CIA threatens "Press for Truth" producers over release of new documentary

[jimd3100]

Do you know what "hindsight" means? You seem to be pretending that you don't. The CIA was sharing information on these terrorists with the Saudis BEFORE any of them even came to America, AFTER they did this, they were shutting down and disrupting arrests of these known terrorists. The White house claimed all the information pointed to an attack overseas AFTER it was known these terrorists were coming to America. The Saudis were assisting these terrorists AFTER they knew they were in America and were known Al Qaeda operatives. The 28 pages of the joint Inquiry about Saudi Involvement in 9-11 was written and then Censored by the White House BEFORE the Iraq War. The Penttbom investigation was revealing Saudi Gov involvement DURING the time the White House was making it's case for "possible" Iraqi involvement.

You seem to be confused and think hindsight means when YOU finally discover something.
Example:

I've heard mention of the Capitol building and the White House as potential fourth targets but not the CIA building. Where did you get that from?

 

[beachnut]

Do you know what "hindsight" means? You seem to be pretending that you don't. The CIA ...
You seem to be confused and think hindsight means when YOU finally discover something.
Example:

You are confused. The topic is about silly headlines from a crazy website of woo, the CIA threatens "press for truth". You are off on a tangential witch hunt which belongs in a thread titled, "Crazy Leaps to Crazy Claims never to be Prime-time", similar to the "Shoot Down, means Stand Down" nonsense.

Did the CIA threaten "press for truth"? Why did MSM ignore the big story? Spamming hindsight nonsense does not seem to be related to the OP nonsense, save it is nonsense. How does the shoot down logic go again?

 

[paloalto]

You are confused. The topic is about silly headlines from a crazy website of woo, the CIA threatens "press for truth". You are off on a tangential witch hunt which belongs in a thread titled, "Crazy Leaps to Crazy Claims never to be Prime-time", similar to the "Shoot Down, means Stand Down" nonsense.

Did the CIA threaten "press for truth"? Why did MSM ignore the big story? Spamming hindsight nonsense does not seem to be related to the OP nonsense, save it is nonsense. How does the shoot down logic go again?

You are the one that is confused. And as I said before!

The topic of this thread is CIA threatens "Press for Truth" producers over release of new documentary and CIA Goes After Producers Nowosielski & Duffy. This was the result of the interview by Nowosielski & Duffy of Richard Clarke three years earlier.

Based on this interview of Richard Clarke, Nowosielski & Duffy were releasing information on their web site entitled "Who is Richard Blee", the mystery man right in the middle of the massive criminal conspiracy to criminally withhold the information on Mihdhar and Hazmi and the fact that they had been at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting with Walid bin Attash planning the Cole bombing from him and the FBI.

The information on “Who is Richard Blee” included the real names of two CIA employees that had taken part in this criminal conspiracy but were up to this point never named except as aliases. Clarke stated in his interview that the CIA managers Richard Blee, Cofer Black and George Tenet had deliberately withheld information from him and the FBI on Mihdhar and Hazmi. He further stated that with holding this information blocked him and the FBI from preventing the attacks on 9/11. Clarke said that even if Tenet had given him the information on Mihdhar and Hazmi as late as September 4, 2001 when Clarke, Tenet and the other principles were at a White House meeting on the al Qaeda terrorists, the US government could have mounted a huge search and located them before the attacks on 9/11.

Clarke was and perhaps is still unaware that much this information had been given accidentally to FBI Agent Steve Bongardt on August 28, 2001, but that former CIA manager, Tom Wilshire, using FBI HQ agents that the CIA had corrupted, Dina Corsi and Rod Middleton, illegally shut down Bongardt’s investigation of these al Qaeda terrorists even when Bongardt knew these terrorists were inside of the US to take part in a massive al Qaeda attack that would kill many Americans.

The import of all of this is this is the first time Clarke, who had been at the center of counter terrorism in the White House, had publically stated that Tenet had withheld this information from him and the FBI, a crime of immense proportions. This was also the first time the name Richard Blee had even been reveled in the main stream press, up to that point the name Richard Blee had been kept completely secret from anyone outside of the CIA and NSC.

The denial by Tenet, Black and Blee, to the Clarke interview was a non-denial denial. In effect they admitted their guilt in allowing the attacks on 9/11, when they left out the fact of what they knew about Mihdhar and Hazmi, and the fact that these terrorists were inside of the US on August 22, 2001 and even knew that these terrorists were in the US only in order to take part in the massive al Qaeda attack that would kill thousands of Americans.

Tenet was in effect admitting he knew this information. When he says in his denial he stood by his 9/11 Commission testimony, where he stated he had not talked to the President in all of August 2001, about the fact that he knew a huge al Qaeda attack was just about to take place inside of the US that would kill thousands of Americans, he was lying and is still lying about this even to today. Since we now know he flew down to Crawford for a 6 hour meeting with the President on August 24, 2001, the big question remains what did the tell the President about Mihdhar and Hazmi and the fact that he knew that these terrorists were inside of the US as to take part in a plan by KSM to hijack several large commercial aircraft and fly these into the World Trade Center Towers, the Pentagon, and US Capital building.

This was the information Tenet had on August 24 2001. It is inconceivable that he did not give this horrific information to the President, after all why then did he fly down to Crawford Texas for this secret urgent meeting. And why has Tenet and the White House kept the facts surrounding this meeting so secret even to today, with Tenet even going so far as to out and out lie to the 9/11 Commission at their public hearings on April 14, 2004 about this meeting with the President. What was he and the White House trying to hide.

And then the big question is if the President had this horrific information, then why did he not do anything to prevent this horrific al Qaeda attack?

But of course there are people on this forum who will say this is all nonsense, you are jumping to conclusions, but then why should they get confused with the facts.

The web site was about this interview and an article on Richard Blee, whose name was so secret it had never been mentioned in the main stream media before. So why did main stream media keep the name Richard Blee a secret from the American people? Blee was right at the heart of the CIA criminal conspiracy to allow the al Qaeda terrorists to carry out the attacks on 9/11.

I actually believe that many of the people at the CIA who had allowed these attacks to take place actually did not really want these attacks to occur. They all clearly knew that thousands of Americans would be murdered in these attacks. But they all knew they would face many years in prison if Bongardt continued with his investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi and then found the CIA photo of Walid Bin Attash taken at Kuala Lumpur, or if Samit exposed Moussaoui’s connection to the al Qaeda terrorists and Ramzi bin al-Sheibh back in Hamburg, which would have lit a fire under Bongardt's investigation. So the people at the CIA had no choice but to allow the al Qaeda terrorists to carry out the horrific attacks on 9/11.

Your question "Why did MSM ignore the big story?" is an excellent question. When Richard Clarke said publically for the first time that it was George Tenet, Cofer Black and Richard Blee, all in the main management hierarchy of the CIA, that had criminally withheld the information on Mihdhar and Hazmi from him and the FBI, little notice was paid to the interview it makes one wonder.

FBI Agent Ali Soufan said the exact same thing in his new book, "Black Banners". But Clarke, apparently out of fear, refused to answer any mainstream media calls to reconfirm the information in his interview. This could be the reason they ignored his story. But main stream media also ignored George Tenet's obvious and outright lies and perjury at the 9/11 Commission hearings on April 14, 2004, so their ignoring horrific information is par for the course.

 

[Robrob]

You made a claim of fact:

The original plan included CIA headquarters as a target - which is just another reason why CIA would be very interested in KSM and his plans. Murad and Yousef along with KSM had a plan to fly planes into buildings back in 1995. Murad told authorities this back then. I think that is what he is referring to.

I politely asked your source:

I've heard mention of the Capitol building and the White House as potential fourth targets but not the CIA building. Where did you get that from?

You went off on a tangent without answering the question:

You seem to be confused and think hindsight means when YOU finally discover something.
Example:

Why?

 

[jimd3100]

You made a claim of fact:

Yes, it's a fact-so what?

I politely asked your source:

And you were given several sources. It's not my fault you refuse to admit it.

You went off on a tangent without answering the question:

Why do you lie? The question was answered. How many times does it need to be answered?

Paloalto has named sources for it there are lots of sources for it here are some more.....

There was your answer.

Why?

Yea, why? And Why do you try and use the same pathetic "hindsight" excuse that Tenet tried and failed during his lies at the joint inquiry? Why use the failed excuse he already tried as he told his lie that nobody read the cable when the oig report and CIA later admitted that 50 to 60 read the cable. Why?

Q: "So the cable that said Hazmi had entered the Untied States came to your headquarters, nobody read it?"

Tenet: "Yes sir, it was an information only cable from the field and nobody read that information only cable."

Q: "Should it have been read?"

Tenet: "Yes, of course - in hindsight."

Q: In?...Should it have been read at the time!?

Tenet: "Of course it should have been."

Source: 2 minute mark:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IF38P58-rdo

 

[paloalto]

Orignally posted by Robrob:

You made a claim of fact:

Originally Posted by jimd3100
The original plan included CIA headquarters as a target - which is just another reason why CIA would be very interested in KSM and his plans. Murad and Yousef along with KSM had a plan to fly planes into buildings back in 1995. Murad told authorities this back then. I think that is what he is referring to.

I politely asked your source:

see the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bojinka_plot

Phase II, CIA plane crash plotAbdul Hakim Murad confessed details of Phase II in his interrogation by the Manila police after his capture.

Phase two would have involved Murad either renting, buying, or hijacking a small airplane, preferably a Cessna. The airplane would be filled with explosives. He would then crash it into the Central Intelligence Agency headquarters in the Langley area in Fairfax County, Virginia. Murad had been trained as a pilot in North Carolina, and was slated to be a suicide pilot.

There were alternate plans to hijack a 12th commercial airliner and use that instead of the small aircraft, probably due to the Manila cell's growing frustration with explosives. Testing explosives in a house or apartment is dangerous, and it can easily give away a terrorist plot. Khalid Sheik Mohammed probably made the alternate plan.

A report from the Philippines to the United States on January 20, 1995 stated, "What the subject has in his mind is that he will board any American commercial aircraft pretending to be an ordinary passenger. Then he will hijack said aircraft, control its cockpit and dive it at the CIA headquarters."

Another plot the men were cooking up would have involved hijacking of more airplanes. The Sears Tower (Chicago, Illinois), The Pentagon (Arlington County, Virginia), the United States Capitol (Washington, D.C.), the White House (Washington, DC), the Transamerica Pyramid (San Francisco, California), and the World Trade Center (New York City, New York) would be the likely targets. This plot eventually would be the base plot for the September 11, 2001 attacks, only hitting the World Trade Center (which was destroyed) and The Pentagon (which suffered partial damage).

In his confession with Filipino investigators, Abdul Hakim Murad said that the Manila cell could not recruit enough people to implement other hijackings prior to the foiling of Oplan Bojinka.

By the way, this took all of 30 seconds to find on Google, try it sometime.

 

[Axxman300]

Explain why in 19 months and 44 Billion dollars a year the CIA and later the FBI HQ were somehow unable to give the information on the Mihdhar and Hazmi to the FBI Cole bombing investigators and allow them to pursue these al Qaeda terrorists known to be in the US so they could take part in a massive al Qaeda attack.

Explain why the US Ambassador to Yemen refused to cooperated with the FBI team investigating the Cole bombing.

Explain why both the FBI and CIA had Bin Laden desks which were separate from their counter-terrorism desks, and rarely talked to each other.

Explain why the FBI agents at ALEC Station felt it wasn't their job to pass along warnings up their chain of command.

Explain why the general public blew off the June and mid-July warnings of an anticipated Al Qaeda attack while the military closed off their bases to public access.

I'll give you a hint: Ego, stupidity, and middle management by numbers.

It really is this simple.

Richard Clarke was as much a part of this problem as everyone else, maybe more so. He was a self-serving, ego maniacal bully who ruined many careers of more competent but less well connected people. Anything he says needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt.

 

[LSSBB]

Richard Clarke was as much a part of this problem as everyone else, maybe more so. He was a self-serving, ego maniacal bully who ruined many careers of more competent but less well connected people. Anything he says needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt.

Clarke did make himself out to be quite the hero in Against all Enemies, however I don't see any saints here so it still comes down to facts. There may be facts of perjury and I see no facts presented of anything higher that can stick in court, so far.

 

[jimd3100]

Richard Clarke was as much a part of this problem as everyone else, maybe more so.

I noticed you didn't provide any evidence that he knew Al Qaeda terrorists were inside the United States, and then lie about it under oath. How Come? It's easy to do with the CIA. Are you upset that I show evidence provided by the FBI and 9-11 Commission along with the joint Inquiry that Saudi Agents were helping the hijackers after the CIA knew they were in the country and shared info with the Saudi's?...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8364086&postcount=525

I'm no fan of Clark's - he used his testimony before 9-11 commission to sell a book, but if you are going to make accusations perhaps you should back them up with evidence. How does whatever beef you have with Clarke negate what the CIA and Saudi's did?

 

[paloalto]

Explain why the US Ambassador to Yemen refused to cooperated with the FBI team investigating the Cole bombing.

Explain why both the FBI and CIA had Bin Laden desks which were separate from their counter-terrorism desks, and rarely talked to each other.

Explain why the FBI agents at ALEC Station felt it wasn't their job to pass along warnings up their chain of command.

Explain why the general public blew off the June and mid-July warnings of an anticipated Al Qaeda attack while the military closed off their bases to public access.

I'll give you a hint: Ego, stupidity, and middle management by numbers.

It really is this simple.

Richard Clarke was as much a part of this problem as everyone else, maybe more so. He was a self-serving, ego maniacal bully who ruined many careers of more competent but less well connected people. Anything he says needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt.

“Explain why the US Ambassador to Yemen refused to cooperated with the FBI team investigating the Cole bombing.”

Ambassador Barbara Bodine did not want to piss off the Yemenis, simple as that. Her reluctance to cooperate with the FBI Cole bombing team did not in any way interfere with the CIA from giving the information they had to the FBI Cole bombing investigators.

"Explain why both the FBI and CIA had Bin Laden desks which were separate from their counter-terrorism desks, and rarely talked to each other."

What exactly are you referring to. The CIA CTC was over the Alec station, and the FBI HQ Bin Laden desk was in charge of investigations concerning Bin Laden while the New York Cole bombing investigators were criminal investigators on the Cole bombing. Is this what you are refereeing to?

“Explain why the FBI agents at ALEC Station felt it wasn't their job to pass along warnings up their chain of command.”

They could not pass information to the rest of the FBI without permission from the CIA managers at Alec station. In the case of Doug Miller's cable on Mihdhar and his passport, Tom Wilshire, a CIA Deputy Chief in the CIA Bin Laden unit, refused to give Miller permission to pass his cable on Mihdhar to the rest of the FBI on January 5, 2000.

“Explain why the general public blew off the June and mid-July warnings of an anticipated Al Qaeda attack while the military closed off their bases to public access.”

As far as I know, no one knew about these warnings if fact there were any. Rumsfeld as was Ashcroft was told on July 17, 2001 by Tenet, that a huge al Qaeda attack was about to take place inside of the US that would kill thousands of Americans. This warning never went to the US general public.

“Richard Clarke was as much a part of this problem as everyone else, maybe more so. He was a self-serving, ego maniacal bully who ruined many careers of more competent but less well connected people. Anything he says needs to be taken with a huge grain of salt.”

Regardless of what you personally think of Clarke, he stated clearly that George Tenet, Cofer Black and Richard Blee, criminally withheld the information on Mihdhar and Hazmi from him and the FBI. This is backed up by all of the US government investigations on 9/11 and by FBI Agent Ali Soufan. So I take Clarke at his word.

 

[Robrob]

Yes, it's a fact-so what?

I ask how you knew. Why are you so antagonistic about a simple question?

And you were given several sources. It's not my fault you refuse to admit it.

Please feel free to point out where I have "refused to admit anything." I asked a question and you responded not with a source but with this:

You seem to be confused and think hindsight means when YOU finally discover something.

It's almost as if you are arguing with someone not actually in the conversation.

Why do you lie? The question was answered. How many times does it need to be answered?

The real question might be what are you talking about? I asked a simple question and you've freaked out. Is that what normal people do?

 

[Childlike Empress]

The real question might be what are you talking about? I asked a simple question and you've freaked out. Is that what normal people do?

He did not freak out at all. He referred to your lack of knowledge in response to the silly pic you spammed.

 

[sleahead]

They could not pass information to the rest of the FBI without permission from the CIA managers at Alec station. In the case of Doug Miller's cable on Mihdhar and his passport, Tom Wilshire, a CIA Deputy Chief in the CIA Bin Laden unit, refused to give Miller permission to pass his cable on Mihdhar to the rest of the FBI on January 5, 2000.

Not true. There was an FBI detailee at Alec Station who had supervisor status. He could have authorized Miller to send the cable or sent it himself. In extremis, they could have passed the information informally* to the rest of the FBI and, assuming they would later be challenged, cooked up an explanation as to how the information was obtained (as it turned out, Beyoumi would have served wonderfully well in that regard). But hindsight is still a wonderful thing.

*I can already hear you say "they would never do that". Oh yes they would.

On another occasion an F.B.I. agent at Alec Station was caught stuffing C.I.A. files down his shirt to take back up to O’Neill in New York. “So here Scheuer’s getting angry, knows he’s being had,” recalls MacGaffin.http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2004/11/path-to-9-11-200411

While your there, check out FBI's failing to share with the CIA for 12 months.

 

[dafydd]

That is why the US taxpayer spent 44 billion a year, to get foresight.

No amount of money can enable one to see the future.

 

[beachnut]

Yes, we get it. No Planes were shot down. If there was a stand down then no planes would be shot down. We get it. But there wasn't a stand down. Dick Cheney was in charge and giving shoot down orders. We get it. But no planes would be shot down on orders from Cheney because he is not part of the NCA and isn't authorized to give such orders. We get it. But it has nothing to do with the topic. Which brings up the question-why would a forum embarrass itself by even allowing you to post on it?

You still seem to have a problem answering this...

Off topic? again.

Do you know what the topic is? Is that old "shoot down means stand down" nonsense like the OP? Still trying to back in your failed stand down claim? Good luck.

Was "Press for Truth" in danger?

 

[paloalto]

No amount of money can enable one to see the future.

In the summer of 2001 the CIA and FBI HQ knew a huge al Qaeda attack was just about to take place inside of the US that would kill thousands of Americans. And beyond belief, the FBI HQ and the CIA even knew on August 22, 2001 that two al Qaeda terrorists, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, were inside of the US, and even knew there were in the US in order to take part in this horrific al Qaeda terrorists attack.

So the obvious question is if the FBI HQ knew about this massive al Qaeda attack, and the CIA and even high level White House officials knew about this attack, why did the let these FBI criminal investigations of any and all al Qaeda terrorists found inside of the US to be either blocked or shut down, when they knew it would result in the murder of thousands of Americans?

The FBI HQ knew this because it was their own FBI HQ agents either blocking the Moussaoui’s investigation or shutting down the investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi. The CIA knew this because Tenet had admitted he knew about the Moussaoui investigation and the issues Samit was having trying to convince FBI HQ to let him have a search warrant. And it was the CIA's own spy inside of the FBI, Tom Wilshire, who was secretly working for his CIA managers Blee, Black, and Tenet while ostensibly working as the Deputy Chief of the ITOS unit over both the RFU with Maltbie and Frasca and the bin Laden unit with Corsi and Middleton, who was actually shutting down the investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi.

To date no one has answered this very simple question.

But we have one answer posted on this forum that said: “No amount of money can enable one to see the future”.

But from the information that the CIA and FBI HQ had, it is hard if not completely impossible for the ordinary US citizen to see why they would want to keep this information secret from the very FBI criminal investigators that wanted to investigate and search for Mihdhar and Hazmi or search Moussaoui’s duffle bag to further their investigation and lead to the other terrorists who were going to take part in the attack the CIA and FBI HQ knew about. It is further impossible to see why the CIA and FBI HQ shut these investigations down.

The FBI criminal agents who wanted to search for Mihdhar and Hazmi even knew that these terrorists were inside of the US for no other reason than to take part in some horrific al Qaeda attack. If the people at the CIA and FBI HQ had the information that could have prevented these attacks, and knew by blocking these FBI criminal investigations that these attacks would take place and the result would be that thousands of Americans would be killed, why did they do this?

The CIA had even been told by FBI ITOS Deputy Chief, Tom Wilshire, in his July 23, 2001 email back to Blee, Black and Tenet that Mihdhar will be found at the next big al Qaeda attack. How much into the future do you have to see to put the warnings of a huge al Qaeda attack together with the information that Mihdhar and Hazmi are inside of the US in order to take part in this attack.

But we are told: No amount of money can enable one to see the future.

No, I don’t think the average American will ever understand the reasoning at the CIA and the FBI HQ that had allowed these attacks to take place. All of the protestations to the contrary, it does not make sense that the FBI HQ and the CIA had all of this information, that could easily have been used to prevent these al Qaeda attacks, and then just deliberately allowed these al Qaeda terrorists to carry out these horrific al Qaeda attacks, when they knew the results would be so catastrophic.

 

[dafydd]

In the summer of 2001 the CIA and FBI HQ knew a huge al Qaeda attack was just about to take place inside of the US that would kill thousands of Americans.

Evidence please.

 

[paloalto]

Evidence please.

Already been posted in previous posts, go back and see my prior posts.

But in case you missed it see "State of Denial", by Bob Woodward, which describes the urgent meeting on the July 10, 2001 at the White House where Blee, Black and Tenet told Rice, Hadley and Clarke, that a huge al Qaeda attack that was just about to take place inside of the US that would kill thousands of Americans.

Then see DE #939 entered into the Moussaoui trial on March 11, 2006, which has the email from Tom Wilshire on July 23, 2001, back to his CTC managers Blee, and Black, and to Tenet, stating that Khalid al-Mihdhar will be found at the next big al Qaeda attack.

See DOJ IG report, pages 280-310, that states that CIA Bin Laden detailee, FBI Agent Gillespie took the INS information that al Qaeda terrorists Mihdhar and Hazmi were found to be inside of the US to FBI Agent Dina Corsi and FBI ITOS Deputy Chief Tom Wilshire on August 22, 2001. After giving them this information she took this same information back to the CIA Bin Laden unit to Richard Blee, information which then went to Black and then to Tenet.

 

[LSSBB]

Where is the evidence they specifically knew ahead of time the suspected attack, if carried out, would kill "thousands"?

 

[MikeW]

But in case you missed it see "State of Denial", by Bob Woodward, which describes the urgent meeting on the July 10, 2001 at the White House where Blee, Black and Tenet told Rice, Hadley and Clarke, that a huge al Qaeda attack that was just about to take place inside of the US that would kill thousands of Americans.

The book actually reports them saying only that "al Qaeda was going to attack American interests, possibly within the United States itself" (page 51), while the preceding page says Tenet was expecting "the big one", but spelling out their true level of knowledge:

"they did not know when, where or how"