| 
			  
			 
 
  
  
			by Joël van der ReijdenSeptember 10, 2005
 from 
			ProjectForTheExposureOfHiddenInstitutions 
			Website
 
			  
			As I already mentioned, the purpose of
			
			PEHI (Project For The Exposure 
			Of Hidden Institutions) is to put together the entire spectrum 
			of the world's hidden organizations. But even though I'm familiar 
			with the Pilgrims Society, the 1001 Club, the 
			Multinational Chairmans Group, Le Cercle, and other very 
			powerful hidden organizations, I'm sure there's is a lot more to 
			discover.
 
			  
			For example, during the long hours that these membership 
			lists were put together, I've always paid attention to individuals 
			who might have been involved with different intelligence agencies. 
			Information remains scarce, but it happens relatively often that you 
			come across someone who is involved with the CIA. This isn't 
			such a surprise, because there's no doubt that the CIA is 
			very closely allied with the most important financial and political 
			institutions in the United States. 
 On the other hand, I seldom or never came across individuals 
			involved with Army intelligence, Navy Intelligence, Air Force 
			Intelligence, the DIA, the NRO, or the NSA. Le Cercle is a 
			bit of an exception, because it's focused on bringing together 
			members of the international intelligence agencies. And, of course, 
			there is the science-oriented JASON Group, which has at least 
			one former NSA employee and two founders of the NRO.
 
 All in all, besides their official functions it's very hard to get 
			an idea of what most of these intelligence agencies are doing. 
			Personally, I am always looking for leads in the longest and most 
			obvious cover up ever; that one about the UFO phenomenon, in 
			which I include the cattle mutilations (take a look here). There's 
			no indication that the average Pilgrims Society or
			
			Trilateral Commission member has 
			any idea about these subjects, but somewhere these two worlds have 
			to meet. I am anything but an expert on intelligence agencies, but I 
			do want to put some basic information here which I think is 
			important for anyone looking into hidden organizations. It could 
			easily take a couple of years before I write some additional 
			information on this subject, and maybe I never will.
 
 In the U.S. you only have 3 types of classification: 
			Confidential, Secret, and Top Secret. That's it. 
			But this doesn't matter, since the true power of the classification 
			system is the famous 'need to know' policy. Just because you have a 
			Top Secret clearance doesn't mean you can gain access to all the 
			different Top Secret documents of the CIA, Army, Navy, and Air 
			Force.
 
 However, this 3-tiered classification system is not enough to 
			protect some of the more sensitive information. Therefore additional 
			levels of compartmentalization have been created. After a very 
			intensive background check, someone with a Top Secret clearance 
			might obtain an additional Sensitive Compartmented Information 
			(SCI) clearance, under which information is buried that needs 
			to be restricted to even fewer individuals. This TS-SCI clearance 
			had been introduced mainly to stop some higher ranking officers from 
			looking into Top Secret files they don't have any business 
			with.
 
 But even the TS-SCI clearance doesn't provide the secrecy 
			needed for some of the most sensitive projects. This is the reason 
			that Special Access Programs (SAP) are created all the 
			time. In this case only a predetermined list of authorized personnel 
			has access to the project and additional security measures can be 
			taken to keep outsiders away from it. Different congressional 
			committees are informed about these SAPs, but there is very 
			little time for questions.
 
 Most SAPs start out as Unacknowledged Special Access 
			Programs (USAP), better known as 
			
			Black Projects. The F-117A 
			Nighthawk and the B-2 Spirit are examples of projects that started 
			out as Unacknowledged SAPs.
 
			  
			A DOD manual describes a USAP 
			as follows (1):  
				
				"Unacknowledged SAPs require 
				a significantly greater degree of protection than acknowledged 
				SAPs... A SAP with protective controls that ensures the 
				existence of the Program is not acknowledged, affirmed, or made 
				known to any person not authorized for such information. All 
				aspects (e.g., technical, operational, logistical, etc.) are 
				handled in an unacknowledged manner."  
			Persons involved in a particular USAP 
			are ordered to deny such a program exists. It's not allowed to react 
			with a "no comment", because that way someone immediately suspects 
			something is being hidden and might be motivated to look further 
			into it. Officers not 'accessed' for a USAP, even superior 
			ones, are to be given the same response. The more sensitive the 
			program, the more protection the commanding officer can demand. He 
			could even subject his personnel to lie-detector tests to see 
			whether or not they have been talking about it to anyone. According 
			to a 1997 Senate investigation (2): 
				
				"Additional security requirements to 
				protect these special access programs can range from mere 
				upgrades of the collateral system’s requirements (such as 
				rosters specifying who is to have access to the information) to 
				entire facilities being equipped with added physical security 
				measures or elaborate and expensive cover, concealment, 
				deception, and operational security plans."  
			There are two versions of the 
			Unacknowledged Special Access Programs. The first one is 
			the regular USAP. These regular USAPs are reported in the 
			same way as their acknowledged versions. In closed sessions, the 
			House National Security Committee, the Senate Armed Services 
			Committee, and the defense subcommittees of the House and Senate 
			Appropriations committees can get some basic information about them. 
			The Secretary of Defense, however, can decide to 'waive' 
			particularly sensitive USAPs. These are unofficially referred to as
			
			Deep Black Programs. According to 
			the same 1997 Senate investigation as mentioned earlier: 
				
				"Among black programs, further 
				distinction is made for “waived” programs, considered to be so 
				sensitive that they are exempt from standard reporting 
				requirements to the Congress. The chairperson, ranking member, 
				and, on occasion, other members and staff of relevant 
				Congressional committees are notified only orally of the 
				existence of these programs." 
			This leads to the conclusion that only
			very few people are aware of these waived Unacknowledged 
			Special Access Programs. Congress certainly doesn't get the 
			information it needs to speak out against newly established waived
			USAPs and I haven't read anywhere that their opinion is 
			actually appreciated. You could also ask yourself if Congress is 
			told the truth about many of the most sensitive Special Access 
			Projects or if their successors are informed about previously 
			activated (waived) USAPs. Even with regular SAPs Congress is ignored 
			at times:  
				
				"Last summer, the House Defense 
				Appropriations Committee complained that "the air force 
				acquisition community continues to ignore and violate a wide 
				range of appropriations practices and acquisition rules". One of 
				the alleged infractions was the launch of an SAP without 
				Congressional notification." (3) 
			What makes Unacknowledged Special 
			Access Projects even more impenetrable is the fact that a lot of 
			these programs are located within private industry. The U.S. 
			government generally doesn't develop a whole lot. If you look at the 
			defense industry, you have companies like Boeing, Lockheed, 
			Northrop, McDonnell Douglas, TRW, Rockwell, Bechtel, SAIC, or 
			Decision-Science Applications (DSA Inc.), who develop certain 
			technologies for the U.S. government.  
			  
			This means it's virtually impossible to 
			get information about these projects, because private industry is 
			protected by something called 'proprietary privilege'. You 
			generally can't get any information about a USAP by issuing a
			FOIA or by annoying a Congressman (National Security), but 
			just in case anyone might be able to succeed, there's always the 
			argument of proprietary privilege of the private industry. 
 
				
					
						| 
                  
                    | Category | Secrecy levels |  
                    | Additional levels of Compartmentalization | A USAP behind another SAP or USAP, combined with the protection the private industry enjoys. |  
                    | 'Waved' Unacknowledged Special Access Programs / 'Deep Black Programs'
					 (details already completely invisible to congress and the president) |  
                    | Unacknowledged Special Access Programs / 'Black Programs' |  
                    | (acknowledged) Special Access Programs |  
                    | Top Secret Sensitive Compartmented Information (TS-SCI) |  
                    | Basic secrecy levels | Top Secret | NATO Cosmic Top Secret |  
                    | Secret | NATO Secret |  
                    | Confidential | NATO Confidential |  
                    | Public or semi-public | For Official Use Only | NATO Restricted |  
                    | Unclassified | NATO Unclassified |  |  
			And even in case the National Security State and proprietary 
			privilege fails, there still seems to be at least one other 
			(unverified) mechanism to protect the most sensitive projects from 
			public exposure. This information comes from (many very credible)
			
			Disclosure Project witnesses (4), 
			all of them claiming to have some kind of experience with these type 
			of projects.
 
			  
			Some of these people, with no one in the 
			project disputing it, are saying that certain Black Programs 
			(USAPs) act as covers for UFO / ET related projects. 
			This means that in an emergency situation a sensitive Black 
			or Deep Black Program could be revealed to the public, while 
			the program behind it remains undiscovered. In a 1997 speech, 
			
			former 
			astronaut  Edgar Mitchell summarizes what the Disclosure 
			Project is all about (5): 
				
				"I also think that the prevalence in 
				the modern era of so many events - the sightings, the continual 
				mutilation events, the so-called abduction events - that we are 
				looking at likely reversed engineered technology in the hands of 
				humans that are not under government control or any type of high 
				level control...    
				So if there are back engineered 
				technologies existing, they are probably in the hands of 
				this group of individuals, formerly government, formerly perhaps 
				intelligence, formerly, under private sector control with some 
				sort of oversight by military or by government. But this 
				(oversight) is likely no longer the case as a result of this 
				access denied category that is now operating. I call it a 
				clandestine group. The technology is not in our military 
				arsenals anywhere in the world, but it does exist, and to me 
				that's quite disconcerting."  
			 
			According to the 
			Disclosure Project some of black triangles have been developed 
			in Unacknowledged Special Access Projects.  
			Screenshots taken 
			from 'UFOs, The Footage Archives 1947-1997'.  
			Pictures of the 
			Belgian sightings have been included as well  
			as screenshot from 2 
			recent movies and a drawing of a witness.
 
			A big questions that remains of course 
			is how all these projects are funded. The official black 
			budget of the DoD would be the most likely explanation, but 
			there are 'indications' that the U.S. economy is being plundered for 
			at least $1 trillion every year (yes, about 10% of GNP). 
			Because no one is going to believe this without reading the full 
			original sources, I cached all the mainstream news reports at the 
			bottom of this article.  
			  
			I extracted the following numbers from these 
			reports:
 
				
					
						| 
                
                  
                    | Year | Missing | Sources
					 (all cached at the bottom of this article) |  
                    | 1998 | $3.4 trillion | Washington Times |  
                    | 1999 | $2.3 trillion | Congressional meeting |  
                    | 2000 | $1.1 trillion | Congressional meeting; Insight Magazine |  
                    | 2001 | $2.3 trillion | CBS quoting Rumsfeld |  
                    | 2002 | $1+ trillion | San Francisco Chronicle; CBS |  |  
			According to financial expert Catherine Austin Fitts this has 
			become possible due to the introduction of acts like the 1947 
			National Security Act and the 1949 CIA Act (6). Large New York banks 
			like J.P. Morgan Chase and defense contractors like 
			Lockheed Martin, who are running the systems of all the 
			government departments, seem to be responsible for diverting and 
			laundering billions of dollars every day from public and other 
			undisclosed funds. I suggest you read all the sources that are 
			provided for this article, because I sure haven't got any answers on 
			this subject.
 
			  
			At the moment, I am wondering who is 
			using who here? Is J.P. Morgan Chase, the core of the 
			American part of the Anglo-American financial empire, being used as 
			a milch cow to fund secret projects of the most unimaginable 
			magnitude? Or, in line with
			
			the NWO conspiracy theories, are 
			the bankers of the Pilgrims Society themselves really the 
			ones in control? Or is there some kind of mutual interest here, 
			whereby these bankers fund
			
			the Black Projects, while 
			technology and services from these Black Projects keeps them on top 
			of the world? I guess anything is possible at this moment. 
 By the way, USAPs don't always have to involve the 
			development of new cutting edge technology. In the following case a 
			USAP is used as to a tool to circumvent national and international 
			humanitarian laws. Seymour Hersh, 2004 (8):
 
				
				"Rice and Rumsfeld 
				know what many others involved in the prisoner discussions did 
				not -- that sometime in late 2001 or early 2002, the President 
				had signed a top-secret finding, as required by law, authorizing 
				the Defense Department to set up a specially recruited 
				clandestine team of Special Forces operatives and others who 
				would defy diplomatic niceties and international law and snatch 
				-- or assassinate, if necessary -- identified 'high-value' Al 
				Qaeda operatives anywhere in the world.    
				Equally secret interrogation 
				centers would be set up in allied countries where harsh 
				treatments were meted out, unconstrained by legal limits of 
				public disclosure. The program was hidden inside the Defense 
				Department as an 'unacknowledged' special-access program, or
				SAP, whose operational details were known only to a few 
				in the Pentagon, the CIA and the White House." 
			All I want at this point is the names of 
			the people who are running all these projects. Check back in a 
			couple of years or so.  
			
			 
			  
			  
			National 
			Industrial Security Program Operating Manual Supplement
 
 
			The Under Secretary Of DefenseWashington D.C. 20301
 
			2000Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC):
 
				
				DoD 5220.22-M-SUP-1 
					
					... g. Procedures for 
					unacknowledged SAP security.  
					An unacknowledged SAP 
					will require additional security training and briefings, 
					beyond that required in the baseline. Additional 
					requirements will be specified in the Contract Security 
					Classification Specification and will address steps 
					necessary to protect sensitive relationships, locations, and 
					activities.
 ... 3102. Unacknowledged Special Access Programs (SAP).
 
 Unacknowledged SAPs require a significantly greater 
					degree of protection than acknowledged SAPs. Special 
					emphasis should be placed on:
 
						
							
							a.   Why the 
							SAP is unacknowledgedb.   Classification of the SAP
 c.   Approved communications system
 d.   Approved transmission systems
 e.   Visit procedures
 f.    Specific program guidance
 
					... Unacknowledged Special 
					Access Program.    
					A SAP with protective controls 
					that ensures the existence of the Program is not 
					acknowledged, affirmed, or made known to any person not 
					authorized for such information. All aspects (e.g., 
					technical, operational, logistical, etc.) are handled in an 
					unacknowledged manner. 
			Endnotes
 
 
				
					
						| 
                  
                    | [1] | Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC), 'National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual Supplement' (part of a (badly) scanned DOD manual) |  
                    | [2] | 1997, Senate Document 105-2, 'Report of the Commission on Protecting and Reducing Government Secrecy' |  
                    | [3] | January 5, 2000, Jane's Defense Weekly, 'In Search of the Pentagon's Billion Dollar Hidden Budgets' |  
                    | [4] | April 2001, 
					
					Disclosure Project briefing document, USAP excerpts |  
                    | [5] | October 13, 1997, Las Vegas SUN / Associated Press Phoenix, 'Astronaut Says Aliens Have Landed' (includes a partial speech of Edgar Mitchell that was held at the conference) |  
                    | [6] | April 4, 2005, Coast to Coast AM, Catherine Austin Fitts talks for over 2 hours about the missing trillions and the U.S. government's black budget. (Fitts was 
					assistant-secretary of Housing at HUD, managing director of Wall Street investment bank Dillon Read & Co., and helped to clean up the financial mess of Iran-Contra and the BCCI scandal) |  
                    | [7] | November 23, 2003, Michael E. Salla, 'The Black Budget Report: An Investigation into the CIA’s ‘Black Budget’ and the Second Manhattan Project' |  
                    | [8] | 2004, Seymour M. Hersh, 'Chain of Command: The Road From 9/11 to Abu Ghraib' (book) |  |  
			
 References 
			to the missing annual trillions (no typo) in the DOD and 
			other government agencies
 
			  
				
					
						| 
                  
                    | [1] | April 1, 1999, Washington Times, '$3,400,000,000,000 Of Taxpayers' Money Is Missing' |  
                    | [2] | November 6, 2000, Insight Magazine, 'Why Is $59 Billion Missing From HUD?' |  
                    | [3] | June 25, 2001, Insight Magazine, 'THE CABINET - Inside HUD's Financial Fiasco' |  
                    | [4] | September 3, 2001, Insight Magazine, 'Rumsfeld Inherits Financial Mess' |  
                    | [5] | September 28, 2001, Insight Magazine, 'Wasted Riches' |  
                    | [6] | January 29, 2002, CBS News, 'The War on Waste - Defense Department Cannot Account For 25% Of Funds — $2.3 Trillion' |  
                    | [7] | April 29, 2002, Insight Magazine, 'Government Fails Fiscal Fitness Test' |  
                    | [8] | May 18, 2003, San Francisco Chronicle, 'Military waste under fire $1 trillion missing -- Bush plan targets Pentagon accounting' |  
                    | [9] | May 19, 2003, CBS, 'Pentagon Fights For (Its) Freedom' |  
                    | [10] | May 22, 2003, The Guardian, 'So much for the peace dividend: Pentagon is winning the battle for a $400bn budget' |  
                    | [11] | June 28, 2003, NPR's Morning Edition, Congressman Dennis Kucinich mentions the missing trillions. |  
                    | [12] | April 6, 2004, USA Today, 'NASA costs can't be verified, GAO report says' |  
                    | [13] | March 2005, Senate Armed Services Committee, FY 2006 Defense Dept. Budget (congresswoman Cynthia McKinney asks some hard questions) |  |  
			  
			  |