Michael Isikoff should follow-up on a story with thoroughness as befits a true Investigative Journal
Mr. Isikoff interviewed Stephen Kinzer about Whitey Bulger's involvement in the MKUltra Project--yet, sadly, Kinzer knew little to nothing about Bulger's involvement. Any info he now has, he received from me through his friend Michael Rezendes, AP investigative journalist.
Bulger didn't understand the full intent of MKUltra and his own victimization until after his trial in 2013. He discovered it through me. I was the juror in Bulger's trial that told Rezendes that I would not have found Bulger guilty of any of the murders had the truth of MKUltra been presented. I do not blame his attorneys for not presenting it--they represented their client and his wishes at the time. Though they are bound by attorney/client privilege, I am not. Bulger told me why he didn't want it presented. He told me what he experienced for the 15 months he was used as a subject. He came to realize, through me, the depth of the damage done to his mind.
My disappointment is this: Kinser failed to connect the dots on the CIA's portion of the project that would attempt to make subjects homicidal and their use of Bulger, Kaczynski, and quite possibly Charles Manson. (How many others? We can only guess.)
Not one "investigative journalist" has been curious enough to consider all Bulger had to say regarding stories told of him. Is it truth an investigative journalist is after? Or sensationalism? Is Yahoo News another tabloid outlet?
I understand why the Boston Globe hasn't reached out to discover what they can about James Bulger through the many letters I have -- after all, they staked their reputation on and made money off the tales of the Boston US Attorney's Office's key witnesses against Bulger. Tales tall enough to save them from the electric chair and earn them get out of jail cards and hefty profits. Certainly the Globe doesn't want to confuse it's readers with the truth now...
But why wouldn't Isikoff reach out to me to get to what Bulger actually said in more than 70 letters and our 15 hours of conversation? Bulger's story of MKUltra is paramount to understanding the degree to which the CIA would go. And, what of Ted Kaczynski -- only 17 when the CIA destroyed his mind? What of Charles Manson? What of the CIA's connection there?
Bulger's planned murder indicates the government, with the help of the media perhaps, is still trying to control this story. I have proof in letters, and in my visual assessment as a nurse of Bulger's physical deterioration. The government said his health "Improved" and therefore they decided enroute to a medical prison not to send him--but instead sent him immediately, unguarded, to a prison with a violent history.
Guess what? The government lied. Bulger's health could not improve without surgeries. Will Michael Isikoff and Yahoo News sweep this under the rug too? Or, will they be an example of journalistic ethics in leading the way on this story?