Cynthia McKinney's CIA Agent Involved in Plame Letter

Revisiting the issue that helped spur her ouster from Congress three years ago, Rep. Cynthia McKinney led a Capitol Hill hearing Friday on whether the Bush administration was involved in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The eight-hour hearing, timed to mark the first anniversary of the release of the Sept. 11 commission's report on the attacks, drew dozens of contrarians and conspiracy theorists who suggest President Bush purposely ignored warnings or may even have had a hand in the attack — claims participants said the commission ignored.

That, in and of itself, is nothing unusual for Cynthia McKinney. But, the story gets more interesting as you read on:

The commission's report was not a rush to judgment, it was a rush to exoneration," said John Judge, a member of McKinney's staff and a representative of a Web site dedicated to raising questions about the Sept. 11 commission's report.

The White House and the commission have dismissed such questions as unfounded conspiracy theories.

McKinney first raised questions about Bush's involvement shortly after the attacks in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, generating a furious response from fellow Democrats in Washington and voters in Georgia, who ousted her in 2002.

"What we are doing is asking the unanswered questions of the 9/11 families," McKinney, a DeKalb County Democrat who won back her seat in 2004, said during the proceedings.

She rebuffed a reporter's repeated attempts to ask her why she would so boldly embrace the same claims that led to her downfall.

"Congresswoman McKinney is viewed as a contrarian," panelist Melvin Goodman, a former CIA official, said. "And I hope someday her views will be considered conventional wisdom."

Who is Melvin Goodman? Why, one of the signatories to this letter regarding the Plame leak. The letter that has been widely trumpeted by Josh Marshall and others.

Assuming there is only one former CIA official named Mel Goodman, it appears Mr. Goodman has been very busy lately. His inclusion as a signatory also makes the letter from former 'outraged' CIA officials look less like straight talk than it did initially. That in and of itself does not invalidate the letter, but it makes it look much less like the pristine indictment against all things Bush that Mr. Marshall would have you believe.

In continuing our examination of Josh Marshall's favorite letter, we're moseying on down the list of signatories, and their credibility ain't exactly improving.

Ray McGovern, for instance, contributed an article to the ultra-left truthout.org arguing that the Downing Street Memo conclusively proves that Bush deliberately forged intelligence to get us into war in Iraq. Now, are we to believe that he just innocently and in a non-partisan manner became concerned about what happened to poor old Valerie Plame? If you're still unconvinced, read his hysterical rant at DemocracyNow about what a right-wing rag the WaPo is. You might also be interested to know that McGovern thinks that the reason 9/11 happened was because of "gross ineptitude and gross malfeasance" on the part of the Bush administration. They should have paid more attention to Sandy Berger. I'm serious, it's all in there.

One of the other signatories to the letter, David MacMichael, also belongs to McGovern's group, Veterans Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, which has been virulently anti-war since well before the Plame situation exploded. Observe some of the quotes from MacMichael during an interview with lefty host Amy Goodman:

It is all happening because there are lies upon lies, deceit upon deceit that have been used to justify this illegal war on against an unprovoked enemy, or an enemy that does not provoke us.

AMY GOODMAN:Now one of the things we are talking about a lot and seeing a lot is that the same people that were there during the Reagan-Bush years and even before, the Wolfowitzes the Rumsfelds, Cheneys were there then. What was George Bush’s view of these people then?

Those were 1981-1983 under Reagan and under William Casey. In fact I embarked on that job the day Casey came in. I can assure you that the way in which the National Intelligence Council and the National Intelligence officers, the directing officers in there were stacked during the Casey years, meant that intelligence was designed, and I focused principally on Central America, the whole Iran Contra thing later, truthful analysis was not the highest priority there. The determination was to produce analyses that would support the previously decided upon policy so for me, getting back involved with Ray McGovern here and VIPS dealing with this current situation, its kind of like déjà vu all over again. It’s a familiar process.

Additionally, several of the other signatories had been outspoken critics of the administration's decision to go to war before the incident with Plame erupted, including Col. Patrick Lang. Vince Cannistraro was part of the group of CIA officials who suspiciously began speaking critically about the Bush administration in the month before the general election, rather than at a time when it might have been practically useful (such as, before the war).

This letter becomes less credible by the minute. We are still looking for a signatory that didn't have an axe to grind with Bush BEFORE the outing of Plame.

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/0705/23natmckinney.html

McKinney reopens 9/11
Conspiracy theories implicating president aired at 8-hour hearing

By BOB KEMPER
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 07/23/05
Washington — Revisiting the issue that helped spur her ouster from Congress three years ago, Rep. Cynthia McKinney led a Capitol Hill hearing Friday on whether the Bush administration was involved in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

The eight-hour hearing, timed to mark the first anniversary of the release of the Sept. 11 commission's report on the attacks, drew dozens of contrarians and conspiracy theorists who suggest President Bush purposely ignored warnings or may even have had a hand in the attack — claims participants said the commission ignored.

"The commission's report was not a rush to judgment, it was a rush to exoneration," said John Judge, a member of McKinney's staff and a representative of a Web site dedicated to raising questions about the Sept. 11 commission's report.

The White House and the commission have dismissed such questions as unfounded conspiracy theories.

McKinney first raised questions about Bush's involvement shortly after the attacks in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, generating a furious response from fellow Democrats in Washington and voters in Georgia, who ousted her in 2002.

"What we are doing is asking the unanswered questions of the 9/11 families," McKinney, a DeKalb County Democrat who won back her seat in 2004, said during the proceedings.

She rebuffed a reporter's repeated attempts to ask her why she would so boldly embrace the same claims that led to her downfall.

"Congresswoman McKinney is viewed as a contrarian," panelist Melvin Goodman, a former CIA official, said. "And I hope someday her views will be considered conventional wisdom."

Though she left the testimony and questioning of panelists to others, McKinney was the main attraction, presiding over more than two dozen participants, including the author of a book that claims the U.S. government had advance knowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack and allowed it to happen, and Peter Dale Scott, who wrote three books on President John F. Kennedy's assassination.

Georgia peanuts, Cokes and coffee were available to more than 50 attendees, whose casual dress was a decided change from the gangs of blue-suited lobbyists who usually crowd Capitol Hill hearings.

McKinney herself offered witnesses bottled water and found additional trash cans to place around the room.

Nearly a dozen 9/11 enthusiasts lined one side of the room, camcorders at the ready, broadcasting the hearing live over the Internet or recording it for later release. C-SPAN cameras documented the hearing, and a DVD recording of the proceedings will soon be available.

Ten people sat in a section reserved for family members of 9/11 victims.

"Nine-eleven could have been prevented," said Marilyn Rosenthal, a University of Michigan professor who lost a son in the attacks, echoing the premise of the hearing.

Panelists maintained that Bush ignored numerous warnings from the CIA, the Federal Aviation Administration, foreign governments and others who told him before 9/11 that Osama bin Laden was planning to attack the United States and that terrorists were likely to use hijacked airliners as weapons.

But why would the president or his administration want the 9/11 attacks to occur? Power, the panelists agreed.

In the wake of the attacks, the administration was able to greatly expand the president's power and the reach of the federal government, they said, but whistle-blowers and other potential witnesses who could have testified to the Sept. 11 commission about such things were either prevented from speaking or ignored in the commission's final report. Panelists called the commission's report "a cover-up."

"The American people have been seriously misled," said Scott.

For the record:

This was a dog and pony show, not a Congressional hearing. I found it on McKinney's official congressional website. And I wonder how much it cost?

http://www.house.gov/mckinney/pr_050722.htm

July 22nd Congressional Briefing:
The 9/11 Commission Report One Year Later:
A Citizens’ Response – Did They Get It Right?

On July 22, 2005, Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) will host a full-day briefing, co-sponsored by Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), and other sponsors, for Members of Congress and their staffs in the Caucus Room, Cannon House Office Building, Room 345, Independence Ave. & First Street SE, from 9:00 am to 5:00 pm.

One year after the release of the 9/11 Commission Final Report many questions about what transpired on September 11, 2001 and who should be held accountable still remain unanswered. Serious flaws and omissions in the Report have been addressed by whistleblowers and academics. Well known researchers and authors have put the evnts of that day into historical perspective, and have suggested possible alternatives to the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission regarding intelligence reform, domestic and foreign policy. The hard evidence has yet to be properly evaluated, and points to the need for full transparency, release of information, and continued probative investigations to have an effective, democratic response to the crisis that confronts all of us.

Family members of the victims of 9/11 will present a “Report Card” to address their still unanswered questions about the events of 9/11 and the lack of accountability for the security and intelligence failures that may have allowed these events to happen. Other experts will speak to the flaws in the 9/11 Commission’s process, including conflicts of interest, lack of transparency, investigative rigor and public input, and the many whistleblowers ignored by the Commission.

One panel of experts will explore the omissions and errors in the Commission’s Final Report, including the timeline of NORAD/FAA and P-56 defense responses that day, the suspects and plot, the background of Al Qaeda and bin Laden, the involvement of other countries, the obstruction of investigations by the FBI and CIA, and foreknowledge and forewarnings prior to the attacks. Another panel will place 9/11 into historical perspective and looka t the flawed assumptions that misled the Commission’s work, including the politics of illegal drugs, oil investments, covert operations and terrorism, as well as past covert operations like Contragate and the rise of the neo-conservatives and their agenda.

The last half of the day will be a critical examination by experts of the Commission’s recommendations concerning domestic and foreign policy and intelligence reforms, suggesting other alternatives and policies that could lead to real security and preserve civil liberties and democracy. Rep. McKinney will also address the need for further investigation and opening the evidence for public scrutiny.

A list of confirmed speakers so for includes:

Rober McIlvaine, father of 9/11 victim, member of September 11th Families for Peaceful Tomorrows
Marilyn Rosenthal, mother of 9/11 victim, professor at U. of Michigan, expert on forewarnings to 9/11
Robert Baer, author of Sleeping with the Devil and See No Evil, former CIA
Nafeez Ahmed, author of The War on Truth, Director, Institute for Policy Research & Development
Jumana Musa, Amnesty International
Melvin Goodman, Fellow, Center for International Policy, former CIA
John Newman, Ph.D., professor University of West Virginia, former NSA analyst
Paul Thompson, author of The Terror Timeline
Elaine Cassel, author of The War on Civil Liberties, legal expert
William Michaels, author of No Greater Threat
Lauretta Napoleoni, author of Terror Incorporated: Tracing the Dollars Behind the Terror Networks
Anne Norton, author of Leo Strauss and the Politics of American Empire
Mary Rose Oaker, President, American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, legal expert
Peter Dale Scott, Ph.D., professor UC Berkeley, author of Drugs, Oil and War, former Canadian diplomat
Murray Weiss, author of The Man Who Warned America concerning FBI agent John O’Neill who died on 9/11

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.