--- Begin Message ---
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Constantine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 12:12 PM
Subject: Where IS the CIA in Your Books?
Dan: As a political researcher who has read several of your books and
learned from them, I have to wonder, as do many others, why you avoid
writing critically about the CIA. You fault others for suspecting you of
cooperating with the Agency. No offense intended, but this is your own fault
-- if you didn't avoid the obvious and take the word of CIA operatives as
Gospel, would anyone question your integrity?
It has always struck me as very odd that you concentrate on the Mafia to the
exclusion of organized crime in the intelligence services, in many instances
overlapping with the thugs you've written about. At any rate, your books
have been essential to my own understanding of the Mafia, but this is an
enduring mystery, one that I'd like to see cleared up once and for all.
-- AC
----------
From: "Dan E. Moldea" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 13:24:05 -0500
To: "Alex Constantine" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Where IS the CIA in Your Books?
Dear Alex:
Thank you for your candid note. I take no offense from your tone or
your questions.
Actually, I did write about the CIA-Mafia plots against Castro in The
Hoffa Wars In fact, I was the first journallist to identify Tony deVarona's
role in the conspiracy--a fact I had dragged out of Bob Maheu during my
interview with him.
Also, contrary to what you appear to be suggesting, I can't recall
anything I've ever written in which I simply bought into the CIA's version
of anything. In fact, in the Postscript to my 1986 book, Dark Victory, I
was among that first journalists to accuse some of these intelligence
operatives of drug trafficking, as part of their role in the Iran-Contra
scandal.
But, frankly, I have always had little enthusiasm for writing about the
intelligence community. The reason? More than any other genre, reporters
who specialize in that world become hostages to their sources. In order to
maintain the access and goodwill of their sources, these journalists must
follow the party line. To stray means getting their flow of information cut
off. In many ways, they are like sports reporters, who become cheerleaders
for the local pro franchises--and then become part of the teams'
public-relations machinery. They must behave in order to continue receiving
the inside information.
I know some very nice people who have worked in the CIA and other
intelligence agenices. But despite how genuinely nice they are, they are
all trained to lie. There are no exceptions. If I worked in that world, I
would get weary of figuring out whether my particular sources were good guys
or bad guys.
That's why I always preferred investigating the mob. The good guys and
bad guys are easily distinguishable.
I hope this note addresses your concerns. If it doesn't, please feel
free to ask for further clarification.
Best wishes,
Dan E. Moldea
--- End Message ---
