CIA Criminal Revolving Door: CIA Officer “Albert” Involved in False Intelligence Linking Al-Qaeda to Iran, Iraq

Reprimanded for Torture, Retired, then Back to CIA as a Contractor

By Kevin Fenton

BlackBannersA recent book by former FBI agent Ali Soufan shows that the same CIA officer was involved in generating intelligence that falsely linked al-Qaeda to first Iran and then Iraq. The officer was also involved in a notorious torture episode and was reprimanded by the Agency’s inspector general.

The officer, who Soufan refers to as “Fred,” but whose real first name is “Albert” according to a February 2011 Associated Press article, served at the CIA station in Jordan in 1999. During that time, al-Qaeda, aided by a collection of freelance terrorists headed by Abu Zubaidah, attempted to commit a series of attacks in the country, known as the Millennium Plot. However, the attacks were foiled by the local Jordanian intelligence service, working with the CIA and FBI.

During the investigations of the plotters, Albert drafted a series of official cables that were later withdrawn. Although the withdrawing of the cables was first mentioned in a July 2006 article by Lawrence Wright for the New Yorker, Wright did not mention what was in the cables or by whom they were drafted. The content of one of them and the drafter were first revealed upon the publication of Soufan’s book in mid-September 2011.

According to Soufan, one of the twelve withdrawn cables falsely stated that the group of terrorists later arrested for the Millennium Plot in Jordan was linked to Iran. Albert’s reasoning for this was that the group had trained in the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon, an area of high activity by the Iranian-backed militant group Hezbollah. Therefore, the group in Jordan had to be working with Hezbollah and be backed by Iran.

Soufan was also sending reports to Washington, and someone in DC noticed that Albert claimed a link to Iran while Soufan did not. An investigation followed and Soufan was proved right—the Millennium Plot had nothing to do with Iran—leading to the withdrawal of Albert’s cables. In his book, Soufan attributes Albert’s error to “a tendency to jump to conclusions without facts.”

Albert had previously worked with the FBI as a translator, but had failed to make agent status, and Soufan says he was reputed to bear a grudge against the Bureau for this slight.

The contents of the other eleven cables that had to be withdrawn are unknown.

AlLibiThe second episode, where Albert played a part in the generation of false information that helped justify the invasion of Iraq, is notorious. Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, a senior militant training camp commander in Afghanistan, was captured by US forces and turned over to the FBI towards the end of 2001. Al-Libi was being interrogated by George Crouch and Russell Fincher, an FBI agent a group of CIA officers had withheld information from in the run-up to 9/11. Al-Libi was co-operating with Crouch and Fincher, and had even provided information about an ongoing plot in Yemen.

Albert burst into the interrogation room, told al-Libi that information about plots in Yemen was meaningless, and made threats against him. As a result of this, al-Libi clammed up and refused to provide more information that day. Albert was subsequently banned from Bagram air base, where the interrogation was being conducted.

However, Albert’s superior, CIA Chief of Station in Afghanistan Richard Blee, complained to Washington about the alleged lack of information from the interrogation of al-Libi and initiated a turf war between the Bureau and the Agency. The CIA won and Albert returned to Bagram, taking control of al-Libi.

At one point, Albert threatened to rape al-Libi’s mother. According to Jane Mayer’s The Dark Side, Albert screamed, “You’re going to Egypt! And while you’re there I’m going to find your mother, and fuck her.” Soufan’s book contains a slightly different quote: “If you don’t tell me about what you are planning [redacted, evidently “in Egypt”], I’m going to bring your mother here and fuck her in front of you.” [Read more...]

The CIA and 9/11 Part 3: The Shouting Match

 Tom Wilshire’s Orchestrated Ruse

By Kevin Fenton

CIAIn the first two parts of this series we saw how a group of officers at Alec Station, the CIA’s bin Laden unit, concealed information about al-Qaeda’s Malaysia summit from their FBI colleagues in January 2000. In particular they hid information about a US visa in the possession of Flight 77 hijacker Khalid Almihdhar. We also saw how this protection of Almihdhar, his partner Nawaf Alhazmi and al-Qaeda leader Khallad bin Attash continued even after the involvement of Almihdhar and bin Attash in the October 2000 USS Cole bombing became known to the US intelligence community. Concealing information about terrorists involved in seventeen homicides was bad enough, but things were about to get much worse.

wilshireShortly after the CIA had failed to respond truthfully to a second formal request for information about the Cole bombing from FBI agent Ali Soufan in April 2001, the cables the CIA drafted about the Malaysia summit were reviewed at Alec Station. The review was conducted by Tom Wilshire, the station’s deputy chief and one of the key figures in the withholding of the information, and a female CIA officer whose name is not known. The two of them re-read cables from the previous year that said Almihdhar had a US visa and that Alhazmi had flown to Los Angeles with a companion, but neither of them took the appropriate action—watchlisting the Malaysia attendees and alerting the FBI.

After this review, Wilshire ordered another review of the same information. The review was to be carried out by Margaret Gillespie, a CIA detailee to Alec Station whose alleged memory loss regarding the events of January 2000 makes one suspicious of her motives. Wilshire believed, correctly as it turns out, that the cables contained the key to preventing the next major al-Qaeda attack—had they been handled properly, 9/11 would never have happened.

Three weeks before the attacks, Gillespie allegedly discovered a key cable, and this led her to tell the FBI about Almihdhar and Alhazmi. As you know, the FBI hunt for Almihdhar and Alhazmi was unsuccessful and this, as you probably don’t know, was largely due to Wilshire. Nevertheless, Wilshire received substantial praise from the post-attack investigations for getting Gillespie to do the review. Plenty of his other actions cast suspicion on him, but this review seemed to put him in the clear—if he really was trying to hide the information, why start a review? [Read more...]

The EyeOpener- CIA in the News Media

CIA News: A Brief History of Media Manipulation by U.S. Intelligence 

It is a well-known and uncontested fact that the CIA has enjoyed a long and intimate relationship with some of the largest news organizations in the world, and has used this relationship to manipulate, censor, and even fabricate news stories in support of its own covert agenda.

Over the years, numerous specific examples of the agency's manipulation of the news media have surfaced, including multiple instances where stories that had been outright fabricated by CIA assets had resulted in the justification for military intervention. And, recently we witnessed how the CIA steps in to stop the publication of certain stories when the agency threatened independent documentary filmmakers John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski from publishing the names of two recently identified CIA agents, Alfreda Frances Bikowsky and Michael Anne Casey.

It is no longer disputed that the CIA has maintained an extensive and ongoing relationship with news organizations and journalists, and multiple, specific acts of media manipulation have now been documented. But as long as the public continues to ignore the influence of intelligence agencies in shaping or even fabricating news stories, the agency will continue to be able to set the policy that drives the American war machine at will.

This is our EyeOpener Report by James Corbett presenting documented facts and examples of the CIA’s extensive and ongoing relationship with news organizations and journalists: ‘CIA in the News Media’

*The Transcript for this video is now available at Corbett Report: Click Here

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by subscribing .

BFP Exclusive: Washington Post Takes Editorial Direction from the CIA & the White House

Washington Post Reporter Confirms Identity and Roles of Two CIA Officers Involved in Suppression of Critical Pre-9/11 Intel & The Post’s Knowledge of Secret Inspector General Report


washpostOn Wednesday, Peter B. Collins interviewed Washington Post reporter Joby Warrick, who writes on the Middle East and National Security at The Post’s national desk, about Warrick’s new book that recounts the deadly attack on the CIA base near Khost, Afghanistan at the end of 2009.

Warrick’s book, The Triple Agent, focuses on Jennifer Matthews, the CIA station chief at forward base Chapman who was among those killed by a Jordanian suicide bomber.  In discussing the role of Matthews in the CIA’s withholding of critical pre-9/11 intelligence from the FBI and counterterrorism official Richard Clarke, Collins asked if Jennifer Matthews had connections to Alfreda Frances Bikowsky—the CIA officer recently identified here at Boiling Frogs Post. Warrick responded:

“There is a group of very, shall we say, strong personalities within the counterterrorism division, you’ve named 2 of them, they were good friends, they worked together on these cases, and the list of people the IG has identified as potentially deserving of disciplinary review for their actions before 9/11 never been published, but we know from multiple counts that Jennifer Matthews had been on that list…”

In this response, Warrick directly confirms the role of Bikowsky in the pre-9/11 intelligence debacle, as well as her presence at the waterboarding of Abu Zubaydeh, which was being directed by Matthews.  And without explicitly naming Bikowsky, he confirms that she was a friend and colleague of Matthews and that they worked together on counterterrorism at CIA. 

Warrick also asserts that he knows of the Inspector General’s list of some 60 CIA employees proposed for investigation over the pre-9/11 intelligence suppression, and that he has been able to get multiple confirmations that Matthews was on that list. But it appears that The Post has acquiesced to the CIA, and its editors believe that the public is not interested in learning the truth and seeking accountability on these matters.

“We’d still love to get that list. And we tried at the time to get the names of the individuals. It was decided at a high level, this was back during the Bush administration, when Porter Goss was CIA Director that these names would never be published, as far as the CIA was concerned, and there is not much of a process to force the CIA to retreat from that decision….and no one in either the Bush or Obama administration has pushed for further disclosure, they’d like for this thing pretty much to be put to rest and forgotten about.

There is nothing that makes officials here want to change the subject more quickly than those kinds of questions; politicians and certainly the intelligence people would just rather see it go away…and there just doesn’t seem to be much public interest, either, that we’ve detected….there are certainly pockets of it, but in terms of getting people excited and interested in this again, it’s been a real struggle.”

These comments raise serious questions about the integrity and independence of The Washington Post, as Warrick says his newspaper has had this information for years but appears to take editorial direction from the CIA and the White House.  The failure of The Post and the 9/11 Commission to fully investigate the CIA for its actions prior to 9/11 and explore the Malaysia summit and visas issued to al-Hazmi and al-Midhar are part of an obvious cover-up, and suggest widespread obstruction of justice. 

In addition, the Washington Post and more recently the Associated Press  refrained from reporting the complete story and Bikowsky’s involvement in the German citizen el-Masri’s rendition and torture, in compliance with the CIA pressure. The well-known New Yorker journalist Jane Mayer also complied with CIA’s unofficial request and withheld certain facts and the identities of the CIA employees and contractors involved in rendition and barbaric cases in her book The Dark Side.

Boiling Frogs Post broke the story and identified Alfreda Frances Bikowsky for the first time a week ago on September 21, 2011. Although the CIA had threatened producers Nowosielski and Duffy, and had prevented them from identifying the two CIA officers Bikowsky and Michael Anne Casey, the agency did not threaten or request redaction when asked for confirmation by the alternative news site Gawker. Despite Boiling Frogs Post’s exposé as the first alternative news site to publish the story, complete coverage by Cryptome, the video report by independent investigative journalist James Corbett at Corbett Report, and the subsequent coverage and analyses by Gawker, the mainstream media and the so-called independent outlets have so far readily complied with the establishment’s no-no rule and have abstained from covering this significant report involving obstruction of justice, cover up, lying to Congress, rendition and torture.

Here is the relevant portion of the audio interview of Joby Warrick by Peter B Collins:

To listen to the entire show visit Peter B Collins’ website: here.

We have so far identified and confirmed three CIA officers, Alfreda Frances Bikowsky, Jennifer Matthews and  Michael Anne Casey, who were involved in the intentional cover up of significant pre 9/11 intelligence, subsequent cover up during the quasi 9/11 investigations, and the CIA’s rendition and torture cases. As we can see, the partnership between the government, mainstream media, pseudo alternative media, and Congress makes sure the facts pertaining to these crimes and criminals remain untouched and buried.

# # # #

*For additional more background check out the following links:

BFP Breaking News: Confirmed Identity of the CIA Official behind 9/11, Rendition & Torture Cases is Revealed 

Boiling Frogs Breaking News: CIA Goes After Producers Nowosielski & Duffy

The Still Developing Story of the Recently Issued CIA Threats to Producers Nowosielski & Duffy

Podcast: The Boiling Frogs Presents Ray Nowosielski & John Duffy

As you can see we are doing our share as one of the very few true alternatives. Please do your share and help us continue our operation by subscribing to Boiling Frogs Post. Thank you.

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by subscribing .

Subs

Podcast Show #57

The Boiling Frogs Presents Kevin Fenton

BFP Podcast Logo

Author and researcher Kevin Fenton joins us to discuss the recent case involving the CIA’s withholding of the release of audio documentary “Who is Richard Blee?” and the extensive research and findings which have resulted in the unmasking of three former top CIA officials and their role in withholding intelligence on two key 9/11 hijackers and subsequent cover-ups. He details the findings on the two key CIA analysts who were instrumental in this cover up - who were recently identified and exposed as Alfreda Frances Bikowsky and Michael Anne Casey. Mr. Fenton discusses the CIA’s Alec Station, and questions the notion of incompetence versus intentional when it comes to the events leading to and making the terrorist attacks possible on 9/11.

Kevin Fenton is an independent researcher and the author of Disconnecting the Dots: How CIA and FBI Officials Helped Enable 9/11 and Evaded Government Investigations.

Here is our guest Kevin Fenton unplugged!

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by subscribing .

Subs

James Corbett Report: New World Next Week- Secrecy Kills, Occupy Wall Street & More

For tons of brilliant and truly independent podcast, video and interviews visit our partner James Corbett's own website here at: http://www.corbettreport.com/

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by subscribing .

Subs

BFP Breaking News: Confirmed Identity of the CIA Official behind 9/11, Rendition & Torture Cases is Revealed

Update 1: It was brought to our attention that the webmaster at Secrecykills.com had mistakenly scanned and posted the uncensored documents containing the names of the two CIA officers. Per their request we now are removing the second CIA officer’s name. Boiling Frogs Post had independently obtained and confirmed the first name: Alfreda Frances Bikowsky, but had included the second name, M. A. C., based on the uncensored documents posted by mistake at Secrecykills.com previously. Due to the government pressure on and threats to the producers Nowosielski-Duffy we were asked to remove the references to their site and previous post…At least for now. As you can see the mainstream media and pseudo alternatives (including Raw Story) have abided by their government masters and fund-ers, and have refused to pick up the story or support the producers-reporters or Boiling Frogs Post. We rely on ‘your’ support. The story is still developing-please stay tuned.

Alfreda Frances Bikowsky: The Current Director of the CIA Global Jihad Unit


BNBoiling Frogs Post has now confirmed the identity of the CIA analyst at the heart of a notorious failure in the run-up to the September 11th tragedy. Her name is Alfreda Frances Bikowsky and she is the current director of the CIA Jihad Unit. Through three credible sources and documents we have confirmed Ms. Bikowsky’s former titles and positions, including her start at the CIA as an analyst for the Soviet Desk, her position as one of the case officers at the CIA’s Bin Laden Unit-Alec Station, her central role and direct participation in the CIA’s rendition-torture and black sites operations, and her current position as director of the CIA’s Global Jihad Unit.

The producers Nowosielski and Duffy have now made both names available [link removed] at their website. They also identify the second CIA culprit as M. A. C. We have not been able to obtain confirmation by other sources on this person yet, but we are still working on it.

Alfreda Frances Bikowsky is the person described in New Yorker journalist Jane Mayer's book The Dark Side as having flown in to watch the waterboarding of terrorist Khalid Sheikh Mohammad without being assigned to do so. "Its not supposed to be entertainment," superiors were said to have told her.  She was also at the center of "the el-Masri incident,” in which an innocent German citizen was kidnapped by the CIA in 2003 and held under terrible conditions without charges for five months in a secret Afghan prison. The AP characterized it as "one of the biggest diplomatic embarrassments of the U.S. war on terrorism."

Both the previous and current administrations appear to have deemed Alfreda Frances Bikowsky’s direct involvement in intentional obstruction of justice, intentional cover up, lying to Congress, and overseeing rendition-kidnapping-torture practices as qualifying factors to have kept promoting her. She now leads the CIA’s Global Jihad Unit and is a close advisor to the President.

# # # #

*For more background check out the following links:

Boiling Frogs Breaking News: CIA Goes After Producers Nowosielski & Duffy

The Still Developing Story of the Recently Issued CIA Threats to Producers Nowosielski & Duffy

Podcast: The Boiling Frogs Presents Ray Nowosielski & John Duffy

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by subscribing .

Subs

Boiling Frogs Exclusive: September 11th Advocates’ Statement on Recent Developments Involving 9/11, CIA & Richard Clarke

Punitive Actions Are Once Again Being Taken Against the Wrong People


PressForTruthIn Boiling Frogs Post’s recent interview with Ray Nowosielski and John Duffy, Sibel Edmonds questioned the timing of former Counter-Terrorism Czar, Richard Clarke’s willingness to speak out about alleged 9/11 hijackers, Nawaf al Hazmi and Khalid al Mihdhar, and the CIA’s knowledge of their whereabouts after the January 2000 Malaysia “terrorist summit.”  Sibel asked Ray and John, “why now?”  We would like to note that the interview with Clarke was actually recorded two years ago, in October 2009.  As such, the “why now” question should actually be posed to Ray and John.  The real questions for Clarke should be, “why then?”  Why then and not during his testimony before the 9/11 Commission, when it would have been meaningful to the Commission’s investigation?  In addition, in his October 2009 interview, Clarke revealed pertinent insight into information sharing at high levels, which would clearly counter the misleading findings of the 9/11 Commission regarding the “failures” of communications between the FBI and CIA.
 
It is extremely troubling to us that the former Counter-Terrorism Czar, for both the Clinton and Bush Junior Administrations, as well as chair of the Counter-Terrorism Security Group for Bush Senior (essentially working in an anti-terrorism related capacity since about 1992), took so long to speak out about why the CIA would intentionally fail to share such critically important information with the FBI.  If nothing else, he should have mentioned in his testimony before the 9/11 Commission in 2004 that information sharing was not a problem between intelligence agencies themselves or with the Executive Branch.  Clarke was clearly well aware of how he, and the FBI, received raw data from CIA sources and had to be keenly aware that the Commission was basing many of their recommendations on this misinformation.  Clarke did not bother to clear that up during his testimony or immediately afterwards.
 
This is just another glaring example of how the 9/11 Commission failed.  How could the Commission have been unaware of how information sharing was actually accomplished within the agencies and with the White House?  Did they fail to ask any appropriate questions to the key witnesses?  Why did they purposely choose to relegate the extremely important fact that the CIA intentionally withheld information from the FBI to a tiny footnote (Chapter 6, Footnote 44) in their final report?  Worse yet, according to the 9/11 Commission, they allegedly have never found out who in the CIA gave the order to keep the FBI out of the loop.  They had to know that this deliberate failure to share information could only be fixed by removing the individuals responsible and not be cured by a reorganization recommendation.  Despite logic, that is what they recommended.
 
Furthermore, we find it truly disturbing that Ray and John are potentially being legally challenged by the CIA for attempting to bring to light information that they reportedly were able to glean from open source material for their current project.  Instead of going after a minority of journalists who are doing their job of informing the public, we would prefer to see the unnamed agents held responsible for their past actions, which according to the official story, would have led to two American Airlines Flight 77 hijackers.  If the agents had merely used the information they had to stop, search and ultimately arrest al Hazmi and al Mihdhar, the 9/11 plot may have been foiled and almost 3,000 lives may have been saved.  We find it incredulous that these agents are still employed by the CIA.
 
To our dismay, punitive actions are once again being taken against the wrong people.

# # # #

September 11th Advocates:

Patty Casazza

Monica Gabrielle

Mindy Kleinberg

Lorie Van Aucken

*For more background check out the following links:

Boiling Frogs Breaking News: CIA Goes After Producers Nowosielski & Duffy 

The Still Developing Story of the Recently Issued CIA Threats to Producers Nowosielski & Duffy

Podcast: The Boiling Frogs Presents Ray Nowosielski & John Duffy

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by subscribing .

Subs

The Still Developing Story of the Recently Issued CIA Threats to Producers Nowosielski & Duffy

CIA’s Maneuver: A Case of Bluffing? Buying Time? Or Something More?


ciaLast week we broke the story of the CIA issued legal threats against producers Ray Nowosielski and John Duffy on their discovery of the identities of the two key CIA analysts who executed the Tenet-Black-Blee cover-up in the case of two key 9/11 hijackers. The analysts were referred to only by first names initially, but were going to be fully named in a follow up segment. It appears the story is still developing,  but we now have further details on the case, an analysis by an expert producer, and a few comments on assessing the nature and possible implication of this move by the CIA.

I asked Mr. Nowosielski how the CIA was informed about the schedule and the content of their upcoming segment, and he provided us with the following details:

We emailed CIA Public Affairs on Thursday morning telling them of our intention to name two current agents in our journalism piece and explained the context of their use -- the things they were accused of. We also explained that their names had been deduced through open-source materials and that our sources had told us they were working from headquarters.

As for the CIA’s reaction and response Mr. Nowosielski recounted the following:

Their media spokesperson called back almost immediately. After a brief discussion, we emailed him the script for official reply. We also requested an interview with the two to ensure that we were telling the full story accurately. The reply email began "This is off the record:" and then informed us that we may be violating federal law by including those two names. When we asked him to cite the law, we were told it was the Intelligence Identities Protection Act. This and follow up calls occurred on Thurs, Fri, and Sat, until we explained that we were not recognizing "off the record" in our official interactions with the Agency. We have heard nothing further since.

My own immediate response to the way in which CIA responded to the producers can be summed up in three questions:

1- Is this one of those fairly common cases where the government agency tries its ‘bluffing tactic’ to see whether that suffices to intimidate and stop the whistleblower or reporter in question?

Because the threat is issued by e-mail, and ludicrously, it starts off by stating ‘off the record.’ When confident and on solid ground the agencies come after the targets armed with official- legal letters or even court orders. In my days, in my own case as a government whistleblower, and later as the director of NSWBC dealing with many intelligence agencies whistleblowers and  also reporters, I have experienced the government agency ‘Bluffing Tactic’ more than a few times. For example, the FBI tried to stop my interview with CBS-60 Minutes and later attempted to stop the airing of the segment, but when challenged and invited to go ahead and take legal action, they changed their mind; they went away.

2- Is this an attempt by the CIA to buy needed time to take further action against the producers through the Department of Justice?

One thing I know is that government bureaucracy takes time. It takes time to get ‘things done’ when it comes to the government. In this case, the CIA would have to bring and make the case to the Justice Department. The DOJ then would have  to go through its own bureaucracy and reviews to decide whether it could turn this into a legal action via the courts. Thus, this could possibly be a case of the CIA trying to buy more time to translate its ludicrous ‘off the record’ threat issued by a casual e-mail into a real threat with some teeth. If so, wouldn’t that mean a window of opportunity for the producers to release the information? Or not?

3- What are the real legal liabilities facing the Producers, since the names of the two culprit CIA analysts are already out in public records? Further, with other sources in addition to the public records ‘outing’ the names of the analysts who happen to be involved in possible criminal actions, what level of threat are the producers faced with?

Again, based on my own experience and the experiences of many government intelligence agencies whistleblowers, the CIA would have to first classify the already public information-documents out there revealing the identities of the two CIA analysts; classification after the fact. Next, they would have to legally pursue the other involved sources who have either confirmed or released those names. The CIA hasn’t done that. At least not yet. And what does this mean? Does it mean the producers still have the burden of abiding by the casually issued ‘off the record’ e-mail by the CIA? Or not?

BorjessonWe are still waiting for further analysis by our legal experts and other intelligence sources. Meanwhile I asked our media advisor Kristina Borjesson to give us her take and expert analysis on this case. Internationally acclaimed for her work, Ms. Borjesson has produced for major American and European television networks and published two groundbreaking books on problems of the U.S. press: Into the Buzzsaw: Leading Journalists Expose the Myth of a Free Press and Feet to the Fire: the Media After 9/11, Top Journalists Speak out. Her awards include an Emmy and Murrow Award in TV, the National Press Club’s Arthur Rowse award for Media Criticism, and two Independent Publishers Awards for her books.

Here is the analysis of this case by Ms. Borjesson for Boiling Frogs Post:

The Pitfalls of Due Diligence for Deep Journalism

When independent filmmakers Ray Nowosielski and John Duffy interviewed Richard Clarke in 2009, the former counterterrorism czar dropped a bomb on camera.  Clarke accused former CIA head George Tenet and two other CIA officials, Cofer Black and Richard Blee of withholding critical intelligence from the FBI, DOD, White House and Immigration on the presence in the US of two alleged 9/11 hijackers well before 9/11.  In their film, “Who is Richard Blee?” Nowosielski and Duffy also identify two CIA analysts who participated in the cover-up.

After interviewing Clarke, the filmmakers tried for more than a year to interest media outlets in their bombshell information. “We pitched everywhere and were told no,” says Nowosielski, “We always held out hope to get funding for it to be a real documentary, which we thought [the subject] deserved.” Finally, the filmmakers settled on putting the film out as a podcast.

The CIA is now holding up the release of the recording as a result of the filmmakers doing due diligence as reporters.  It is a standard practice of good journalism to get in touch with subjects that other subjects in a print or TV news piece are talking about if the talked-about subjects are being accused of malfeasance or illegal or unethical behavior.  It is only fair to allow accused subjects to answer and/or defend themselves. It is also then incumbent upon the reporter to get to the bottom of who exactly is telling the truth—the accuser or the accused. [Read more...]

The CIA and 9/11 Part 2: The Cole & “Omar”

The Tale of Incompetence Stretched Well Beyond Breaking Point

By Kevin Fenton

coleIn the first part of this series we saw how, in January 2000, the CIA learned that Flight 77 hijacker Khalid Almihdhar had a US visa, but kept this secret from the FBI. At the time, concealing a terrorist or two from the FBI may have been wrong, but it was nothing to get that excited about. However, the withholding of the information took on a new meaning on October 12, 2000, when al-Qaeda bombed the USS Cole in Aden, Yemen.

Although there is no stone-cold proof of Almihdhar’s involvement in the bombing, there is a small hill of circumstantial evidence linking him to it. For example, he was in Yemen at the time, reportedly with one of the masterminds of the attack, Khallad bin Attash, and the bombers called his phone number in Sana’a, Yemen, although this was an al-Qaeda communications hub and they could have been talking to somebody else there. In addition, one day after al-Qaeda’s previous ship-bombing attempt in Yemen, he had left the country and gone to meet with other people suspected of involvement in the operation. Also, he worked on another al-Qaeda ship-bombing plot, to be carried out in Singapore.

The team that went to Yemen to investigate the bombings was mostly from the FBI, although there were also Naval Criminal Investigative Service agents, and the CIA station in Yemen was supposed to co-operate. The team was led by FBI managers John O’Neill, who died on 9/11, and Ali Soufan, who later became famous due to his opposition to torture by the CIA and US military.

al-QThey quickly found evidence linking the bombing to al-Qaeda. This was both through the calls to the communications hub where Almihdhar lived and through evidence linking the attack to bin Attash and another al-Qaeda leader, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri. Both bin Attash and al-Nashiri were known to the US intelligence community. Indeed, the number of core bin Laden operatives was so small that both had also played a part in the 1998 East African embassy bombings, something already known to US authorities in 2000.

Investigating bin Attash, Soufan picked up hints of an al-Qaeda meeting somewhere in Southeast Asia around January 2000. Thinking this might be significant; in November 2000 he sent a formal request to the CIA asking whether the Agency knew anything about such meeting. The reply that came back was that it knew nothing. This was not true, as the CIA was highly aware of the meeting, having followed the participants around Kuala Lumpur for several days. [Read more...]

Boiling Frogs Breaking News: CIA Goes After Producers Nowosielski & Duffy

breakingnewsOn Thursday, September 8, 2011, the CIA issued legal threats against producers Ray Nowosielski and John Duffy on their discovery of the identities of the two key CIA analysts who executed the Tenet-Black-Blee cover-up in the case of two key 9/11 hijackers. The analysts were referred to only by first names initially, but were going to be fully named in a follow up segment.

Nowosielski and Duffy are working with legal advisors and we will have more on this soon. Meanwhile you can listen to our recent exclusive interview with the producers and their discovery here at Boiling Frogs Post:

Podcast Show #55: The Boiling Frogs Presents Ray Nowosielski & John Duffy 

Also, here are related interviews with Paul Thompson based on the exposé by the two producers: Part 1 & Part 2.

The producers’ website was taken down yesterday. We are in touch with them, and we will keep you informed. Please disseminate this stunning new development, the CIA’s panic, and the content of their interview. Thank You.

Sibel Edmonds

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by subscribing .

Podcast Show #55

The Boiling Frogs Presents Ray Nowosielski & John Duffy

BFP Podcast Logo

Filmmakers Ray Nowosielski and John Duffy join us to discuss their extensive research, interviews and findings which have resulted in the unmasking of three former top CIA officials- George Tenet, Cofer Black and Richard Blee- and their role in withholding intelligence on two key 9/11 hijackers and subsequent cover-ups. Duffy and Nowosielski provide us with a detailed account of their new interview with former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke and his allegations against the CIA officials- Tenet, Black and Blee – accusing them of knowingly withholding intelligence from the White House, the FBI, Immigration and the State and Defense Departments. They discuss two key CIA analysts who were instrumental in this cover up, a joint statement issued by the three accused CIA officials in response to Clarke’s allegations, and more!

Ray Nowosielski and John Duffy produced the film “Press for Truth,” which documented the journey of four 9/11 widows as they lobbied the Bush White House to convene an independent commission to probe the attacks. They recently launched a new transparency web site SecrecyKills.com.

Here are our guests Ray Nowosielski & John Duffy unplugged!

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by subscribing .

The CIA & 9/11 Part I: A Meeting in Malaysia

The Question of “Failures”- Deliberate or Incompetence?

By Kevin Fenton

cia911Although the story of the CIA’s actions in the run-up to 9/11 is complicated, at a fairly early point in any examination of them it becomes clear the agency committed multiple failures, and that these failures enabled the attacks to go forward. The key issue that remains in dispute ten years on is whether these “failures” were deliberate or simply the product of overwork and incompetence. Making an informed judgment means taking the time to look at all the failures, put them in order, and analyze what it all means.

Perhaps the most comprehensible problem is the scope of the CIA’s failings. There was not one error by some lowly neophyte, but a massive string of failures. As Tom Wilshire, one of the key CIA officials involved in the withholding of the information commented to the Congressional Inquiry, “[E]very place that something could have gone wrong in this over a year and a half, it went wrong. All the processes that had been put in place, all the safeguards, everything else, they failed at every possible opportunity. Nothing went right.”

In addition, some of the failures were extremely serious. For example, the alleged failure by Alec Station, the CIA’s bin Laden unit, to inform CIA Director George Tenet that Flight 77 hijacker Khalid Almihdhar was in the country in August 2001 is simply beyond comprehension. Added to this, the failures were committed by a small group of intelligence officers, centered on Wilshire and his boss Richard Blee, and focused on a few al-Qaeda operatives, in particular Almihdhar and his partner Nawaf Alhazmi. Finally, one of the officers who withheld information has admitted this publicly, and a second reportedly in private, and some surviving documents contradict the “incompetence excuse.”

yemenThe story of the CIA’s pre-9/11 failings starts in late December 1999, when the NSA intercepted an al-Qaeda communication, apparently between Almihdhar and bin Laden associate Khallad bin Attash, who is currently in Gitmo. One end of the call was at al-Qaeda’s operations hub in Yemen, which the NSA had been monitoring for some time. The communication showed that a group of al-Qaeda operatives would soon be travelling to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The NSA told the CIA and FBI.

The CIA tracked Almihdhar from Yemen to a stopover in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, where a photocopy of his passport was made. US officials discovered he had a US visa, issued several months earlier and due to expire in April 2000. This information was reported to the various CIA stations involved in the tracking operation and to Alec Station at CIA headquarters on January 5, 2000. [Read more...]

The EyeOpener- 9/11, the CIA & the Art of the Hangout

 9/11 & "Incompetence" Theory: More Questions Than Answers

Last month the former White House counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke made headlines in the alternative press when he revealed that the CIA's failure to pass on information it knew about two of the alleged 9/11 hijackers living in the United States for over a year before the attacks did not merely involve a few lowly CIA analysts who did not understand the importance of the information, but instead extended all the way to former CIA director George Tenet.

The claim that the Director of Central Intelligence knowingly and purposely blocked the White House Counter-Terrorism Czar and high-level FBI officials from learning about known Al Qaeda agents living in the United States is profound in its implications. Given that any interpretation of this assertion would necessarily mean that Tenet and the other CIA officials who blocked this information actually aided the alleged 9/11 attackers and have now participated in a decade-long cover-up of their role, the question necessarily becomes: Why did they do this?

This is our EyeOpener Video Report by James Corbett on 9/11, the CIA & the Art of the Hangout: for boilingfrogspost.com.

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by subscribing .

Podcast Show #54

The Boiling Frogs Presents Paul Thompson-Part II

BFP Podcast Logo

This is Part II of our three-part one-of-a-kind interview series with author and researcher Paul Thompson. For additional background information please visit the complete 9/11 Timeline Investigative Project at HistoryCommons.Org and Richard Clarke’s interview by John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski at SecrecyKills.Com.

Paul Thompson joins us to discuss the latest revelations by former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke and his explosive allegations against three former top CIA officials – George Tenet, Cofer Black and Richard Blee – accusing them of knowingly withholding intelligence about two of the 9/11 hijackers, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, who had entered the United States more than a year before the attacks. He provides us with the most comprehensive history and context to date on Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, who hijacked American Airlines Flight 77 with three other terrorists and flew the jetliner directly into the Pentagon killing 189 people. Mr. Thompson takes us through a mind-boggling journey through the Yemen Hub, the highly critical Malaysia Summit, Thailand, USS Cole bombing, CIA’s Alec Station, NSA, FBI and beyond!

ptPaul Thompson is the author of the Terror Timeline, a compilation of over 5,000 reports and articles concerning the September 11, 2001 attacks. His research in the field has garnered over 100 radio and TV interviews. Mr. Thompson holds a psychology degree from Stanford University obtained in 1990. For the complete 9/11 Timeline Investigative Project visit HistoryCommons.Org

Here is our guest Paul Thompson unplugged!

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by subscribing directly.