The CIA and the Crime of the Century

Good piece of media history by Thomas Joscelyn on the plot to kill John Paul II.

I think it deserves one important addenda. When CIA bureaucrats attacked Reagan and Casey for distorting intelligence for political ends, the “non-existent” plot against the Pope was one of their top exhibits. Casey’s refusal to accept the verdict of CIA’s professionals was seen as an egregious assault on the integrity of the agency.

This matter was aired during the Gates’ confirmation hearings in 1991. Even though he was confirmed, many in the media still suspected that Reagan and Casey did try to force a bad conclusion on a resisting CIA. If Casey was right, then hard questions have to be asked about both our spy agencies and our investigative reporters.

In addition, a key part of the “no conspiracy” case was a heavy reliance on Soviet methods and modus operandi. In essence, they argued that the Moscow had no role in the assassination because the KGB did not do those sorts of things. Ergo, no need to investigate. But, the refusal to investigate is an odd stance for an intelligence agency to take. As noted before, there is a stark difference between knowledge and knowingness. (Also here.)

Further, it makes their argument frustratingly circular. When CIA said that there was “no evidence” for Soviet complicity, many took that to mean that they looked and found nothing. However, it really meant that they found nothing because they did not look hard or with an open mind.

Intelligence historian/journalist Nigel West wrote a recent book the subject that took advantage of the East European spy archives that were opened in the 1990s. These new revelations only add to the evidence that undercuts CIA's official position.


UPDATE 2010: Sadly, West's book, The Third Secret is now out of print.

HT: Powerline