General in relation to my complaint about Gary Schaefer—who is currently the Political Officer at the US Embassy in Tokyo—it seems clear that Mr. Schaeffer is a “case officer” in the CIA, and that he was coordinating the actions of the “field officers” whom I was complaining about, while simultaneously shielding them from scrutiny by the CIA Office of Inspector General.

There are a couple of embassy blog entries, chronologically. 

http://deputyscorner.jp/e/deputy-e20120419.html 

“Gary Schaefer is a Political Officer who has been working at Japan's Foreign Ministry since September 2011 as part of the annual Baker-Kato Diplomatic Exchange Program.”

http://zblog.japan.usembassy.gov/e/zblog-e20111014a.html 

“Gary Schaefer presently works in the Foreign Ministry International Press Division. He is excited about this assignment because before he joined the U.S. Foreign Service he worked in Japan for seven years as a journalist for Associated Press and Bloomberg. Upon completion of his year as an exchange diplomat, Gary will join the Embassy Tokyo Political Section working on Japanese domestic politics”.

And here is an article written by Mr. Schaefer, as political officer. http://digitaledition.state.gov/publication/?i=152254&p=20

I recently have been pursuing the case via various avenues, but have had no luck in finding an attorney willing to take the case. In fact, the Lawyer Referral Service of the DC Bar Association claims that they don’t have any attorneys on their list that could handle this case. I’ve contacted other organizations, but the political dimension seems to be a factor. No one, apparently, wants to sue the CIA or DOJ unless they can score partisan points in the process. Washington DC is looking more and more like a hub of white collar crime, not government.

From: xxx (OIG) [mailto:xxx@state.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2014 6:31 AM
To: xxx
Subject: Customer Service Letter - OIG Hotline Complaint No. H20141106

Dear Mr. X:
The OIG has reviewed your complaint and we have determined that the appropriate agency to address your concerns is the Central Intelligence Agency, Office of Inspector General (CIA/OIG).  Your information has been forwarded to that office for action; reference number H20141106.
Please contact CIA/OIG for any future inquiries regarding this matter, reference hotline number H20141106.  You may contact the agency by mail at:

Office of Inspector General

Central Intelligence Agency

Washington, D.C. 20505

Thank you for bringing this matter to our attention. 

OIG Hotline Staff

U.S. Department of State

Office of Investigations

800-409-9926

oighotline@state.gov

http://oig.state.gov

Privacy/PII

This email is UNCLASSIFIED.

Dear Inspector General,

I’m submitting this report is in relation to events from approximately five years ago, in 2009, as seen from the exchange of emails that I appended to a notice of intent to litigate sent to Secretary of State Kerry on June 1, 2014.

The then Citizens Services Officer at the Osaka Consulate in Japan, Gary Schaefer (currently Political Officer in Tokyo), would appear to have misused his official position by misleading me instead of providing me with the services due to American citizens overseas from the agency with which he was invested.

More specifically, he did not indicate that the proper (apparently only) channel for me to submit a complaint about misconduct, etc., of officers in the CIA is through the Office of the Inspector General of the CIA (hereafter referred to simply as CIA OIG). Instead, after my persistent followup to his utter lack responsiveness, he told me to:

“Rest assured that I have taken your concerns on board and will pass them on through the appropriate channels.”

In fact, the problems only became worse from that point forward. Having subsequently learned through the office of Senator Feinstein and the like that the proper course for reporting abuse and illegal activity of the CIA is through the CIA OIG, and in light of the fact that the State Department has in the past year cut off all personal email contact between the Citizens Services Officer and me, resorting to automated responses, I suspect that Gary Schaefer—and perhaps the others holding the post of Citizens Services Officer (e.g., Sylbeth Kennedy) or acting in the capacity thereof (e.g., Marc Snyder) with whom I exchanged emails—failed to provide me the correct (and one would assume required by regulation) information about a matter as serious as alleged misconduct against an American citizen by officers in the CIA and their proxies.

Having read a fair amount about CIA operations (case officers, non-official cover, etc.), and watched television footage of US diplomat Ryan Fogel being exposed in Moscow as a CIA case officer and deported, I am convinced that Gary Schaefer is in fact an officer in the Central Intelligence Agency operating with diplomatic immunity under the cover of the Department of State.

If that is indeed the case, the misconduct and misuse of office demonstrated by the statements in his email not only represent a grave violation of my right that has resulted in years of continual trouble that should have been curtailed thenceforth, but also a clear conflict of interest in allowing an officer in the CIA to hold the post of Citizens Services Officer. That, in and of itself is a systemic flaw that creates conditions enabling the CIA to violate the rights of America citizens overseas while preventing such citizens from seeking assistance through the public office that has been created under the Department of State expressly for that purpose at diplomatic missions overseas.

I’m aware of the fact that I am not the first private American citizen to have problems with the CIA overseas, so it is inconceivable that preventative measures have not been implemented. Otherwise, there would likely be culpable gross negligence spread across more than one branch of government.

Furthermore, it is clear that where there is a possibility of CIA officers undertaking covert operations coming into contact with America citizens in civil society overseas, particularly in economically developed democratic countries, there exists the possibility of a conflict occurring due to the incompatibility of the mode for carrying out the agenda of the CIA in civil society and the activities of private citizens in civil society. It goes without saying that the rights and Constitutional prerogatives of private American citizens take priority under the law.

From what I can gather about publically available knowledge on CIA operations, it would seem that the officers with diplomatic immunity serve as supervisors coordinating the activities of officers in the field; accordingly, there is a high probability that Schaefer was shielding officers in the field from scrutiny of the CIA OIG.

I also intend to submit a much more substantial report to the CIA OIG, but I hope that you take this report under consideration not only with respect to possible disciplinary measures, but also systemic reform. If the CIA requires officers with diplomatic immunity, at the very least, the office of Citizens Services Officer should be an office to which CIA officers are prohibited from holding.

Sincerely,

P.S. For your reference, I’ve appended hereunder the entirety of the aforementioned notice of intent to litigate along with the emails attached thereto.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

REFERENCE USE

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

June 1, 2014

Secretary of State John Kerry

U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520

Re: NOTIFICATION OF PENDING LITIGATION IN RELATION TO FAILURE OF OSAKA CONSULATE CITIZENS’ SERVICES OFFICERS TO PROVIDE APPROPRIATE CITIZENS’ SERVICES IN RESPONSE TO COMPAINTS BY AMERICAN CITIZEN OF ILLEGAL HARRASSMENT BY CIA OFFICERS, ETC.

Dear Secretary of State Kerry,

In relation to the complaints which I have heretofore made via the Osaka Consulate and DOJ related to harassment by CIA officers, etc., in addition to the failure to prevent further harassment, etc., by officers of the CIA, etc., please be informed that it is my intention to file a federal lawsuit against the CIA, the DOJ, and the Department of State.

              With respect to the Department of State, in particular, it has come to my attention that complaints such as mine should be filed with the Office of the Inspector General at the CIA, but no such information was supplied to me by any of the several citizens’ services officers at the U. S. Consulate in Osaka with whom I’ve interacted with personally over the course of several years in relation to the matter at hand. That is most likely because said citizens’ services’ officers were in fact CIA officers with diplomatic cover that were both coordinating the illegal actions of the CIA officers in the field against me as well as shielding them from scrutiny.

That would seem to comprise the deliberate implementation of a strategically planned bureaucratic configuration aimed at subverting the capacity of US government agency to fulfill its designated role, namely, of providing citizens’ services to American living in abroad, while supplanting that role with a criminally culpable subversive role. Insofar as it encompasses the Department of State and the Central Intelligence Agency, it would seem to also embody coordination at the highest levels of the executive branch.

The above-described problem undoubtedly predates the Obama administration, and in fact, the subterfuge launched against me was hatched under the administration of GW Bush, long before Barack Obama was elected to the presidency.

Nonetheless, I have suffered the effects of CIA malfeasance continuously, even after reporting the problem almost five years ago during the Obama administration, and it is me that is going to bring this to the light of day and put an end to the pernicious practices that would place an American citizen deemed an obstacle to CIA officers aiming to carry out subversive covert programs of questionable legality against an allied nation that would be extremely harmful to the credibility of the USA if exposed.

I have attached a print out of a brief email exchange after I visited the U. S. Consulate in Osaka personally to make the complaint for your reference. Note that nowhere is there mention of reporting the matters to the Office of the Inspector General at the CIA.

              I note that the matters at hand occurred while Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, and that during your tenure practice has changed, with automated email responses and the name of the American Citizens’ Services Officer not being revealed.

              Clearly there is something of a breakdown scenario in the internal system of checks and balances with respect to the illicit activities of intelligence officers in allied countries, and the dysfunction extends into the diplomatic corps responsible for providing “citizens’ services” to Americans living abroad.

Accordingly, it has fallen upon me to have to engage the judicial branch in order both to seek redress for the wrongs I’ve suffered at the hands of the abovementioned culprits and restore integrity to the system of checks and balances.

              This case not only demonstrates that the presence of such so-called deep cover intelligence officers in high positions in civil society poses a serious threat to the well-being of private American citizens such as me pursuing our livelihoods in a normal and lawful manner within civil society in a foreign country, it proves that such officers infiltration of civil society poses an existential threat to the very fabric of civil society.

              I have gone so far as to contact my congressional representative, to little avail. Thus, the only recourse—aside of public opinion—is the judicial system.

              Furthermore, as you may be aware, I made an offer of my services to the CIA in 2009. I was rebuffed and the efforts against me redoubled, undoubtedly with participation of CIA officers stationed at the Osaka Consulate.

              I applaud efforts taken by the Obama administration against Japanese organized crime groups, but those efforts have only an indirect relationship to the complaint at hand.

              Aside from the basic legal prohibitions provided for in the National Security Act, etc., against CIA officers’ acting against private American citizens, there are questions that are of a broader scope encompassing civil liberties and “the pursuit of happiness” by American citizens.

              Neither being an attorney nor having consulted with an attorney in relation to this case yet, I hereby explicitly reserve any and all manner of legal recourse provided for under any and all applicable laws in relation to any and all violations committed against me by officers of the CIA and other agencies of the government of the United States of America, their recruits and/or associates acting in collusion therewith.

              Prior to filing a suit in federal court, it is my desire to attempt a good faith resolution of this matter. If this is your desire as well, please contact me in writing no later than June 31, 2014.

Sincerely,

RE: Rougue CIA agents in Kyoto, e.g. Glen Paquette, et al‏

From: Osaka-Kobe, AmConGen (AOK@state.gov)

Sent:   Wed 9/16/09 7:10 AM

Dear Mr. X,

I hereby confirm receipt of this e-mail and the e-mail you wrote on Monday.

I am sorry I was unable to respond sooner. Yesterday I was visiting an American in prison, and on Monday I was sorting through the personal effects of a young American who unexpectedly died of a heart attack and has no next-of-kin in this country.

Rest assured that I have taken your concerns on board and will pass them on through the appropriate channels.

I thank you again for the detailed information that you have provided.

Regards,

Gary Schaefer

Chief, American Citizen Services Unit

Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 2009 2:19 PM
To: Osaka-Kobe, AmConGen
Subject: Rougue CIA agents in Kyoto, e.g. Glen Paquette, et al

Mr. Schaeffer,

Pardon me if I have happened to misspell your name, but I am assuming that my messages are reaching you.

I fail to see how non-responsiveness qualifies as fulfilling your duties to provide citizens’ services.

The matter at hand is of no light gravity and is something that I seek to resolve in the very near future.

Once again, I’m providing you with a partial list of people I allege to have been involved in systematic efforts to, shall we say, contain and isolate me socially and economically with the apparent objective of having me leave Kyoto; I expect you to confirm receipt of this message. Excuse the grandiose allusion to cold war policy, but as the individuals on the following list are by and large in the employ of the CIA and other national intelligence services, including a number of freemasons who have seemingly infiltrated law enforcement and perhaps other government agencies internationally, and are not above collaborating with international organized crime and engaging in criminal activities against citizens of the USA and hostile activities against allied countries, these allegations are serious.

Glen Paquette

塚田芙貴子:       (090) 5572-xxxx – Kyoto university student, entering Japanese Foreign Service

Brad Croft(?): Australian, formerly employed by wine/spirits distributor

Anthony Blackman

Mike: 50s, white hair, English teacher, guitar, tai-chi

Yoshiyuki:         (090) 3651-xxxx

Motaz: Kyoto University, Robotics Engineering, Palestinian

Craig Corm(?): Canadian, English teacher, in Kyoto @5 years ago

Sasha Peterka

工藤　麻歩

Jamie Roughan

  

Regards,

Sent:   Mon 9/14/09 6:25 AM

To:   aok@state.gov

Dear Mr. Schaeffer,

Thank you for speaking with me the other day. I normally wouldn’t go to such extremes, but given the state of affairs here and the harassment and outright physical assaults I’ve been subjected to for the past 6-7 years, it has become necessary that I bring this matter to the fore and address those concerned head on.

I had been naively hoping to receive an email from you, but understand that under the circumstances it may either be a little bit soon, or simply not something that would be forthcoming at all.

In any case, I do keep to a schedule of sorts myself, so I would like to receive an email from you in order to document the event of my telephone call and subsequent visit and discussion, as well as the nature of the subject matter.

By the way, I did look up the Fletcher school, and it seems like quite an interesting institution. I myself pursued an interdisciplinary course at UC Berkeley as an undergrad. I was wondering if you had the opportunity to do any research in relation to the topic of “civil society” while you were there. That is one of the spheres that I did a little writing about as an undergrad.

  Sincerely,