The CIA is trying its best to avoid oversight and accountability. The CIA practice known as the ‘eyewash’ has just been uncovered. ‘Eyewashing’ involves sending accurate information only to a very small number of people, and disinformation to all other employees.
An anonymous ex-CIA officer explains:
“The classic use of an eyewash is if you have a garden-variety source and all of a sudden he gains access to truly sensitive information,“
“What you might do is have a false communication saying the guy got hit by a bus and died. The large number of people aware of this source suddenly think he is dead. But the continuing reporting on that source and from that source gets put into a very closed compartment that few would know about.”
In one documented example, CIA officials said that a senior Al-Qaeda member was killed as a result of tribal violence. Yet, in actual fact, the terrorist had been killed by a drone strike.
The intent behind this eyewash was to conceal the then-secret CIA drone program in Pakistan.
Former CIA inspector general, Fred Hitz, said that deliberately misleading employees is “really playing with fire.”
Steven Aftergood, a government secrecy expert at the Federation of American Scientists, said, “When you introduce falsehoods into the communications stream then you can destabilize the whole system of intelligence oversight and compliance with the law.”
What now needs to be examined is the extent to which this practice still takes places today and who exactly receives the accurate information. Is the true information ever sent to elected officials, or always withheld by this shadow government operating essentially on its own?
Interestingly, it is often said by skeptics that any part of the government could never be involved in a monumental conspiracy because too many people would have to know about it, and someone would talk.
The exposure of the eyewashing program now crushes this argument, as it reveals to us the extreme extent of compartmentalisation that exists within the modern American government that is capable of hiding the most despicable activities.
It is also likely that many other government agencies employ similar tactics, in order to ensure that those at the top stay there and threats to their power can be dealt with quietly. Departments look out for themselves, and particularly their own relevance.
Naturally, this intelligence phenomenon extends into the media, as mainstream media outlets always rely on their internal agency “sources” for any ‘inside information’ – which could misleading, or completely false.
What might they do, and subsequently try to hide, to ensure they stay relevant?