Support 911Blogger


Who is Rich Blee?

Today, Secrecy Kills.com released part 1 of their audio documentary, 'Who Is Rich Blee?'

The podcast can be found at the Secrecy Kills website.

The investigative work was originally to be released on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, but the creators of the documentary were threatened with federal prosecution by the CIA because they had unearthed the names of two CIA agents involved in the withholding of key information from the FBI and Whitehouse.

Ray Nowosielski and John Duffy released a statement in response to the CIA threat that is also available on their website.

[This is an outstanding piece of journalism that has taken Ray and John several years to bring to us. The work of people like Paul Thompson and Kevin Fenton has been a tremendous help to the 9/11 truth, justice, and accountability movement for many years now. I urge everyone that is interested in the truth of 9/11 to disseminate this as widely as you can. Part 2 will become available on October 11, 2011. -zbh]

The forbidden names

Alfreda Frances Bikowsky – http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=redheaded_cia_manager_1

Michael Anne Casey – http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=michelle_1

Hat tip to Jon Gold. We are all Spartacus.

Alfreda Frances Bikowsky: The Current Director of the CIA Global

Boiling 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 at their website. They also identify the second CIA culprit as Michael Anne Casey. 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.

http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2011/09/21/bfp-breaking-news-confirmed-identity-of-the-cia-official-behind-911-rendition-t...

Another promotion

“In collection, we’re not evaluating the why of the case or even the threat—we’re telling you how we’re positioned to collect against it and what capabilities we have—or need—to fill the gaps,” said Dina Corsi, chief of the Domain Collection Operations Support Section in the Directorate of Intelligence.

The goal, Corsi said, is to build collection and reporting capabilities and make the results available to all programs across the Bureau. “So if you are working in counterintelligence and the Criminal Division might have assets you could use, you would be aware of that and be able to leverage it. Our job is to streamline the intelligence process.”

Intelligence Analysts Part 2: The Subject Matter Experts

Corsi went from an IOS to a section chief. Evidently FBI headquarters didn't have a problem with her obstruction of the Cole investigation and the search for al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar. Why is that?

Good point

Something is off about UBLU. More digging is necessary there. Jack Cloonan says that Tom Wilshire "has a lot to answer for", but apparently so does Corsi. I wonder what his opinion on her is? It would be interesting to hear at the very least.

From The Threat Matrix by Garrett Graff

Steve Bongardt was on a 2:30 conference call with Liguori and Maxwell. Also at the other end were Mike Rolince, headquarters supervisor Rod Middleton, and analyst Dina Corsi, whom Bongardt and Fincher had clashed with that spring.

Maxwell opened. "What do we know? Do we recognize any of the hijacker names?"

Corsi replied affirmatively and began to read some. Bongardt came alert quickly at one name in particular. "Dina!" he interrupted. "Khalid al-Mihdhar? The same one you told us about? He's on the list?"

Middleton broke in from Washington. "Steve," he said, "we did everything by the book."

Bongardt exploded. "Hope that makes you fucking feel better! Tens of thousands are dead!"

Maxwell, sitting in New York, hit the mute button on the conference call and pointed at Bongardt, saying "Now is not the time. There will be a time for that. Now's not it."

pg. 313

AFAIK no criminal side agents have ever publicly addressed the conduct of the UBLU. Richard Clarke glossed over the sharing, noting that some low level FBI agents received the information too late. While the UBLU may not have had the cachet of the I-49 squad they evidently had enough pull to obstruct al Qaeda investigations.

Please confirm:

UBLU = Usama Bin Laden Unit

Yep

You got it.

"Dina!" he interrupted.

"Dina!" he interrupted. "Khalid al-Mihdhar? The same one you told us about? He's on the list?"

Is it known what Dina "told" them about Khalid?

From History Commons

Steve Bongardt, an FBI criminal agent investigating the bombing of the USS Cole, receives an e-mail from FBI headquarters asking the FBI’s New York office to start looking for future 9/11 hijacker Khalid Almihdhar under an intelligence investigation, but is forced to delete it following an argument with headquarters. The e-mail was not addressed to Bongardt, but forwarded to him by a supervisor, possibly in error. However, Bongardt calls Dina Corsi, the headquarters agent who wrote the e-mail, and expresses his surprise at the information contained in it, saying: “Dina, you got to be kidding me! Almihdhar is in the country?” He tells her the search should be conducted as a criminal investigation, not an intelligence investigation. Corsi incorrectly replies that the “wall” prevents the search from being carried out by criminal agents (see Early 1980s and July 19, 1995), as the investigation requires intelligence from the NSA that criminal agents cannot have, and she forces Bongardt to delete the e-mail from his computer (see August 29, 2001).

Bongardt+receives+info+about+al-Mihdhar

FBI New York agent Steve Bongardt, FBI headquarters agent Dina Corsi, and acting FBI Osama bin Laden unit head Rod Middleton, who is Corsi’s supervisor, discuss whether the search for future 9/11 hijacker Khalid Almihdhar should be an intelligence or criminal investigation. Bongardt argues that the search should be a criminal investigation because of Almihdhar’s connection to the bombing of the USS Cole and because more agents could be assigned to a criminal investigation. (Note: the office only has one rookie intelligence agent available.) He also says a criminal investigation would have better tools, such as grand jury subpoenas, which are faster and easier to obtain than the tools in an intelligence investigation. Corsi and Middleton say that the “wall” prevents the intelligence information necessary for the case being shared with criminal investigators, so the search must be an intelligence investigation. (Note: Corsi and Middleton are wrong (see August 29, 2001).) Bongardt is unhappy with this and requests an opinion from the Justice Department’s national security law unit (see August 28-29, 2001).

Bongardt+argues+that+investigation+should+be+handled+by+criminal+side+agents

Just as with Blee the public knows very little about Middleton. He was chief of the UBLU from June 28, 2001 until September 10, 2001.

This is the only article I have ever found that focuses specifically on the UBLU:

The UBLU, as it is called in the bureau (because the FBI spells it Usama, not Osama), had only existed for about four years. Before that, bin Laden and al-Qaida were the responsibility of the Radical Fundamentalist Unit.

The UBLU's mission was to track bin Laden, his actions, his intentions and anything related to al-Qaida.

The unit consisted of 18 people, including analysts who ate, slept and breathed bin Laden.

"They knew his underwear size, they knew his shoe size, they knew what hand he picked his nose with," Foust said.

Agent's career forged in the fires of terrorism

One wonders what the other 16 people (not counting Middleton and Corsi) thought of the decision to falsely keep the al-Hazmi/al-Mihdhar info from the criminal side agents. We are told that only one intel agent was available for finding al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar. What else was the UBLU working on that could possibly be more important than finding al Qaeda operatives inside the US?

UBLU: They knew so much...

...yet knew so little.

How did Bin Laden "escape" for 10 years after 9/11?

Is the identites of the other 16 UBLU agents available or confidential?

AFAIK most of them are unknown to the public

Another known ID is IOS Jennifer Maitner.

The media's failure to interview either Blee or Middleton is unforgivable. The contrast between the media's awful journalism in regard to the pre-9/11 conduct of the intelligence community and their coverage of the 9/11 memorial is really nauseating. The point being that it shows little to no respect for the victims when the media can't be bothered to interview the chiefs of Bin Laden units.

I'm pretty sure that no 9/11 Commission MFR's with Alec Station or UBLU personnel have been released.

well

All they had to do was pick up a phone book.

When Alhazmi and Almidhar came to the United States from their side trip to Thailand after the Malaysia summit, they lived with Omar al-Bayoumi for a couple weeks, a Saudi intelligence agent. After that, Nawaf Alhazmi lives in the United States openly, for TWO YEARS prior to the 9/11 attacks. Khalid Almidhar went back to Yemen for at least a month to be with his wife.
Where at in Yemen? At the famous hub that was being monitored by 4 or 5 different intelligence agencies, with satellite photos and even bugs in the house. After that when Almidhar returns to the states, him and Alhazmi are making calls back and forth to the Yemen hub. So how is it that the plot was not discovered? How is it that the CIA just forgot about these guys they were monitoring at the Malaysian summit AND the Yemen hub?

alternate mp3 download links

Who is Richard Blee audio podcast (alternate download links) -

Alternate 1:
http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-94247/TS-499960.mp3

Alternate 2:
http://www.pumpitout.com/audio/sk-001.mp3

.

& lady

liberty weeps & weeps.

this one must be on par w/ the witch that ran Murdochs UK empire.

thanks to all who pursue the truth, looking forward to learning more details about this.

real investigative journalism - puts the MSM to shame.

so many insiders giving statements of fact that contradict the official 9/11 account, and saying they don't believe the CIA's story. Other than the Tenet-Black-Blee weasel-worded statement, those involved at CIA wouldn't go on the record for this.

An excellent contribution to the body of independent research into 9/11.

Quote: Tom Kean

[RORY: Does this not suggest something more than careless oversight?]

Oh, it wasn’t careless oversight. It was purposeful. No question about that in mind. It was purposeful. But it was purposeful, we believe, because these agencies had been brought up to hold everything tight… The conclusion that we came to was that in the DNA of these organizations was secrecy. And secrecy to the point of ya don’t share it with anybody…

[RORY: Well, beyond not sharing, it was actually lying.]

Yeah. Oh yeah. It's, it's – hey, does it surprise you the CIA was brought up to lie?

[RORY: It surprises me that the CIA is lying to the FBI.]

It's outrageous really. I mean, the idea that that information was left out of something that was so essential for the FBI, whose job it is to work within the United States and track these people. Ya know, it's one of the most troubling aspects of our entire report, that particular thing.

Why Are They Acting?

The following interview of Richard A. Clarke by John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski very much comes off as acting in their reactions and mannerisms. The interview wasn't a normal sit-down interview, but was obviously scripted, with a lot of videographic cut-shots.

"Interview #07 (Washington, DC)", FF4Films, August 11, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bl6w1YaZdf8

The "revelations" provided by Clarke, Duffy and Nowosielski--in this interview and elsewhere on Duffy and Nowosielski's secrecykills.com website--are just more of the U.S. government position of LIHOS: Let It Happen Out of Stupidity, which reinforces the official U.S. government position. They make it seem as if they're really offering up some deep, dark, juicy secrets, but actually it's simply another permutation of the standard U.S. government line of "We mean well, but there were serious screw-ups."

Duffy and Nowosielski call themselves "journalists" on their secrecykills.com website, but they either haven't scratched the surfice regarding the alleged "hijackers" or they have no interest in doing so, as it doesn't take much digging to find out that the purported hijackers were clearly not Muslim extremists but did cocaine, hired prostitutes, drank alcohol, partied hard, etc., and obviously knew that they had protection from the highest levels of the U.S. government and repeatedly went out of their way to draw attention to themselves as crazed, potential terrorists, as if to build a "legend" backstory. For instance, see the below post by me for extensive documentation on this. Additionally covered is the fact that the many FBI agents attempting to investigate these supposed hijackers were repeatedly and consistently blocked and ordered not to investigate these supposed hijackers, despite forceful protestations from said FBI agents that terrorist attacks were going to happen.

The below post by me contains the November 10, 2003 article "September 11--Islamic Jihad or Another Northwoods?" by Tim Howells, Ph.D., which is a very good, short introduction to just some of the more damning mainstream major media articles and U.S. government primary documentation which proves up one side and down the other that the 9/11 attacks and the following anthrax attacks were a Hegelian dialectical PsyOp staged by the U.S. government as a pretext in order to obtain more power and control. I append my own additional endnotes at the conclusion of Dr. Howells' article, in order to add further mainstream documentation.

"The U.S. Government Staged the 9/11 Attacks", James Redford, soc.college, et alibi, Message-ID: ttj0d09ofjefrfgapi44ifpgu6lf2vi1h7@4ax.com , Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 13:49:56 GMT http://groups.google.com/group/soc.college/msg/cdb2f90b15ea3233?dmode=source , http://web.archive.org/web/20091022103614/http://geocities.com/psyop911/tim-howells-september-11-islamic-jihad-or-another-... , http://www.webcitation.org/61vnyqJwM

For much, much more hardcore documentation on government-staged terrorism, see my below pages:

"Documentation on Government-Staged Terrorism", TetrahedronOmega, November 28, 2008 http://www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2&mforum=libertyandtruth, http://www.webcitation.org/61voOtx5q

"9/11 'Hijackers' Trained on U.S. Military Bases", TetrahedronOmega, December 16, 2008 http://www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=58&mforum=libertyandtruth , http://www.webcitation.org/5vcbzYzM7

Thanks

... for introducing the forum to 9/11. I, for one, am very impressed.

(Thanks also for that much needed background check on Duffy and Nowosielski... you never know!)

You're Welcome. The Acting Is Weird to Me as Well.

You're welcome, SnowCrash. I'm glad you found the information of value.

But your comment doesn't address why Richard A. Clarke, John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski are acting in the video which I cited. It is very clear that this video wasn't filmed as a normal sit-down interview, but was scripted beforehand.

Richard A. Clarke is merely promulgating more U.S. government propaganda that the supposed 9/11 "hijackers" really were Muslim extremists who hijacked and crashed four airliners on 9/11, and that the collapsed buildings weren't controlled demolition, all of which is known to be false. Clarke is simply engaging in the time-worn spook tactic of "modified limited hangout" (to quote John Ehrlichman).

Nothing essential to the U.S. government's position changes with Clarke's "revelations": al-Qaeda isn't a Western intelligence operation; al-Qaeda staged the 9/11 attacks and brought down the World Trade Center; al-Qaeda and other Muslim extremists really are trying to kill Americans en masse; and the U.S. government is doing its best to try to defend America and the world, even if there are some major screw-ups along the way. All of which is easily shown to be false, such as in the documentation I linked to in my previous post.

Thus, I don't see what there is to get excited about in this obvious spook-tactic by Clarke.

Beware, highly biased and rampant speculation via James Redford

Ah, no hijacker idiocy. Almost as refreshing as my coffee this morning.

Just because I could really use a laugh, would you mind expounding your thoughts on the Able Danger program?

Palm readings?

It is very clear that this video wasn't filmed as a normal sit-down interview, but was scripted beforehand.

You have spoken some pretty strong words, and accusing some pretty good people (Duffy, Nowosielski) without a shred of evidence.

Until you drop the Tarrot-card-reading-style-accusations, you may not be taken seriously.

As it is, I am trying hard to be polite to you.

Why should anyone listen to you and your paranoid fantasy?

They're Not Exposing Anything; It's Just Standard Government MLH

Hi, Nor Cal Truth. As you can see for yourself, Richard A. Clarke is merely promulgating more U.S. government propaganda that the supposed 9/11 "hijackers" really were Muslim extremists who hijacked and crashed four airliners on 9/11, and that the collapsed buildings weren't controlled demolition, all of which is known to be false. Clarke is simply engaging in the time-worn spook tactic of "modified limited hangout" (to quote John Ehrlichman).

Read the post by me which you here reply to, where I go over all of that.

Nor do I palm-read. The video was clearly scripted. It's not a normal sit-down interview. The acting is apparent, and the abundance of cut-shots makes it even faker.

I'm the one who exposed the "Illuminati Death-Bed Confession Video" hoax created by Mike Zieper (a.k.a Mike Z), of which you can see my exposé below (under the nom de plume of Count Lithium von Chloride):

"Worldwide Internet 'Death-Bed Confession' Video: Talented NY Film-Maker 'Mike Z' Strikes Again," January 6, 2002 http://www.rense.com/general18/dbed.htm , http://www.webcitation.org/61xHLeh4h

Mike Zieper has a fondness for creating such hoaxes. The above wasn't his first such hoax nor his last.

Acting for whatever reason comes off as very obvious to me.

Your welcome is very welcome

"But your comment doesn't address why Richard A. Clarke, John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski are acting in the video which I cited."

They're not.

"It is very clear that this video wasn't filmed as a normal sit-down interview, but was scripted beforehand."

No it's not. It simply isn't what you imply it is. Clarke had already written about this in his 2008 book.

"Richard A. Clarke is merely promulgating more U.S. government propaganda that the supposed 9/11 "hijackers" really were Muslim extremists"

And they were. I am sick and tired of hearing these platitudes about drug use, strippers, and what not, as if religion isn't fraught with hypocrisy. As a martyr, you are admitted into paradise as soon as you shed your first drop of blood in jihad. Your sins are expunged. Why do you leave this out? Because you are reciting talking points, lacking any semblance of original thought or research.

"who hijacked and crashed four airliners on 9/11, and that the collapsed buildings weren't controlled demolition, all of which is known to be false.:"

Yes, they hijacked the planes. What happened to the buildings... I don't think you understand the first thing about that outside of the talking points you relay. You're welcome to check out my article on WTC 7 though. Be sure to follow the footnotes, you might learn something.

"Clarke is simply engaging in the time-worn spook tactic of "modified limited hangout" (to quote John Ehrlichman)."

Nelson Mandela once told me it's shallow to drop names.

"Nothing essential to the U.S. government's position changes with Clarke's "revelations": "

You don't understand the first thing about what you're critiquing. You don't even know who John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski are, (Quick, quick, Google is your friend!) or the nature of the research you're passing foregone judgment on.

"al-Qaeda isn't a Western intelligence operation; "

This is a gross oversimplification, but I expect nothing less from you, given the deplorable polemic I've seen from you so far. I'm trying to muster forbearance here, but you're making it very hard. I'm sure the next rabbit you pull out is going to be the 'database' canard.

"al-Qaeda and other Muslim extremists really are trying to kill Americans en masse; "

Yes, they are, I wonder why. (Foreign policy?) Doesn't mean we should be waging this insane 'war on terror' though. As it stands, I have more chance of dying from aspirin side-effects.

"All of which is easily shown to be false, such as in the documentation I linked to in my previous post."

Like I said, thank you for introducing the forum to 9/11, I'm very impressed and I'm overflowing with appreciation.

"Thus, I don't see what there is to get excited about in this obvious spook-tactic by Clarke."

Of course you don't. You are looking through a filter. That filter limits your view, warps your judgment, consigns you to paranoid platitudes and compels you to inject cheesy Infowars.com-style phraseology you probably don't even really understand like 'Hegelian dialectic' into the discussion, in the hopes that this will puff up your credentials as you level your wanton attacks on researchers who have accomplished more in a 15 minute interview than you have in your entire life.

Am I too harsh? Perhaps, but..... I didn't just accuse two brave researchers who stood up for 9/11 families since 2002 of being fucking actors. Nor did I, as you did just now, merrily ignore years of research conducted at History Commons (the context of the interview with Clarke) in order to soap box 911blogger with demonstrably false no hijacker nuttery. You are protecting your outdated belief system at the expense of good people, and you are bayoneting the Richard Clarke straw man. Your ignorance is insulting and annoying... your self-congratulatory, self-promotional back-slapping offensive and misplaced.

You're too kind, SC

Couldn't have said it better myself. Funnily enough, I posted it here for the benefit of 911Blogger readers, since I was highly doubtful that it would be posted on Infowars...you know, because I couldn't see how Alex might turn a profit from it ;) But lo and behold,

Steve Watson of Infowars has covered this story!

Boy, is my face red.

The 9/11 truth movement some day soon may, perhaps, just maybe, have to come to terms with the fact that yes, terrorists exist, and yes, some of them are even Muslims! And that its possible, that with a little Help from their friends, they can lead successful, happy (however limited) terrorist lives. By the way, Redford, please, will you entertain us further with any fantasies you might have about the Able Danger program? I can't wait!

Love and laughs,

zombie bill hicks

Thanks ZBH

I'm wondering if I should respond any further. I have the wherewithal to do so but not the gusto. Maybe Bryan @ TA was right, you know. Maybe I will, maybe I won't. The circus rolls on as the 9/11 Truth Movement makes it its mission to viciously attack credible 9/11 researchers in defense of blatantly false beliefs. It's an ongoing morale-destroying fiasco.

appreciation

I, for one, appreciate it when you take the time and effort to comment. Thanks!

Thank You for Your Welcome

Hi, SnowCrash.

You display no awareness of the extensive documentation on the supposed 9/11 "hijackers" which clearly shows that they were working as covert U.S. government intelligence agents, including what appears to be illicit activities such as drug-running through C.I.A. front-companies: for instance, the small-plane airfield in Venice, Florida. In addition to the extensive documentation which I provided in my original post in this thread, read the works of Daniel Hopsicker on this.

And again, these were not people who had an interest in Islam while they were alive, but rather their interest was in ingesting large amounts of illegal drugs and partying with strippers while apparently running drugs with the close help of U.S. intelligence agencies, for which agencies they were in their conscious employ, and for which they also did antiterrorism work. It was this "antiterrorism" work they did which was their downfall, as their jobs in this regard (in their minds) was to test security, yet this allowed them to be set up as patsies, like in so many other government-staged attacks (e.g., John F. Kennedy's assassination, the 7/7 bombings, etc.). Governments use antiterrorism operations to set up patsies and to build a legend.

And yes, I know quite well who John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski are. They aren't "journalists" as far as I can discern, or else they'd be interested in doing more than promoting blatant and provably false U.S. government Let It Happen Out of Stupidity (LIHOS) modified limited hangout propaganda. Especially when it comes from a super-spook like Richard A. Clarke.

Regarding the obvious acting in the video which I cited in my original post in this thread, I actually have a track-record on such matters. I'm the one who exposed the "Illuminati Death-Bed Confession Video" hoax created by Mike Zieper (a.k.a Mike Z), of which you can see my exposé below (under the nom de plume of Count Lithium von Chloride):

"Worldwide Internet 'Death-Bed Confession' Video: Talented NY Film-Maker 'Mike Z' Strikes Again," January 6, 2002 http://www.rense.com/general18/dbed.htm , http://www.webcitation.org/61xHLeh4h

Mike Zieper has a fondness for creating such hoaxes. The above wasn't his first such hoax nor his last.

Acting for whatever reason comes off as very obvious to me.

No Speculation, Just the Documented Facts

Hi, zombie bill hicks.

I don't doubt that Arab U.S. government agents could have boarded the flights. However, their history in this country shows that they were working closely with U.S. intelligence agencies. In boarding the flights, in their mind they would have thought that their function was to test security by acting suspiciously on the flight (as they had gone out of their way to do numerous times, of which actor James Woods reported one such incident). They would not have thought that that would be their last flight wherein they would be set-up as patsies, as for them this was just part of their job as covert antiterrorism agents. They certainly weren't suicidal nor Muslim extremists.

For extensive documentation on this, see the links I provided in my original post in this thread.

Search 'Rich Blee' in Google News :D

Ray and John deserve Oscars for their performance, methinks. With an honorable mention to Mr Clarke, of course. The amount of media attention this has drawn is absolutely STUNNING. The 9/11 Truth Movement is being bamboozled by these charlatans. I mean, Scoop.co.nz, and Gawker.com?? AMAZING.

All part of Ray and John's evil plan. Anyone that can't see that is just a planehugging Muslim hater.

Yea!

By far one of the most important 9/11 documentaries of all time. If you spend any time at this site or any other 9/11 Justice seeking site, you better be showing this documentary to everyone you know!

Hey!

Still no mention of this story in the MSM. Does Mr Redford have any insight as to why the US government would pay these guys to act and then cleverly edit this interview and not cash in on the propaganda? Is it perhaps that this story is quite damaging to the government sanctioned narrative of 9/11, and that the media has a vested interest in perpetuating that narrative?

You can't just make a bunch of allegations and then leave the thread, no one will take you very seriously.Forgetting the Richard Clarke interview for a moment, what is the actual problem with the Rich Blee podcast?

Great news

Posted on Slashdot!

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/10/03/1327211/Wiki-Editor-Helps-Reveal-Pre-911-CIA-Mistakes

Considering how "anti-conspiratorial" Slashdot is (Often if not almost always with justification) , this is exceptional.

Nice

I'm Anonymous Coward #37590372 :)

Got it

here :)

Where is the Secrecy Kills

Where is the Secrecy Kills website?

Anyone have info?

Yes

Something's coming up, I heard.

It was taken down

because someone with a nice chunk of clout wants to do something with their story besides a podcast. Stay tuned.

Whuuuut?!

YES!

timeline

Do you have any kind of guess about when we might know more?

If there is anything I can do to help...

....my email is available at my profile.