LEUTRELL OSBORNE, SR. website 2015

January 4, 2015


Annapolis, 2015: Leutrell M. Osborne, Sr. is an inspirational leader and recognized as a national and international security expert, who was hired by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) for over 26 years.  He has distinguished himself as a Counter Intelligence (CI) expert who has supervised CIA agents and assets in over 30 countries and traveled to more than 100 foreign cities in over five different continents.  Mr. Osborne was the first African American CIA Case Officer (C/O) to desegregate the management in two different CIA entities: the CIA’s Near East Asian (NEA) Division in l982 and the Office of Communication Security Division (COMSEC) in 1976.  As the CIA’s tenth African American Case Officer, he was the only Case Officer in the history of CIA to also serve more than six years also as a CIA Communications Security (COMSEC) officer after becoming a Clandestine CO.

Mr. Osborne continues to perform as is an inspirational leader and transformation agent, now leading a consulting, risk management and staffing company, The Osborne Group 007 (TOG).



January 4, 2015

March on Washington redux

July 22, 2010

Did COINTEL PRO & CIA “Back Pocket Agents” Kill Rev. King, Jr.?

July 10, 2010

Did COINTEL PRO & CIA “Back Pocket Agents” Kill Rev. King, Jr.?

By Iona Miller

Annapolis, Md. July 9, 2010. COINTEL PRO is the acronym used by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for one of the FBI’s domestic intelligence operations called Counter Intelligence Program. Leutrell Osborne, Sr. former CIA Spy Manager and CI officer likes to tell it like it is. He renames it “domestic dirty tricks” because the FBI clandestine intelligence operation was not a Counter Intelligence (CI) operation but a Covert Action (CA) domestic dirty tricks operation aimed at US citizens and Native Americans.

The FBI used domestic CA operations from 1956 thru 1971. Their stated motivation at the time was “protecting national security, preventing violence, and maintaining the existing social and political order.” However, the evidence below disputes that mis-information.

Osborne’s experienced opinion is that five very important insights need to be understood regarding past Government led “dirty tricks’ and illegal activities.

1. From 1956 to the early 1970s, the secret domestic intelligence operations of the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) for the most part were performed without the upper level political leaders of the US Government knowing the truth. In other words, persons conducting these domestic activities even fooled them. Thus most of the campaign was unknown to the upper echelons like the Presidents and Attorney Generals while the key elements of the IC deployed dirty trick specialists from the FBI, CIA, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) against so-called enemies of the state such as dissidents, the peace movement, and made secret war on select individuals and groups, particularly Blacks and Native Americans.

2. The FBI was not alone in doing these dirty deeds. Other members of the National Intelligence Community (NIC) collaborated and conducted the dirty tricks along side the FBI’s COINTEL PRO.

3. COINTEL PRO was not a Counter Intelligence operation. It was a Covert Action Intelligence operation equal to if not better than what CIA could perform.

4. Most of the so-called adversaries were not really “bad” people but the nature of dirty trick operations by the US Government made these persons appear “dirtier” than they were.

5. Several CIA components performed illegal domestic dirty tricks intelligence activities in concert with the FBI’s COINTEL PRO. As an IC activity, COINTEL PRO “neutralized” and fabricated threats against individuals and organizations. The NIC activities sowed distrust and disinformation utilizing a controlled system of informants and provocateurs against various individuals and organizations.

COINTEL PRO was unconstitutional clandestine activity meant to shape and manipulate the sociopolitical landscapeby preventing or disrupting the exercise of First Amendment rights and advocacy. They wanted to suppress speaking, teaching, meeting, writing and publishing.Vigilante-style domestic covert action and propaganda was used against American citizens.

Agents infiltrated, manipulated and disabled organizations, conducted “dirty tricks” psychological warfare, used the legal system, warrant less break-ins, stalking, assaults and beatings for harassment. They inflicted physical, emotional and economic damage, and did not stop short of using assassinations to “neutralize” their adversaries.


Some of the main objectives of the secret so-called counter intelligence program COINTEL PRO were to prevent the rise of a “black messiah.” The Black Panthers, NAACP, Malcolm X, and Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. as well as other Black nationalists were heavily surveilled. Andrew Young made the statement that he and Dr. King, Jr. knew that the government surveilled them and he commented about a mike even being discovered.

In Oslo for the Nobel Peace Prize, Dr. King, Jr. himself on the day after the ceremony while attending the the US Ambassador’s reception for him told Leutrell Osborne, Sr. that he knew that the Government was watching him and his people in the USA. The legacy of this domestic spying continues today in the lies and continued persecution of political targets, such as former Black Panther, Mumia Abu-Jamal.

Osborne wonders why over forty years after the fact, CNN (April, 2008), validates disinformation by pointing the finger at James Earl Ray, restating the lies about the assassination of Dr. Martin Luthr King, Jr. Neither James Earl Ray nor Loyd Jowers did the killing but both had dirty hands, according to Osborne.

The King family brought a civil suit against Jowers because they refused to believe Ray was the killer. A jury determined the plot included “governmental agencies.” Pepper argued in Orders to Kill (1995) that King was the victim of an elaborate plot involving the Mafia, the FBI, the CIA, military intelligence – and the highest levels of the U.S. government.

“In an unlikely alliance, the King family was represented in the [Memphis wrongful death] case by William Pepper, who had been Mr. Ray’s lawyer. The King family maintains that Mr. Pepper’s version of the assassination is the one that gets at the real truth behind Dr. King’s death, not the official version with Mr. Ray as the gunman. Mr. Pepper said federal, state and Memphis governmental agencies, as well as the news media conspired in the assassination.”http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E04EFDC1631F93AA35751C1A96F958260

Why doesn’t media get the truth and point the fingers in the correct directions at COINTEL PRO and organized crime? The 2008 CNN documentary continues pointing at James Earl Ray and Loyd Jowers. But the bullet has never been linked to Ray’s rifle. http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2008/black.in.america/. After more than 40 years, we need to focus on telling the truth of King’s untimely death. The full storystill hasn’t been told.

Truth At Last (2008) is a book by James Earl Ray’s older brother John Larry Ray, claiming there is forensic evidence that exonerates his brother. He also says Ray was inducted into the CIA, then used as a patsy. He blames “white America,” but the perps may be fewer in number. The government is not the country.

“Martin Luther King Jr. was a man admired by millions, but my brother didn’t kill him,” John told the New York Daily News. “I believe my brother was not only misused by conspirators within our government but also greatly misconstrued as a ‘racist’ and a ‘murderer’ by

the media.” http://www.globepequot.com/special/whokilledmlk/

Gary Revel was commissioned in 1977 to go undercover To find the King killers. Since then, he has not been fired, decommissioned, told the job was done, nor been paid. The stark reality is that the King killers have not yet been found. But the only offically appointed undercover investigator of the MLK assassination, Revel doesn’t mince words – he names names: Lyndon Baines Johnson, J. Edgar Hoover, Vito Genovese, Santo Trafficante Jr., Sam Giancana, Meyer Lansky, Joseph Colombo, Frank Costello, Don Carlo Gambino, Joseph Bonnano, Paul Castellano, Carlos Marcello, and the CIA’s E. Howard Hunt.


Revel previously advised Osborne about information that might lead to solving other related deaths to the assassination of King. When Osborne learned about the deaths of people associated with the investigation of King such as the two judges and six FBI Special Agents (SAs), Osborne said “There has to be fire where there is smoke.”

Revel laid out these details to Osborne: Two of the judges in Tennessee, who were planning to give James Earl Ray the trial he never had, died of heart attacks just before their plans could be put into place. Six FBI officials, all of which were to testify before the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA), were prevented from doing so because of their deaths. Revel said deaths of these FBI SAs could be more significant than what many realized because all six of these FBI SAs were identified to Revel as being important witnesses for the HSCA. “Is it likely that the stress of the planned testimony really brought on heart attacks to three of these people?” questioned Revel.

Osborne knows of eight people who died or were killed within a 6-month period. All eight were directly related to Revel’s investigation of the King assassination. When including other deaths during that year that were official suicides, accidents or deaths under unusual circumstances related to the work of the HSCA then a judicious person has to pause for thought. There is truth yet to be learned about unknowns who were directly involved in the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. as well as the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, Presidential Candidate Robert F. Kennedy, and Malcolm X.


Osborne is emphatic: “Let me frame one of the most important insights into the events surrounding the assassination of Dr. King, Jr that I, Leutrell “Mike” Osborne, Sr., am able to state as of 040910. First ignore every mention of COINTELPRO as a counter intelligence operation of the FBI. COINTEL-PRO was not CI.

“The FBI led domestic dirty tricks intelligence operation known by the acronym COINTEL PRO was a Covert Action intelligence operation equal to if not better than one led and directed by the CIA Clandestine Service Spy Masters that I worked with in the past.”

“This may be the most important insight I have for you to understand. CA as I define it included both assassinations and collaboration with intelligence operation resources such as organized crime and international hit persons. That is the way CA used to be even though there are rules of the game that tend to state that the US Government doesn’t participate in such activities today. We are discussing the past.”

“Further, it is enlightening that much of the COINTELPRO or COINTEL FACTOR (as I prefer to call it) was not performed so that neither the White House nor the Attorney General knew in advance what was taking place. This observation is based on my research and reading so-called official documents. “

“Further many of the DOJ and FBI post investigations in my opinion confused matters and did not include persons doing the investigation who had a paradigm of a CIA Spy Master like me and others who understand the protocols and downside of CA intelligence operations. Plus many departments and agencies in the Intelligence Community collaborated both wittingly and unwittingly during the COINTEL FACTOR in the dirty tricks against US citizens, especially Blacks and Native Americans.”

“One more point and I will hold for now. Also discount the mis-information about James Earl Ray and the true COINTEL FACTOR professionals mostly out of the FBI and some of the US Army intelligence organizations on the contrary there used Loyd Jowers being the assassins. Perhaps the only true link is the coordinator and agent handler known as Raul.”

“In my opinion Raul had the attributes of a person trained by Spy Masters but Raul is not what I call a Case Officer, per se. However, he has the attributes that tend to resemble a “trained agent or asset who knows how to handle agents” or people like Ray and Jowers in this case. During my life I have been blessed to meet people who have first hand knowledge of COINTEL PRO and the related events concerning the assassination of Dr. King, Jr.”

Gary Revel suggests, based on his personal interviews of James Earl Ray, that there were several “Raul’s” or “Raoul’s” and all were covers. Revel’s opinion from deep within his own investigation winds up countering Pepper’s theory and naming former CIA officer and White House Watergate secret agent E. Howard Hunt once again holding the bag. Hunt died in January, 2007.

Revel notes, “there are many Hunt and Sturgis like characters around still today. They can be hired or conscripted into killing people by more powerful people like President Lyndon Baines Johnson and FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover. Their roles in the killing of MLK were important but did not make the crime. If it wasn’t or hadn’t been them it would be or would have been others.”

Osborne disagrees strongly, counting Hunt out of the still-shadowy picture of the hidden truth of the assassination. All agree there was a dark marriage of organized crime and clandestine government behind the trigger and media manipulation after the fact, including contemporary depictions. Osborne even wonders if CNN isn’t under “adversary control.” But then what 3-lettered acronym organizations aren’t? Perpetual suspicion, even of one another, goes with the territory.

More Cloak & Less Dagger – A New DNI

June 9, 2010



CIA Veteran Leutrell Osborne says Covert Action is Obsolete

Can We Maintain Security with a Kinder, Gentler Intelligence Community?

by Iona Miller, June 2010

“When did the DNI’s new leadership start determining that we had to give up rights so we can protect a vulnerability in our nation-state’s security? What is the real DNI agenda? When will the HUMINT capabilities be improved and increased? When will the funds be pulled from Covert Action intelligence operations so the funds can be used for greater results? Tell me when you news people will really get the more important stories going? ” –Leutrell Osborne, Sr.

“The future enters into us, in order to transform itself in us, long before it happens.” –Rilke

Leutrell Osborne, Sr. bids for Director of National Intelligence

June 7, 2010. Annapolis, Md. In late May of 2010, President Obama forced out his Director of National Intelligence (DNI) and began reevaluating the post, which is probably best led by a civilian, according to top lawmakers. “The president needs to decide what he wants the DNI to be,” Feinstein said, “and then work with the intelligence committees to see that the necessary authority is, in fact, in law.” It needs to be someone who can work with Directors of CIA, NSA and FBI, as well as the support agencies.

But, as of this writing, the President supports tough-sell candidate James Clapper, with his military background. Since retiring as a US Air Force general, he’s headed the Pentagon’s intelligence operations, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, and the Defense Intelligence Agency. But, he may lack Congressional support and credibility. Further the function of DNI, who doesn’t actually direct anything, needs to be clarified by Congress. Legislation is required to increase the power of the position.

Clapper is a personal favorite of Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who selected Clapper as undersecretary of Defense for intelligence in January 2007. When he stayed on in 2009, he became one of the few holdovers from the Bush administration in a top policy position.

Two former intelligence officials said the nomination of Clapper would send a signal that, by design or default, the administration was accepting a more limited mandate for the DNI than advocates for the position had in mind when Congress created the job in 2004 to address intelligence failures prior to the 9/11 attacks.

While Obama said Clapper would be his principal intelligence adviser, former officials said that task was increasingly in the hands of John Brennan, the White House’s Deputy National Security Adviser for Counterterrorism and Homeland Security.

It is sad that the Military Covert Actions intelligence umbrella now covers the NIC. It may be worse than what went on in the Soviet Union when the KGB and GRU did Covert Action intelligence operations. Given the oil chaos the US Govt has to regroup on all major fronts and that means even NIC CA.

Osborne wonders how things will get done especially knowing that the govt has two major internal weaknesses: each agency and department refuses to adequately collaborate with each other nor is there any tech system that works between the entities in the NIC. Today only big dog companies are being hired by the NIC agencies and departments without hope of solving the inability of the agencies and departments to communicate to one another with harmony.

Top Spook

The DNI needs to wear many hats to coordinate and deploy the 16 intelligence agencies and report those filtered results directly to the President. First and foremost he needs visionary insight to navigate through the turbulent waters of international sociopolical complications, as well as the diplomatic power to mesh all the powerful players involved in the National Intelligence Community (NIC).

An effective DNI needs credibility to get the job done and the clout to determine and execute direction. He needs the capacity to mobilize and transform the Draconian bureaucracy. He even needs to be able to stand up to the President, helping him navigate and course correct the ship of State.

One intent in establishing the DNI was to gain control of the budgets of the 16 agencies and departments of the NIC. Congress was previously unable to handle budget issues of the NIC. Hence, Congress created the DNI layer of management over the NIC.

As in Rilke’s line, “The future enters into us, in order to transform itself in us, long before it happens,” the future has entered Leutrell Osborne, Sr. Advocating the ethical High Road, he would like to bring transformation to the NIC’s clandestine intelligence operations while balancing equities of governance with stakeholders and career government employees. In short, US foreign policy can be improved by re-inventing the NIC especially regarding “Covert Action (CA) intelligence operations.”

The creation of the DNI has been a transformational and very tumultuous time for the intelligence community and particularly the CIA. When you ask somebody to do so much transformational change, often it makes sense to let somebody then take the agency forward from there.

Osborne suggests he has “natural leadership qualities” with his “decades of experience in the intelligence community,” government and private business world. He suggests Intelligence needs to be more human. Humans provide the best intelligence. An extrovert and “relater,” he emphasizes the value of the human connection and even intuition. The county’s core needs are changing. Citizens are fed up with corrupt government, institutions and corporations.

Transformational Leadership

Osborne doesn’t mind admitting that transformational leaders need to listen to their Spirit and ethical conscience. He advocated against “dirty tricks” and for the moral/ethical approach during his tenure with CIA. CIA is somewhat infamous for an “ends justifies the means” attitude, but Osborne claims those ends simply aren’t met with “dirty tricks,” such as those chronicled in the book of greatest hits, CIA’s Family Jewels. So, we need to consider the real effects and rework our strategy.

HUMINT or human intelligence remains one of the best forms of clandestine intelligence trade crafts though other methods such as “TECHINT” continue to play a significant role in the nation-state’s effort to obtain so called secret information. The question remains, without Covert Action (CA) could the USA still have achieved what it has? This “change agent” says, “Yes, since there is little to no evidence indicating that CA ever worked, per se.”

The sequence of events prior to shooting wars remain questionable and may be where the next transformation needs to occur. That is, once the USA deals with reduction of CA it can press on more HUMINT and TECHINT clandestine operations. Please remember there is no need for CIA clandestine operations when the Department of State and our diplomats exchange overt information with other nation-states. Useful secrets are ‘captured’ or acquired on policies, scenarios and deployments, etc. through normal espionage.

Annapolis, Maryland resident, “Mike” Osborne, Sr. was a spymaster for the CIA. Case Officers function more like spy managers over independent contractors (agents, assets and recruits), overseeing select operations within their respective specialties. They are deployed periodically outside Langley as Field Officers.

Operations include three types: 1) Intelligence, or collection of information, 2) Counter Intelligence (CI) to prevent or stop foreign intrusion; and, 3) Covert Action (CA). Other CIA activities include analysis and projections. Osborne’s specialty was and still is CI – Counter Intelligence — the defensive “cloak” of “cloak and dagger.”

Intelligence is one form of control system. Other control systems on the minds of large populations include education (controls behavior), money (controls wealth), law (controls authority), politics (controls national will), economy (controls wealth), history (controls beliefs), psychology (controls thinking), philanthropy (controls opinion), medicine (controls health), religion (controls spiritual beliefs), media / propaganda (controls culture, opinion), and continuity of succession (controls power).

CIA is not the only intelligence agency deployed by and reporting to the U.S. President. There are now 16 intelligence collection agencies (IC) coordinated by the DNI. They include military intelligence, information operations (IO), satellite and electronic surveillance (SIGINT), science intelligence, even domestic spying and homeland security.

Osborne notes, “Law enforcement in the USA has to change and acquire some of the attributes of intelligence work. That’s why FBI SAs are now going to CIA for training. That’s why USA is fighting dirty tricks, aka CA, aka terrorism, formerly known as secret para-military warfare.”

“For the record,” Osborne says, “the continued preoccupation with reducing vulnerabilities is costly and just the opposite of what the “Osborne Ultimatum” recommends. We recommend more and improved HUMINT. Intelligence is a property of human beings.”


Osborne was trained in Transformational Leadership in both CIA and government contracting as a transformation agent. He would bring a Transformational Leadership approach to the position of DNI. His view of leadership transformational theory is one of reaching to higher moral positions without the pitfalls and conceptual weaknesses of charismatic leadership.

Osborne believes he can translate his CIA and business experience into an overview and coordination of the entire Intelligence Community and its administrative guidance needs in the rapidly shifting balance of world power.

Yet, he continuously questions the CIA’s transformation to a paramilitary organization. He also notes, while CIA was originally mandated to perform foreign espionage, Intelligence has now merged with domestic law enforcement in Fusion Centers that monitor and control the activities of US citizens.

The global war on terrorism has, if nothing else, renewed the discussion of when and how societies—especially those believing that they are constituted on some values more noble than the mere continuation of their governing regimes—can use violence or restrict (on security grounds) the liberties of their own citizens or persons they encounter from other countries, friendly, neutral, or hostile.

The military services have faced transformational decision points for centuries. We know how the right path to innovation, so easy to define in hindsight, frequently proves “too hard to do” even for devoted and capable professionals trapped in a framework of institutional loyalties and structures.

There could be an inverse rule between how much military SpecOps does and reduction in CIA CA, leaving CIA to focus on its specialties. The entire NIC does CA without genuine oversight. CIA has been the real agency that has previously received oversight after flaps. Spec Ops more than likely can be classified as CA ops. In the old days it would be secret para-military operations.

The creation of the DNI has been a transformational and very tumultuous time for the intelligence community and particularly the CIA. When you ask somebody to do so much transformational change, often it makes sense to let somebody then take the agency forward from there.

Dedicated to civil rights and protection of Constitutional law, Osborne has certain pet peeves that have prompted him to continue his own investigations into the injustices and truth of our nation’s clandestine history. His interests include what he calls more intelligent intelligence (HUMINT), the KKK Assassinations (JFK, RFK and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.), 9/11, COINTELPRO, Covert Action (CA) oversight, and transnational crime including global drug trade.

Osborne was interviewed on national television channel BET the day after 9/11 with Congresswoman Maxine Waters. Anderson Cooper has also interviewed him on CNN about life in CIA when he assisted in the defense with lawyer Mark Zaid of a fellow Black CIA Case Officer (Jeffrey Sterling), who had lost his job. Osborne was also interviewed in Mike Ruppert’s book Crossing the Rubicon. He has championed many issues and been a valuable mentor and “godfather” to many.

Osborne’s personal story of his mother’s CIA employment and his own vocation was featured on CNN during Black History Month in February 2007 A highlight of his life was attending the awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize for Martin Luther King, Jr. and a long conversation with the Civil Rights leader at the following reception. Dr. King was a very influential transformational leader and Osborne seeks to emulate him. But more than charisma and comprehension of task importance is needed to direct the IC of the United States and coordinate it with both military and law enforcement agendas


As a CIA veteran, Osborne sees the main conceptual weakness of CIA as its ineffective use of dangerous and expensive COVERT ACTION. Secret paramilitary activities within other nations have largely failed and cost the US in credibility and public opinion. Even the “most successful” operations during the Soviet War in Afghanistan have blown back upon the US which is now mired in a similar stalemate.

CIA is now taking on bigger and riskier roles in the Front Lines. In recent years the civilian spy agency has transformed into a paramilitary organization at the vanguard of America’s far-flung wars.


The C.I.A. has always had a paramilitary branch known as the Special Activities Division, which secretly engaged in the kinds of operations more routinely carried out by Special Operations troops. But the branch was a small — and seldom used — part of its operations.

That changed after Sept. 11, 2001, when President George W. Bush gave the agency expanded authority to capture or kill Qaeda operatives around the world. Since then, Washington has relied much more on the Special Activities Division because battling suspected terrorists does not involve fighting other armies. Rather, it involves secretly moving in and out of countries like Pakistan and Somalia where the American military is not legally allowed to operate.

The fact that the agency is in effect running a war in Pakistan is the culmination of one of the most significant shifts in the C.I.A.’s history. But the agency has at times struggled with this new role. It established a network of secret overseas jails where terrorist suspects were subjected to brutal interrogation techniques, and it set up an assassination program that at one point was outsourced to employees of a private security company, then known as Blackwater USA.

Some longtime agency officers bristled at what they saw as the militarization of the C.I.A., worrying that it was straying too far from its historical missions of espionage and intelligence analysis.

When he took office, President Obama scaled back the C.I.A.’s counterterrorism mission, but only to a point. He ordered that C.I.A. prisons be shut and that C.I.A officers no longer play a role in interrogating suspects accused of terrorist acts. At the same time, the administration accelerated the C.I.A.’s drone campaign, using Predator and Reaper aircraft to launch missiles and rockets against militants in Pakistan.


Human intelligence is the collection of intelligence from human sources, including defectors, voluntary sources, spies recruited to betray their country or organization, prisoners, diplomats, information from allied or liaison intelligence services.

The US needs to reconfigure how it uses HUMINT tools by examining their effectiveness in the recruitment-centered model. When using this tool, the collecting agency finds a member of an adversarial group with access to important information. He then turn him or her into a spy by building a personal relationship and eventually popping the question, “Will you spy for me?”

Back pocket agents are nefarious agents or assets, loosely associated to the Company. The key is an “agent” has a narrow meaning and in the espionage business one ought not use words and terms that are loosey-goosey. An agent generally is paid and proven. An asset may not be paid nor in agreement with the nation state.

This model dominates since the Cold War, when spying followed fairly predictable guidelines. The organizational solution to the question of penetration was to rely on finding agents ‘in-place’ and to develop an approach in which agent recruitment played the fundamental role in HUMINT operations. However, even using ‘in-place’ sources had its difficulties. The normal process of developing and managing a HUMINT source consists of a cycle of Spotting, Assessing, Recruiting, Handling, and Terminating an asset In the Recruitment Cycle.

Driving this is an organizational culture that elevates recruiting in the hearts and minds of the Clandestine Service cadre. Career paths are driven by asset and agent recruiting, ‘hallway reputation,’ and ‘scalp-hunting,’ which measures performance for promotions. The highest value is given to recruiting and personality traits that facilitate it. In the Cold War that meant infiltrating the diplomatic scene of embassies and consulates under the guise of ‘official cover’ – cover where an officer’s affiliation with the US is not concealed, but his or her status as an intelligence officer is.

Intelligence liason in the War on Terror is necessarily more difficult, due to access to cultural groups, de-centralization of authority, and heavy need for collection on terrorist targets. Liason with foreign security units is crucial, actually better understood as a form of subcontracted intelligence collection based on barter.

Thus, liaison for the purpose of HUMINT collection is essentially “outsourcing the task of penetration,” an approach upon which the CIA appears to regularly lean when collecting on terrorists. Herein lies liaison’s greatest weakness – that we cannot control it. In a liaison partnership, HUMINT officers may be afforded access to a captured terrorist, or made aware of or allowed to participate in the partner service’s surveillance.



Issue No. 1

US intelligence needs to be reinvented and transformed, especially Covert Action intelligence operations in all of the various aspects called “dirty tricks.” Tighter oversight and accountability with improved end results are required. Accountability boards are not enough. One still has to measure the failed Covert Action intelligence for “blowback.”

Issue No. 2

No nation-state currently polices transnational crime, which is a growing threat. Failure to provide adequate Human Intelligence (HUMINT) is a true weakness in the USA system. Most policy decisions are not based on hard HUMINT sourced information but other so-called facts and truths open to spin and interpretation. Senator Jay Rockefeller, Chairman of Select Committee on Intelligence claimed congressional oversight has increased about 100% since 9/11, but that program is now strangled.

Issue No. 3

The shadow of the Shadow Government, including domestic spying and assassinations, needs to be revealed to the American people and the world so we can finally heal. We must take responsibility for that shadow..

Issue No. 4

Our Constitutional rights are under attack, including the First Amendment. Free speech, the right to assembly, and freedom of the press are in jeopardy. It will be illegal to disagree with government policy, even with patriotic dissent. We’ve traded our democracy for corporate feudalism.

Issue No. 5

A serious consequence, the breakdown in credibility between the U.S. government and its citizenry, needs to be addressed, as well as increasing militarization of police and unwarranted surveillance of US citizens. The breakdown of domestic relations is a serious issue, perhaps concealing further manipulations. Those hunting the truth continue to press for disclosure from all knowledgeable sources.

WHY Leutrell Osborne, Sr.?

Osborne characterizes himself as, “a living a transformation and change agent from the world of espionage that can improve the DNI.” The story of his life as THE BLACK MAN IN THE CIA is currently in press and recounts the inspirational details of his rise within the Agency. He cites his decades of varied experience, mentoring and activism:

1939-1951 Birth, mother, father, WDC, light skinned black man w/o money- then at 12 mother working at CIA when he got the vision to get a job at CIA and become a Spy Manager.

1952-1957 – Inspirational life involved in participating in changes like reduction of segregation barriers especially in high school and self taught photography skills that got me hired by CIA as well as eloping and marrying a wonderful life partner Rose Marie Battle Osborne who enabled us to have six children, raise 11 other children and stay married 52 years.

1957-1968 From the CIA’s DO become CIA Case Officer w/o a college degree and graduate from the CIA’s Career Training Program (CTP) after having a tour abroad in the Far Northern Country (FNC) that enabled the family and me to serve as genuine change agents, including actually meeting and talking with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Rose talked with Coretta while I was talking to Dr. King for over one hour at the US Ambassadors reception for Dr. King, Jr.

1968-1972 Acquiring language and college degree overcoming obstacles that godfathers and mothers helped me resolve.

1972-1974- Latin American tour as Case Officer involved in clandestine service change management and accomplishing firsts in tech operations, agent access opportunities and even sending out information that was from a tech op that become a formal CIA intelligence dissemination to the NIC.

1974-1976 While holding down a significant position as CI for Central America, I was selected to be an advisor to two CIA Directors: Colby and “daddy” Bush 41. These opportunities enabled me to serve as a transformation agent while being on the DCI’s EEO Advisory Panel that brought greater equality to the CIA. That advisory opportunity was extra-curricula and enabled me to have the same vantage point on the CIA as the DCIs. Thus, from this platform, I made the decision and move to desegregate the management of CIA’s Office of Communication and I became a Communications Security (COMSEC) officer.

I led a transformation team in COMMO and again advised another DCI Admiral Stansfield Turner. Two of our recommendations impacted NIC telecommunications and creation of CIA’s move to separate telecommunications and information management. One of the other significant events was the participation in the NIC’s decision to no longer depend on host government’s to provide protection for US Embassies and personnel but for the USA to include such matters in NIC protection of US property and personnel.

1976-1981 As the only known CIA Spy Manager with six years COMSEC experience, I was able to transfer the NIC especially on improving NIC tech information across agencies and departments.

1982-1984 As Chief CI for the Directorate of Operation’s Libya Branch, again I was position to use past transformation experiences especially knowledge of CIA Commo to improving the DO’s handling of vital and important raw information from the field so that it went through the maze of barriers easier and faster to the NIC customer.

1984-1988 Private sector experiences as an international food broker, commercial mortgage broker and security and sales director for one of the few Black owned armored car companies in the world provided more experiences and insights into what works and what does not work. I even had the experience of working with the FBI to investigate a million dollar armored car robbery.

1988-1994 Return to govt via tempo jobs at the Department of Education and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) in l988 and l989. The latter OPM opportunity besides serving as the platform to continue as a change agent allowed me to re-enter government service but now in government procurement as an advocate for small business owners, I began learning and keeping book on many things, but the government vertical systems that don’t work such as Equal Employment Opportunity and the Inspector General enabled some of us to gain greater understanding of government barriers and challenges to equality and justice. With the peer election of me to serve as the Director OSDBU, I along with key other govt employees worked through Public Law 95-507 and even improved Congressional understanding of the adversities impacting small business. The OSDBU Director experiences resulted in my assisting in the creation of FAR Part 10 which was part of the stimulus that eliminated my OPM job as Director OSDBU when I retired in l994.

1994-2010 Performing as a “sales consultant” guiding companies in Marketing to the Government (MTG). Note that these 16 years of private sector procurement experience and the prior five (5) years inside of government with several significant transformation managements surely enabled me to influence government to improve contracting for small business owners while these same events also helped set the stage for much of the current government success with government contracting preference programs today.

In conclusion, the family “relationship” responsibilities for over 50 years of marriage as well as various leadership roles in the Catholic Church and the Knights of Columbus enabled me to gain significant insight and sensitivity for community stake holder expectations that further assisted me in being the transformation agent that I am.

Thus, Osborne feels feels he epitomizes the transformational leader. If we examine the overview of Transformational Leadership Theory, we see he fulfills the criteria and has experience in each segment.


Pulitzer Prize winner, James MacGregor Burns first brought the concept of transformational leadership to prominence in his extensive research into leadership. His key innovation in leadership theory was shifting away from studying the traits of great men and transactional management to focus on the interaction of leaders and led as collaborators working toward mutual benefit. He is best known for contributions to the Transformational, Aspirational and Visionary schools of leadership theory.

Excerpts from his book Leadership:

* Leadership over human beings is exercised when persons with certain motives and purposes mobilize, in competition or conflict with others, institutional, political, psychological, and other resources so as to arouse, engage, and satisfy the motives of followers… in order to realize goals mutually held by both leaders and followers….

* Transformational leadership occurs when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality.

* That people can be lifted into their better selves is the secret of transforming leadership and the moral and practical theme of this work.

“Essentially the leader’s task is consciousness-raising on a wide plane. The leader’s fundamental act is to induce people to be aware or conscious of what they feel – to feel their true needs so strongly, to define their values so meaningfully, that they can be moved to purposeful action.”

In this leadership style, the leader enhances the motivation, moral and performance of his follower group. So according to MacGregor – transformational leadership is all about values and meaning, and a purpose that transcends short-term goals and focuses on higher order needs.

At times of organizational change, and big step change, people do feel insecure, anxious and low in energy – so in these situations and especially in these difficult times, enthusiasm and energy are infectious and inspiring. And yet so many organizational changes fail because leaders pay attention to the changes they are facing instead of the transitions people must make to accommodate them.

In Osborne’s view it is the responsibility of the director leading the change to supply an infusion of positive energy. The transformational approach also depends on winning the trust of people – which is made possible by the unconscious assumption that they too will be changed or transformed in some way by following the leader.

Bass defined transformational leadership in terms of how the leader affects followers, who are intended to trust, admire and respect the transformational leader.

He identified three ways in which leaders transform followers:

* Increasing their awareness of task importance and value.
* Getting them to focus first on team or organizational goals, rather than their own interests.
* Activating their higher-order needs.

Bass has recently noted that authentic transformational leadership is grounded in moral foundations that are based on four components:

* Idealized influence
* Inspirational motivation
* Intellectual stimulation
* Individualized consideration

…and three moral aspects:

* The moral character of the leader.
* The ethical values embedded in the leader’s vision, articulation, and program (which followers either embrace or reject).
* The morality of the processes of social ethical choice and action that leaders and followers engage in and collectively pursue.

The four components of the transformational leadership style are:

(1) Charisma or idealized influence – the degree to which the leader behaves in admirable ways and displays convictions and takes stands that cause followers to identify with the leader who has a clear set of values and acts as a role model for the followers. Idealized Influence provides a role model for high ethical behavior, instills pride, gains respect and trust. Charisma is seen as necessary, but not sufficient, for example in the way that charismatic movie stars may not make good leaders. Two key charismatic effects that transformational leaders achieve is to evoke strong emotions and to cause identification of the followers with the leader. This may be through stirring appeals. It may also may occur through quieter methods such as coaching and mentoring.

(2) Inspirational motivation – the degree to which the leader articulates a vision that is appeals to and inspires the followers with optimism about future goals, and offers meaning for the current tasks in hand. Inspirational Motivation – the degree to which the leader articulates a vision that is appealing and inspiring to followers. Leaders with inspirational motivation challenge followers with high standards, communicate optimism about future goals, and provide meaning for the task at hand. Followers need to have a strong sense of purpose if they are to be motivated to act. Purpose and meaning provide the energy that drives a group forward. The visionary aspects of leadership are supported by communication skills that make the vision understandable, precise, powerful and engaging. The followers are willing to invest more effort in their tasks, they are encouraged and optimistic about the future and believe in their abilities.

(3) Intellectual stimulation – the degree to which the leader challenges assumptions, stimulates and encourages creativity in the followers – by providing a framework for followers to see how they connect [to the leader, the organization, each other, and the goal] they can creatively overcome any obstacles in the way of the mission. Intellectual Stimulation includes the degree to which the leader challenges assumptions, takes risks and solicits followers’ ideas. Leaders with this style stimulate and encourage creativity in their followers. They nurture and develop people who think independently. For such a leader, learning is a value and unexpected situations are seen as opportunities to learn. The followers ask questions, think deeply about things and figure out better ways to execute their tasks.

(4) Personal and individual attention – the degree to which the leader attends to each individual follower’s needs and acts as a mentor or coach and gives respect to and appreciation of the individual’s contribution to the team. This fulfills and enhances each individual team members’ need for self-fulfillment, and self-worth – and in so doing inspires followers to further achievement and growth. Individualized Consideration includes the degree to which the leader attends to each follower’s needs, acts as a mentor or coach to the follower and listens to the follower’s concerns and needs. The leader gives empathy and support, keeps communication open and places challenges before the followers. This also encompasses the need for respect and celebrates the individual contribution that each follower can make to the team. The followers have a will and aspirations for self development and have intrinsic motivation for their tasks.

Transformational leadership applied in a change management context, is ideally suited to the holistic and wide view perspective of a program based approach to change management and as such is key element of successful strategies for managing change.

Yukl (1994) draws some tips for transformational leadership

1. Develop a challenging and attractive vision, together with the employees.
2. Tie the vision to a strategy for its achievement.
3. Develop the vision, specify and translate it to actions.
4. Express confidence, decisiveness and optimism about the vision and its implementation.
5. Realize the vision through small planned steps and small successes in the path for its full implementation.

Transformational leadership is defined as a leadership approach that creates valuable and positive change in the followers with the end goal of developing followers into leaders. A transformational leader focuses on “transforming” others to help each other, to look out for each other, to be encouraging and harmonious, and to look out for the organization as a whole.

With this leadership, the leader enhances the motivation, morale and performance of his followers through a variety of mechanisms. These include connecting the follower’s sense of identity and self to the mission and the collective identity of the organization; being a role model for followers that inspires them; challenging followers to take greater ownership for their work, and understanding the strengths and weaknesses of followers, so the leader can align followers with tasks that optimizes their performance.
This is in contrast with pseudo-transformational leadership, where, for example, in-group/out-group

‘us and them’ games are used to bond followers to the leader.

CHANGE AGENTS: Research on champions or change agents typically examines the behaviors, attributes, and motivations of the individual leading the organizational change. As such, “championing” is understood as a near heroic venture by those with a near innate ability and expressed interest in such work. However, change leaders generally rely on the support of a team of employees and consultants.

The experience of the members of change teams is less well understood despite their role in introducing, legitimating, and managing change among the rank and file of the organization. Interviews with full-time members of change teams reveal that they do not begin as skilled, motivated agents of change but rather they undergo extensive training and, in many cases, describe themselves as having experienced a personal transformation during their intense involvement in the change activities. The findings suggest that organizations, in the pursuit of change, produce change agents and that these change agents seek opportunities in the labor market that allow them to continue this work – initiating, championing, and implementing business process management – in other organizations.

The Black Man in the CIA

June 1, 2010
Leutrell Osborne, Sr.


Leutrell Osborne Group Social Network at ning.com

September 2, 2009

LOG has created its own social network for in-house business at ning. com
Click to join at http://leutrellosbornegroup.ning.com
Register and sign in and link to all our members, to faciliate information sharing and learning about one another’s common goals.

McKinney Released

July 6, 2009

McKinney released, returning to United States
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Sunday, July 05, 2009

Cynthia McKinney’s mom said she’s learned that her daughter is on the way home.

Leola McKinney said a friend who contacted the U.S. Embassy in Israel reported that the former congresswoman was released from Israeli custody and taken to Ben Gurion International Airport.
See the McKinney video

Recent headlines:

* Atlantans’ business geared toward curvy jeans fits
* McKinney, still in jail, expected to see judge Sunday
* Man drowns at Stone Mountain park

• DeKalb County news

“We finally got word that she was released,” Leola McKinney said late Sunday afternoon. “We don’t know what time she is supposed to fly out. All we know is that they took her to the airport.

“I would be more relieved when I know she’s on the flight,” Leola McKinney added. “But I am relieved that she’s away from there.”

McKinney had been in custody since Tuesday, when she and 20 others were swept up by the Israeli Navy while allegedly trying to sail through a navy blockade. The group says it was attempting to deliver humanitarian supplies to Gaza.

McKinney and the rest of her group could have been released soon after they were taken into custody but they refused to sign a document admitting they violated Israel’s blockade, according to McKinney’s parents. The group was due to appear in an Israeli court Sunday.

Leola McKinney said she had no information about the court hearing.

Leola McKinney said she had not spoken with her daughter since shortly after she was taken into custody.

Cynthia McKinney and other members of the “Free Gaza Movement ” left Cyprus Tuesday on the Greek-registered ship Arion.

Their ship was stopped when they tried to pass through the Israeli Navy’s security blockade at Ashdod. The group was taken into custody and their ship was seized. Israel officials promised to deliver by ground all of the humanitarian supplies that were on the boat.

Family, friends and supporters say Cynthia McKinney believed she was in international waters and was free to pass.

“The Israelis hijacked us because we wanted to give crayons to the children of Gaza,” Cynthia McKinney said in a recorded statement delivered via telephone and posted on the internet site YouTube [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JkPvzSZRuDo].

The office of the Consulate General of Israel in Atlanta said in a statement released Friday, “According to Israeli law Ms. McKinney and her fellow crew members were suggested to sign a form acknowledging their deportation… Since Ms. McKinney has refused to do so, she is expected to appear before an Israeli judge on Sunday, July 5, and afterwards be returned home as soon as possible.”

Civil rights leader the Rev. Joseph Lowery, head of the Atlanta-based Coalition for the People’s Agenda, said he and others have spoken by phone with the Consulate General of Israel.

“Whatever happened, there was no harm done,” Lowery said. “She was not carrying munitions, but medicine. We hope Israel will show compassion and release her and let her go on to deliver the much-needed medicine to the Gaza Strip. … If she were carrying guns, that would be a different thing. [But] she was carrying humanitarian aid.”

Israeli officials blame McKinney and her group for the controversy, saying they were looking for confrontation to attract publicity. The officials note that Palestinian Authority and the rest of the international community had agreed to the off-shore blockade to prevent arms smuggling into Gaza. Gaza is controlled by Hamas, which is classified by the U.S. and European Union as a terrorist organization.

Leola McKinney said the trip would have received no “publicity if they had been allowed to deliver supplies to Gaza. They [Israel] made an issue out of it by taking the boat and escorting them into Israel.”

Billy McKinney, Cynthia McKinney’s father and a former state legislator, said his daughter was only trying to show “the devastation in Gaza… Anybody who has a humanitarian spirit would not want to see those people live in those conditions.”


July 6, 2009

Cybersecurity Plan to Involve NSA, Telecoms
July 3, 2009, Washington Post

The Obama administration will proceed with a Bush-era plan to use National Security Agency assistance in screening government computer traffic on private-sector networks, with AT&T as the likely test site, according to three current and former government officials. President Obama said in May that government efforts to protect computer systems from attack would not involve “monitoring private-sector networks or Internet traffic,” and Department of Homeland Security officials say the new program will scrutinize only data going to or from government systems. But the program has provoked debate within DHS, the officials said, because of uncertainty about whether private data can be shielded from unauthorized scrutiny, how much of a role NSA should play and whether the agency’s involvement in warrantless wiretapping during George W. Bush’s presidency would draw controversy. Each time a private citizen visited a “dot-gov” Web site or sent an e-mail to a civilian government employee, that action would be screened for potential harm to the network. Under a classified pilot program approved during the Bush administration, NSA data and hardware would be used to protect the networks of some civilian government agencies. Part of an initiative known as Einstein 3, the plan called for telecommunications companies to route the Internet traffic of civilian agencies through a monitoring box that would search for and block computer codes designed to penetrate or otherwise compromise networks. AT&T, the world’s largest telecommunications firm, was the Bush administration’s choice to participate in the test. AT&T officials declined to comment. The prospect of NSA involvement in cybersecurity … fuels concerns about unwarranted government snooping into private communication.”

Terror Policy

July 6, 2009

To Critics, New Policy on Terror Looks Old
July 2, 2009, New York Times

Civil libertarians recently accused President Obama of acting like former President George W. Bush, citing reports about Mr. Obama’s plans to detain terrorism suspects without trials on domestic soil after he closes the Guantánamo prison. It was only the latest instance in which critics have argued that Mr. Obama has failed to live up to his campaign pledge “to restore our Constitution and the rule of law” and raised a pointed question: Has he, on issues related to fighting terrorism, turned out to be little different from his predecessor? Mr. Obama’s critics say that … the core problem with Mr. Bush’s approach … was that it trammeled individual rights. And they say Mr. Obama’s policies have not changed that. “President Obama may mouth very different rhetoric,” said Anthony D. Romero, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union. “He may have a more complicated process with members of Congress. But in the end, there is no substantive break from the policies of the Bush administration.” Mr. Obama has also drawn fire from human rights advocates for fighting to prevent detainees in Afghanistan from having habeas corpus rights. Mr. Obama has also continued other Bush-era policies … like the C.I.A.’s “extraordinary rendition” program … and the invocation of the “state secrets” privilege to shut down some lawsuits. Jack Balkin, a Yale Law School professor, said Mr. Obama’s ratification of the basic outlines of the surveillance and detention policies he inherited would reverberate for generations. By bestowing bipartisan acceptance on them, Mr. Balkin said, Mr. Obama is consolidating them as entrenched features of government. “What we are watching,” Mr. Balkin said, “is a liberal, centrist, Democratic version of the construction of these same governing practices.”