Widowmaker, "but is it true/" - that is the problem as about 80% of counter-intelligence work is disinformation. The article you linked to quotes two fellows, Joe Viallis (apparently not his real name) and Tony Pitt.
Joe's work left a lot to be desired. It would have heaps of good information and then suddenly some wacko stuff that discredited the good stuff - classic disinfo. He was always the first to publish on some psy-op. On the Bali Bombing, which took place late at night on the west coast of Australia, Joe had an article up on the 'net the next morning, less than 8 hours later. Pretty good for a fellow that should have been sleeping and where information was difficult to come by.
Tony had a newspaper up in Queensland. He used to run some of my legal stories on fundamental rights and early English law. He and his wife even visited me in chambers for some advice regarding something he was considering. Unfortunately, I think he was constantly looking for filler for his newspaper and would print a bunch of nonsense or some disinformation which was sent him.
A classic case was the tape I referred to above. When the police found out about the tape being in the public domain they went around to everyone they thought had a tape and confiscated them (Aussie Dave you can confirm that with Stewart as he was one of them). After they thought they had all the tapes, 'someone' made up a very poorly done hoax tape and sent it to Tony. Tony then wrote an article for his newspaper that rubbished the tape and how people had been had.
However, not all the tapes had been confiscated. Tony was then provided with one of the real tapes and he wrote a retraction of his previous article - strike one for the good guys.
Sometimes you don't have all the information and you just have to sit on what you have. I mentioned the antrax attacks, I considered the information I got somewhat credible given the source. However, the potential targets were way off from what I had been informed. I just stuck the information in the back of my mind and it didn't click until I found out where the military grade antrax came from. I then remembered who the fellow got his information from (a very reliable source). When I put two and two together, I realised the primary source had only been aware of the theft and not the targets. Although the targets suggested were logical, they were in fact just speculation.
Being on the outside looking in on this stuff can send you up some blind alleys. However, after all these years there is some very good stuff on the 'net that has filtered out a lot of the early disinformation on things like 9-11.