News of CIA's ongoing coverup of 911 from former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds

[Peter Lemkin]

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

Note from former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds
Sunday, 11. September 2011
[URL="http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2011/09/11/boiling-frogs-breaking-news-cia-goes-after-producers-nowosielski-duffy/"]Boiling Frogs
[/URL]
On 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 (see link)

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

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

[Peter Lemkin]

STATEMENT ON THE DELAY IN RELEASING WHO IS RICH BLEE?

While producing our investigative podcast "Who Is Rich Blee?," intended to be released on Sunday, our team managed to deduce the likely identities of two CIA employees at the heart of a notorious failure in the run up to the September 11th tragedy.

Savvy internet searches based on minimal background details helped us determine candidates for the two CIA employees. When the names were used by our interviewers repeatedly during interviews and never corrected by the interviewees, we began to feel more certain. Ironically, it was the response from CIA that provided final confirmation.

On Thursday, we submitted our script to CIA along with a request to interview the two employees. We wanted to be fair in giving them a chance to tell their sides of the story. Instead, the Agency sent us a message threatening that if we went forward with the names included in the piece that it would be a potential violation of federal criminal law.

A prominent civil liberties attorney has advised us that the law cited, the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, has never been used to convict a journalist. The law pertains to government employees who violate their security clearances, certainly not those who find "classified information" in open-source materials posted on the Net.

The threat of prosecution under this act may be a baseless attempt by CIA to intimidate journalists exposing wrongdoing by their employees. Or it may announce an intention by the U.S. government to dangerously expand precedent in the application of this law. That would certainly be in line with a general anti-transparency movement in recent years.
Some background:

In January 2000, a 27-year-old female desk officer working in Rich Blee's Bin Laden Station, called "Michael" in the Commission Report, was placed in charge of an operation to track several known Al Qaeda terrorists to a meeting in Malaysia.

Learning that one of the men, a future Flight 77 hijacker, possessed a visa allowing him entry to the U.S., FBI agent Doug Miller, working at CIA, drafted a warning to his FBI bosses. According to the Justice Department's Inspector General, it was Michael who directly ordered Miller to hold off on sending the cable, what turned out to be a permanent "hold off." A few hours later, she sent a misleading email throughout CIA stating that the visa info had been shared with FBI. It seems circumstantially clear she knew this to be untrue, as only two days later, another FBI agent at CIA named Mark Rossini describes having a heated conversation with her in which she instructed him, "This is not a matter for the FBI. When we want them to know, we'll let them know. And you're not going to say anything."

"Its one of the most troubling aspects or our entire report, that particular thing," revealed the 9/11 Commission chairman Tom Kean to us in 2008. Newsweek's Michael Isikoff, who first broke the CIA withholding story in 2002, goes even further. "That was a pretty stunning intelligence lapse. Probably one of the biggest intelligence lapses of our time."

In an interview we released in part in August, the former counterterror adviser to the President, Richard Clarke, claimed the information about the travel of two future hijackers to the U.S. had not just been withheld from FBI but also from the White House. Former CIA agent Bob Baer confirmed to us that whoever was in charge of the Mihdhar surveillance op (which we know to be Michael) would by standard protocol have held direct responsibility for sending this fax to Clarke.

Michael's direct supervisor was a redhead who the Associated Press identified by her middle name "Frances" in a story earlier this year. Sometime after the bombing of the USS Cole in late 2000, we're told Frances became Deputy Chief of Bin Laden Station, where circumstantial evidence connects her to the continued withholding of information from FBI investigators regarding this same future 9/11 hijacker, who by that time was known to be connected to the suspected Cole mastermind. Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Lawrence Wright told us he feels this amounted to obstruction of justice in the criminal investigation of the death of seventeen U.S. military men.

Frances reportedly told investigators working for Congress in 2002 that it was she who physically walked a copy of the terrorist's U.S. visa to the FBI, a statement proven false by a later check of the log books at headquarters. Former intelligence committee staff director Eleanor Hill told us her team found no documentary evidence showing that FBI had ever been told. Michael also apparently failed to inform Hill's investigation or the one conducted shortly thereafter by Justice's Inspector General that she had blocked Doug Miller from sending a warning cable and had ordered Mark Rossini not to tell the Bureau.

The AP reported that Frances was also at the center of "the el-Masri incident," in which an innocent German citizen was kidnapped by 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." It was no doubt something more to el-Masri. We have confirmed that Frances 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.

In late 2009, a Jordanian double agent with a suicide vest was brought into a CIA base in Khost, Afghanistan, exploding himself and killing seven CIA personnel. It was the deadliest day for the Agency in over two decades. The security failure has been widely criticized. A source informs us that the internal investigation into that matter singles out Frances and the then-head of CTC for interfering with the instincts of the Base Chief on the ground. "They told her not to search the source, that it would offend him," claims our source.

The CIA has told us we would be irresponsible to identify these two individuals working in the fight against Al Qaeda. We believe it is irresponsible for the CIA to leave them in such positions given the results of their previous work in this area. This is a public safety issue. Despite CIA's protestations that these may be covert operatives, two sources have informed us that they are presently working from CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.

"A lot of these people who withheld this information were not covert operatives," former Middle East case officer Bob Baer remarked, explaining that as analysts their names were not classified before 9/11. "There was no reason to hide their names. They are out there in the public. You can find them in data and credit checks and the rest of it... They certainly could have been brought before the House or the Senate in closed session and an explanation and a report put out there."

"Frances" and "Michael" reported to Bin Laden Station Deputy Chief Tom Wilshere and Chief of Station Richard Blee, who himself reported to Counter-Terrorist Center chief Cofer Black and CIA Director George Tenet. The actions of the whole group are explored in our investigative podcast.

The Society of Professional Journalists' code of ethics states that "journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know" and should "be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable." The day that journalists' exposés of wrongdoing within government agencies require the approval of those government agencies before release, that is the day that transparency and accountability are lost.

We have done nothing wrong. In fact, we have done some excellent investigative journalism, mostly unpaid, and were ready to release it for free as a kind of public service. The CIA have now put us in a position where we must choose between participating in their decade-long protection of these individuals at the expense of public safety or possibly facing prosecution. We are weighing our options and deciding what is right and best for all concerned. We will release our decision and some version of the investigative podcast in the coming days.

THE WHO IS RICH BLEE? TEAM

[Albert Doyle]

Kind of reminds you of Oswald's files being carefully guided in order not to set-off any Security Index triggers.

[Peter Lemkin]

From: FF4 Films
Date: Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 10:52 AM
Subject: Request for response from George Tenet (At the Center of the Storm)
To: ZZZZZ

ZZZZZ,
It was a pleasure to speak with you briefly over the phone late last Thursday. Thank you for forwarding the following request to Mr. Tenet, as per our conversation.

Best,
Ryan

Dear Mr. Tenet,

I write as part of a documentary production team working in association with the Emmy-winning media firm Globalvision, also the winner of a George Polk Award for Journalism. We've been investigating the Mihdahr/Hazmi matter for several years, and we would like to speak with you by phone soon, either for a recorded interview or, less preferably, off-the-record.

CIA insiders, as well as others at NSC, FBI, and DOD, have already spoken to us, and if you will speak with us I think you will be interested to learn that the picture they've painted often differs greatly from that recounted in your book At the Center of the Storm.

In ten days, we will be releasing via public television one such interview -- with Richard Clarke -- ahead of our full release on the 9/11 anniversary. We are providing it to you now in a private YouTube link here:

YouTube Video (link has been changed to allow public access)

We sincerely hope that you will speak with us in order to set the record straight and respond to specific allegations made by Clarke and others.

Thank you,
Ryan XXXXX
Associate Producer

FF4 Films
Globalvision

From: Bill Harlow
Date: Wed, Aug 3, 2011 at 11:25 AM
Subject: Your Request To Interview George Tenet
To: FF4 Films

Mr. XXXXX,

ZZZZZ relayed to us your request to interview George Tenet.

Mr. Tenet does not wish to be interviewed either on camera or on background for your project.

However, in light of some of the absurd and patently false statements made by Richard Clarke in the YouTube clip you shared, Mr. Tenet reached out to Cofer Black and Richard Blee. Together they are providing the attached joint statement to you. We request that you make their statement available, in its entirety, to any media organization to which you distribute your interview with Richard Clarke.

Bill Harlow
Joint Statement
from George J. Tenet, Cofer Black and Richard Blee
August 3, 2011

Richard Clarke was an able public servant who served his country well for many years. But his recently released comments about the run up to 9/11 are reckless and profoundly wrong.

Clarke starts with the presumption that important information on the travel of future hijackers to the United States was intentionally withheld from him in early 2000. It was not.

He wildly speculates that it must have been the CIA Director who could have ordered the information withheld. There was no such order. In fact, the record shows that the Director and other senior CIA officials were unaware of the information until after 9/11.

The handling of the information in question was exhaustively looked at by the 9/11 Commission, the Congressional Joint Inquiry, the CIA Inspector General and other groups.

The 9/11 Commission quite correctly concluded that "...no one informed higher levels of management in either the FBI or CIA about the case."

In early 2000, a number of more junior personnel (including FBI agents on detail to CIA) did see travel information on individuals who later became hijackers but the significance of the data was not adequately recognized at the time.

Since 9/11 many systemic changes have been made to improve the watchlisting process and enhance information sharing within and across agencies.

Building on his false notion that information was intentionally withheld, Mr. Clarke went on to speculate--which he admits is based on nothing other than his imagination--that the CIA might have been trying to recruit these two future hijackers as agents. This, like much of what Mr. Clarke said in his interview, is utterly without foundation.

Many years after testifying himself at length before the 9/11 Commission and writing several books but making no mention of his wild theory, Mr. Clarke has suddenly invented baseless allegations which are belied by the record and unworthy of serious consideration.

We testified under oath about what we did, what we knew and what we didn't know. We stand by that testimony.

###

On 8/4/2011 3:37 PM, FF4 Films wrote:

Mr. Harlow, Thank you very much for providing that joint statement. We will make it available in its entirety to any media organization to which we distribute the Clarke interview, as requested.

We are passionate about telling an accurate story, but the refusal of Mr. Tenet, Mr. Black, and Mr. Blee to discuss it even on background makes that impossible, as we are forced to rely on the info we've been provided by those who will talk to us. I have summarized the highlights of that information in an attached doc, including many, many issues still unaccounted for with regard to CIA's handling of Mihdhar/Hazmi, none of which have anything to do with Mr. Clarke's judgement or accuracy.

If there are simple -- even benign or admirable -- explanations for those issues, I sincerely wish Mr. Tenet, et al, would break their media silence and simply provide those answers. I want them to realize that their failure to do so only appears to give credence to speculation like that in the Clarke interview.

Furthermore, Mr. Clarke is not the only gov't insider who has stated to us that he/she believes these unexplained events can be explained by high-level deliberate choices within the CIA. If these folks are wrong, Mr. Tenet, et al, could easily choose to make them look foolish and set the record straight for all concerned by going through this story with us and providing explanations in detail, case by case. Their motivations in continuing to refuse to do so a full decade after the terrible tragedy and in the face of accusations from other gov't officials is, frankly, baffling to me.

Also, a quick correction on a couple items in the joint statement: Mr. Clarke did previously make this same accusation in his 2009 book Your Government Failed You, p. 165-171. Also, the Commission line quoted, "no one informed higher levels of management in either the FBI or CIA about the case" actually began "It appears that..." and concerned only the search for Mihdhar/Hazmi from Aug 2001 onward, although we have spoken to an insider from Alec who claims even that simple fact was not the case. In fact, they should be made aware that in our interview with Chairman Tom Kean, he told us explicitly that he believed the withholding of Mihdhar info was deliberate and purposeful (though he believed this was due to an absurd culture of secrecy within the Agency) and also stated that he and his staff believed Mr. Tenet provided false testimony on a number of points ("No, I don't think he misspoke. I think he misled.")

If you will, please pass on the attached list of issues with the CIA story, if anyone wants to provide a more detailed response. Thank you again.

Best,
Ray Nova
Producer / Co-Director

FF4 Films
Globalvision

On Aug 9, 2011, at 3:30 PM, Bill Harlow wrote:

Got your voice mail message over the weekend...sorry it has taken a little while to get back to you.

Yes....the material you originally sent via XXX was made available to Tenet, Black and Blee and the statement I provided to you was their response in light of that material.

None of them have any plans to go beyond that statement or to respond to the additional material you sent via email on 8/4/11.

Bill Harlow

From: FF4 Films
Date: Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 3:55 PM
Subject: Re: Your Request To Interview George Tenet
To: Bill Harlow

Understood, Mr. Harlow. Thank you for the response. Also, we truly hope Mr. Blee feels better soon.

Cordially,
Ray

[Carsten Wiethoff]

On the issue of CIA hiding identities of hijackers (and other issues), Peter Dale Scott spoke on the Toronto Hearings on 9/10/11.
He can be seen here: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/17209099 (First 20 Minutes deal with above issue)

All Toronto Hearings here: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/thetorontohearings/videos

[Peter Lemkin]

On the issue of CIA hiding identities of hijackers (and other issues), Peter Dale Scott spoke on the Toronto Hearings on 9/10/11.
He can be seen here: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/17209099 (First 20 Minutes deal with above issue)

All Toronto Hearings here: http://www.ustream.tv/channel/thetorontohearings/videos

Thanks for that url...YES, this covers the exact same material, and is very important and well done [as PDS is wont to do!].....

[Bernice Moore]

http://howthehellshouldiknow-wallyworld....er-up.html

Richard Clarke spilling the beans about 9/11?

[Ed Jewett]

CIA Bad Apples Named By Whistleblowers

Posted on September 22, 2011 by WashingtonsBlog
Bush and Clinton counter-terrorism czar Richard Clarke alleges that the CIA improperly blocked information from being passed to the FBI which would have stopped 9/11. Many other top counter-terrorism experts question the "official" governmental version of 9/11 as well.
Yesterday, FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds along with producers Ray Nowosielski and John Duffy named two additional CIA officers who they allege blocked the information from being passed to the FBI. See this, this and this.
According to New Yorker and Wall Street Journal reporter Jane Mayer, one of these CIA agents was also instrumental in U.S. torture and rendition, including the torturing of an innocent man.
It is certainly beyond dispute that 9/11 was foreseeable. And it is beyond dispute that the CIA could have stopped 9/11, but failed to do so.
But other intelligence agencies like the NSA were also listening into the hijackers' phone calls, and an FBI informant rented a room to two hijackers. So it is not like the other agencies were helpless in light of CIA failures. NSA, FBI or other intelligence services could have stopped 9/11 as well. And various government teams tasked with tracking Al Qaeda were disbanded or stopped prior to 9/11. Seethis.
But professor Michel Chossudovsky argues that all of the claims of "foreknowledge" and "intelligence failures" are red herrings, because they still justify the basic phony narrative for the war on terror. Remember, former U.S. National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski told the Senate that the war on terror is "a mythical historical narrative". The war on terror is and has always been about regime change in a number of Middle Eastern countries which America considers to be strategic targets.
For example, General Wesley Clark states:

I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, "Sir, you've got to come in and talk to me a second." I said, "Well, you're too busy." He said, "No, no." He says, "We've made the decision we're going to war with Iraq." This was on or about the 20th of September.
***

So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, "Are we still going to war with Iraq?" And he said, "Oh, it's worse than that." He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, "I just got this down from upstairs" meaning the Secretary of Defense's office "today." And he said, "This is a memo that describes how we're going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran."

And a newly-published memo on U.S. strategy from secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld to President Bush dated September 30, 2001, stated:

If the war does not significantly change the world's political map, the U.S. will not achieve its aim/ There is value in being clear on the order of magnitude of the necessary change. The USG [U.S. Government] should envision a goal along these lines: New regimes in Afghanistan and another key State (or two) that supports terrorism.

And the U.S. appears to be using Al Qaeda brigades as the spearhead of its war in Libya … and soon Syria. See this and this (from an Israeli source frequently cited by top American intelligence officials),this, this, this, this and this.
Moreover, virtually everything the U.S. is now doing was planned before 9/11.
Indeed, professor Chossudovsky documents the creation and control of Al Qaeda by the CIA to fight against the Russians in Afghanistan, and the continuing use and control during the Bosnian war and continuing up until 9/11. Chossudovsky says that 9/11 was a false flag incident.
So are Edmonds' and Chossudovsky's claims irreconcilable?
Perhaps. But Edmonds also alleges that Bin Laden worked for the United States right up until 9/11.
In other words, even if the hijackers were patsies or agents of rogue elements within the CIA and/or other governmental agencies, the FBI could have stopped them if the information had not been blocked by the CIA.
So instead of being irreconcilable, they might be providing two different pieces to the same puzzle.

[Jan Klimkowski]

See also the thread here.