Madagascar Institute
C: Friends of Jinx(?)
Ca: 1990's(?)-present(?)
Author: *********

The Madagascar Institute remains secret and is presumed highly dangerous.

This report was commissioned by the Jinx Ministry of Intelligence. The report was prepared, and is presented, over the protests of several senior officials. The authors wish concur with those objections, and regret that this report should have been ordered. We advise NO FURTHER INQUIRY into this subject.

The Madagascar Institute cannot be safely investigated, described, or even mentioned. Our investigations have yielded virtually no hard data. Rumors, hearsay and innuendo comprise the bulk of our information. Agents assigned to this matter have described repeated, credible threats to their safety. One Agent (Agent ***********), ordered to infiltrate the Institute, has been missing since 3/13/2002.

On the basis of the very dubious, very limited scope of our intelligence, we offer the following theories. The Ministry of Intelligence is requested to consider that these theories are highly speculative, almost entirely lacking evidentiary support.

Theory One: The Madagascar Institute is a laboratory for robotic weapons research.

Theory Two: The Madagascar Institute is a private space program seeking to compete with or replace the NASA program.

Theory Three: The Madagascar Institute does not exist.

Theory Four: The Madagascar Institute is a mirror government for the city of New York. According to this theory, the Madagascar Institute provides certain sections of the city with an independent police force, postal service, public works, etc., without the knowledge or consent of the Mayor.

Theory Five: The Madagascar Institute is a neo-Futurist cult. The Futurists were a short-lived movement in Italy between the First and Second World Wars. The Futurists worshipped machines, speed, power, war, and masculinity.

This report must again emphasize that these theories are almost certainly false and without merit. Protocol generally indicates a second study should be commissioned to build on the data of this study. We strongly advise against such a study. First, there is no data to build on. Second, an additional study would pose an unacceptable level of risk to any agents and officers involved.