top
Newswire
Calendar
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Related Categories: East Bay | Police State and Prisons
Cody's Thurs: 'Denial and Deception' - 'Former' CIA Agents Advancing the 9/11 Cover-up
by repost
Friday Feb 18th, 2005 11:21 PM
Out of the stampede of recently-former CIA agents publishing books and writing articles to explain away the 'intelligence failures' that supposedly led to 9/11 comes Melissa Boyle Mahle, speaking at Cody's Books on Thursday the 24th.
'Denial and Deception' - Melissa Boyle Mahle and Other 'Former' CIA Agents Advancing the 9/11 Cover-up of Incompetence

While browsing books at Cody's books in Berkeley the other evening, I was surprised to notice that a former CIA agent named Melissa Boyle Mahle, was scheduled to be a featured book review speaker the next week. I picked up the book and thought it was strange that there was not a single review on the back dust cover. Looking on Amazon just now, I saw that there were only 2 reviews. And not surprisingly, the description on the back cover reads like a bad spy novel. Some areas are even blacked-over reactions - areas the CIA supposedly censored. Wow!

Here's the important part of the description of the book on Amazon:

"Mahle provides a vivid personal and historical narrative on how the CIA became an anorexic organization, lost in the post-Cold War world. Afraid to take risks that might offend Washington politicos and European allies, gutted of the clandestine operators who knew how to run secret wars, exhausted from reform whiplash, and demoralized by demonization and poor performance, the CIA simply became unable and unwilling "to get down and dirty to do the hard part to fight a real war on terrorism."
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1560256494/102-5568204-6217722

Lost? Afraid to take risks that might offend Washington politicos? Exhausted from reform whiplash? Maybe these are real concerns, I don't know - does the CIA not get any black ops money? You know, the trillions of dollars dissapearing from our tax money with no paper trail at all? Is the agency simply reeling under such a cash flow? Whatever the case, from the cover-up work of these so-called former agents, it seems obvious what's going on here.

I opened the book up and started to read and was disgusted almost immediately. Mahle leaps into 9/11 at the start, describing her own experience as a CIA agent, but focuses on aspects like her tears at seeing all the flags come out later that day and how it was all just another INTELLIGENCE FAILURE, the name of the chapter, incidentally. Perhaps she really believes it was a 'failure,' as hard as that is to imagine. But the recent stampede of CIA agents exiting the agency since 9/11 with their publisher's contract in hand appears to me to be a part of an agenda. Why? Because you have to wonder how is it that the average person you meet or know already understands that 9/11 was never an intelligence failure, but these people supposedly don't know that. Most of us know that 9/11 was meant to happen, it was made to happen, and it was pulled off only with the help of a fascist corporate media and hard-core cover-up commission, so that a small group of already extremely wealthy and powerful inividuals could become ever more powerful in its wake. And all the while, do people like Melissa Boyle Mahle really think - in their patriotic state of blissful ignorance - that this wasn't an inside job? Doubtful.

You can browse the first few slick pages on Amazon here:

http://www.amazon.com/...
http://makeashorterlink.com/?D5432248A

But perhaps the example of another recently-former CIA agent, Robert Baer, could help illuminate the context. Baer reportedly emerged in the media spotlight in the months after 9/11 and was described as a 'former CIA official involved in counter-terrorism.' Chaim Kupferberg, author of an article titled, "CIA's Robert Baer Spins Official Legend of 9-11," describes Baer's start this way:

"After publishing his widely acclaimed book, 'See No Evil,' Baer established himself as the mainstream media's "go-to" guy when making the case for pre-9/11 complacency and opportunistic blindness."
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=75&contentid=1031

Kupferberg delves into the notable inconsistencies in Baer's reported activities before and after 9/11, particularly those related to Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Daniel Pearl. And ultimately, he also wonders what's going on when a former CIA agent is suddenly offering up the 'real deal' on 9/11:

"Isn't Baer, after all, just a retired CIA guy far out of the loop, trolling the media circuit as an "independent" critic? Or is he, rather, a key operative among an insular (though by no means rogue) counter-terror clique involved in the formation and presentation of the Official 9/11 Legend and its off-shoots?"
http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=75&contentid=1031&page=2

Part of the agenda, I note, is to come off as critical of the 9/11 report - both Baer and Mahle go on record taking the report down. Here's how Baer decribes the report in an interview:

ROBERT BAER: I think it's fairly bland. Most of the information in this report has already been leaked to the press in one form or another. There's no particularly important revelations. And it's also a report that avoids controversy.
http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2004/s1160534.htm

Indeed, this description could probably describe his own role in maintaining the illusion that 'intelligence failure' was the cause of 9/11. He was also recently used by the Nation magazine (for an excellent background on the Nation, see: http://www.oilempire.us/gatekeepers.html#thenation) to write a piece attacking David Ray Griffin (author of The New Pearl Harbor and The 9/11 Commission Report: Ommission and Distortions). Not surprisingly, Baer opens his article with this line:

"Conspiracy theories are hard to kill."
http://www.agenceglobal.com/article.asp?id=231

Indeed, killing an understanding that the official story on 9/11 is a lie, is hard to do when the evidence is flowing all over the internet - worldwide - and was captured in images in front of our own eyes. Aside from the tons of other evidence (such as the speed of the collapse of the towers, the massive sizes of the dust clouds, etc.) today, all we need to do is look at two fires that burned for over 15 hours each in skyscrapers in Spain and Venezuela in the past year without causing total destruction, and ask why fires that burned for only 1 hour could bring both WTC towers down. A good summary with excellent pictures is here, at the bottom of the page:

http://www.infowars.com/articles/world/madrid_towering_inferno.htm

And the only way to keep the lie alive - that it was all just a big mistake! - the CIA needs to trot out supposed former agents to share their secret inside inderstanding. Luckily, we have authors like David Ray Griffin, who brings together the work of many researchers to ask the questions they don't want us to ask. Baer's response to Griffin is likely the exact same response that Mahle would give to anyone who asked too many questions:

"For a start, Griffin simply cannot accept that our national security system totally failed all on its own on September."
http://www.agenceglobal.com/article.asp?id=231

On its own. Indeed.

Another description of Baer's and the Nation's attack on Griffin is here:

"On September 13, The Nation magazine published 'Executive Secrecy: Conspiracy or Failure?' by CIA agent Robert Baer. Baer ridicules "conspiracy theories" that 9/11/01 was an inside job, suggesting that this "monstrous proposition" and Griffin's choice to "recycle some of the wilder conspiracy theories" is driven by the evasions and lies of the Bush administration."
http://911research.com/essays/pentagontrap.html

That's the limited hangout component of the work of recently-former agents - pass along a few morsels, like trashing the 9/11 Commission Report, or criticizing Bush lies, but never let anyone get near the real truth underneath. By handing out morsels, people are derailed from looking any deeper. In her book 'Denial and Deception,' Mahle seems to paint herself as concerned about 'agency morale' and other nobel endeavors, almost like a protagonist in a spy novel. But don't take the bait. Ask her the hard questions yourself. She'll be in person at Cody's on Thursday the 24th, and at the Commonwealth Club on the 23rd (sold out already).

And if you can't think of any hard questions, you could ask her some of the questions the 9/11 Family Steering Committee would have asked:

http://www.911independentcommission.org/cia3182004.html

Here's a good one:

11. There were an extraordinarily large number of stock puts on American and United airlines stock and others which were subsequently impacted by the terrorist attack.

“It is well documented that the CIA has long monitored such trades – in real time – as potential warnings of terrorist attacks and other economic moves contrary to U.S. interests.
http://www.hereinreality.com/insidertrading.html

•Was the CIA monitoring the financial markets in the weeks preceding September 11th? If so, via what system and/or software were the markets monitored?
•Was such activity viewed as a warning of an impending attack?
•Did the CIA, in coordination with other agencies, both domestic and abroad, investigate the purchasers of those stock puts?
•Please provide the names of those individuals, investment groups and others who purchased the stock puts in question and the reasons they gave for anticipating a drop in the stocks of companies which coincidentally happened to have been severely impacted on September 11th.

Or you could just ask how it was that Osama was able to stand down the US military on 9/11,

Below are a few of the many important sites covering 9/11 truth:

http://www.911truth.org/index.php
http://www.oilempire.us/
http://whatreallyhappened.com/
http://questionsquestions.net/
http://wtc7.net/

LATEST COMMENTS ABOUT THIS ARTICLE
Listed below are the latest comments about this post.
These comments are submitted anonymously by website visitors.
TITLE AUTHOR DATE
Response to inaccurate statementsKyle F. HenceWednesday Jul 13th, 2005 7:38 PM
Could somebody fix this page so that it's readable?Aaron AaronsFriday Feb 25th, 2005 5:39 PM
Careful with your sourcesKarl RoveWednesday Feb 23rd, 2005 5:02 PM
"Hey David Corn: the "entry hole" wasn't 75 feet. "readerWednesday Feb 23rd, 2005 5:00 PM
Related ArticleJohn DoraemiWednesday Feb 23rd, 2005 1:10 PM
Don't trust themFredMonday Feb 21st, 2005 9:07 PM
9-11-01 Media CoverageTim McNivenSunday Feb 20th, 2005 3:49 PM
Thanks!Carol BrouilletSunday Feb 20th, 2005 11:25 AM