9/11 Info Dump

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

Re: 9/11 Info Dump

Postby Elvis » Sun Sep 17, 2017 12:07 am

[p.13 of dump]


[Money trail]


Daniel Pearl and the Paymaster of 9/11:

9/11 and The Smoking Gun that Turned On its Tracker


by Chaim Kupferberg
Centre for Research on Globalisation (CRG), 4 September (revised 21 September 2002)

SUMMARY
A mere week after the destruction of the World Trade Center, authorities were gradually building toward an official announcement that would definitively link Osama bin Laden to the events of September 11 - a wire transfer of $100,000 to lead hijacker Mohamed Atta. To an increasingly skeptical public, here was the "smoking gun", a bona fide money trail that would demonstrate how al-Qaida planned and financed the operation.
On October 1, 2001, the press revealed the pseudonym of the al-Qaida operative who allegedly passed on the funds to the hijackers. Days later, CNN revealed that the pseudonym belonged to a 28-year old Pakistani militant, a former student at the London School of Economics named Omar Saeed Sheikh. Yet on October 9, the Times of India reported that Omar Saeed was in fact acting under the authority of General Mahmud Ahmad, the chief of Pakistani intelligence, who had spent the morning of September 11 in deep discussion with Sen. Bob Graham and Rep. Porter Goss (now the co-chairmen heading up the "independent" investigation into 9/11). An intricate disinformation campaign was now set in motion to control any damaging fallout that might have implicated elements of the U.S. government in the events of September 11.

At the insistence of U.S. authorities, General Ahmad was "quietly retired," and a cover story was then elaborated to explain that General Ahmad was "purged" by the Pakistani President for being "pro-Taliban" - yet distancing him from any connection to the 9/11 money trail.

As for the initial "smoking gun" itself - the money trail - trouble was brewing in the days before the Times of India's October 9 revelation. While plans were possibly being put into effect to initially publicize Omar Saeed as the 9/11 paymaster, confusion apparently set in when the Indian government began to ferret out the link between Omar Saeed and the Pakistani spymaster. It now became necessary to gradually put the brakes on the money trail story, minimizing it with the release, on Oct. 3, of the Blair document setting out the "persuasive" case against bin Laden (yet omitting mention of the alleged money trail).

A few days later, the invasion of Afghanistan commenced, and the money trail story began to die a slow death in the mainstream media. Yet in the meantime, it had to be dealt with.

With a cover story for General Ahmad's sudden dismissal firmly in place, a "legend" now had to be elaborated for Omar Saeed to distance him from General Ahmad and the money trail story. After October 9, as Omar Saeed suddenly disappeared from the world's headlines, the Indian-Pakistan front was now heating up, stoked by an October 14 announcement on Kashmir by al-Qaida.

By mid-December, the Associated Press had dislodged Omar Saeed from the money trail story by tagging bin Laden's brother-in law - Shaykh Saiid - as the actual 9/11 paymaster. That week, the Bush Administration also managed to fully bury the money trail story by presenting a new, "sexier" smoking gun - the Bin Laden Videotape Confession. Also that week, Pakistan and India were brought to the brink of war by a daring terrorist attack on the Delhi parliament - an attack that would eventually be linked to Omar Saeed.

On January 23, 2002, one day after a terror attack in Calcutta (which would also be linked to Omar Saeed), Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl disappeared off the streets of Karachi. On February 5, Pakistani authorities revealed the prime suspect in Pearl's kidnapping - Omar Saeed. With Saeed actually being in Pakistani custody on that very day, the authorities then spent the following week on a "hunt" for him, officially announcing his "arrest" on February 12.

With Omar Saeed back in the headlines, his link to the money trail was being gradually resurrected, yet this time it was minimized with the news of his now-publicized links to most of the post-9/11 terror attacks heating up the Pakistan-Indian border. In the meantime, the Times of India was now backing away from its October 9 bombshell, cutting General Ahmad out of the picture and connecting Omar Saeed to the money trail by way of an alternative al-Qaida operative (who was linked to the January 22 attack in Calcutta). Omar Saeed was now cast as a Kashmir militant with collateral ties to al-Qaida, employing terrorist attacks to foil Pakistani President Musharraf's collaboration with U.S. authorities in the War On Terror.
With General Ahmad branded as a "rogue" intelligence chief, all the pieces of the cover story were now firmly in place, providing an "alternative" explanation for the history books.

On July 15, 2002, Omar Saeed was sentenced to die for the kidnapping and murder of Daniel Pearl. While some correspondents had briefly touched upon Omar Saeed's alleged additional role as 9/11 paymaster, most persisted in refusing to acknowledge this angle of the story, focusing instead on a 1994 kidnapping which was the subject of a "secret" indictment against Saeed by the Justice Department back in November 2001.
While the media may, one day, present a "plausible" explanation for many of these anomalies, the evidence nevertheless now irrefutably points toward the existence of a vast disinformation apparatus that has managed, manipulated, and obfuscated most of the information being fed to the public - the true smoking gun of 9/11.
* * * *

COMPLETE ARTICLE

It was supposed to be the key chain of evidence linking the September 11 hijackers to Osama bin Laden - a wire transfer of $100,000 to lead hijacker Mohamed Atta. For a public increasingly skeptical of evidence culled from passports in the rubble and flight manuals in the glove compartment, here was the "money" shot, a financial trail leading to the fall of the Twin Towers. Yet less than five months later, the man initially fingered as the paymaster of 9/11 would be sitting in a Pakistani jail, accused of a wholly different crime - the murder of Daniel Pearl.

Depending on where or when you have read his name, he is known as Ahmad Omar Saeed Sheikh, or Umar Sheikh, or Syed Sheikh(if you write for CNN). For simplicity's sake, we will refer to him as Omar Saeed, a Pakistani-born former student of the London School of Economics who grew up in the suburbs of Great Britain. Under the alias of Mustafa Mohammed Ahmad, he was reported to have wired $100,000 to a bank account in Florida belonging to 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta.

"U.S. investigators believe they have found the 'smoking gun' linking Osama bin Laden to the September 11 terror attacks," wrote Julian Borger and John Hooper of The Guardian on October 1, 2001. That very same day, a terror group based in Pakistan, the Jaish-e-Mohammed, claimed responsibility for a suicide attack against the provincial legislature in Kashmir, leaving 38 dead - and Pakistan on the brink of war with India.
As reported by Maria Ressa of CNN on October 8, 2001, here is Omar Saeed's connection to that incident:

"The Pakistan-based group, Jaish-e-Mohammad, initially claimed responsibility for the attack. It was formed by Pakistani cleric Maulana Mazood Azhar, shortly after he was released from an Indian prison in 1999. Azhar was one of three jailed Islamic militants freed by Indian authorities in exchange for passengers of the hijacked Indian Airlines 814. Indian and U.S. authorities now see a link between that hijacking and the September 11 attacks in the United States. Freed with Azhar was Ahmed Umar Syed Sheikh [Omar Saeed], whom authorities say used a pseudonym to wire $100,000 to suspected hijacker Mohammad Atta, who then distributed the money in the United States."
According to a CNN posting dated October 6:

"[Omar Saeed] would still be in prison were it not for the December 1999 hijacking of Indian Airlines Flight 814 - an ordeal strikingly similar to the four hijackings carried out on September 11. The plane, with 178 passengers on board, was en route from Katmandu, Nepal, to New Delhi, India, when terrorists used knives to take control of the aircraft, slitting the throat of one passenger to force the pilots to open the cockpit door…Because investigators have now determined that [Omar Saeed] and Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad [the pseudonym] are the same person, it provides another key link to bin Laden as the mastermind of the overall [9/11] plot."

Notice the implication here: the bin Laden connection to 9/11 is considerably strengthened by reason of bin Laden's connection to Omar Saeed, whose own connection to the 1999 Indian Airlines hijacking bears a gruesome similarity to the modus operandi reportedly employed in commandeering the airplanes on September 11. Lest there be any doubt as to Omar Saeed's status in al-Qaida, terrorism expert Magnus Ranstorp offered this assessment in the same October 6 article: "He [Omar Saeed] is also linked to the financial network feeding bin Laden's assets, so therefore he's quite an important person...because he transfers money between various operatives, and he's a node between al Qaeda and foot soldiers on the ground."

That is the testimony from CNN. And, as far as I can tell, CNN's October 8 article was - at least for several months - practically the American "mainstream" media's last mention of Omar Saeed and his $100,000 deposit for 9/11. For on that very next day - October 9 - The Times of India broke with this bombshell:

"While the Pakistani Inter Services Public Relations claimed that former ISI [the "Pakistani CIA"] director-general Lt-Gen Mahmud Ahmad sought retirement after being superseded on Monday, the truth is more shocking. Top sources confirmed here on Tuesday that the general lost his job because of the "evidence" India produced to show his links to one of the suicide bombers that wrecked the World Trade Center. The U.S. authorities sought his removal after confirming the fact that $100,000 were wired to WTC hijacker Mohammed Atta from Pakistan by Ahmad Umar Sheikh [Omar Saeed] at the instance of General Mahmud [Ahmad]. Senior government sources have confirmed that India contributed significantly to establishing the link between the money transfer and the role played by the dismissed ISI chief. While they did not provide details, they said that Indian inputs, including [Omar Saeed's] mobile phone number, helped the FBI in tracing and establishing the link."

Thus, courtesy of The Times of India, by October 9, Omar Saeed was not only tagged as the "bagman" of 9/11, but he was now reported as acting under the orders of the chief of Pakistani intelligence. That in itself is not so surprising, as the ISI was long acknowledged as being the primary backer - pre-9/11 - of the Taliban. Yet why, then, would the U.S. government insist on nothing more punitive than the general's immediate retirement? Here is one possible reason, courtesy of the archives of Karachi News, datelined September 9, 2001 (two days before 9/11, for those who didn't notice):
"ISI Chief Lt-Gen [Mahmud Ahmad's] week-long presence in Washington has triggered speculation about the agenda of his mysterious meetings at the Pentagon and National Security Council. Officially, State Department sources say he is on a routine visit in return to CIA Director George Tenet's earlier visit to Islamabad...What added interest to his visit is the history of such visits. Last time Ziauddin Butt, [General Ahmad's] predecessor, was here during Nawaz Sharif's government, the domestic politics turned topsy-turvy within days. That this is not the first visit by [General Ahmad] in the last three months shows the urgency of the ongoing parleys."

In the light of what followed, one might hazard a guess as to what was so urgent. Whatever the case, Omar Saeed, by way of General Mahmud Ahmad, had now garnered his very own - albeit indirect - connection to the Pentagon. Under normal circumstances, The Times of India article could be effectively quashed simply through being ignored by the mainstream American media (which it was, save for a brief, almost sluggish, mention from the Wall Street Journal). Nevertheless, there now remained the sticky matter of dealing with that $100,000 money trail - possibly one of the greatest examples (if the only one) of a smoking gun turning on its tracker.

Put simply, here was the problem: as early as September 18, the gun was simmering on low heat, gradually drawing flavor as the days passed. As reported by Jim Stewart of CBS News that day: "From apartments, homes and cars once belonging to the dead hijackers, agents have uncovered a money trail that they hope will lead to the hijackers' accomplices." And, sure enough, by September 30, it did, when ABC News "This Week" reported:
"...federal authorities have...tracked more than $100,000 from banks in Pakistan to two banks in Florida to accounts held by suspected hijack ringleader Mohamed Atta. As well this morning, TIME magazine is reporting that some of that money came in the days just before the attack and can be traced directly to people connected to Osama bin Laden."

The next day, October 1, 2001, the smoking gun sprouted an alias - Mustafa Ahmad, as reported by Judith Miller of the New York Times (and not to be confused with General Mahmud Ahmad, the ISI Chief). Similarly, Borger and Hooper of The Guardian that very same day named bin Laden's paymaster as Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad, pointing out that this was the alias for a "Sheikh Saeed", who was reported to have wired the money from the United Arab Emirates before he left for Pakistan.

The money trail story was now in full swing, yet trouble - perhaps traces of the brewing ISI revelation - now seemed to be lurking in the background. By October 3, 2001, things started to get unsettlingly murky. For on that day, British Prime Minister Tony Blair released his infamous report, summarizing - for a skeptical public - the "persuasive" case against bin Laden for involvement in the events of September 11. Yet amid all the innuendo that was employed in the report to nail down bin Laden's culpability, there was nary a mention of that key piece of evidence - the $100,000 pay-off to the hijackers.

Even more curiously, on that very day, New York Newsday reporters John Riley and Tom Brune provided an alternative suspect for the Mustafa Ahmad alias:

"Mustafa Ahmad is an alias used by Shaykh Sai-id, who has been identified as a high-ranking bin Laden financial lieutenant. In the wake of the bombing of the U.S. embassy in Tanzania in 1998, Tanzanian officials arrested and charged with murder an Egyptian named Mustafa Ahmed. After alleging that he had confessed to being a high-level al-Qaida operative, Tanzania then released him without explanation a few months later, according to news reports at the time."

Put simply, if Riley and Brune are correct, then "Shaykh Sai-id", alias Mustafa Ahmad, could not possibly be Omar Saeed, as Omar was nicely locked away in an Indian prison in 1998. Keep in mind, too, that this article appears to be one of the first American references to Mustafa Ahmad as being an alias for a "Shaykh Sai-id."

A follow-up article by The Guardian's Julian Borger, dated October 5, 2001, does not make matters any clearer. Critiquing Blair's definitive report on al-Qaida, he wrote:

"It omits mention of a key link in the evidential chain discovered by U.S. investigators: the money trail between a group of the hijackers and an al-Qaida operative in Dubai, known as Mustafa Ahmad. It is not clear whether it is Ahmad, an al-Qaida paymaster, that Mr. Blair has in mind when the document claims 'one of Bin Laden's closest and most senior associates was responsible for the detailed planning of the attacks.' He could instead have in mind someone higher up in the chain of command such as Mohamed Atef or Abu Zubeidah, both of whom are al-Qaida military commanders."

As to Borger's consideration of Mustafa Ahmad's status in the al-Qaida hierarchy: "A lower-level al-Qaida figure, known as Sheikh Saeed, alias Mustafa Mohamed Ahmad, organized money transfers from Dubai to the hijackers and received return transfers of unused money before leaving for Pakistan on September 11." By the end of the first week of October, various news correspondents had apparently provided alternative personas for the Mustafa Ahmad alias - and nobody seemed to notice.

That first week of October 2001 was indeed a busy one in the War Against Terror. It began with a high-profile terror attack in Kashmir, perpetrated, reportedly, by a group with links to the man tagged by CNN as paving the money trail to 9/11. Mid-week saw the release of Tony Blair's much-touted report on the evidence against bin Laden, conveniently timed for the invasion of Afghanistan by week's end. If, by late September, the smoking gun was shaping up to be the starting gun for the race into Afghanistan, at some point in that first week of October, there was enough smoke blowing in all directions to keep everyone well and thoroughly diverted.

On December 18, 2001, the Associated Press - acting as the mouthpiece for the mainstream press in absentia - would officially (and matter-of-factly) put on record for us the identity of the paymaster behind 9/11, unveiling him as:

"Shaihk Saiid, also known as Sa'd al-Sharif and Mustafa Ahmad al-Hisawi. A Saudi, Saiid, 33, is bin Laden's brother-in-law and financial chief. Saiid has been with bin Laden since his time in the Sudan. Saiid allegedly wired money to Atta in preparation for the Sept. 11 attacks, according to court documents."

The "court documents" in question are, presumably, the Zacarias Mossaoui indictments released earlier that week, listing "Mustafa Ahmad" as paymaster. With a deft sleight of hand, and seemingly from out of nowhere, the Associated Press had managed to replace a 28-year old Pakistani militant tied to the ISI (Omar Saeed) with a 33-year old Saudi (Shaihk Saiid) tied - by marriage- to Osama bin Laden himself.

The Associated Press had gradually edged toward its December 18 announcement, supported by a convenient paper trail - in particular, President Bush's Global Terrorist Executive Order, signed September 23, 2001, in which a "Shaykh Sai'id (aka Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad)" was mentioned as a financial operative in al-Qaida, among a list of 27 individuals and entities slated to have their assets frozen. On October 13, 2001 (four days after The Times of India bombshell), the Associated Press announced that "the government [had] widened its financial dragnet," including on a "new list": "Sa'd Al-Sharif, a brother-in-law of bin Laden and a senior associate believed to head bin Laden's complex financial network." Note that the October 13 piece made no mention of any aliases for Sa'd al-Sharif, nor did it connect him to the - by then - well-publicized money trail. It took a third list, announced on December 18, for the Associated Press to complete the syllogism: Sa'd al-Sharif = Shaykh Sai'id = Mustafa Ahmad = 9/11 bagman. By then, however, bin Laden's culpability was long settled, and any money trail long forgotten.

More conveniently, an alternative home could now be found for that $100,000 revelation, distancing it from The Times of India and CNN, circa Oct. 6-8. Now all that remained was to prepare alternative "lodgings" for Omar Saeed and the retired ISI general. Sometime in November 2001, the Justice Department complied by laying out the bedding, "secretly" indicting Omar Saeed for a 1994 kidnapping, and thus setting the stage for his later appearance in an entirely different performance - the murder of Daniel Pear.


The Disinformation Thickens

If, by December 18, the money trail to 9/11 was now a settled fact, nobody seemed to take much notice. Earlier that week, on December 13, the Bush Administration had presented a new, more "sexy", smoking gun - the certified Osama bin Laden Videotape Confession. That would probably explain why, five days later, no headlines were screaming "Bin Laden Brother-In-Law Linked To 9/11!" And perhaps that would be for the better, as such a headline might have triggered a keen sense of deja vu in anyone who was able to recall another bin Laden brother-in-law who was linked to the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 - Mohammed Jamal Khalifa. Ramzi Yousef, the alleged terrorist bomber convicted of that crime, was "said to have received money from bin Laden's brother-in-law," according to Steve Macko in a July 25, 1997 item from ERRI.

Curiously, it was this particular brother-in-law who was first mentioned in connection with the events of September 11, as early as two days after. According to correspondent Jaime Laude of Philippine Headline News Online, "...the government announced it is stepping up efforts to hunt down Mohammad Jamal Khalifa, a brother-in-law of Bin Laden, the prime suspect in Tuesday's terrorist attacks on the U.S." A CNN article by Maria Ressa, dated September 28, 2001, linked Khalifa to the terrorist Abu Sayyaf group in the Philippines, and, through Ramzi Yousef, to the 1993 WTC attack. As reported by Ressa in that article, "Part of the Osama bin Laden money trail [for September 11] may lead to the Philippines and the Abu Sayyaf terrorist group." In other words, if the money trail did lead to Abu Sayyaf, we would possibly be faced with the following syllogism: Abu Sayyaf = Mohammad Khalifa = Mustafa Ahmad = 9/11 bagman. As Ressa, by October, had explicitly tagged Omar Saeed as the alleged paymaster, we can safely assume that CNN was no longer pursuing the brother-in-law angle to the money trail.

And what of this other brother-in law -The "Shaihk" With The Many Aliases? It appears that with the authoritative - and shockingly brief - proclamation from the Associated Press on December 18, no further commentary on the Man Behind The Money Trail was needed. The Shaihk's disappearance from the world's headlines was as sudden as his appearance. In any case, the world was by then distracted by the December 13 attack by Kashmiri terrorists on the Indian Parliament in Delhi - an attack that once more placed India and Pakistan on the brink.

Coincidentally enough, Omar Saeed was linked to that attack by - another coincidence - Maria Ressa, in a CNN article dated June 7, 2002. If, by then, she had already forgotten her previous designation of Omar Saeed as the 9/11 bagman, her memory was now jogged by the revelation that "Al Qaeda funded the [1999 Indian Airlines] hijacking operation" that resulted in Omar Saeed's release from prison. Omar Saeed, through his purported membership in Jaish-e-Mohammed, would now find an alternative bin Laden link (and cover story), courtesy of Maria Ressa and colleagues. As the above-mentioned July 7 article reports: "Evidence is surfacing that al Qaeda is controlling key Kashmiri separatist groups and fueling tensions - something al Qaeda successfully did in Chechnya and Southeast Asia." In a June 12 report, Maria Ressa elaborated: "What Osama Bin Laden has done, intelligence officials say, is to hijack regional movements and exploit them for his purpose." The CIA must be green with envy.
One wonders if the October 9 Times of India article might have aroused bin Laden's wrath toward India, for it was a mere five days later - on October 14, 2001 - that The Times of India reported:

"Osama Bin Laden's Al Qaeda terrorist group has now formally and publicly adopted the Kashmir issue as one of their causes...In a new video-taped message released through Al-Jazeera television network, an unnamed Al-Qaeda spokesman added the Kashmir cause to their familiar list of grievances that include US presence in Saudi Arabia, the Palestinian issue, and the situation in Iraq."

Now that bin Laden's people had formally announced his updated business plan, he was free to plan some spectacular mischief in India - presumably while dodging all those "daisy cutter" bombs being hurled his way. And his "apparent" agent of choice - Omar Saeed, by way of the Jaish-e-Mohammed terror group.


The Developing Cover Story

While CNN's October articles on Omar Saeed linked him to the September 11 hijackers, it made no mention at all of any links to ISI Chief Mahmud Ahmad. As to those mainstream news outlets that neither mentioned Omar Saeed nor the ISI Chief in their reports on the money trail, frequent reference was made to the paymaster's alleged pseudonym - Mustafa Muhammad Ahmad. By fortuitous happenstance, the pseudonym also had the odd feature of sounding confusingly similar to the ISI Chief's name. Thus, in the early days of October, one could read an American article about the paymaster Mustafa Ahmad and, assuming he came across The Times of India's piece on ISI General Mahmud Ahmad, conclude that the Indian article was just an alternative version of the American articles on Mustafa Ahmad. Assuming a reader caught the anomaly early on, he would have a hell of a time making his case at any dinner parties. Mahmud Mustafa? Muhammad Ahmad? This, in intelligence parlance, would be a textbook example of "muddying the waters" over the ISI Chief's link to the money trail.

Similarly, bin Laden's brother-in-law, "Shaihk Saiid," bears more than a passing resemblance to the name Omar Saeed Sheikh. Drop the "Omar", and one could easily see how a well-intentioned correspondent (like Maria Ressa) and a well-informed terrorism expert (like Magnus Ranstorp) could mistaken bin Laden's 33-year old V.P. of Finance for bin Laden's 28-year old V.P. of Finance In Kashmir.
Whatever the case, after October 9, Omar Saeed, as a news item, largely receded into the background while the money trail story died a slow, subtle death. In the meantime, an explanation was gradually being elaborated for the ISI Chief's "sudden" retirement. As early as October 10, 2001, Vernon Loeb and Alan Sipress of the Washington Post reported that Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf "ousted several influential intelligence and military leaders who remained close to the Taliban, most notably purging Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed of the [ISI], which long served as the Taliban's patron." Vernon Loeb here seemed to be replicating a technique that was used to great effect the day after September 11 - briefly reporting on an anomaly with an authoritative tone that appeared to say, Move on, folks. Nothing to see here.

For the sake of economy, we will refer to it as the Shrug Technique of disinformation. Loeb had previously provided a demonstration of the technique soon after the Twin Towers had collapsed, in a brief capsule obituary on World Trade Center security chief John O'Neill, where Loeb blandly informed us that: a) John O'Neill was formerly the main FBI agent in charge of investigating all terrorist acts linked to bin Laden; b) O'Neill was banned from Yemen by Ambassador Bodine; c) O'Neill recently left a 30-year career in the FBI "under a cloud" to d) take up the position at the WTC only two weeks before 9/11. Nothing to see here, folks. Move on.

On October 22, more than a week after President Bush decided to freeze bin Laden brother-in-law Sa'd al-Sharif's assets (presumably to accompany his "Shaykh Sai'id" alias, whose assets were frozen on September 23), Johanna McGeary of Time Magazine drew a lawyerly distinction between President Musharraf and the policies of his ISI:

"Most startling was the premature retirement of [Musharraf's] trusted friend Lieut. General Mahmoud Ahmad, chief of the formidable...ISI, widely regarded as the country's invisible government. As a staunch patron of pro-Taliban policies, Ahmad is thought to have opposed Pakistan's new alliance with the U.S. Musharraf had reason to fear that segments of the ISI might thwart promised cooperation with U.S. intelligence."

In the parlance of propaganda, the above could be termed as an example of a "limited hangout." It begins with a frank admission of a fact that, on its surface, appears to be damaging (i.e. ISI support of the Taliban, and, through them, al-Qaida), yet instead serves to protect a far more damaging revelation (i.e. American/CIA influence over the ISI). By conceding the most transparent evidence against the ISI, one may then resort to the Shrug Technique to dismiss those who might be inclined to ask their own questions.

For instance: if President Musharraf "had reason to fear" being thwarted by segments of his ISI, then why would he send someone so clearly unreliable as General Ahmad to negotiate the handover of Osama bin Laden? Tim McGirk, in an April 29, 2002 piece for Time Magazine, provides the backdrop for that answer:

"The first move Musharraf made to tame the ISI was dumping its chief, [General Ahmad]. He and [Musharraf] were close friends and fellow plotters in the 1999 coup that brought Musharraf to power. But the intelligence chief proved too radical for Musharraf's purposes. Former comrades of [General] Ahmed's say he experienced a battlefield epiphany in the Himalayan peaks during a 1999 summer offensive against India and began to pursue his own Islamic-extremist agenda. At a cabinet meeting, he once yelled at an official, 'What do you know? You don't even go to prayers.' Of more concern than these outbursts was [General] Ahmed's sympathy for the Taliban. When the President sent him to Kandahar six days after Sept. 11 to persuade Taliban chief Mullah Mohammed Omar to hand over bin Laden, the spymaster instead secretly told Omar to resist, an ex-Taliban official told TIME. Word of this double cross reached Musharraf, who on Oct. 7 replaced [General] Ahmed as ISI boss."

Apparently, General Ahmad was quite adept at pulling the wool over one's eyes. According to a September 12, 2001 article from the Scripps Howard News Service, Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and Rep. Porter Goss (R-Fla.) were sitting down for breakfast with the ISI Chief when they received word of the 9/11 attacks. "[He] was very empathetic, sympathetic to the people of the United States," Graham reported of Ahmad. If Ahmad was opposed to any U.S. alliance, as Johanna McGeary reported, Graham certainly wasn't seeing past the "love-me" vibes that Ahmad was apparently flashing him over coffee and danishes - a considerable oversight for someone who is Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

Incidentally, Graham and Goss are the co-chairmen in charge of the commission to investigate the events behind September 11. Graham, a former Florida governor, and Goss, a veteran of the CIA, "are guarding their intelligence turf, saying they and their staffs are uniquely qualified to sift through tens of thousands of sensitive intelligence documents and interview spies and spymasters without compromising classified sources and methods," according to an Associated Press item dated May 30, 2002. "Colleagues say Graham and Goss bring a pragmatic, bipartisan style to intelligence committee work that leaves politics outside their mostly secret meetings." We can trust they will give each other a probing, "independent" grilling as to their itinerary in the days leading up to 9/11.

The above-referenced article, by Curt Anderson, also contains a superb demonstration of the Shrug Technique. Witness:

"The morning of Sept. 11, Sen. Bob Graham and Rep. Porter Goss were doing what the two intelligence committee chairmen frequently do - having breakfast together at the Capitol. With them was then-Pakistani intelligence chief [Mahmud Ahmad]. [General Ahmad's] task was to persuade Afghanistan's Taliban leaders to hand over terror suspect Osama bin Laden. As the three men talked over the knotty problem, an aide handed Goss a note saying an airplane had hit the World Trade Center. A few moments later the Capitol would be evacuated, and the following month [General Ahmad] was fired."

Move on, folks. Nothing to see here.


End Game

On January 22, 2002, a terror attack was launched on the American Cultural Center in Calcutta (which was eventually linked to Omar Saeed). The next day, Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl disappeared off the streets of Karachi, Pakistan. As the mainstream media reported it, Pearl was investigating Pakistani links to Richard Reid, otherwise known as "the shoe bomber." Yet as Tariq Ali of The Guardian reported on April 5, 2002: "Those [Pearl] was in touch with say he was working to uncover links between the intelligence services and terrorism. His newspaper has been remarkably coy, refusing to disclose the leads Pearl was pursuing."

Whether Pearl's leads had anything to do with the laptop hard drive that the Wall Street Journal passed on to the Defense Department sometime in December 2001 is a question that some have parsed. The story, according to Wall Street Journal reporters Alan Cullison and Andrew Higgins, of "how a computer apparently stuffed with al-Qaida secrets came to light, involves a combination of happenstance and the opportunism of war..."
As reported by Dan Kennedy of The Boston Phoenix: "The Journal's foreign editor, John Bussey, says that Cullison had been covering the Northern Alliance for about a month and a half when his computer was destroyed." In one of those fortuitous examples of happenstance, as Cullison went computer shopping in Kabul, he was informed that a local computer merchant had on sale a genuine al-Qaida computer, certified by the looter himself, who claimed to have filched it from the bombed-out headquarters of bin Laden lieutenant Mohammed Atef. Among the incriminating hard drive documents that basically confirmed everything ever told to us by every counterterrorism expert throughout the '90's, Cullison - who was on the Northern Alliance beat - was lucky enough to find the smoking gun implicating al-Qaida in the assassination of Northern Alliance leader Ahmad Shah Massoud, who was mortally wounded just two days before September 11.

The smoking gun, as reported by Cullison and Higgins on December 31 2001, was a "letter, written in clumsy French in the name of an obscure, London-based Islamic information agency." The letter - carrying the name of Yasser Al-Siri - involved an interview request of Massoud. The Northern Alliance leader, as it turned out, was killed by "two men who posed as journalists to interview Massoud Sept. 9, both French-speaking Arabs, [who] carried stolen Belgian passports." As luck would have it, the incriminating letter also happened to confirm the hunch of Her Majesty's Government, which had already arrested one Yasser Al-Siri in London in October, charging him with conspiring to assassinate Massoud. London. Al-Siri. Clumsy French. Stolen Belgian passports - to any aspiring Sherlock Holmes or Perry Mason, al-Qaida is the gift that keeps on giving.

So where was the Pearl angle in all this? In the July/August 2002 issue of The Columbia Journalism Review, the former president of NBC News, Lawrence K. Grossman, presented the possibility that Pearl was kidnapped due to the Wall Street Journal's decision to publish the laptop documents. He quoted James Goodale, a former lawyer for the New York Times, as saying, "No matter what, they should not have published that they cooperated with the government...I will say flat out what the WSJ did is detrimental to the safety of U.S. journalists abroad."

Columbia Journalism students take note: what Grossman has authored is a superbly crafted exercise in disinformation (for an article that runs barely 1,000 words). You can almost feel the directed implications cresting over your brain as you read Grossman's account of what those al-Qaida computer files contained: "... a remarkably detailed account of its agent Abdul Ra'uff's travels in Israel and Egypt in search of terrorist targets. Ra'uff's itinerary matched that of the would-be shoe bomber, Richard C. Reid...U.S. officials who reviewed the files are convinced that Ra'uff and Reid are the same person."

Implication #1: The contents of those computer files might have sent Pearl on his purported quest for the shoe bomber. His quote of Goodale leads us to Implication #2: The Wall Street Journal's admitted assistance to the government may have led Pearl's captors to conclude that Pearl was a CIA agent. Most importantly, Grossman establishes his bona fides with this little anecdote:

"...The late William Colby, a CIA director, once confided to a reporter friend of mine, Stanley Karnow, that several major news organizations actually were complicit in helping the CIA plant agents posing as reporters in their overseas bureaus. To this day, the CIA has refused to make clear that it no longer uses reporters as agents or agents posing as reporters..."

All of which leads us to Implication #3: He is shocked - shocked! - that propaganda happens here because - take his word as a media insider - it's not the norm.

Note to aspiring investigators: Be careful as to which facts you "ingest" in constructing your theories. Some stories - like The Al-Qaida Computer Tale - serve as nothing more than a red herring "cluster bomb", meant to forever obscure the truth by forcing an accommodation with a "well-known fact" - a sort of modern update on the "Oswald In Mexico" gambit. Whichever lead Daniel Pearl was pursuing - which we may never know - the important fact to keep in mind is the man who would eventually be tagged for his murder - Omar Saeed Sheikh.

Only four days after the disappearance of Daniel Pearl, Omar Saeed once more bobbed up into the world's headlines after staying submerged for more than four months. As reported by Rajeev Syal and Chris Hastings for The Telegraph on January 27:

"The London School of Economics...has been host to at least three al-Qa'eda-linked terrorists, The Telegraph has been told. An intelligence report says that the trio studied or lectured at the London University college between 1990 and 1993, when it became a breeding ground for Islamic extremism...The three - including one man called Ahmed Omar Sheikh [Omar Saeed] - have been revealed as having links with the LSE in an intelligence file seen by this newspaper and now being studied by police."

The reason for Omar Saeed's sudden reappearance in this article had nothing to do with Daniel Pearl. As Syal and Hastings reported:
"Omar [Saeed], 28, a former mathematics student at the LSE, is said to have been linked to last week's drive-by shooting in Calcutta that killed five policemen. He has also been named as one of the key financiers of Mohammed Atta, the pilot of one of the jets that hit the World Trade Centre on September 11."

Unfortunately, Syal and Hastings did not provide the names of the other two terrorists, but they did report that one of them "was arrested in Delhi last month for reported involvement in the recent attack on the Indian Parliament."

As we shall soon see, Omar Saeed's link to the largely forgotten money trail was now being carefully resurrected, leaving bin Laden's ever-marginalized brother-in-law off to the sidelines once more. What had changed in the interim? An October 1 attack on the provincial legislature in Kashmir, a December 13 attack on the parliament in Delhi, a January 22 attack in Calcutta, and - the coup de grace - the January 23 kidnapping of Daniel Pearl. If, after October 9, Omar Saeed had largely gone underground, he was purportedly a busy little mole in the months following.

While the average news reader would now care less about any arcane financial dealings, the money trail story was nevertheless "out there" and ultimately had to be accounted for in a definitive version. Somebody was playing for the history books. In the months following October 9, a working "legend" was being elaborated for Omar Saeed, one that would increasingly distance him from the implications of his relationship with the ISI chief.
Now, as the purported perpetrator of all sorts of al-Qaida-linked mischief - helped along by bin Laden's well-timed October 14 plug for Kashmir - Omar Saeed's link with the 9/11 hijackers could be obscured and/or minimized amid a veritable buffet of terrorist activity. By the time of Omar Saeed's debutante "outing" as a suspect in the kidnapping of Daniel Pearl on February 6, 2002, the Omar Saeed/Money Trail Story was now fully ripened for the Shrug Technique. On February 10, Time Magazine's Unmesh Kher offhandedly mentioned Omar Saeed's $100,000 link to 9/11. But more importantly, that very day, the Associated Press, courtesy of Kathy Gannon, would officially snub bin Laden's brother-in-law (and thereby refute itself) by reporting: "Western intelligence sources believe Saeed sent $100,000 to Mohamed Atta, the suspected ringleader of the Sept. 11 terrorist hijackings, through a money transfer system known as hawala that bypasses banks and official financial institutions." Alas, it appears in retrospect that bin Laden brother-in-law Sa'd al-Sharif (alias Shaykh Sai'id alias Mustafa Ahmad al-Hisawi) was merely a "temporary hide-out" for the money trail.
The February 10 article by Gannon, while making a redemptive stab at a limited hangout of the truth, nevertheless spoiled its record by grabbing at another juicy morsel of disinformation: "Kamal Shah, chief of police in Sindh province...said investigators were trying to track Saeed. 'We feel we are close,' he said. 'We can't give you a timeframe. But we don't think we are far off.'"

As far off as the upstairs bathroom, perhaps - for Saeed had already been in custody for five days by that time. Saeed "surrendered Feb.5 in the presence of Ejaz Shah, a former top ISI official now working as home secretary of Punjab province," reported Karl Vick and Kamran Khan of the Washington Post on May 3. On February 12, the Pakistani authorities finally decided to formally announce the arrest of Omar Saeed. So how did he spend his week-long secret hideaway with the Pakistani authorities? As reported by the Associated Press on July 1 2002, "Saeed said authorities illegally detained him and tortured two of his fellow defendants in order to give police more time to fabricate a case against him."

As the Washington Post framed it on May 3: "Officials acknowledge that Saeed remained in ISI custody for a week while Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, visited Washington and said he was 'relatively certain' Pearl was alive."

If Musharraf was being somewhat shifty, he ratcheted it up a notch on February 9, when he suggested that Indian intelligence played a hand in Pearl's kidnapping. His evidence, according to a February 9 Washington Post item by Kamran Khan:

"So far, investigators said, the suggestion of an Indian connection revolves around three phone calls to New Delhi placed from the same cell phone that was used to lure Pearl to a restaurant in Karachi on Jan. 23, the last time he was seen in public. Police sources say they have traced the calls, with the help of the FBI, to numbers for an Indian cabinet minister and two members of parliament. But the sources said they believe those phone calls were made to mislead investigators into concluding that India was involved."

In almost an exact mirror image of the October 9 Times of India allegations, Omar Saeed was now being pawned off on the Indians.

In the same article, on that very day, the disinformation was coming fast and furious:

"Police today also took the unusual step of turning for help to the jailed leader of Jaish-i-Muhammad, Masood Azhar. The sources said they persuaded Azhar to make a call from his prison cell to Saeed requesting Pearl's release."

More likely, he used string attached to two styrofoam cups to reach Saeed in the neighboring cell.

As the "official" story had it soon after Saeed's "official" arrest on February 12, the case was solved when the authorities successfully traced a series of e-mails back to one of Saeed's alleged accomplices, who then confessed that he was only acting under Saeed's orders. The government's case, as reported by Zarar Khan of the Associated Press on July 1, "rests heavily on technical FBI evidence, which traced the e-mails to fellow defendant Fahad Naseem."

Thus, it would appear that the FBI had a hand in linking Omar Saeed to the kidnappers of Daniel Pearl. This is an important fact to consider, for -remember - The Times of India, on October 9, had linked Saeed to ISI Chief Ahmad, reporting that Indian intelligence had supplied evidence to the FBI. In the aftermath, ISI Chief Ahmad was "quietly retired" at the insistence of the U.S. government, according to the Oct. 9 Times of India. Eventually, the American mainstream media - mostly through Time Magazine - would provide the cover story for General Ahmad, tagging him as "pro-Taliban" yet omitting any suggestions that he might have been orchestrating payment for the 9/11 hijackers, with Saeed as his primary agent. And while the mainstream media began to effectively distance Saeed from the money trail soon thereafter (while simultaneously "smothering" the money trail story), the Justice Department waited a month after the October 9 revelations to finally move against Saeed by issuing an indictment - but not by reason of any alleged 9/11 links. According to a CNN item posted February 28, 2002:

"U.S. officials said that [Omar Saeed] was secretly indicted in November in connection with the 1994 kidnapping in India of western tourists, including an American. Justice Department officials won't say what prompted that indictment, which came more than six years after the incident."

The revelation - in February - that the FBI had already moved against Saeed back in November was an excellent exercise in "plausible deniability." The indictment itself would provide a cover story for any future "limited hangout" concerning Saeed's links to the money trail. Citing "uncertainty" as to the true identity of the pseudonymous paymaster Mustafa Ahmad, the Justice Department could then claim that it played it "safe" in November by indicting Saeed for an offense to which he could definitely be linked. Any notion of a "cover-up" could then be dismissed by evidence for the admitted confusion surrounding the identity of "Shaykh Sai'id" as Mustafa Ahmad.


By late February, most of the components for the full cover story were coming together in the mainstream media. Omar Saeed could now simultaneously be linked to al-Qaida and "rogue" elements in the ISI, distancing him from President Musharraf and the post-September 11 "good" ISI. As reported by Nancy Gibbs in a February 25 article for TIME:

"Pakistani investigators and newspapers in the U.S. have speculated that rogue elements linked to the ISI wanted to demonstrate to Musharraf and the world that they were not so easily tamed...[Musharraf] was able to cut the extremists loose after Sept. 11 and replace the hardline, pro-Taliban ISI Chief [General Ahmad]..."

In short, the mainstream media were laying the groundwork for a possible future "hangout" on explicit links between General Ahmad's "rogue" ISI clique and Omar Saeed. In this respect, Saeed and General Ahmad would be portrayed as having a common intention. As reported by Kamran Khan and Molly Moore of the Washington Post on February 18:

"Saeed said attacks outside the U.S. cultural center in Calcutta, the Indian Parliament in New Delhi and a legislative assembly in Kashmir were aimed at provoking India into taking action against Pakistan. Extremist organizers - some with ties to Saeed - hoped Musharraf would be forced to back away from his public stand against militant activities, Saeed told police."

While the Post item by Khan and Moore also mentioned Saeed's links to bin Laden - "Saeed told [police] he had traveled to Afghanistan 'a few days after September 11' to meet Osama bin Laden" - at no point was General Ahmad or the 9/11 money trail mentioned.

Yet Khan and Moore introduced a seemingly innocuous new "wrinkle" to the story - Saeed's admitted "relationship with Aftab Ansari, the alleged gangster and chief suspect in the shooting outside the U.S. cultural center in Calcutta...Saeed said he met Ansari while the two men were jailed in New Delhi's Tihar prison." To anyone reading that snippet - unaware of the Saeed/ISI/9/11 Money Trail link - the offhand mention of Ansari would barely register. As we shall shortly see, though, the addition of Ansari to an eventual "hangout" of the full cover story would be absolutely crucial, for it also involves the participation of the Times of India.

As we have seen, the Times of India, through its October 9 revelation, set in motion a huge degree of activity surrounding the evidence implicating bin Laden for September 11. Moreover, India was repeatedly being led to the brink with Pakistan through terror attacks that would eventually be linked to Saeed and/or rogue elements in the ISI. If, theoretically, India had the "goods" on Pakistan and the U.S. government, apparently other forces were at work to maintain countervailing pressure on India. If the October 9 revelation seemed - on its face - to be an attempt by India to soil the reputation of Pakistan, by February 13, the Times of India was explicitly backing away from the sinister implications of its October 9 outing.
When the news of Saeed's "official" arrest broke on February 12, here is how the Times of India would describe Saeed's connection to the 9/11 money trail a day later:

"...there were allegations that [Saeed] had organized at least one bank remittance to the terrorists who were responsible for the September 11 strikes in the US and that Lt. Gen. Mahmood Ahmed had helped him in this regard. There was, however, no evidence to indicate whether Ahmed was aware that this amount was meant for the terrorist strikes in the U.S."

This was a crucial point to emphasize, for it was widely known that General Ahmad had been involved in several intense discussions with American officials in the months leading up to 9/11. The importance of any cover story, then, would be to divert attention and thought from The Implication That Dare Not Speak Its Name - that General Ahmad's ISI were the operational commanders of the 9/11 hijackers, acting themselves as proxies for the U.S. government/U.K./EU (i.e., the coalition spearheading the War On Terrorism).

With General Ahmad's involvement in 9/11 thus somewhat obfuscated by the Times of India on February 13, the Times of India then proceeded, on February 14, to fully "inoculate" against the virus that it had released on October 9. Its main vaccine - Aftab Ansari:

"Aftab Ansari arranged for $100,000 for Omar [Saeed] Sheikh, prime accused in the kidnapping of WSJ reporter Daniel Pearl...Ansari arranged a series of e-mails with [Saeed] and Asif Reza Khan [who was killed on December 7] in August 2001, where he was asked to help out with a 'noble cause'... Indian officials interrogating Ansari said that, on August 8, 2001, Ansari asked Khan over e-mail whether he agreed to part with $100,000 for a 'noble cause' as requested by [Saeed]...on August 11, Ansari sent an e-mail to Khan saying that 'the amount mentioned had been sent to [Saeed]'...On August 19, [Saeed] e-mailed Ansari again, saying, 'The money that was sent has been passed on.'"

Thus, after attempting to clip ISI General Ahmad out of the picture on February 13, the Times of India then attempted the next day to insert Aftab Ansari into the money trail story. Conveniently, Ansari was deported from the United Arab Emirates to India only a few days before, where he was arrested for the terror attack in Calcutta. As the UAE was previously reported by the American media to be the country from which the pseudonymous paymaster "Mustafa Ahmad" made the $100,000 wire transfer, Ansari's link to that country would provide further confirmation for this developing cover story.

And while Pakistan was not quite let off the hook, the Times of India - by way of Ansari - now more firmly linked the money trail back to al-Qaida:
"Officials said the e-mails also hint at Ansari's possible linkages with the al-Qaeda network. The e-mails also refute Pakistani authorities' rebuttal of their nexus with the deported gangster. Interestingly, the mode of communication adopted by them is similar to that used by Mohammad Atta and other al-Qaeda members to carry out the September 11 attacks...This gives credence to the perception that Ansari had arranged $100,000 for the terror attacks on America, officials said."

In short, by February 14, the Times of India was officially touting the Saeed/Ansari duo rather than the Saeed/General Ahmad coupling.
Yet this was not the Times of India's first mention of Ansari in connection with Omar Saeed and the 9/11 money trail. That first mention dates, in fact, to Tuesday January 22, 2002 - the day of the Calcutta attack, and exactly one day before Daniel Pearl's disappearance. Here, then, was the Times of India's initial account of the Saeed/Ansari connection:

"[Indian] CBI Director P C Sharma told visiting FBI Chief Robert S Mueller that Ansari, who claimed responsibility for [today's Calcutta] attack, had taken a ransom of Rs 37.5 million to free shoe baron Parthapratim Roy Burman through hawala channels to Dubai, CBI sources said. Out of this amount, Omar [Saeed] ... had sent $100,000 to Atta through telegraphic transfer, CBI sources said."

Thus, by January 22, not only was FBI Director Robert Mueller on scene in India, but he was reportedly apprised of the Ansari/Saeed/Money Trail by Indian authorities. Conveniently, Ansari had claimed responsibility for the attack that very day, and his subsequent deportation to India from Dubai was also conveniently timed with the subsequent arrest of Omar Saeed for the kidnapping of Daniel Pearl. As Mueller's FBI was also reportedly on hand to trace the Pearl kidnapping back to Omar Saeed, it is reasonable to deduce from these facts an alternative explanation for Mueller's January 22 visit - namely, that Mueller was "on hand" to coordinate this final leg of the Omar Saeed cover-up story, bringing in Ansari by way of the well-timed Calcutta attack, and then employing his colleagues in Indian intelligence to feed the Times of India its corrective "take" on the Omar Saeed/Money Trail Story.

With the Calcutta operation in place, in conjunction with the Pearl kidnapping, Omar Saeed would now be nicely set up for his initial January 27 resurrection in the British Telegraph, to be followed days later in the American media through his February 5 "outing" in connection with the Pearl kidnapping. I do not mean to imply by this that the Calcutta attack and the Pearl kidnapping were conducted for the sole purpose of establishing a cover-up legend. Far from it. Covert operations - particularly those with propaganda value - are often "loaded up" with a number of multi-faceted, yet related, objectives. In this way, a "rogue ISI" element could be established as standing against the interests of the U.S./Pakistani War On Terrorism, and Omar Saeed in this light could then be presented as standing at the center of the very nexus between this rogue ISI and the al-Qaida terror network that had already declared its opposition to India in Kashmir.

On July 15, 2002, Omar Saeed was sentenced to die by a Pakistani court. By this time, all contingencies had long been covered. The confusion surrounding the identity of the pseudonym Mustafa Ahmad could provide a "plausible" explanation as to why the media neglected - even after Saeed's February 12 "arrest" - to consistently link him to the money trail, which by then had long taken a backseat to the Official Bin Laden Videotape Confession of December 13. Moreover, by linking Saeed up with all that post-9/11 terror activity, Saeed's pre-9/11 role would be effectively minimized. Most importantly, the mainstream media would - as of this writing - observe an iron-clad rule for reporting on Saeed - that is, never mention Saeed, al-Qaida, the money trail, the ISI, and General Ahmad in the same article. In those articles that would mention Saeed's links with the money trail, they would also now mention his links to al-Qaida but omit any mention of General Ahmad. Where those articles mentioned Saeed's links with the ISI, they would omit mention of the money trail and General Ahmad. Of those articles that mentioned General Ahmad and the ISI, General Ahmad would be tagged as "pro-Taliban" while "rogue" elements in his ISI would then be linked to al-Qaida - with any mention of Saeed and the money trail safely omitted. Now, with the Ansari angle credibly in place, it is a safe bet that the mainstream media - probably courtesy of Time Magazine - will one day "put it all together" for us, detailing how Ansari and Saeed, at the behest of al-Qaida, organized the money transfers to the hijackers as rogue elements in the ISI looked the other way, possibly not realizing that their "pro-Taliban" sympathies would facilitate the actions of September 11.

The whole cover story, however - with its endless obfuscations, diversions, and fallback explanations - cannot obscure the fact that it depends on a huge number of coincidences and conveniently timed set-ups to keep it in place. Moreover, evidence can be marshaled to show that the mainstream media - either as willful agents or as passive mouthpieces of the intelligence apparatus - planted disinformation that was meant to structure perceptions in a specific direction. The elaboration of the cover story bears the marks of its apparent mistakes and missteps.

But more disturbingly, the Omar Saeed/ Money Trail Story effectively shatters the credibility of the media/intelligence apparatus that provided virtually all the information on bin Laden and his al-Qaida network over the years. If this one small element of the overall 9/11 terror picture shows this much evidence of information management, one wonders how many other elements in this tale bear the marks of elaborate orchestration by the parties who have fed us all the data.

In intelligence operations, a credible "legend" is created through acting out all elements in the story rather than simply fabricating them for later use. Thus, "lead" hijacker Mohamed Atta most likely did receive a wire transfer of $100,000, arranged by an operative who was connected to al-Qaida, an organization that was fully financed, structured and "false-flagged" by Pakistanis and Saudis acting as operative proxy agents/patsies for what appears to be a globally connected Western elite intelligence apparatus.

As a crucial element in constructing the "legend" of 9/11, it was necessary to provide the links between the hijackers and al-Qaida. The paradox is this - an apparently sophisticated terror entity like al-Qaida would be required to maintain an elaborate evidential trail leading to its hijackers. Put simply, the names on those boarding passes would have to be the same names linked to various credit cards, witnesses, apartments, cell phone records, etc. Whether or not a hijacker by the name of Al-Suqami, al-Shehhi, or Atta was using a false passport would be largely irrelevant if it could be shown that someone employing the same false alias was linked to the same incriminating evidence. The evidence - culled from credit card charges, Internet communications, cell phone calls, and ATM withdrawls - revealed, according to a November 4, 2001 article in the New York Times, "...a picture in which the roles of the 19 hijackers are so well-defined as to be almost corporate in their organization and coordination." And that is the paradox. If the names on those boarding passes were used only once, there would be no evidence at all linking those hijackers to al-Qaida.

Here was an example of an anomaly "hiding in plain sight." With the hijackers conveniently sowing a consistent trail of the same names or aliases all over the place - establishing a "legend" that could be corroborated by real witnesses - the media could then be used to plant all kinds of disinformation and red herrings to divert attention from this most obvious anomaly. For example, where ABC News would report on September 12 that a passport belonging to a hijacker named Satam Al-Suqami was found in the rubble of the World Trade Center, the other mainstream outlets would widely report the discovery of the "mystery passport" days later - on September 16 - as having some kind of evidential significance. But it was an obvious red herring. At best, it would signify this - that a passport was found which bore the same name as someone whose boarding pass bore the same name as someone linked to an al-Qaida training camp in Afghanistan. More "smoke" would then be wafted over the "mystery" surrounding this discovery when it was widely reported that FBI honcho Barry Mawn would not reveal the name on the passport (when all the media had to do was to check their Sept. 12 file clippings from ABC News).

Other red herrings would follow. The "full" passenger lists, for instance, would be released without the names of the purported hijackers on it - leaving some to sniff that the government had "something to hide." But quite simply, the main fact worth hiding is the notion that the hijackers worked so assiduously to build a convenient evidential trail with their supposed aliases. Take Mohamed Atta, for example. If he weren't so wedded to spreading his name like seed, then we would have no money trail story, no incriminating flight manuals in rented cars, no surveillance videos, no flight school witnesses - in fact, nothing at all on which we could hinge a legend for Mohamed Atta. The mainstream media repeatedly assured us that the hijackers were quite meticulous in staying below the radar, following the professional protocols of the Al-Qaida Handbook. Yet at every step of the way, they risked blowing their cover, going so far as to book flights under names that were either already on FBI watch lists or that could easily be linked to "shady" associates.

By smothering the public with an apparent abundance of evidence, by conjuring the illusion that thousands of federal agents were compiling a comprehensive paper trail, the terror "experts" diverted us from the obvious fact that the 9/11 hijackers - purportedly the most cunning operatives for the most sophisticated terror operation in history - were instead certified morons, leaving us the gift of their boarding passes as the slim thread that would tie them to the Potemkin facade that is al-Qaida.

Someone by the name of Marwan Al-Shehhi was careful to rent a hotel room in Deerfield Beach, taking further care to leave behind Boeing 757 manuals and "an eight-inch stack of East Coast flight maps." Someone under the name of Marwan Al-Shehhi was also careful to use that name in activating his cell phone account so that one day, on November 4, 2001, Don Van Natta and Kate Zernike of the New York Times would be able to write: "Mohamed Atta, in seat 8D in business class, dialed his cellphone ... [reaching] Marwan Al-Shehhi in seat 6C on United Airlines Flight 175." How Van Natta and Zernike were also able to report that Atta called Al-Shehhi his "cousin" on that particular phone call perhaps reveals my ignorance over what can be divined through paper records of cell phone calls.

Moreover, it was convenient that someone by the name of Mohamed Atta took care to fasten his name tag on the luggage that he so thoughtfully left behind - in addition to the rented car he abandoned in the airport parking lot - so that authorities could find "a five-page handwritten document in Arabic that includes...practical reminders to bring 'knives, your will, IDs, your passport, all your papers.'" The existence of a written reminder for professional hijackers - who were presumably intensively trained to commandeer those airplanes with knives - to pack blades for their flight bears no rational explanation (except to confirm to us that, indeed, the hijackers did use sharp implements to take those planes).

But for all his credit card charges, cell phone calls, and bar tab receipts, Mohamed Atta was most fastidious in setting up a bank account in his name, so that he would be able to receive a wire transfer of $100,000 from someone who could definitively be linked to al-Qaida. That would be the paper trail, the "money" shot, the financial link to 9/11. And, best of all, the evidence would be unimpeachable because the whole transaction was in fact carried out by this "lead" hijacker who so consistently provided the evidence in elaborating the "legend" of 9/11. But it was not meant to be. At some point, the lines crossed, a seam showed, a careless inconsistency bore its ugly head. Amid the confusion, this emergent "smoking gun" needed to be aborted.
In the aftermath, new "smoking guns" would emerge, more smoke would be blown. And what of that illusion - the one that in those early days after 9/11 seemed to conjure an image of thousands of federal agents building a paper forest of evidence implicating the hijackers? "The hijackers left no paper trail," declared FBI director Robert Mueller on April 30, 2002. "In our investigations, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper ... that mentioned any aspect of the Sept. 11 plot." In other words, they no longer needed to stand guard and defend the mountains of innuendo and smoke that was blown in those early days to provide you with the authorized account of 9/11. Mueller, with his carefully worded lawyerly formulation - "piece of paper", "mentioned", etc. - would thus have it both ways: throwing up the innuendo without legally obligating himself to defend it.

In the end, the smoking gun was not the money trail. Nor was it the "whistle-blowing" article that appeared to expose it. Instead, the smoking gun lay in the actions, words, and deceptions of those who so cynically took it upon themselves to direct our perceptions - to tell us what, why, and how we know what we know. For in so closely managing the flow of information, by weaving in so many coincidences and synchronicities that could only be explained by willful orchestration, they exposed the seams of their duplicity, and in so doing, exposed before our eyes the intricate workings of a vast, all-pervasive disinformation apparatus that now risks its own destruction - for its contours can now be perceived by all who care to look.


Copyright Chaim Kupferberg 2002. Chaim Kupferberg is a freelance researcher and writer. His previous CRG article , The Propaganda Preparation For 9/11, describes a general media campaign, in the years leading up to 9/11, to present al-Qaida as a plausibly sophisticated nemesis with the motive, means, and opportunity to destroy the World Trade Center. .


The URL of this article is:
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/KUP209A.html




And FWIW Wayne Madsen:


WMR has obtained further paper trails linking George H. W. Bush's longtime mysterious Swiss German money mover (see July 24-25 article below) to a now defunct bank operated on behalf of Osama Bin Laden, his family, and some of his closest business associates. The network of Swiss-based terrorist financiers are also linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and prominent European fascist leaders.

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com
Intelligence Whispers
Wayne Madsen
08/25/2005

Mysterious Geneva money mover: tied to Enron, Saudis, Osama Bin Laden, and Iran-contra principals.

WASHINGTON, DC -- August 25, 2005 -- The bank, Al Taqwa ("Fear of God"), was headquartered in the Italian Swiss enclave Campione d'Italia and had offices in the Bahamas. It ceased operations after its assets were blocked by a US Treasury Department order, its assets were frozen by the Swiss government, and its banking license was revoked by the Bahamas. Al Taqwa subsequently changed its name to Nada Management Organization.

Al Taqwa and a complex web of affiliate front companies and brass plates in Switzerland, the Bahamas, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Jersey, Isle of Man, Turkey, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Croatia, Slovenia, the United States (Delaware and Texas), Germany, Belgium, Albania, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Somalia, Sudan, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, Austria, Bahrain, Singapore, Thailand, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Liechtenstein were reportedly involved in funding terrorist operations around the world, including the procurement of nuclear material from the former Soviet Union through Baltic intermediaries.

According to a EUROPOL diagram obtained by WMR, these companies included Iksir Holding, SA (Italy), Asat Trust (Liechtenstein), Iksir Ltd. (Bahamas), Gulf Center (Italy), NASCO (Turkey), Nasreddin International Group (Liechtenstein), Akida Bank (Bahamas), MIGA (Switzerland), and Nasreddin Foundation (Liechtenstein).

Madsen then ties Al Taqwa to George H.W. and Enron.

http://www.pej.org/html/modules....=0&thold=0

According to intelligence sources in the United States and Europe, the Al Taqwa network intersected with tranches in Geneva and the Isle of Man that involve front companies associated with George H. W. Bush and Enron: Topaz Liberty, Bluelake World, and Potomac Capital. The Iranian con man and Pentagon neocon contact Manucher Ghorbanifar, Saudi billionaire Adnan Khashoggi, and members of the Bin Laden family are reportedly linked to Geneva-based Potomac Capital, a front company created by George H. W. Bush when he was CIA Director in 1976.

Interestingly, it was George W. Bush, who, in November 2001, cited Al Taqwa as part of "Al Qaeda's" money laundering activities. However, Bush's neocon allies at The Washington Times and World Net Daily quickly altered course and drew attention away from Al Taqwa's Saudi and Kuwaiti investors and began to erroneously link Al Taqwa to Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Further criminal investigations of Al Taqwa's principals were also quickly dropped.

Potomac Capital appeared on the radar screen of Federal investigators during the Iran-Contra investigation conducted in the late 1980s and early 1990s. The Al Taqwa connection to weapons of mass destruction proliferation, Bin Laden, and George H. W. Bush and his business associates stands as another reason the George W. Bush administration leaked the CIA's Brewster Jennings & Associates counter-WMD network. The CIA counter-proliferation team was getting uncomfortably close to tying members of the Bush family and their business associates to the same financial networks that fund Osama Bin Laden and his "Al Qaeda" network.

WMR has also obtained a possible second connection between the Swiss network connected to George H. W. Bush and other 911 hijackers.

The first connection concerned hijacker Fayyaz Ahmed and a $50,000 check he received from a tranche connected to the Swiss network. The second is the listing of Ahmed Mesfer Ahmed Alghamdi as a shareholder of Al Taqwa on a Central Bank of the Bahamas document dated April 15, 2000.

Ahmed Alghamdi and Hamza Alghamdi were two of the Saudi hijackers on board United Flight 175, which struck the South Tower of the World Trade Center. Saeed Alghamdi was one of the hijackers on board United Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylania after being shot down by U.S. military fighter planes (according to an NSA employee who was on duty in the National Security Operations Center on the morning of 911).

According to the FBI, the Alghamdi hijackers used a number of aliases. Ahmed Alghamdi used the names Ahmed Saeed Saleh Alghamdi, Ahmed Mohammed Alghamdi, Saeed Alghamdi, Ahmed Saleh, and Juan Poncho Bennett. Hamza Alghamdi used Saleh Alghamdi Hamzah. Saeed Alghamdi used Mohsalih Alghamdi, Mokhlidmazid Almotairi, Saeedayed Alghamdi, and Saeed H. Alghamdi. Other Alghamdis wanted by the FBI for involvement with "Al Qaeda" include Nora Alghamdi, Ali A. Alghamdi, Abdulrahman Alghamdi, Othman Alghamdi, Sadda Alghamdi, and Tareqsaeed Alghamdi.

UPDATE -- WASHINGTON, DC -- July 31, 2005 -- On June 20, Intelligence Whispers reported on New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's investigation of American Insurance Group and shady deals involving Citigroup, Enron, and UBS. T

This weekend brought two strange deaths involving recently retired top banking officials -- one in New York and the other in Europe. On July 30, it was reported that former Citigroup board member Arthur Zankel fell from the window of his 9th floor Manhattan apartment.

Zankel retired from Citigroup's board in 2004 and was said by his longtime friend and colleague, Citigroup Chairman Sanford Weill to have been suffering from depression. Hours later, Wim Duisenberg, the retired head of the European Central Bank, was found dead in his swimming pool at his villa in Faucon, in southeastern France. Duisenberg retired in 2003.

On July 29, Milan prosecutors announced indictments against subsidiaries of UBS, Deutsche Bank, Citigroup, and Morgan Stanley as part of the investigation of the financial collapse of the Italian dairy mega-corporation Parmalat. Duisenberg was backed for the head of the European Central Bank by the German banking establishment, including Deutsche Bank.

"Follow the Money ... The Truth is Out There."

UPDATED -- WASHINGTON, DC, HOUSTON, AND ZURICH -- July 24-25, 2005 -- On July 15, Intelligence Whispers reported on a July 31, 1995, $10 million transfer of funds (US Treasury Bills) from Banca Svizzera Italiana (BSI) in Zurich, via Swiss Bank Corp., New York, to Nations Bank in Texas that originated from Saudi Arabia.

On Sept. 28, 1995, a $50,000 check drawn on those funds was cashed by Fayyaz Ahmed, identified as one of the 911 hijackers aboard United Flight 175 that crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center. WMR has now obtained the SWIFT documents from that funds transfer, which identifies Treatment Services of the Southwest Corporation of Houston, the account name for the account (account number 2664055561) on which the $50,000 check to Ahmed was drawn.

Topaz Liberty, Inc. of Zurich and a firm called Andromeda International Ltd. of Edmonton, Alberta are mentioned in the SWIFT cashback wire transfer notice. Topaz Liberty maintained a brass plate front at MSL Office Services, Todistrasse, Zurich. Topaz Liberty also had a business relationship with Stephens Securities of Little Rock, Arkansas and businessmen in Oklahoma. The payee of the $10 million was Bluelake World, SA, a Swiss-registered firm.

The wire transfer, itself, was a violation of SWIFT rules, which specified that a company had to be in existence for at least 6 months prior to a wire transfer via SWIFT. Bluelake World, which had working capital of $40 million, had only been in existence for 5 months when the $10 million SWIFT transfer to Texas was made.

The FBI in Phoenix was investigating the transfer of some of the $10 million to Egyptian nationals it had under surveillance in Arizona and Dallas, some of whom were involved in flight training. The Dallas-based Egyptians were concentrating on training on Boeing 727s.

The FBI investigated a Dallas-based distribution channel for the money called RDC Holdings, Inc., according to a well-placed source. RDC used a Merrill Lynch account (Account No. 41C-07021) to receive $7,499,985 from Bluelake on December 15, 1995. On March 29, 1996, $7.5 million from RDC's Merrill Lynch account was seized by the Arizona Attorney General. Some of the funds were returned to Bluelake but some of the money is still in Arizona accounts.

It has also been revealed that the Russian Foreign Intelligence agency, the SVR, had a well-placed mole inside Barclay's Bank who was monitoring the transfer of Saudi money to Texas, including 1996 $10 billion Saudi transfer to the Enron account. It was the financial intelligence about large scale Saudi money movements to the United States that contributed to Russian intelligence warnings to the CIA prior to the 911 attacks.

The mysterious Geneva-based money mover described in the article below is also reported to be a longtime supporter of both Islamist radical movements and neo-Nazi organizations. He is linked to providing financial support for Osama bin Laden, the late President of Azerbaijan Gaidar Aliev, Manuel Noriega (who he later testified against at the Panamanian dictator's Miami trial), the Muslim Brotherhood, and neo-Nazi and other right-wing groups in Europe and America.


WASHINGTON, DC AND HOUSTON -- UPDATED -- July 15, 2005 -- On June 20, Intelligence Whispers reported on a secret meeting between UNOCAL, Enron, and Taliban officials in Tashkent, Uzbekistan in 1996. The report stated: "Prior to the Tashkent oil summit, on June 23, 1996, a $10 billion wire transfer was made from Cyprus, via Barclays Bank in London, to Enron in Houston. Cyprus is a major banking center for illicit activity. The Tashkent meeting was followed by a spring 1997 meeting between Enron, UNOCAL, and Taliban representatives at the posh Houstonian Hotel in Houston."

Now, more information has been gleaned from knowledgeable intelligence sources about the secret UNOCAL, Enron, and Taliban negotiations over the Central Asian Gas pipeline (CentGas). The source of the $10 billion was the Saudi Royal family and the recipient was Enron's LJM1 off-the-books partnership, also known as LJM Cayman, LP. LJM1 was primarily set up to finance the CentGas pipeline deal.

Convicted Enron Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Andrew J. Fastow was the managing member of the LJM1 partners. In addition to Barclays, the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce was also allegedly used to transfer the $10 billion to the Enron account.

The Russian Finance Ministry, which became interested in the deals hammered out at the Tashkent meeting between UNOCAL, Enron, and the Taliban, was aware of where the $10 billion came from and where it ultimately went. Russia backed the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance when the CentGas pipeline deal was being negotiated with the Taliban in Tashkent on September 7, 1996.

The Cyprus financial middleman, an on-and-off resident of Vienna, Austria, and a specialist in international financial transfers, made a smaller transfer a year before he moved the $10 billion.

In 1995, a $10 million transfer was made to Houston and the source was, again, the Saudi Royal family. The funds were transferred to Nations Bank via Banca Svizzera Italiana via SWIFT. On September 28, 1995, a $50,000 check was cashed at Nation's Bank of Pasadena, Texas. It allegedly originated from the $10 million of transferred funds from Saudi Arabia and the payee was "Fayyaz Ahmed."

Fayyaz Ahmed, aka Fayez Ahmad, was also named as one of the hijackers aboard United 175 that crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center. The $50,000 check was signed by a Texas businessman who was later jailed by Federal authorities for three years for money laundering and wire fraud.

------------



[9/11/Money/Turkey/Haster/Sibel Edmonds &tc.]


http://www.theinternationalpost.com/z15082005.html

Hastert’s Turkish Allies Tied to Bin Laden
15 Aug 2005 07:48:00 GMT

By Lynn Grant

“If they were to allow the whole picture to emerge… certain elected officials will stand trial and go to prison.” – Sibel Edmonds

CHICAGO, Illinois, Aug 15 (IP) – During the current flurry of September 11th related news, one item has gone largely unnoticed.

Reports of former FBI translator Sibel Edmonds’ allegations concerning improper financial ties between House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Turkish officials and businessman have become a source of discontent for beltway insiders on both sides of the aisle.

However, the recent coverage has not addressed why Sibel Edmonds’ information regarding Speaker Hastert’s dealings with the Turks necessitated an in-depth investigation by the September 11th Commission.

In an August 10, 2005 interview about her reported allegations, Edmonds was asked, “What are you alleging about the Speaker of the House?” Though under a strict gag order, she replied:
“I have been giving all the details to the appropriate channels. And they have been confirmed. And what I have said all along is the fact that as far as the 9/11 is concerned, September 11 is concerned, these departments -- and when I say “these departments,” the Department of Justice, the Department of State, and the Department of Defense -- have intentionally blocked the investigations of real -- the real criminals in this country. …

Most of al Qaeda’s funding is… through narcotics. And have you heard anything to this date, anything about these issues which we have had information since 1997? And as I would again emphasize, we are talking about countries. And they are blocking this information, and also the fact that certain officials in this country are engaged in treason against the United States and its interests and its national security, be it the Department of State or certain elected officials.
While alluding to treason, Edmonds’ reply indicates that her allegations about Speaker Hastert are linked to al-Qaeda and the September 11th attacks.

To understand this link, it is necessary to examine the substance of Mrs. Edmonds’ allegations, as reported in the recent issue of Vanity Fair:

A large part of her work at the F.B.I. involved listening to the wiretapped conversations of people who were the targets of counter-intelligence investigations. …

Many involved an F.B.I. target at the city’s large Turkish Consulate, as well as members of the American-Turkish Council and the Assembly of Turkish American Associates. Some of the calls reportedly contained what sounded like references to large scale drug shipments and other crimes. …

One name, however, apparently stood out – a man the Turkish callers often referred to by the nickname “Denny boy.” It was the Republican congressman from Illinois and Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert.

According to some of the wiretaps, the F.B.I.’s targets had arranged for tens of thousands of dollars to be paid to Hastert’s campaign funds in small checks. Under Federal Election Commission rules, donations of less than $200 are not required to be itemized in public filings.

The Vanity Fair article adds:

The targets reportedly discussed giving Hastert tens of thousands of dollars in surreptitious payments in exchange for political favors and information. …

“She told us she’d heard mention of exchanges of information, dead drops—that kind of thing,” a congressional source says. “It was mostly money in exchange for secrets.” …

There was talk, she told investigators, of laundering the profits of large-scale drug deals and of selling classified military technologies to the highest bidder. …

“There was pressure within the bureau for a special prosecutor to be appointed and take the case on, “the [FBI] official says. Instead, his colleagues were told to alter the thrust of their investigation – away from elected politicians and toward appointed officials. “This is the reason why Ashcroft reacted to Sibel in such an extreme fashion [invoking the rarely used State Secrets Privilege],” he says “It was to keep this from coming out.”

Though a Hastert spokesperson has dismissed Edmonds’ allegations and no evidence is presented confirming Hastert received illegal payments, the article reports on another wiretap in which “a senior official at the Turkish Consulate is said to have claimed in one recording that the price for Hastert to withdraw the resolution [recognizing the Turkish slaughter of Armenians in the early 1900s as Genocide] would have been at least $500,000.”

The targets of the wiretaps translated by Edmonds were heavily concentrated near Hastert’s Chicago-area congressional district:

Vanity Fair reveals that the FBI’s investigation centered on Speaker Hastert’s Chicago-area district:

One counter-intelligence official familiar with Edmonds’s case has told Vanity Fair that the F.B.I. opened an investigation into covert activities by Turkish nationals in the late 1990’s. That inquiry found evidence, mainly via wiretaps, of attempts to corrupt senior American politicians in at least two major cities - Washington and Chicago. …

In December 2001, Joel Robertz, an F.B.I. special agent in Chicago, contacted Sibel and asked her to review some wiretaps. Some were several years old, others more recent; all had been generated by a counter-intelligence that had its start in 1997. “It began in D.C.,” says an F.B.I. counter-intelligence official who is familiar with the case file. But “it became apparent that Chicago was actually the center of what was going on.”

These disclosures about Edmonds’ targets help to clarify her past statements to the press.

For example, when asked in a January 2005 interview if she had any information that would tie the targets of her FBI wiretaps to the September 11th attacks or Osama bin Laden’s organization, Edmonds replied, “Through certain activities with money laundering, and narcotics and illegal weapons procurement. Yes.” (audio)

More specifically, Edmonds wrote in a July 2004 article that she has “firsthand knowledge of ongoing intelligence received and processed by the FBI since 1997, which contained specific information implicating certain high level government and elected officials in criminal activities directly and indirectly related to terrorist money laundering, narcotics, and illegal arms sales.”

Yet Edmonds may not be the only well-known FBI Whistleblower with connections to this 9/11-related investigation in Chicago.

Beginning in the mid-1990s, FBI Special Agent Robert Wright was given orders to investigate several Chicago-based businessmen with ties to Turkey – and Osama bin Laden.

Special Agent Wright shared details of his investigation with Brian Ross of ABC’s Primetime Live in 2002:

ROSS: Their story begins in the mid-1990s. With growing terrorism in the Middle East, the two agents were assigned to track a connection to Chicago, a suspected terrorist cell that would later lead them to an Osama Bin Laden connection.

WRIGHT: We had a cell in Chicago, right. And that was, that was the premise of how we got the investigation going.

ROSS: But Wright says he soon discovered that all the FBI Intelligence Division wanted him to do was to follow suspected terrorists around town and file reports, but make no arrests.

WRIGHT: The supervisor who was there from headquarters was right straight across from me and started yelling at me, “You will not open criminal investigations. I forbid any of you. You will not open criminal investigations against any of these intelligence subjects.”

ROSS: You’re on the Terrorism Task Force and you were told you will not open criminal cases?

WRIGHT: Yes.

ROSS: In 1998, Al-Qaeda terrorists bombed two American Embassies in Africa, killing more than 200 people. The agents say some of the money for the attack led back to the people they had been tracking in Chicago, and to a powerful Saudi Arabian businessman, this man, Yassin Kadi, who had extensive business and financial ties in Chicago. Yet, even after the bombings, the agents say headquarters ordered no arrests.

WRIGHT: Two months after the embassies are hit in Africa, they want to shut down the criminal investigation. They wanted to kill it.

ROSS: The move outraged the Federal Prosecutor in Chicago, who says Agents Wright and Vincent were helping him build a strong criminal case against Kadi and others.

MARK FLESSNER, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: There were powers bigger than I was in the Justice Department and within the FBI that simply were not going to let it happen. And it didn’t happen.

Wright’s investigation appeared to have had little effect on Chicago businessman Yassin Kadi. The Boston Globe reported in 2002, “Qadi was so well respected that he escorted former president Jimmy Carter around a Saudi women’s college in 2000.”

Though a presidential escort, Kadi’s al-Qaeda ties are so widespread, agents working on his investigation once pondered whether he may have been Osama bin Laden. During a June 2003 conference at the National Press Club, Special Agent Wright declared:

On June 9, 1998… I became the only FBI agent before 9/11 to utilize the civil forfeiture laws of the United States to seize $1.4 million in international terrorism assets from a Middle Eastern terrorist group. The original source of these seized funds was Yassin Kadi, a Saudi businessman. During 1998, an assistant United States attorney and I discussed the possibility that Mr. Kadi might actually be Osama bin Laden, or at least a close associate of bin Laden’s. …

However, my repeated attempts requesting FBI’s international terrorism unit to investigate Kadi’s financing of international terrorism was ignored. …

Four years later, only three weeks after the September 11 attacks, Mr. Kadi was designated by the United States government as the financier of Osama bin Laden.

Kadi, now 48, acted as ‘the financier of Osama bin Laden’ not only in the Chicago-area, but in Turkey as well. Two months after 9/11, The Turkish Daily News published an article detailing Kadi’s investments entitled “Osama bin Laden’s ‘Cashier’ in Turkey”. The Turkish Daily added:

Kadi, who was living in Istanbul, fled from Turkey following the Sept.11 attack. Kadi is a partner in two Turkey-based companies, the Karavan DisTicaret, a foreign trade company, and Ella Film-Produksiyon, a movie company. He once owned a 90 percent stake in Karavan and 30 percent in Ella but more recently these stakes have changed due to capital expansion.

In March 2005, Turkish authorities concluded an investigation into Yassin Kadi’s suspected links with al-Qaeda. The Arab News described the probe’s findings:

Turkey’s chief public prosecutor has formally ruled that there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest that Saudi businessman and philanthropist Yassin Abdullah Al-Qadi has had contact with or has assisted the Al-Qaeda terrorist organization. …

The probe concluded that, far from being a member or supporter of Al-Qaeda, Al-Qadi was above board and his actions were at all times wholly legitimate.

Turkey’s Prime Minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, took no issue with his chief prosecutor’s questionable ruling. Though few familiar with Turkish politics would be surprised at Prime Minister Erdogan’s position.

In November of 2001, The Turkish Daily News published an article with the headline ‘Tayyip – bin Laden Relationship’ referring to Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The article provided translation of a Turkish language report one of the country’s largest newspapers which stated, “A Cumhuriyet headline said, referring to Justice and Development Party (AKP) leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan: “… Al Kadi’s business partner Faruk Sarac is a close friend of the Erdogan family.”

Though the Turkish Prime Minister is a close family friend of a business partner of bin Laden’s financier, this may be nothing more than a coincidence.

However, another report seems to cast doubt on the coincidence theory. The Turkish Daily News reported in October 2001:

Hurriyet said: “Cuneyd Zapsu is the partner in Turkey of Saudi businessman Yasin al-Qadi whose assets in the United States have been frozen because he has links with terrorism. Zapsu, one of the founders of the AKP, is Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s closest friend.”

Some Turks consider Zapsu to be their own version of Karl Rove. Earlier this year Prime Minister Erdogan sued a news contributor because of a political cartoon depicting Zapsu perched on Erdogan’s back. And in late 2004 The Economist reported:

Secular Turks… fear that Mr Erdogan might use his muscle to expand the role of religion in public life. The real worry should be that more power could encourage his authoritarian streak. Even today only a handful of his advisers, among them Cuneyd Zapsu, a wealthy businessman, and Omer Celik, his youthful speech-writer, dare to disagree openly with Mr Erdogan.

The terrorist tendencies are not confined solely to Erdogan’s closest friends and advisors. The Prime Minister himself has been involved in extremist behavior.

According to The Turkish Daily News, “A Cumhuriyet headline said, referring to the Istanbul Municipality during Erdogan’s time as mayor, “The headquarters of religious reactionaryism [sic].”
While Mayor of Istanbul in the 1990s, Erdogan was jailed for four months by Turkey’s secular military after reading an Islamic poem containing the phrase, “Mosques are our bayonets, the domes our helmets and the believers our soldiers.”

Erdogan imprisonment began in 1998, after a military coup forced his political party from power. Less than four years later, Erdogan’s party resumed power and the national hero soon became Turkey’s Prime Minister.

The Prime Minister’s life story reads like a movie script: a man of destiny and vision, who can overcome any obstacle his path. Erdogan is surrounded by leaders who have been by his side from early on in his political career, including his Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul and Parliamentary Speaker Bulent Arinc. An April 1998 report in The Turkish Daily News stated:

Cumhuriyet reported that the prison sentence Istanbul Mayor Recep Tayyip Erdogan has been given has come as a relief to the older generation. … Meanwhile, Abdullah Gul and Bulent Arinc are expected to come to the foreground as the younger generation’s potential candidates.
Another 1998 Turkish news article reported:

Commenting on the prison sentence given to Istanbul Mayor Erdogan, Gul said… “This incident will add strength to our cause -- to Erdogan’s own cause and to our party.” …

Arinc said that they had not expected Erdogan to receive a sentence of this kind… “We have joined our fates with our friend, Tayyip Erdogan.”

Erdogan, Gul and Arinc would soon become the three most powerful men in Turkey. Such power combined with the Erdogan administration’s various ties to Osama bin Laden should cause alarm among American officials engaged in the War on Terror.

Yet even post-September 11, 2001, the result has been the opposite. During a 2002 visit with the Prime Minister in Turkey, Dennis Hastert stated:

It was a very good meeting that we had with the new Prime Minister. … We are committed as our country, the United States, to work with Turkey, to carry on. We see Turkey as a very stable country, as a matter of fact the model for stability and moderation and democracy.

Despite the Turkish government’s refusal to grant coalition forces access to key military bases during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, Speaker Hastert never wavered in his support of Turkey. According to Turkish Speaker Arinc, Hastert declared, “We respect your parliament’s decision. Our Congress does the same thing from time to time. It is nothing to be offended by.”

In late 2004 Hastert made another trip to Turkey, as The Washington Post reports:

Folks in Europe are still talking about that splendid, 10-day, pre-Christmas tour of Europe led by House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) to attend the 60th anniversary ceremonies of the Battle of the Bulge. The group stopped to… visit more troops at Incirlik air base in Turkey…

Support personnel... [were] amazed the plane got off the ground in Turkey -- what with all the fine rugs and pashminas -- not to mention some Turkish-made shotguns Hastert and Dingell bought.

With such a display of hospitality, it is not surprising that Speaker Hastert invited his Turkish friends for a visit in May 2005. The Anatolia News Agency reported on the trip:

Turkish Parliament Speaker Bulent Arinc has indicated today that his visit to the US Congress will be the first ever one by a Turkish parliament Speaker…

Arinc will be in Washington DC upon an invitation from US House of Representatives Speaker Dennis Hastert.

A Turkish government website added:

Parliament Speaker Bülent Arınç visited Washington between May 24-27 as the guest of Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the US House of Representatives. Arınç also attended a reception hosted in his honor by Hastert. …

Arınç, who completed his meetings in Washington D.C. arrived in Chicago on May 27. …
Arınç, who got information from Turkish Consul General Naci Koru about the work of the Turkish Consulate General in Chicago on Saturday… met Turkish community in Chicago on May 29.

The previous passage would have seemed relatively innocuous, if not for the recent Vanity Fair article which included passages such as:

“It began in D.C.,” says an F.B.I. counter-intelligence official who is familiar with the case file. But “it became apparent that Chicago was actually the center of what was going on.” …

The FBI’s investigations into a senior official at the Turkish Consulate is said to have claimed in one recording that the price for Hastert to withdraw the resolution would have been at least $500,000. …

In all, says a source who was present, she [Edmonds] managed to listen to more than 40 of the Chicago recordings supplied by Robertz. Many involved an F.B.I. target at the city’s large Turkish Consulate… and the Assembly of Turkish American Associations.

It should come as little surprise that while in the U.S., Arinc visited the ATAA, according to the Anatolia News Agency:

Turkish Parliament Speaker Bulent Arinc, who is currently in the United States upon formal invitation of the U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Dennis Hastert, met representatives of the Jewish community and of the Assembly of the Turkish-American Associations (ATAA) on Wednesday.

Though even without the recent allegations by Sibel Edmonds, the following report from The Turkish Daily News regarding Prime Minister Erdogan’s 2004 trip stateside to meet President Bush may have raised an eyebrow:

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan… first arrived at the Peninsula Hotel in Chicago. …
After the concert, Chicago Municipal Mayor Richard M. Daley held a dinner for Erdogan.

Welcome to America.




http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/08/10/1346254

Wednesday, August 10th, 2005
Did Speaker Hastert Accept Turkish Bribes to Deny Armenian Genocide and Approve Weapons Sales?


AMY GOODMAN: We're joined in our D.C. studio by Sibel Edmonds. We are also joined on the telephone from Britain by David Rose, an investigative reporter and author of the Vanity Fair article. David Rose, let's begin with you. Can you lay out your thesis in this Vanity Fair piece?

DAVID ROSE: Well, I try to tell the whole story of Sibel Edmonds' treatment by the FBI and by the Department of Justice from the beginning until the current time in rather more detail than before, but I suppose what is the most striking feature is I tried to look at why the government has invoked the State Secrets privilege in this case. As you say, just as in the Maher Arar case, the government is saying that her case against the authorities for having her fired can't proceed because to let any of the evidence about what lies behind it out in court, even in a court which has been security cleared where the attorneys have top secret clearance, would jeopardize the foreign policy and national security interests of the United States. And, by the way, I think it's interesting that in his declaration about this, John Ashcroft, the former Attorney General, uses that formulation: foreign policy and national security interests.

So, as Ann Beeson, Sibel's attorney from the ACLU, says in the article, ‘Well, what could they be trying to hide?’ And that's what I set out to try to find out. And I think there is now considerable evidence that what they may be trying to hide is not simply a national security scandal, but something potentially much more explosive and embarrassing, namely, evidence that some Turksih groups, some of them officials of the government, some private individuals, perhaps associated or allegedly associated with organized crime, have been making efforts to corrupt elected American officials and also appointed government officials in the United States, and one name that has cropped up in wiretaps, which my informants tell me Sibel Edmonds translated, is that of the Speaker of the House, Denny Hastert, as you say.
AMY GOODMAN: Sibel Edmonds, what did you learn about Dennis Hastert when you were an FBI translator after 9/11, listening to these pre-9/11 wiretaps?

SIBEL EDMONDS: Good morning, Amy.

AMY GOODMAN: It’s good to have you with us.

SIBEL EDMONDS: Thank you. Thank you for having me back. Well, as you know, I'm under several gag orders, and I have been for the past three, three-and-a-half years. And as far as disclosing information that the Americans have the right to know, I have already done that. I have done that repeatedly for the past three years. And I have gone through the appropriate channels. I have gone to the United States Congress. I have gone to the 9/11 Commission. I disclosed information in secure facilities in all of these channels, including the Inspector General's office for the Department of Justice. And to this date, as you know, we have an Inspector General's report that has come out and said my allegations, my report have been supported by other witnesses, by other documents, by other facts and evidence. Three years ago, you had two senators coming out saying that the FBI during unclassified briefings have confirmed all my allegations, and they have denied none. So, whatever I have reported have already been confirmed.

It's been three years, and the government still insists in invoking the State Secret privilege. As you know, last year they went ahead and they gagged the United States Congress, by the way, illegally. And according to my attorneys, I am the most gagged American in the United States history, and nobody is asking why. They aren’t saying, ‘Why is it that the government is going to such length to invoke State Secret privilege, to gag the Congress, to classify the Inspector General's report, to stop the 9/11 family members' attorneys to subpoena my deposition?’ And the answer to this question is it's not to protect any national security. It is not to protect any ongoing investigations, because to this day they have never used that. Do you know why they have never used the fact that, oh, maybe this is an ongoing investigation? Because the fact of it is that's why I blew the whistle. There are no investigations out there. There is no investigation whatsoever, because they are not targeting the true criminals. And they are not targeting those who truly masterminded these terrible acts against the Americans and their best interest, their national security.

AMY GOODMAN: Sibel Edmonds, we contacted Congress member Hastert's office, the Speaker of the House, as well as the Turkish embassy, for comment, they did not return our phone calls. But what are you alleging about the Speaker of the House?

SIBEL EDMONDS: As I said, Amy, I have been giving all the details to the appropriate channels. And they have been confirmed. And what I have said all along is the fact that as far as the 9/11 is concerned, September 11 is concerned, these departments -- and when I say “these departments,” the Department of Justice, the Department of State, and the Department of Defense -- have intentionally blocked the investigations of real -- the real criminals in this country. And we are talking about countries involved. The Vanity Fair article points out to Turkey -- countries. And it's very interesting. To this date, we are not hearing anything about targeting, you know, certain Central Asian countries. They are not speaking about the link between the narcotics and al Qaeda. Yes, we are hearing about them coming down on some charities as the real funds behind al Qaeda, but most of al Qaeda's funding is not through these charity organizations. It's through narcotics. And have you heard anything to this date, anything about these issues which we have had information since 1997? And as I would again emphasize, we are talking about countries. And they are blocking this information, and also the fact that certain officials in this country are engaged in treason against the United States and its interests and its national security, be it the Department of State or certain elected officials.

AMY GOODMAN: Could you name names?

SIBEL EDMONDS: I have named names. I have given it to those people who are supposed to be representing this country through the Congress. I have given it to the Inspector General's office, and the report doesn't name names because everything was classified, but they are saying that my reports, my allegations, have been confirmed and have been supported by other witnesses, documents and evidence. I have given it to the 9/11 Commissioners, and interestingly, the 9/11 Commissioners after having the meetings with me, they went ahead and they had certain meetings and decided to only refer to I.G. report and ask them to classify the I.G. report so it wouldn't come out before their report comes out. Now, we have to ask the questions: Why are they going to this length, to such a length to cover up and to gag and to classify and to invoke State Secret privilege? What are they covering up?

AMY GOODMAN: Sibel Edmonds is our guest in Washington, D.C., former F.B.I. translator challenging her firing from the F.B.I., and on the line with us, David Rose from Britain, who wrote the Vanity Fair piece called “An Inconvenient Patriot,” the subtitle “Love of country led Sibel Edmonds to become a translator for the F.B.I. following 9/11, but everything changed when she accused a colleague of covering up illicit activity involving Turkish nationals. Fired after sounding the alarm, she's now fighting for the ideals that made her an American and threatening some very powerful people.” David Rose, can you talk about Sibel Edmonds' colleague within the F.B.I., Melek Can Dickerson, the relationship and –

DAVID ROSE: Sorry, I’ve got a very bad line.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you hear me?

DAVID ROSE: Yes, I can, yeah.

AMY GOODMAN: Can you -- yeah –

DAVID ROSE: Hello?

AMY GOODMAN: Hi. Go ahead.

DAVID ROSE: Let me just -- yes. I think there's one very important new development, which has not been reported, because it took place after the magazine went to press, which is that in addition to making her complaints against the F.B.I. and talking about the apparent evidence of possible espionage, which she had discovered on the part of her colleague, Melek Can Dickerson, at the F.B.I., and her husband, an Air Force major, Douglas Dickerson. Back in 2002, Sibel Edmonds wrote to the Office of Special Investigation and the Air Force Inspector General, which conducted a very brief investigation in the summer of 2002 and in September 2002, after less than three weeks, without interviewing Sibel herself, the Air Force Inspector General wrote to Sibel Edmonds and her then attorneys and said that the case was closed, that they were not pursuing her allegations against the Dickersons, which I will go into in just a moment.
But the new development is that just ten days ago, her attorney in Washington, Mark Zaid, received a message from the Office of Special Investigation at the Air Force saying that after this very long gap, nearly three years, they were reopening the investigation into the Dickersons, into Can Dickerson and her husband, Douglas, and might at some near future date seek to interview Sibel. Now, it may or may not be coincidental that, as part of the research for my article for Vanity Fair, I had submitted about 150 different questions about the entire case to the Air Force, to other parts of the Pentagon, to the D.O.J. and the F.B.I., and none of these questions were answered, but they did, of course, set out in enormous detail the various allegations that are being raised. Following the receipt of those questions, the investigation was formally reopened, which is, I think, perhaps significant.

So as to the substance of the allegations, in essence, it's quite simple. What Sibel Edmonds has alleged and has indeed been alleging now since the end of 2001, beginning of 2002, is that towards the end of 2001, Can Dickerson, her fairly new colleague at the F.B.I., and her husband Douglas, called unexpectedly at the home she shares with her husband, Matthew, in Alexandria, Virginia. And over tea one Sunday morning, the Dickersons suggested that Sibel and her husband might like to join an organization called the American Turkish Council, which is essentially a business group which exists to foster trade deals, mainly of a military nature, between America and Turkey. And they suggested that – according to Sibel and her husband, they suggested that if they did this, they might become rich. And Sibel was particularly surprised at this, because they also boasted that they knew an individual who had close links with this organization, who was also an official of the Turkish Embassy, and in fact, although she hadn’t said so in her application to join the F.B.I., Can Dickerson had at one stage worked for the American Turkish Council herself as an intern and clearly had got a close relationship with this particular diplomat.

Well, after that – and this is all set out, by the way, in legal filings, and much of it is now completely confirmed by the D.O.J. Inspector General's report into Sibel's case, the unclassified part of it – following that, Sibel says that Can Dickerson tried to stop Sibel listening to wiretap conversations by this particular official, who was a friend of the Dickersons and also conversations by others who appeared to be involved in various illegal activity. So, she went to other officials at the F.B.I., to a particular agent, Dennis Saccher, who was in charge of counterintelligence and counterespionage regarding Turkey, who immediately suspected that this was possibly some kind of recruitment exercise, that she was being asked to participate in some kind of illegal espionage operation and perhaps was being offered some kind of inducement.

It was when she started to complain about this and took her complaints up the ladder within the F.B.I., and eventually to the Congress, that she was fired, and that's the substance of the case. But clearly, given that the D.O.J. Inspector General has now corroborated and supported her allegations, and has said that many have bases in fact, and that the F.B.I. fired her as an act of retaliation when it should have investigated the claims much more seriously, the fact that the Air Force is now again looking at Major Douglas Dickerson, Can Dickerson's husband, who remains on active duty in Europe, is clearly of some significance.

AMY GOODMAN: And David Rose, the issue of the Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, and conversations overheard that link his office with improper dealings with Turkish nationals, can you talk about particular legislation?

DAVID ROSE: Well, there was – there were two things, I understand, which those who were wiretapped, whose conversations were recorded and translated, referred to. One was the controversial deal to sell helicopters, attack helicopters, to Turkey, which was an issue of great controversy in the late 1990s. At that point, Turkey was fighting a pretty hot civil war with the Kurdish separatists in the east of the country. There were allegations of human rights abuses and so forth, and some in America thought it was wrong that Turkey should be sold several billion dollars worth of attack helicopters in those circumstances. So some of the calls allegedly referred to the hope that the Congress would approve that very large weapons sale.

But the second occasion or second event which is allegedly referred to in these wiretaps is the Armenian genocide resolution which came before the House in 2000. Now, the Armenian lobby has made attempts with some support -- I mean, Senator Bob Dole was a very great supporter of this back in the 1980s. The Armenians have tried to get the Congress to pass a genocide resolution so that – which would basically state that the mass murder of Armenians in Turkey that was carried out after 1915 was a genocide, and some countries have indeed passed such resolutions. Some states have in America. This resolution never really got anywhere until in 2000, Dennis Hastert, as House Speaker, announced he would support it.

Now, at the time, analysts noted that there was a tight congressional race in California, in which the Armenian community might just swing it in favor of the Republican incumbent. But what is significant, the resolution had passed the Human Rights Subcommittee of the House. It passed the International Relations Committee, but on the eve of the House vote, the full House vote, Dennis Hastert withdrew the resolution. Now, at the time, he explained this by saying that he had had a letter from President Clinton asking him to withdraw it, because it wouldn't be in America's interests to have such a resolution, which, of course, was bitterly resisted inside Turkey, pass through the House.

Well, it is slightly curious when you think about it. I mean, Dennis Hastert was not known, as one of the authors of Clinton's impeachment, for deferring to his judgment on many occasions, but on this occasion, he apparently did. Well, whether or not these allegations have substance is not something that I am able to state with any knowledge, but it is said that in the wiretaps that were translated by Sibel Edmonds, reference was made to this very controversial question of the House vote. One of the Turkish targets of these wiretaps claimed that the price for getting Dennis Hastert to withdraw the resolution would be $500,000. Now, I do emphasize there's no evidence at all that he received such a payment, but that is what is said to have been recorded in one of the wiretaps.

AMY GOODMAN: We have to wrap up the discussion. We only have a few seconds, but Sibel Edmonds, you are taking a challenge to your dismissal, appealing your dismissal to the Supreme Court?

SIBEL EDMONDS: Yes, Amy. Last week, we filed our petition with the Supreme Court, and in a few weeks there will be amicus filed in our support by 9/11 family members and other government watchdog organizations, and basically this is the last stop. This is the last channel, because, as you know, we have never been given our day in court, due to the State Secret privilege and the gag orders. And also I am pursuing this still with the Congress and I will continue until these issues come to light and until the Americans know what is going on in their government.

AMY GOODMAN: Well, Sibel Edmonds and David Rose of Vanity Fair – Sibel Edmonds, former F.B.I. translator, thanks very much for joining us.

----------
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5821
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 9/11 Info Dump

Postby Elvis » Sun Sep 17, 2017 12:18 am

[p.14 of dump]


Text of Sibel Edmonds' Court Filing

Text of March 16 2005 DC Court Filing

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA


CASE NUMBER # 1:05CV00540
JUDGE: James Robertson
DECK TYPE: Personal Injury/Malpractice
DATE STAMP: 03/16/2005

SIBEL EDMONDS
6631 West Wakefield Drive
Alexandria, VA 22307

Plaintiff

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Defendant

COMPLAINT

NOW COMES Plaintiff, Sibel Edmonds, by and through undersigned counsel, pursuant
to Rules 3 & 8, Fed.R.Civ.Proc. , and for her Complaint against Defendant United States of America, avers as follows:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1. This action arises under the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA"), 28 U.S.C. 9 2671
et seq. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U. C. 99
1346(b) & 1402(b).
2. Beginning on March 22, 2001 and continuing to the present, Defendant has
injured Plaintiff through negligent acts and omissions constituting, inter alia
negligent endangerment, negligent investigation, conversion of property, false
light invasion of privacy, infliction of emotional distress and interference with
prospective economic opportunity resulting in financial loss, actionable under the
FTCA.
3. Defendant's complained of acts and omissions have occurred within the District
of Columbia.
4. Pursuant to 28 U. C. 9 2672, Plaintiff submitted an administrative claim for
negligence encompassing the allegations contained herein to the Federal Bureau
of Investigation ("FBI") on March 21 , 2004, within two years of the beginning of
their occurrence. A denial letter was mailed to Plaintiffby the FBI on October 27
2004. Plaintiffs Complaint is filed within six (6) months thereafter.
5. Venue is proper in the District of Columbia pursuant to 28 U. C. 9 1402(b).
6. Service of process on Defendant may be accomplished pursuant to Rule 4
Fed.R. Civ .Proc.

FACTS1

7. Plaintiff was formerly employed by the FBI, an agency of Defendant, as a contract
linguist. Published media reports have stated that she is fluent in Turkish and
Farsi, and conversational in Azerbaijani.
8. Plaintiff is a citizen of the United States of Turkish descent. She first came to the
United States in 1988 and became a citizen in 1996. Plaintiff has never formally
renounced her Turkish citizenship to the Government of Turkey, however.
9. Plaintiffs entire family continues to reside in Turkey, with the exception of two
sisters. Plaintiff owns real property in Turkey, including a country summer house
and a small apartment in Istanbul. She previously engaged in a real estate
investment business with her mother and a textile manufacturing business with
her uncle, both in Turkey. Plaintiff owned a partial interest in her late father
medical clinic in Turkey. Plaintiff also obtained Turkish clients for her husband'
information technology consulting business. The grave site of Plaintiff slate
father is in Turkey. Between 1993 and 2000, Plaintiff visited Turkey on twentytwo
separate occasions for family and business reasons, spending an average of
two or three months each year in Turkey.
10. In September, 2001 , Plaintiff was retained by the FBI as a contract linguist, on a
six month renewable contract, to perform translation services at the FBI
Washington Field Office ("FBI/WFO"), located within the District of Columbia.
After September 2001 Plaintiff was assigned to work on FBI counterterrorism
and counterintelligence investigations.
11. FBI contract linguists perform document-to-document or audio-to-document
translation services, translating into English from the target language the speech
and/or writings of non-English speaking individuals and, on occasion, render
translations from English into the target language. FBI contract monitors perform
summary translations of voice recordings.
12. Plaintiff s primary duties for FBI/WFO were working as a contract linguist in the
Language Administration and Acquisition Unit ("LAAU"), translating
information from the foreign languages in which she is fluent into English.
Between September, 2001 , and March, 2002, Plaintiff performed translation
services as an FBI contract linguist in Turkish, and Plaintiff performed some
services as a contract monitor in two other languages.
13. As a condition of employment all FBI contract linguists and FBI contract monitors
are required to pass a polygraph examination and a 10-year single-scope
background investigation in order to obtain a TOP SECRET security clearance.
14. Plaintiff passed a polygraph examination and a full background investigation and
was granted a security clearance by the FBI prior to commencing her employment
in September, 2001.
15. Prior to her retention, FBI officials assured Plaintiff that her Turkish business
interests and family members would not be jeopardized by her FBI work because
all of her co-workers would also have passed similar background investigations
and hold a TOP SECRET security clearance. Therefore, they assured her that she
need not use an alias to protect her true identity.
16. Between January and March, 2002, Plaintiff reported a number of
whistleblower allegations to FBI management officials concerning serious
breaches in the FBI security program and a break-down in the quality of
translations as a result of willful misconduct and gross incompetence by FBI
officials.
17. Plaintiff s reports included, but were not limited to, the following:

(a) that a contract FBI monitor, Melek Can Dickerson, who was granted a
TOP SECRET security clearance by the FBI, had immediately prior to her
FBI position been employed for more than two years by an organization
that was a target of an ongoing FBI investigation;

(b) that Ms. Dickerson had past and ongoing association with at least two or
more targets of an ongoing FBI investigation (who subsequently fled the United States);

(c) that Ms. Dickerson was translating information obtained from FBI wiretaps
concerning one or more targets with whom she had past and ongoing
improper contacts;

(d) that Ms. Dickerson was suspected of leaking information to one or more
targets of an FBI investigation to which she was assigned to perform
translation services;

(e) that Ms. Dickerson had improperly instructed Plaintiff and another
monitor not to listen and translate certain FBI wire-taps because she knew
the subjects and was confident that there would be nothing important to
translate concerning those subjects or their conversations;

(f) that Plaintiffs supervisor, Supervisory Language Specialist ("SLS") Mike
F eghali, issued instructions that assisted Ms. Dickerson in carrying out
misconduct;

(g) that in December, 2001 and again in January, 2002 Ms. Dickerson
threatened to disclose Plaintiff s true identity to the target organization
thereby jeopardizing the lives and safety of Plaintiff and her family
members, who were citizens of and resided in Turkey, because Plaintiff
refused to go along with Ms. Dickerson s scheme to block translations and
because Plaintiff reported her concerns about Ms. Dickerson s wrongdoing
to FBI management;

(h) that both as a result of misconduct by Ms. Dickerson and SLS Feghali, and
as a result of gross incompetence in the FBI, numerous translations were
improperly conducted or not conducted, which threatened intelligence and
law enforcement investigations related to the September 11th attack, and
other ongoing counter-terrorist, counter-intelligence and law enforcement
investigations;

(i) that work order documents concerning translations related to the
September 11th investigation were falsified and contained forgeries of
Plaintiffs name and/or initials;

(j) that SLS Feghali issued an instruction forbidding Plaintiff from raising her
concerns to the FBI Special Agent assigned to the case, or others, without
the permission of SLS Feghali;

(k) that extremely sensitive and material information was deliberately withheld from translations; and

(l) that FBI management had failed to take corrective action in response to
Plaintiff s reports and serious concerns, and instead retaliated against
Plaintiff for reporting her concerns.


18. Prior to Plaintiff raising these concerns, Ms. Dickerson and her husband, Air
Force Major Douglas Dickerson, had unexpectedly visited Plaintiff and her
husband at their Alexandria home in early December 2001. During this visit
Major Dickerson talked extensively to Plaintiffs husband about meeting his wife
in Turkey; about his job, which he said had been in weapon s procurement;
dealing with Turkey and several central Asian countries. He said that he had lived
in Turkey and later in Germany. He asked whether Plaintiff and her husband were
active in the Turkish community here or whether they had many Turkish friends
to which they replied no. He said that he and his wife had some high level Turkish
friends in the United States that they saw regularly and named one of them. He
said that they regularly shopped for this person at a middle-eastern market in
Alexandria, and then mentioned an organization, the American Turkish
Association AT A"). He brought up another Turkish organization, the American
Turkish Council ATC"), which he said he and his wife were very active in, and
said that it was a very good organization to belong to and have ties with. He said
that a relationship could insure that a person would be able to retire early and be
guaranteed a very good and lucrative life afterwards in Turkey, what he and his
wife planned to do shortly. He then asked whether Plaintiff and her husband were
members of ATC, and Plaintiffs husband replied that they were not although
they were familiar with it, but believed that they would have to have some
business relationships with Turkey before they could become members. Major
Dickerson then turned and pointed to Plaintiff and said, "all you have to do is tell
them who you work for and what you do and you will get in very quickly." At that
point Plaintiff quickly changed the conversation to other topics.
18. Plaintiff subsequently verbally reported the Dickerson visit and conversation to SLS Feghali.
19. Plaintiff formally raised her concerns to SLS Feghali in writing on January 22
2002 and then again orally at a meeting on January 25, 2002. Plaintiff emphasized
the serious national security implications of her concerns, specifically that
sensitive ongoing criminal and counter-terrorism investigations were being
compromised, including those of the September 11 attack and certain of the
detainees captured in its wake. FBI management at FBI/WFO failed to take
prompt, corrective action as requested by Plaintiff and instead Plaintiff herself
became subjected to a concerted pattern of reprisal and retaliation as a direct result
of raising her concerns.
20. Although Plaintiff s supervisor informed an FBI manger about her allegations, the
matter was not reported to the FBI Security Office until more than two weeks
later, on February 11 2002.
21. On or about February 8, 2002, Plaintiff wrote a detailed memorandum to the
Acting Assistant Special Agent in Charge ("ASAC"), documenting her concerns
about security and management problems in the language department
emphasizing the serious national security implications and requesting that prompt
corrective action be taken. Although Plaintiff s supervisor had given her
permission to write the memorandum on her home computer because of concern
of retaliation by SLS Feghali, the FBI later concluded that the memorandum
contained classified information and seized Plaintiffs home computer.
22. Plaintiff also informed the ASAC and other FBI management officials that
Plaintiff was deeply concerned for her personal safety and the safety of her family
as a result of the conduct of and threats made by Ms. Dickerson and Plaintiff
requested that the FBI take immediate steps to address these problems.
23. On February 12 2002 Plaintiff was finally interviewed by the FBI Security Office
about her allegations. The following day Ms. Dickerson also was interviewed.
Both were deemed credible by a Security Officer. However, a subsequent
investigation by the DOJ/OIG found that "the Security Officer did not challenge. .
. (Ms. Dickerson) with respect to any information. . . (she) provided although that
information was not consistent with FBI records." It found that "the Security
Officer s investigation of. . . (Plaintiffs) claims. . . was significantly flawed
and labeled it "superficial."
24. During this period, Plaintiff advised her sister living in Turkey of the threats by
Ms. Dickerson to disclose the identity of Plaintiff to the target organization.
Fearing for her own safety, Plaintiffs sister immediately fled Turkey and
currently resides in the United States where she has applied for asylum. In order to
flee Turkey, Plaintiffs sister was forced to abandon her employment with KLM
Airlines and suffer substantial financial hardship. To date she resents Plaintiff and
has not spoken to her for nearly three years.
25. By letter dated February 13 2002, Plaintiff wrote to Executive Assistant Director
for Counterterrorism/Counterintelligence Dale L. Watson, notifying him of her
serious security concerns which potentially put Plaintiff s personal safety and the
safety of her family at risk. In her letter Plaintiff informed Mr. Watson that she
had already reported her concerns to the management in her department but that
no corrective action had been taken and that Plaintiff s management expressed a
let's just sweep it under the rug " attitude. Plaintiff again emphasized that
sensitive ongoing criminal and counter-terrorism investigations were being
compromised.
26. On February 14 2002 SLS Feghali sent an e-mail to the LAAU Chief and another
FBI official asserting that "there was no basis for. . . (Plaintiffs) allegations.
27. On February 22, 2002 Plaintiff met with Supervisory Special Agent ("SSA") Tom
Frields, and SLS (and acting ASAC) Stephanie Bryan to discuss her concerns.
Immediately after the meeting, . . . (FBI management) began to explore whether
the FBI had the option to cease using. . . (Plaintiff) as a. . . (contract linguist)."
28. In an internal memorandum drafted on February 25 2002 the FBI recommended
that both Plaintiff and Ms. Dickerson undergo a polygraph examination to assist
in the investigation. However, the proposed questioning of each was to focus on
whether either had made any unauthorized disclosures of classified information
rather than (on) the threat that had been alleged by . . . (Plaintiff).
29. On February 27, 2002, Mr. Watson signed the certified mail Domestic Return
Receipt that was attached to Plaintiff.s letter dated February 13 2002.
30. On or about March 7, 2002, Plaintiff personally met with Deputy Assistant
Director for Counterterrorism/Counterintelligence James T. Caruso, who was Mr.
Watson s direct deputy, about her concerns. During the course of their meeting,
which lasted between one and a half to two hours, Mr. Caruso listened to
Plaintiff s reports of misconduct, and her detailed concerns about serious security
breaches and misconduct in the language department. However, Mr. Caruso did
not take any notes during his meeting with Plaintiff and at the conclusion of the
meeting he failed to commit to taking corrective action of any kind.
31. Also, on or about March 7 2002, Plaintiff filed complaints with the FBI Office of
Professional Responsibility ("FBI/OPR") and the DOJ/OIG in which Plaintiff
reported her allegations of serious security breaches and misconduct. Plaintiff also
alleged in her complaints to FBI/OPR and DOJ/OIG that she was being subjected
to harassment and retaliation for making reports of serious security breaches and
misconduct.
32. Also, on or about March 7, 2002, the FBI renewed Plaintiffs contract as a linguist
for an additional six month period.
33. On March 8, 2002, Plaintiff underwent a polygraph examination which
determined she was not being deceptive in denying having made any unauthorized
disclosures of classified information.
34. By March 15 2002, Plaintiff noted to SLS Feghali that "in the past few weeks
coincidental' to her reports of wrongdoing, she had received no new work
assignments and no offers of temporary duty assignments.
35. Despite the open status of the "investigation" of Plaintiff s allegations, by March
, 2002 an FBI draft Electronic Communication ("EC") stated that "some of. . .
(her) allegations. . . were not substantiated and that she had not been completely
forthcoming. . . and recommended that. . . (the FBI) immediately discontinue
using her as a linguist. . . .”
36. On March 21 , 2002, Ms. Dickerson similarly underwent a polygraph examination which determined that she was not being deceptive in denying having made any
unauthorized disclosures of classified information.
37. Despite the fact that FBI officials "later expressed disappointment with the
questions asked in the polygraphs, . . . as they were not responsive to the
allegations raised by . . . (Plaintiff), . . . the FBI never considered doing any
additional polygraphs and continued to rely on the (existing) polygraphs as
support for its position that. . . (Plaintiffs) allegations were unfounded." Indeed
the Polygraph Unit Chief (later) admitted that questions directly on point could
have been asked but were not."
38. On March 22, 2002, as she was about to leave FBI/WFO for the day, Plaintiff was
summoned to a meeting with SLS Stephanie Bryan, SSA Frields and SSA in
charge of WFO Personnel Security George Stukenbroeker. Plaintiff was first
instructed to wait in the office ofSLS Bryan. As Plaintiff waited, SLS Feghali
stopped by the open office door, faced Plaintiff, tapped on his watch and stated
(i)n less than an hour you will be fired, you whore." He then smiled and returned
to his office next door. This incident was witnessed by, Liz, a secretary and SLS
Janice (LNU). Minutes later Plaintiff was summoned into the office of S
Frields. Also present were SSA Stukenbroeker and SLS Bryan, where she was
advised that her employment with the FBI was being summarily terminated and
was ordered to surrender her security badge. Plaintiff requested a written
explanation for her termination. In response, SSA Stukenbroeker threw a security
form in front of her and stated, "(y)ou want something written, here it is. That
form has all the reasons why you have been fired. You have violated every single
item in that form." Plaintiff reminded those present that her reports of misconduct
were still pending before DOJ/OIG and FBI/OPR. SSA Frields replied, "(w)e
have already called them. OIG and OPR are not willing to take your case and have
told us that there will not be any investigation." SSA Stukenbroeker added
(t)hey won t process your case." Plaintiff requested to return to her work station
to retrieve her personal belongings, including a personal calendar, notes and
family photographs, but her request was denied. As Plaintiff was escorted from
the building, she was told that she would never set foot in the FBI again. Plaintiff
told SSA Frields, "(y)ou are only making your wrongdoing worse, and my case
stronger. I will see you very soon." SSA Frields replied, "(s)oon maybe, but it will
be in jail. I'll see you in jail."
39. Immediately after leaving FBI/WFO Plaintiff met with John Roberts, Unit Chief
ofFBI/OPR, who informed her that he had personally checked the results of her
polygraph examination, and that she had passed it with absolutely no deception
indicated.
40. By letter dated April 2, 2002, Defendants officially notified Plaintiff that her
contract was "terminated completely for the Government's convenience.
However, the subsequent DOJ/OIG investigation found that "the FBI has not
asserted that. . . (Plaintiffs) contract was terminated because it had no further
need for her services " and that "there has been no reduction in the need for
linguists to translate the language. . . (Plaintiff) translated.
41. On or about April 11 , 2002 a warrant from the Turkish security service was served
at the former residence of Plaintiff s sister demanding that she appear for
interrogation. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff alleges that the Turkish
security service learned about her FBI employment through clandestine
disclosures made by Ms. Dickerson, acting upon her earlier threats to do so.
42. In an internal memorandum finalized on May 2, 2002 the FBI recommended that
Plaintiff s security clearance be revoked because she had prepared a classified
memorandum on her home computer and was observed placing classified information into an envelope for delivery to FBI/OPR and DOJ/OIG. "without the
proper markings." The memorandum "failed to point out that the polygraph
results undercut the claim that she had discussed classified information outside the
FBI with unauthorized persons at a social setting.
43. By letter dated May 8 , 2002, Plaintiff, through prior counsel, notified (former)
Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller, III, that as a
direct result of the FBI's failure to address or correct the serious misconduct and
security breaches reported by Plaintiff, the safety and security of Plaintiff and
her family has been jeopardized, and that Turkey has targeted Plaintiff s sister to
be interrogated "and taken/arrested by force." This letter also provided them with
a copy of the arrest warrant served by the Turkish security service at the residence
of Plaintiff s sister in the foreign country together with a copy of the English
translation of the arrest warrant.
44. Also by letter dated May 8 2002, Senator Charles E. Grassley, Ranking Member
of the Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs, notified Director Mueller that Plaintiff
has come forward with a number of disturbing allegations about misconduct
incompetence, potential security violations and retaliatory threats." Senator
Grassley also provided Director Mueller with a copy of the arrest warrant served
at the residence of Plaintiff s sister in the foreign country and asked Director
Mueller to review the letter from Plaintiffs counsel to the DOJ/OIG expressing
concerns about the arrest warrant. Senator Grassley also asked Director Mueller to
emphasize to officials in the Washington Field Office that retaliation against
current or former FBI employees is not acceptable, especially when retaliation
endangers a person s family member.
45. Upon information and belief, during this period officials of the FBI negligently
disclosed the true identity of Plaintiff to the media.
46. On June 8, 2002, the Associated Press ("AP") published an article, which was
widely disseminated on its news wire, quoting "Government officials, who spoke
only on condition of anonymity," about Plaintiff and identifying her by name.
47. The June 8, 2002 AP article reported the FBI was investigating Plaintiffs
whistleblower "allegations of security lapses in the translator program that has
played an important role interpreting interviews and intercepts of Osama bin
Laden s network since September 11." Citing Government officials who only
spoke on condition of anonymity, the AP reported that "the FBI has been unable
to corroborate the whistleblower s allegations.
48. In addition, again citing to unnamed government officials, the AP reported on
June 8, 2002 that Plaintiff, "a contract employee in the FBI linguist program, was
fired last spring for performance issues. She subsequently was subjected to a
security review herself, the officials said.
49. The June 8, 2002 AP article also reported that "The FBI has focused its
investigation on whether either the accused or the whistle-blower compromised
national security, officials said.
50. Subsequently, SLS Feghali convened an urgent meeting of all translators in the
unit to which he brought a copy of the AP article, stating that the translators
should learn from Plaintiffs experience " and that "(t)his is what happens when
you betray the Bureau, . . . your name and reputation will be destroyed." SLS
Feghali also specifically instructed two of Plaintiffs former co-workers to cease
all further contact with Plaintiff "for their own good.
51. In the wake of these public disclosures, the FBI conducted an initial review of its
investigation of Plaintiff s allegations. An internal memorandum dated June 14
2002, "revealed substantial infirmities in the. .. investigation. Nevertheless
higher-level FBI security officials failed to initiate a more thorough investigation . . . (despite an) ample basis. . . for such a review.
52. On June 18 2002, the Washington Post published an article citing to unidentified
Government officials" who said "the FBI fired Plaintiff because her
disruptiveness hurt her on-the-job performance." In addition, the Washington Post
reported in its June 18th article that "FBI officials said that Plaintiff ' had been
found to have breached security.'"
53. On August 7, 2002 Plaintiff, through prior counsel, requested that the Air Force
Office ofInspector General ("AF/OIG") investigate the conduct of Major
Dickerson.
54. On September 10 2002 the AF/OIG responded to Plaintiffs request stating that
(t)he Air Force Office of Special Investigations. . . conducted a complete and
thorough review of Major Dickerson s relationship with the American-Turkish
Council. Their findings disclosed no evidence of any deviation from the scope of
his duties. “
55. On October 29 2002, the largest circulation national Turkish newspaper
Hurriyet published a front page story identifying Plaintiff by name and asserting
that she was fired from her position where she had been translating/monitoring
Turkish intercepts.
56. The following day, on October 30, 2002, the fourth largest news paper in Turkey,
Yeni Safak, published a story identifying Plaintiff by name and accusing of spying
on Turks for the United States government, thereby forgetting about her Turkish
roots and loyalties. This article also contained additional info on Plaintiff
including her maiden name, when she emigrated to the United States and the
location of her residence in the United States.
57. On July 15 2003. the largest Internet based Turkish newspaper Haber Vitrini
reported that Plaintiff had accused Turkish officials of spying against the FBI.
58. On July 16, 2003 , ABC affiliate Channel 7 News, broadcast a similar report
emphasizing Plaintiff s claim that Turkish Intelligence-officials were spying
against the FBI.
59. Also on July 16, 2003 , the newspaper Star Gazette published an article asserting
that Plaintiff was accusing Turkish government officials in Washington, DC of espionage activities.
60. Also on July 16 2003 , the newspaper Turkish Daily News also sold in the United
States, published an article proclaiming, "Turkish Intelligence infiltrates Pentagon
according to. . . (Plaintiff).
61. On April 2, 2004, the largest circulation national Turkish newspaper Hurriyet
again published a story identifying Plaintiff by name and asserting that she
was hired by the CIA on September 13 , 2002, that she worked to spy on Turks and
Turkish officials, and reported her testimony to the 9/11 Commission. A similar
article appeared in the Independent a large circulation newspaper in the United
Kingdom.
62. Also on April 2, 2004, the second largest Turkish newspaper Milliyet published
and article identifying Plaintiff by name and associating her with alleged FBI
foreknowledge of the September 11th attack.
63. On July30, 2004, the international newspaper Sabah published an article asserting
that an internal memorandum by FBI Director Mueller confirmed that a DOJ/OIG
report substantiated most of Plaintiffs above-allegations as true, including those
alleging espionage in the FBI linguist program.
64. Throughout the period May, 2002 to the present, Plaintiffs friends and family
members still residing in Turkey have confirmed to her that she has been the
subject of numerous television and radio talk shows characterizing her as "'The
enemy of the State (Turkey), that she "'Forgot her roots, sold out her country and people " that she "spied on Turkey," and "betrayed her country.”
65. As the direct proximate result of the public disclosure of her true name by the FBI
Plaintiff has been subjected to the above adverse publicity and is deemed to have
committed treason by the Government of Turkey. Also, throughout the period
May, 2002 to the present, Plaintiffs friends and family members have implored
Plaintiff never to return to Turkey for their safety as well as her own. Therefore
Plaintiff has been unable to visit Turkey since February, 2002 and is unlikely ever
to be able to do so again for the remainder of her natural life.
66. Despite Plaintiffs allegations, the FBI never conducted any investigation of Ms.
Dickerson nor removed her from her position at FBI/WFO. She voluntarily left
her position some six months after Plaintiff s allegations and has since fled the
United States.
67. Contrary to its regulations and procedures, the FBI never conducted a proper 10-
year single-scope background investigation of Ms. Dickerson prior to granting her
a TOP SECRET security clearance, which allowed an unqualified individual
access to highly classified information as well as the identity of Plaintiff, which
she subsequently compromised to the Turkish security service.
68. As a direct and proximately result of the above events, Plaintiff has been damaged
as follows:

a) Plaintiff lives in constant fear for her own safety and for that of her family members;
b) Plaintiff has become completely estranged from her family, the members
of which either resent her for the peril in which her activities have placed
them or eschew any contact with her for fear that they may be placed in
greater peril;
c) Plaintiff may never again return to her native homeland to visit friends or
emotionally significant locations;
d) Plaintiff was forced to forfeit her 50% interest, valued at approximately
$500 000. , in her late father s medical clinic in Turkey when she was
unable to travel there to execute documents and consummate the
inheritance;
e) Plaintiff s vacant investment property in Istanbul has substantially
diminished in value because Plaintiff was unable to visit Turkey and sell it
at peak value in 2003 and continues to produce monthly upkeep expenses;
f) Plaintiff s vacant summer home in Bodrum, Turkey, which she is unable
to visit, is deteriorating and produces monthly upkeep expenses;
g) Plaintiff and her husband expended approximately $120 000.00 in time
and expenses to develop a textile import business in partnership with her
uncle in Turkey, which has now been totally abandoned;
h) Plaintiff has abandoned her real estate investment business with her
mother in Turkey and incurred significant damages in lost economic
opportunity;
i) Plaintiff has lost personal items and irreplaceable photographs of her late
father that she was forced to abandon at her FBI/WFO workstation when
she was summarily escorted from the premises;
j) Plaintiff incurred $800.00 in costs for a airline ticket she purchased for her
sister to enable her to flee Turkey;
k) Plaintiff has been forced to support her two sisters living in virtual exile in
the United States for more than two years at a cost of $60 000.00;
l) Plaintiff has incurred legal fees resulting from the wrongful conduct of the
FBI in the amount of $80 000.00; and
m) Plaintiff has suffered lost income in the amount of $240 000.00 and may never be able to obtain employment again because of the public antipathy
towards her by the FBI.

69. As a result of the above events, the DOJ/OIG conducted an extensive
investigation of Plaintiff s allegations and the related conduct of the FBI. The
declassified summary of that investigation, released in January, 2005 contained
the following conclusions:

We found that many of . . . (Plaintiff s) core
allegations relating to the co-worker were supported
by either documentary evidence or witnesses other
than. . . (Plaintiff).
* * *
In part, we attributed the FBI's failure to investigate
further to its unwarranted reliance on the
assumption that proper procedures had been
followed by the FBI during the co-worker s hiring
and background investigation, which did not include
a risk assessment, contrary to FBI practice. We also
found that. . . (Plaintiff) was justified in raising
number of these concerns to her supervisors. For
example, with respect to an allegation that focused
on the co-worker s performance, which. . .
(Plaintiff) believed to be an indication of a security
problem, the evidence clearly corroborated. . .
(Plaintiff s) allegations.
In sum, . . . we believe that the FBI significantly
mishandled this matter.
* * *

70. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff alleges that twelve other credible cases of
possible espionage in the FBIIWFO/LAAU have been reported but not
investigated due to fear of embarrassment as the individuals involved had already
been granted a TOP SECRET security clearance by the FBI.


COUNT I
FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT

Plaintiff realleges each and every allegation contained in paragraphs numbered 1 through 70, above, as if fully set forth herein.

71. If Defendant were a private person, it would be liable to Plaintiff in accordance
with the law of the District of Columbia.

72. Plaintiff is free from any acts of negligence contributing to the proximate cause of
her complained of damages.

73. Defendant's complained of acts and omissions constitute a negligent investigation of Plaintiff s allegations in violation of its established procedures and requirements.

74. Defendant's complained of acts and omissions constitute a negligent investigation of the suitability of Ms. Dickerson to hold a TOP SECRET security clearance and be privy to the true identity of Plaintiff.

75. Defendant's complained of acts and omissions constitute a negligent public
disclosure of Plaintiff s true identity as a key witness in an espionage
investigation.

76. Defendant's complained of acts and omissions constitute a negligent endangerment of Plaintiff s safety and life.

77. Defendant's complained of acts and omissions constitute a negligent conversion
of Plaintiffs personal property.

78. Defendant's complained of acts and omissions constitute a negligent false light
invasion of Plaintiffs privacy.

79. Defendant's complained of acts and omissions constitute a negligent infliction of
emotional distress upon Plaintiff.

80. Defendant's complained of acts and omissions constitute a negligent interference
with Plaintiffs prospective economic opportunity.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays this Honorable Court award her damages in the amount of Ten-Million ($10 000 000.00) Dollars, together with whatever further, different or additional relief as it should deem just and proper.

Respectfully submitted
Roy W. Krieger
C. Bar #375754
Mark S. Zaid
C. Bar #440532
KRIEGER & ZAID, P.L.L.C.
1747 Pennsylvania Ave. , N.
Suite 300
Washington, D.C. 20006
202/223-9050

Counsel for Plaintiff



1 Text in quotations, unless otherwise attributed, is excerpted from the unclassified
summary of the Department of Justice, Office of Inspector General ("DOJ/OIG") report of its investigation into Plaintiff s allegations and the conduct of the FBI, entitled A Review of the FBI's Actions in Connection With Allegations Raised By Contract Linguist Sibel Edmonds released in January, 2005.






Hersh New Yorker piece with important clues:

WHAT WENT WRONG

by SEYMOUR M. HERSH

The C.I.A. and the failure of American intelligence.

Issue of 2001-10-08
Posted 2001-10-01

After more than two weeks of around-the-clock investigation into the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the American intelligence community remains confused, divided, and unsure about how the terrorists operated, how many there were, and what they might do next. It was that lack of solid information, government officials told me, that was the key factor behind the Bush Administration's decision last week not to issue a promised white paper listing the evidence linking Osama bin Laden's organization to the attacks.

There is consensus within the government on two issues: the terrorist attacks were brilliantly planned and executed, and the intelligence community was in no way prepared to stop them. One bureaucratic victim, the officials said, may be George Tenet, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, whose resignation is considered a necessity by many in the Administration. "The system is after Tenet," one senior officer told me. "It wants to get rid of him."

The investigators are now split into at least two factions. One, centered in the F.B.I., believes that the terrorists may not have been "a cohesive group," as one involved official put it, before they started training and working together on this operation. "These guys look like a pickup basketball team," he said. "A bunch of guys who got together." The F.B.I. is still trying to sort out the identities and backgrounds of the hijackers. The fact is, the official acknowledged, "we don't know much about them."

These investigators suspect that the suicide teams were simply lucky. "In your wildest dreams, do you think they thought they'd be able to pull off four hijackings?" the official asked. "Just taking out one jet and getting it into the ground would have been a success. These are not supermen." He explained that the most important advantage the hijackers had, aside from the element of surprise, was history: in the past, most hijackings had ended up safely on the ground at a Third World airport, so pilots had been trained to coöperate.

Another view, centered in the Pentagon and the C.I.A., credits the hijackers with years of advance planning and practice, and a deliberate after-the-fact disinformation campaign. "These guys were below everybody's radar—they're professionals," an official said. "There's no more than five or six in a cell. Three men will know the plan; three won't know. They've been 'sleeping' out there for years and years." One military planner told me that many of his colleagues believe that the terrorists "went to ground and pulled phone lines" well before September 11th—that is, concealed traces of their activities. It is widely believed that the terrorists had a support team, and the fact that the F.B.I. has been unable to track down fellow-conspirators who were left behind in the United States is seen as further evidence of careful planning. "Look," one person familiar with the investigation said. "If it were as simple and straightforward as a lucky one-off oddball operation, then the seeds of confusion would not have been sown as they were."

Many of the investigators believe that some of the initial clues that were uncovered about the terrorists' identities and preparations, such as flight manuals, were meant to be found. A former high-level intelligence official told me, "Whatever trail was left was left deliberately—for the F.B.I. to chase."

In interviews over the past two weeks, a number of intelligence officials have raised questions about Osama bin Laden's capabilities. "This guy sits in a cave in Afghanistan and he's running this operation?" one C.I.A. official asked. "It's so huge. He couldn't have done it alone." A senior military officer told me that because of the visas and other documentation needed to infiltrate team members into the United States a major foreign intelligence service might also have been involved. "To get somebody to fly an airplane—to kill himself," the official added, further suggests that "somebody paid his family a hell of a lot of money."

"These people are not necessarily all from bin Laden," a Justice Department official told me. "We're still running a lot of stuff out," he said, adding that the F.B.I. has been inundated with leads. On September 23rd, Secretary of State Colin Powell told a television interviewer that "we will put before the world, the American people, a persuasive case" showing that bin Laden was responsible for the attacks. But the widely anticipated white paper could not be published, the Justice Department official said, for lack of hard facts. "There was not enough to make a sale."

The Administration justified the delay by telling the press that most of the information was classified and could not yet be released. Last week, however, a senior C.I.A. official confirmed that the intelligence community had not yet developed a significant amount of solid information about the terrorists' operations, financing, and planning. "One day, we'll know, but at the moment we don't know," the official said.

"To me," he added, "the scariest thing is that these guys"—the terrorists—"got the first one free. They knew that the standard operating procedure in an aircraft hijacking was to play for time. And they knew for sure that after this the security on airplanes was going to go way up. So whatever they've planned for the next round they had in place already."

The concern about a second attack was repeated by others involved in the investigation. Some in the F.B.I. now suspect that the terrorists are following a war plan devised by the convicted conspirator Ramzi Ahmed Yousef, who is believed to have been the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Yousef was involved in plans that called for, among other things, the releasing of poisons in the air and the bombing of the tunnels between New York City and New Jersey. The government's concern about the potential threat from hazardous-waste haulers was heightened by the Yousef case.

"Do they go chem/bio in one, two, or three years?" one senior general asked rhetorically. "We must now make a difficult transition from reliance on law enforcement to the preëmptive. That part is hard. Can we recruit enough good people?" In recent years, he said, "we've been hiring kids out of college who are computer geeks." He continued, "This is about going back to deep, hard dirty work, with tough people going down dark alleys with good instincts."

Today's C.I.A. is not up to the job. Since the breakup of the Soviet Union, in 1991, the C.I.A. has become increasingly bureaucratic and unwilling to take risks, and has promoted officers who shared such values. ("The consciousness of kind," one former officer says.) It has steadily reduced its reliance on overseas human intelligence and cut the number of case officers abroad—members of the clandestine service, now known formally as the Directorate of Operations, or D.O., whose mission is to recruit spies. (It used to be called the "dirty tricks" department.) Instead, the agency has relied on liaison relationships—reports from friendly intelligence services and police departments around the world—and on technical collection systems.

It won't be easy to put agents back in the field. During the Cold War, the agency's most important mission was to recruit spies from within the Soviet Union's military and its diplomatic corps. C.I.A. agents were assigned as diplomatic or cultural officers at American embassies in major cities, and much of their work could be done at diplomatic functions and other social events. For an agent with such cover, the consequence of being exposed was usually nothing more than expulsion from the host country and temporary reassignment to a desk in Washington. Today, in Afghanistan, or anywhere in the Middle East or South Asia, a C.I.A. operative would have to speak the local language and be able to blend in. The operative should seemingly have nothing to do with any Americans, or with the American embassy, if there is one. The status is known inside the agency as "nonofficial cover," or NOC. Exposure could mean death.

It's possible that there isn't a single such officer operating today inside Islamic-fundamentalist circles. In an essay published last summer in The Atlantic Monthly, Reuel Marc Gerecht, who served for nearly a decade as a case officer in the C.I.A.'s Near East Division, quoted one C.I.A. man as saying, "For Christ's sake, most case officers live in the suburbs of Virginia. We don't do that kind of thing." Another officer told Gerecht, "Operations that include diarrhea as a way of life don't happen."

At the same time, the D.O. has been badly hurt by a series of resignations and retirements among high-level people, including four men whose names are little known to the public but who were widely respected throughout the agency: Douglas Smith, who spent thirty-one years in the clandestine service; William Lofgren, who at his retirement, in 1996, was chief of the Central Eurasia Division; David Manners, who was chief of station in Amman, Jordan, when he left the agency, in 1998; and Robert Baer, an Arabic speaker who was considered perhaps the best on-the-ground field officer in the Middle East. All left with feelings of bitterness over the agency's procedures for running clandestine operations.

"We'll never solve the terrorism issue until we reconstitute the D.O.," a former senior clandestine officer told me. "The first line of defense, and the most crucial line of defense, is human intelligence." Baer, who was awarded a Career Intelligence Medal after his resignation, in late 1997, said, "You wouldn't believe how bad it is. What saved the White House on Flight 93"—the plane that crashed in Pennsylvania—"was a bunch of rugby players. Is that what you're paying thirty billion dollars for?" He was referring to the federal budget for intelligence. He and his colleagues aren't surprised that the F.B.I. had no warning of the attack. "The bureau is wonderful in solving crimes after they're committed," one C.I.A. man said. "But it's not good at penetration. We've got to do it."

Today, the C.I.A. doesn't have enough qualified case officers to man its many stations and bases around the world. Two retired agents have been brought back on a rotating basis to take temporary charge of the small base in Karachi, Pakistan, a focal point for terrorist activity. (Karachi was the site of the murder, in 1995, of two Americans, one of them a C.I.A. employee, allegedly in retaliation for the arrest in Pakistan of Ramzi Ahmed Yousef.) A retired agent also runs the larger C.I.A. station in Dacca, Bangladesh, a Muslim nation that could be a source of recruits. Other retirees run C.I.A. stations in Africa.

One hard question is what lengths the C.I.A. should go to. In an interview, two former operations officers cited the tactics used in the late nineteen-eighties by the Jordanian security service, in its successful effort to bring down Abu Nidal, the Palestinian who led what was at the time "the most dangerous terrorist organization in existence," according to the State Department. Abu Nidal's group was best known for its role in two bloody gun and grenade attacks on check-in desks for El Al, the Israeli airline, at the Rome and Vienna airports in December, 1985. At his peak, Abu Nidal threatened the life of King Hussein of Jordan—whom he called "the pygmy king"—and the King responded, according to the former intelligence officers, by telling his state security service, "Go get them."

The Jordanians did not move directly against suspected Abu Nidal followers but seized close family members instead—mothers and brothers. The Abu Nidal suspect would be approached, given a telephone, and told to call his mother, who would say, according to one C.I.A. man, "Son, they'll take care of me if you don't do what they ask." (To his knowledge, the official carefully added, all the suspects agreed to talk before any family members were actually harmed.) By the early nineteen-nineties, the group was crippled by internal dissent and was no longer a significant terrorist organization. (Abu Nidal, now in his sixties and in poor health, is believed to be living quietly in Egypt.) "Jordan is the one nation that totally succeeded in penetrating a group," the official added. "You have to get their families under control."

Such tactics defy the American rule of law, of course, and the C.I.A.'s procedures, but, when it comes to Osama bin Laden and his accomplices, the official insisted, there is no alternative. "We need to do this—knock them down one by one," he said. "Are we serious about getting rid of the problem—instead of sitting around making diversity quilts?"

A few days after the attacks, Vice-President Dick Cheney defended the C.I.A.'s director, George Tenet, on television, saying that it would be a "tragedy" to look for "scapegoats." President Bush subsequently added a note of support with a visit to C.I.A. headquarters. In an interview last week, one top C.I.A. official also defended Tenet. "We know there's a lot of Monday-morning quarterbacking going on, but people don't understand the conditions that George inherited," he told me. "You can't penetrate a six-man cell when they're brothers and cousins—no matter how much Urdu you know." The official acknowledged that there was much dissatisfaction with the C.I.A.'s performance, but he said, "George has not gotten any word other than that the President has full confidence in him." He went on, "George wouldn't resign in a situation like this."

I was informed by other officials, however, that Tenet's days are numbered. "They've told him he's on his way out," one official said. "He's trying to figure it out—whether to go gracefully or let it appear as if he's going to be fired." A White House adviser explained Cheney's public endorsement of Tenet by saying, "In Washington, your friends always stab you in the chest. Somebody has to take the blame for this." It was his understanding, he added, that "after a decent interval—whenever they get some traction on the problem—he will depart. I've heard three to six months." Even one of Tenet's close friends told me, "He's history."

Tenet's standing was further undermined, after September 11th, by what proved to have been a series of wildly optimistic claims about the effectiveness of the C.I.A.'s Counter Terrorism Center, which was set up in 1986 after a wave of international bombings, airplane hijackings, and kidnappings. The idea was to bring together experts from every American police agency, including the Secret Service, into a "fusion center," which would coördinate intelligence data on terrorism. In October, 1998, after four men linked to bin Laden were indicted for their role in the bombings at the American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, reporters for Newsweek were given a tour of the center. The indictments, Newsweek reported, "were intended as a clear message to bin Laden and his fugitive followers: the United States knows who they are and where to find them. . . . The story of how the C.I.A. and F.B.I., once bitter bureaucratic rivals, collaborated to roll up bin Laden's elusive network is a tale of state-of-the-art sleuthing—and just plain luck."

But in fact the C.T.C. was not authorized to recruit or handle agents overseas—that task was left to the D.O. and its stations in the Middle East, which had their own priorities. The C.T.C. was bolstered with more money and more manpower after the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, but it remained a paper-shuffling unit whose officers were not required to be proficient in foreign languages. Many of the C.I.A.'s old hands have told me that the C.T.C., despite its high profile, was not an assignment of choice for a young and ambitious D.O. officer. The C.T.C. and two of the other major intelligence centers—dealing with narcotics and nuclear-nonproliferation issues—are so consumed by internecine warfare that the professional analysts find it difficult to do their jobs. "They're all fighting among each other," said one senior manager who took early retirement and whose last assignment was as the director of one of the centers. "There's no concentration on issues."

In 1986, Robert Baer, freshly arrived as a case officer from Khartoum, was drafted into the Counter Terrorism Center, a few months after it was set up, by its director, Duane (Dewey) Clarridge. A draft of a memoir Baer wrote, which will be published by Crown this fall, depicts what happened next:

The first few months was about as exhilarating as it can get in the spy business. Dewey had authority to pretty much do anything he wanted against the terrorists. He had all the money he wanted. . . . It wasn't long, though, before the politics of intelligence undermined everything Dewey tried to do. . . . It was too risky. A botched—or even a successful—operation would piss off a friendly foreign government. Someone would be thrown out of his cushy post. Someone could even get killed. . . .

You'd ask [the C.I.A. station in] Bonn to recruit a few Arabs and Iranians to track the Middle East émigré community in West Germany, and it would respond that it didn't have enough officers. You'd ask Beirut to meet a certain agent traveling to Lebanon, and it would refuse because of some security problem. It was nothing but bureaucratic foot-dragging, but it effectively hamstrung anything Dewey tried to do. After six months, Dewey could put his hands on only two Arabic speakers—another officer and me.

Many people in the intelligence community, in their conversations with me, complained bitterly about how difficult it was to work with the Directorate of Operations, even during a crisis. "In order to work on a problem with D.O.," a former senior scientist told me, "you have to be in D.O." Similarly, a congressional observer of the C.I.A. came to understand the bureaucratic power of the D.O. "To succeed as director of Central Intelligence," he said, "you have to ingratiate yourself with the D.O." Other intelligence sources have told me that the D.O.'s machinations led, at one point, to a feud with the National Security Agency over who would control the Special Collection Service, a joint undertaking of the two agencies that deploys teams of electronics specialists around the world to monitor diplomatic and other communications in moments of crisis. The S.C.S.'s highly secret operations, which produced some of the Cold War's most valuable data, are usually run from secure sites inside American embassies.

Competence and sophistication were hindered by an absurd amount of bickering. A military man who in 1998 was involved in a Middle East signals-intelligence operation told me that he was not able to discuss the activity with representatives of the C.I.A. and the N.S.A. at the same time. "I used to meet with one in a safe house in Virginia, break for lunch, and then meet with the other," the officer said. "They wouldn't be in the same room."

If the current crisis does lead to an overhaul of the agency, the Senate and House intelligence committees are not likely to be of much help. Lofgren, Smith, Manners, and Baer, among others, repeatedly met with legislators and their staffs and testified before Congress in an effort to bring about changes. But nothing was done.

Not surprisingly, Republicans and Democrats have differing explanations for what went wrong. One Republican staff member said that Senator Richard C. Shelby, of Alabama, who was the committee's chairman until early this year, understood that the problem was at the top of the agency. "We do have guys in the field with great ideas who are not supported by the establishment," the staff member said. But none of the senior Democrats, he said, wanted to embarrass the director, George Tenet, by holding an inquiry or hearings into the various complaints. (Tenet had spent years working for the Democrats on the committee staff, and had served as a member of Bill Clinton's National Security Council staff before joining the C.I.A.'s management team.)

One Democrat, however, blamed the process within the Senate committee, which, he said, neglected terrorism in favor of more politically charged issues. "Tenet's been briefing about bin Laden for years, but we weren't organized to consider what are threats to the United States. We're chasing whatever the hell is in the news at the moment."

Former Senator Bob Kerrey, of Nebraska, who served for four years as the Intelligence Committee's ranking Democrat and is now the president of the New School, in New York, is one of Tenet's defenders. But Kerrey also acknowledges that he no longer knows "how well we did our job" of legislative oversight. "Nobody with any responsibility can walk away from this. We missed something here."

Kerrey remains angry about the U.S. policy toward Afghanistan in the years after its defeat of the Soviet Union. "The Cold War was over, and we shut down Afghanistan"—that is, ceased all intelligence operations. "From Bush to Clinton, what happened is one of the most embarrassing American foreign-policy decisions, as bad as Vietnam," Kerrey said. He cited a botched 1996 C.I.A. plot to overthrow President Saddam Hussein of Iraq: "We also had a half-baked Iraqi operation and sent a signal that we're not serious."

Last June, Shelby, after a tour of the Persian Gulf and a series of intelligence briefings, told a Washington Post reporter that bin Laden was "on the run, and I think he will continue to be on the run, because we are not going to let up." He went on, "I don't think you could say he's got us hunkered down. I believe he's more hunkered down." After the bombing, however, Shelby was among the first to suggest publicly that it was time for Tenet to go. "I think he's a good man, and he's done some good things, but there have been a lot of failures on his watch," Shelby told USA Today. Tenet, he said, lacked "the stature to control all the agencies. In a sense, he is in charge, but in reality he's not."

One friend and former colleague of Tenet's says that his refusal to urge the Senate leadership to deal with the hard issues was symptomatic of his problems as C.I.A. director. "He's a politician, too," that person said of Tenet. "That's why he shouldn't have been there, because he had no status to tell the senators, 'You don't know what you're talking about.' "

In his memoir, Robert Baer describes the "fatal malaise" that came over the Paris station of the C.I.A. in the early nineties: "Case officers weren't recruiting new agents. The agents already on the books were old. They'd lost their access. And no one seemed to care." Many in the agency were shocked in early 1992 when Milton Bearden, the head of the Soviet-East European division—he had also played a major role in the C.I.A.'s support for the Afghan rebels in their brutal war against the Soviet Union—informed his overseas stations that Russia would now be treated like any other friendly nation, such as Germany or France. The C.I.A. was no longer in the business of recruiting agents to spy against the Russians. In addition, C.I.A. surveillance apartments were closed and wiretaps turned off throughout the Middle East and Europe. "We'll never know the losses we had in terms of not capitalizing on the Soviet collapse," a retired official said. Former high-level Soviet officials with intelligence information or other data were rebuffed. "Walk-ins were turned away. It was stunning, and, as far as I knew, nobody fought it."

Little changed when Bill Clinton took office, in 1993. Baer, now assigned, at his request, to the tiny C.I.A. outpost in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, near the Afghanistan border, watched helplessly as Saudi-backed Islamic fundamentalists—the precursors of the Taliban—consolidated training bases and began to recruit supporters and run operations inside the frontier nations of the former Soviet Union.

In 1995, the agency was widely criticized after the news came out that a paid informant in Guatemala had been involved in the murders of an American innkeeper and the Guatemalan husband of an American lawyer. The informant had been kept on the C.I.A. payroll even though his activities were known to the Directorate of Operations. John Deutch, the C.I.A.'s third director in three years, responded to the abuses, and to the public outcry, by issuing a directive calling for prior approval from headquarters before any person with criminal or human-rights problems could be recruited. The approval, Deutch later explained, was to be based on a simple balancing test: "Is the potential gain in intelligence worth the cost that might be associated with doing business with a person who may be a murderer?"

The "scrub order," as it came to be known, was promulgated by Deutch and his colleagues with the best of intentions, and included provisions for case-by-case review. But in practice hundreds of "assets" were indiscriminately stricken from the C.I.A.'s payroll, with a devastating effect on anti-terrorist operations in the Middle East.

The scrub order led to the creation of a series of screening panels at C.I.A. headquarters. Before a new asset could be recruited, a C.I.A. case officer had to seek approval from a Senior Review Panel. "It was like a cardiologist in California deciding whether a surgeon in New York City could cut a chest open," a former officer recalled. Potential agents were being assessed by officials who had no firsthand experience in covert operations. ("Americans hate intelligence—just hate it," Robert Baer recalls thinking.) In the view of the operations officers, the most important weapons in the war against international terrorism were being evaluated by men and women who, as one of the retired officers put it, "wouldn't drive to a D.C. restaurant at night because they were afraid of the crime problem."

Other bureaucratic panels began "multiplying like rabbits, one after another," a former station chief said. Experienced officers who were adamant about continuing to recruit spies found that obtaining approval before making a pitch had become a matter of going from committee to committee. "In the old days, they'd say, 'Go get them,' " the retired officer said. Yet another review process, known as A.V.S.—the asset-validation system—was put in place. Another retired officer told me, "You'd have to write so much paper that guys would spend more time in the station writing reports than out on the street."

"It was mindless," a third officer said. "Look, we recruited assholes. I handled bad guys. But we don't recruit people from the Little Sisters of the Poor—they don't know anything." He went on, "What we've done to ourselves is criminal. There are a half-dozen good guys out there trying to keep it together."

"It did make the workday a lot easier," Robert Baer said of the edict. "I just watched CNN. No one cared." The C.I.A.'s vital South Group, made up of eight stations in central Asia—all threatened by fundamentalist organizations, especially in Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, with links to the Taliban and bin Laden—had no agents by the mid-nineteen-nineties, Baer said. "The agency was going away.

"Unlike many senior officials at C.I.A. headquarters, Baer had lived undercover, in the nineteen-eighties, in Beirut and elsewhere in the Middle East, and he well understood the ability of terrorist organizations to cover their tracks. He told me that when the C.I.A. started to go after the Islamic Jihad, a radical Lebanese group linked to a series of kidnappings in the Reagan years, "its people systematically went through documents all over Beirut, even destroying student records. They had the airport wired and could pick the Americans out. They knew whom they wanted to kidnap before he landed." The terrorists coped with the American ability to intercept conversations worldwide by constantly changing codes—often doing little more than changing the meanings of commonly used phrases. "There's a professional cadre out there," Baer said. Referring to the terrorists who struck on September 11th, he said, "These people are so damned good."

"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5821
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 9/11 Info Dump

Postby Elvis » Sun Sep 17, 2017 12:25 am

[p.15 of dump]


[Readiness/stand-down]


The Failure to Defend the Skies on 9/11
by Paul Thompson

On May 22 and 23, 2003, the 9/11 Independent Commission held its second set of public hearings, focusing on the issue of air defense. It's not surprising if you haven't heard about this, because the hearings were poorly covered by the media, with major papers such as the New York Times and Los Angeles Times failing to write any articles on them.

That's unfortunate, because the hearings were important, and the issue of air defense is critically so. Could at least some of the 9/11 attacks have been stopped if the US air defense system had reacted faster? We need to know the answers and identify possible failures if we are to prevent future attacks from succeeding.

The heads of the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration), the Transportation Department, NORAD (the North American Aerospace Defense Command, in charge of defending America's airspace), and others testified before this commission hearing. Unfortunately, many of their statements consisted of evasions, lies, and spin. Their statements will be examined more closely below. But before that, it is important to ask, what intelligence warnings could have led to an improved defensive posture by 9/11, and what actions were taken to improve the nation's defense against terrorism before 9/11?


No Warnings at All?

In his May 2003 testimony, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta stated to the Independent Commission, "I don't think we ever thought of an aircraft being used as a missile. We had no information of that nature at all." [Norman Mineta Testimony, 5/23/03] FAA Administrator Jane Garvey said, "I was not aware of any information about (planes) being used as weapons that was credible." [UPI, 5/22/03 (B)] Mineta and Garvey were merely repeating the same claims many Bush administration officials have made since 9/11. For instance, National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice stated in May 2002, "All this reporting about hijacking was about traditional hijacking." [Washington Post 9/18/02] Even President Bush stated, "Never did anybody's thought process about how to protect America did we ever think that the evil-doers would fly not one, but four commercial aircraft into precious US targets - never." [NATO, 9/16/01]


Attacks Using Planes as Weapons

Careful examination of the published record clearly shows these claims there were no warnings are simply not true. Historically there have been many attacks using planes as weapons, an obvious example being the kamikaze strikes by Japanese pilots on Allied ships in World War II. More recently, in 1994, there were three separate attempts to hijack airplanes and fly them into buildings. A disgruntled Federal Express worker tried to crash a DC-10 into a company building in Memphis but was overpowered by the crew. A lone pilot crashed a small plane onto the White House grounds, just missing the president's bedroom. An Air France flight was hijacked by a terrorist group linked to al-Qaeda, with the aim of flying it into the Eiffel Tower; however, French Special Forces stormed the plane while it was refueling. [New York Times, 10/3/01]

In January 1995, acclaimed 9/11 "mastermind" Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and others were within weeks of implementing a massive plot named Operation Bojinka when they were foiled by authorities in the Philippines. This plot involved the simultaneous bombing of up to a dozen passenger airliners flying over the Pacific Ocean. But in some variations of this plan, planes were to be hijacked and flown into "key structures" in the United States. According to a US intelligence analysis shortly after the plot was uncovered, "The World Trade Center, the White House, the Pentagon, the Transamerican Tower, and the Sears Tower were among the prominent structures that had been identified in the plans that we had decoded." [Village Voice, 9/26/01] One pilot, Abdul Hakim Murad (who incidentally learned to fly in US flight schools), confessed that his role was to crash a plane into CIA headquarters. [Washington Post, 9/23/01] Details of Operation Bojinka were widely known within the US government. Yet Khalid Shaikh Mohammed escaped capture and later stated that the 9/11 attacks were essentially a refinement and resurrection of Bojinka. [Australian, 9/9/02] Even the fact that Mohammed would have led a resurrection of Bojinka should have been no surprise, because in 1997 the intelligence agency of Qatar, where Mohammed had been hiding, told the US that Mohammed was once again planning "to hijack some planes." [UPI, 9/30/02] In June 2001, US intelligence additionally learned that Mohammed was interested in "sending terrorists to the United States" and planning to assist their activities there. [Los Angeles Times, 12/12/02]


Bojinka was only the most spectacular of many failed plans to use planes as flying bombs. In January 1996, US intelligence received information concerning a planned suicide attack by individuals connected with al-Qaeda. They wanted to fly from Afghanistan to the US and crash into the White House. In October 1996, an Iranian plot to hijack a Japanese plane over Israel and crash it into Tel Aviv was exposed. [Senate Intelligence Committee, 9/18/02] On November 24, 1996, several Ethiopians took over a passenger airliner, and let it run out of fuel. Hijackers fought with the pilot as the hijackers tried to steer the plane into a resort on a Comoros Islands beach, but seconds before reaching the resort the pilot was able to crash the plane into shallow waters instead, 500 yards short of the resort. 123 of the 175 passengers and crew died. [New York Times, 11/25/96, Australian, 11/26/96, Houston Chronicle, 11/26/96] In August 1998, a CIA intelligence report asserted that Arab terrorists were planning to fly a bomb-laden aircraft from a foreign country into the World Trade Center. Later, other intelligence information connected this group to al-Qaeda. [New York Times, 9/18/02, Senate Intelligence Committee, 9/18/02] One month later, information given to US intelligence suggested that al-Qaeda's next operation might involve crashing an aircraft loaded with explosives into a US airport. [Senate Intelligence Committee, 9/18/02, Washington Post, 9/19/02] Two months later, in November 1998, the US learned that a Turkish group, cooperating with al-Qaeda, planned to crash an airplane packed with explosives into a famous tomb during a government ceremony. They were arrested before they could carry out the plot. [Senate Intelligence Committee, 9/18/02]

In March 1999, US intelligence learned that a US citizen who was involved in al-Qaeda planned to fly an explosives-laden hang glider into the Egyptian Presidential Palace in Cairo. There were problems in testing the glider in Afghanistan, and he was eventually arrested before the plot was carried out. [Senate Intelligence Committee, 9/18/02] Later that year, an Egyptian pilot intentionally flew a passenger airliner into the ocean, killing everyone on board. [AP, 1/21/00, Atlantic Monthly, 11/01, Aviation Week and Space Technology, 3/25/02] In August 2001, US intelligence learned of a plot to either bomb the US embassy in Nairobi from an airplane or crash an airplane into it. Two people who were reportedly acting on instructions from bin Laden met in October 2000 to discuss this plot. [Senate Intelligence Committee, 9/18/02]

In July 2001, Bush attended the G-8 Summit in Genoa, Italy. The Egyptian government warned that al-Qaeda planned to assassinate Bush and other heads of state using "an airplane stuffed with explosives." [New York Times, 9/26/01] US intelligence also learned of this from Russia and other sources. [CNN, 3/02] The Italian government surrounded the summit with antiaircraft guns, kept fighters in the air, and closed off local airspace to all planes. [Los Angeles Times, 9/27/01] The reports were taken so seriously that Bush stayed overnight on an aircraft carrier offshore. [CNN, 7/18/01] The plot was reported in the media before the summit began, so, not surprisingly, the attack was called off. [Los Angeles Times, 9/27/01] Some media reports even mentioned that the plan was to attack Bush on the ground from al-Qaeda-controlled aircraft. [BBC, 7/18/01]


Foreign Government Warnings of Planes as Weapons

Numerous foreign governments warned the US that it was likely to be attacked by airplanes used as weapons. In 1999, the British warned that al-Qaeda had plans to use "commercial aircraft" in "unconventional ways, possibly as flying bombs." [Sunday Times, 6/9/02] In early August 2001, Britain gave a categorical warning that the US should expect multiple airline hijackings. This warning was passed on to Bush a short time later. [Sunday Herald, 5/19/02] In June 2001, Germany warned that Middle Eastern terrorists were planning to hijack commercial aircraft and use them as weapons to attack "American and Israeli symbols, which stand out." [Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, 9/11/01, Washington Post, 9/14/01, Fox News, 5/17/02] In August, Russian President Putin warned the US that suicide pilots were training for attacks on US targets. [Fox News, 5/17/02]

In late July 2001, "Egyptian intelligence [learned] ... from one of its operatives in Afghanistan that 20 al-Qaeda members had slipped into the US and four of them had received flight training on Cessnas. To the Egyptians, pilots of small planes didn't sound terribly alarming, but they passed on the message to the CIA anyway, fully expecting Washington to request information. The request never came." [CBS, 10/9/02] This closely matches the details of the actual 9/11 plot, with its four pilots who trained on Cessnas. Around the end of August, Egyptian intelligence followed up with a warning that al-Qaeda was in the advanced stages of executing a significant operation against an American target, probably within the US. [AP, 12/7/01, New York Times, 6/4/02] Jordan passed on the message that a major attack, code named the "Big Wedding," was planned inside the US and that aircraft would be used. [International Herald Tribune, 5/21/02, Christian Science Monitor, 5/23/02] "Big Wedding" was in fact al-Qaeda's secret code name for the 9/11 attacks. [Chicago Tribune, 9/5/02]

Israel went even further, warning in mid-August 2001 that between 50 to 200 al-Qaeda terrorists had slipped into the US and were planning an imminent, "major assault on the United States." They said it was likely to be on a "large scale target" (the CIA has denied this warning). [Telegraph, 9/16/01, Los Angeles Times, 9/20/01, Fox News, 5/17/02] On August 23, Israel even gave the CIA a list of 19 terrorists living in the US who were about to stage an attack. It's not known if these were the exact same 19 hijackers as in the 9/11 attack, but at least four of the names on the list were the same: Nawaf Alhazmi, Khalid Almihdhar, Marwan Alshehhi, and Mohamed Atta. [Die Zeit, 10/1/02, Der Spiegel, 10/1/02, BBC, 10/2/02, Haaretz, 10/3/02] Apparently Israeli agents had been monitoring the hijackers inside the US for months. For instance, beginning in December 2000, agents lived a few blocks from Marwan Alshehhi and Mohamed Atta, and observed them "around the clock." [Salon, 5/7/02, Der Spiegel, 10/1/02]


An al-Qaeda Attack Expected Within the US

Bush officials, when admitting that any warnings were known at all, have suggested that most intelligence information pointed toward overseas attacks only. FAA Director Jane Garvey repeated this in her May 2003 testimony, saying attention "was focused on threats overseas." [UPI, 5/22/03 (B)] But even this is not true - many of the foreign government warnings mentioned above pointed to attacks in the US, and there was much more evidence that the target was inside the US.

In the autumn of 1998, US intelligence heard of an al-Qaeda plot involving aircraft in the New York and Washington areas. [Senate Intelligence Committee, 9/18/02, New York Times, 9/18/02] Around this time bin Laden declared a worldwide fatwa, or religious call to arms, against US targets and American citizens anywhere in the world. By December, a US intelligence assessment stated, "Multiple reports indicate bin Laden is keenly interested in striking the US on its own soil." [Senate Intelligence Committee, 9/18/02, Washington Post, 9/19/02] Later in the month a Time magazine cover story, entitled "The Hunt for Osama," reported that intelligence sources had "evidence that bin Laden may be planning his boldest move yet - a strike on Washington or possibly New York City..." [Time, 12/21/98]

In July 1999, an agent of Pakistan's intelligence service, in the US to buy illegal weapons for al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan, pointed to the World Trade Center and stated, "Those towers are coming down." An FBI informant recorded him saying this and similar threats against that building on two other occasions. This information reached higher officials, including the office of Senator Bob Graham, who was chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. [WPBF Channel 25, 8/5/02, Cox News, 8/2/02, Palm Beach Post, 10/17/02]

In September, US intelligence learned of a planned al-Qaeda attack in the US, possibly against landmarks in California and New York City. [Senate Intelligence Committee, 9/18/02] Two months later, in December 1999, an al-Qaeda bomb attack on the Los Angeles International Airport was narrowly averted. Ahmed Ressam was arrested by an alert Washington state border guard who noticed his nervousness. [New York Times, 12/30/01] Documents found with Ressam led to co-conspirators in New York, Boston and Seattle. Enough people were arrested to prevent a series of attacks planned for December 31, 1999. National Security Council Chief of Counterterrorism Richard Clarke later said that as a result, "I think a lot of the FBI leadership for the first time realized that ... there probably were al-Qaeda people in the United States." [PBS Frontline, 10/3/02]

In April 2000, a man walked into the FBI office in Newark, New Jersey, and claimed he had received hijacking training at an al-Qaeda camp in Pakistan. He also stated that he was supposed to meet five or six other individuals in the US and participate in the hijacking of a 747. Pilots in the hijacking team would either fly the plane to Afghanistan or blow it up. The individual passed an FBI polygraph, but the FBI was unable to verify his story or identify his contacts in the US. [Senate Intelligence Committee, 9/18/02]
In late July 2001, Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil, foreign minister for the Taliban, tried to warn the US that al-Qaeda was planning a "huge attack" on targets inside America. The attack was imminent, and would kill thousands. His message was told to US officials, but it is unclear how far the warning was passed along. [Independent, 9/7/02, Reuters, 9/7/02] Then, according to a CIA official, "There was something specific in early August that said to us that [bin Laden] was determined in striking on US soil." [AP, 10/3/01] "Shortly before" 9/11, there was even an intercept of a conversation between Osama bin Laden and an associate talking about an incident to take place in the US on or around 9/11, and its implications. [Sunday Times, 10/7/01]

Experts Realized Planes Could Be Used as Weapons

Despite the Bush administration's frequent protests to the contrary, many experts had considered this type of attack. In 1993, an expert panel commissioned by the Pentagon suggested that an airplane could be used as a missile to bomb national landmarks. But the panel was not allowed to mention this in its published report. According to one of the authors, Pentagon officials said, "We don't want it released, because you can't handle a crisis before it becomes a crisis. And no one is going to believe you." [ABC News, 2/20/02] However, the next year one of the panel's experts wrote in Futurist magazine, "Targets such as the World Trade Center not only provide the requisite casualties but, because of their symbolic nature, provide more bang for the buck. In order to maximize their odds for success, terrorist groups will likely consider mounting multiple, simultaneous operations with the aim of overtaxing a government's ability to respond, as well as demonstrating their professionalism and reach." [Washington Post, 10/2/01] Later in 1994, Tom Clancy published a book in which terrorists try to destroy the US Capitol Building by crashing a radio controlled airplane into it. In a Time magazine cover story the next year, Senator Sam Nunn repeated Clancy's idea, and said it was "not far-fetched." [Time, 4/3/95]

It turns out that in every Olympic Games since 1972, security officials have specifically attempted to prevent any plane crashes into crowded stadiums. [Sydney Morning Herald, 9/20/01] For instance, in the 1996 Games held in Atlanta, Georgia, planes were banned from getting too close, helicopters and jets were deployed to intercept suspicious aircraft nearby, and so on. [Chicago Tribune, 11/18/01] At the 2000 Olympics in Sydney, Australia, six planes were kept in the sky at all times to intercept any aircraft. Officials considered al-Qaeda the number-one threat, and the idea of "a fully loaded, fueled airliner crashing into the opening ceremony" was one of their greatest fears. [Sydney Morning Herald, 9/20/01]

In September 1999, a report by a group advising the president and US intelligence on emerging threats contained these ideas: "Al-Qaeda's expected retaliation for the US cruise missile attack ... could take several forms of terrorist attack in the nation's capital. Al-Qaeda could detonate a Chechen-type building-buster bomb at a federal building. Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al-Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and Semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House. Whatever form an attack may take, bin Laden will most likely retaliate in a spectacular way." [AP, 4/18/02] The Bush administration later claimed to have never heard of this publicly released report until long after 9/11, even though the New York Times said it was "widely shared within the government." [CNN, 5/18/02, New York Times, 5/18/02]


War Games Prepare for 9/11

In truth, the US government seemed quite concerned the possibility of an attack using a plane as a weapon. For example, on October 24-26, 2000, Pentagon officials carried out a "detailed" emergency drill based upon the crashing of an airliner into the Pentagon. [MDW News Service, 11/3/00, Mirror, 5/24/02] Also, US Medicine magazine reported that in May 2001, "DoD [Department of Defense] medical personnel trained" to respond to "an ersatz guided missile in the form of a hijacked 757 airliner" crashing into the Pentagon. [US Medicine, 10/01] On June 1-2, 2001, NORAD sponsored a multi-agency planning exercise named Amalgam Virgo involving the hypothetical scenario of a cruise missile launched by "a rogue (government) or somebody" from a barge off the East Coast. Bin Laden was pictured on the cover of the proposal for the exercise. [American Forces Press Service, 6/4/02] Before 9/11, it was already planned that the next year's version of Amalgam Virgo would involve a simultaneous hijacking scenario. [NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03] Additionally, at some point before 9/11, NORAD conducted another drill, in which a hijacked plane slammed into a highly visible US target. Details of this drill are not known, except that it involved a plane hijacked from a foreign airport. [AP, 10/7/01]

Remarkably, on the morning of 9/11 itself, "[John] Fulton and his team at the CIA were running a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building. Little did they know that the scenario would come true in a dramatic way that day." [National Law Enforcement Security Institute, 8/02] Fulton's team was part of the National Reconnaissance Office, which "operates many of the nation's spy satellites. It draws its personnel from the military and the CIA." The simulation was to start at 9:00 a.m., four miles from where one of the real hijacked planes had just taken off. Apparently it was cancelled when real events took over. [AP, 8/21/02] Also on 9/11, NORAD was in the middle of another periodic war game, this one called Vigilant Guardian. Details are vague, except that the scenario tested "an imaginary crisis to North American Air Defense outposts nationwide" [Newhouse News, 1/25/02], and according to one NORAD employee, "everybody" at NORAD initially thought the real hijackings were part of the exercise. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02, Newhouse News, 1/25/02, ABC News, 9/11/02]


Nobody Knew?

The above is only a partial listing of all the information that should have alerted the Bush administration to the nature of the 9/11 attack. For instance, one could also go into detail about the failure to appreciate FBI agent Ken Williams's July 2001 memo warning of al-Qaeda agents training in US flight schools, or the failure to follow up on the August 15, 2001, arrest of Zacarias Moussaoui which led one flight school official to complain to FBI agents, "Do you realize how serious this is? This man wants training on a 747. A 747 fully loaded with fuel could be used as a weapon!" [New York Times, 2/8/02] There were numerous additional warnings suggesting targets like the World Trade Center and indicating exactly when the attacks would happen (see this page and this page for more).

It's no wonder the Bush administration has refused to allow most of the findings of the 2002 9/11 Congressional Inquiry to be made public, and has repeatedly attempted to prevent any serious investigation into 9/11. [Newsweek, 4/30/03, Newsweek, 2/4/02] Stunningly, the administration now wants material that has already been made public to be reclassified. The Congressional Inquiry was not allowed to reveal which warnings reached which officials. Its final 800-page report - still being withheld - is said to "name names" regarding who was told what. For instance, it apparently says that one CIA briefing from July 2001 was presented to Bush. That briefing predicted that al-Qaeda would launch a terrorist strike "in the coming weeks." It added, "Attack will be spectacular and designed to inflict mass casualties against US facilities or interests. Attack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning." [Newsweek, 4/30/03]

If that briefing wasn't enough to cause concern for the president, the very title of the CIA's daily briefing to Bush on August 6, 2001, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US," should have. This also was kept from the public until someone leaked it to the press in May 2002. The entire memo focused on the possibility of terrorist attacks inside the US. Some accounts claim it was 11 pages long, instead of the usual two or three pages. [Newsweek, 5/27/02, New York Times, 5/15/02, Die Zeit, 10/1/02] Its contents have never been released. However, a Congressional report later described what is likely this memo. Supposedly, it mentions "that members of al-Qaeda, including some US citizens, had resided in or traveled to the US for years and that the group apparently maintained a support structure here. The report cited uncorroborated information obtained in 1998 that Osama bin Laden wanted to hijack airplanes to gain the release of US-held extremists; FBI judgments about patterns of activity consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks and the number of bin Laden-related investigations underway; as well as information acquired in May 2001 that indicated a group of bin Laden supporters was planning attacks in the US with explosives." [Senate Intelligence Committee, 9/18/02]


What Preparations?

So given all these warnings, and undoubtedly many more that have not been made public, wouldn't one naturally think the US government would have taken basic steps to guard against hijackings? Even forgetting planes as flying bombs, what about defenses against traditional hijackings? Transportation Secretary Mineta was asked at the May 2003 hearing, "Did this higher level of [terrorist] chatter ... result in any action across the government? I take it your answer is no.'' He replied, "That's correct." [AP, 5/23/03 (C)]

In fact, rather than strengthening defenses, there actually were suggestions to weaken the country's defenses even further. Supposedly, in 1997, the number of fighters on 24-hour active alert defending the continental US was reduced from about 100 fighters to only 14. And in the months before 9/11, the Pentagon was planning to reduce that number still further! "While defense officials say a decision had not yet been made [by 9/11], a reduction in air defenses had been gaining currency in recent months among task forces assigned by [Defense Secretary] Rumsfeld..." [Los Angeles Times, 9/15/01 (B)] Additionally, several months before, the FAA had tried to dispense with "primary" radars altogether and only use radars that detect transponder signals. Had that happened, when the hijackers turned off the planes' transponder signals, no radar would have been able to find them. Luckily, NORAD rejected the proposal. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02]

Furthermore, despite all of the threats made against prominent landmarks, especially those in Washington and New York City, no steps appear to have been taken to better defend logical attack targets or these cities generally. For instance, there had long been a surface-to-air missile battery on top of the White House. [Telegraph, 9/16/01] Such batteries were not set up in New York City or anywhere else, in the way that the Italian government did to protect Genoa in July 2001. Nor were fighters kept in the skies as they were over recent Olympic Games, despite the high probability that bin Laden was determined to strike inside the US [to paraphrase the title of Bush's August 6 briefing] within a matter of weeks. In fact, the nearest military base with fighters on alert was 188 miles from New York City, and 129 miles from Washington. The fighters at Andrews Air Force Base, only 10 miles from the center of Washington, were not put on a higher alert status, as far as we know.

Bush's national security leadership held about 100 meetings between the January 2001 inauguration and 9/11, but terrorism was discussed in only two of these meetings (on June 3 and September 4). [Washington Post, 5/17/02] By comparison, Clinton's Counterterrorism Security Group of similar stature met two or three times a week between 1998 and 2000. [New York Times, 12/30/01] And on August 22, 2001, FBI agent John O'Neill, the government's "most committed tracker of Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda network of terrorists" [New Yorker, 1/14/02], quit after a critical article about him was published in the New York Times. O'Neill believed interim FBI Director Tom Pickard orchestrated the article as part of an effort to remove him, because the incoming FBI Director Robert Mueller wanted O'Neill replaced with a Bush ally. [PBS Frontline, 10/3/02, New Yorker, 1/14/02] O'Neill was killed in the 9/11 attacks.

The FAA sent 15 general terrorist warnings to US airlines between January and August 2001. But airlines had been receiving at least one such warning a month for a long time. [CNN, 3/02, CNN, 5/17/02] As one newspaper later put it, "There were so many that airline officials grew numb to them." [St. Petersburg Times, 9/23/02] The Bush administration officials acknowledged that these warnings were so vague that they did not require tighter airline security. [AP, 5/18/02] In late June 2001, Richard Clarke, the White House National Coordinator for Counterterrorism, did give a direct warning to the FAA to increase security measures in light of an impending terrorist attack. But the FAA refused to take such measures, and nothing was done about its refusal. [New Yorker, 1/14/02]


Protection for a Lucky Few

In fact, just about the only known actions taken by top-level Bush administration officials were to protect their personal safety. According to Congressman Porter Goss (R), Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, "the chatter level [of intercepted terrorist communications] went way off the charts" in summer 2001 and stayed high until 9/11. [Los Angeles Times, 5/18/02] Both Bush and Vice President Cheney responded by spending nearly the entire month of August on vacation at separate locales. [AP, 7/30/01, Jackson Hole News and Guide, 7/15/01] Former US Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney said she was disturbed about the implications that "24-hour fighter cover was placed over the Bush ranch in Crawford, Texas" during his vacation there from August 4-30, 2001. [Counterpunch, 9/18/02] ABC News reported that Bush was doing "nothing much" on his vacation, aside from his regular daily intelligence briefings. [ABC, 8/3/01, Washington Post, 8/7/01, Salon, 8/29/01] On August 6, when Bush received the briefing entitled, "Bin Laden to Strike in US," he apparently "broke off from work early and spent most of the day fishing." [New York Times, 5/25/02] Despite this carefree attitude, when Bush spent the night in Sarasota, Florida, the night before the 9/11 attacks, surface-to-air missiles were placed on the roof of the resort where he was staying. [Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/10/02] Presumably the presence of fighters in August and surface-to-air missiles protecting Bush that night were hardly typical security procedures.

Perhaps even more remarkable was the behavior of Attorney General John Ashcroft. In May 2001, he told a Senate committee that counter-terrorism was his "highest priority." But on September 10, 2001, Ashcroft rejected a $58 million increase in funding for counter-terrorism programs, and sent an internal memorandum stating his seven priorities - none of them relating to counter-terrorism. [New York Times, 6/1/02, Guardian, 5/21/02] Yet, back on July 26, 2001, CBS News reported that Ashcroft had stopped flying commercial aircraft due to a threat, but "neither the FBI nor the Justice Department ... would identify what the threat was, when it was detected or who made it." [CBS, 7/26/01] In May 2002, Ashcroft walked out of his own office rather than answer questions about why he had stopped flying on commercial planes. [AP, 5/16/02] The San Francisco Chronicle concluded, "The FBI obviously knew something was in the wind. ... The FBI did advise Ashcroft to stay off commercial aircraft. The rest of us just had to take our chances." [San Francisco Chronicle, 6/3/02]

Actually, some other lucky few received warnings not available to the general public. On September 3, 2001, author Salman Rushdie was banned by US authorities from taking internal US flights. Rushdie said the FAA told his publisher it had "intelligence of something about to happen." The FAA later confirmed that "it stepped up security measures concerning Mr. Rushdie but refused to give a reason." [London Times, 9/27/01] Years before, Iran had issued a religious fatwa against Rushdie calling for his murder, so if Rushdie had been caught up in a hijacking it would have been a major propaganda coup for the terrorists. (Its interesting to note that Rushdie was only banned from internal US flights while the US later claimed their only concern was overseas.) Even more curiously, two days after 9/11, Newsweek reported, "The state of alert had been high during the past two weeks, and a particularly urgent warning may have been received the night before the attacks, causing some top Pentagon brass to cancel a trip. Why that same information was not available to the 266 people who died aboard the four hijacked commercial aircraft may become a hot topic on the Hill." [Newsweek, 9/13/01] Far from becoming a hot topic, the only subsequent media mention of this story was in the next issue of Newsweek: "A group of top Pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns." [Newsweek, 9/17/01]

It almost seems as if Bush administration officials didn't really care if a terrorist attack happened or not, as long as they and other important people were not killed in it.


The Response to the 9/11 Hijackings

With this background understanding of the numerous warnings given and a complete lack of protective measures taken, we can now turn to the subject of the May 2003 Independent Commission hearings. How effective were the air defenses on 9/11? Not surprisingly, with only 14 fighters on 24-hour active alert, the military was already at an unnecessary disadvantage. But even factoring in such a lack of planes, the defensive response to the hijackings was so remarkably poor that it has caused some to wonder if the hijackers were deliberately allowed to succeed.

Before looking at how the military response to 9/11 fared, we should consider the defensive posture on the East Coast at the time. Officially, there were only two air force bases in the Northeast region that were formally part of NORAD's defensive system. One was Otis Air National Guard Base on Massachusetts' Cape Cod peninsula and about 188 miles east of New York City. The other was Langley Air Force Base near Norfolk, Virginia, and about 129 miles south of Washington. [BBC, 8/29/02] During the Cold War, the US had literally thousands of fighters on alert. But as the Cold War wound down, this number was reduced until it reached only 14 fighters in the continental US by 9/11. [Los Angeles Times, 9/15/01 (B)] A cursory web search shows that until recently, many units were on five-minute alert status, which meant that from the moment they were scrambled (ordered into the air), they were guaranteed to be airborne within five minutes. NORAD has claimed that on 9/11 fighters in bases within its system, including Otis and Langley, were guaranteed to get airborne within 15 minutes, not five. [Calgary Herald, 10/13/01, NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03] (Why this reduction in capability happened even as the terrorist threat dramatically increased is another unanswered question.)

These planes within NORAD's system routinely scrambled after other aircraft. Often the goal was drug interdiction. General Ralph Eberhart, NORAD Commander in Chief, said that before 9/11, "Normally, our units [flew] 4-6 sorties a month in support of the NORAD air defense mission." [Federal News Service, 10/25/01] In 2000, there were 425 "unknowns" - pilots who didn't file or diverted from flight plans or used the wrong frequency. Fighters were scrambled in response to 129 of those cases, when problems were not immediately resolved. [Calgary Herald, 10/13/01] Unfortunately, statistics on how many minutes it took for these fighters to get airborne apparently have not been released.

But there are dozens of other air force bases on the East Coast. How quickly other bases could get fighters into the air varied from base to base. Before 9/11, the web sites of many of these bases used terms like "combat ready," "five minute alert," "highest state of readiness," and so on, indicating they should have been able to quickly respond as well. For instance, the web site for Andrews Air Force Base next to Washington boasted that it hosted two "combat ready" squadrons, "capable and ready response forces for the District of Columbia in the event of a natural disaster or civil emergency."

The District of Columbia Air National Guard was stationed at Andrews, and its web site claimed its mission was "to provide combat units in the highest possible state of readiness." Both web sites changed on September 12, 2001, and the phrases suggesting such quick response capability were removed. [DC Military website, DCANG Home Page (before and after the change)] Bases at Westfield, Massachusetts; Syracuse, New York; and Hartford, Connecticut, also promised high readiness status, and these bases would have been in good positions to defend the skies on 9/11.


The Morning of September 11, 2001

As the sun rose on September 11, 2001, NORAD was already taking part in the Vigilant Guardian war game, which had begun a few days before. [Newhouse News, 1/25/02, Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/02, Code One Magazine, 1/02] As a result, NORAD was in peak form. It was fully staffed and alert, and senior officers were manning stations throughout the US when the first hijacking was reported. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02] Because of the war game, NORAD "had extra fighter planes on alert." [ABC News, 9/14/02] Colonel Robert Marr, in charge of NORAD's Northeastern US sector, said, "We had the fighters with a little more gas on board. A few more weapons on board." [ABC News, 9/11/02]


American Airlines Flight 11

All four of the hijacked planes were scheduled to take off within several minutes of 8:00 a.m., though Flight 93 was delayed on the runway for 40 minutes. Flight 11 from Boston was the first plane to get hijacked. Edited transcripts of the cockpit transmissions show that the last routine communication between Flight 11 and Boston's air traffic control was at 8:13 a.m. and 47 seconds. [New York Times, 10/16/01 (C)] The loss of communication was quickly noticed - flight controllers can be heard discussing it at 8:15. Furthermore, "just moments" after the radio contact was lost, the transponder was turned off as well. [MSNBC, 9/15/01] The transponder is the electronic device that identifies the jet on the controller's screen, gives its exact location and altitude, and also allows a four-digit emergency hijack code to be sent. Boston air traffic manager Glenn Michael later said, "We considered [Flight 11] at that time to be a possible hijacking." [AP, 8/12/02]

Normally, pilots press the ELT (emergency locator transmitter) button as soon as they suspect a hijacking is in progress. This button is within easy reach. However, the pilot of Flight 11, Captain John Ogonowski, did not press this button, and nor did the pilots on Flights 77 and 93. There has been speculation that this may have been because hijackers were already in the cockpits when the hijackings began, posing as a guest pilot sitting in the cockpit's extra seat. [Fox News, 9/24/01, Boston Globe, 11/23/01] This would explain, for instance, why Flight 11's radio contact and transponder signal were both lost at about 8:14, while two stewardesses calling from the flight indicated the hijackers in the passenger section didn't get out of their seats until about 8:21. [Boston Globe, 11/23/01, ABC News, 7/18/02] But Captain Ogonowski was clever. He began turning the talk-back button off and on, which enabled flight controllers to hear what was being said, and also showed them that something was wrong. One controller said, "The button was being pushed intermittently most of the way to New York," and continued until about 8:38, so he must have started not long after 8:14. [Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01, MSNBC, 9/15/01]

Flight controllers suspected something was wrong, but perhaps were confused because the ELT button had not been activated. But at 8:20, Flight 11 stopped transmitting its IFF (identify friend or foe) beacon signal [CNN, 9/17/01], and the plane also was clearly off course by that time (see adjacent flight path map). As a result, at "about 8:20" Boston flight control decided that Flight 11 had probably been hijacked. [Newsday, 9/23/01, New York Times, 9/15/01 (C)] However, it did not notify NORAD or anyone else of a possible problem.

This is when the failure of America's air defense system began. FAA regulations in force at the time state, "Consider that an aircraft emergency exists... when: ... There is unexpected loss of radar contact and radio communications with any... aircraft." [FAA regulations] They also state, "If... you are in doubt that a situation constitutes an emergency or potential emergency, handle it as though it were an emergency." [FAA regulations] Furthermore, MSNBC explained that a significant course deviation is "considered a real emergency, like a police car screeching down a highway at 100 miles an hour" and leads to fighters being quickly dispatched to see what the problem might be. [MSNBC, 9/12/01] But, as ABC News later put it, around 8:20, "There doesn't seem to have been alarm bells going off, traffic controllers getting on with law enforcement or the military. There's a gap there that will have to be investigated." [ABC News, 9/14/01]
If there still was any doubt Flight 11 had been hijacked, that doubt was removed at 8:24. Because Captain Ogonowski was periodically holding down the talk-back button, beginning at 8:24 and 38 seconds, Boston flight controllers heard the hijackers in the cockpit broadcasting a message to the passengers: "We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you will be OK. We are returning to the airport." A flight controller responded, ''Who's trying to call me?'' The hijacker continued, "Everything will be OK. If you try to make any moves you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet." [Guardian, 10/17/01, New York Times, 10/16/01 (C)] A Boston flight controller later said that immediately after hearing this voice, he "knew right then that he was working a hijack." [Village Voice, 9/13/01] At 8:25 exactly, seconds after hearing this message, Boston flight control notified other flight control centers of the hijacking. But, supposedly, once again it did not notify NORAD. Incredibly, NORAD asserts that it wasn't told of the hijacking until 8:40 - a full 15 minutes later! [NORAD, 9/18/01]

These 15 minutes are vital. As mentioned previously, NORAD guaranteed that its fighters could take off within 15 minutes of being given the order to scramble. It must also have taken a few minutes for NORAD to confirm the situation and pass the word to the pilots. Let's say this takes five minutes (in actual fact, when Major General Larry Arnold at NORAD's Command Center in Tyndall Air Force Base, Florida, first heard that Flight 11 had been hijacked, he said, "Go ahead and scramble them, and we'll get the authorities later" [ABC News, 9/11/02], so pilot notification could have happened very quickly). It would then have taken another 15 minutes at most to get the fighters in the air. A NORAD spokeswoman said that fighters from Otis can reach New York City in 10 to 12 minutes. [Cape Cod Times, 9/16/01] So, adding this up, 8:25, plus 5, 15, and 12 minutes, means that the fighters would have reached New York City by 8:57. This would have been too late for Flight 11, which crashed into the World Trade Center at 8:46, but it would have reached New York six minutes before Flight 175, which crashed at 9:03.


Lies and Contradictions

Thus, had the FAA not delayed its notification of NORAD, the approximately 620 people killed in the World Trade Center's South Tower might have been saved. [New York Magazine, 9/02] Had the FAA reported its suspicions at 8:20 or even around 8:14 (when a hijacking was already suspected), the fighters would have had another 15 to 21 minutes to reach New York City and decide what to do. But is it true that the FAA did in fact wait so long before notifying NORAD? As a matter of fact, a later ABC News report says that the FAA notified NORAD employee Lt. Colonel Dawne Deskins at 8:31 a.m., not 8:40. [ABC News, 9/11/02] A different version of that ABC report states, "Shortly after 8:30 a.m., behind the scenes, word of a possible hijacking reached various stations of NORAD." [ABC News, 9/14/02] Even such a late notification around 8:30 would have given the fighters from Otis a fighting chance to reach Flight 175 before it crashed, especially since NORAD says the fighters only took six minutes to get ready and take off, instead of the maximum 15. [NORAD, 9/18/01]

NORAD claims that after being told of the hijacking at 8:40, it waited six minutes to give the scramble order to the Otis pilots. It then took another six minutes before the pilots took off. So, at 8:52, two fighters took off toward New York City. According to Lt. Col. Timothy Duffy, one of the pilots, before he took off a fellow officer had told him, "This looks like the real thing." Duffy later said, "It just seemed wrong. I just wanted to get there. I was in full-blower all the way." A NORAD commander has said the planes were stocked with extra fuel as well. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02] Full-blower meant the fighters were going as fast as they could go. An F-15 can travel over 1875 mph. [Air Force News, 7/30/97] Duffy later said, "As we're climbing out, we go supersonic on the way, which is kind of nonstandard for us." Their target destination was the airspace over Kennedy airport in New York City. [ABC News, 9/11/02]

So even if the late notification of 8:40 is true, these fighters still should have been able to reach New York City before Flight 175 as long as they traveled 1100 mph or faster - far below their maximum speed of 1875 mph. In fact, Major General Larry Arnold says they did head straight for New York City at about 1100 to 1200 mph. [MSNBC, 9/23/01 (C), Slate, 1/16/02] Yet, according to NORAD, the journey took 19 minutes, meaning the fighters traveled below 600 mph, and below supersonic speeds. [NORAD, 9/18/01] Major Gen. Paul Weaver, director of the Air National Guard, thus made the absurd statement, "The pilots flew 'like a scalded ape,' topping 500 mph but were unable to catch up to the airliner." [Dallas Morning News, 9/16/01] At that speed, Flight 11 would have been traveling faster than the fighters!


Did the Otis Fighters Even Exist?

What is NORAD hiding with these conflicting notification times, and absurd "scalded ape" statements? Remarkably, it is possible that the story of fighters scrambling from Otis could be a complete fabrication. Vice-Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Richard Myers was the acting head of the US military on 9/11 because the Chairman was out of contact on an international flight. [Washington Post, 1/27/02] Two days after 9/11, under oath and in front of a Congressional committee, Myers was asked when the order to scramble planes was first given. He responded, "That order, to the best of my knowledge, was after the Pentagon was struck [at 9:37]." [Myers Senate Confirmation Hearing, 9/13/01] If true, the claim that fighters were ordered scrambled at 8:46 is incorrect by almost one hour! This idea was not simply Myers's confused recollection. The next day, NORAD spokesman Marine Corps Major Mike Snyder also claimed that no fighters were scrambled until after the Pentagon was hit. Only then did the military realize the scope of the attack and order fighters into the air. [Boston Globe, 9/15/01 (D)] NORAD's current story of two fighters being scrambled at 8:46 was first reported on CBS Evening News on September 14, hours after Snyder agreed with Myers's assertions. [CBS, 9/14/01] But even after that, in early October 2001, NORAD commander General Ralph Eberhart stated, "We did not anticipate this threat would take off from inside the United States and it would be a matter of double-digit minutes" to respond. [AP, 10/7/01] So in other words, even though NORAD fighters were supposed to be able to take to the sky within 15 minutes of being ordered to do so, NORAD claimed it was unable to respond unless it was warned more than an hour (or does he mean 99 minutes?) in advance!


United Airlines Flight 175

For the sake of argument, let's assume that NORAD's claim that fighters were scrambled at 8:46 is true. What else do we need to know about Flight 175, in order to judge the air defense response? On May 22, 2003, a NORAD spokesman claimed that the FAA notified NORAD that Flight 175 was "possibly hijacked" at 9:05, two minutes after it had crashed into the World Trade Center, and that its transponder was never turned off. [NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03] Both of these assertions contradict all previous post-9/11 reports, including NORAD's earlier timeline. [NORAD, 9/18/01]

At 8:16 a.m., Flight 175 took off late, 16 minutes after both its scheduled departure and the departure of Flight 11. [CNN, 9/17/01, AP, 8/19/02] The hijacking also started much later than on Flight 11. Flight 175's last routine communication occurred four seconds before 8:42. Exactly one minute later, a Boston flight controller said of the flight, "He's off about 9 o'clock and about 20 miles looks like he's heading southbound but there's no transponder no nothing and no one's talking to him." [New York Times, 10/16/01 (B)] So, all at once flight control discovered the radio had been cut off, the transponder had been turned off, and the plane was seriously off course. The FAA immediately notified NORAD before the minute was out. NORAD's own timeline, released one week after 9/11, states that NORAD was notified about this plane at 8:43. [NORAD, 9/18/01]

Actually, notifying NORAD was unnecessary, because by this time NORAD technicians had their headsets linked to Boston flight control to hear about Flight 11, and so NORAD learned about Flight 175 at the same time Boston did. [Newhouse News, 1/25/02] If there was any doubt the plane was hijacked, that was removed five seconds after 8:44. A nearby airliner said to flight control about Flight 175, "I just picked up an ELT [emergency locator transmitter] on 121.5 it was brief but it went off." [New York Times, 10/16/01 (B)] Clearly, NORAD's latest claim that it was not notified until 9:05 is wildly incorrect. As for its recent claim that the transponder was never turned off, the above flight controller's comment, "there's no transponder no nothing," shows how incorrect that is. But apparently, the transponder didn't stay off for long. It was turned off for about 30 seconds, and then changed to a signal that was not designated for any plane on that day. [Newsday, 9/10/02] Ironically, this "allowed controllers to track the intruder easily..." [Washington Post, 9/17/01]

Both Flights 11 and 175 were never lost to Boston flight control's radar. When Flight 11 turned its transponder off at 8:14, that only prevented Boston from determining the plane's exact altitude, because they could still track the plane using primary radar. [Christian Science Monitor, 9/13/01, Newhouse News, 1/25/02] Boston flight controller Mark Hodgkins later said, "I watched the target of American 11 the whole way down." [ABC, 9/6/02] At some point before the plane turned toward New York City at 8:28, the FAA had tagged Flight 11's radar dot for easy visibility, and at American Airlines headquarters, "All eyes watched as the plane headed south." [Wall Street Journal, 10/15/01] But apparently NORAD had different radar, and Boston had to periodically update it on Flight 11's position by telephone until NORAD finally found it a few minutes before it crashed into the World Trade Center. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02, ABC News, 9/11/02, Newhouse News, 1/25/02]

So in the 18 minutes between the crash of Flight 11, many eyes watched their radars show Flight 175 inexorably making its way toward New York City, heading nearly 180 degrees away from its previous flight path. Also, "several minutes" after the first attack at 8:46, Boston flight control reported to NORAD that it was Flight 11 that had crashed into the World Trade Center. [New York Times, 9/13/01 (F), Newhouse News, 1/25/02] NORAD now claims it wasn't notified about this until 9:05. [NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03]

Also "within minutes" of 8:46, two open telephone conference calls were established between the FAA, NORAD, the Secret Service, and a number of other government agencies. [FAA, 5/22/03, UPI, 5/22/03 (B)] Even Bush and Cheney were occasionally heard on these open lines. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02, CNN, 9/4/02, ABC News, 9/11/02] But between the crashes of Flights 11 and 175, not everyone who should have been informed actually was. Flight controllers in New York City later complained that Boston controllers didn't give them a conclusive report of what happened to Flight 11 until a minute or two before Flight 175 crashed at 9:03. They also weren't told there was a concern with Flight 175 until right before it crashed. [New York Times, 9/13/01 (F)] And despite so many agencies being in the know through the conference call, apparently no one thought to notify officials in New York City. As a result, from about 8:55 until shortly before the second crash, a public announcement was broadcast inside the South Tower of the World Trade Center, saying that the building was secure and that people could return to their offices. [USA Today, 9/3/02, New York Times, 9/11/02, click on interactive popup]

Even worse, the pilots flying toward New York City were poorly informed. One pilot, Major Daniel Nash, says he can't recall actually being told of the Flight 11 crash. [Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02] Both pilots say they weren't told about Flight 175 until after it had crashed. [ABC News, 9/11/02, ABC, 9/14/02] At no point in the day were these pilots given permission to shoot down any airliners. Nash points out that even if he had reached New York City before Flight 175, he couldn't have shot it down because only the president could make that decision, and he was preoccupied with a classroom of children in Florida. [Cape Cod Times, 8/21/02]


American Airlines Flight 77

So clearly NORAD and the rest of the government has little to be proud of regarding Flights 11 and 175. With better communication, a good portion of the people inside the World Trade Center could have been warned in time to leave, and perhaps Flight 175 could have been prevented from hitting the South Tower altogether. But the response to Flight 77 was even worse.

Flight 77 took off from Dulles International Airport near Washington at 8:20, ten minutes after the scheduled departure time. [8:20, CNN, 9/17/01, Guardian, 10/17/01] Its last routine radio communication was made 51 seconds after 8:50, and then it failed to respond to a routine instruction. [New York Times, 10/16/01 (D)] According to a USA Today map, it likely had already turned about 90 degrees from its scheduled flight path by this time (see the flight path map above). According to the New York Times, "a few minutes" after 8:48, flight controllers learned that Flight 77 had been hijacked. [New York Times, 9/15/01 (C)] But, as with Flight 11, they clearly violated regulations and failed to immediately notify NORAD.

A few minutes later, Flight 77 began turning around over northeastern Kentucky, and eventually headed back toward Washington. [Washington Post, 9/12/01, Newsday, 9/23/01] At 8:56, Flight 77's transponder signal was turned off. [Guardian, 10/17/01, Boston Globe, 11/23/01] The New York Times later pointed out that "by 8:56 a.m., it was evident that Flight 77 was lost." Starting at 8:56, flight controllers repeatedly called for Flight 77 over the radio and received no reply. [New York Times, 10/16/01] Even though Flight 77 had already turned around before the transponder was turned off, flight controllers failed to notice that and continued to look for its signal further west, instead of east where it was headed. West Virginia flight controllers finally noticed it entering their airspace around 9:05. [Newsday, 9/23/01] But again, supposedly now both West Virginia and Washington flight control apparently failed to notify NORAD. In fact, if NORAD can be believed, the FAA didn't notify NORAD until 9:24 or 9:25, and even then only suggested that it "may" have been hijacked! [NORAD, 9/18/01, AP, 8/19/02, Guardian, 10/17/01] That's half an hour after the New York Times says the FAA decided Flight 77 had been hijacked!

This huge time gap was a contentious point in the May 2003 Independent Commission hearings. Jane Garvey, FAA Administrator on 9/11, claimed that the FAA notified NORAD well before 9:24. In a statement released after her testimony, the FAA claimed, "NORAD logs indicate that the FAA made formal notification about American Flight 77 at 9:24 a.m., but information about the flight was conveyed continuously during the phone bridges [between the FAA, NORAD, the Secret Service, and other agencies] before the formal notification." [FAA, 5/22/03] A few days after 9/11, the New York Times reported, "During the hour or so that American Airlines Flight 77 was under the control of hijackers, up to the moment it struck the west side of the Pentagon, military officials in a command center on the east side of the building were urgently talking to law enforcement and air traffic control officials about what to do." [New York Times, 9/15/01 (C)] This largely matches the FAA's more recent claim that NORAD and other agencies knew about the hijacking of Flight 77 long before 9:24.

If this is true, NORAD is once again wildly incorrect with its estimates. Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon at 9:38. So, if NORAD did in fact learn of Flight 77's hijacking around 8:51 when the FAA concluded it had been hijacked, it would have had about 47 minutes to get a plane over Washington. Even traveling at 1100 mph - the speed NORAD commander Larry Arnold says fighters traveled in making the longer journey to New York City earlier in the day - the F-16 fighters from Langley Air Force Base 129 miles away could have reached Washington in only seven minutes.

NORAD officials present a different account. They claim that at 9:09 a.m. NORAD ordered the F-16s at Langley Air Force Base to battle stations alert. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02] However, a pilot, code-named "Honey," who was actually in one of the first planes to take off from Langley, later said the battle stations alert wasn't sounded until 9:24. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 64-65] 9:24 is also when NORAD was supposedly officially notified. NORAD claimed that three minutes later, three F-16s at Langley were scrambled to intercept Flight 77. Three minutes after that, at 9:30, these three fighters took off. [NORAD, 9/18/01] But once again, the recollection of "Honey" doesn't jibe with NORAD's timing. While he doesn't give exact times, he describes a series of events lasting much longer than six minutes, including waiting from "five to ten minutes" between two of these events. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, pp. 64-65]

But again, even if we assume NORAD's times are correct, the agency's explanations don't make sense. Even if the fighters left at 9:30, they should have been able to reach Washington one minute before Flight 77 crashed, if they traveled the same 1100 mph that the fighters traveling to New York City did. The maximum speed of an F-16 is a bit slower than that of the F-15s used near New York, but still a respectable 1500 mph. [AP, 6/16/00] One of the F-16 pilots, Major Dean Eckmann, said he was told before scrambling that the World Trade Center had been hit by a plane. [AP, 8/19/02 (C)] So, no doubt the pilots would have wanted to get to Washington quickly. But in their May 2003 testimony, NORAD officials said that afterburners were not used on these planes, even though the planes earlier in the day flew using their afterburners. They said these planes flew about 660 mph to Washington. [NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03] But if NORAD's earlier timeline is to be believed, these fighters were still 105 miles away when Flight 77 crashed. [Newsday, 9/23/01, NORAD, 9/18/01] If so, that means they must have flown north 24 miles in 8 minutes - an average of only about 180 mph, not 660 mph!

Clearly that cannot be correct, and once again the testimonies of the pilots differ greatly from NORAD's explanations. The pilot "Honey" claimed the F-16s were in fact flying toward New York City, not Washington. They were 30 or 40 miles to the east of Washington, not south of it, when they saw a black column of smoke coming from the city. They then headed to Washington instead. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 76] By contrast, two of the pilots have claimed their destination was always Washington [ABC News, 9/11/02, AP, 8/13/02 (C)], while NORAD officer Major James Fox claims he dispatched the fighters without any target. [Newhouse News, 1/25/02] So the issue certainly is confused.

Interestingly, at the May 2003 hearing, NORAD officials claimed that the fighters from Langley were sent to fly over the Atlantic Ocean instead of heading directly toward Washington. [NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03] This would jibe with "Honey"'s account of the fighters being too far east. NORAD officials admitted that had the fighters traveled faster and headed directly toward Washington, they could have theoretically arrived there before Flight 77. But NORAD claims the fighters had to fly over the ocean because NORAD didn't have jurisdiction over land. [NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03] Said NORAD Commander Major General Larry Arnold: "Anything that takes off in the United States is considered a law enforcement issue -- or was considered a law enforcement issue, prior to Sept. 11." [AP, 5/23/03 (C)] Arnold added, "And, of course, [the fighters were] out over water because our mission, unlike law enforcement’s mission is to protect things coming towards the United States." [NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03] This makes no sense, especially given that earlier in the day fighters flew over land to reach New York City, and that NORAD officials decided to override official regulations from the first word of the first hijacking. Were they hoping the hijacked planes would oblige them and join their fighters out over the ocean? If we add "Honey"'s account suggesting that the Langley fighters actually took off later than admitted and headed toward New York City, and if we believe NORAD's original explanation that no fighters at all scrambled until after the Pentagon was hit, then we can at least see an explanation as to why the Langley fighters would have been headed toward New York City. But the level of incompetence this implies is breathtaking.


Other Planes, Other Options

The failure to shoot down Flight 77 is even more glaring when one realizes that NORAD didn't have to only use planes from Langley or Otis. Shortly after Flight 175 crashed, it became obvious that the nation was under attack. As a result, calls from fighter units started "pouring into NORAD and sector operations centers, asking, 'What can we do to help?'" The Air National Guard commander in Syracuse, New York, told Colonel Robert Marr, in charge of NORAD's Northeastern US sector, "Give me 10 min. and I can give you hot guns. Give me 30 min. and I'll have heat-seeker [missiles]. Give me an hour and I can give you slammers [Amraams]." Marr replied, "I want it all." [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02] Supposedly, Marr also said, "Get to the phones. Call every Air National Guard unit in the land. Prepare to put jets in the air. The nation is under attack." [Newhouse News, 1/25/02] Another NORAD commander, Major General Eric Findley, claims he had his staff immediately order as many fighters in the air as possible. [Ottawa Citizen, 9/11/02] But the facts don't fit the rhetoric. Note that Marr's answer to Syracuse meant that no fighter would take off for an hour, when in fact Syracuse could have had planes with some weapons in the sky in ten minutes. Even if fighters didn't take off from Syracuse until 9:20, that still would have been enough time for those fighters to reach Washington before Flight 77 did, if they had been ordered to protect that city.

Another account says, "By 10:01 a.m., the command center began calling several bases across the country for help." [Toledo Blade, 12/9/01] This fits better with what actually happened. A base in Toledo was one of those called at that time, and it appears to have been the first base outside of Otis, Langley, or Andrews to send up any fighters, which they did at 10:16 (the situation at Andrews will be discussed below). Syracuse may have been next, finally putting fighters in the air at 10:44. [Toledo Blade, 12/9/01] If so many bases were in communication with NORAD right after 9:03, then why were no fighters put into the air until so long afterward?


A Stand Down Order?

Could it be that instead of ordering all those fighters into the air, other bases were actually ordered NOT to scramble their fighters? According to Time magazine, at 9:26 a.m., FAA Administrator Jane Garvey "almost certainly after getting an okay from the White House, initiated a national ground stop, which forbids takeoffs and requires planes in the air to get down as soon as reasonable. The order, which has never been implemented since flying was invented in 1903, applied to virtually every single kind of machine that can takeoff — civilian, military, or law enforcement." Note the inclusion of military planes. Military and law enforcement flights were allowed to resume taking off at 10:31 a.m. A limited number of military flights were allowed to fly during this ban, but the FAA won't reveal details. [Time, 9/14/01] USA Today later claimed that it was Ben Sliney who made this decision, and without consulting his superiors. This would be even more remarkable, because it was Sliney's first day on the job as the FAA's National Operations Manager, "the chess master of the air traffic system." [USA Today, 8/13/02]


Why Not Andrews Air Force Base?

As previously mentioned, it appeared that Andrews Air Force Base had "combat ready" fighters "in the highest possible state of readiness." This is not surprising, given that Andrews is the airport typically used by Air Force One and foreign dignitaries when flying to Washington. Furthermore, at the time of the first World Trade Center crash, three F-16s assigned to Andrews were flying a training mission in North Carolina, 207 miles away from Washington. These fighters were only twenty miles further from Washington than the planes in Massachusetts ordered to New York were from that city. Yet it took about an hour more before they were recalled. They landed at Andrews at some point after Flight 77 had crashed into the Pentagon at 9:38. One of the fighters, piloted by Major Billy Hutchison, still had enough fuel to immediately take off again but the other two needed to refuel. Hutchison supposedly took off with no weapons. "Hutchison was probably airborne shortly after the alert F-16s from Langley arrive over Washington, although 121st FS pilots admit their timeline-recall 'is fuzzy.'" [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02] If NORAD's timeline for those other fighters is correct, this means Hutchison didn't leave Andrews until after 9:49. Again, one must wonder why these planes weren't recalled from their training much earlier. And why, even so much later, wasn't Hutchison with his adequate fuel ordered directly to Washington's skies, which was still unprotected?

The answer appears to be that NORAD only wanted to use fighters from the two bases on the Northeast Coast that they directly controlled, even if there were other bases or fighters in the air that were closer. But there was no reason for this. We know details of a 1999 fighter scramble, because famous golfer Payne Stewart was aboard a runaway Learjet. With the pilot unconscious, NORAD used fighters from a number of bases outside NORAD's official seven bases to follow the plane as it crossed over several states before finally crashing. [ABC News, 10/25/99] But on 9/11, NORAD seemed determined not to use fighters from other bases such as Andrews, even though Andrews was only ten miles from Washington. Andrews personnel learned about the national emergency through news coverage, and then a pilot called a friend in the Secret Service for more information. A few minutes after the second crash, it was the Secret Service, not NORAD, who called Andrews and asked them to get fighters ready. Again, a few minutes after the Pentagon crash at 9:38, it was the Secret Service who called Andrews, and said the fighters needed to "Get in the air now!" [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02]

Yet, despite Andrews' claim to have "combat ready" fighters "in the highest possible state of readiness" when the "Get in the air now!" command came, the fighters still were not fully ready to take off. They had ammunition for "hot" guns. But AIM-9 missiles were located in a bunker on the other side of the base, and even though base commanders began the process of loading them shortly after 9:00, they still weren't finished until about 40 minutes later. The next two fighters to take off from Andrews after Major Billy Hutchison were only armed only with "hot" guns and 511 rounds of "TP" - nonexplosive training rounds. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02] Even though the Secret Service and NORAD had long been sharing a conference call by this time, NORAD officials claim they remained unaware that the Secret Service ordered any planes into the air from Andrews. [NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03]


The Sharing of Information

But the communication problems at Andrews were hardly unique. In his May 2003 testimony, Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta claimed that about 9:25 or 9:26, a few minutes after his arrival at the bunker beneath the White House, he overheard an aide tell Vice President Cheney that a hijacked plane headed toward Washington was 50 miles away, then 30 miles away (judging by the speed of the plane it would have been 50 miles from Washington around 9:27). [Norman Mineta Testimony, 5/23/03, Washington Post, 1/27/02, ABC News, 9/11/02] When the plane was announced to be 10 miles away, the aide asked the vice president, "Do the orders still stand?" Cheney replied, "Of course the orders still stand. Have you heard anything to the contrary?" Mineta inferred that the order was an order to shoot down the plane. [Norman Mineta Testimony, 5/23/03]

Unbelievably, in his May 2003 testimony, NORAD Commander Larry Arnold doubts Flight 77 would have been shot down, because even at that point, it was only "through hindsight that we are certain that this was a coordinated attack on the United States." [NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03] Perhaps at 9:38 a.m. Arnold was the only person in the US aware of the news who was still doubting the US was under attack!

In any case, if Cheney did order Flight 77 shot down, none of the pilots from either Langley or Andrews appear to have been aware of any such orders! In fact, at this time there were no fighters near Washington to carry out those orders. But, one article points out, "If the airliner had approached much nearer to the White House it might have been shot down by the Secret Service, who are believed to have a battery of ground-to-air Stinger missiles ready to defend the president's home." [Telegraph, 9/16/01] Given that Flight 77 made a near 360 degree turn over Washington and that the Pentagon is only two miles from the White House [CBS News, 9/21/01], why wasn't it shot down by those missiles, if Cheney had already given the order to bring down the plane?

Since the FAA said Flight 77 was headed toward Washington at 9:24, and Cheney and Mineta knew of Flight 77's progress from at least 50 miles away, it's strange that other reports suggest that the Washington flight controllers weren't aware of the plane until much later. One Washington flight controller has claimed she was the first to notice Flight 77 when it was about 12 to 14 miles away, and Cheney learned of it only after that. [ABC, 10/24/01, ABC, 10/24/01 (B)] The head Washington flight controller claimed the Secret Service first alerted his tower of a hijacked plane coming his way, when it was only five miles away. [USA Today, 8/12/02] According to another account, flight controllers detected it just before 9:30, and told the Secret Service. [USA Today, 8/13/02] Another account stated radar detected Flight 77 30 miles away at 9:30 and yet another account claimed 9:33. [CBS News, 9/21/01, New York Times, 10/16/01] If Washington flight control's radar didn't detect Flight 77 from 9:24 and before, then whose radar did?

We know NORAD was officially notified that Flight 77 was headed toward Washington at 9:24, and FAA Administrator Jane Garvey claimed a conference call had discussed Flight 77 well before that. But it wasn't until well after the Pentagon was hit at 9:38 that the order was given to evacuate likely Washington targets such as the White House, the Capitol Building, State Department, or the Pentagon. [CNN, 9/16/01] Had Flight 77 hit the Capitol Building instead of the Pentagon, most Senators and Congresspeople would still have been inside. [AP, 8/19/02] (Would be twentieth hijacker Ramzi bin al-Shbih later revealed that the Capitol Building was the target for Flight 93.) [Guardian, 9/9/02] Supposedly even Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and his top aides in their Pentagon offices remained unaware of any danger until the Pentagon was actually hit, even though the conference call was being run out of the National Military Command Center inside the Pentagon itself! [Newsday, 9/23/01, Aviation Week and Space Technology, 6/3/02, CNN, 9/4/02, ABC News, 9/11/02] Why did Cheney and others track Flight 77 getting closer and closer to Washington, and fail to give any evacuation orders? How many of the 125 people killed inside the Pentagon could have been saved?





Flight 93

Flight 93 had to wait in a line of planes before it could take off, delaying its departure about 40 minutes until 8:42 a.m. [Newsweek, 9/22/01, USA Today, 8/12/02] As a result, it was the last of the four planes to be hijacked. The FAA told NORAD at 9:16 that Flight 93 was hijacked [CNN, 9/17/01, NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03], but it's not clear why they believed this because the transponder wasn't turned off until about 9:30 or 9:40 and the flight didn't go off course until much later. [9:30, MSNBC, 9/3/02, 9:40, CNN, 9/17/01] (Edited transcripts of cockpit voice recordings have been released for every plane but Flight 93. [New York Times, 10/16/01, New York Times, 10/16/01 (B), New York Times, 10/16/01 (C), New York Times, 10/16/01 (D)])

Much of the timing surrounding Flight 93 has not been released, or is in dispute. For instance, NORAD maintains the plane crashed at 10:03 [NORAD, 9/18/01, NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03], even though a seismic study commissioned by the US Army determined the plane crashed five seconds after 10:06. [US Army Authorized Seismic Study, Philadelphia Daily News, 9/16/02] Even more mysterious is when, or even if, fighters flew toward Flight 93. NORAD's first timeline failed to give this information, except to say that a fighter was 100 miles or 11 minutes away when Flight 93 crashed into the Pennsylvania countryside. [NORAD, 9/18/01] That means the fighter was traveling about 550 mph. As with the fighters going after Flight 77, that seems strangely slow, considering the first fighters dispatched to New York City an hour earlier flew twice as fast.

That statistic also means that the fighters had only gone about 80 miles from Washington when Flight 93 crashed. If we assume the slow 550 mph speed was correct and constant, that means the fighters left Washington about eight minutes before the crash, or 9:58.

Think about the implications of that. Even before Flight 93 was hijacked at 9:16, the nations' defenses were in an uproar, with base commanders all over the country calling in, asking to help. Yet, incredibly, about 42 minutes passed before even anyone sent any fighters toward the hijacked Flight 93!


A Shoot Down Order?

Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta's impression that Cheney had given an order to shoot down Flight 77 around 9:26 has already been mentioned. It has also been claimed that at some point after Flight 77 crashed, someone from the White House spoke directly with the pilots over Washington, and declared the Washington area "a free-fire zone." [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02] In another account, the Secret Service told the pilots, "I want you to protect the White House at all costs." [New York Times, 10/16/01] However, a common story is that it wasn't until just after Bush took off from Sarasota, Florida aboard Air Force One at about 9:56 that he and Cheney had a short discussion and authorized the military to shoot down any plane under control of hijackers. [Washington Post, 1/27/02, CBS, 9/11/02] Unfortunately, none of the pilots over Washington claim to have heard any such order. "Honey," the lead pilot, claimed to have heard a garbled message about Flight 93 that the other pilots didn't hear. He said, "The message seemed to convey that the White House was an important asset to protect." The language was, "Something like, 'Be aware of where [Flight 93] is, and it could be a target.''' [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 76] Both "Honey" and another pilot code-named "Lou" stated they were never given orders to shoot down any plane that day. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 222]
All six of the first pilots to arrive over Washington have been quoted in the press, and none of them indicated they flew after Flight 93. One article does say of Billy Hutchison's fighter from Andrews: "Primarily, he was to go ID [identify] that unknown [aircraft] that everybody was so excited about." But the article goes on to describe how he began patrolling over Washington in low flying loops instead. [Aviation Week and Space Technology, 9/9/02] Furthermore, Hutchison's was the only fighter of the six that was completely unarmed, but NORAD's most recent claim is that two unarmed fighters from Washington were sent after Flight 93. [NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03, UPI, 5/23/03]

Typical of NORAD's conflicting stories, NORAD has previously claimed that at some point after Flight 77 crashed, two unarmed fighters in Michigan were ordered after Flight 93. [AP, 8/30/02, ABC News, 8/30/02, ABC News, 9/11/02] They were already in the air since the time of the first attack at 8:46, raising the question of why they weren't recalled an hour earlier. [AP, 8/30/02] NORAD seems to have forgotten this story in their most recent timeline. [NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03] Furthermore, Major Gen. Paul Weaver, director of the Air National Guard, claimed that no fighters were sent after Flight 93 at all! [Seattle Times, 9/16/01]

In contrast to Weaver's claim, the day after 9/11, a New Hampshire flight controller claimed "that an F-16 fighter closely pursued Flight 93... the F-16 made 360-degree turns to remain close to the commercial jet, the employee said. 'He must've seen the whole thing,' the employee said of the F-16 pilot's view of Flight 93's crash." [AP, 9/13/01, Nashua Telegraph, 9/13/01] There are even details of how Cheney was given notice when a fighter was 80 miles of Flight 93, then when it was within 60 miles, then he was given another notice (but the distance was unspecified). He confirmed his order to shoot down Flight 93 after every update. [Washington Post, 1/27/02]

Both stories of unarmed fighters being sent toward Flight 93, from either east or west, don't stand up to logic. Three fully-armed fighters reached Washington before the one unarmed or the two-partially armed ones did. So why not send one of those first three fighters after Flight 93? Is it believable that an hour and a half after NORAD had been notified of the first hijacking, the best NORAD could have done with Flight 93 when fighters would have finally caught up with it around 10:16 would have been to have a fighter attempt to bring it down by crashing into it?

NORAD has tried hard to keep any armed fighter away from Flight 93 in all their various accounts. Since the order to shoot down Flight 93 had been given, if an armed fighter did reach Flight 93, then one might naturally conclude that order was carried out. There already has been much speculation that Flight 93 was shot down (see for instance Philadelphia Daily News, 12/28/01 or Independent, 8/13/02). Beginning at 9:45, passengers using phones on Flight 93 began telling their loved ones on the ground that they were forming a plan to take over the plane. By this time, the FBI and other agencies were being directly patched into some of these same calls. [Among the Heroes, by Jere Longman, 8/02, p. 111, Toronto Sun, 9/16/01, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01] Thus there would have been a 21 minute-advanced warning that a passenger takeover could happen. It appears that a passenger takeover began at about 9:57 [MSNBC, 7/30/02, Telegraph, 8/6/02, Newsweek, 11/25/01, Observer, 12/2/01, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, 10/28/01], so if a fighter shot down Flight 93, they may have shot it down after the passengers took control of it.

NORAD is in a fix. If an armed fighter did reach Flight 93, then NORAD may have needlessly shot down a plane already taken over by the passengers. If a fighter didn't reach Flight 93, then that plane flew unopposed 50 minutes after NORAD was told it had been hijacked. No wonder NORAD tries to split the difference, with vague stories of unarmed fighters that lack any timing details. In the May 2003 hearings, NORAD Commander Craig McKinley went even further, and made a brand new claim that NORAD was unaware of any shoot down order until five minutes after Flight 93 had crashed. [UPI, 5/23/03]


Air Force One

The slow response to all four hijacked planes was not the end of NORAD's incompetence that day. There is also the matter of Air Force One's fighter escort. At 9:03 a.m., one of Bush's security personnel at the Sarasota, Florida, elementary school Bush was visiting saw the second World Trade Center crash on television and immediately said, "We're out of here. Can you get everyone ready?" [Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 9/10/02] Certainly by the time Bush got in his motorcade and began driving toward Sarasota's airport at 9:35, his security must have contacted the military to provide fighter escort when Bush took off. If not, just as other bases around the country began offering help shortly after 9:03, some bases in Florida must have as well. Two bases in Florida were part of NORAD's seven base system, and were thus guaranteed to send up armed fighters within 15 minutes. One, Homestead Air Station, is 185 miles from Sarasota, and the other, Tyndall Air Station, is 235 miles away.

Yet, it appears no fighters reached Air Force One until some time between 11:00 and 11:30! (Times are vague because NORAD hasn't released details, and the media hasn't investigated in detail.) [Code One Magazine, 1/02, Sarasota Magazine, 9/19/01, Washington Post, 1/27/02] Incredibly, reports state that the first fighters to reach Air Force One came from Ellington, near Houston, Texas, apparently long after Air Force One had left Florida. [CBS, 9/11/02, American Defender, 2001] NORAD left Air Force One undefended for over an hour at exactly the time when their help was most needed.


Was NORAD Merely Grossly Incompetent?

NORAD seems to have no respect for the truth. In late 2001, Major General Larry Arnold wrote how NORAD's 9/11 response was "immediate" and "impressive." Moving into outright fiction, Arnold claimed, "we were able to identify, track and escort suspected hijacked aircraft after the initial attacks," "our reaction time outpaced the process in some instances," "our well-practiced rapid response capability may very well have prevented additional surprise attacks on the American homeland saving countless lives," and so on. [American Defender, 2001] With Arnold sitting next to him, Major General Craig McKinley admitted in the May 2003 hearings, "We had not positioned prior to September 11, 2001, for the scenario that took place that day." [New Jersey Star-Ledger, 5/24/03] "McKinley admitted that NORAD was utterly unprepared for the attack." [UPI, 5/23/03] He called NORAD's 9/11 stance "a Cold War vestige." [New Jersey Star-Ledger, 5/24/03] NORAD now claims to be so incompetent that they had to rely on the FAA for all radar information, and even had to go through the FAA to communicate with their own pilots. [Knight Ridder, 5/24/03]

NORAD's explanations about 9/11 have never made sense, and their new eagerness to be seen as an incompetent "Cold War vestige" is equally suspect. NORAD officials brazenly lied throughout their testimony. In the new NORAD timeline they presented, they even claimed that CNN first began showing images of the World Trade Center on fire at 8:57 when it is easily verifiable that CNN began doing this at 8:48. [CNN, 9/11/01, NORAD Testimony, 5/23/03] Like their many other lies, one can see how this lie serves to cover up the extent of their failure. Unfortunately, the Independent Commission did not require that testimony be given under oath, so these officials cannot be charged with perjury.

One Toronto Star columnist wrote in May 2003, "The great majority of people, sickened and overwhelmed by the horror of the attacks, unquestioningly accepts the White House version [of what happened on 9/11]. Many thousands, however, are patiently stitching together the documented evidence and noting the huge holes in the fabric of that official story." [Toronto Star, 5/18/03] A Sarasota Herald-Tribune columnist recently called the "restrained - even failed - standard US military air defense protocols while the attacks were occurring" a "real mystery" that deserves a serious investigation. [Sarasota Herald-Tribune, 5/20/03] But most of the mainstream media doesn't appear at all interested in these mysteries.

Given the many warnings that came before 9/11, it is not only NORAD that deserves blame for the utter failure to defend the skies on 9/11. Thousands of lives could have been saved if standard procedures were properly followed. Perhaps only those in the World Trade Center's North Tower need have died, if the FAA and NORAD did their job properly. No wonder the government passed a law making it difficult for relatives of the 9/11 terrorists to sue anyone but the terrorists. [Los Angeles Times, 1/17/02] There has been no accountability for all these failures and needless deaths. There still has not been one demonstrable firing or punishment for any government employee because of 9/11. Many unanswered questions remain, and are likely to remain unanswered until people put pressure on the media and government to finally stop covering up what happened on 9/11.

Also see the essay, An Interesting Day: Bush on 9/11, for more analysis on related topics. For more details on what happened on 9/11, see a detailed timeline about that day.

Comments can be directed to: paulthompson22b @yahoo.com (remove the space). Thanks to Melissa Kavonic, Allan Wood, Allan Duncan, and Derek Mitchell for their assistance.

See also 9/11 Citizens Watch, a group that is trying to keep pressure on the Independent Commission.




Thomas Frank:

Newsday, Inc.

FAA Delay in Reporting 9/11 Hijackings Probed
Commission also questions ex-chief on shooting report

By Thomas Frank
WASHINGTON BUREAU

May 23, 2003

Washington - The independent commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks grilled the former chief federal aviation regulator yesterday in a tense public exchange over whether the government bungled its response that day.

Jane Garvey, former head of the Federal Aviation Administration, was asked pointedly by commissioner Richard Ben-Veniste why the agency apparently took a half-hour to notify the country's air defense command about the hijackings.

Another commissioner, Fred Fielding, pressed Garvey about an FAA report from Sept. 11 that a hijacker on American Airlines Flight 11 fatally shot a passenger five minutes before the plane smashed into the World Trade Center. The federal government has said no guns were on any of the four planes and that hijackers had only box cutters.

Garvey disputed both reports, but the questions indicated a tough approach being taken by the 10-member commission established last year to find out what allowed the attacks to occur.

"The line of questioning was extraordinary," said Kristen Breitweiser of New Jersey, who became a leading advocate for creating the commission after her husband, Ronald, was killed in the World Trade Center. Breitweiser, sitting in the Capitol Hill hearing room yesterday, broke into a smile as Ben-Veniste pressed Garvey repeatedly.

"They asked the exact questions we want answered," said a beaming Breitweiser, who was with about 15 other relatives of Sept. 11 victims. "To hear someone put on the spot and possibly be held accountable is so gratifying."

In another reassurance to Sept. 11 families, the commission took testimony from Bogdan Dzakovic, a one-time FAA security inspector who is well known in aviation circles for his criticism of the agency. Dzakovic, now in an administrative job for the Transportation Security Administration, told the commission of his longstanding complaint that the FAA ignored his reports about security lapses.

"Every time we found a major problem in security, we were prohibited from doing further testing," said Dzakovic, who had worked for the FAA testing airport security. Weeks after Sept. 11, Dzakovic filed a complaint about FAA security lapses, which the independent Office of Special Counsel upheld in March.

Ben-Veniste, former Watergate prosecutor, provided the emotional highlight when he told Garvey that the FAA had learned at 8:55 a.m. that Flight 77 was off course and headed for the Pentagon - after it had already declared Flight 11 and Flight 175 hijacked. But, Ben-Veniste said, recounting previously known information, it wasn't until 9:24 a.m. that the FAA alerted the North American Aerospace Defense Command, which defends against aerospace threats.

Garvey initially said the command was notified at 8:34 a.m., but when Ben-Veniste read aloud testimony from NORAD's former commander saying the FAA didn't notify his agency until 9:24 a.m., Garvey said she would have to check FAA records.

Garvey firmly denied that guns were used on any airplane, despite a written FAA report saying that an American Airlines flight attendant had told the airlines operations center that a hijacker "shot and killed a passenger in seat 9B." Some Sept. 11 families question whether the airlines and government are covering up the presence of a gun, which was barred from airlines, to avoid liability or embarrassment.

Garvey said the FBI and the General Accounting Office found "no evidence" of a gun. "It may have been something that was reported in confusion," she said.




US air officials had warnings of al-Qaida threat

Agencies
Friday February 11, 2005

Aviation officials in the US received multiple warnings that al-Qaida could strike through airline hijackings in the months leading up to the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington.

More than 50 warnings about the terror group and its leader, Osama bin Laden, were given to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) between April and September 10 2001, according to documents released by the 9/11 commission that investigated the attacks.

Five of the warnings made reference to al-Qaida's training of hijackers and two detailed suicide operations that were not connected to aviation.

However, officials were "lulled into a false sense of security", and "intelligence that indicated a real and growing threat leading up to 9/11 did not stimulate significant increases in security procedures", the commission report, written last August, said.

The report gives more details than had been included in the 9/11 commission's overall report, which was released in July. The Bush administration blocked the public release of the full version of the report for more than five months.

It reveals that, in spring 2001, the FAA had warned US airports that hijackers intending to commit suicide "in a spectacular explosion" would be most likely to select domestic targets. The FAA is criticised for being more concerned with reducing airline congestion, lessening delays, and easing airlines' financial problems than with deterring a terrorist attack.

The report also accuses the authority of failing to pursue domestic security measures that could have helped counter the threats that led to September 11. Such actions could have included the toughening of airport screening procedures for weapons or expanding the use of on-flight air marshals, it said.

FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown said the agency had been well aware of the threat posed by terrorists before the attacks, and had taken substantive steps to counter it. "We had a lot of information about threats," she said. "But we didn't have specific information about means or methods that would have enabled us to tailor any counter measures."

Ms Brown added that, after September 11, the FAA had taken "bold steps" to improve aviation security, including fortifying cockpit doors on 6,000 planes. "Without specific information about means and methods, there was no way we could tailor the counter measures specifically to deal with the threat that we learned about on September 11," she told Reuters.

Before September 11, the airport security system was run by the airlines but overseen by the FAA. After the attacks, the government ordered cockpit doors to be strengthened, took over screening of passengers and bags at airports, and coordinated "watch lists" of known or suspected terrorists among intelligence agencies.

Like previous commission documents, the report did not find evidence that the government had specific warning of the September 11 attacks.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/september11/s ... 72,00.html




Telegraph UK

Israeli security issued urgent warning to CIA of large-scale terror attacks

By David Wastell in Washington and Philip Jacobson in Jerusalem
(Filed: 16/09/2001)

ISRAELI intelligence officials say that they warned their counterparts in the United States last month that large-scale terrorist attacks on highly visible targets on the American mainland were imminent.

The attacks on the World Trade Centre's twin towers and the Pentagon were humiliating blows to the intelligence services, which failed to foresee them, and to the defence forces of the most powerful nation in the world, which failed to deflect them.

The Telegraph has learnt that two senior experts with Mossad, the Israeli military intelligence service, were sent to Washington in August to alert the CIA and FBI to the existence of a cell of as many of 200 terrorists said to be preparing a big operation.

"They had no specific information about what was being planned but linked the plot to Osama bin Laden and told the Americans that there were strong grounds for suspecting Iraqi involvement," said a senior Israeli security official.

The CIA has said that it had no hard information that would have led to the prevention of the hijacking, but the FBI said it believed that cells operating within America and totalling at least 50 terrorists were behind last week's devastating hijacks; the names of new suspects are being added to the list daily.

America's intelligence agencies are being widely blamed for their failure to predict the attacks, or anything like them, and for not discovering any of the terrorist cells before the hijackings on Tuesday. Some of those who took part had lived in the US for months, or even years.

Evidence that a clear Israeli warning was delivered to American authorities, but ignored, would be a further blow to the reputation of the CIA, which is under fire for its failure last week.

An administration official in Washington said: "If this is true then the refusal to take it seriously will mean heads will roll. It is quite credible that the CIA might not heed a Mossad warning: it has a history of being overcautious about Israeli information."

For years, staff at the Pentagon joked that they worked at "Ground Zero", the spot at which an incoming nuclear missile aimed at America's defences would explode. There is even a snack bar of that name in the central courtyard of the five-sided building, America's most obvious military bullseye.

This weekend, five days after that target was struck with devastating effect by a hijacked plane, the joking has stopped.

It is far from certain that any military commander would have had the courage to recommend shooting down a passenger airliner, even in the unprecedented circumstances of last Tuesday.

For three of the four airliners hijacked last week, however, the question did not even arise. Two pairs of combat fighters were scrambled into action but did not get near enough to shoot any of them down.

Norad, the command headquarters in Colorado responsible for defending all of North America from air attack, was notified of the first hijack at 8.38am and six minutes later two F-15 fighter jets were ordered into the air from Otis airforce base on Cape Cod.

Before they could take off, however, the first hijacked airliner crashed into the World Trade Centre's north tower at 8.46am. Six minutes later the two military jets were airborne, but when the second hijacked airliner hit the south tower shortly after 9am they were still 70 miles from Manhattan.

The only successful action against the hijackers was taken by passengers of the fourth airliner, whose heroic decision to fight back led to its crashing into the fields of Pennsylvania.

The reason lies in the strict distinction America draws between civil and military power, combined with the fact that until last week nobody had confronted the possibility that a terrorist hijacker might turn kamikaze pilot.

Although Norad has its own radar system to track aircraft over the US, its prime task is to watch for hostile aircraft approaching America from outside. "We assume anything originating in US airspace is friendly," said a spokesman.

For the same reason, the 20 or so American fighter planes on permanent full alert in case of a suspect intruder, were deployed at half a dozen bases in the likeliest flightpaths of an attack from the former Soviet Union, several hundred miles from New York or Washington DC.

All aircraft flying over American airspace are monitored and controlled by a network of 20 regional Federal Aviation Authority air traffic control centres, backed up by individual airport control towers. Military aircraft under Norad control can intervene with domestic traffic only if called on for help by their civilian colleagues.

That is what happened on Tuesday, but in no case was there apparently enough time after the FAA's warning for fighter planes to reach the hijacked airliners.

More puzzling, there were 45 minutes between air traffic controllers losing contact with the third airliner, which took off from Dulles airport just outside Washington, and its crash on to the Pentagon.

At that point, however, the aircraft was still flying on its intended course westwards. It may not have been until later, possibly after a passenger's mobile phone call to the Justice Department, that the civil authorities finally twigged what was happening.

It was not the military but civilian air traffic controllers at Washington's Reagan National Airport - tipped off by their colleagues at Dulles - who alerted the White House to the fact that an unauthorised jet was flying at full throttle towards it.

As shaken White House staff began a frantic evacuation, the aircraft banked, performed a 270 degree turn and sailed past lines of aghast drivers on expressways to crash explosively into the west side of the Pentagon.

If the airliner had approached much nearer to the White House it might have been shot down by the Secret Service, who are believed to have a battery of ground-to-air Stinger missiles ready to defend the president's home.

The Pentagon is not similarly defended. "We are an open society," said a military official. "We don't have soldiers positioned on the White House lawn and we don't have the Pentagon ringed with bunkers and tanks."

It emerged last night that two F-16 fighters took off from Langley airforce base in Virginia just two minutes before the American Airlines Boeing 767 crashed into the Pentagon, again too late to have a chance of intercepting.

Only the fourth hijacked airliner, which was less than 30 minutes from Washington when it crashed, might have been successfully intercepted: air traffic controllers at a regional centre in Nashua, New Hampshire, told a Boston newspaper that at least one F-16 fighter was in hot pursuit, and defence officials confirmed that the fighters already launched from Langley were on their way to intercept the flight when passengers apparently took matters into their own hands.

Deep inside the Pentagon, in the hardened bunkers of the National Military Joint Intelligence Centre, senior officials were said to be "stunned" by the terrorists' achievement.

Within minutes of the attack American forces around the world were put on one of their highest states of alert - Defcon 3, just two notches short of all-out war - and F-16s from Andrews Air Force Base were in the air over Washington DC.

A flotilla of warships was deployed along the east coast from bases in Virginia and Florida, with two aircraft-carriers to help protect the airspace around New York and Washington DC. Off the west coast, a further 10 ships put to sea to take up station close to the shore.

Extra Awacs aerial reconnaissance aircraft were sent aloft to ensure that nothing other than military aircraft flew in American airspace - a home-grown version of the "no-fly zones" enforced for many years over Iraq. For much of the rest of the week, the unsettling roar of F-15 and F-16 fighters patrolling the skies high above America's biggest cities replaced the usual rumble of commercial airliners.

On Friday, in a tacit admission that America must in future be better prepared, Donald Rumsfeld, the Defence Secretary, announced that fighters were being put on a 15-minute "strip" alert at 26 bases nationwide.

There was anger among politicians at what many saw as the failure of the intelligence services, and some officials on Capitol Hill began canvassing support for a move to force George Tenet, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, originally appointed by Clinton, to step aside.

James Traficant, a Democratic congressman from Pennsylvania, said that for years Congress had poured billions of dollars of largely unscrutinised funding into America's intelligence services, "yet we learnt of every one of these tragedies from Fox News and CNN"- two television channels. Senator Richard Shelby, a Republican member of the Senate intelligence committee, said it was "a failure of great dimension".

There are moves to address one severe shortcoming noted by many critics: the CIA's reliance on technological rather than "human" means to gather information, and its weakness as a means of finding out what Osama bin Laden is up to.

During the Clinton administration, Congress banned the CIA from recruiting as a paid informer anyone with a criminal record or who was guilty of human rights violations. James Woolsey, another former CIA director, said: "Inside bin Laden's organisation there are only people who want to be human rights violators. If you don't recruit them then you don't recruit anyone."


http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main ... wcia16.xml
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5821
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 9/11 Info Dump

Postby Elvis » Sun Sep 17, 2017 1:01 am

[p.16 of dump]

I'm ending up doing a bit of sorting, but topics are still scattered. Very generally, I'm trying to first stick with the lead-up, then the day itself, the response, and the aftermath.

First item in the next file is this classic:

The Washington Post

September 28, 2001

Instant Messages To Israel Warned Of WTC Attack

NEW YORK -- OFFICIALS at instant-messaging firm Odigo confirmed today that two employees received text messages warning of an attack on the World Trade Center two hours before terrorists crashed planes into the New York landmarks. Citing a pending investigation by law enforcement, the company declined to reveal the exact contents of the message or to identify the sender.

But Alex Diamandis, vice president of sales and marketing, confirmed that workers in Odigo's research and development and international sales office in Israel received a warning from another Odigo user approximately two hours prior to the first attack. Diamandis said the sender of the instant message was not personally known to the Odigo employees. Even though the company usually protects the privacy of users, the employees recorded the Internet protocol address of the message's sender to facilitate his or her identification.

Soon after the terrorist attacks on New York, the Odigo employees notified their management, who contacted Israeli security services. In turn, the FBI was informed of the instant message warning. FBI officials were not immediately available for comment today. The Odigo service includes a feature called People Finder that allows users to seek out and contact others based on certain interests or demographics. Diamandis said it was possible that the attack warning was broadcast to other Odigo members, but the company has not received reports of other recipients of the message.

In addition to operating its own messaging service network, Odigo has licensed its technology to over 100 service providers, portals, wireless carriers, and corporations, according to the company. Odigo is online at http://www.odigo.com .

© 2001 The Washington Post Company




This story is excellent (when Salon was still relatively good). When asked why his administration was doing nothing about terrorism, Bush responded by putting Cheney in charge of all counterterrorism efforts.

http://dir.salon.com/politics/feature/2001/09/12/bush/index.html

SALON
September 12, 2001

"We predicted it"

A bipartisan commission warned the White House and Congress that a bloody attack on U.S. soil could be imminent. Why didn't anyone listen?

By Jake Tapper
- - - - - - - - - -

September 12, 2001 | WASHINGTON -- They went to great pains not to sound as though they were telling the president "We told you so."

But on Wednesday, two former senators, the bipartisan co-chairs of a Defense Department-chartered commission on national security, spoke with something between frustration and regret about how White House officials failed to embrace any of the recommendations to prevent acts of domestic terrorism delivered earlier this year.

Bush administration officials told former Sens. Gary Hart, D-Colo., and Warren Rudman, R-N.H., that they preferred instead to put aside the recommendations issued in the January report by the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century. Instead, the White House announced in May that it would have Vice President Dick Cheney study the potential problem of domestic terrorism -- which the bipartisan group had already spent two and a half years studying -- while assigning responsibility for dealing with the issue to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, headed by former Bush campaign manager Joe Allbaugh.

The Hart-Rudman Commission had specifically recommended that the issue of terrorism was such a threat it needed far more than FEMA's attention.

Before the White House decided to go in its own direction, Congress seemed to be taking the commission's suggestions seriously, according to Hart and Rudman. "Frankly, the White House shut it down," Hart says. "The president said 'Please wait, we're going to turn this over to the vice president. We believe FEMA is competent to coordinate this effort.' And so Congress moved on to other things, like tax cuts and the issue of the day."

"We predicted it," Hart says of Tuesday's horrific events. "We said Americans will likely die on American soil, possibly in large numbers -- that's a quote (from the commission's Phase One Report) from the fall of 1999."

On Tuesday, Hart says, as he sat watching TV coverage of the attacks, he experienced not just feelings of shock and horror, but also frustration. "I sat tearing my hair out," says the former two-term senator. "And still am."

Rudman generally agrees with Hart's assessment, but adds: "That's not to say that the administration was obstructing."

"They wanted to try something else, they wanted to put more responsibility with FEMA," Rudman says. "But they didn't get a chance to do very much" before terrorists struck on Tuesday.

The White House referred an inquiry to the National Security Council, which did not return a call for comment.

The bipartisan 14-member panel was put together in 1998 by then-President Bill Clinton and then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., to make sweeping strategic recommendations on how the United States could ensure its security in the 21st century.

In its Jan. 31 report, seven Democrats and seven Republicans unanimously approved 50 recommendations. Many of them addressed the point that, in the words of the commission's executive summary, "the combination of unconventional weapons proliferation with the persistence of international terrorism will end the relative invulnerability of the U.S. homeland to catastrophic attack."

"A direct attack against American citizens on American soil is likely over the next quarter century," according to the report.

The commission recommended the formation of a Cabinet-level position to combat terrorism. The proposed National Homeland Security Agency director would have "responsibility for planning, coordinating, and integrating various U.S. government activities involved in homeland security," according to the commission's executive summary.

Other commission recommendations include having the proposed National Homeland Security Agency assume responsibilities now held by other agencies -- border patrol from the Justice Department, Coast Guard from the Transportation Department, customs from the Treasury Department, the National Domestic Preparedness Office from the FBI, cyber-security from the FBI and the Commerce Department. Additionally, the NHSA would take over FEMA, and let the "National Security Advisor and NSC staff return to their traditional role of coordinating national security activities and resist the temptation to become policymakers or operators."

The commission was supposed to disband after issuing the report Jan. 31, but Hart and the other commission members got a six-month extension to lobby for their recommendations. Hart says he spent 90 minutes with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and an hour with Secretary of State Colin Powell lobbying for the White House to devote more attention to the imminent dangers of terrorism and their specific, detailed recommendations for a major change in the way the federal government approaches terrorism. He and Rudman briefed National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice on the commission's findings.

For a time, the commission seemed to be on a roll.

On April 3, before the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Terrorism and Technology, Hart sounded a call of alarm, saying that an "urgent" need existed for a new national security strategy, with an emphasis on intelligence gathering.

"Good intelligence is the key to preventing attacks on the homeland," Hart said, arguing that the commission "urges that homeland security become one of the intelligence community's most important missions." The nation needed to embrace "homeland security as a primary national security mission." The Defense Department, for instance, "has placed its highest priority on preparing for major theater war" where it "should pay far more attention to the homeland security mission." Homeland security would be the main purpose of beefed-up National Guard units throughout the country.

A new strategy, new organizations like the National Homeland Security Agency -- which would pointedly "not be heavily centered in the Washington, D.C. area" -- would be formed to fulfill this mission, as well with the fallout should that mission fail. As the U.S. is now, the Phase III report stated, "its structures and strategies are fragmented and inadequate." Diplomacy was to be refocused on intelligence sharing about terrorist groups. Allies were to have their military, intelligence and law enforcement agencies work more closely with ours. Border security was to be beefed up.

More resources needed to be devoted to the new mission. "The Customs Service, the Border Patrol, and the Coast Guard are all on the verge of being overwhelmed by the mismatch between their growing duties and their mostly static resources," the report stated. Intelligence needed to focus not only on electronic surveillance but a renewed emphasis on human surveillance -- informants and spies -- "especially on terrorist groups covertly supported by states." As the threat was imminent, Congress and the president were urged to "start right away on implementing the recommendations put forth here."

Congress seemed interested in enacting many of the commission's recommendations. "We had a very good response from the Hill," Rudman says.

In March, Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, introduced the National Homeland Security Agency Act. Other members of Congress -- Rep. Wayne Gilchrest, R-Md., John Kyl, R-Ariz., Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif. -- talked about the issue, and these three and others began drafting legislation to enact some of the recommendations into law.

But in May, Bush announced his plan almost as if the Hart-Rudman Commission never existed, as if it hadn't spent millions of dollars, "consulting with experts, visiting 25 countries worldwide, really deliberating long and hard," as Hart describes it. Bush said in a statement that "numerous federal departments and agencies have programs to deal with the consequences of a potential use of a chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear weapon in the United States. But to maximize their effectiveness, these efforts need to be seamlessly integrated, harmonious and comprehensive." That, according to the president, should be done through FEMA, headed by Allbaugh, formerly Bush's gubernatorial chief of staff.

Bush also directed Cheney -- a man with a full plate, including supervision of the administration's energy plans and its dealings with Congress -- to supervise the development of a national counter-terrorism plan. Bush announced that Cheney and Allbaugh would review the issues and have recommendations for him by Oct. 1. The commission's report was seemingly put on the shelf.

Just last Thursday, Hart spoke with Rice again. "I told her that I and the others on the commission would do whatever we could to work with the vice president to move on this," Hart said. "She said she would pass on the message."

On Tuesday, Hart says he spent much of his time on the phone with the commission's executive director, Gen. Charles G. Boyd. "We agreed the thing we should not do is say, 'We told you so,'" Hart says. "And that's not what I'm trying to do here. Our focus needs to be: What do we do now?"

Of course, as a former senator, Hart well knows what happens to the recommendations of blue-chip panels. But he says he thought that the gravity of the issue -- and the comprehensiveness of the commission's task -- would prevent its reports from being ignored. After all, when then-Secretary of Defense William Cohen signed the charter for the 21st Century National Security Strategy Study, he charged its members to engage in "the most comprehensive security analysis" since the groundbreaking National Security Act of 1947, which created the National Security Council, the Central Intelligence Agency and the Office of Secretary of Defense, among other organizations.

Neither Hart nor Rudman claim that their recommendations, if enacted, would have necessarily prevented Tuesday's tragedy. "Had they adopted every recommendation we had put forward at that time I don't think it would have changed what happened," Rudman says. "There wasn't enough time to enact everything. But certainly I would hope they pay more attention now."

"Could this have been prevented?" Hart asks. "The answer is, 'We'll never know.' Possibly not." It was a struggle to convince President Clinton of the need for such a commission, Hart says. He urged Clinton to address this problem in '94 and '95, but Clinton didn't act until 1998, prompted by politics. "He saw Gingrich was about to do it, so he moved to collaborate," Hart says. "Seven years had gone by since the end of the Cold War. It could have been much sooner."

Rudman said that he "would not be critical of them [the Bush administration] this early because the bottom line is, a lot has to be done." The commission handed down its recommendations just eight and a half months ago, he said, and they'll take years to fully enact.

"On the other hand," Rudman said, "if two years go by and the same thing happens again, shame on everybody.

"I'm not pointing fingers," Rudman said. "I just want to see some results." He may get his wish. On Wednesday, Thornberry renewed his call for a National Homeland Security Agency. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., the assistant majority leader, called for the formation of a federal counter-terrorism czar.

Three days ago, if asked to predict what the first major foreign terrorist attack on America soil would involve, Hart says he would have guessed small nuclear warheads simultaneously unleashed on three American cities. But, he says, "there wasn't doubt in anyone's mind on that commission" that something horrific would happen "probably sooner rather than later. We just didn't know how."

In addition to the Bush administration, Hart has another group that he wishes had paid the commission's suggestions more heed. "The national media didn't pay attention," Hart says. One senior reporter from a well-known publication told one of Hart's fellow commissioners, "This isn't important, none of this is ever going to happen," Hart says. "That's a direct quote."

Hart points out that while the New York Times mentioned the commission in a Wednesday story with the sub-headline "Years of Unheeded Alarms," that story was the first serious mention the Times itself had ever given the commission. The Times did not cover the commission's report in January, nor did it cover Hart's testimony in April, he points out. "We're in an age where we don't want to deal with serious issues, we want to deal with little boys pitching baseballs who might be 14 instead of 12."

Hart says he just shook his head when he saw a former Clinton administration Cabinet official on TV Tuesday calling for the formation of a commission to study the best way to combat terrorism. "If a former Cabinet officer didn't know, how could the average man on the street? I do hope the American people understand that somebody was paying attention."

In his April 3 testimony, Hart noted that "the prospect of mass casualty terrorism on American soil is growing sharply. That is because the will to terrorism and the ways to perpetrate it are proliferating and merging. We believe that, over the next quarter century, this danger will be one of the most difficult national security challenges facing the United States -- and the one we are least prepared to address." He urgently described the need for better human intelligence and not just electronic intelligence, "especially on terrorist groups covertly supported by states."

He's far from happy to have been proven correct. Both Hart and Rudman say with grim confidence that Tuesday's attacks are just the beginning. Maybe now, Rudman says, Congress, the White House, the media and the American people will realize how serious they were about their January report.

"Human nature is prevalent in government as well," Rudman says. "We tend not to do what we ought to do until we get hit between the eyes."

salon.com
- - - - - - - - - - - -

About the writer
Jake Tapper is Salon's Washington correspondent and the author of "Down and Dirty: The Plot to Steal the Presidency."




http://www.josephbosco.com/2004/03/what-is-dubya-cheney-rumsfeld.html

Wednesday, March 10, 2004

What Is Dubya Cheney Rumsfeld & Associates, Inc. Hiding?
Joseph Bosco

Setting the Record Straight

In recent weeks, President Bush has touted his record on national security issues, while criticizing others for supposedly weakening U.S. homeland defense. But with the President refusing to meet with the 9/11 commission for longer than one hour, concerns are being raised about whether the Bush Administration has something to hide about it's pre-9/11 behavior. As columnist Richard Cohen notes, "If the President wants to own Sept. 11" for his political gain "he's entitled. But it does not come alone. Sept. 10 is his, too." While Vice President Cheney has derided questioning of the Administration's pre-9/11 behavior as "thoroughly irresponsible and totally unworthy of national leaders in a time of war," serious questions remain about whether the White House grossly neglected counter-terrorism in the lead-up to 9/11. As a 5/27/02 Newsweek cover story noted, before 9/11 "the Bushies had an ideological agenda of their own": one that subordinated – and in many cases tried to reduce funding for – counter-terrorism efforts. As the NYT reported on 2/28/02, the shift was so dramatic that senior intelligence agents feared it would mean "that counterterrorism would be downgraded" over the long run and that there was a "lack of focus on fighting terrorism." What follows is an analysis of what the Administration knew before 9/11, and what it did – and did not do - with that information:

THE WARNINGS – BUSH ADMINISTRATION WAS TOLD: Upon coming into office, the Bush Administration inherited a government that was receiving more and more specific warnings about the threat of an Al Qaeda attack on the United States. As ABC News reported, Bush Administration "officials acknowledged that U.S. intelligence officials informed President Bush weeks before the Sept. 11 attacks that bin Laden's terrorist network might try to hijack American planes." Similarly, Newsweek reported "that as many as 10 to 12 warnings" were issued, and "more than two of the warnings specifically mentioned the possibility of hijackings." Meanwhile, George Tenet, "was issuing many warnings that bin Laden was 'the most immediate' threat to Americans." The warnings were so explicit that in the months leading up to 9/11, Attorney General John Ashcroft stopped flying commercial airlines and instead began "traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines" because of "what the Justice Department called a 'threat assessment.'" That "threat assessment" was not made public.

THE WARNINGS – POST-9/11 DENIALS: Despite these explicit warnings, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice claimed that the Administration was never warned of an attack before 9/11, saying "I don't think anybody could have predicted that they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile." Similarly, President Bush denied having any idea about the threat, saying on 5/17/02, "Had I known that the enemy was going to use airplanes to kill on that fateful morning, I would have done everything in my power to protect the American people."

THE FOCUS – WHAT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION INHERITED: Upon taking office, the Bush Administration inherited a national security structure increasingly focused on the threat of terrorism. As the NYT reported, Attorney General Janet Reno ended her tenure as "perhaps the strongest advocate" of counterterrorism spending, and Newsweek reported National Security Adviser Sandy Berger was "totally preoccupied" with the prospect of a domestic terror attack, telling his replacement that they need to be "spending more time on this issue than on any other." As a 4/2/00 WP story noted Berger "insists that the threat of large-scale terrorist attacks on U.S. soil is 'a reality, not a perception.'" He said at the time, "We would be irresponsible if we did not take this seriously. I hope that in 10 years' time, they will say we did too much, not too little." And the warnings – which the Bush Administration denied ever receiving – "found a receptive ear in Clinton. In January 2000, [Clinton] departed from the prepared text of his State of the Union address to predict that terrorists and organized criminals 'with increasing access to ever more sophisticated chemical and biological weapons' will pose 'the major security threat' to the United States in 10 to 20 years."

THE FOCUS - TAKING EYES OFF THE BALL: The NYT reported that in the lead-up to 9/11, Attorney General John Ashcroft "said fighting terrorism was a top priority of his agency," yet upon entering office, "he identified more than a dozen other objectives for greater emphasis within the Justice Department before the attacks, internal department documents show." On Aug. 9, the Administration distributed a strategic plan to the Justice Department highlighting its new goals from a list of Clinton Administration goals. The item that referred to intelligence and investigation of terrorists was left unhighlighted. Similarly, Newsweek reported that the Bush Administration "seemed particularly eager to set a new agenda. In the spring of 2001, the attorney general had an extraordinary confrontation with the then FBI Director Louis Freeh at an annual meeting of special agents. The two talked before appearing, and Ashcroft laid out his priorities for Freeh: "basically violent crime and drugs," recalls one participant. Freeh replied bluntly that those were not his priorities, and began to talk about terror and counterterrorism. "Ashcroft didn't want to hear about it," says a former senior law-enforcement official."

THE FOCUS – THE TASK FORCE THAT WASN'T: The al Qaeda warnings were dire enough to move President Bush in May of 2001 to appoint Vice President Cheney to head a task force "to combat terrorist attacks on the United States." As the WP reported, Bush said that day that Cheney would direct a government-wide review on managing the consequences of a domestic attack, and that "I will periodically chair a meeting of the National Security Council to review these efforts." Neither "Cheney's review nor Bush's took place." Meanwhile, Newsweek reported that when Sens. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and John Kyl (R-AZ) "sent a copy of draft legislation on counterterrorism and homeland defense to Cheney's office on July 20," they were told by Cheney's top aide "that it might be another six months before he would be able to review the material."

THE FUNDING - CUTTING COUNTER-TERRORISM PROGRAMS... In its final budget request for the fiscal year 2003 submitted on Sept. 10, 2001, the Administration "called for spending increases in 68 programs, none of which directly involved counterterrorism...In his Sept. 10 submission to the budget office, Mr. Ashcroft did not endorse F.B.I. requests for $58 million for 149 new counterterrorism field agents, 200 intelligence analysts and 54 additional translators. Mr. Ashcroft proposed cuts in 14 programs. One proposed $65 million cut was for a program that gives state and local counterterrorism grants for equipment, including radios and decontamination suits and training to localities for counterterrorism preparedness." The WP reported that in its first budget, the White House left "gaps" between "what military commanders said they needed to combat terrorists and what they got." Newsweek noted that, among other things, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld elected not to re-launch a Predator drone that had been tracking bin Laden. When the Senate Armed Services Committee tried to fill those gaps, "Rumsfeld said he would recommend a veto" on September 9. By comparison, "Under Mr. Ashcroft's predecessor, Janet Reno, the department's counterterrorism budget increased 13.6% in the fiscal year 1999, 7.1% in 2000 and 22.7% in 2001."

THE FUNDING: ...WHILE GIVING GIFTS TO THE TALIBAN: At the same time the White House was trying to gut counter-terrorism funding, it ignored human rights concerns and the Taliban's known ties to terrorists, and gave "$43 million in drought aid to Afghanistan after the Taliban began a campaign against poppy growers." As the 5/29/01 edition of Newsday noted at the time, the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan "are a decidedly odd choice for an outright gift of $43 million from the Bush administration. This is the same government against which the United Nation imposes sanctions, at the behest of the United States, for refusing to turn over the terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden. The Bush Administration is so delighted at the opium ban that it's willing to overlook America's differences with the Taliban even its protection of bin Laden."

THE RESULT – EFFORTS TO PREVENT ATTACK WERE "UNDERMINED": According to one former FBI official, the Administration "really undermined a lot of effort to change the culture and change the mind-set" of law enforcement agencies that were making progress on counter-terrorism. Newsweek echoed this sentiment, noting "the question is whether the administration was really paying much attention" to counter-terrorism at all in the lead up to 9/11.



New York Times
February 28, 2002
How Sept. 11 Changed Goals of Justice Dept.
By ADAM CLYMER

W ASHINGTON, Feb. 27 — Attorney General John Ashcroft has been testifying before Congress this week, arguing for substantial spending increases for counterterrorism programs.

His appearances, in which he is seeking nearly $2 billion in additional spending next year, are a vivid example of the changed priorities of many cabinet agencies in a post- Sept. 11 world, as preventing future attacks has emerged as the Bush administration's top priority.

For Mr. Ashcroft, the change in spending priorities before Sept. 11 and after has been especially noteworthy. Although the attorney general made speeches and delivered Congressional testimony before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in which he said fighting terrorism was a top priority of his agency, he identified more than a dozen other objectives for greater emphasis within the Justice Department before the attacks, internal department documents show.

In his final budget request for the fiscal year 2003 submitted on Sept. 10 to the budget director, Mitchell E. Daniels Jr., the attorney general called for spending increases in 68 programs, none of which directly involved counterterrorism. Upgrading the F.B.I.'s computer system, one of the areas in which he sought an increase, is relevant to combating terrorism, though Mr. Ashcroft did not defend it on that ground.

But in his Sept. 10 submission to the budget office, Mr. Ashcroft did not endorse F.B.I. requests for $58 million for 149 new counterterrorism field agents, 200 intelligence analysts and 54 additional translators.

Mr. Ashcroft proposed cuts in 14 programs. One proposed $65 million cut was for a program that gives state and local counterterrorism grants for equipment, including radios and decontamination suits and training to localities for counterterrorism preparedness.

Last August, before he proposed cutting the program to $44 million from $109 million, Mr. Ashcroft went to Dayton, Ohio, and watched a preparedness exercise and announced grants totaling $1.8 million to Ohio. He said: "All of these domestic preparedness efforts have one overarching goal: to ensure that those of you at the state and local levels build the critical capacity to adequately respond to domestic terrorism. At the Department of Justice, we recognize that the threat of terrorism here at home is a serious and growing challenge for our nation."

Mr. Ashcroft justified the cut to Mr. Daniels by saying that states had been slow to develop the statewide plans needed to qualify for federal money. Congressional critics of the attorney general said the Justice Department was not really interested in the program and did not help states develop the required plans.

In various listings of priorities for his department issued between May 10 and Aug. 9, made available to The New York Times by Congressional officials critical of Mr. Ashcroft, the attorney general did not single out counter-terrorism.

For example, in a May 10 letter to department heads, which told them the agenda the new administration was setting, he did not mention terrorism. Instead, Mr. Ashcroft cited seven goals: reducing gun violence and drug trafficking; helping states with anticrime programs; reducing racial discrimination; securing the nation's borders and cutting the immigration backlog; reducing overcrowding and drug use in prisons; securing the rights of victims of crime and strengthening internal financial and computer systems.

Department officials said none of Mr. Ashcroft's budget recommendations or priority memorandums before Sept. 11 detracted from the government's counterterrorism efforts. A department budget official said the listing was intended to focus new attention on "specific presidential initiatives, such as gun violence and immigration services," and not to suggest that other department functions were unimportant.

Barbara Comstock, a spokeswoman for the Justice Department, said "The attorney general supported budget requests, last year and this year, that are necessary to support his commitment to counterterrorism."

To underscore Mr. Ashcroft's dedication to fighting terrorism before Sept. 11, Ms. Comstock also pointed to a variety of statements and speeches in which Mr. Ashcroft said that fighting terrorism was his highest priority.

Testifying before Congress on May 9, Mr. Ashcroft said of counterterrorism, "The Department of Justice has no higher priority." In a July 11 speech at a domestic preparedness summit of the National Governors Association, he said, "Our No. 1 priority is the prevention of terrorist attacks."

But the attorney general's tough talk was not always reflected in the department's priority lists and budget requests, and some former Justice officials and officials at the Federal Bureau of Investigation said they were frustrated that he had not supported more financing for counter- terror programs before Sept. 11.

On Aug. 9, a chart titled "Strategic Plan — Attorney General Priorities" was distributed inside the department. This listed the same seven goals and 36 objectives under them. Thirteen of the objectives were highlighted in yellow and explained as "Highlight=AG Goal," including reducing gun violence, cutting the immigration backlog and strengthening internal financial systems. One of the 36 items referred to intelligence and investigation concerning terrorists, but it was not highlighted. A Justice Department official said this was a preliminary document and the eventual version, issued on Nov. 8, made counterterrorism "the No. 1 goal."

Under Mr. Ashcroft's predecessor, Janet Reno, the department's counterterrorism budget increased 13.6 percent in the fiscal year 1999, 7.1 percent in 2000 and 22.7 percent in 2001.

One outside consultant who has worked with the Justice Department and other law enforcement agencies for many years said Mr. Ashcroft's initial focus on other priorities was "not unusual."

New attorneys general, he said, always come with their "local agenda," and Mr. Ashcroft highlighted greater enforcement of existing gun laws. He said Ms. Reno ended her tenure as "perhaps the strongest advocate" of counterterrorism spending, after starting her tenure emphasizing how the department would try to protect children.

One former federal law enforcement official said that top officials in the F.B.I., which does the bulk of the department's counterterrorism work, had been concerned about Mr. Ashcroft's initial lack of focus on fighting terrorism. He said there was worry among some senior agents that counterterrorism would be downgraded in future years if Mr. Ashcroft's early attitude did not change.

Another former F.B.I. official said that Mr. Ashcroft's attitude "really undermined a lot of effort to change the culture and change the mind-set" of F.B.I. agents. Any organization, the official said, reacts to its boss's priorities.

But a senior F.B.I. official said the bureau's final budget request, which had not been approved by the Department of Justice before Sept. 11, did contain substantial counter-terrorism spending.

"We had a fairly robust counterterrorism item in," the official said, "and we expected it was going to survive the department's budget review."

And the special agent in charge of one major F.B.I. post, who would not allow his name to be used, agreed. He said: "We were under our own strategic plan. The Tier 1 issues were counterterrorism and counterintelligence."

On Nov. 8, a new version of the Strategic Plan chart was issued. Instead of seven strategic goals, it had eight. No. 1 was "Protect America Against the Threat of Terrorism."

Now Mr. Ashcroft is seeking the money he needs to fulfill that goal.



Related, also good:

Washington Post
January 20, 2002

A Strategy's Cautious Evolution
Before Sept. 11, the Bush Anti-Terror Effort Was Mostly Ambition
By Barton Gellman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, January 20, 2002; Page A01

On a closed patch of desert in the first week of June, the U.S. government built a house for Osama bin Laden.

Bin Laden would have recognized the four-room villa. He lived in one just like it outside Kandahar, Afghanistan, whenever he spent a night among the recruits at his Tarnak Qila training camp. The stone-for-stone replica, in Nevada, was a prop in the rehearsal of his death.

From a Predator drone flying two miles high and four miles away, Air Force and Central Intelligence Agency ground controllers loosed a missile. It carried true with a prototype warhead, one of about 100 made, for killing men inside buildings. According to people briefed on the experiment, careful analysis after the missile pierced the villa wall showed blast effects that would have slain anyone in the target room.

The Bush administration now had in its hands what one participant called "the holy grail" of a three-year quest by the U.S. government – a tool that could kill bin Laden within minutes of finding him. The CIA planned and practiced the operation. But for the next three months, before the catastrophe of Sept. 11, President Bush and his advisers held back.

The new national security team awaited results of a broad policy review toward the al Qaeda network and Afghanistan's Taliban regime, still underway in a working group two and three levels below the president. Bush and his top aides had higher priorities – above all, ballistic missile defense. As they turned their attention to terrorism, they were moving toward more far-reaching goals than the death of bin Laden alone.

Bush's engagement with terrorism in the first eight months of his term, described in interviews with advisers and contemporary records, tells a story of burgeoning ambition without the commitment of comparably ambitious means. In deliberations and successive drafts of a National Security Presidential Directive approved by Bush's second-ranking advisers on Aug. 13, the declared objective evolved from "rolling back" to "permanently eroding" and eventually to "eliminating" bin Laden's al Qaeda organization.

Cabinet-rank policymakers, or principals, took up the new strategy for the first time on Sept. 4. It called for phased escalation of pressure against Taliban leaders to present them with an unavoidable choice – disgorge al Qaeda or face removal from power.

The directive asked the CIA and the Pentagon to produce options involving force – covert and overt – but it deferred decisions on their use. It had not reached Bush's desk by Sept. 11, and on that day its multiyear plan of single steps became a race to start the war on every front at once.

Had hijackers not killed more than 3,000 people, senior advisers said, there is no way to predict how far Bush would have chosen to follow the path they were mapping.

"We won't really know, because the strategy doesn't unfold" before Sept. 11, said a central participant in developing it, who declined to be quoted by name. "It's a phased strategy that we lay out. And in some sense, whether you have to use the military option is going to depend [on] whether the first part of your strategy fails or succeeds. I can tell you the strategy we had, the sequencing we had in mind. I guess I can't prove to you that we would have done it."

Privately, as the strategy took form in spring and summer, the Bush team expressed disdain for the counterterrorist policies it had inherited from President Bill Clinton. Speaking of national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, a colleague said that "what she characterized as the Clinton administration approach was 'empty rhetoric that made us look feckless.'‚"

Yet a careful review of the Bush administration's early record on terrorism finds more continuity than change from the Clinton years, measured in actions taken and decisions made. Where the new team shifted direction, it did not always choose a more aggressive path:

The administration did not resume its predecessor's covert deployment of cruise missile submarines and gunships, on six-hour alert near Afghanistan's borders. The standby force gave Clinton the option, never used, of an immediate strike against targets in al Qaeda's top leadership. The Bush administration put no such capability in place before Sept. 11.

At least twice, Bush conveyed the message to the Taliban that the United States would hold the regime responsible for an al Qaeda attack. But after concluding that bin Laden's group had carried out the October 2000 attack on the USS Cole – a conclusion stated without hedge in a Feb. 9 briefing for Vice President Cheney – the new administration did not choose to order armed forces into action.

In the spring, CIA officers traveled into northern Afghanistan to assess rebel forces commanded by Ahmed Shah Massoud. They found him worse than he had appeared the autumn before. The agency gave Massoud cash and supplies in small amounts in exchange for intelligence on al Qaeda but did not have the authority to build back his fighting strength against the Taliban.

In his first budget, Bush spent $13.6 billion on counterterrorist programs across 40 departments and agencies. That compares with $12 billion in the previous fiscal year, according to the Office of Management and Budget. There were also somewhat higher gaps this year, however, between what military commanders said they needed to combat terrorists and what they got. When the Senate Armed Services Committee tried to fill those gaps with $600 million diverted from ballistic missile defense, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said he would recommend a veto. That threat came Sept. 9.

On May 8, Bush announced a new Office of National Preparedness for terrorism at the Federal Emergency Management Agency. At the same time, he proposed to cut FEMA's budget by $200 million. Bush said that day that Cheney would direct a government-wide review on managing the consequences of a domestic attack, and "I will periodically chair a meeting of the National Security Council to review these efforts." Neither Cheney's review nor Bush's took place.

Bush did not speak again publicly of the dangers of terrorism before Sept. 11, except to promote a missile shield that had been his top military priority from the start. At least three times he mentioned "terrorist threats that face us" to explain the need to discard the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty.

The Treasury Department created a new deputy assistant secretary's post last summer to coordinate anti-terrorist efforts among its five enforcement arms, and it took the first steps toward hosting a Foreign Terrorist Assets Tracking Center. It also spent months fending off the new laws and old global institutions that are central to the war against al Qaeda's financing. Unresolved interagency disputes left the administration without a position on legislative initiatives to combat money laundering. And until the summer, Treasury Secretary Paul H. O'Neill suspended U.S. participation in allied efforts to penetrate offshore banking havens, whose secrecy protects the cash flows of drug traffickers, tax evaders and terrorists.

At the nexus of law enforcement and intelligence, where the United States has concentrated its work against al Qaeda since 1998, a longtime senior participant said he observed no essential change after the White House passed to new occupants.
"Ninety-nine point-something percent of the work going on and the decisions being made would have continued to be made whether or not we had an election," the career officer said. "I have a real difficult time pointing to anything from January 20th to September 10th that can be said to be a Bush initiative, or something that wouldn't have happened anyway."

'What Are You Going to Do About It?'

At 1:30 on a Wednesday afternoon, two weeks after receiving the nod as Bush's national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice walked into a room whose maps and charts only partly obscured the peeling of pale yellow paint. Room 302 of the Old Executive Office Building had become the unlikely seat of a bureaucratic empire built by Richard Clarke and Roger Cressey, his chief of staff.

Clarke's white crew cut imparts a military demeanor, but he actually came to government by way of Boston Latin School and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Under Clinton, he had combined modest authority with immodest infighting skills to become the government's main engine of policy on terrorism. In this first meeting with Rice, on Jan. 3, he won a prompt invitation to keep the job.

"The focus was on al Qaeda – who is al Qaeda, what is al Qaeda and why is it an existential threat?" Clarke recalled in an interview.

Rice told him first, he said, that the dangers appeared to be greater than she had known.

"Her second reaction was 'What are you going to do about it?'‚" Clarke said. "I don't think we actually got a tasking at that meeting, but it was clear that she wanted an organized strategy review. She didn't just passively take this information."

Soon afterward, Rice had lunch with the man she would replace in the northwest corner office of the White House. Sitting face to face in blue wingback chairs, Rice and Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger traversed the policy horizon from Russia, China and the Middle East to the spread of nuclear weapons. Berger made what he thought might be an unexpected claim.

"I said to Condi, 'You're going to spend more time during your four years on terrorism generally and al Qaeda specifically than any other issue,' " he said. Bush administration officials gave a similar account.

In the Situation Room on Jan. 10, a CIA briefer showed Rice a video clip of bin Laden filmed by a Predator drone – then unarmed – some months before. The live-action image tracked him out the door of a villa and across the road. The same villa, in another five months, would rise and fall on the Nevada desert test range.

Across the Potomac River, outgoing defense secretary William S. Cohen and his chief of staff, Robert Tyrer, prepared what may stand as the shortest memo of consequence in Pentagon lore.

"There's a period in the transition where the building gets its hooks into you and you get 'death by briefing' by each component in every service," Tyrer recalled. Before that started, he said, "we wanted to lay out, from the perspective only the top guy has, what are some of the issues that may not occur to you that you need to be prepared for."

One of those came in a handwritten note, covering less than a page. The lined paper had nothing on it but three names and three telephone numbers – the Pentagon's top career specialists on terrorism. Cohen had found out the hard way that a defense secretary might need them fast.

"Literally, it was 'Here's a piece of paper, here are the names of your experts who you haven't met, here are their home phone numbers,' " said another top Cohen aide, who had prepared the list. "We tried to make it clear that you can wake up on the morning of your inauguration and have something very big in your face."

At a Jan. 10 meeting in the Tank, the secure conference room of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, President-elect Bush and his defense team took their first briefing from Gen. Henry H. Shelton, the chairman, and the four service chiefs. Participants said neither side, then or later, raised the subject of a six-hour alert force near Afghanistan.

Shelton had no interest in returning Los Angeles-class submarines, which carry cruise missiles, or AC-130 gunships, which fire computer-directed cannon, to their previous Afghan stations. The intelligence community had yet to give him a target for bin Laden that he thought he could strike in time.

Those on Bush's team had different reasons. They had already begun discussions, one adviser said, of whether bin Laden's death would be enough. And they were convinced that "this wasn't about [bin Laden], this was about al Qaeda, and that's why we had to go after the network as a whole."

Personalizing the struggle to one man, he said, was "one of the fallacies" of the Clinton team's approach.

'There Must Be a Consequence'

In his first week on the job, deputy national security adviser Stephen J. Hadley instructed NSC team leaders to propose subjects for high-level review. Much of the incoming staff was still finding its way around the 553 rooms and two miles of corridors in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, once the world's largest.


Clarke did not need a map, or a second invitation. He had a three-page proposal on Hadley's desk that day.

The Jan. 25 memorandum spoke starkly. Clarke and Cressey had just navigated through the most intensive period of counterterrorist activity in American history. The millennium year marked its start with al Qaeda plots – stopped by improbable good fortune – to mount synchronized strikes on airports in Boston and Los Angeles, and on American tourists in Jordan. It ended with a suicide attack that killed 17 sailors and crippled the USS Cole in Yemen three weeks before the presidential election.

More attacks had almost certainly been set in motion, Clarke and Cressey wrote. American intelligence believed there were al Qaeda "sleeper cells" in America – not a potential problem but "a major threat in being," according to people who read their proposal.

Clarke had pressed superiors since the Cole bombing on Oct. 12, 2000, to mount a military attack on al Qaeda's Afghan training camps. Clinton left the question for his successor, and what little public record there was hinted that Bush might choose to act.
"I hope that we can gather enough intelligence to figure out who did the act and take the necessary action," candidate Bush said the morning after the explosion. "There must be a consequence."

Clarke argued that the camps were can't-miss targets, and they mattered. The facilities amounted to conveyor belts for al Qaeda's human capital, with raw recruits arriving and trained fighters departing – either for front lines against the Northern Alliance, the Afghan rebel coalition, or against American interests somewhere else. The U.S. government had whole libraries of images filmed over Tarnak Qila and its sister camp, Garmabat Ghar, 19 miles farther west. Why watch al Qaeda train several thousand men a year and then chase them around the world when they left?

Clarke asked Rice to let him begin an interagency review. As it began, he recommended five immediate steps.

Massoud's Northern Alliance fighters, in danger of defeat by the Taliban, needed enough aid "to keep them alive until we figured out what our overall strategy would be," as a new Bush appointee put it. In neighboring Uzbekistan, President Islam Karimov needed more help for an American-trained battalion he sent against fundamentalist rebels allied with al Qaeda. Treasury had to get moving on a terrorist assets tracking center, months overdue. The CIA's Counterterrorism Center could buy a lot more cooperation from foreign intelligence services if it had more cash – the center's whole budget, sources said, did not exceed $50 million. And the Voice of America had to start answering bin Laden – in local languages – to counter his appeal in the Islamic world.

Not much came of Clarke's immediate requests. It would be months before the new team's appointees arrived in force. But Rice and Hadley liked his zeal. The inherited strategy of battling al Qaeda cell by cell, they believed, could not work.

"The premise was, you either had to get the Taliban to give up al Qaeda, or you were going to have to go after both the Taliban and al Qaeda, together," Hadley said in an interview. "As long as al Qaeda is in Afghanistan under the protection of the Taliban . . . you're going to have to treat it as a system and either break them apart, or go after them together."

Work began in the Counterterrorism Strategy Group, or CSG, by the first week of February. There it stayed for months.

"The U.S. government can only manage at the highest level a certain number of issues at one time – two or three," said Michael Sheehan, the State Department's former coordinator for counterterrorism. "You can't get to the principals on any other issue. That's in any administration."

Before Sept. 11, terrorism did not make that cut.

Army Lt. Gen. Donald Kerrick, who had come from top posts on the Joint Staff and the Defense Intelligence Agency to manage Clinton's National Security Council staff, remained at the NSC nearly four months after Bush took office.

He noticed a difference on terrorism. Clinton's Cabinet advisers, burning with the urgency of their losses to bin Laden in the African embassy bombings in 1998 and the Cole attack in 2000, had met "nearly weekly" to direct the fight, Kerrick said. Among Bush's first-line advisers, "candidly speaking, I didn't detect" that kind of focus, he said. "That's not being derogatory. It's just a fact. I didn't detect any activity but what Dick Clarke and the CSG were doing."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy ... ge=printer



Not to be confused with The New Yorker Hersh:

WHAT WENT WRONG. The inside story of the missed signals and intelligence failures that raise a chilling question: did September 11 have to happen?

By Michael Hirsh and Michael Isikoff
Newsweek
May 27/02

SO MUCH COMES IN, rumor, hearsay, disinformation, so little of it more than trash: once in a blue moon an agent-prospector may get lucky. But even then an agent’s warning is likely to be dismissed as what Condoleezza Rice last week called “chatter.” “There’s always TMI—too much information,” says former CIA agent Milt Bearden. Often agents poke fun at the sometimes obsessive quirks of their colleagues. “If a confidential memorandum comes from a guy out in, say, Phoenix, the first thing that goes up the line is, ‘That’s Harry again. He’s like a broken clock twice a day’, ” one ex-agent says. Even today, long after 9-11, streams of new threats pass unnoticed through Washington. In recent weeks, for instance, the FBI has gotten specific threats about a car- or truck-bomb attack on an “all-glass” building near the U.S. Capitol, and another threat against a Celebrity cruise ship off Florida. Neither was corroborated, or publicized.

Yet every now and then, amid the piles of dross, a nugget of pure gold turns up in intel files. The key for American national security—now and into the future—is to know it when we see it. Back in July 2001, Bill Kurtz and his team hit pay dirt, and no one seemed to care. A hard-driven supervisor in the FBI’s Phoenix office, Kurtz was overseeing an investigation of suspected Islamic terrorists last July when a member of his team, a sharp, 41-year-old counterterrorism agent named Kenneth Williams, noticed something odd: a large number of suspects were signing up to take courses in how to fly airplanes. The agent’s suspicions were further fueled when he heard that some of the men at the local Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University were asking a lot of questions about airport security.

SOMETHING BIGGER?

Kurtz, who had previously worked on the Osama bin Laden unit of the FBI’s international terrorism section, was convinced he and his colleagues might have stumbled on to something bigger. Kurtz’s team fired off a lengthy memo raising the possibility that bin Laden might be using U.S. flight schools to infiltrate the country’s civil-aviation system. “He thinks of everything in terms of bin Laden,” one colleague recalled. The memo outlined a proposal for the FBI to monitor “civil aviation colleges/universities around the country.”

Williams, the agent who sniffed out the link, was described by one former colleague as a “superstar,” a former SWAT sniper and family man who coaches Little League and, in 1995, helped track down Michael Fortier, Timothy McVeigh’s former Army buddy. “Anything he says you can take to the bank,” says former agent Ron Myers.

But little of that seemed to make a difference back in Washington, where the Kurtz team suffered a fate even worse than Cassandra’s: not only were they not believed, they were ignored altogether. The FBI was concerned about racial profiling. Moreover, it wasn’t used to gathering intelligence, especially domestically, given American sensitivities about intrusive government and civil liberties. Its intelligence-assessment system was almost laughably antiquated. And under Attorney General John Ashcroft, the department was being prodded back into its old law-and-order mind-set: violent crime, drugs, child porn. Counterterrorism, which had become a priority of the Clintonites (not that they did a better job of nailing bin Laden), seemed to be getting less attention. When FBI officials sought to add hundreds more counterintelligence agents, they got shot down even as Ashcroft began, quietly, to take a privately chartered jet for his own security reasons.

The attorney general was hardly alone in seeming to de-emphasize terror in the young Bush administration. Over at the Pentagon, new Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld elected not to relaunch a Predator drone that had been tracking bin Laden, among other actions. In self- absorbed Washington, the Phoenix memo, which never resulted in arrests, landed in two units at FBI headquarters but didn’t make it to senior levels. Nor did the memo get transmitted to the CIA, which has long had a difficult relationship with the FBI—and whose director, George Tenet, one of the few Clinton holdovers, was issuing so many warnings that bin Laden was “the most immediate” threat to Americans he was hardly heeded any longer.

A STREAM OF WARNINGS

Last week the tale of the missed signal from Phoenix became, for thousands of families of 9-11 victims, yet another tendril of pain stemming from that day. Indeed, it was part of a whole summer of missed clues that, taken together, seemed to presage the terrible September of 2001. The same week in early July that Kurtz and his team were dispatching their memo, the White House acknowledged for the first time, Bush was privately beginning to worry about the stream of terror warnings he was hearing that summer, most of them aimed at U.S. targets abroad. On July 5, five days before the Phoenix memo, Bush directed Rice to figure out what was going on domestically. A month later, America learned for the first time last week—nine months after the attacks—Bush received a “presidential daily brief” in Crawford, Texas, that mentioned the possibility of an airline hijacking as a domestic threat. The Aug. 6 briefing was only “an analytic report that talked about [bin Laden’s] methods of operation, talked about what he had done historically,” Rice said in a hastily called conference to contain the damage from the news.

Because Bush has long insisted he had no inkling of the attacks, the disclosures touched off a media stampede in a capital long deprived of scandal. The fact that the nation’s popular war president might have been warned a little over a month before September 11—and that the supposedly straight-talking Bushies hadn’t told anyone about it—opened up a serious credibility gap for the first time in the war on terror.

There were, in fact, failures at every level that summer: from the shortcomings in the law-enforcement trenches—the FBI’s poor record at domestic surveillance, the CIA’s poor record at infiltrating Islamic groups and the lack of cooperation between the two agencies—to the fixed strategic mind-set of the Bush administration. Between the claims by the FBI and CIA that they didn’t get enough information and the White House’s insistence that it didn’t receive any reports—”He doesn’t recall seeing anything,” Rice said when asked if Bush had read the Phoenix memo—the buck seems to be stopping nowhere. “If I were an average citizen, I’d be pissed at the whole American government,” says a senior official who has worked on counterterrorism.

The question is not so much what the president knew and when he knew it. The question is whether the administration was really paying much attention. Terrorism is by nature stealthy and hard to crack, even in the face of the most zealous efforts to thwart it. What Americans should be asking is why the Bush administration in its first eight months, like the Clinton administration for much of its eight years, did not demand the intelligence cooperation that was needed. At issue is not whom to blame for the past, but how to learn from it to safeguard our future.

NEW CLUES IN ODD PLACES

The fact is, in a nation that prides itself on its mastery of the Information Age, almost no one in the U.S. government seemed to know what anyone else was doing. Even as what Rice called “major threat spikes” began to appear on Washington’s radar screen the summer of the Phoenix memo, other new clues began arising in odd places around the country, unknown to senior members of the administration. In mid-August Minneapolis agents arrested a French-Moroccan flight student, Zacarias Moussaoui, and worked themselves into a “frenzy” over the possibility that he was planning a terrorist act involving a large aircraft, one official said. One agent even speculated in his notes that Moussaoui, whom some authorities now believe was supposed to have been the 20th hijacker, might be planning to crash a plane into the World Trade Center. But the Minneapolis agents knew nothing about the Kurtz team’s memo.

Nor did they or senior administration officials appear to know that a few weeks after the Phoenix warning, the FBI got wind that two men who were on a watch list of terror suspects—Khalid Almihdhar, who had been linked to the USS Cole bombing, and an associate, Nawaf Alhazmi—were in the United States. The FBI traced them to southern California, but failed even to check the San Diego phone book to see if they were listed (Alhazmi was), or local banks to see if they had accounts (one of them did). Both men, then in San Diego, were hijackers on American Airlines Flight 77. Rice also disclosed that during the course of last summer, the Federal Aviation Administration issued several “information circulars” warning the aviation industry of possible terror attacks. NEWSWEEK has learned that as many as 10 to 12 such warnings were issued to all U.S. airlines and major airports in the period between June 2001 and September 11. According to sources who have read them, more than two of the warnings specifically mentioned the possibility of hijackings.

9-11 Families: Reopening the Wounds Also in early July, about the same time that Bush expressed an interest in learning more about Al Qaeda, Ahmed Ressam was spilling his guts in prison on the West Coast. Ressam had planned to bomb the L.A. Airport after the turn of the millennium but was caught when he bolted from his car. After he was convicted in the spring of 2001, Ressam started giving investigators detailed information on Al Qaeda’s designs in the United States. He left no doubt that U.S. airports were a prime target “because an airport is sensitive politically and economically,” as Ressam said in court on July 3. At least two of the FAA’s summer warnings came from Ressam’s information, which should have given pause to Bush administration officials who remained convinced that the threat was abroad.

NEWSWEEK has learned there was one other major complication as America headed into that threat-spiked summer. In Washington, Royce Lamberth, chief judge of the special federal court that reviews national-security wiretaps, erupted in anger when he found that an FBI official was misrepresenting petitions for taps on terror suspects. Lamberth prodded Ashcroft to launch an investigation, which reverberated throughout the bureau. From the summer of 2000 on into the following year, sources said, the FBI was forced to shut down wiretaps of Qaeda-related suspects connected to the 1998 African embassy bombing investigation. “It was a major problem,” said one source familiar with the case, who estimated that 10 to 20 Qaeda wiretaps had to be shut down, as well as wiretaps into a separate New York investigation of Hamas. The effect was to stymie terror surveillance at exactly the moment it was needed most: requests from both Phoenix and Minneapolis for wiretaps were turned down.

Reaction from Washington Click here to watch 1 / 9 Common ground? Tim Russert, moderator of NBC’s “Meet the Press”, says the White House and Democratic lawmakers ought to be able to agree on ways to improve the U.S. intelligence infrastructure.

Together all these clues, scattered like tantalizing jigsaw pieces across America, suggest that U.S. airports at least should have been on high alert on September 11. They weren’t. Indeed, the two airlines involved in the hijackings say they were barely aware of the FAA warnings.

FUZZY AND THIN

Even most of Bush’s critics said the president himself was mostly blameless in the blame game, at least when it came to the kind of briefing he received on Aug. 6. Rice said the memo he got that day was fuzzy and thin, only a page-and-a-half long. But once again the administration sought to fend off hearings—as Vice President Dick Cheney had in early February, when he defiantly told Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle that administration officials might not show up to testify. Meanwhile, the president, still basking in his 70 percent-plus approval rating, put on a defiant, even haughty, front.

Once upon a time, a stern word from George W. Bush on the war on terror would have been enough. But this time the Democrats, and even Republicans like Richard Shelby and John McCain, weren’t buying the Teflon patriotism. The president’s political opponents were backed by some 9-11 victims’ families. “Look at all of the investigations that have been held to examine the Enron collapse, a financial thing,” said Kathy Ashton, whose 21-year-old son Tommy was killed at the World Trade Center on his second day on a contracting job. “Why, eight months later, are we not investigating the mass murder of 3,000 human beings on American soil by an enemy of the United States that was enabled to carry out this mass murder because many agencies in this country dropped the ball?” The administration’s defensiveness suggested America may have entered the post-post-9-11 period. Washington politics is back to its partisan snarling, and the media, self-muzzled until now, is yapping at the White House’s heels.
One sign is that heads in Washington are already rolling. FBI Director Robert Mueller is said by associates to be furious over the bureau’s internal handling of the memo. (Six days after the attack, Mueller had said at a news conference: “There were no warning signs that I’m aware of that would indicate this type of operation in the country.”) On Friday it was learned that the FBI’s and CIA’s top counterterrorism officers were leaving, though officials denied they were being pushed out.

The administration’s defensiveness suggested America may have entered the post-post-9-11 period. Washington politics is back to its partisan snarling, and the media, self-muzzled until now, is yapping at the White House’s heels. One sign is that heads in Washington are already rolling. FBI Director Robert Mueller is said by associates to be furious over the bureau’s internal handling of the memo. (Six days after the attack, Mueller had said at a news conference: “There were no warning signs that I’m aware of that would indicate this type of operation in the country.”) On Friday it was learned that the FBI’s and CIA’s top counterterrorism officers were leaving, though officials denied they were being pushed out.

BEYOND TRADITIONAL TERROR

While Bush may have a point in saying he heard no specific threat, other aspects of the administration’s story weren’t holding up. Last week Rice declared, “I don’t think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center ... All of this reporting about hijacking was about traditional hijacking”; in other words, using passenger jets as hostages. In fact, the government had ample reason to believe that Al Qaeda was no longer interested in traditional terror. The CIA had learned as early as 1995 that Abdul Hakim Murad, an associate of ’93 WTC plotter Ramzi Yousef, had talked about plunging an airliner into the CIA building. Italian authorities had warned of a similar bid at last June’s Genoa summit of the G8 leaders—and they ringed the area with surface-to-air missiles, with CIA cooperation.

In any case, few Americans seem to be in the mood any longer for more-of-the-same from Washington. September 11 has often been compared to Pearl Harbor as a fault line between a complacent and war-ready America. And, like Pearl Harbor, questions about whether it could have been prevented will forever haunt us. To give the Bush administration some credit, no government in modern history has ever predicted a major surprise attack. Britain and France missed the Blitzkrieg in 1940. The Germans missed D-Day in June 1944. And everyone missed Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait in August 1990.

Even so, it’s too simple to say that postmortems now are somehow unfair or unpatriotic in “wartime America.” The latest revelations could open up a Pandora’s box of questions about the administration’s pre- 9-11 performance on terror—questions with complicated and interesting roots.

By the end of the Clinton administration, the then national-security adviser Sandy Berger had become “totally preoccupied” with fears of a domestic terror attack, a colleague recalls. True, the Clintonites had failed to act decisively against Al Qaeda, but by the end they were certain of the danger it posed. When, in January 2001, Berger gave Rice her handover briefing, he covered the bin Laden threat in detail, and, sources say, warned her: “You will be spending more time on this issue than on any other.” Rice was alarmed by what she heard, and asked for a strategy review. But the effort was marginalized and scarcely mentioned in ensuing months as the administration committed itself to other priorities, like national missile defense (NMD) and Iraq.

Warning sings: Leading up to Sept. 11 there were numerous indications that al Quida was stepping up its war against the United States. Click on NEWSWEEK'S timeline of how the U.S. Government responded.

John Ashcroft seemed particularly eager to set a new agenda. In the spring of 2001, the attorney general had an extraordinary confrontation with the then FBI Director Louis Freeh at an annual meeting of special agents in charge in Quantico, Va. The two talked before appearing, and Ashcroft laid out his priorities for Freeh, another Clinton holdover (though no friend of the ex-president’s), “basically violent crime and drugs,” recalls one participant. Freeh replied bluntly that those were not his priorities, and began to talk about terror and counterterrorism. “Ashcroft didn’t want to hear about it,” says a former senior law-enforcement official. (A Justice Department spokeswoman hotly disputed this, saying that in May Ashcroft told a Senate committee terrorism was his “highest priority.”)

That was unfortunate, because Freeh, despite his late-tenure interest in global terrorism, had left behind an FBI that badly needed fixing, especially its antiquated evidence-gathering methods. So fouled up is the FBI’s communications system that it is almost impossible for agents to send classified e-mails to another agency like the CIA; the effect is that little is shared.

It wasn’t that Ashcroft and others were unconcerned about these problems, or about terrorism. But the Bushies had an ideological agenda of their own. At the Treasury Department, Secretary Paul O’Neill’s team wanted to roll back almost all forms of government intervention, including laws against money laundering and tax havens of the kind used by terror groups. At the Pentagon, Donald Rumsfeld wanted to revamp the military and push his pet project, NMD. Rumsfeld vetoed a request to divert $800 million from missile defense into counterterrorism. The Pentagon chief also seemed uninterested in a tactic for observing bin Laden left over from the Clinton administration: the CIA’s Predator surveillance plane. Upon leaving office, the Clintonites left open the possibility of sending the Predator back up armed with Hellfire missiles, which were tested in February 2001. But through the spring and summer of 2001, when valuable intelligence could have been gathered, the Bush administration never launched even an unarmed Predator. Hill sources say DOD didn’t want the CIA treading on its turf.

And while most of the current controversy is about what America didn’t do defensively, Rumsfeld and Bush didn’t take the offensive, either. Upon entering office, both suggested publicly that the Clinton administration left America with a weak image abroad. The day after the Oct. 12, 2000, attack on the USS Cole, the then candidate Bush said “there must be aconsequence.” An FBI document dated January 26, 2001—six days after Bush took office—shows that authorities believed they had clear evidence tying the bombers to Al Qaeda. Yet the new administration mounted no retaliation of its own.

GETTING SERIOUS ABOUT AL QAEDA?

By the time the Bushies did get serious and gear up against Al Qaeda, it was too late. The administration says a long process of revamping the strategy against Al Qaeda culminated—in a supreme irony—on Sept. 10, when the directive reached Rice’s desk for Bush’s signature. And yet even then there were questions about how serious the administration really was. The new strategy called for little more aggressive action than Clinton had adopted: arming and financing anti-Taliban forces inside Afghanistan. And on the same day, Ashcroft submitted his budget request, barely mentioning counterterrorism.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who with Republican Sen. Jon Kyl had sent a copy of draft legislation on counterterrorism and homeland defense to Cheney’s office on July 20, also heard some news that day. Feinstein was told by the veep’s top aide, “Scooter” Libby, as Feinstein described it to NEWSWEEK, “that it might be another six months before he would be able to review the material.”

Today the Bush team is clearly focused, and the CIA and FBI are cooperating more smoothly. They had better: ominous if unconfirmed threats keep pouring over the transom—among them, NEWSWEEK has learned, a recent CIA warning of a “series of explosions using ‘low charge’ nuclear weapons.” Mueller has recentralized FBI analysis in Washington to coordinate intel. The key will be how the Bush administration can learn both from past mistakes and from the investigation that, whether they like it or not, is surely coming.

With Daniel Klaidman, Mark Hosenball, Eleanor Clift, John Barry, Colin Soloway and Tamara Lipper in Washington, Andy Murr in Phoenix, Jamie Reno in San Diego and Christopher Dickey in Paris
© 2002 Newsweek, Inc.


http://foi.missouri.edu/terrorismfoi/whatwentwrong.html




Close Informant & Friend Of Former FBI Agent John O'Neill, Killed on 9/11, Tells How FBI Higher-Ups 'Shut Him Down' Letting 9/11 Happen

By Greg Szymanski
8-16-5

Seattle woman who was a close informant of former FBI agent and Al Qaeda hunter John O'Neill during the crucial months prior to the 9/11, said they both provided vital information in an attempt to stop the attack but were blocked by officials in the New York and Washington bureaus every step of the way.

The informant's earth shattering revelations and hard evidence, including names, dates, locations, motives and sordid dealings of known terrorists, may once and for end all speculation that the FBI overtly tried to thwart O'Neill's investigation, as well as even show authorities worked closely, assisting known terrorists in bringing about 9/11 as well as other previous terrorist attacks.

The detailed information, never released publicly and provided to the Arctic Beacon and the American Free Press, clearly shows, according to the informant, a plot in the FBI by O'Neill's boss, Tom Picard and others higher-up in the chain of command to block O'Neill just when he may have been able to gum up the works, mainly from contacts made by the Seattle informant with a major Al Qaeda cell operating on the East Coast.

Seattle veterinarian and long time friend and informant of O'Neill, Janet Parker, 53, said O'Neill was stopped by his bosses only months prior to 9/11 from getting a wire tap on a major cell leader, Shadrack Manyathella, who had close ties with Ali Mohammad, a suspected CIA double operative and Mohammad Atta, the alleged 9/11 ring leader.

"His own bureau blocked him every step of the way, but John wanted me to bate Shadrack and get as much information as possible," said Parker in an extended telephone conversation from her Seattle home this week, concerning several telephone conversations with the alleged terrorist thug in the months preceding 9/11.

"Shadrack was anxious to get me into his organization, since I was considered a valuable asset as a veterinarian. Also, he wanted me to marry another one of his friends named Mohammad, I think so he could get him citizenship papers and a passport."

During July 2001, O'Neill and Parker communicated numerous times, sharing vital information and trying to determine the best way to uncover Shadrack's plans, as O'Neil told Parker "something big was in the works and coming down soon."

Although O'Neill was working non-stop, day and night, to connect the dots and pin down Shadrack and the intentions of other terrorists, traveling back and forth from Europe and Yemen about the USS Cole bombing as well as trying to stop future attacks.

However, Parker said during this time O'Neill also became very despondent and depressed by the lack of cooperation he was getting from FBI headquarters.

Parker, who first became associated with O'Neill more than 30 years ago in other FBI-related investigations, said O'Neill had even traveled to France, deciding to work with French intelligence, instead of his own bureau, since they were more cooperative and Shadrack often communicated to other terrorist cells, located in all parts of the world, in French.

"You have to understand that John and I had known each other for a long time. We shared a lot of information, not only about Shadrack, Al Qaeda and what turned out to be 9/11, but also about the Boston FBI scandal which I was involved in, when various FBI agents were jailed for corruption and about 19 informants like myself were brutally murdered," said Parker, adding O'Neill protected her identity in that case and probably saved her life, allowing her to run for her life and start over again in Seattle. "I remember once when my foster daughter was visiting, I think in February, 2001, I overheard talk about airplanes and the World Trade Center.

"But concerning John, he was ambitious and maybe that was his downfall, but he was also skilled, talented and completely dedicated to stopping terrorism. He did pressure me over the years and put me in difficult spots, but I would fight back at times, reminding him I was only a volunteer.
"However, since we both knew my inside connection with Shadrack was extremely important, concerning both the bombing of the USS Cole off the coast of Yemen and what turned out to be 9/11, I tried to help any way I could until we both realized we were working alone with no assistance from higher-ups in the FBI."

Parker also sadly recalls during the crucial months before 9/11, O'Neill telling her that "someone higher-up" had blocked attempts to wire tap Shadrack, refused to let him return to Yemen, mysteriously deleted all his files at FBI New York headquarters and then finally relegated him to a desk job, far away from the front lines of terrorism.

"John was devastated when this happened, telling me how frustrating it was to know that something big was coming down but not be able to do anything about it due to lack of cooperation by his own bureau," said Parker, adding O'Neill told her in the later part of July 2001 that he had already planned to leave the FBI but was unsure of his next move.

"Although John would keep sensitive details from me for ethical reasons and also in order to protect my life, never specifically mentioning names, I think, as does his long time partner Valerie James, it was his direct boss, Tom Picard, who was acting on orders from higher-ups, all of them together trying to stifle John's investigation. I am not really sure why but the only conclusion I can draw is that they wanted to let 9/11 play out and John and I were getting in the way."

During the month of August 2001, Parker lost contact with O'Neill, who resigned under pressure in late August, taking a cushy job handed to him on silver platter as head of security at the World Trade Center. According to Parker, O'Neill never really wanted to leave the FBI and would have preferred staying in the intelligence field for another agency, but was lured away to the WTC job over money, being offered $350,000 in comparison to his $100,000 FBI salary.

What happened next is well-documented, as O'Neill was killed inside the Twin Towers on 9/11, after officially starting work on Sept. 10, a coincidence never been fully investigated but filled with suspicion, some saying he was set-up and others brushing his death aside as mere coincidence.
"The last time I talked with John was Sept 8, 2001. He wasn't with the FBI, but was still somehow actively pursuing Shadrack and Al Qaeda," said Parker. "John was telling me all sorts of things. I said I'd help him, but I also remember asking him how much danger I was in and if I even had to watch my back from our own FBI. He never mentioned anything about the World Trade Center security job, but was furious with me for allowing my foster daughter to fly from the East Coast to Seattle.

"John had been closely monitoring her activities as well, since she had unwillingly gotten caught up with Shadrack and his shady activities years ago. John was furious since he lost track of her on the East Coast, having no idea I changed her flight date for the early part of September.
"I remember him saying that they were planning something big soon and he was angry because he was still watching my foster daughter's movements closely. At that time we decided to meet in October at a remote place in the Berkshires during an upcoming Boston veterinarian conference I was attending so we could talk strategy. This was the last time I talked to John, but some strange things happened with my foster daughter while she was visiting me in Seattle just days before 9/11."

And it was Parker's foster child, Patty, now 24, originally sold as a sex slave to Shadrack by her Vermont drug-running brothers in the late 1990's that provided Parker and O'Neill's main connection to what she calls an Al Qaeda cell heavily involved for years in the planning of 9/11 and other terrorist acts.

Although the story of Parker and her step daughter involve a complicated web of corruption starting in the mid 1990s on the East Coast, including illegal arms dealing, brutal killings of young girls stolen from state-sponsored foster care institutions, corruption in the famous Boston FBI scandal, connections to the Irish mob and gangster Whitey Bulger and finally Shadrack's terrorist cell, it was originally problems surrounding Parker's foster daughter that brought the pair together again.

After Parker and her foster daughter witnessed an arms deal going down near their country home in Hudson Falls, O'Neill intervened to lend assistance in the mid 1990's, although she did communicate with him briefly in 1993 involving an upstate New York investigation after first World Trade Center bombing.

Parker first met O'Neill in 1975 when she worked in Peru in the Peace Corps and was airlifted from Lima back to Washington D.C. during a coup attempt. Afterwards, O'Neill, just getting started in the FBI, took an interest in her Peruvian experiences, interviewing her at Penn State where she attended school, beginning what turned out to be a working relationship that lasted up until O'Neill' untimely death at Ground Zero in 2001.

"I've been accused before of being John's lover, but that's never been the case," said Parker. "I lost track of John in 1975, both of us getting married and going our own separate ways."

And it wasn't until 1987 that the paths of Parker and O'Neil crossed again, this time at Washington State University when Parker was in the midst of getting her veterinarian's degree and O'Neill was investigating alleged terrorist activity going on at the university.

"He asked for my help in getting photos for a sting operation involving an Iranian who was harassing me when I was teaching English as a second language," recalls Parker. "I got him to go to a picnic where John took the photos and it turned out he was on a terrorist watch list.

"John was involved in watching for domestic terrorism and as a veterinarian, I was close to animal rights' groups, who John was investigating and who were also putting pressure on Washington State and especially targeting my professor, Dr. Robert Speth. Together John and I made a good team, attending various animal rights' conferences and trying to secure information."

After graduating in 1991 and traveling to Hudson Falls, NY, to practice veterinary medicine on primarily cats and dogs, it wasn't until 1993 that O'Neill came calling again, this time asking Parker for assistance in tracking a local upstate New York Pakistani woman, suspected of being involved in the 1993 first World Trade Center bombings.

"He asked for my help again, but this time it didn't amount to much," said Parker, recalling that O'Neill always approached his work diligently, like a true detective, always using inductive and deductive reasoning in an attempt to solve his case.

"He was a pleasant man, extremely intelligent and liked to live the good life, knowing that being around money and power meant also gaining vital knowledge. Maybe in the long run this was his downfall, but at heart, he was a good, honest, hard working man dedicated to his country and the FBI."

But after helping O'Neill in the 1993 bombing investigation, Parker's real troubles began, first witnessing with her foster daughter an illegal arms deal going down at her neighbor's house and then getting thrown in up to her neck unexpectedly into the Boston FBI corruption case and, if that wasn't enough, simultaneous getting embroiled into the dealings of the dangerous Irish mob and its leader, Whitey Bulger.

"I was always interested in helping abused children and decided to take on a foster child, as my husband of 22 years, though we are now divorced, couldn't have children,. I met Patty and went about the foster care procedures. She had gone through incredible abuse with her drug-trafficking family and was living with me when we witnessed the arms deal go down at Joe Lambert's house as we were standing in our horse pasture," said Parker, recalling that her problems increased substantially when she notified authorities, receiving no help and eventually, along with her daughter, becoming the victim of threats and several near misses on her life.

Although what followed involved many mysterious and complicated details, basically O'Neill tried to protect Parker throughout the investigation while, at the same time, trying to nab the crooked FBI agents in the Boston bureau, agents involved in illegal dealings with the Irish mob and other known terrorists.

"I found myself in the middle of drugs and violence while still practicing veterinary medicine and essentially John got involved, coming to my rescue. It was a web of criminality that went deep and was hard to pinpoint, but I remember John was always trying to get me to testify but, at the same time, trying to protect me and my foster daughter from getting killed," said Parker, adding during this period in 1995 her personal life went through turmoil, getting divorced, placing her foster daughter back in foster care and moving to where she took another job as a veterinarian.

"I was offered this great job with great pay in Massachusetts that turned out to be a come-on to get me involved with illegal prescriptions sales and money-laundering," said Parker. "When things started to heat up, I started to get violent calls threatening me and my foster daughter who was back in the Vermont foster care program.

"John got dragged into this whole mess and he said he didn't like it one bit since he was in direct conflict with the Boston FBI. They didn't want him to get too close. Then in 1997 John wanted me to testify and put me in the witness protection program .At the same time, I started getting run off the road in obvious murder attempts, found out my horse pasture was set on fire back in upstate New York and also was being told my foster daughter's life was in serious danger."

However, after 19 confidential informants were mysteriously murdered during the Boston FBI corruption case, sending some agents to prison including the Boston FBI Director, Parker backed-off from testifying, fleeing with her horse van and running for her life cross country, finally settling in Tukwila, WA near Seattle.

"I wanted out, plain and simple," said Parker.

But several months after landing another veterinary job, Parker again started receiving threatening phone calls, wondering if the nightmare she was living on a daily basis would ever end.

Then in January 1999, O'Neill turned up on her Seattle doorstep again, this time investigating the 2000 Millennium plot and the LAX bombing threats. And it was when O'Neill arrived that threats started escalating further, as frightening news came from the East Coast that her foster daughter had been sold to Shadrack by her brothers as a drug payoff and two of the four eye-witnesses to the upstate New York illegal arm's shipment, Joe Lambert and his daughter, Jessica, had been brutally murdered.

"My foster daughter and I were the other two witnesses and I was totally scared," said Parker. "She was now in the hands of Shadrack, had a baby with him and I heard two other girls recruited for sex and put into that group's hands were eventually found beheaded before they had a chance to go to police."

During this time, Parker was also accosted, threatened and pushed into a hallway wall outside her apartment by someone she later identified as one of Bulger's Irish mob street thugs.

"Every time I went to the authorities, nobody helped me," said Parker, adding a lack of law enforcement cooperation turned out to be a pattern throughout her Al Qaeda investigations with O'Neill and continuing even today.

At present, the whereabouts of her foster daughter and Shadrack are unknown, her daughter essentially disappearing after her trip in early September 2001 to Seattle. Parker also said the last time she spoke with Shadrack was on or about Sept. 8, 2001, when he tried to encourage her to join his organization.

"The whole key to this story that I am telling is that John O'Neill may have been able to do something good for America and stop 9/11 and other terrorist activity, but they shut him down. Plain and simple that's what they did and I am totally convinced of it," said Parker.


For more informative articles, go to http://www.arcticbeacon.com

http://www.arcticbeacon.com/articles/ar ... /31621.htm
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5821
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 9/11 Info Dump

Postby Elvis » Sun Sep 17, 2017 1:33 am

[p.17 of dump]


Report Warned Of Suicide Hijackings

WASHINGTON, May 17, 2002


(CBS) Two years before the Sept. 11 attacks, an analysis prepared for U.S. intelligence warned that Osama bin Laden's terrorists could hijack an airliner and fly it into government buildings like the Pentagon.

"Suicide bomber(s) belonging to al Qaeda's Martyrdom Battalion could crash-land an aircraft packed with high explosives (C-4 and semtex) into the Pentagon, the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or the White House," the September 1999 report said.

The Bush administration has asserted that no one in government had envisioned a suicide hijacking before it happened.

"Had I know that the enemy was going to use airplanes to kill on that fateful morning, I would have done everything in my power to protect the American people," Mr. Bush told U.S. Air Force Academy football team members who were visiting the White House on Friday. It was his first public comment on revelations this week that he was told Aug. 6 that bin Laden wanted to hijack planes.

CBS Senior White House Correspondent Bob Schieffer reports that other top officials were less forthcoming. The usually talkative Attorney General John Ashcroft just stared when reporters asked him about the terror warnings. FBI Chief Robert Mueller also refused to comment.

White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said the administration was aware of the 1999 report prepared by the Library of Congress for the National Intelligence Council, which advises the president and U.S. intelligence on emerging threats. He said the document did not contain direct intelligence pointing toward a specific plot but rather included assessments about how terrorists might strike.

"What it shows is that this information that was out there did not raise enough alarm with anybody," Fleischer acknowledged.

Former CIA Deputy Director John Gannon, who was chairman of the National Intelligence Council when the report was written, said officials long have known a suicide hijacking was a threat.

"If you ask anybody could terrorists convert a plane into a missile, nobody would have ruled that out," he said.

Democrats and some Republicans in Congress Friday raised the volume of their calls to investigate what the government knew before Sept. 11.

"I think we're going to learn a lot about what the government knew," Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton said during an appearance in New York. She said she was unaware of the report created in 1999 during her husband's administration.

Sen. Charles Grassley, a senior member of the Senate Judiciary and Finance committees, demanded the CIA inspector general investigate the report, which he called "one of the most alarming indicators and warning signs of the terrorist plot of Sept. 11."

Meanwhile, court transcripts reviewed by The Associated Press show the government had other warning signs between 1999 and 2001 that bin Laden was sending members of his network to be trained as pilots and was considering airlines as a possible target.

The court records show the FBI has known since at least 1999 that Ihab Mohammed Ali, who was arrested in Florida and later named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Africa, had been sent for pilot training in Oklhhoma before working as a pilot for bin Laden.

He eventually crashed a plane owned by bin Laden in Sudan that prosecutors alleged was used to transport al Qaeda members and weapons. Ali remains in custody in New York.

In February 2001, federal prosecutors told a court they gained information in September 2000 from an associate of Ali's, Morrocan citizen L'Houssaine Kherchtou, that Kherchtou was trained as an al Qaeda pilot in Kenya and attended a meeting in 1993 where an al Qaeda official was briefing Ali on Western air traffic control procedures.

"He (Kherchtou) observed an Egyptian person who was not a pilot debriefing a friend of his, Ihab Ali, about how air traffic control works and what people say over the air traffic control system," then-Assistant U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald told a New York court.

"And it was his belief that there might have been a plan to send a pilot to Saudi Arabia or someone familiar with that to monitor the air traffic communications so they could possibly attack an airplane perhaps belonging to an Egyptian president or something in Saudi Arabia."

That intelligence is in addition to information the FBI received in July 2001 from its Phoenix office that a large number of Arabs were training at U.S. flight schools and a briefing President Bush received in August of that year suggesting hijacking was one possible attack the al Qaeda might use against the United States.

The September 1999 report, entitled "Sociology and Psychology of Terrorism: Who Becomes a Terrorist and Why?" described suicide hijacking as one of several possible retribution attacks the al Qaeda might seek for a 1998 U.S. airstrike against bin Laden's camps in Afghanistan.

The report noted an al Qaeda-linked terrorist first arrested in the Philippines in 1995 and later convicted in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing had suggested such a mission.

"Ramzi Yousef had planned to do this against the CIA headquarters," the report said.

Bush administration officials have repeatedly said no one in government had imagined such an attack.

"I don't think anybody could have predicted that ... they would try to use an airplane as a missile, a hijacked airplane as a missile," National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice said Thursday.

The report was written by the Federal Research Division, an arm of the Library of Congress that provides research for federal agencies.

"This information was out there, certainly to those who study the in-depth subject of terrorism and al-Qaeda," said Robert L. Worden, the agency's chief.

"We knew it was an insightful report," he said. "Then after Sept. 11 we said, 'My gosh, that was in there.'"

Gannon said the 1999 report was part of a broader effort by his council to identify the full range of attack options of U.S. enemies.

The vice president has repeatedly asked Congress not to investigate the intelligence failures. But with the new commotion, the White House now says it will cooperate with an investigation if it's done the right way

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/05/ ... 9488.shtml




http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages ... ID=/has%5C

Haaretz

Odigo says workers were warned of attack
By Yuval Dror

Odigo says workers were warned of attack By Yuval Dror Odigo, the instant messaging service, says that two of its workers received messages two hours before the Twin Towers attack on September 11 predicting the attack would happen, and the company has been cooperating with Israeli and American law enforcement, including the FBI, in trying to find the original sender of the message predicting the attack.

Micha Macover, CEO of the company, said the two workers received the messages and immediately after the terror attack informed the company's management, which immediately contacted the Israeli security services, which brought in the FBI.

"I have no idea why the message was sent to these two workers, who don't know the sender. It may just have been someone who was joking and turned out they accidentally got it right. And I don't know if our information was useful in any of the arrests the FBI has made," said Macover. Odigo is a U.S.-based company whose headquarters are in New York, with offices in Herzliya.

As an instant messaging service, Odigo users are not limited to sending messages only to people on their "buddy" list, as is the case with ICQ, the other well-known Israeli instant messaging application.

Odigo usually zealously protects the privacy of its registered users, said Macover, but in this case the company took the initiative to provide the law enforcement services with the originating Internet Presence address of the message, so the FBI could track down the Internet Service Provider, and the actual sender of the original message.



August 13, 2002

Hon. John Ashcroft
Attorney General

United States Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20530

Dear General Ashcroft:

We are writing jointly in order that you might allay our concern about the status of the investigation into allegations made by Sibel Edmonds, a former contract linguist in the Washington Field Office of the FBI. Although we understand that the matter is currently under investigation by the Inspector General, we are troubled that the Department of Justice, including the FBI, may not be acting quickly enough to address the issues raised by Ms. Edmonds' complaints or cooperating fully with the Inspector General's office.

By way of background, Ms. Edmonds first raised concerns about security problems and the integrity of important translations earlier this year. Unfortunately, nearly every person at the FBI who was notified of the situation reacted by questioning why Ms. Edmonds was "causing trouble." Indeed, the FBI's first internal security action in this case focused on Ms. Edmonds, instead of the allegations that she raised in good faith as a whistleblower and which bore on national security and the war against terrorism.

Ms. Edmonds has made a number of serious allegations, some of which the FBI verified during an unclassified briefing for Judiciary Committee staff on June 17. First, Ms. Edmonds has alleged that a contract monitor in her unit ("monitor") chose not to translate important, intelligence-related information, instead limiting her translation to unimportant and innocuous information. The FBI has verified that this monitor indeed failed to translate intelligence-related information, but has attributed the failure to a lack of training as opposed to a malicious act.

That conclusion is directly related to Ms. Edmond's second allegation. Ms. Edmonds alleged that the same contract monitor once worked for an organization associated with the target of a counter-intelligence investigation and that the monitor had unreported contacts with a foreign national who was a member of the target institution. Additionally, Ms. Edmonds states that some of the mistranslated recordings on which the monitor actually worked contained conversations by this same foreign national with whom the monitor had such contacts. Finally, the foreign national disclosed in recorded conversations that he handled intelligence matters. This fact was among the information that was not translated or summarized by the monitor.

Even after verifying these allegations, the FBI downplayed the importance of this matter and seemed to imply that it had ceased looking into the complaints as a security matter until after the Inspector General Office finishes its investigation. Anyone who remembers the long-time treachery of former FBI Agent Robert Hanssen would be concerned at this reaction. For years, Hanssen's bizarre actions were also written off as minor security breaches and unworthy of serious consideration. If even routine diligence had been exercised earlier, Hanssen could have been stopped from doing untold damage. The FBI needs to learn from its mistakes.

In addition to general concerns raised by this case, we have several specific concerns we wish to raise for your review. First, we have learned that a person central to the investigation -- the monitor referred to earlier -- will be leaving the country in early September, which most likely will be before the investigation is resolved. If you or your staff would like to know the identity of the monitor, please contact Inspector General Fine's office, with whom Senator Grassley's staff has been in touch. The monitor may hold dual citizenship with the United States and a foreign country and may possess a valid passport issued by that foreign country. Thus, there will be little or no assurance that the monitor will return or cooperate with an investigation in the future. Based on these facts, we would like your assurance that you are satisfied that there has been and will be no delay that will prejudice, in any way, the outcome of this investigation.

Furthermore, we would like your assurance that the Department of Justice, including the FBI, will fully cooperate in all aspects of the inquiry. For instance, we draw your attention to the fact that the FBI currently opposes depositions of the monitor and her husband as part of the investigation into this case. The FBI takes this position despite the fact that the monitor is no longer employed by the FBI, that the monitor's husband never worked at the FBI and even though the military agency that employs the monitor's husband does not oppose a deposition. Moreover, we understand that the monitor and her husband have signed a letter stating they will make themselves available for depositions. It is unclear, then, why the FBI is taking this position in the wake of such important allegations bearing on national security. We hope that you will ensure that the FBI is fully compliant with the Inspector General's inquiry as it proceeds.

Finally, we are concerned about the most crucial evidence in the case -- the recordings that were allegedly improperly translated. Because these bear directly on the veracity of Ms. Edmonds' allegations, we seek your assurance that the recordings will be properly maintained, turned over to the Inspector General's Office and promptly translated by a competent and independent authority. That way the validity of the complaint can be quickly evaluated.

We know that you share our concern that the FBI address issues bearing on national security in a prompt manner, regardless of whether or not they cast the FBI in a positive light. Only by honest evaluation can the FBI learn from its past mistakes. We thank you in advance for your cooperation in this matter. We request a reply in writing by Wednesday, August 28, 2002.

Sincerely,

Sen. Patrick J. Leahy

Sen. Chuck Grassley
Chairman, Ranking Member
Subcommittee on Crime and Drugs




Next are the rather exhaustive or should I say exhausting inquiries into OKC & 9/11 by Patrick B. Briley, the self-described "patriot"-militia sort who apparently has done some homework on this:

From:
"ragnar" <ragnar@mail.thementalmilitia.org>


To:
<elias@thementalmilitia.org>


Date:
July 28, 2004 05:19:12 pm


Ashcroft Personally Rejected Specific Warnings of
Impending Terrorist Attacks During Summer of 2001


Source: CBS News, CNN, Author's Research
Published: Apr 27, 2004
Author: Patrick B. Briley
EDITORIAL
Copyright 2004 by Patrick B. Briley


During June to early August 2001 Attorney General Ashcroft and his staff received but
strongly rebuffed more than one plea from Chicago attorney David Schippers to look into intelligence Schippers had of an impending Middle Eastern initiated terrorist attack on Manhattan for late summer or early fall of 2001, around the time of the 9/11 attacks.

Schippers has revealed this story publicly on many talk radio programs throughout
America. Schippers was the attorney for the Republican House Managers during the trial of Clinton in the Senate.

[ea note: David Schippers' interview with Alex Jones of Infowars.com is available on Jones' film, "911: The Road To Tyranny", available here:

http://www.infowars.com/videos.html

http://www.infowars.com/videos.html

And in August 2001 Ashcroft met with Air Force General Benton Partin in Ashcroft's
DC home to receive a lengthy report (that I helped prepare) and briefing about terrorism in the OKC bombing that proved to be directly related to the 1993 WTC bombing and the subsequent 9/11 attacks. Ashcroft not only rejected Partin's pleas to investigate failed FBI and DOJ policies leading to domestic and foreign terror operation in the US, but Ashcroft to this day has not followed up, but instead covered up FBI and DOJ criminal conduct by obstructing justice and ordering FBI agents not to testify about matters relating to the OKC bombing, FBI and DOJ foreknowledge, and the use of informants and provocateurs associated with domestic and foreign terrorists.

Fox News Dallas recently conducted a lengthy interview with a major witness, Gloria Smith of the OKC Travelers Aid, [who] connected directly the evidence presented to Ashcroft by General Partin in August 2001. Fox News did a report on the interview with Smith on April 19, 2004 but deliberately and knowingly left out all mention of the Ashcroft briefing, the information in the report Ashcroft received and the names of the FBI informants and provocateurs who were involved in the OKC bombing operation. Smith told me that Fox News deliberately did not notify Smith of the Fox News report and that Smith feels that she was treated rudely and with great disrespect by Fox News for not notifying her of the report when it aired especially since the reporter doing the story, Phil Keating promised her she would be notified. I was notified only a few minutes before the report aired on the Fox Report with Sheppard Smith by voice mail and was not told of the content until a week later.

Fox News has relatives working for Bush and it is strongly believed that Fox News covered up for Bush and Ashcroft when they aired a brief excerpt of their interview with Smith leaving out all of the details incriminating to Bush, Ashcroft and the DOJ and FBI in the case.

I specifically asked the Dallas Bureau chief for Fox about these matters today and I asked it Fox ever planned to reveal the letters from Smith to Ashcroft and any information about the FBI informants with McVeigh's car at Travelers Aid. The Fox News Dallas bureau chief answer was "of course not." I was stunned and told the chief that we were very disappointed and thought that Fox should air all the important parts of the interview for the good and safety of the country.

This coverup by Fox News was done even though previously the Dallas bureau chief had told me that Fox News had verified independently that the same suspects seen by Smith were seen with McVeigh in OKC before the OKC bombing. This episode demonstrates that Fox News is deliberately not reporting information that is important to national security in order to protect and hide the misconduct of political figures Fox News favors, Bush and Ashcroft.

On April 13, 2004 Attorney General Ashcroft testified before the 9/11 Commission.

The remainder of article reveals how prior testimony given to the 9-11 Commission prior to Ashcroft's appearance demonstrated not only the Bush administration's lack of interest in terrorism in the US prior to 9/11 but a strong and consistent pattern of Ashcroft's out right rejection of numerous other pleas and specific and detailed warnings (in addition to Schippers and Partin) concerning impending terrorist attacks in the US during the summer and fall of 2001.

These rejections were so strong by Ashcroft and the pleas so numerous, credible and highly placed that Ashcroft's actions cannot be explained by just gross negligence, which alone is grounds worthy of having Ashcroft fired and replaced immediately. Ashcroft had extreme forewarning about pending terror attacks in the US and yet Ashcroft deliberately did nothing adequate to even try to have something done about them. It appears that Ashcroft's failure to act was deliberate and not based on incompetence.

What follows is a presentation of information found in the following two articles:
Critiquing Ashcroft's 9/11 Show

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/ ... 2043.shtml

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/04/ ... 2043.shtml

Ashcroft denies taking little interest in terrorism

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/ ... ommission/

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/ ... ommission/

In one of its staff reports, the 9/11 Commission had already offered a harsh assessment of Ashcroft's performance before the attacks, portraying him as uninterested in terrorism issues and unresponsive to pleas from the FBI to beef up its counterterrorism efforts. And earlier that day former acting FBI director Thomas Pickard and former FBI counterterrorism chief Dale Watson - two of the main sources for the negative information about Ashcroft contained in the staff report - had expanded on their criticism of the attorney general in public testimony before the commission.

By the time Ashcroft's turn arrived, some fairly serious charges about him were on the table. Why, one day after telling the Senate in May 2001, that combating terrorist attacks was his highest priority, did Ashcroft issue a memo outlining the Justice Department's strategic goals that didn't mention counterterrorism -- a memo that Watson testified almost made him fall out of his chair?

Former acting FBI Director Thomas Pickard said Ashcroft dismissed warnings of
terrorist threats that summer and rejected appeals for additional counterterrorism funds.
Pickard said "in late June and through July, he met with Attorney General Ashcroft
once a week," the report says. "He told us that though he initially briefed the attorney
general regarding these threats, after two such briefings the attorney general told him he did not want to hear this information anymore."

Pickard also said that though President Bush had been warned on August 6, 2001, in an intelligence memo that al Qaeda was "determined" to strike U.S. targets, neither Bush nor Ashcroft asked to meet with him between then and the attacks.

The commission also heard from J. Cofer Black, the former head of the CIA's
counterterrorism center, who said that intelligence reports in the summer of 2001
indicated a "massive" terrorist strike was in the works.

"The attorney general on May 10 issued budget guidance for us, and I did not see
that as a top item on the agenda," Pickard said.

The Justice Department proposal did not include an increase in counterterrorism funding over its pending proposal for fiscal year 2002, and Pickard said Ashcroft rejected his appeal for additional counterterrorism funds on Sept. 10 -- a day before the al Qaeda attacks.

In addition, FBI counterterrorism chief Dale Watson "told us that he almost fell out of his
chair" when Ashcroft outlined his budget priorities in May 2001, because the list made no mention of counterterrorism, the commission reported earlier.

So why, in the summer of 2001, did Ashcroft reject a request from Pickard for an extra
$58 million to help the FBI combat al Qaeda? And why did Ashcroft, after being briefed
twice by Pickard on terrorist threats that summer, tell the acting FBI director that he
didn't want to hear about the matter anymore?

The Gorelick memo was a way for Ashcroft to turn the harsh spotlight on someone other
than himself - which he needed to do since his responses to the criticisms leveled by
Pickard and Watson were decidedly unpersuasive. Ashcroft initially said that the May
2001 memo that didn't list counterterrorism as one of DOJ's top priorities -- the memo
that almost madeWatson fall out of his chair -- was based on a strategic plan issued by his predecessor, Janet Reno. But he also conceded that Reno's strategic plan did indeed include mentions of terrorism.

As for his rejection in the summer of 2001 of Pickard's request for $58 billion more in
counterterrorism money for the FBI, Ashcroft tried to fudge matters by noting that the
FBI was working under a Clinton administration budget when the attacks occurred and
that the first Bush budget for the FBI, which was for fiscal year 2002, substantially
increased counterterrorism spending. But of course it did; that budget was crafted after
the 9/11 attacks.

Finally, Ashcroft just denied that he ever told Pickard he didn't want any more briefings
on terrorism issues. That left Ashcroft in a he-said/he-said dispute with a career FBI
agent whose integrity -- unlike the attorney general's -- has never before been questioned.

Copyright 2004 by Patrick B. Briley

* * * * *

Counter Terrorism Antecedents for the 9/11 Attacks - Terrorism Cover-Up

Source: Investigations of Author and Attorneys
Apr 3, 2004
Author: Patrick B. Briley

Authors Note:
The report below has been formally transmitted to, received by and discussed with the 9-
11 Commission Staff with the full knowledge of House Speaker Dennis Hastert's office.
Hastert's office has also received and discussed the report.

The report is accompanied to the 9/11 Commission with a copy of a Federal lawsuit OKC attorney Mike Johnston filed against Iraq in the DC court of Federal Magistrate Deborah Robinson in March 2003 The lawsuit contains evidence relevant to the participants and sponsors of 9/11 as well as the OKC bombing. Johnston is also an expert and prior litigant on Iraqi acquisition of WMDS technologies inside the US prior to the Gulf War.

This report is being posted on LP to make the public aware of the details of this evidence and information sent to and received by the 9-11 Commssion and Congressional leaders. The public has a right and a need to know this information regardless of the final outcome or actions of Congress, of the White House, of the 9-11 Commission, or any pending or subsequent legal proceedings.

REPORT TO THE 9/11 COMMISSION :

"Intelligence and Counter Terrorism Antecedents for the 9/11 Attacks"
With Addendum:
"Iraq and Chinese Support for Collaborating Terror Organizations; Small Footprint
WMD Development and Proliferation by Iraq"
April 3, 2004

Copyright 2004 by Patrick B. Briley

This report asserts that the FBI and CIA learned the plans of and "monitored" the
activities of known Al Qaeda terrorists and 9/11 hijackers in the US with informants for
more than 3 years prior to 9/11 without getting them off the streets.

A PBS Frontline documentary aired Thursday, October 16, 2003 and was entitled
"Chasing the Sleeper Cell" and examined the extended, long term FBI surveillance of an Al Qaeda terror cell at Lackawanna, New York after 9/11. In the documentary FBI
official Dale Watson of the Joint FBI and CIA Counter terrorism Center (CTC) was
interviewed at length:

Mr. Watson: "Once the C.I.A. gave Lackawanna the "most dangerous" label, however,
administration officials asked, "Can you guarantee to me that these people won't do
something?"

"And the answer," he said, "is we think we can."

The following is the section of the PBS interview with Watson that should cause the
Commission enough concern that the Commission will want to further re-evaluate existing FBI and CIA policies and activities that the remainder of this report describes and that were in effect years before 9/11:

"We are probably 99 percent sure that we can make sure that these guys don't do
something - if they are planning to do something. And under the rules that we were
playing under at the time, that's not acceptable. So a conscious decision was made, `Let's get `em out of here.' "

CTC Chief Watson said the bureau felt it could ensure that nothing would happen "while
it continued to watch the suspects, in the hope of being led to bigger prey."

FBI CTC official Dale Watson was exhibiting the same mentality that prevailed before
9/11 with the FBI tracking of terrorist hijackers for too long, that is, to "continue to watch
the suspects, in the hope of being led to bigger prey " while mistakenly assuring the
White House with a 99 per cent probability that nothing bad would happen" even though
the FBI intentionally left KNOWN terrorists on the streets. This same policy and
mentality affected FBI and CIA handling of the known 9/11 hijackers before 9/11 as this
report describes below.

Fortunately in the Lackawanna situation, administration officials and the CIA prevailed
in convincing the FBI that it could not guarantee something could go wrong if the FBI
continued to monitor the terror cell at Lackawanna so at least "they were taken off the
streets."

But the Lackawanna cell is not the only Al Qaeda cell the FBI was monitoring at the time
and PRIOR TO 9/11. In the fall of 2001 the Washington Post and Bob Woodward
reported that the FBI was monitoring at the same time but NOT moving against 5
KNOWN Al Qaeda terror groups inside the US only ONE of which was the Lackawanna
group.

These other 4 KNOWN cells still have not been taken off the streets to this day.

The Commission should consider that there likely are not enough FBI agents on every
street corner to watch all these terror groups at once like the FBI monitors the mob and
still be sure that nothing will go wrong unless the FBI gets the terrorists off the street
with existing laws including the new Patriot Act tools as soon as the FBI and CIA know
they are terrorists.

The situation is even more difficult for the FBI and CIA because of the influx of
unscreened illegal aliens into the US and the recent FBI admission there are Al Qaeda
sleeper cells inside at least 40 different states at this time who may have access to small footprint WMDS.

What should further concern the Commission is that apparently the FBI has convinced
the administration to go back to the old way of operating PRIOR TO 9/11 to continue to
monitor for years members of six known large Al Qaeda cells inside the US without
taking them off the streets. I refer the Commission to the following quote in the NY
Times article by DON VAN NATTA Jr. from Aug 23, 2003, "Six Groups Said to Be
Monitored in U.S. for Possible Qaeda Links":

"American officials have limited their actions so far to intensive surveillance of the
suspects, who they say are spread across 40 states, in order to gather more information
about their plans and organization, the officials said. The decision to continue the
surveillance, rather than to detain some suspects, reflects a strategic shift by United States government investigators. They said they had concluded that at this stage it was more valuable to try to learn more about the groups' activities and possible plans through extended observation."

What the New York Times article fails to recognize is that "the strategic shift" in policy it
refers to really only occurred with the Lackawanna cell and pre 9/11 surveillance policies of tracking known terrorists for years without getting all of them off the streets remain unchanged.

The Commission should evaluate whether or not "extended observation" was and still is
too long (more than a few weeks) when the FBI and CIA say they lost track of too many
KNOWN Al Qaeda hijacker terrorists PRIOR to 9/11. As shown in the addendum to
this report, before and after 9/11, terrorists of different organizations were and still are
collaborating inside and outside the US and may succeed in setting up more cells,
recruiting more terrorists, receiving small footprint WMDS and carrying out more attacks in the US.

There are FBI agents such as Robert Wright of Chicago and XXXXXX have publicly
stated their opinions that laws existing prior to 9/11 gave the FBI the tools to take these
terrorists off the streets back then if FBI supervisors and officials had permitted it. The
new Patriot Act makes it even more certain that the FBI has the tools so that terrorists can and should be taken off the streets. Those monitored without arrest, detention or
deportation prior to 9/11 include but are not limited to Ali Mohammed and 9/11 hijackers
Atta, Jarrah, Hanjour, Al Shehhi, Al Hazmi and Al Mihdhar, along with Moussaoui in San
Diego, Phoenix and at the Norman, Oklahoma Airman flight school.

The following is some detailed evidence and proof of FBI, CIA and White House policy ,
surveillance activities and conduct that permitted known terrorists to operate inside the
US for years prior to 9/11, the OKC bombing and the 1993 WTC bombing when some of
these same terrorists were actively involved in two and in some cases all three of these
attacks and bombings. This failed policy needs reevaluation and correction so that
attempts to stop future terror attacks inside the US will be more successful:

1. The FBI and CIA station chief in the Philippines learned the details of plans for the
OKC bombing and plans to train hijacker pilots for a 9/11 style attack on the WTC, other
US skyscrapers and DC Federal buildings (not Project Bokinka) in January and February 1995.

The CIA and FBI learned this information from CIA surveillance of an Abu Sayeff
terrorist cell meetings involving Iraqi operative Khalid Mohammed, his nephew Ramzi
Yousef, Abdul Murad, Wali Khan, Philippino Edwin Angeles, Americans John Lebney,
and Terry Nichols, and 5 Iraqi agents including a bomb expert.

The CIA and FBI also learned of this information in debriefings from undercover
Philippine Intelligence agent Edwin Angeles who was in the meetings. John Lebney was
engaged in Chinese appliance sales and was known to the CIA. Further information was learned by FBI interrogation of fellow cell members (arrested) Abdul Murad and Wally Khan.

Khalid Mohammed made these plans for the 9/11 style attack with FBI and CIA
knowledge in 1995 a full year before Khalid went to Bin Laden and AlQaeda in 1996 to
finalize and gain support for his plans.

Khalid Mohammed has told US interrogators that he indeed planned the 9/11 mission in
the Philippines in 1995. Philippine authorities have told CNN that the Philippine
government told the FBI and CIA of the plot in 1995. The FBI legal attaché blocked the
Pentagon terror advisor, Jesse Clear, from getting details of 1995 Abu Sayeff meetings
with Terry Nichols out of the Philippines starting in 1996. This is according to what Jesse Clear personally told me in late 1996.

In the Philippines in late January 1995 the FBI and CIA also obtained access to Ramzi
Yousef's computer hard drive in. The computer hard drive contained a letter from Khalid
Mohammed to a Mr. Siddiqy urging greater help from Mr Siddiqy. News reports stated
that one or more Siddiqys were suspects involved in the 1993 WTC bombing AND the
1995 OKC bombing. Anis and Assad Siddiqy and Mohammed Chafti from Brooklyn
New York were arrested immediately after the OKC bombing and then the FBI had them
released the same day.

The FBI claims they lost track of their arrest and the FBI 302 reports of their arrest until
they were discovered in the Dallas FBI SAC office of Danny Defenbaugh in January
2001. FBI agent Odom from Denver twice actively tried to intimidate the witness Debbie
Burdick to keep silent about her eyewitness account that she had seen the Siddiqy's and Chafti with McVeigh in OKC near the bombing scene.

The Commission needs to know that Mohammed Chafti, and Anis and Assad Siddiqy
from Brooklyn New York were suspects in the 1993 WTC bombing AND were involved
in the OKC bombing with McVeigh. On the day of the OKC bombing FBI agent Floyd
Zimms admitted to OKC police officers that Zimms deliberately gave out false
information concerning the vehicle driven by the men. Zimms deliberately and falsely
identified their getaway car as an old green Oldsmobile Cutless, one Zimms used to
drive, but not the vehicle the men were driving on the day of the bombing when they fled
to Dallas and were later released. The vehicle two of the men were driving was a rental
car from Dallas, the men had switched the plates on their rental car, they were detained
initially by the Oklahoma Highway Patrol and later arrested in Dallas. One of the other
men was arrested in OKC at a motel. The FBI intervened in Dallas and OKC and had the men later released for reasons unknown.

The CIA and Tenet should have known that Saddam Hussein and Iraq made direct
payments to 911 hijacker Mohammed Atta and mastermind Khalid Mohammed via the
Muslim and Syrian brotherhood starting over ten years before 9/11 and while they were
working with Iraqi agents.

The CIA and Tenet should have known that Iraq used Abu Nidal to train Ramzi
Youseff, Khalid Moahmmed and the 9/11 hijackers Mohammed Atta and Ziah Jarrah,
who were the roommates of fellow hijacker Al Shehhi in Hamburg.

The CIA and Tenet should have known that Ramzi Yousef traveled with Iraqi Dr. Ishan
Barbouti in the US and in England during the 1980s to acquire WMDS for Iraq including
from US companies. This is also further described in the addendum below.

Khalid Mohammed worked with an American citizen who was also an FBI informant,
Melvin Lattimore, and they both helped carry out ALL THREE OF THESE ATTACKS,
1993 WTC, the OKC bombing and 9/11. This is explained in detail in item 7. and other
items following below.

2. FBI agents visited the Norman flight school in 1999 after a visit by 9/11 hijacker
Mohammed Atta, and told the owners that they were tracking Atta as a suspect in a terror plot involving airliners. Bin Laden's personal pilot had trained at the Norman flight
school in 1996. The FBI was tracking hijacker pilots being trained in the US because the
FBI and CIA had learned of the 9/11 plot by Khalid Mohammed starting in 1995
described in item 1 above. The FBI visited several flight schools in Phoenix and Norman
tracking the training of the hijacker pilots well before 9/11. See items 3-8 below.

3. FBI agent Ken Williams used informants Adjai Collins in Phoenix to track hijacker
Hani Hanjour for over three years. FBI agent Steven Butler used informant Abdussattar
Shaikh in San Diego to track for at least two to three years the hijacker pilots Hani
Hanjour, Al Hazmi and Al Mihdhar.

While living with Abdussattar Shaikh, hijackers Al Hazmi and Al Mihdhar had frequent
visits from Mohammed Atta and Hani Hanjour. The FBI agent Steven Butler who was
Shaikh's handler claims that he never had reason to suspect Al Hazmi, Al Mihdhar, Atta or his informant Abdussattar.

Yet the FBI knew that Shaikh paid for computers for Al Hazmi and Al Mihdhar and that
he paid for a rental car the FBI knows was driven by them between San Diego and
Phoenix for their visits with hijacker Hani Hanjour in the fall of 2000.

Al Hazmi and Al Mihdhar lived with Hanjour in a San Diego apartment from February
2000 to September 2000 and had limousines pick them up for short rides in the middle of the night.

Then Al Hazmi and Al Midhar moved to the house of long time FBI counter intelligence
informant Abdussattar Shaikh in September 2000 where their rent was paid for by a
Saudi Omar al-Bayoumi who worked for officials of the Saudi Arabian consulate in Los
Angeles. Al-Bayoumi is believed by the FBI to be an intelligence officer. Al-Bayoumi
put Al Hazmi and Al Mihdhar in contact with their new landlord and FBI informant
Shaikh at the local mosque where Shaikh was a leader of the mosque.

According to an October 5, 2002 article in the New York Times the FBI refused to allow
the San Diego FBI informant Abussattar Shaikh and his handler, FBI agent Steven Butler to testify before the Congressional hearings on 9/11 about their monitoring of 9/11 hijackers Al Hazmi, Hani Hanjour and Al Hamdi:

"As for Butler, his criticism of FBI headquarters and the intelligence community,
in general, led to a punitive transfer and he left the FBI in disgust."

What is important for the Commission to note is that the 9/11 Congressional report states the best chance the FBI had to unravel the 9/11 plot was by paying more attention to the FBI informant Abdussattar Shaikh who lived with Al Hazmi and Al Mihdhar.

4. FBI agent Ken Williams sent a memo to an FBI unit in the CTC directed by Dale
Watson in the early summer of 2001. William's memo warned of Al Qaeda plans to use
hijacked airlines inside the US based on information Williams had learned about hijacker Hani Hanjour from informant Adjai Collins. One should wonder if Williams's memo was also based on information learned about Hani Hanjour co-hijackers Atta, Al Mihdhar and Al Hazmi from FBI agent Butler and FBI informant Abdussattar Shaikh. Williams's memo to an FBI CTC unit was ignored and Watson claimed he did not learn of the Williams memo in time.

5. While the FBI CTC units ignored Williams, Williams persisted and contacted the CIA
directly in the early summer of 2001 about his evidence and concerns pertaining to
Al Qaeda training pilots for attacks inside the US. Williams was reprimanded for going to
the CIA.

The Commission should determine if the Williams memo and conversations with the CIA reached Cofer Black of the CIA part of CTC AND if William's information was included in the CIA report concerning Al Qaeda attacks inside the US discussed by Dr. Rice at President Bush's Daily Brief on August 6, 2001. If this information was not provided in the CIA report and part of Dr. Rice's briefing on Aug 6, 2001, then the Commission should determine why it was not especially since then it should have been because the CIA knew about it in detail from Ken Williams in time to put it in the CIA report for Dr. Rice.

The Commission needs to be fully aware that according to Senate Intelligence Committee staff Director Eleanor Hill, the White House ordered the classifying and withholding
from Congress all information the US knew about terror mastermind Khalid Mohammed
and his 9/11 plot plans, the foreign [Saudi] sponsorship of the plans with money and help to 9/11 hijackers Al Hazmi and Al Mihdhar and Hani Hanjour via Saudi Omar Al-Bayoumi and all antecedent information the President was told about the 9/11 plot before 9/11.

The 9/11 Congressional report leaves out the most important facts that the information
from Ken Williams memo (that reached the CIA) was specific about Al Qaeda attacks
INSIDE the US using hijacked airlines with the very hijacker pilots ATTA, HANJOUR,
AL MIHDHAR and AL HAZMI that lived with and/or visited and were helped by the FBI
informant Abdussattar Shaikh and with the help of the Saudi Omar Al-Bayomi.

The Commission should review and investigate why this information is not in the final
900-page 9/11 report issued by Congress and why the information was withheld from
Congress even though part of it may have once been in the redacted 28 pages of the
report.

I received a phone call from James Lewis, the staff director (who helped write and
assemble the 900 page report) for the House Intelligence Committee over this story
BEFORE the Congressional report on 9/11 came out. Lewis told me that I could provide
him with information if I wanted to but he also advised me that I would be under
investigation by law enforcement such as the FBI for anything I told him or provided him
in writing.

Before the Congressional report came out I also had a phone discussion about this same information with James Hensler, the staff director for the Senate Intelligence Committee who also helped write the 9/11 Congressional report. The OKC attorney with whom I have closely worked for almost 9 years, Michael Johnston wrote Mr. Lewis and Mr Hensler providing some of this information before the 9/11 Congressional report came out. Mr. Johnston received no response and none of the information was included in the 9/11 Congressional report.

The discussion in items 1-5 above and in items 6-7 below provides a very strong basis to conclude that Congress was not fully informed and in fact blocked by White House
actions and classifications over the 9/11 plot plans of Khalid Mohammed and what the
FBI ,CIA , CTC and Bush and Clinton administrations knew or should have known from
tracking the 9/11 hijacker pilots for several years before 9/11.

6. George Tenet has said publicly and recently that he and the CIA only got incomplete
information - a first name and a phone number - two years before the 9/11 attacks, from
German intelligence about a member of the Hamburg cell of Atta and Zarrah, namely
9/11 hijacker Al Shehhi.

The Tenet public explanation about Al Shehhi is inconsistent with published accounts that
CIA agent David Edger monitored the Hamburg cell of Atta, Al Shehhi and Zarrah for
almost four years before the 911 attacks with an informant Dakalzani. The CIA and FBI
also appear to not want it publicly learned that a member of the Hamburg cell, Ziah
Jarrah, had his ticket purchased on the Pennsylvania 9/11 flight by an employee of
Oklahoma University (OU) with the knowledge of the FBI at the time when CIA agent
Edger was in Norman working with Tenet's mentor, David Boren, the former Chairman
of the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Chancellor of OU. Ziah Jarrah's uncle
supported Ziah while working for German intelligence and Abu Nidal.

7. In 1998-2000 the CIA learned from monitoring a Malaysian meeting with Hambali and
other Al Qaeda members that Zacahrias Moussaoui was Al Qaeda. And Moussaoui was
sent from Paris via the Hamburg cell by Khalid Mohammed to live with US citizen and
FBI informant Melvin Lattimore while attending the Norman OK Airman flight school.

Lattimore's credit card was used to buy bomb-making materials in the 1993 WTC
bombing. Lattimore was with McVeigh's car and two other FBI informants in OKC at
the time of the OKC bombing and was named to the FBI as part of the OKC bombing one day after the bombing. CIA operative Khalid Mohammed used Lattimore for roles in the 1993 WTC, the OKC and the 9/11 attacks.

The CIA's top man at the CTC, Cofer Black, was in a position to have known and to have told Tenet about the connections of Moussaoui with Al Qaeda and his monitoring in OK by FBI informant Melvin Lattimore. Groups associated with the CTC blocked Minnesota FBI agents from searching Moussaoui's computer when the FBI (Dale Watson) and CIA (Black) CTC knew from 1998 -2000 that Moussauoi was Al Qaeda and training for a terror mission with hijacked airliners.

8. OKC bombing witness Gloria Smith is the Director of the Travelers Aid that was down
the street from the bombed Murrah Federal building in OKC. Smith and three of her
co-workers saw three key suspects that were FBI informants with McVeigh's car at the
Travelers Aid.

One of the suspects is the known terrorist and the long time FBI informant, Melvin
Lattimore who is also a Black Muslim originally from St Louis.

Lattimore was Zacharias Moussaoui's roommate who Khalid Mohammed had sent via
Paris and the Hamberg cell to live with Lattimore while Moussaoui attended the Norman
OK flight school. Lattimore's credit card was used to buy bomb-making materials for the
Khalid Mohammed planned and Ramzi Yousef executed 1993 WTC attack. Other
informants named Lattimore to the FBI one day after the OKC bombing as a participant
in the OKC bombing. Yet the FBI did nothing adequate about the FBI informant Melvin
Lattimore.

Lattimore was Federally imprisoned in November 2001 for carrying a weapon in
violation of a prior felony conviction of stockpiling explosives. Lattimore was to have
been released in November 2003. Lattimore's attorney was Susan Otto, McVeigh's original attorney, who once told attorney Stephen Jones that Jones' opinion of the US government would never be the same if Jones learned what the US government's role in the OKC bombing had been. Jones described the Otto statement in his book "Others Unknown".

Melvin Lattimore worked with Khalid Mohammed to help do the 1993 WTC, the OKC
and the 9/11 attacks all while known to the FBI. Adanan Shukrijumah was sent to
Oklahoma after 9/11with two other Al Qaeda accomplices by Khalid Mohammed to
conduct terrorist acts on the US. The men are pilots and are believed to be carrying small footprint WMDS. The FBI claims that they cannot find the men even though the FBI has confirmed that the men were inside the US twice in 2003.

Lattimore is now is out of prison and could harm Smith. The DOJ and FBI should get
Lattimore off the street before he could harm Smith. Unless Lattimore is found and
stopped, Lattimore can connect up again with a known Al Qaeda terrorist Adan
Shukrijumah at large inside the US and sent by Khalid Mohammed to attempt another
terror attack inside the US.

Even as an FBI informant, Lattimore should still be considered as a terrorist and the
911 Commission should understand that the FBI has proven three times that the FBI's
awareness of Lattimore failed to stop the 1993 WTC, the OKC and the 9/11 attacks. A
fourth attempt by the FBI to monitor Lattimore to track Al Qaeda and other terrorists like
Adnan Shukrijumah could once again prove to be a fatal mistake.

The other two suspects and known FBI informants identified with Lattimore and
McVeigh's car by Smith and her co-workers at the Travelers Aid in OKC were Peter
Langan and James Rosencrans. See item 9 also.

Langan was taken out of prison by the FBI and Secret Service in 1994 to do undercover
work on domestic and foreign terrorism inside the US. While working for the FBI he
robbed banks in the MidWest, was photographed painting hand grenades at the FBI
infiltrated compound, Elohim City, and was with Rosencrans and Lattimore at the
Travelers aid with McVeigh's car just before the OKC bombing.

Rosencrans was a drug dealer and Fortier's next-door neighbor in Arizona. Rosencrans
was allowed by the FBI to keep the proceeds from the pawning of guns that were stolen
from gun dealer Roger Moore, the FBI and prosecutors had testified (perjury) were used
to fund the OKC bombings. Rosencrans was the FBI's star witness against McVeigh at
the Federal Grand Jury in OKC in June and July 1995. Yet Rosencrans had large amounts of ammonium nitrate like [that which was] used to make the OKC bomb found dumped in his back yard right after the OKC bombing.

Smith has high quality photographs of Lattimore, Langan and Rosencrans that match her eyewitness descriptions extremely well. Smith spoke directly with Rosencrans at the
Travelers Aid.

At least 6 different FBI agents interviewed and brow beat Smith and three co-workers
over their eyewitness accounts over a six-month period. The agents took few notes, did
no FBI 302 interview reports to be passed on to the courts and would not allow the
witnesses to work with a famous FBI sketch artist in town. The FBI agents were
particularly aggressive toward the witnesses about Lattimore and tried to make the
witnesses change their stories about Lattimore.

A major news network and other witnesses have validated and independently confirmed
Smith's account of Lattimore and other men with McVeigh and McVeigh's car in OKC
before the OKC bombing. Other witnesses and the news network also place Lattimore
with McVeigh and other terrorists at an OKC motel before the OKC bombing and also a
few months before the 9/11 attacks.


Federal court testimony revealed that gun dealer Roger Moore was an FBI and CIA
operative at the time he knew McVeigh and encouraged him for almost two years to
attack Federal buildings and do the OKC bombing to "combat the "new world order"
according to Moore's letters to McVeigh. Moore had a CIA based contract to build
nitromethane (believed used with ammonium nitrate and fuel oil in the OKC bombing
and sought out by McVeigh and Fortier in OKC) powered drug interdiction boats in
Florida with HW Bush close associate Aranow, involved in Iran Contra. Moore also
introduced McVeigh to an explosives chemist, Steve Coburn in Arizona before the OKC
bombing.


Part Two: Continuation of "911, OKC, FBI, CIA: Patrick B. Briley"

~

The Smith story is an indictment of officials in the Clinton and Bush administrations. AG
John Ashcroft and IG Glen Fine of the DOJ personally received and acknowledged
receipt of letters from Gloria Smith in the summer of 2001 about suspects seen by her at the Travelers Aid with McVeigh's car and about the criminal malfeasance of FBI agents toward her, her coworkers and the US criminal justice system. But Ashcroft, Fine and the FBI never followed up.

The FBI misconduct and behavior toward Smith and her co-workers and the FBI's
deliberate mishandling of their eyewitness accounts may have been an officially ordered
cover-up by Clinton officials high up in the FBI or White House particularly because
these FBI agents' conduct was unlike that of other FBI agents Smith has worked with for
years and known of them to be very efficient and professional note takers and FBI 302
report writers and willing to have sketch artists work with witnesses over serious crimes
like the OKC bombing. While the initial FBI deliberate inaction was during the Clinton
administration, the deliberate inaction continued within the FBI under Bush and
especially by IG Glen Fine and AG Ashcroft of the DOJ.

In a recently taped interview with Fox News Dallas, Smith told Fox that she felt that if
Ashcroft and Fine had acted on her information and followed up on Lattimore, the 9/11
attacks would have been less likely.

9. There is evidence to the effect that Khalid Mohammed was in OKC in March and
April 1995 to help in the OKC bombing the planning of which Khalid appears to have
assisted Terry Nichols with in the Philippines in January 1995. CIA official Robert Baer
told OKC attorney Mike Johnston that the time line of Khalid's activities supported
Khalid being in OKC at that time.

Further, there are witnesses associated with a Hamas and Palestinian operative who
describe seeing and talking to Khalid in OKC at that time. And there are witnesses that
sketched two ME looking men, including a man looking strikingly similar to Khalid
(same height, build and beard), casing the Murrah building a few days before the OKC
bombing. The sketches were shown to the FBI right after the bombing but were
deliberately ignored by FBI agents. There are also sources close to former CIA director
Admiral [James] Woolsey that also assert Khalid Mohammed was in OKC during March and possibly April 1995.

Robert Baer also complained to Bill Gertz of the Wahsington Times in a published
interview in 2002 that Baer was ignored and rebuffed for over a year by the Bush
administration to try and track down Kahlid Mohammed. Baer then worked with WSJ
reporter Danny Pearle to find Khalid. Unfortunately, Khalid beheaded Pearle as a result.
But the incident finally motivated the Bush administration to then try harder to capture
Khalid. Khalid was captured in March 2003.

10. This item should be known by the CIA and Tenet and should also be investigated by
the 9/11 Commission:

Federal court testimony revealed that gun dealer Roger Moore was an FBI and CIA
operative at the time he knew McVeigh and encouraged him for almost two years to
attack Federal buildings and do the OKC bombing to "combat the "new world order"
according to Moore's letters to McVeigh. Moore had a CIA based contract to build
nitromethane (believed used with ammonium nitrate and fuel oil in the OKC bombing
and sought out by McVeigh and Fortier in OKC) powered drug interdiction boats in
Florida with HW Bush close associate Aranow, involved in Iran Contra. Moore also
introduced McVeigh to an explosives chemist, Steve Coburn in Arizona before the OKC
bombing.

Moore is the man who testified at the Nichols Federal trial and recanted his testimony in
a published letter a few months later. Nothing was ever done to Moore about his false
testimony. The US prosecutors had claimed that guns were stolen from Moore to help
pay for the OKC bombing. The problem with that false reason is that at least one of the
guns they claimed were stolen was not stolen at all but in fact belonged to Terry Nichols.

Moore's alias with McVeigh, Robert Miller, was used by FBI informant Peter Langan
(see item 7.) on a phony drivers license found with Langan's belongings.

Langan's father was a high level official at the CIA. Langan was taken out of Federal
prison in 1994 by the FBI and Secret Service to do undercover work on domestic and
foreign intelligence. Langan was filmed by BATF informant Carol Howe at the FBI and
CIA infiltrated Elohim City compound in OK where CIA, FBI and German intelligence
informant Andreas Strassmeyer also worked. Strassmeyer worked with Colonel Petroskie
connected to the CIA and was protected by the US State Department and FBI during
undercover operations (1989-1995) at the Elohim compound in Oklahoma including
Strassmeyer contacts with Tim McVeigh.

The other problem is that the FBI permitted FBI and DEA informant James Rosencrans
(Fortier's neighbor) to sell guns stolen from Moore and keep the proceeds for himself
allegedly because McVeigh and Fortier owed Rosencrans money for drug deals.
Rosencrans testified against McVeigh twice at the Federal grand jury in OKC in 1995
even though he brandished guns at FBI agents and even though large amounts of
ammonium nitrate (like used in the OKC bomb) were found dumped in his back yard.

11. The CIA and Tenet should know that Iraqi Heidar Barbouti of Houston (son of Dr
Ishan Barbouti described in item1) may have assisted the Iraqi Al Hussain Hussaini after the OKC bombing even though Hussaini was seen by many reliable witnesses with
McVeigh before and at the time of the OKC bombing. Hussaini was brought to the US
under the direction of former CIA director Admiral Woolsey and President HW Bush
along with other Iraqis after the Gulf War.

Hussaini was permitted to roam free by the FBI for years and was a baggage handler at
Bostons' Logan airport used by the 9/11 hijacker around the time of the 9/11 attacks. For more on Hussaini please see item 18.

The CIA and Tenet should know that Heidar Barbouti bought the luggage that carried
the bomb that blew up the Lockerbie flight with direct Iraqi help.

12. The CIA and Tenet should know that the acting CIA director at the time of the OKC
bombing, Admiral William Studdeman (see addendum) publicly stated in published
accounts that the OKC bombing was an act of International terrorism shortly after the
OKC bombing while making a speech in Chicago.

13. The CIA, FBI (Freeh) and Tenet know that OKC bombing provocateur Andreas
Strassmeyer knew and encouraged McVeigh while Strassmeyer was an FBI asset and a CIA asset (with Colonel Petroskie) in the US from 1989 until 1995 and, like 9/11 hijacker Ziad Jarrah, was involved directly with German intelligence. Strassmeyer was also protected from arrest in Oklahoma near the FBI infiltrated compound Elohim City by the US State Department in 1999.

14. FBI SAC Danny Defenbaugh (former OK Bomb Inspector) tracked known Al Qaeda
terrorists in Dallas and the US and around the world for years using FBI agents AND
Dallas police officers from 1997 to 2000 when he should have arrested them. These
terrorists are believed to have helped in the 9/11 attacks and possibly in the OKC
bombing (see below). The Dallas chief of police at the time, Terrell Bolton publicly
objected on TV to his not being adequately informed by Defenbaugh's activities with
Bolton's Dallas police officers.

15. A number of FBI agents like Robert Wright of Chicago have publicly complained
that they were only allowed to follow known terrorists for years inside the US but never
allowed to open a criminal investigation against them for prosecution and arrest.

16. Former FBI Director Louis Freeh told the Senate Judiciary Committee and Senator
Orin Hatch in May 1995 that the FBI was monitoring known Abu Nidal terror cells in
Dallas, LA and Virginia without taking them off the streets. Freeh told the committee that
the FBI was also deliberately helping known terrorist individuals come into the US to
populate and track the Nidal cells for years.

The problem with this policy by Freeh which the Judiciary Committee did not object to is
that while Abu Nidal worked directly for Iraq he trained terror mastermind Khalid
Mohammed, his nephew Ramzi Yousef (1993 WTC bombing), along with 9/11 terror
hijackers Mohammed Atta and Ziad Jarrah.

17. Senator Orin Hatch openly told journalist Cal Thomas for a 1998 published interview
that the FBI was closely monitoring (but not taking off the streets) over 2000 known
terrorists INSIDE the US.

18. FBI and Israeli intelligence agents jointly monitored the Al Arian terrorist group in
Florida for almost 13 years without taking the group and Al Arian off the streets. The FBI
also monitored the activities of Syrian Islamic Jihad leader Ramadan Sallah while he was working in Florida with the Al Arian group. There was a raid by Federal authorities in OKC on March 13, 1995 in connection with the OKC bombing when authorities were
trying to find an associate of the Al Arian group connected to Ramadan Sallah and
professor Sami Al Arian.

Dual Israeli and US intelligence asset William Northrup was sent immediately from
Florida to warn OKC FBI officials on April 17, 1995 of a possible Middle Eastern
assisted terror attack on the Murrah and one other federal building across the street from Murrah in OKC. Northrup knew the Pentagon terror advisor Jesse Clear for over 20 years and gave Clear and others his account. Northrup also told a radio news audience in OKC in 1998 that Israeli and German intelligence told the US government that ME terrorists were involved in the OKC bombing.

In an affidavit more than 100-pages long, FBI Agent Kerry Myers detailed the long
investigation of former University of South Professor Sami Al-Arian.

Myers, an anti-terrorism expert who once testified in the case against Oklahoma City
bomber Timothy McVeigh, also said Al-Arian and the others provided advice on the
terrorist group's structure, financing, organization and relationships with other terrorist
groups, including Hamas [appear tied to PLO activist Dr. Samir Khalil of OKC and the
OKC bombing]. They used the University of Southern Florida USF as a cover and
brought other terrorists into the United States "under the guise of academic conferences, meetings and employment."

This included a conference in OKC in December 1991 with Hamas members taped by
Steve Emerson for his video "Jihad in America". The attendees to the conference openly discussed attacking the WTC. And in 1997 Emerson gave an interview with Chris Ruddy in which Emerson said that there would be many repeated attempts to bring down the WTC until it succeeded. Emerson worked with FBI Deputy director Buck Revel and Israeli Counter terrorism official Yigal Carmone. Carmone publicly stated soon after the OKC bombing that foreign terrorists were involved in the OKC bombing and offered Israel's help to Clinton from Israeli Prime Minister Rabin.

Former House Intelligence Chairman Dave McCurdy from Oklahoma wrote an article for
the Oklahoma Gazette in May 1995 in which McCurdy stated that demolition agents
associated with a large Hamas cell in Oklahoma likely contributed to helping in the OKC
bombing.

A ME male was with Terry Nichols and two other accomplices at Newkirk Oklahoma
and headed toward OKC with a Ryder truck on the afternoon before the OKC bombing.
The FBI and BATF interviewed three witnesses to this incident including two school
teachers and the wife of a police officer. The witnesses identified the ME male from a
good sketch the FBI showed them. None of this information was ever brought up at trial.
On the morning of the OKC bombing a ME male was seen by witness John Morris Kuper accompanying McVeigh in OKC and in front of working surveillance cameras at the Downtown Public Library and Southwestern Bell Telephone Company. The surveillance tapes were confiscated by FBI agents immediately but were never turned over at trial. Kuper testified at the Nichols trial. Kuper went to the FBI with his story soon after the bombing.

Two ME males were seen by witnesses with McVeigh in front of the Murrah building
and running to a late model brown Chevy truck with a bug shield that was the subject of a public FBI APB right after the bombing. The same men and truck were later seen
speeding a few block away by witness Kay Herron moments before Murrah was bombed.

The two ME males were positively identified by Herron as the Iraqi Al Hussain Hussaini
(see item 11 also) and the Palestinian Abraham Ahmad. Hussaini and Ahmad were
employed by a Palestinian believed to be associated with Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Dr. Samir Khalil. Khalil was reportedly in Las Vegas in 1994 with McVeigh at the same time and at the same motel with an Iraqi recruiter. Khalid was photographed with a man believed to be an Iraqi intelligence agent identified as Jafar Osman within a week after the OKC bombing. And the Pentagon terror advisor Jesse Clear knew this information.

The Chevy pickup was later returned painted yellow at an OKC apartment complex by
Olie Ahmad shortly after the bombing. The morning of the bombing, a group of ME
males abruptly left the same apartments without paying their rent. The truck was
impounded by FBI agent Jim Ellis who told witnesses that the truck was the same truck
used in the OKC bombing.

Yosef Bodansky, director of the House Task Force on Terrorism, wrote memos to his
boss and to the intelligence community a few months before and after the OKC bombing stating that US intelligence believed that there could likely be a ME terrorist assisted attack on the Murrah building. Bodansky worked for the Task Force Chairman, James Saxton, Republican Congressman from New Jersey.

Deputy Sheriffs Dave Kochendorfer and Don Hammonds publicly stated in a news
conference and before an Oklahoma Country grand Jury that they were told by Oklahoma Congressman Earnest Istook the night of the OKC bombing that the FBI had received a threat from a local ME terrorist group against the Murrah building on April 9, 1995.

Kochendorfer was intentionally intimidated by FBI agent James Carlisle to try and have
Kochendorfer change his story. Carlisle falsified his FBI 302 interview report with
Kochendorfer according to Kochendorfer's account. Kochendorfer wrote a letter of
protest to the OKC FBI SAC, Mr Kucker.

In March 1995 the Newark Star Ledger, in an article by John Rudolph, published memo
excerpts from the head of the US Marshals, Eduardo Gonazales, warning of ME terrorist attacks on US Federal buildings in Americas heartland (including the Murrah building) as a result of a fatwah issued over the 1993 WTC bombing trials.

Federal Judge Wayne Alley and the entire OKC Federal family was warned of a pending possible attack against an OKC Federal building in late March 1995. US prosecutor Beth Wilkerson testified to this fact to Federal Judge Matsch in a preliminary hearing for the McVeigh trial.

Judge Alley was warned by the US Marshals and decided to stay home from work from
April 4, 1995 until after the OKC bombing. Judge Alley also told his children to take
Alley's grand children out of the Murrah day care center before the OKC bombing. This
story is reported in the Oregonian, Alleys hometown newspaper who interviewed Alley
after the OKC bombing.

FBI agents who normally visited the Murrah building on business at 9 am (two minutes
before the time of the bombing) and who brought children to the day care center were
told not to go the Murrah building on April 19, 1995. There are many witnesses to
corroborate this fact. Yet none of public victims who went to the Social Security office
and the Day care center in the Murrah building were ever warned.

19. FBI agents in Sacramento, California used Egyptian Ali Mohammed as an informant
from 1992 until 1996 while Ali Mohammed participated in AlQaeda operations around
the world. The CIA should have been aware of Ali Mohammed's operations during this
time as well. Ali Mohammed wrote Bin Ladens' terrorist training manual, not just
Mohammed Atef, according to what CIA official LC Johnson admitted to me.

Ali Mohammed helped Bin Laden write the AlQaeda terrorist manual using US
intelligence manuals and information Ali gained while he served as a US Green Beret and worked for a time for the CIA. Ali moved Bin Laden from Sudan to Afghanistan while CIA agent Cofer Black of the CTC was in the Sudan monitoring Bin Laden's activities.

Ali Mohammed was used by the FBI to squire Dr. Ayman Zawahiri around inside the US
in 1995 possibly along with Khalid Mohammed as well.

During that time Ali Mohammed helped Khalid Mohammed set up terrorist cells
throughout the US, trained Bin Laden terrorists in the US on how to use US intelligence
manuals and to deliver bombs, biological, chemical and possibly nuclear weapons in the
US. Ali was indicted in New York in December 1998 along with Bin Laden's secretary el
Hage for the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, the Kenyan and Tanzanian
Embassy bombings and for setting up Bin Laden terrorist cells in the US.

El Hage had been living in Dallas and [was] tracked by the FBI in Dallas for several years before his arrest. When arrested, Ali was carrying US intelligence manuals and
documents on how to plant explosive devices in public buildings. Explosive devices were planted inside the Murrah building based on eyewitness accounts and forensic experts. In addition to an exploded Ryder truck, evidence of exploded and non-exploded devices was found at the scene.

FBI and CIA asset Ali Mohammed may have had a role with Khalid Mohammed in the
1995 OKC Oklahoma City bombing because of the direct participation of Ali and Khalid
Mohammed with the same men in the OKC bombing that were also involved in the 1993
WTC attacks, namely Anas and Asad Siddiqy, Mohammed Chafti (see item 1), and
Melvin Lattimore (see items 1,7, 8)

20. FBI agents contributed funds to known Hamas terrorists inside the US for over 6
years to track the KNOWN Hamas terrorists but not take them off the streets. The
operation was approved by DOJ AG Janet Reno and included payments made to Hamas by Phoenix FBI agent Ken Williams who was using informant Adjai Collins to also track 3 known 9/11 hijackers in Phoenix for almost 4 years before 9/11.

21. It is known as fact that, while an FBI and CIA informant, Ali Mohammed along with
Khalid Mohammed and Khalid's nephew Ramzi Yousef, assisted in the 1993 WTC
bombing. The FBI through FBI agent Nancy Floyd and informant Salem had
foreknowledge of the 1993 WTC attack.

The FBI and US Attorney in New York squired another known 1993 WTC bomb maker,
Mr. Yassin around New York for a week after the bombing while Yassin had acid burns
on his legs but showed the FBI how and where the bomb was assembled. The FBI
deliberately let Yassin go directly to Iraq. Vice President Cheney referred to Yassin last
summer in an interview as an example of an Iraqi involved in the 1993 WTC bombing.

22. There are published reports that the DOJ withheld evidence the Moussaoui case in
order to avoid having Khalid Mohammed assistant Bin Alshibh testify about this
information and to keep it from coming out in a public trial. The DOJ decision to do this
may have been based in part upon the advice of the CIA and Tenet.

A trial in Germany of an Al Qaeda member of the 9/11 hijacking team is going to be
retried because the US (based on DOJ and CIA decisions?) refused to let AlQaeda
member and Khalid Mohammed associate, Bin Alshibh testify about his knowledge of
the Hamburg cell operations monitored by CIA agent David Edger and German
intelligence. This is the situation even though German intelligence testified in the first
trial about IRAN'S role and German and CIA monitoring of the cell before 9/11.

The DOJ wants alleged dirty radiation bomber Jose Padilla tried as an enemy combatant rather than be tried in public court even though he is a US citizen. Is this being done because the DOJ and CIA want to avoid having the public learn of the CIA's knowledge and previous contacts with terror mastermind Khalid Mohammed? Jose Padilla also closely resembles a ME John Doe (with the same scar on his face) seen with McVeigh AND Nichols in OKC at the time of the OKC bombing.

Addendum:

Iraq and Chinese Support for Collaborating Terror Organizations; Small
Footprint WMD Development and Proliferation by Iraq

There are also considerable questions that need to be asked of George Tenet, Dr. Kay and Stuart Cohen about small print WMDS jointly developed by Iraq and Al Qaeda in Iraq since at least 1998 (based on a 1998 DOJ public indictment) and shipped to terrorist groups around the world prior to April 2003.

Cohen wrote the 2002 National Intelligence estimate and told Nightline about the small
footprint WMDS late in January 2004. Dr. Kay told Nightline and the British press that
Iraqi scientists with WMD technical know how and WMD materials started going out of
Iraq to terrorist nations such as Iran and Syria starting in 1998.

The CIA and Tenet should know that the CIA and HW Bush directly assisted Iraq AND
LIBYA (Rabthah Chemical plant and fissile materials production, uranium and
plutonium) using Iraqi Dr. Ishan Barbouti in the late 1980s to acquire US WMD based
technologies and materials in the US and overseas with the full help and involvement of
Ramzi Yousef and also possibly with his uncle Khalid Mohammed.

The CIA and Tenet also should know that Admiral Studdeman (see item 12) was directly involved for HW Bush and the CIA to acquire and transfer US WMD technologies to Iraq and to personally attempt to discredit the factual allegations of Texas Congressman Henry B. Gonzalez about the transfers read on the floor of Congress on national TV and introduced into the Congressional Record.

The Bush administration knew where and how to also take out another Al Qaeda
supporter of Iraq, Zarqawi, but rejected a Pentagon plan to take him out in 2001-2002.
Zarqawi has led the killing of US troops in Iraq to this very day and was leading Iraq's
effort to help Al Qaeda leader Zawahiri develop small footprint WMDS at Ansar AlIslam
in Iraq to be given to terrorists around the world- and they were doing this from 1998 to
2003.

A sister cell of Ansar Al Islam is in Canada and may have received WMDS and may be
assisting Adnan Shukrijumah and two accomplices sent to North America by Khalid
Mohammed and seen in the US and Canada in 2003.

Before 9/11 and after Bush took office was Bush told by Tenet (like Clinton was told by
Tenet) where Bin Laden was? Did Bush like Clinton not attempt to take out Bin Laden
when the CIA knew where he was and had an opportunity? Or did Tenet not tell Bush or
did Bush find out too late to do anything?

In 2000 and 2001 Baghdad hosted terrorism coordination and collaboration conferences
between Al Qaeda leader Zawahiri and leaders from Hamas, Al Qaeda, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah as well as leaders from Syria and Iran. These meetings have led to greater cooperation, amalgamation, coordination and planning of new terror attacks around the world since 9/11.

The meetings also resulted in the transfer and propositioning of small footprint,
concentrated and re-constitutable WMDS specifically designed for terrorist use with
these terror groups and nations around the world including Canada, the Far and Near
East, Europe, Cuba and Iran and Syria. The CIA and Tenet have only recently publicly
announced last month that these groups are now working together when the CIA has
known this since at least 2000 or earlier.

China is a leading backer of Al Qaeda with intelligence, training, money, and weapons
and safe haven. China has used Al Qaeda to attack Spain and now threaten France to
drive a wedge in the Western alliance and split off American allies. China has
proliferated nuclear missile and WMD technologies to Iraq, Iran, Syria and North Korea.

A war on terror that does not publicly address China's role in terrorism and proliferating
weapons to terrorist groups and nations is not a complete or adequate war on terrorism.
Copyright 2004 by Patrick B. Briley


FAIR USE NOTICE: The above may be copyrighted material, and the use of it on
LibertyPost.org may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such
material is made available on a non-profit basis for educational and discussion purposes only. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 USC § 107. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material
from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain
permission from the copyright owner.

* * * *
[Part Four] (three?)

Anatomy of CIA Planted Disinformation about
USG Prior Knowledge of 9/11 and OKC Bombing

Published: Apr 19, 2004
Author: Patrick B. Briley
EDITORIAL
Copyright 2004 by Patrick B. Briley

While the article presented below by AP reporter John Solomon has some interesting
facts and information from the past especially the NSC, it needs to be read with the
understanding that the article misdirects the reader away from what really happened with respect to FBI and CIA and the Joint Counter Terrorism Center's (CTC) foreknowledge and tracking of known Al Qaeda terrorists in the US for years. In this area, the article is flat incorrect and appears to be deliberate disinformation.

John Solomon has received information from the CIA and written articles over the years
when the information from the CIA was intentional disinformation. For example,
Solomon has written and gone on talk shows claiming that Khalid Mohamed planned the 9/11 attacks for Bin Laden in 1996 (rather than 1995 as will be shown) and has
deliberately parroted the Rice, Clarke and Tenet, CIA cover-up and disinformation line
that there was no connection between Al Qaeda and Iraq or Iraq and 9/11.

This is knowingly false disinformation. Even CNN reported that Khalid Mohammed told
his interrogators about planning the 9/11 attacks in 1995 and not 1996 as Solomon would have you believe. And CNN reported that Philippine authorities not only corroborated Khalid's interrogation but revealed that knowledge that the Iraqis helped make the 9/11 plan and the OKC bombing plot was described to the US CIA and FBI by Philippine authorities in 1995.

Solomon knows that Khalid Mohammed came up with the 9/11 and OKC bombing plans
in the Philippines with full CIA and FBI monitoring and knowledge in late 1994 and
early 1995 using 5 Iraqi agents and an Iraqi demolition expert. Solomon knows that
Khalid and his nephew were trained by Iraqi agent Abu Nidal in bomb making skills
along with hijacker Atta and Ziad Jarrah.

Solomon has also had access to most all of the USG prior warning memos about the OKC bombing written by the director of the Congressman James Saxton's House Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, Josef Bodansky, but Solomon has
deliberately not completely or accurately reported about these memos in an effort to
perpetuate the CIA cover up of FBI and CIA foreknowledge of the OKC bombing.
Solomon actually bragged to me about his handling of these memos in a phone call
slightly less than two years ago.

Solomon also worked with reporter and Marine Colonel Roger Charles and as noted in
the Solomon article has also had close interview contact with Richard Clarke. Clarke and Charles are men both well connected to the Clinton White House staffs.

Solomon's article does give some glimpses of Dale Watson, a key figure in the USG 9/11 hijacker foreknowledge and cover-up. The White House exerted executive privilege to
keep Watson from testifying before the 911 Commission. Watson is the man who knew
the results of FBI translator Sibel Edmonds translations showing the 911 attacks were
imminent.

http://www.thementalmilitia.org/modules ... =0&thold=0

http://www.thementalmilitia.org/modules ... =0&thold=0

Bush has also blocked testimony by Edmonds at the Commission hearings.

Before reading Solomon's article below first read the facts in the next few paragraphs,
then decide if Solomon is writing the correct stuff about what the FBI and CIA did and
did not do prior to 9/11. Keep in mind also that the CIA has had journalists on its payroll
before. And the CIA has fed false disinformation to their favorite journalists even when
the journalists are not on the CIA payroll.

The FBI did know in detail about 9/11 hijacker AlHazmi (Hamzi) for years as an Al
Qaeda hijkacker pilot in the US. More importantly, former CIA director Woolsey's boy,
FBI chief Dale Watson, at the Joint FBI and CIA Counter Terrorism Center did know all
about the FBI tracking Hazmi for years.

The FBI agent Steven Butler in San Diego who was following Hazmi, (Hamzi) used FBI
informant Abdussatar Shaikh as an informant for three years as Hazmi drove back and
forth to see Hani Hanjour with Al Mihdhar in Phoneix where they were being monitored
at the same time by FBI agent Ken Williams and his informant Adjai Collins. Williams is
the agent who sent a very specific memo to the FBI and CIA and discussed it at length
with the CIA in early to mid summer 2001.

The CIA had hijacker Al Shehhi's numbers and name and was following him in Hamburg
and the US for years. THE CIA agent who did this was David Edger who also came to
Norman OK in Aug 2001 when hijacker pilot Ziad Jarrah's ticket was purchased there by
someone close to the FBI. Atta, Zarrah and Al Shehhi were part of the same Hamburg cell connected directly to Khalid Mohammed and Moussaoui. The FBI and CIA at CTC were both tracking Moussaoui inside (Lattimore informant) and outside the US.

All of this is in my report to the 9/11 Commission which I posted on LP (Intelligence and
Counter Terrorism Antecedents for the 9/11 Attacks) but which the Commission has
swept under the rug thanks to Bush cover up man, Philip Zelikow, the staff director at the Commission who worked for Condi Rice before going to the Commission.


Hijacker Chats Years Before 9/11 Detailed
John Solomon
The Associated Press
Wed, Jul. 23, 2003

http://asia.news.yahoo.com/030723/ap/d7sfhkjo0.html

http://asia.news.yahoo.com/030723/ap/d7sfhkjo0.html

The government intercepted conversations by early 1999 indicating that two Sept. 11
hijackers-to-be were connected to a suspected al-Qaida facility in the Middle East, but the National Security Agency did not pass on the information to other agencies, a
congressional report on intelligence failures says.

The NSA interception was the first evidence in American possession that eventual
hijackers Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi were connected to each other and to al-Qaida, but some of that information was not brought to the attention of other agencies
until early 2002 after Congress began investigating pre-Sept. 11 failures, according to
excerpts of the report that is to be released Thursday.

The Associated Press obtained excerpts from officials [Clarke, CIA friends of Solomon?]
who had read it after it was declassified.

The report states that NSA began intercepting conversations in fall 1998 from an
undisclosed al-Qaida location in the Middle East, and that analysis of those
communications in early 1999 divulged that al-Hazmi was mentioned by name and al-Mihdhar was mentioned as "Khaled."

NSA subsequently concluded that "Khaled" was the eventual hijacker, al-Mihdhar, the
report states.

"These communications were the first indication that NSA had of a link between al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi," the report says. "They were not reported in NSA SIGINT (signal
intelligence) reporting because the persons were unknown, and the subject matter did not meet NSA reporting thresholds," the report says. It adds that the standards inside NSA for when to report such information varied greatly depending on the analyst.

Beyond its own interception, the NSA also received similar electronic eavesdropping
information in 1999 from another unnamed intelligence agency and did not pass that
information on either.

"For an undetermined reason, NSA did not disseminate the report," the excerpts stated.
"It was not until early 2002 during the joint inquiry, that NSA realized it had the report in
its databases and subsequently disseminated" the information to CIA, Congress and other intelligence agencies.

In testimony before the joint congressional intelligence committee, NSA Director Lt.
Gen. Michael Hayden conceded "our performance in retrospect could have been better." But he added, "This was not some culturally based failure to share information."

Hayden said that despite the fact that NSA did not share the 1998-99 interceptions, U.S.
intelligence by 2000 had al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar "in our sights. We knew of their
association with al-Qaida." Before that time, he said, the information about their
connections to al-Qaida in the intercepts was "unexceptional."

The interception by the super-secretive NSA, the government's premiere electronic
eavesdropping agency, is one of numerous signs of growing terrorist threats against
America that were missed by U.S. intelligence before Sept. 11, the report states, citing
examples in which different agencies had pieces of the puzzle.

For instance, the CIA separately received information that al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar were present at a January 2000 meeting of al-Qaida operatives in Kuala Lumpur that was monitored by Malaysian authorities. By the time CIA recognized the significance of the information and shared it with the FBI, the two hijackers had slipped into the United
States.

The joint congressional committee that conducted the inquiry, however, concludes none
of the U.S. agencies had information that "would have provided specific, advance
warning" to uncover the Sept. 11 hijackings, the report says, according to the excerpts
provided to the AP. [NOT TRUE]

The report spends substantial time discussing failures by the FBI to adapt to the growing terrorist threat. Officials said it portrays an agency that had not yet shifted its priorities from crime-fighting, which had been at the heart of its mission for decades, to preventing terrorism before Sept. 11.

For instance, agents in charge of FBI offices across the country were instructed early in
2000 to scour their communities for al-Qaida operatives but they made only spotty
progress before the hijackings, according to the officials.

The FBI's top terrorism official, Dale Watson, and the White House's anti-terrorism
director, Richard Clarke, told a meeting of FBI supervisors in March 2000 that there was
a high probability that al-Qaida "sleeper cells" were working on U.S. soil and that
identifying them should be a top priority, the officials said.

Clarke told the joint congressional committee that investigated the Sept. 11 attacks that
he later visited a half-dozen FBI field offices to reinforce the message and returned with
the assessment that the job of getting the FBI to focus on the terrorist group headed by
Osama bin Laden was like "trying to ... sort of turn this big Queen Mary luxury liner,"
according to excerpts from the report.

FBI officials declined to discuss details of the report, but they reiterated that Director
Robert Mueller has remade the bureau to focus on preventing terrorist acts. Mueller was
on the job just a few days when the attacks occurred.

The changes include borrowing the expertise of the CIA to train FBI analysts on how to
read intelligence with an eye toward prevention rather than crime solving; hiring new
analysts and linguists to focus on intelligence from countries with high terrorism threats;
refocusing the priorities of field offices, and shedding some crime-fighting duties to free
resources for the war on terrorism.

Clarke told the gathering of FBI supervisors in March 2000 that a plot to blow up U.S.
sites during the millennium celebrations _ a plan that was foiled just months before the
Florida meeting when an al-Qaida operative was captured at the U.S.-Canadian border
was evidence of the existence of sleeper cells.

To emphasize the importance of the mission, Watson told the supervisory agents that
their future promotions and bonuses would be based in part on their performance in
tracking al-Qaida cells, according to Clarke and others who attended the meeting.

"They were somewhat taken aback," Clarke, now a private security consultant, told AP in an interview.

Clarke said in the months after he and Watson made the presentation, there was some but "not a lot" of evidence that the FBI's field offices had made progress tracking terrorists. The report says Watson, who retired last year after serving as assistant director for counterterrorism, tried in the period before Sept. 11 "to get more control of field offices" but that he believed the special agents in charge were "focused more on convicting than disrupting" terrorists.

FAIR USE NOTICE: The above may be copyrighted material, and the use of it on
LibertyPost.org may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such
material is made available on a non-profit basis for educational and discussion purposes only. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 USC § 107. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material
from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain
permission from the copyright owner.

Clarke is not high on my list of favorites but he did publicly apologize to the families of
9/11 for not stopping 9/11, something that Bush has not found the moral character and
courage to really do yet.

end


http://www.thementalmilitia.org/modules ... =0&thold=0



http://www.devvy.com/200406130416.html

For the sake of a little background, Pat has a Masters degree in Chemical Engineering with graduate level course work in nuclear engineering from Northwestern University in Evanston Illinois and the Bettis Atomic Power Lab Nuclear Reactor engineering school near Pittsburgh. He was a staff project engineer for Admiral Rickover at Naval Reactors near DC for the design and construction of the nuclear power plant for the Trident (Ohio class) ballistic missile submarine. Additionally, Pat worked with a former Pentagon terrorism advisor and briefed legal counsels for committees of the Senate Judiciary and Senate Intelligence committees on the OKC bombing. He has personally discussed his findings on OKC and 9/11 with the assistant Chief of Staff for the Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, as well as a member of the 9/11 Commission staff, Mr. John Roth.

Pat's father worked for Army intelligence and the IG (Inspector General) of the Army. He was in the first graduating class of the OK state Highway patrol and is buried in Arlington National Cemetery. His grandparents belonged to the Sons and Daughters of the American Revolution; Pat is related to Presidents Polk, Lincoln, Jefferson and Washington.

"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5821
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 9/11 Info Dump

Postby Elvis » Sun Sep 17, 2017 3:00 am

[p.18 of dump]




[Money/stock trades &ct.]




http://tbrnews.org/Archives/a048.htm

SEC SECRET PROBE OF STOCK DEALINGS BEFORE 9/11

Between August 26 and September 11, 2001, a group of speculators, identified by the American Securities and Exchange Commission as Israeli citizens, sold “short” a list of 38 stocks that could reasonably be expected to fall in value as a result of the pending attacks. These speculators operated out of the Toronto, Canada and Frankfurt, Germany, stock exchanges and their profits were specifically stated to be “in the millions of dollars.”

Short selling of stocks involves the opportunity to gain large profits by passing shares to a friendly third party, then buying them back when the price falls. Historically, if this precedes a traumatic event, it is an indication of foreknowledge. It is widely known that the CIA uses the Promis software to routinely monitor stock trades as a possible warning sign of a terrorist attack or suspicious economic behavior. A week after the Sept.11 attacks, the London Times reported that the CIA had asked regulators for the Financial Services Authority in London to investigate the suspicious sales of millions of shares of stock just prior to the terrorist acts. It was hoped the business paper trail might lead to the terrorists.

Investigators from numerous government agencies are part of a clandestine but official effort to resolve the market manipulations There has been a great deal of talk about insider trading of American stocks by certain Israeli groups both in Canada and Germany between August 26 and the Sept.11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Lynne Howard, a spokeswoman for the Chicago Board Options Exchange (CBOE), stated that information about who made the trades was available immediately. "We would have been aware of any unusual activity right away. It would have been triggered by any unusual volume. There is an automated system called 'blue sheeting,' or the CBOE Market Surveillance System, that everyone in the business knows about. It provides information on the trades - the name and even the Social Security number on an account - and these surveillance systems are set up specifically to look into insider trading. The system would look at the volume, and then a real person would take over and review it, going back in time and looking at other unusual activity."

Howard continued, "The system is so smart that even if there is a news event that triggers a market event it can go back in time, and even the parameters can be changed depending on what is being looked at. It's a very clever system and it is instantaneous. Even with the system, though, we have very experienced and savvy staff in our market-regulations area who are always looking for things that might be unusual. They're trained to put the pieces of the puzzle together. Even if it's offshore, it might take a little longer, but all offshore accounts have to go through U.S. member firms - members of the CBOE - and it is easily and quickly identifiable who made the trades. The member firm who made the trades has to have identifiable information about the client under the 'Know Your Customer' regulations (and we share all information with the Securities and Exchange Commission.)"

Given all of this, at a minimum the CBOE and government regulators who are conducting the secret investigations have known for some time who made the options puts on a total of 38 stocks that might reasonably be anticipated to have a sharp drop in value because of an attack similar to the 9/11 episode. The silence from the investigating camps could mean several things: Either terrorists are responsible for the puts on the listed stocks or others besides terrorists had foreknowledge of the attack and used this knowledge to reap a nice financial harvest from the tragedy.

Adam Hamilton of Zeal LLC, a North Dakota-based private consulting company that publishes research on markets worldwide, stated that "I heard that $22 million in profits was made on these put options..."

Federal investigators are continuing to be so closed-mouthed about these stock trades, and it is clear that a much wider net has been cast, apparently looking for bigger international fish involved in dubious financial activity relating to the 9/11 attacks on the world stock markets.

Just a month after the attacks the SEC sent out a list of stocks to various securities firms around the world looking for information. The list includes stocks of American, United, Continental, Northwest, Southwest and US Airways airlines, as well as Martin, Boeing, Lockheed Martin Corp., AIG, American Express Corp, American International Group, AMR Corporation, Axa SA, Bank of America Corp, Bank of New York Corp, Bank One Corp, Cigna Group, CNA Financial, Carnival Corp, Chubb Group, John Hancock Financial Services, Hercules Inc, L-3 Communications Holdings, Inc., LTV Corporation, Marsh & McLennan Cos. Inc., MetLife, Progressive Corp., General Motors, Raytheon, W.R. Grace, Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., Lone Star Technologies, American Express, the Citigroup Inc. ,Royal & Sun Alliance, Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc., Vornado Reality Trust, Morgan Stanley, Dean Witter & Co., XL Capital Ltd., and Bear Stearns.

The Times said market regulators in Germany, Japan and the US all had received information concerning the short selling of insurance, airlines and arms companies stock, all of which fell sharply in the wake of the attacks.

City of London broker and analyst Richard Crossley noted that someone sold shares in unusually large quantities beginning three weeks before the assault on the WTC and Pentagon.

He said he took this as evidence that someone had insider foreknowledge of the attacks.

"What is more awful than he should aim a stiletto blow at the heart of Western financial markets?" he added. "But to profit from it? Words fail me."
The US Government also admitted it was investigating short selling, which evinced a compellingly strong foreknowledge of the coming Arab attack.
There was unusually heavy trading in airline and insurance stocks several days before Sept.11, which essentially bet on a drop in the worth of the stocks.

It was reported by the Interdisciplinary Center, a counter-terrorism think tank involving former Israeli intelligence officers, that insiders made nearly $16 million profit by short selling shares in American and United Airlines, the two airlines that suffered hijacking, and the investment firm of Morgan Stanley, which occupied 22 floors of the WTC.

Apparently none of the suspicious transactions could be traced to bin Laden because this news item quietly dropped from sight, leaving many people wondering if it tracked back to American firms or intelligence agencies.

Most of these transactions were handled primarily by Deutsche Bank-A.B.Brown, a firm which until 1998 was chaired by A. B."Buzzy" Krongard, who later became executive director of the CIA.

More serious was an article in the Sept. 28, 2001 edition of the Washington Post stating that officials with the instant messaging firm of Odigo in New York confirmed that two employees in Israel received text messages warning of an attack on the WTC two hours before the planes crashed into the buildings!

The firm's vice president of sales and marketing, Alex Diamandis said it was possible that the warning was sent to other Odigo members, but they had not received any reports of such.

The day after, the Jerusalem Post claimed two Israelis died on the hijacked airplanes and that 4,000 were missing at the WTC.

A week later, a Beirut television station reported that 4,000 Israeli employees of the WTC were absent the day of the attack.

This information spread across the Internet but was quickly branded a hoax.

On Sept. 19, the Washington Post reported about 113 Israelis were missing at the WTC and the next day, President Bush noted more than 130 Israelis were victims.

Finally, on Sept. 22, the New York Times stated "There were, in fact, only three Israelis who had been confirmed as dead: two on the planes and another who had been visiting the towers on business and who was identified and buried."

Investigators from numerous government agencies are part of a clandestine but official effort to resolve the market manipulations There has been a great deal of talk about the insider trading of American stocks by certain Israeli groups both in Canada and Germany between August 26 and the Sept.11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.

Government investigators have maintained a diplomatic silence about a Department of Justice (DOJ) probe of possible profiteering by interested parties with advance knowledge of the attack.

On Sept. 6, 2001, the Thursday before the tragedy, 2,075 put options were made on United Airlines and on Sept. 10, the day before the attacks, 2,282 put options were recorded for American Airlines. Given the prices at the time, this could have yielded speculators between $2 million and $4 million in profit.

The matter still is under investigation and none of the government investigating bodies -including the FBI, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and DOJ -are speaking to reporters about insider trading. Even so, suspicion of insider trading to profit from the Sept. 11 attacks is not limited to U.S. regulators. Investigations were initiated in a number of places including Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Luxembourg, Hong Kong, Switzerland and Spain. As in the United States, all are treating these inquiries as if they were state secrets.




Reuters
Sunday December 16 9:23 PM ET
German Firm Probes Final World Trade Center Deals

By Erik Kirschbaum

PIRMASENS, Germany (Reuters) - German computer experts are working
round the clock to unlock the truth behind an unexplained surge in
financial transactions made just before two hijacked planes crashed
into New York's World Trade Center on September 11.

Were criminals responsible for the sharp rise in credit card
transactions that moved through some computer systems at the WTC
shortly before the planes hit the twin towers?

Or was it coincidence that unusually large sums of money, perhaps
more than $100 million, were rushed through the computers as the
disaster unfolded?

A world leader in retrieving data, German-based firm Convar is trying
to answer those questions and help credit card companies,
telecommunications firms and accountants in New York recover their
records from computer hard drives that have been partially damaged by
fire, water or fine dust.

Using a pioneering laser scanning technology to find data on damaged
computer hard drives and main frames found in the rubble of the World
Trade Center and other nearby collapsed buildings, Convar has
recovered information from 32 computers that support assumptions of
dirty doomsday dealings.

``The suspicion is that inside information about the attack was used
to send financial transaction commands and authorizations in the
belief that amid all the chaos the criminals would have, at the very
least, a good head start,'' said Convar director Peter Henschel.

``Of course it is also possible that there were perfectly legitimate
reasons for the unusual rise in business volume,'' he told Reuters in
an interview.

PROFITING FROM DISASTER?

``It could turn out that Americans went on an absolute shopping binge
on that Tuesday morning. But at this point there are many
transactions that cannot be accounted for,'' Henschel said.

``Not only the volume but the size of the transactions was far higher
than usual for a day like that. There is a suspicion that these were
possibly planned to take advantage of the chaos.''

Nearly 3,300 people were killed in the attacks that destroyed the
World Trade Center.

Some 30,000 people in the buildings, symbols of America's financial
might, were able to escape between the time the planes crashed and
about an hour later when they collapsed -- even though many of the
unmanned computers continued working.

The United States blames the al Qaeda group led by Saudi-born Osama
bin Laden (news - web sites) for the attack and has since waged war
on the Taliban regime in Afghanistan (news - web sites) that
sheltered them.

ADVANCE KNOWLEDGE OF ATTACK?

There are several data retrieval companies in the United States and
Europe, but Convar said it has won the lion's share of the contracts
from the World Trade Center because of its laser scanning technology.

Convar developed the laser scanner two years ago that made it
possible to retrieve data from badly damaged computers.

With a staff of 30 in its high-security facility in Pirmasens near
the French border, the firm has worked with the U.S. armed forces in
Germany as well as German federal police for the last 15 years.

Its offices in Pirmasens, a town of 36,000 still suffering from the
departure of some 4,000 American soldiers stationed here during the
Cold War, are closely guarded behind high fences and monitored by
dozens of security cameras.

Inside the building, an endless series of code-operated door locks
keeps unwelcome visitors away. In the center of the facility is a 120
square meter (1,292 square foot), dust-free ''clean room'' where the
damaged computer drives are coaxed back to life.

Citing client privacy, Henschel declined to say which companies
Convar is working for, or provide details about the data retrieved so
far. But he said the raw material, up to 40 gigabytes per computer
hard drive, is sent immediately by satellite or courier back to New
York.

MONEY TRAIL

Richard Wagner, a data retrieval expert at the company, said illegal
transfers of more than $100 million might have been made immediately
before and during the disaster.

``There is a suspicion that some people had advance knowledge of the
approximate time of the plane crashes in order to move out amounts
exceeding $100 million,'' Wagner said. ``They thought that the
records of their transactions could not be traced after the main
frames were destroyed.''

The companies are paying between $20,000 and $30,000 for each
computer recovered, Henschel said.

The high recovery costs are one reason why only a limited number of
hard drives are being examined. Convar has turned down a request by
one British newspaper to try to recover personal last hour e-mails
sent by someone trapped in the doomed building.

Henschel said the companies in the United States were working
together with the FBI (news - web sites) to piece together what
happened on September 11 and that he was confident the destination of
the dubious transactions would one day be tracked down.

``We have been quite surprised that so many of the hard drives were
in good enough shape to retrieve the data,'' he said.

``The contamination rate is high. The fine dust that was everywhere
in the area got pressed under high pressure into the drives. But
we've still been able to retrieve 100 percent of the data on most of
the drives we've received.

``We're helping them find out what happened to the computers on
September 11 as quickly as possible. I'm sure that one day they will
know what happened to the money.''




FWIW: This next from a 2001 Google Goups page:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/soc ... -8&rnum=22

Moments before the World Trade Towers collapsed, $100 million in credit card transactions were sent through the computers inside the doomed buildings, transactions that should have vanished when the buildings collapsed.

But a German company was able to recover data from the hard drives pointing to WHO, armed with advance knowledge, executed this monstrous fraud. But the company doing the data recovery was bought out, the project halted, while the FBI as usual does not look where it is told not to look.

"PIRMASENS, Germany (Reuters) - German computer experts are working round the clock to unlock the truth behind an unexplained surge in
financial transactions made just before two hijacked planes crashed into New York's World Trade Center on September 11.

Were criminals responsible for the sharp rise in credit card transactions that moved through some computer systems at the WTC
shortly before the planes hit the twin towers?

Or was it coincidence that unusually large sums of money, perhaps more than $100 million, were rushed through the computers as the
disaster unfolded?

A world leader in retrieving data, German-based firm Convar is trying to answer those questions and help credit card companies,
telecommunications firms and accountants in New York recover their records from computer hard drives that have been partially damaged by
fire, water or fine dust...


The CONVAR data salvage has made it completely clear that more than $100 million in insider credit card transactions took place in the hours and minutes before the twin towers collapsed. The mainframe computers in the towers processed these transactions; and the credit card data would have been lost forever had it not been for the successful data reconstruction of the CONVAR specialists.

A German company, CONVAR of Pirmasens near the French border, was given more than 400 computer hard drives from the wreckage of the World Trade Center. These are extremely sensitive computer components that went through the collapse of the World Trade Center. Using blue laser technology, CONVAR succeeded in reconstructing all the data from the computer debris. This includes diverse financial data and telecommunication protocols up to a few seconds before the collapse of each tower. (Source: e-mail from CONVAR Germany on October 16, 2003.) The U.S. government’s blatant lie about the allegedly missing black boxes is outright made ludicrous by this fact.

The reconstructed data was given by CONVAR to the FBI. The FBI was held by law to investigate, based on the reconstructed data, who placed the inside transactions.

The FBI is doing no such thing.

GFP would like to inform, that in June 2002, Ontrack/Convar was aquired by Kroll Inc. (Kroll O'gara Eisenhardt), which has strong with the US Government. One of their former employees, Jerome Hauer, organised a security job for ex-FBI anti-terror chief John O'Neill in the Twin Towers, where he died on Sep11th.

Kroll O’ Gara Eisenhardt is one of the oldest security companies in the United States and, some say, responsible for every U.S. President since the end of WW2. What does an upstanding, powerful company like Kroll do in its spare time? Why it trains local forces in Saudi Arabia, of course! One partner of Kroll, Cable & Wireless provides training in Counter-Terrorism and Urban Warfare in Saudi Arabia. In August 2001, former Kroll employee, Jerome Hauer, arranged a security job in the Twin Towers for FBI Agent John O’Neill. At the time, O’Neill had been investigating ENRON’s business deals with the Taliban and was subsequently pulled from that investigation. Neither Kroll nor Hauer was asked to testify about this coincidence. – here Jerry Hauer has been around a bit – Batelle, Dyncorp, SAIC (note DAVID KAY’S (of Iraq WMD fame) MENTION of him) ...




Sharp Increase in Short Selling of American and United Airlines Stocks

There is a sharp increase in short selling of the stocks of American and United Airlines on the New York Stock Exchange prior to 9/11. A short sell is a bet that a particular stock will drop. There is an increase of 40 percent of short selling over the previous month for these two airlines, compared to an 11 percent increase for other big airlines and one percent for the exchange overall. A significant profit is to be made: United stock drops 43 percent and American drops 39 percent the first day the market reopens after the attack. Short selling of Munich Re, the world's largest reinsurer, is also later noted by German investigators. Inquiries into short selling millions of Munich Re shares are made in France days before the attacks. [Reuters, 9/20/01; San Francisco Chronicle, 9/22/01] Munich Re stock will plummet after the attacks, as they claim the attacks will cost them $2 billion. [Dow Jones Business News, 9/20/01] There is also suspicious trading activity involving reinsurers Swiss Reinsurance and AXA. These trades are especially curious because the insurance sector “is one of the brightest spots in a very difficult market” at this time. [Los Angeles Times, 9/19/01] There is also a short spike on Dutch airline KLM stock three to seven days before 9/11, reaching historically unprecedented levels. [USA Today, 9/26/01]


http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/sear ... Go+#events




More Unusual Market Activity Reported Before Attacks

by Laura Jacobs and Thomas Atkins
Reuters
September 20, 2001


CHICAGO/FRANKFURT- Chicago traders on Wednesday cited unusual activity in airline options up to a month before attacks on U.S. landmarks, and German bankers reported brisk activity in reinsurer Munich Re shares, adding to speculation that those behind the attacks tried to profit from their acts.

The reports were the latest from U.S. and European traders that have triggered an investigation by financial regulators worried that the attacks may not only have killed thousands of people but those behind it profited from the carnage as well.

The U.S. has said the prime suspect in the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington is wealthy, Saudi-born dissident Osama bin Laden, believed to be hiding in Afghanistan.

"We have received reports that those associated with the terrorist activities of last week may have sought to exploit our securities markets to profit from those activities,'' Stephen Cutler, the acting top enforcement officer at the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, said on Wednesday. "We are vigorously pursuing all credible leads, but at this time, we have drawn no conclusions.''

In Chicago, a market maker on the Chicago Board Options Exchange said there was some unusual buying in both the September and October 30 puts of United Airlines parent UAL Corp. days and even a month before the attack.

"They bought them before (the attacks) and the month before, September 6 and August 6, the Oct and Sept 30 puts,'' he said.

A put option gives the buyer the right to sell the underlying stock at a specific price during the option's life.

Talk focused on stocks and options on UAL Corp and AMR Corp., the parent companies operating the two U.S. airline carriers whose jets were highjacked.

While some industry analysts have said that the spike in volume could have been based on fundamental and economic reasons, one industry official familiar with the investigations said: "From what I'm hearing, it's more than coincidence.''


LARGE INQUIRIES IN GERMANY

In Frankfurt, bankers also noticed unusual interest in stock-lending in shares of Munich Re, raising the possibility that at least one player may have prepared a short position with advance knowledge of an attack that would send the insurer's shares plummeting.

One banker, who requested anonymity, said he had received three price inquiries from major French banks about borrowing abnormally large stakes -- millions of shares -- in Munich Re. The requests were never followed up with an actual share loan.

"These inquiries were very big in size and they only asked about one share, and for that reason it stood out,'' he said.

Borrowing stocks allows investors to go short, selling the borrowed shares in the anticipation that their price will fall, after which the investors purchase the shares more cheaply on the market and return them to the borrower minus a fee.

"Shorting'' a stock, like buying a put option, is one way investors can make money in falling markets.

Buying a stock option at gives an investor the right to buy (using a call option) or sell (using a put option) the stock at a later date for a set price, known as the strike price. Because options can be purchased for a relatively small amount, as they are leveraged instruments, investors betting on a falling share price could in theory, make vast amounts of money if the share weakens sharply.

Before the attack, September and October 30 puts, which give an investor the right to sell 100 shares of UAL stock for $30 a share, were worth very little because UAL was trading above that price. But after the attack, UAL shares dropped below $20, making the options worth at least five times their pre-attack price.

Another German banker said price inquiries for millions of shares in Munich Re should have sounded the alarm that something very unusual was underway.

"If somebody would be looking for that many, it would be super-obvious. The share price would go through the floor. A normal request for Munich Re shares would be 50,000 or 100,000,'' said the banker, who also requested anonymity.

"Even at 500,000 we would be immediately looking into the company to see if there was something fundamental going on, a takeover or some news,'' he added.


EUROPEAN OPTIONS TRADES JUMP

Separately, options traders in Europe also reported unusual activity in Munich Re shares before the attack but said it was not dramatic enough to sound an alarm, adding that a shrewd actor would not likely have used the open market in full view of regulators.

Volatility in Munich Re shares increased sharply before the attack, jumping 30 percent from September 4 to September 7.

Open interest -- the number of contracts outstanding on the underlying stock -- in Munich Re also jumped by 3,500 lots on the Friday before the attack, compared to daily average volume of 2,400.

A spokesman for Eurex said the exchange, the world's largest derivatives exchange, had probed transactions in the days before and after the attack but found nothing to raise an alarm flag.

On Tuesday, Chicago traders said they had detected unusually brisk trading volume in some options of AMR Corp, the parent company American Airlines.

And in Amsterdam, Dutch traders said they had noticed unusually large volumes in options of the national airline KLM ahead of the attacks.


Copyright © 2001 Reuters Limited




Data shows heavy airline-stock short selling

Christian Berthelsen, Chronicle Staff Writer
Saturday, September 22, 2001

In another sign that some investors speculated against the stocks of airlines whose jets were used in terrorist attacks on New York and the Pentagon, there was a sharp increase in short selling of the stocks of American and United airlines during the month before Sept. 11.

The trading activity far outpaced the rise in short selling for all stocks on the New York Stock Exchange -- or other major airline stocks as a group on the Big Board -- according to a computer analysis by The Chronicle of data released yesterday by the New York Stock Exchange.

A short sale is essentially a financial market bet that the value of a particular stock will drop. In a successful short sale, an investor borrows the stock from a broker, sells it and then repurchases it at a lower price, returning the shares to their owner and turning a profit on the difference.

Federal securities and law enforcement investigators have been looking at unusual trading activities in the stocks of AMR Corp. and UAL Corp., the parent companies of American and United, as well as a number of other securities in the days leading up to the terrorist attacks. Specifically, the investigators want to determine whether someone with advanced knowledge of what would happen was trying to profit on the ensuing financial downturn.

The data released yesterday is part of the NYSE's regular monthly report on short-selling. It shows that investors shorted nearly 4.39 million shares of UAL in portions of August and September. That represented an increase of 1.25 million shares, or 40 percent over the previous month's level.

Meanwhile, investors shorted more than 2.98 million shares of AMR, a jump of nearly 497,000 shares, or 20 percent above what it was in August.

Those increases were far larger than the average shorting of stocks for the two companies' major competitors on the exchange, including Delta, Continental, US Airways and Southwest. As a group, the competitors saw an increase in shorting of only 11 percent. And shorting on the exchange overall totaled only a one percent increase.

As reported previously, some of the suspicious trading under investigation by market monitors, the FBI and the Securities and Exchange Commission include an unusual spike in the purchase of "put" options on the stocks of AMR and UAL.

A put is essentially a bet that the stock will decline, giving the buyer the right to sell the stock at a set price at a set time and delivering profits when the share price drops lower than the agreed sale price.

To be sure, there are a number of legitimate reasons to account for the increase in short selling that have nothing to do with terrorism.

For instance, the airline industry was in serious finance trouble even prior to the attacks, as business and consumer travel demand slacked off in a weakening economy. And both AMR and UAL posted huge second-quarter losses in July and said they could be in the red for the rest of the year.

What's more, short-selling on the exchange has become increasingly prevalent. Each month has seen a record high, with a new peak of 5.98 billion shares shorted this month.
Still, anyone shorting shares of AMR and UAL would have turned a strong profit. UAL closed yesterday at $17.13 per share, off 44 percent from its close of $30.82 the day before the attack. AMR is down 40 percent, closing at $17.90 yesterday from $29.70 on Sept. 10.

Only one carrier, US Airways, saw a higher jump in short sales, with an increase of 41 percent. But there were obvious reasons to short that company: US Airways is laden with debt and was the target of a takeover bid from United that failed in July.

As with put options, it is difficult to tell how much money was made in the short selling of UAL and AMR stocks without more specific information about sale and repurchase prices and dates of execution.

E-mail Christian Berthelsen at cberthelsen@sfchronicle.com.
Page C - 1

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.c ... U27558.DTL



Two Big Reinsurers Say Their Attack Losses Will Hit $3.2 Billion
Potential business-interruption claims boost claim estimates

Dow Jones Business News
September 20, 2001

GENEVA -- The world's two largest reinsurance companies said Thursday the terror attacks on New York will produce far and away the largest claims they have ever faced, doubling their previous estimates to $3.2 billion.

Munich Re, the largest reinsurer, said this year's damage claims from the U.S. terrorist attacks could cost it 2.1 billion euros ($1.95 billion) before tax.

"In absolute terms (that figure) represents by far the largest damages burden in the company's history," Munich Re said from its headquarters in Germany. It had previously estimated damages of some one billion euros. The sum represents 11.5% of the company's 18.3 billion euros reinsurance premiums collected in fiscal 2000.

In Zurich, Switzerland, world number two Swiss Re said the strikes will have an after-tax effect of around two billion Swiss francs ($1.25 billion) in the current year -- about two thirds of 2000's annual profit.
It said it has yet to decide whether its reserves of 2.5 billion francs would need to be tapped to cover the impact.

In early trading in Frankfurt, Munich Re shares plunged by 4.6% to 245 euros. In Zurich, Swiss Re shares fell 4.9% to 136.5 Swiss francs.

The companies said they had to revise their estimates because a number of buildings close to the World Trade Center have been damaged or destroyed. This will have an impact on business interruption claims, Munich Re said.

"The attacks have revealed a previously unimaginable risk potential," Munich Re said. "This not only affects the U.S. market but applies worldwide. Primary insurance and reinsurance coverage, as well as terms and conditions, will have to be completely rethought."

Analysts said the insurance industry was in some respects prepared for such a disaster because experts had long considered it possible that a plane could hit the 110-story World Trade Center and had shared the risk, but no one had foreseen two planes hitting the twin towers.

A Munich Re spokeswoman said the cost estimate was "generous, with a degree of play room," but the company could not rule out a further rise.

Price increases could likely result and additional premiums for specific coverage for terrorist attacks were options, she added.

Due to the complexity of the losses, it also could take a long time to settle claims, Munich Re said.
Reinsurers provide backup to insurance companies against major losses.

Fitch Inc., a Stamford, Connecticut-based rating agency, said Wednesday overall insurance costs from last week's attacks against the World Trade Center and Pentagon are expected to exceed $30 billion, making it the industry's costliest disaster ever.

Swiss Re said it was fully cooperating with all stock exchanges and other authorities investigating short selling of Swiss Re shares, both prior to and since the attacks on the U.S.

Authorities in Germany, Switzerland, the U.S. and Japan are looking into reports of unusual trading in Swiss Re, Munich Re and other insurance shares in the days before the Sept. 11 attack.

They reportedly are checking into whether associates of alleged attacks mastermind Osama bin Laden profited by "short-selling" stocks because they knew of the attack in advance and anticipated it would cause share prices to plummet.

Short-selling involves offering shares of a company the seller does not yet own, anticipating that he will be able to buy the shares at a cheaper price than he has promised to sell.

Munich Re said it still plans to pay a 1.25 euros dividend.

Separately, Germany's Hanover Re said Thursday that it sees no reason to alter its estimated losses arising from damage claims in connection with the terrorist attacks in the U.S. last week.

"We see no reason to make a revision," said spokeswoman Gabriele Handrick. "We took more time than Munich Re for research, and these figures are definitive."

A week ago, Hanover Re said it estimated that profits will be down 400 million euros for 2001 because of last week's disaster in the U.S.



September 19, 2001
International Probe of Unusual Trading Before Attacks
In the wake of the terrorist attacks which caused the destruction of the Twin Towers of New York's World Trade Center, damaged the Pentagon, and destroyed four large airliners with all aboard, securities-exchange investigators on three continents are poring over trading records to determine whether one or more parties profited by their advance knowledge of the disaster.

Investigations are focusing on the many different ways and places in which profits could be made following the Black Tuesday outrage.

Terrorists could have profited from advance knowledge of attacks

The Chicago Board Options Exchange (CBOE), the world's largest options market, said Tuesday it is investigating reports of unusual trading activity prior to the attacks in New York and Washington. The investigation, in itself, is not unusual, said a spokeswoman for the exchange. CBOE routinely investigates reports of suspicious trading linked to possible advance knowledge of takeovers or mergers.

The Chicago exchange trades options on the stocks of about 1,400 companies along with 38 stock-based indexes, including the Dow Jones Industrial Average, the Standard & Poors 500, and the NASDAQ 100. All of these stock indices plummeted in the aftermath of the attacks, along with a number of individual stocks such as American Airlines, United Airlines, and Boeing. This would have meant substantial profits for anyone who had bet on their decline by buying put options or through short-selling.

Short-selling involves selling borrowed shares of a stock the seller does not yet own, in the expectation he will be able to buy the stock later at a cheaper price than he sold it at. Put options are contracts that give the holder the right to sell an asset at a specified price before a certain date.

Possible suspicious trading in hijacked airlines shares

The Associated Press, quoting a government source, said the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) had received information from other U.S. regulators about possible suspicious trading earlier this month in put options. AP reported that in the days before the attacks, unusually high numbers of put options were purchased for the stocks of AMR Corp. and UAL Corp., the parent companies of American Airlines and United Airlines, each of which had two of its planes hijacked.

Significantly, there was no such trend reported involving other major airlines.
According to a report in The Wall Street Journal, the SEC said it had received information from various U.S. agencies Friday about possible trading by terrorists in industries affected by the bombing, including insurance and the airlines. There were similar reports of suspicious trading in put options.

The San Fransisco Chronicle quoted John Kinnucan, a principal of Broadband Research, an independent telecommunications research firm, as saying that the put options numbers were definitely unusual. "I saw put-call numbers higher than I've ever seen in 10 years of following the markets, particularly the options markets," he said. "When one sees this type of activity, the first thing one does is ask oneself, 'What is the explanation? What are people worried about?'"

European regulators checking "suspicious stock movements" of reinsurance companies

On Monday, Germany's stock market regulator said it was looking into claims of suspicious short-selling just before the September 11 attacks.

On Monday, a global conference call was organised by the Madrid-based International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) with the help of London's Financial Services Authority. German watchdog BAWe said regulators from 10 to 12 nations, including the United States, participated in the teleconference, and discussed the possibility that insiders had placed large bets in the days before the attacks.

Meanwhile, European and U.S. investigators are reportedly checking stock movements of three large European reinsurance companies -- Germany's Munich Re, Switzerland's Swiss Re and AXA of France. Reinsurance companies provide coverage for losses by insurers. Industry experts have said losses due to the attacks could reach U.S. $20 billion.
France's AXA reportedly asked France's stock market regulator to look into whether its shares were the object of short-selling on behalf of bin Laden.

The Swiss stock exchange said it was conducting a routine investigation of its share movements. Ettore Candolfi, a member of the exchange's board, said it would be conducting a price pattern analysis on Swiss Re, a routine occurrence when there was an unusual movement in the price -- such as the 17 per cent drop after the September 11 attacks.

According to WiredNews, the FBI has asked all U.S. banks and foreign banks with operations in the U.S. to check their records for any accounts held or transactions by the 19 suspected hijackers and report them to federal banking regulators.

Sources: Agence France Presse, Associated Press, Wall Street Journal, WiredNews

http://www.ict.org.il/spotlight/det.cfm?id=675







[PNAC]


http://www.crisispapers.org/Editorials/roadwomen.htm

Bush's Foreign Policy:
"There Must Be Some Way Out of Here"

An Address to River Oaks Area Democratic Women Houston, TX

By Bernard Weiner
Co-Editor, "The Crisis Papers."
September 16, 2003

[see end for beginning of article]

…The neoconservatives believed that in the process of moving more forthrightly in the world, the U.S. could reshape the political geography in key regions, for example bringing Islamic countries the benefits of Western-style democracy and the glories of the capitalist marketplace -- which, not coincidentally, would just happen to coincide with our corporate and strategic interests. Maximizing profit while doing the Lord's work -- what more could one ask for? Greed-in-stealth-disguise as altruism -- without, of course, first asking residents of those countries whether they might appreciate receiving those American gifts.

Which brings us to the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). Even though the group wouldn't be founded until 1997, the leading neo-conservatives -- mostly carryovers from the Reagan Administration, led by folks such as Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz and so on -- were agitating for this kind of muscular American foreign/military policy as early as 1991.

Here's the list of names of the founders of PNAC. You'll be surprised at how many of the names you'll recognize, and a whole lot more that we don't recognize -- but keep in mind that most of these folks are currently creating America's foreign and military policy from key positions of power inside the Bush Administration:

Elliot Abrams, Gary Bauer, William J. Bennett, Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney, Elliot A. Cohen, Midge Dector, Paula Dobriansky, Steve Forbes, Aaron Friedberg, Francis Fukuyama, Frank Gaffney, Fred C. Ikle, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad, I. Lewis Libby, Norman Podhoretz, Peter W. Rodman, Stephen P. Rosen, Henry S. Rowen, Donald Rumsfeld, Vin Weber, George Weigel and Paul Wolfowitz.

Among those who have affiliated with PNAC over the years since those founders set up the organization are: Newt Gingrich, Richard Armitage, John Bolton, Robert Zoellick, Richard Perle, Wayne Downing, Douglas Feith, Michael Ledeen, and so many more.

I didn't read that long list to risk boring you, but so that we all can come to understand the quality and breadth of the opposition.

The first thing to know is that these guys -- all of whom evolved from rabidly anti-Communist organizations, some of whom came originally from far-left groups, some of whom are Zionists from Jewish backgrounds but also Zionists from fundamentalist Christian churches -- these guys felt exiled from rightful power during the Clinton years. They were champing at the bit to get back into the White House, and, if and when that happened, they wanted there to be an off-the-shelf philosophy and strategy that could be taken down and templated right onto the new Republican Administration. And so they agitated and talked and wrote voluminously in the early-'90s about how the U.S. should use its muscle in the world.

They weren't taken very seriously by the mainstream of the Republican Party because their views were so extreme: initiating pre-emptive wars, abrogating treaties, humiliating the United Nations as a competitor, moving aggressively in regions to gain control of oil and gas, etc. In short, acting unilaterally as an arrogant, imperial bully. We're the one superpower, here's what we want, get out of our way or get run over.

So, with that background, here's a brief chronology of PNAC's evolution, with emphasis supplied by your's truly.

1. The first public hint of this Pax Americana approach came in 1992, when then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney had a strategy report drafted for the Department of Defense, written by Paul Wolfowitz, then Under-Secretary of Defense for Policy. The report called for pre-emptive attacks and ad hoc coalitions where possible, but said the U.S. should be ready to act alone when "collective action cannot be orchestrated."

The central strategy was to "establish and protect a new order" that accounts "sufficiently for the interests of the advancing industrial nations to discourage them from challenging our leadership" -- in other words, those other countries will share in some of the goodies but will not be making the key political decisions. At the same time, the U.S. would maintain military dominance capable of "deterring potential rivals from even aspiring to a larger regional or global role."

Wolfowitz outlined plans (remember, this is in 1992) for intervention in Iraq for, among other reasons, to assure "access to vital raw material, primarily Persian Gulf oil."

Somehow, this report leaked to the press and the resulting roars of protest were immediate and intense. Senator Byrd cogently summed them up (and aren't we lucky to have that truth-telling old codger still in the Senate?): "The basic thrust of the document seems to be this: We love being the sole remaining superpower in the world and we want so much to remain that way that we are willing to put at risk the basic health of our economy and well-being of our people to do so." Bush#1 quickly repudiated the report and sent it back for retooling.

2. Finding no success inside the corridors of power, and then with Clinton ensconced in the White House, the neoconservatives retired to their think tanks and committees and began publishing their views in order to set the policy and rally the rightwing to their cause for that day when they would come back into control of American foreign policy.

Perhaps the most startling and important publiciation was written in 1996 for Foreign Affairs journal by neo-conservative leaders Bill Kristol (PNAC's chairman, who is editor of Rupert Murdoch's "Weekly Standard") and Robert Kagan (one of the intellectual doyens of PNAC). In their article, "Towards a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy," they came right out and said that the goal for the U.S. under these more aggressive policies has to be nothing less than "benevolent global hegemony," a polite term for total U.S. domination of the world but "benevolently" exercised, of course -- sort of like "compassionate conservatism" but on a global scale.

3. In 1998, just shortly after PNAC was founded as an organization, the group unsuccessfully lobbied Clinton to attack Iraq immediately and remove Saddam from power. They urged America to initiate that war even if the U.S. could not muster full support from the Security Council at the U.N. Sound familiar? (Clinton replied that he was focusing on dealing with the very real threat coming from al-Qaida.)

4. In September of 2000, sensing a GOP victory in the upcoming presidential election, PNAC issued its white paper on "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for the New Century." The PNAC report was quite frank about why the U.S. would want to move toward imperialist militarism, a Pax Americana, because with the Soviet Union out of the picture, now is the time most "conducive to American interests and ideals... The challenge of this coming century is to preserve and enhance this 'American peace'." And how to preserve and enhance the Pax Americana? The answer is to "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major-theater wars." Note: Not to threaten to fight, or prepare to fight, but to actually launch these multiple wars. (Let's see, we've had the war in Afghanistan and now the war in Iraq... )

In serving as world constable, the PNAC report went on, no other countervailing forces will be permitted to get in the way. Such actions, for example, "demand American political leadership rather than that of the United Nations." No country will be permitted to get close to parity with the U.S. when it comes to weaponry or influence; therefore, more U.S. military bases will be established in the various regions of the globe. Currently, it's estimated that the U.S. now has between 135-150 military bases and deployments in different countries around the world, with the most recent major increase being in the Caspian Sea/Afghanistan/Middle East areas.

One final quote from this report: They were sanguine enough to realize that the objective conditions weren't right for an acceptance of their extremist positions by the American people. They noted that "the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor." Let's just sit with that one for a moment.

5. Early in the Bush presidency the influential Council on Foreign Relations had joined with the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy (yep, that James Baker) to draft an energy proposal for the new administration, based on the scarcity of gas and oil reserves. It was called a "Strategic Energy Policy Challenges for the 21st Century," and saw both Caspian and Iraqi oil as answers to the projected crisis, additionally citing the possible need for ''military intervention'' to secure energy supplies. Access to oil was repeatedly cited as a "security imperative," and the report's authors therefore urged that Cheney's energy task force include participation by the Department of Defense.

Also around the same time, the U.S. Army War College featured a paper by Jeffrey Record, a former staff member of the Senate armed services committee, in which he argued for ''shooting in the Persian Gulf on behalf of lower gas prices. Realizing that such language would sound rather crass, he recommended that a president come up with moral-sounding language that would transform such action into a ''principled crusade''.

(We now know that Cheney's energy task force papers -- which he refuses to release to Congress or the American people -- contain maps of Iraq's oilfields; it is possible that the report also might include references to foreign-policy plans for how to gain military control of such oilfields abroad.)

6. Mere hours after the 9/11, 2001, terrorist mass-murders, PNACer Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld ordered his aides to begin planning for an attack on Iraq, even though his intelligence officials told him it was an al-Qaida operation and there was no connection between Iraq and the attacks. CBS News got copies of Rumsfeld's instructions to his aides. "Go massive," the aides' notes quote him as saying. "Sweep it all up. Things related and not... Best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H. [Saddam Hussein] at the same time. Not only UBL [Usama bin Laden]."

Rumsfeld leaned heavily on the FBI and CIA to find any shred of evidence linking the Iraq government to 9/11, but they weren't able to. So he set up his own fact-finding group in the Pentagon, the Office of Special Plans, staffed it with hardline PNACers, and, surprise, got the "intelligence" that supported an invasion -- based on the lies we all know about today.)

Now we don't have to simply guess about was was going on in Rumsfeld's Office of Special Plans. It turns out that a high-ranking Air Force lieutenant-colonel, Karen Kwaitkowski, worked in and with the Office of Special Plans from May 2002 until February of 2003. She resigned at that point and, appalled at what she witnessed, began writing forceful articles about her experience in the Pentagon. Here are some of her observations:

"All primary staff work was conducted by political appointees [that is, by those with no experience in working with intelligence, but Rumsfeld's hand-picked aides who would give him what he wanted]... What I saw was aberrant, pervasive and contrary to good order and discipline. If one is seeking the answers to why peculiar bits of `intelligence' found sanctity in a presidential speech, or why the post-Hussein occupation has been distinguished by confusion and false steps, one need look no further than the process inside the Office of the Secretary of Defense... . [She continues] "The answers [to questions about why the invasion] had been heavily crafted by the Pentagon, and to me, they were remarkably inadequate, given the late stage of the game. I suggested to my boss that if this was as good as it got, some folks on the Pentagon's E-ring may be sitting beside Hussein in the war crimes tribunals. Hussein is not yet sitting before a war crimes tribunal. Nor have the key decision-makers in the Pentagon been forced to account for the odd set of circumstances that placed us as a long-term occupying force in the world's nastiest rat's nest, without a nation-building plan, without significant international support and without an exit plan. Neither may ever be required to answer their accusers, thanks to this administration's military as well as publicity machine, and the disgraceful political compromises already made by most of the Congress."

Back to the chronology.
7. In the post-9/11 period, feeling confident that all plans were on track for moving aggressively in the world, the Bush Administration in September of 2002, as required by law, published its "National Security Strategy of the United States of America." The official policy of the U.S. government, as proudly proclaimed in this major document, is virtually identical to the policy proposals in the various white papers of the Project for the New American Century and others like it over the preceding decade. Chief among them are: 1) the policy of "pre-emptive" war -- i.e., whenever the U.S. thinks a country may be amassing too much power and/or could provide some sort of competition in the "benevolent hegemony" region, it can be attacked, without provocation. (A later corollary would rethink the country's atomic policy: nuclear weapons would no longer be considered only defensive, but could be used offensively in support of political/economic ends; so-called "mini-nukes" could be employed in these regional wars.) 2) international treaties and opinion will be ignored whenever they are not seen to serve U.S. imperial goals. 3) The new policies "will require bases and stations within and beyond Western Europe and Northeast Asia."

In short, the Bush Administration seems to see the U.S., admiringly, as a New Rome, an empire with its foreign legions (and threat of "shock&awe" attacks, including with nuclear weapons) keeping the outlying colonies, and potential competitors, in line. Those who aren't fully in accord with these goals better get out of the way; "you're either with us or against us."

Finally, one last quote, this one from Michael Ledeen, a leading neocon theoretician at the American Enterprise Institute, deeply involved in drumming up support for the Iraq invasion. Here he talks about the aggressive way the neo-conservatives like to move in the world.

"Creative destruction is our middle name, both within our own society and abroad. We tear down the old order every day, from business to science, literature, art, architecture, and cinema to politics and the law. Our enemies have always hated this whirlwind of energy and creativity, which menaces their traditions (whatever they may be) and shames them for their inability to keep pace. Seeing America undo traditional societies, they fear us, for they do not wish to be undone. They cannot feel secure so long as we are there, for our very existence -- our existence, not our politics -- threatens their legitimacy. They must attack us in order to survive, just as we must destroy them to advance our historic mission."

This fits in with a theory out there that holds that the neoconservatives thrive on chaos, stirring things up in the world and then, as the global supercop, stepping in as the only one with the money and expertise to help calm things down. But peace comes with a price: control of the situation remains with the supercop. And if you object, you must be... not won over or convinced or debated and then defeated... but "destroyed." In this simplistic, nasty, brutish world: You're either with us, or against us.

Now, it's true that as we speak, the neoconservatives are on the defensive with regard to their Iraq policy, not only because of the whoppers they told to get us into the war but mainly because it's clear that they grossly misjudged how the world really works. They are facing harsh criticism not only from some Democrats and peaceniks but also from Republican senators, retired generals and ex-officials in the Administration.

Sure, the neo-conservative cabal is on the defensive and lying low for the moment -- both for practical and electoral reasons -- but we'd be derelict if we thought the PNACers were done-for or that they've altered their long-range goals. And we'd be stupid if we concentrated only on the misguided, perhaps criminally-liable Iraq debacle they've led us into.

Because the neo-con policy of imperial control isn't ready to stop there. It requires permanent war -- both for foreign and domestic reasons. We don't know at this stage which country is next on the list for "regime change" -- it could be Saudi Arabia or Syria or Iran or Pakistan or North Korea or fill-in-the-blank. (Note that they aren't particularly eager to make war on North Korea, and not just because that might be a nuclear war. North Korea has few natural resources, whereas the Middle East is loaded with them. If you look at a world energy map, you'll see where the U.S. is making alliances and setting up military bases: the Middle East and the Caspian-area "stan" countries of the old Soviet empire.)

True, the PNAC boys have been forced by circumstances and by the impending 2004 election to pull in their horns for the moment, but the plans are being worked out, of this we can be sure, perhaps to be implemented after the 2004 election -- or, if the poll numbers are looking bad for Bush, conceivably before the election, to get the rally-around-the-president bump that, they believe, will bring him back into the White House for another four years. (Whether the American public would go along once again, after what they've witnessed in Iraq, is another question.)

The long and short of it is that these guys in charge of our foreign/military policy have to be stopped ASAP. Not only because of the damage they will cause in other areas of the world -- all the death and destruction in the name of "democracy" and "war on terror" and "free-market capitalism" -- and the deaths and injuries and moral confusions our troops will face. All that would be bad enough.

But there's also the domestic component: the damage being done to our own country, our own institutions, our own sense of ourselves as a moral nation. More and more citizens are expressing their revulsion about what's being done in their names, what it's costing in lives and treasure, what's happening to the state and municipal infrastructures as most of the monies go for war and security costs, what's happening to our beloved Constitution and its guarantees of due process of law as we become more and more a militarist state, what's happening to the reputation of the U.S. abroad as we live the life of an international pariah, what's happening in the way of growing terrorism as a result of our misguided policy toward the Islamic world.

In short, the wrong-headed U.S. foreign policy, and the crudeness of its approach, and the incompetency with which it's being carried out -- all of these lead to two inescapable conclusions: 1) that the United States, rather than revealing the supreme authority that can be exercised by the one remaining superpower, has instead demonstrated the limits of its power when faced with real-world obstacles on the ground; terrorists take heart in knowing that they can, often with the overt or covert support of the local populations, hit the U.S. and make it bleed whenever they want, and for however many decades they want; and, 2) that such misguided policies by the United States, rather than strengthening its position in the world, causes great damage to the long-term and short-term national interests of our country.

In other words, these neo-conservatives -- virtually none of whom served in the military, but who feel perfectly comfortable sending our young soldiers into the bloody business of war -- are putting our country in jeopardy as a result of their misguided (and, in my opinion, greedy, power-hungry) policies. They must be stopped.

So how can we get out of this dangerous, PNAC-led pit we're in, how can we find a way out of here? Here are a few suggestions; no doubt you have many more.

1. As individuals and through our groups, we need to put unrelenting pressure on our legislators in Washington to stand up and be counted. If we just sit back and let Congress handle things, we're telling them we don't really care all that much. In order for them to find the courage to stand up straight and fight the worst of Bush's foreign and domestic atrocities, we have to prove to them that their political backsides are covered by an aroused populace. In short, their chances for re-election are in our hands, and if they continue their imitation of a dog rolling over for its master, they need to know that they will pay the electoral consequence.

2. We need to recognize that we're in a very different kind of political fight. In the old days, the parties battled hard and took and gave hard knocks, but afterwards the name of the game was compromise and civil debate. These guys, the neoconservatives who have hijacked the Republican party from its more sensible, moderate-conservative moorings, have only one goal in mind: To win, no matter what they have to do to get to victory. If the five conservative justices of the Supreme Court have to jettison their states-rights philosophy to rule that the state of Florida should not be permitted to recount its votes, then, in order to install one of their own, they do a 180-degree reversal in midair and rule in favor of Bush. If the Republicans historically have stood for smaller, less-intrusive government, once in power, they do a 180-degree reversal and suddenly we've got a huge, growing, big-brother style government. (A growing number of anti-big-government Republicans are appalled by this police-state development.)

In short, we have to realize that we're dealing not with a mere change in political style but rather with a change in kind. These guys play for keeps and are willing to do most anything to maintain their power -- how else can you explain why they would commit a felony, by leaking the name of a covert CIA agent to the press? They did this to the wife of Ambassador Joseph Wilson, after he wrote an op-ed piece in the New York Times -- he felt compelled to do this after the Administration's multiple claims that Iraq had attempted to purchase yellowcake uranium in Niger -- that detailed how he'd been dispatched last year by the CIA at Cheney's request to check out the Niger uranium story but that he returned to tell Cheney's office that the story was unreliable. How else can one interpret this hardball politics, putting a covert CIA agent's life in danger along with all the contacts she'd made over the years, except as a threat to anybody else who might be thinking of telling some truths about the inner workings of the Bush Administration?

3. We need to demand the use of old-fashioned paper ballots in the 2004 election until the computer-voting problems are solved. Just in case you haven't heard, here's a quick summary: The Congress has mandated use of computer-voting machines in all the states; three companies control the proprietary software codes used to count those computer votes; all three are Republican supporters, one is partially owned by a Republican Senator, one is connected to a fundamentalist, rightwing foundation. The companies will not allow examination of those software codes. Various outsiders easily have broken into the system and demonstrated that the software is so deficient, it is possible to enter and manipulate the votes, exit and nobody will ever know you were there. There are suspicions that votes may well have been tampered with in half-a-dozen key states in the 2002 election, where Democrats were either way ahead or even with their opponents right before election day but mysteriously lost when the computer vote tallies were announced. A week or two ago in Ohio, the CEO of one of the three computer companies, one of Bush's big-donor Pioneers, promised to "deliver" the vote for Bush in Ohio in 2004. In short, there are enough questions like this to demand a stop to computer-voting in its tracks until these problems are dealt with. After the Bush manipulations in Florida in the 2000 election, and the possibly corrupted election of 2002, the 2004 election must not only be fair and square but must demonstrably appear to be fair and square so that the citizenry can have confidence that their votes are properly registered, and that our democratic system works.

4. We need to focus like a laser on the 2004 election, and work our behinds off to defeat Bush, by uniting behind whatever reasonable candidate the Democrats put up, even if we don't agree with some of that candidate's positions. Just consider for a moment: Bush&Co. control the Executive branch of government, effectively control the Judiciary, fully control the Legislature, and have more or less control over the Fourth Estate, the mass-media owned by conglomerates that tend to support the Administration. The only way to break the momentum of the neo-conservative juggernaut is to break off one of its wheels, and that means taking back either the House or Senate, which won't be easy in 2004, or by defeating Bush at the polls (assuming we can deal effectively with the computer-voting scandal). So once the Democratic ticket is chosen, we must move full-steam ahead to support it, with money, volunteer effort, helping educate our neighbors and colleagues, knocking on doors to talk up the candidates, whatever it takes. The economy is suffering, our deficit is gargantuan, popular programs are being cut left and right, pensions are shrinking, the U.S. is hated or distrusted in much of the globe, our kids are fighting and dying all over the world, corporations are writing the pollution rules -- in short, Bush is vulnerable. His so-called "re-elect" numbers are way down, as low as 40% in some polls. It's time to take our country back to more sane and civil policies. And we can do it.

5. We need to take back the "national security" issue from the Republicans. They cannot be permitted to own the flag, or to own "God" or "national security." Karl Rove already has made clear that the Bush campaign is going to run on the "security" issue. Americans are fearful, frightened, still in a kind of post-traumatic stress after 9/11, which is played on constantly by the Administration. Our candidates/we have to stress that many of the policies of the Bush Administration are harming our national security rather than improving it, and that we can do better at maintaining and improving national security against terrorists without shredding the Constitutional guarantees of due process and civil liberties.

You do know that even though 150 cities and a number of states have voted not to honor the so-called Patriot Act, Bush has said he wants to expand it, so as to further "untie the hands" of the police forces in our country. Already under the Patriot Act: the tradition of lawyer/client confidentiality is compromised; citizens can be (and have been) "disappeared" into military-base gulags without anyone knowing and without access to a lawyer; your telephone messages and emails can be intercepted, and your home can be entered surreptitiously without you ever being informed, and so on. And Bush wants to "untie the hands" of the police-state government even further, to permit administrative subpoenas and warrants instead of having to go through a judge or grand jury. Does this sound like the America you and I know and love, or is it more reminiscent of Germany in 1933?

6. We need to convince our officials that simply reacting to force and terror -- with more force and terror -- simply won't bring security and peace. Ask the Israelis. It doesn't work. If the U.S. really wanted to remake the soil in which terrorism grows, it would deal forcefully with the one issue that could lead to a lessening of tensions in the Muslim world: the Israel/Palestine situation. Instead, the Bush Administration issues high-sounding pronouncements and "road maps" and then does nothing really to defuse the situation. A comprehensive peace is the only solution -- which would mean Israel giving up its settlements in Palestinian land and ending the Occupation; Palestine ceasing its terror attacks, which it might possibly do if it had its own contiguously viable state; and turning Jerusalem into an international city -- but the U.S. is pre-occupied with dubious wars of its own. Sad, and ultimately self-destructive.

I'll close on this PNAC story. Some months back, I was debating a rightwing host on his nationally syndicated radio show. We were arguing mainly about Iraq and its comparisons to Vietnam, about which these days there are even more similarities. Toward the end, I quoted from some of the PNAC doctrines -- about starting wars pre-emptively, breaking treaties, keeping other countries and organizations down so as to remain the top boss, imitating permanent war and so on; there was a long silence and I heard him gulp. Clearly, he wasn't fully aware of some of this information. Finally, he said, "If you can prove what you're telling me, and get that out there to the American people, you might well deny George Bush a second term."


[Beginning of article:]

I'm from California where our political system is a bit, how shall we say, "different"... and rather confusing and shaky at the moment. So I can't tell you how happy I am to be in the Texas of ROADwomen and the State Senate Democrats and Molly Ivins and Jim Hightower -- where you all seem to have your acts much more together and aren't afraid to act as a true opposition should -- unlike so many Democrats in Washington, D.C., who seem unaware that their bodies actually possess spines.

And we need those Democrats. For thanks to the excesses, lies and extremist policies of the Bush Administration, our country is in one of the most desperate crises we've ever been in -- imperial adventurism abroad, shredding of Constitutional guarantees at home, the slow strangulation of popular social programs, the imposition of unbearable debt burdens on the next generation, the turning over of pollution-control more or less to the polluters, and on and on and on -- and because of these crimes and misdemeanors, we need more spines, more outrage, more of us speaking up and helping to turn things around.

What I'd like to do this evening -- for about 35 minutes or so, and then move on to your questions and comments -- is to give you my take on how our country got into this current mess and how, all along Bob Dylan's watchtower, "there must be some way out of here."

The focus of this talk is foreign policy -- and in a few moments, I'll be concentrating on the Project for the New American Century, the organization of neo-conservatives that has provided the ideological underpinnings for our current fascination with invading and occupying other countries -- but permit me one quick domestic observation here, which we can expand on later:

It's important to be aware that the neo-conservative hold on power did not spring fullgrown from the head of the 9/11 attacks; the neo-conservative evolution into power took decades of hard, slogging work, and lots of money from generous rightwing donors, who bought up important media outlets and financed innumerable think tanks and activist committees and college-recruiting drives and candidate-tutoring sessions. That history provides a lesson we progressives should and must learn. Hold that thought and we'll return to it later.

Now on to foreign policy and a quick, very quick, overview of the historical context.

The decades of the Cold War provided a stable container for American foreign policy; we had a recognizable enemy, the Soviet Union, and the strategy of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) kept us from destroying each other. The right wing had a focus for their aggression: the communist system.

With the implosion of communism, suddenly the U.S. was the only superpower on the planet. Bush#1 talked about a "new world order" but didn't do much about it; he even chose to leave Saddam Hussein in power after the first Gulf War. Bill Clinton, who came to office with little interest in or knowledge of foreign policy, likewise didn't seem to want to take aggressive advantage of the opportunities offered the U.S. in the world. In short, both Bush#1 and Clinton tended to behave in the slow, sure way of their predecessors, mostly content to use diplomacy as their main tool in defending American interests (by and large, American corporate interests).

In the eyes of the neo-conservatives out there on the fringes of the Republican Party, this lackadaisical attitude was evidence of a golden opportunity going to waste. Damn it, they reasoned, there was nobody who could stop the U.S. from moving more aggressively around the world, taking what could be took, overthrowing governments not to our liking, installing so-called democratic regimes that would do our bidding and that would be open to doing business with U.S. and multinational corporations, moving the Islamic Middle East towards modernity, and so on.






[Stolen identities/fake names/movement of suspects or patsies &ct.]


More early recognition of the vexing multiple identities problem, now completely forgotten in any MSM brain.

Multiple identities of hijack suspects confound FBI

By Mitch Lipka
Sun-Sentinel
Posted September 28 2001

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/southf ... iles.story

Two weeks after the terrorist attack that killed an estimated 7,000 people, investigators still are not sure who all the hijackers really were.

The 19 terrorism suspects used stolen identities, multiple identities and fake names, obfuscating their trail so successfully that even thousands of federal agents are having difficulty sorting it out.

On Thursday, Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller released a stack of photographs and a laundry list of aliases, and reached out for help in tracking the true identities of the suspects.

“It should be noted that attempts to confirm the true identities of these individuals are still under way,” the FBI said in a statement.

Many of the suspected terrorists, it is becoming increasingly clear, swapped identities as part of their preparations for the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, according to a Sun-Sentinel review of documents, interviews and published reports.

At least six of the suspected terrorists had two sets of driver’s licenses issued by Florida — which could have allowed two or more people to use the same identity. Once they had licenses, the terror suspects rented cars and traveled on domestic airline flights without the scrutiny faced by travelers who show a foreign license or a passport.

They used our libraries, worked out in our health clubs, ate next to us at restaurants and restaurants, and flew little planes over our houses. They chose landlords who didn’t require background checks. They changed apartments before anyone could take much notice of their activities.

In the case of several of the South Florida-based suspects, they got duplicate licenses issued after they simply filled out change of address forms. A second license was sent, as is routine, with the request to the license holder to destroy the previous ID.

Some of the suspects apparently used the stolen identities of at least five Saudis who worked in the airline industry as pilots, mechanics and flight attendants — people who would have had increased access in airports, a Saudi government official told the Sun-Sentinel.

The stolen and phony IDs have created problems for investigators. “Obviously that’s been a concern,” said Judy Orihuela, spokeswoman for the FBI in Miami.

“We are fairly certain of a number of them,” FBI Director Robert Mueller said at a news conference Thursday, though he wouldn’t specify which.

Some have been linked to the terrorist network operated by Osama bin Laden, Mueller said.

Mueller said the FBI believes the names and photographs released Thursday match those on the manifests of the four hijacked planes. But questions remain over whether those are the true names of the hijackers.

“What we are currently doing is determining whether, when these individuals came to the United States, these were their real names or they changed their names for use with false identification in the United States,” said Mueller.

The FBI has only identified nine of the suspected hijackers who they would even assign a possible country of origin. Eight were Saudis, the other an Egyptian.

“It is our hope that the release of these photos will prompt others who may have seen the hijackers to contact the FBI with any information they may have that would be helpful to the investigation,” said Attorney General John Ashcroft.

The release of the photos, which come from passports, driver’s licenses and other documents identified with the suspected hijackers, marked a change for authorities. Until now they’ve kept the pictures under wraps so potential witnesses and others could get a fresh look at the men.

It is easy to convert a forged document into a legitimate state ID, said Lt. David Myers, who runs the fraudulent ID section of the Florida Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco. He is a national expert on fake IDs and the use of counterfeit documents to obtain IDs.

“There’s 242 valid state-issued ID documents in the United States right now,” he said.

Once an ID is in someone’s hand, there’s little chance it will be detected as a fake, or a valid one obtained under false pretenses, Myers said.

“Do you think that airline lady knows when I hand her my Idaho license that it’s no good anymore? There’s no record. There’s no nothing,” he said. “We pay 53 cents for that document, yet we’re putting all of our trust into that document.

“The United States has the lowest standard of ID documents of probably any country in the world.” Most nations, he went on, have national ID cards, with information collected in a central database.

For most of their time in the U.S., the 19 lived in places where they wouldn’t draw much attention — areas that attracted transients and were outside the view of the intelligence operatives, said Whalid Phares, a Florida Atlantic University professor.

Phares, a terrorism expert and author of numerous books and papers on Islamic fundamentalism, said it was likely that most of the suspects set up in southern states because federal agents were more likely to be paying attention to Mexicans and Cubans.

“It’s not going to provide 100-percent protection,” he said, but it would allow some comfort.

A study of their movements, as traced so far, shows they lived together in small groups, or cells. Their actions were probably controlled by someone who was not among them, — someone who has yet to be identified, said Larry Johnson, former deputy-director of counter-terrorism for the U.S. State Department and now a security consultant in Maryland.

“These guys were just committed zealots and willing to give it up for the cause without really being key members of the network,” Johnson said. “They were told what to prepare for, what to train for. They were not the ones calling the shots.”

They were, however, extremely well organized, Johnson and Phares said.

“We don’t have anything in history to compare with this,” Johnson said. “The only thing that comes close to it is a former Soviet intel [intelligence] operation.”

To investigators on several continents, who have pursued hundreds of thousands of leads, it seems clear the plot was laid out before the terror suspects ever entered the U.S. and began forming their cells to put into motion the nightmare of Sept. 11.

Their trail zig-zagged from their homelands in the Middle East to Germany, Switzerland, Spain, Britain, Malaysia and, ultimately, the United States.

They moved constantly — staying at cheap hotels and transient apartments, rarely for more than two months at a time — in California, Arizona, Oklahoma, Maine, Nevada, Maryland, Massachusetts and New Jersey, while keeping the base of their operations in South Florida.

Of the 19 suspected terrorists, 15 used South Florida addresses in the months leading up to the attacks, according to witnesses, published reports and such documents as rental agreements and driver’s licenses. A man with the same name as a 16th hijacker stayed in Miramar in 1996.

An examination of their movements — pieced together from investigators, media reports from around the world, witnesses and public records — reveals how a handful of conspirators organized themselves into small groups, avoided detection by blending into the background of ordinary life, and then executed their synchronized shock attack on America.

Manila, the Philippines

A plot resembling the Sept. 11 attacks emerged in January 1995, when Philippine authorities investigated a Manila apartment fire. The flat turned out to be a bomb-making nest, rented by Abdul Hakim Murad and Ramzi Yousef — terrorists associated with bin Laden.

From interrogations and coded files from the suspects’ computer, Philippine intelligence officials learned of a plan that then seemed outlandish:

Conspirators wanted to kill the Pope on a visit to Manila, bomb 11 U.S. passenger jets over the Pacific Ocean (killing an estimated 4,000 passengers heading to Los Angeles, San Francisco, Honolulu and New York City), and crash a plane into CIA headquarters in Langley, Va.

Murad, a pilot, brought a bomb aboard a Philippine Airlines jet in 1994 in a dry run. A Japanese businessman was killed.

Details of their scheme came out in a 1996 trial in federal court in New York, resulting in the conviction of Muran, Yousef and a third man, Wali Khan Amin Shah. All three men were sentenced to life in prison. Yousef later was convicted of being the mastermind behind the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

Hamburg, Germany

In a city of 1.7 million people with a quarter-million foreigners, Egyptian-born Mohammed Atta, his nephew Marwan al-Shehhi from the United Arab Emirates, and Lebanon native Ziad Jarrah could have been any three foreign students in 1999 and 2000.

In Germany — a melting pot of nationalities that Johnson said makes it a haven for terrorists — they attracted little attention.

Atta had dropped out of sight in the middle of his eight years at the Technical University of Hamburg-Harburg, where he began studying urban planning in 1992.

By all accounts, the Atta who returned in 1999 had a newly found devotion to Islam. He sported a long beard and founded an Islamic student group.

And he had his younger nephew in tow.

At the same time, Jarrah had an apartment in Hamburg and was studying for a pilot’s license.

Atta, al-Shehhi and Jarrah reported their passports stolen in 1999during a trip to Bavaria in southern Germany, the German newspaper Bild reported.

“They presumably wanted to get rid of visa entries from Iraq and Afghanistan to make it easier to travel to the United States,” the newspaper quoted an Interior Ministry spokesman.

Atta completed his studies at the end of spring semester of 2000, and was soon on the move.

He got his visa from the U.S. consulate in Berlin on May 18, 2000. He landed in Newark, N.J., on June 3.

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Three men were captured on surveillance video in January 2000.

One was arrested in connection with the bomb attack on the U.S.S. Cole in Aden, Yemen, on Oct. 12, 2000. U.S officials believe the attack, which killed 17 sailors and wounded more than twice that many, to be the work of bin Laden.

The CIA said other two men were Khalid al-Midhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi — both of whose names appear on the FBI list of suspected terrorists on American Airlines Flight 77, the plane that crashed into the Pentagon.

The American West and Southwest

Al-Midhar and al-Hazmi arrived in the U.S. in early 2000, setting up in San Diego.

In February, the two paid $3,000 cash for a 1988 Toyota Corolla. They were spotted at a local flying club in May with someone named “Hani,” possibly Hani Hanjour, another of the suspected terrorists.

A man with Hanjour’s name had received some flight training in Scottsdale, Ariz., in 1996 and 1997 but didn’t receive a pilot’s license. He asked for advanced training in 1999, saying he got his license elsewhere, but the school rejected him.

In San Diego, al-Midhar and al-Hazmi met Abdussattar Shaikh, a local Muslim leader and retired professor. He rented them a room in his house from September through December, although al-Midhar was gone much of that time.

Shaikh told the San Diego Union-Tribune he thought he was offering shelter to two young men who were in the country to learn English.

Al-Midhar, he said, could barely speak English and appeared standoffish. Al-Hazmi had a better command of the language, Shaikh said, and became quite friendly.

Oklahoma to Florida

Flight school operators in Norman, Okla., said they briefly met Atta and al-Shehhi while the pair were scouting their operation. After a short stay in the U.S. heartland, the two decided on a flight school in multi-ethnic Florida.

They picked Huffman Aviation in Venice.

Living in nearby Nokomis, uncle and nephew spent July through November, getting a feel for airplanes.

Also in Venice was Jarrah, registering a car in November.In December Atta and al-Shehhi relocate to Florida’s East Coast and trained in Opa-Locka. At the SimCenter, they paid $1,500 to use a Boeing 727, and experienced being at the controls of a commercial jet.

Europe

On Jan. 4, Atta took the first of many trips to Europe, flying from Miami to Madrid, returning about a week later.

Then, neighbors and investigators said, Atta and al-Shehhi returned to Hamburg, moving back to Atta’s old apartment.

As many as 11 of the terror suspects were in London at various times this year, The Times of London reported.

South Florida

Many of the suspected hijackers started to appear here by April.

Using a Mail Boxes Etc. address in Hollywood, al-Shehhi got his Florida driver’s license on April 12. He got a duplicate license two months later.

He and his uncle, Atta, were living in an apartment in Coral Springs. On April 26, Atta got a traffic ticket in Tamarac and gave the Coral Springs address. He was cited for driving without a license.

On April 23, Jarrah rented a small apartment at 1816 Harding St. in Hollywood. He stayed for two months.

A man calling himself Waleed al-Shehri rented a room on April 28 at the Bimini Motel on Ocean Drive in Hollywood. He got his Florida driver’s license May 4 — and a duplicate the next day.

Al-Shehhi arrived at Miami International Airport on May 2 on a flight from Amsterdam, according to the Boston Globe. It is not clear where he’d traveled in Europe or what he was doing.

Atta got a Florida driver’s license on May 2, using the Coral Springs address. Jarrah got a license that same day, saying he lived in Lauderdale-by-the Sea. He got a duplicate on July 10 — the same day that a man calling himself Ahmed al-Haznawi got his Florida license, using the same Lauderdale-by-the Sea address.

(Al-Haznawi got a duplicate of his license on Sept. 7.)

On May 13, al-Shehhi and Atta moved into an apartment on Jackson Street in Hollywood. They stayed a month.

Phoenix

On June 23, a man using the name Hani Hanjour and three other unidentified men began a series of sessions in a flight simulator at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport.

Sawyer Aviation, a Phoenix flight school, told the Arizona Republic the men spent hours in the simulator until July 29.

South Florida

On June 21, Waleed al-Shehri and two other men, Wail al-Shehri and Satam al-Suqami, rented a room at the Homing Inn on Federal Highway in Boynton Beach, staying until July 26.

On July 3, both Wail al-Shehri and al-Suqami got driver’s licenses using the motel’s address.

In Delray Beach, meantime, al-Shehhi rented an apartment for Atta and himself in the gated Hamlet Country Club off Atlantic Avenue. They stayed there from June 13 to Aug. 12.

Using an address on Dotterel Road in Delray Beach, a man calling himself Ahmed al-Nami got a driver’s license on June 29.

Nawaf al-Hazmi, who’d been captured on the CIA surveillance tape with the Cole suspect and al-Midhar before going to San Diego, got a Florida driver’s license using a fictitious address in Delray Beach.

Hamza al-Ghamdi, a man living at the Delray Beach Racquet Club, got his Florida license on June 27 and then received two duplicates, most recently in August.

Las Vegas

Atta took two quick trips in the summer to the glitzy gambling city, staying in a budget motel.

At least four other hijacking suspects in the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks stayed in Las Vegas, the Associated Press reported. In addition to Atta, authorities have evidence that al-Shehhi, Hanjour, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Jarrah visited Las Vegas between May and August, the wire service said, quoting an anonymous source.

That would place at least one man from each of the hijacked planes in that city.

Europe

On July 9, Atta flew from Miami to Madrid. He spent 11 days in Europe before returning to the U.S. Spanish intelligence officials said his rental car had more than 1,200 miles on it, the Spanish newspaperEl Mundo reported.

Intelligence officials have said Atta was meeting with suspected members of bin Laden’s organization at a hotel in Salou, Spain July 17 and 18 and at other locations around Spain. He returned to the U.S. on July 19.

At some point in the summer, Atta and al-Shehhi checked into a hotel in Zurich. They bought knives and box-cutters used in the hijackings, according to the Swiss newspaper SonntagsBlick.

Former counter-terrorism official Johnson theorized why they were there:

“If you’re going to Switzerland you’ll be talking about financial activities,” he said.

The Eastern Seaboard

In August, the CIA alerted the FBI to be on the lookout for al-Midhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi because of the suspected connections to the Cole bombing. That month, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Hanjour reportedly rented at least three cars from Borough Jeep Eagle Chrysler Plymouth in Wayne, N.J. In suburban Washington, Hanjour, Salem al-Hazmi, Majed Moqed, Ahmed Saleh al-Ghamdi and Abdulaziz al-Omari applied for licenses at the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles office in Arlington.

In Bowie, Md., Hanjour flew three training flights in early August with instructors from Freeway Airport. But the instructors said he flew too poorly to rent a plane — even though a Saudi man of that name had a FAA commercial pilot’s license.

Later in August, Jarrah checked into the Pin-Del Motel in Laurel, Md. Less than a mile away, at least two other suspects were in a room at the Valencia Motel, where they stayed Aug. 23 to Sept. 11.

Five days later, Nawaf al-Hazmi checked into the Pin-Del Motel.

Al-Midhar, Majed Moqed, Nawaf al-Hazmi, Salem al-Hazmi and Hanjour all visited a Gold’s Gym in Greenbelt, Md.

South Florida

Atta and other suspected hijackers looked into crop dusters in Belle Glade in August, according to people at the airport. Some say they saw him there as early as February.

Atta rented cars from Warrick’s Rent-A-Car in Pompano on Aug. 6 and Aug. 15. On Aug. 29, he and al-Shehhi exchanged a car that had some problems, returning the newer one Sept. 9.

In Lantana, Atta practiced flying in a rental plane at Palm Beach County Air Park.

In Deerfield Beach, al-Shehhi checked into the Panther Motel on Ocean Boulevard on Aug. 26 with another man. They were sometimes joined by a third. They stayed until Sept. 9.

On Aug. 26, Waleed M. al-Shehri and Wail al-Shehri bought tickets for American Flight 11 for Sept. 11. They gave a Mail Boxes Etc. address in Hollywood.

The next day, Mohand al-Shehri and a man the FBI now says is Fayez Rashid Ahmed Hassan al- Qadi Banihammad bought tickets for United Flight 175 on Sept. 11. They used a Delray Beach Mail Boxes Etc. address.

One day later, Hamza al-Ghamdi and Ahmed al-Ghamdi, using another Mail Boxes Etc. address in Delray Beach bought their tickets for that same flight.The next day, Atta and al-Omari got tickets at the same time for Flight 11 on the American Airlines Web site, using the same frequent flyer number. Al-Omari gave a Mail Boxes Etc. address in Hollywood.

That same day, al-Shehhi bought a ticket for Flight 175 and al-Suqami bought one for Flight 11. Al-Midhar, Moqed, Nawaf al-Hazmi, Salem al-Hazmi and Hanjour bought tickets for the Pentagon-bound plane through the online travel agency Travelocity and giving a Mail Boxes Etc. address in New Jersey, according to CNN.

The hijackers paid as much as $4,500 for a first-class one-way ticket, according to an FBI memo obtained by the German magazine Der Spiegel.

Boston

The first of the suspected hijackers arrived Sept. 6. The Boston Globe reports a car rented by one of them was seen at the Logan International Airport garage. The car was seen again at Logan on Sept. 9 and 10th, the newspaper reported.

On the 10th, Atta and al-Omari drove a rental car to Portland, Maine, where they awaited a flight back to Boston early the next morning. Security experts have suggested they wanted to avoid being seen arriving with the other suspected terrorists at the airport.The other eight Boston suspected hijackers spread out to hotels around the Boston area.

South Florida

On Sept. 7, Atta, al-Shehhi — and by some reports, a third man — drank and played video games at Shuckums, a Hollywood bar and grill.

According to a waitress and the night manager, they quarreled over the $48 tab.

Maine, Boston, Newark, Washington

A video camera in the Portland, Maine, airport caught two men racing to get on a 5:45 a.m. flight to Boston on Sept. 11. Authorities have identified them as Atta and al-Omari.

They arrived, as the other suspects did, just before the end of boarding for their connection in Boston. A bag that Atta had checked did not make the connection to Flight 11.

In it were airline uniforms, a video on commercial aircraft and a five-page handwritten document in Arabic that included Islamic prayers, instructions for a last night of life and reminders to bring “knives, your will, IDs, your passport.” And the words: “Make sure that nobody is following you.”

Also on board were al-Suqami, Waleed al-Shehri and Wail al-Shehri.

At Washington’s Dulles Airport, American’s Flight 77 took off at 8:10 a.m. The passengers included al-Midhar, Moqed, Nawaf al-Hazmi, Salem al-Hazmi and Hanjour.

In Boston, United’s Flight 175 took off at 8:14 a.m. In their seats were al-Shehhi, Banihammad, Ahmed al-Ghamdi, Hamza al-Ghamdi and Mohand al-Shehri.

At Newark Airport, United’s Flight 93 departed at 8:44 a.m., with Saeed al-Ghamdi, al-Haznawi, al-Nami and Jarrah on board.

At 8:45 a.m., Flight 11 crashed into the World Trade Center’s north tower.

Twenty minutes later, Flight 175 exploded on impact with the WTC south tower.

At 9:39 a.m., Flight 77 hit the Pentagon.

At 10:10 a.m., Flight 93 crashed in Stony Creek Township, Pa.


Staff writers Alan Cherry and Stacey Singer and wire services were used in this article. Mitch Lipka can be reached at mlipka@sun-sentinel.com or 561-243-6653.






[Randy Glass, Taliban, World Trade Center, Rajaa Gulum Abbas, Shireen Shawky, Pakistan, Mohamed el Amir, Osama bin Laden, Pakistan Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence, Magdy el Amir, Abdul Malik]

Then there's the whole Randy Glass business.
Original with pictures here: http://www.historycommons.org/entity.js ... andy_glass

Randy Glass


by Paul Thompson

Spring 1999 (B): Randy Glass is a con artist turned government informant participating in a sting called Operation Diamondback. [Palm Beach Post, 9/29/01] He discusses an illegal weapons deal with an Egyptian American named Mohamed el Amir. In wiretapped conversations, Mohamed discusses the need to get false papers to disguise a shipment of illegal weapons. His brother, Dr. Magdy el Amir, has been a wealthy neurologist in Jersey City for the past twenty years. Two other weapons dealers later convicted in sting operation involving Glass also lived in Jersey City, and both el Amirs admit knowing one of them, Diaa Mohsen (see June 12, 2001). Mohsen has been paid at least once by Dr. el Amir. In 1998, Congressman Ben Gilman was given a foreign intelligence report suggesting that Dr. el Amir owns an HMO that is secretly funded by bin Laden, and that money is being skimmed from the HMO to fund terrorist activities. The state of New Jersey later buys the HMO and determines that $15 million were unaccounted for and much of that has been diverted into hard-to-trace offshore bank accounts.

However, investigators working with Glass are never given the report about Dr. el Amir. Both el Amirs have not been charged with any crime. Mohamed now lives in Egypt and Magdy continues to practice medicine in New Jersey. Glass's sting, which began in late 1998, will uncover many interesting leads before ending in June 2001 (see also July 14, 1999, Early August 2001 and August 2, 2002). [MSNBC, 8/2/02]




July 14, 1999: US government informant Randy Glass records a conversation at a dinner attended by him, illegal arms dealers Diaa Mohsen and Mohammed Malik (see June 12, 2001), a former Egyptian judge named Shireen Shawky, and ISI agent Rajaa Gulum Abbas, held at a restaurant within view of the WTC. FBI agents pretending to be restaurant customers sit at nearby tables. [WPBF Channel 25, 8/5/02, MSNBC, 8/2/02] Abbas says he wants to buy a whole shipload of weapons stolen from the US military to give to bin Laden. [Cox News, 8/2/02] Abbas points to the WTC and says, "Those towers are coming down." This ISI agent later makes two other references to an attack on the WTC. [WPBF Channel 25, 8/5/02, Cox News, 8/2/02, Palm Beach Post, 10/17/02] Abbas also says "Americans [are] the enemy," and, "We would have no problem with blowing up this entire restaurant because it is full of Americans." [MSNBC, 3/18/03] The meeting is secretly recorded, and parts are shown on television in 2003 (see also August 17, 1999). [MSNBC, 3/18/03 (B)]



August 17, 1999: A group of illegal arms merchants, including an ISI agent with foreknowledge of 9/11, had met in a New York restaurant the month before (see July 14, 1999). This same group meets at this time in a West Palm Beach, Florida, warehouse, and is shown Stinger missiles as part of a sting operation. [South Florida Sun-Sentinel, 3/20/03] US intelligence soon discovers connections between two in the group, Rajaa Gulum Abbas and Mohamed Malik, terrorist groups in Kashmir (where the ISI assists terrorists fighting against India) and the Taliban. Mohamed Malik suggests in this meeting that the Stingers will be used in Kashmir or Afghanistan. His colleague Diaa Mohsen also says Abbas has direct connections to "dignitaries" and bin Laden. Abbas also wants heavy water for a "dirty bomb" or other material to make a nuclear weapon. He says he will bring a Pakistani nuclear scientist to the US to inspect the material. [MSNBC, 8/2/02, MSNBC, 3/18/03] Government informant Randy Glass passes these warnings on before 9/11, but he claims "The complaints were ordered sanitized by the highest levels of government" (see also Early August 2001). [WPBF Channel 25, 8/5/02] In June 2002, the US secretly indicts Abbas (see June 2002), but apparently they aren't trying very hard to find him: in August 2002, MSNBC is easily able to contact Abbas in Pakistan and speak to him by telephone. [MSNBC, 8/2/02]



June 12, 2001: Operation Diamondback, a sting operation called uncovering an attempt to buy weapons illegally for the Taliban, bin Laden and others, ends with a number of arrests. An Egyptian named Diaa Mohsen and a Pakistani named Mohammed Malik are arrested, and accused of attempting to buy Stinger missiles, nuclear weapon components and other sophisticated military weaponry for the Pakistani ISI. [South Florida Sun-Sentinel, 8/23/01, Washington Post, 8/2/02 (B)] Malik appears to have had links to important Pakistani officials and Kashmiri terrorists, and Mohsen claims a connection to a man "who is very connected to the Taliban" and funded by bin Laden. [Washington Post, 8/2/02 (B), MSNBC, 8/2/02] Some other ISI agents came to Florida on several occasions to negotiate, but they escaped being arrested. They wanted to partially pay in heroin. One mentioned that the WTC would be destroyed (see July 14, 1999 and Early August 2001). These ISI agents said some of their purchases would go to the Taliban in Afghanistan and/or terrorists associated with bin Laden. [New York Times, 6/16/01,


Washington Post, 8/2/02 (B), MSNBC, 8/2/02] Both Malik and Mohsen lived in Jersey City, New Jersey. [Jersey Journal, 6/20/01] A number of the people held by the US after 9/11, including possible al-Qaeda members Syed Gul Mohammad Shah and Mohammed Azmath (see September 11, 2001 (K)) are from the same Jersey City neighborhood. [New York Post, 9/23/01] Mohsen pleads guilty after 9/11, "But remarkably, even though [he was] apparently willing to supply America's enemies with sophisticated weapons, even nuclear weapons technology, Mohsen was sentenced to just 30 months in prison." [MSNBC, 8/2/02] Malik's case appears to have been dropped, and reporters find him working in a store in Florida less than a year after the trial ended. [MSNBC, 8/2/02] Malik's court files remain completely sealed, and in Mohsen's court case prosecutors "removed references to Pakistan from public filings because of diplomatic concerns." [Washington Post, 8/2/02 (B)] Also arrested are Kevin Ingram and Walter Kapij. Ingram pleads guilty to laundering $350,000 and is sentenced to 18 months in prison. [AP, 12/1/01] Ingram was a former senior investment banker with Deutschebank, but resigned in January 1999 after his division suffered costly losses. [Jersey Journal, 6/20/01] Walter Kapij, a pilot with a minor role in the plot, is given the longest sentence, 33 months in prison. [Palm Beach Post, 1/12/02] Informant Randy Glass plays a key role in the sting, and has thirteen felony fraud charges against him reduced as a result, serving only seven months in prison. Federal agents involved in the case later express puzzlement that Washington higher-ups didn't make the case a higher priority, pointing out that bin Laden could have gotten a nuclear bomb if the deal was for real. Agents on the case complain that the FBI didn't make the case a counter-terrorism matter, which would have improved bureaucratic backing and opened access to FBI information and US intelligence from around the world. [Washington Post, 8/2/02 (B), MSNBC, 8/2/02] Federal agents frequently couldn't get prosecutors to approve wiretaps. [Cox News, 8/2/02] Glass says, "Wouldn't you think that there should have been a wire tap on Diaa [Mohsen]'s phone and Malik's phone?" [WPBF Channel 25, 8/5/02] An FBI supervisor in Miami refused to front money for the sting, forcing agents to use money from US Customs and even Glass's own money to help keep the sting going. [Cox News, 8/2/02]

Early August 2001: Randy Glass, a former con artist turned government informant, later claims that he contacts the staff of Senator Bob Graham and Representative Robert Wexler at this time and warns them of a plan to attack the WTC, but his warnings are ignored. [Palm Beach Post, 10/17/02] Glass also tells the media at this time that his recently concluded informant work has "far greater ramifications than have so far been revealed," and "potentially, thousands of lives [are] at risk." [South Florida Sun-Sentinel, 8/7/01] Glass was a key informant in a sting operation involving ISI agents trying to illegally purchase sophisticated US military weaponry in return for cash and heroin (see June 12, 2001). He claims that in 1999, one ISI agent named Rajaa Gulum Abbas pointed to the WTC and said, "Those towers are coming down" (see July 14, 1999). [Palm Beach Post, 10/17/02] Most details remain sealed, but Glass points out that his sentencing document dated June 15, 2001 lists threats against the World Trade Center and Americans. [WPBF Channel 25, 8/5/02] Florida State Senator Ron Klein, who had dealings with Glass before 9/11, says he is surprised it took so many months for the US to listen to Glass: "Shame on us." [Palm Beach Post, 10/17/02] Senator Graham acknowledges that his office had contact with Glass before 9/11, and was told about a WTC attack: "I was concerned about that and a dozen other pieces of information which emanated from the summer of 2001." But Graham later says he personally was unaware of Glass's information until after 9/11. [Palm Beach Post, 10/17/02] In October 2002, Glass testifies under oath before a private session of the Congressional 9/11 inquiry. He states, "I told [the inquiry] I have specific evidence, and I can document it." [Palm Beach Post, 10/17/02] This testimony and most evidence still has not been made public.

June 2002: The US secretly indicts Rajaa Gulum Abbas and Abdul Malik for attempting to buy $32 million in Stinger missiles and other military weaponry in an undercover arms-dealing investigation. However, a US official states that Abbas is an alleged member of the ISI, and is thought to have ties to Middle East terrorist groups and arms-trafficking operations. He also appears to have foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks (see July 14, 1999). Abdul Malik is said to be Abbas' money man. Abdul Malik is not related to Mohammed Malik, a Pakistani later convicted in the undercover operation. The chief US informant in the case, Randy Glass, says that both men also have clear ties to al-Qaeda, and the arms were going to be funneled to al-Qaeda and used against American targets. [Palm Beach Post, 3/20/03, South Florida Sun-Sentinel, 3/20/03] The indictment is not revealed until March 2003; both men still remain missing and are presumed to be in Pakistan. The US says it is still working on capturing and extraditing Abbas and Malik. [MSNBC, 3/18/03] NBC seems to have no trouble reaching Abbas in Pakistan by telephone. [MSNBC, 8/2/02, MSNBC, 3/18/03] The indictment "makes no mention of Pakistan, any ties to Afghanistan's former Taliban regime or the ultimate destination of the weapons." [Palm Beach Post, 3/20/03] In other court cases resulting from this sting, all mentions of Pakistan have been removed (see June 12, 2001).




August 2, 2002: MSNBC airs recordings informant Randy Glass made of arms dealers and Pakistani ISI agents attempting to buy nuclear material and other illegal weapons for bin Laden (see also August 17, 1999 and Early August 2001). [MSNBC, 8/2/02] Meanwhile, it is reported that federal investigators are reexamining the arms smuggling case involving Glass "to determine whether agents of the Pakistani government tried to buy missiles and nuclear weapons components in the United States last year for use by terrorists or Pakistan's military." [Washington Post, 8/2/02 (B)] Two such ISI agents, Rajaa Gulum Abbas and Abdul Malik, are already secretly indicted by this time (see June 2002). But Glass still says, "The government knows about those involved in my case who were never charged, never deported, who actively took part in bringing terrorists into our country to meet with me and undercover agents." [Cox News, 8/2/02] One such person may be a former Egyptian judge named Shireen Shawky, who was interested in buying weapons for the Taliban and attended a meeting in which ISI agent Rajaa Gulum Abbas said the WTC would be destroyed (see July 14, 1999). [WPBF Channel 25, 8/5/02, MSNBC, 8/2/02] Others not charged may include Mohamed Amir and Dr. Magdy el Amir (see Spring 1999 (B)).


http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/time ... glass.html
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5821
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 9/11 Info Dump

Postby Elvis » Sun Sep 17, 2017 4:35 am

[p.19 of dump]




["German Intelligence Report"]

Can anyone here say with any certainty whether or not that infamous 'German Intelligence BND Report' is genuine?

In German here: http://www.barefootsworld.net/strenggeheim.pdf
English translation: http://www.barefootsworld.net/bndreportjune2002.html

For giggles, I'll just post the final sentence:

There is also evidence that if Hussein is toppled by American military force, the oil resources of Iraq would be put under the control of a consortium of the American oil interests that so avidly support the Bush administration.


(Ya think?)







Worthy timeline from Michael Ruppert & co.

A TIMELINE SURROUNDING SEPTEMBER 11th - IF CIA AND THE GOVERNMENT WEREN'T INVOLVED IN THE SEPTEMBER 11 ATTACKS

WHAT WERE THEY DOING?


by Michael C. Ruppert

[© COPYRIGHT 2001, All Rights Reserved, Michael C. Ruppert and From The Wilderness Publications, http://www.fromthewilderness.com. May be copied and distributed for non-profit purposes only.]

[Expanded and Revised Sept. 4, 2002 - Evidence of Bush Administration Foreknowledge and complicity is now overwhelming. Since our last revision July 11, 2002, 16 New Items]

Nov. 2, 2001, 12:00 PST -- On Oct. 31 the French daily Le Figaro dropped a bombshell. While in a Dubai hospital receiving treatment for a chronic kidney infection last July, Osama bin Laden met with a top CIA official -- presumably the chief of station. The meeting, held in bin Laden's private suite, took place at the American hospital in Dubai at a time when he was a wanted fugitive for the bombings of two U.S. embassies and last year's attack on the USS Cole. Bin Laden was eligible for execution according to a 2000 intelligence finding issued by President Bill Clinton before leaving office in January. Yet on July 14, 2001 he was allowed to leave Dubai on a private jet, and there were no Navy fighters waiting to force him down.

In 1985 Oliver North -- the only member of the Reagan-Bush years who doesn't appear to have a hand in the current war -- sent the Navy and commandos after terrorists on the cruise ship Achille Lauro. In his 1991 autobiography "Under Fire," while describing terrorist Abu Abbas North wrote, "I used to wonder: how many dead Americans will it take before we do something?" One could look at the number of Americans Osama bin Laden is alleged to have killed before Sept. 11 and ask the same question.

It gets worse, much worse. A more complete timeline listing crucial events both before and after the Sept. 11 suicide attacks, which have been blamed on bin Laden, establishes CIA foreknowledge of them and strongly suggests that there was criminal complicity on the part of the U.S. government in their execution. It also makes clear that the events that have taken place since Sept. 11 are based upon an agenda that has little to do with the attacks.

[June 19, 2002] -- As the revelations of Bush Administration foreknowledge have progressed from silence, to trickle, to cascade, the question has now changed from forcing the evidence into the open into one of forcing both the media and the people to avoid denying this information in the hopes that their desire for a sense of "normalcy" can be fulfilled. As many of us have known for years, normalcy went out the window forever when the first plane hit the tower. And what has been revealed will not be resolved with an expensive fact-finding commission, a few firing, or even an impeachment proceeding. What is needed in America -- and in the global economic system -- is an overhaul, not a tune up.

1. 1991-1997 - Major U.S. oil companies including ExxonMobil, Texaco, Unocal, BP Amoco, Shell and Enron directly invest billions in cash bribing heads of state in Kazakhstan to secure equity rights in the huge oil reserves in these regions. The oil companies further commit to future direct investments in Kazakhstan of $35 billion. Not being willing to pay exorbitant prices to Russia to use Russian pipelines, the major oil companies have no way to recoup their investments. [Source: "The Price of Oil" by Seymour Hersh, The New Yorker, July 9, 2001 - The Asia Times, "The Roving Eye Part I Jan. 26, 2002.]

2. January 1995 - Philippine police investigating a possible attack on the Pope uncover plans for Operation Bojinka, connected to World Trade Center (WTC) bomber Ramsi Youssef. Parts of the plan call for crashing hijacked airliners into civilian targets. Details of the plan are disclosed in Youssef's 1997 trial for the 1993 WTC bombing. [Source: Agence France-Presse, Dec. 7, 2001]

3. Dec. 4, 1997 - Representatives of the Taliban are invited guests to the Texas headquarters of Unocal to negotiate their support for the pipeline. Subsequent reports will indicate that the negotiations failed, allegedly because the Taliban wanted too much money. [Source: The BBC, Dec. 4, 1997]

4. Feb. 12, 1998 - Unocal Vice President John J. Maresca -- later to become a special ambassador to Afghanistan -- testifies before the House that until a single, unified, friendly government is in place in Afghanistan, the trans-Afghani pipeline needed to monetize the oil will not be built. [Source: Testimony before the House International Relations Committee: http://www.house.gov/international_rela ... 212982.htm]

5. August 1998 - After the U.S. cruise missile attacks on Al Qaeda targets in Afghanistan in retaliation for the African embassy bombings, Unocal officially withdraws from participation in the CentGas trans-Afghani gas pipeline project. [Various sources, Unocal]

6. 1998 - The CIA ignores warnings from Case Officer Robert Baer that Saudi Arabia was harboring an Al Qaeda cell led by two known terrorists. A more detailed list of known terrorists is offered to Saudi intelligence in August 2001 and refused. [Source: Financial Times Jan. 21, 2001; "See No Evil" by Robert Baer (release date February 2002)]

7. April 1999 - Enron with a $3 billion investment to build an electrical generating plant at Dabhol, India loses access to plentiful LNG supplies from Qatar to fuel the plant. Its only remaining option to make the investment profitable is a trans-Afghani gas pipeline to be built by Unocal from Turkmenistan that would terminate near the Indian border at the city of Multan. [Source: The Albion Monitor, Feb. 28, 2002]

8. July 4, 1999 - President Clinton signs Executive Order 13129, which freezes Taliban assets in the U.S. and prohibits trade between the Afghan fundamentalist regime and U.S. entities. [Source: Federal Register, Vol. 64, No. 129, July 7, 1999]

9. 1998 and 2000 - Former President George H.W. Bush travels to Saudi Arabia on behalf of the privately owned Carlyle Group, the 11th largest defense contractor in the U.S. While there he meets privately with the Saudi royal family and the bin Laden family. [Source: Wall Street Journal, Sept. 27, 2001. See also FTW, Vol. IV, No. 7 - "The Best Enemies Money Can Buy"
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/w ... rlyle.html]

10. March 2000 - An FBI agent, reportedly angry over a glitch in Carnivore that has somehow mixed innocent non-targeted emails with those belonging to Al Qaeda, destroys all of the FBI's Denver-based intercepts of bin Laden's colleagues in a terrorist investigation. [Source: The Washington Post, May 29, 2002]
11. 2000 (est.) - The FBI refuses to disclose the date of an internal memo stating that a Middle Eastern nation had been trying to purchase a flight simulator. [Source: Los Angeles Times, May 30, 2002]

12. August 2000 -- Suspected Al Qaeda operatives wiretapped by Italian police made apparent references to plans for major attacks involving airports, airplanes and the United States according to transcripts obtained by the Los Angeles Times. The Times suggests that the information might not have been passed to U.S. authorities (hard to believe), but it did report that Italian authorities would not comment on the report. The Times also noted that "Italian and U.S. anti-terrorism experts cooperate closely." [Source: The Los Angeles Times, May 29, 2002]

13. Oct. 24-26, 2000 - Pentagon officials carry out a "detailed" emergency drill based upon the crashing of a hijacked airliner into the Pentagon. [Source: The Mirror, May 24, 2002]

14. January 2001 - The Bush Administration orders the FBI and intelligence agencies to "back off" investigations involving the bin Laden family, including two of Osama bin Laden's relatives (Abdullah and Omar) who were living in Falls Church, Va. -- right next to CIA headquarters. This followed previous orders dating back to 1996 that frustrated efforts to investigate the bin Laden family. [Source: BBC Newsnight, Correspondent Gregg Palast, Nov. 7, 2001]

15. Jan. 30, 2001 - Sept. 11 hijacker Ziad Jarrah was questioned in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). A number of UAE, Middle Eastern, European, and U.S. sources were cited in this CNN report, which said the CIA requested Jarrah be interrogated because he had been in Afghanistan and was suspected to have ties to terrorists. An unnamed CIA spokesman said the other sources' claims that the agency knew anything about Jarrah before Sept. 11 were "flatly untrue." Jarrah's Jan. 30 detainment at the airport in Dubai, UAE came six months after he took flying lessons in the U.S. Jarrah was released because "U.S. officials were satisfied," said the report. [Source: CNN, Aug. 1, 2002 http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/08/01/cia.hi ... index.html]

16. Feb. 13, 2001 - UPI terrorism correspondent Richard Sale -- while covering a trial of bin Laden's Al Qaeda followers -- reports that the National Security Agency has broken bin Laden's encrypted communications. Even if this indicates that bin Laden changed systems in February, it does not mesh with the fact that the government insists that the attacks had been planned for years.

17. May 2001 - Secretary of State Colin Powell gives $43 million in aid to the Taliban regime, purportedly to assist hungry farmers who are starving since the destruction of their opium crop in January on orders of the Taliban regime. [Source: Los Angeles Times, May 22, 2001]

18. May 2001 - Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, a career covert operative and former Navy Seal, travels to India on a publicized tour, while CIA Director George Tenet makes a quiet visit to Pakistan to meet with Pakistani leader Gen. Pervez Musharraf. Armitage has long and deep Pakistani intelligence connections. It would be reasonable to assume that while in Islamabad, Tenet, in what was described as "an unusually long meeting," also met with his Pakistani counterpart, Lt. Gen. Mahmud Ahmad, head of the ISI. [Source: The Indian SAPRA news agency, May 22, 2001]

19. June 2001 - German intelligence, the BND, warns the CIA and Israel that Middle Eastern terrorists are "planning to hijack commercial aircraft to use as weapons to attack important symbols of American and Israeli culture." [Source: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Sept. 14, 2001; See
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/w ... story.html]

20. June 8, 2001 - Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) publishes a story headlined, "Central Asia: Charges Link Russian Military to Drug Trade." According to the article, figures for 1999 published in a report by the United Nations Drug Control Program (UNDCP) revealed that 80 percent of the heroin consumed in Western Europe originated in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The UNDCP report also revealed half of the drugs in that 80 percent traveled through Central Asia. A study by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace published in March 2000 said Russian soldiers headquartered in Tajikistan were suspected of helping drug traffickers by providing them with transportation facilities. This was confirmed by a Russian intelligence officer who told the Moscow News weekly, "You can come to an arrangement [with custom officials] so that the search of military transport planes remains purely formal. The same goes for train convoys carrying military cargo [to Russia from Tajikistan]." [Source: http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2001/ ... 111711.asp]

21. July 2001 - FBI agents in Arizona write a memorandum warning about suspicious activities involving a group of Middle Eastern men taking flight training lessons in Phoenix. The memorandum specifically mentions Osama bin Laden and warns of connections to terrorist activities. [Source: The New York Times, May 14, 2002]

22. summer 2001 - The National Security Council convenes a Dabhol working group as revealed in a series of government e-mails obtained by the Washington Post and the New York Daily News. [Source: The Albion Monitor, Feb. 28, 2002]

23. summer 2001 - According to a Sept. 26 story in Britain's The Guardian, correspondent David Leigh reported that "U.S. department of defense official, Dr. Jeffrey Starr, visited Tajikistan in January. The Guardian's Felicity Lawrence established that U.S. Rangers were also training special troops in Kyrgyzstan. There were unconfirmed reports that Tajik and Uzbek special troops were training in Alaska and Montana."

24. summer 2001 (est.) - Pakistani ISI Chief Gen. Ahmad (see above) orders an aide to wire transfer $100,000 to Mohammed Atta who was, according to the FBI, the lead terrorist in the suicide hijackings. Ahmad recently resigned after the transfer was disclosed in India and confirmed by the FBI. The individual who makes the wire transfer at Ahmad's direction is Ahmad Umar Sheik, the lead suspect in the kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. [Source: The Times of India, Oct.11, 2001.]

25. summer 2001 - The online newswire online.ie reports on Sept. 14 that an Iranian man phones U.S. law enforcement to warn of an imminent attack on the WTC in the week of Sept. 9. German police confirm the calls but state that the U.S. Secret Service would not reveal any further information. [Source:
http://www.online.ie/news/viewer.adp?article=1512332.
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/w ... story.html ]

26. summer 2001 - Jordanian intelligence, the GID, makes a communications intercept deemed so important that King Abdullah's men relay it to Washington, probably through the CIA station in Amman. To make doubly sure the message got through it was passed through an Arab intermediary to a German intelligence agent. The message: A major attack was planned inside the U.S., and aircraft would be used. The code name of the operation was "The Big Wedding." "When it became clear that the information was embarrassing to Bush Administration officials and congressmen who at first denied that there had been any such warnings before Sept. 11, senior Jordanian officials backed away from their earlier confirmations." This case was authenticated by ABC reporter John K. Cooley. [Source: International Herald Tribune (IHT), May 21, 2002]

27. summer 2001 (est.) - The National Security Agency intercepts telephone conversations between bin Laden aide Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Mohammed Atta and does not share the information with any other agencies. [Source: Jonathan Landay, Knight Ridder Newspapers, June 6, 2002]

28. June 26, 2001 - The magazine indiareacts.com states that "India and Iran will 'facilitate' U.S. and Russian plans for 'limited military action' against the Taliban." The story indicates that the fighting will be done by U.S. and Russian troops with the help of Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. [Source: indiareacts.com, June 26, 2001]

29. summer 2001 - Russian intelligence notifies the CIA that 25 terrorist pilots have been specifically training for missions involving hijacked airliners. This is reported in the Russian press and news stories are translated for FTW by a retired CIA officer. (Note: The story currently on the Izvestia web site has been edited to delete a key paragraph.) [Source: Izvestia, Sept. 12, 2001,
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/w ... y_pic.html]

30. July 4-14, 2001 - Osama bin Laden receives treatment for kidney disease at the American hospital in Dubai and meets with a CIA official, who returns to CIA headquarters on July 15. [Source: Le Figaro, Oct. 31, 2001]
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/Le Figaro_osama_dubai.htmlhttp://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/Le Figaro_osama_dubai.html

31. July 15, 2001 - Members of the G8, meeting in Genoa, Italy, discuss the Taliban, pipelines, and the handing over of Osama bin Laden. According to Pakistani representative Ambassador Naiz Naik, the U.S. delegation, led by former Clinton Ambassador to Pakistan Tom Simmons warned of a "military option" if the Taliban did not change position. [Source: Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, "Bin Laden: La Verite Interdite," pp76-7. Thanks to Prof. Peter Dale Scott]

32. July 2001 - Immediately after the G8 Summit three American officials -- Tom Simmons (former U.S. ambassador to Pakistan), Karl Inderfurth (former assistant secretary of state for South Asian affairs) and Lee Coldren (former State Department expert on South Asia) -- meet with Pakistani and Russian intelligence officers in Berlin and tell them that the U.S. is planning military strikes against Afghanistan in October. A French book released in November, "Bin Laden - La Verite Interdite," discloses that Taliban representatives often sat in on the meetings. British papers confirm that the Pakistani ISI relayed the threats to the Taliban. [Source: The Guardian, Sept. 22, 2001; the BBC, Sept. 18, 2001; The Inter Press Service, Nov. 16, 2001; Alexander's Gas and Oil Connections, Feb. 21, 2002]

33. July 2001 - The G8 summit at Genoa, Italy is surrounded by anti-aircraft guns, and local airspace is closed off after Italian and Egyptian officials (including President Hosni Mubarak) warn American intelligence that airliners stuffed with explosives might be used to attack President Bush. U.S. officials state that the warnings were "unsubstantiated." (But I wonder if they would have taken away the anti-aircraft artillery?) [Source: Los Angeles Times, Sept. 27, 2001]

34. July 26, 2001 - CBS News reports that John Ashcroft has stopped flying commercial airlines due a threat assessment. Ashcroft told the press that he didn't know anything about what had caused it.

35. Aug. 2, 2001 - U.S. ambassador to Pakistan, Christine Rocca (a former CIA officer), meets in Islamabad with a Taliban ambassador and demands the extradition of bin Laden. This was the last known meeting on the subject. [Source: Brisard and Dasquie, p 79. Thanks to Prof. Peter Dale Scott]

36. August 2001 - The FBI arrests an Islamic militant linked to bin Laden in Boston. French intelligence sources confirm that the man is a key member of bin Laden's network and the FBI learns that he has been taking flying lessons. At the time of his arrest the man is in possession of technical information on Boeing aircraft and flight manuals. [Source: Reuters, Sept. 13, 2001]

37. Aug. 11 or 12, 2001 ‚ U.S. Navy Lt. Delmart "Mike" Vreeland, jailed in Toronto on U.S. fraud charges and claiming to be an officer with U.S. naval intelligence, writes details of the pending WTC attacks and seals them in an envelope, which he gives to Canadian authorities. [Source: The Toronto Star, Oct. 23, 2001; Toronto Superior Court Records]

38. August 2001 - As reported in the IHT both a French magazine (name not given) and a Moroccan newspaper simultaneously report that a Moroccan agent named Hassan Dabou had penetrated Al Qaeda to the point of getting close to bin Laden, who was "very disappointed" that the 1993 bombing had not toppled the WTC. Dabou was called to the U.S. after reporting this, which curtailed his ability to stay in touch with the organization and gather additional intelligence that might have prevented the attacks. Though not proved beyond a doubt, these stories have been met with a wall of silence. [The IHT, May 21, 2002]

39. August 2001 - Russian President Vladimir Putin orders Russian intelligence to warn the U.S. government "in the strongest possible terms" of imminent attacks on airports and government buildings. [Source: MSNBC interview with Putin, Sept. 15, 2001]

40. August 2001 - President Bush receives classified intelligence briefings at his Crawford, Texas ranch indicating that Osama bin Laden might be planning to hijack commercial airliners. [CBS News; CNN, May 15, 2002]

41. late-August 2001 - Prince Turki, the pro-U.S. head of Saudi intelligence (also known to be close to bin Laden), is replaced by his more neutral half-brother, Prince Nawwaf who is an ally of Crown Prince Abdullah. [Source: Saudi Arabian Information Resource, Aug. 31, 2001; http://www.saudinf.com/ - Thanks to Prof. Peter Dale Scott]

42. August/September 2001 - The Dow Jones Industrial Average drops nearly 900 points in the three weeks prior to the attack. A major stock market crash is imminent.

43. August/September 2001 - According to a detailed 13-page memo written by Minneapolis FBI legal officer Colleen Rowley, FBI headquarters ignores urgent, direct warnings from French intelligence services about pending attacks. In addition, a single Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) in Washington expends extra effort to thwart the field office's investigation of Zacarias Moussaoui, in one case rewriting Rowley's affidavit for a search warrant to search Moussaoui's laptop. Rowley's memo uses terms like "deliberately sabotage," "block," "integrity," "omitted," "downplayed," "glossed over," "mis-characterize," "improper political reasons, "deliberately thwarting," "deliberately further undercut," "suppressed," and "not completely honest." These are not terms describing negligent acts but rather, deliberate acts. FBI field agents desperately attempt to get action, but to no avail. One agent speculates that bin Laden might be planning to crash airliners into the WTC, while Rowley ironically noted that the SSA who had committed these deliberate actions had actually been promoted after Sept. 11. [Source: Associated Press, May 21, 2002]

44. Sept. 3-10, 2001 - MSNBC reports on Sept. 16 that a caller to a Cayman Islands radio talk show gave several warnings of an imminent attack on the U.S. by bin Laden in the week prior to 9-11.

45. early-September 2001 - An FBI internal document, based upon field notes from Minnesota field agents discloses that the agents had been investigating and had questioned the "20th hijacker," Zacarias Moussaoui. The field notes speculate that Moussaoui, who had been taking flight lessons, might crash an airliner into the WTC. Interestingly, the field agents' requests to obtain a search warrant for his personal computer were denied. French intelligence confirms to the FBI that Moussaoui has ties to terrorist groups and may have traveled to Afghanistan. The agents also had no knowledge of the Phoenix memo (See Item #18). One news story states that agents were in "a frenzy," absolutely convinced that he was "going to do something with a plane." [Source: Newsweek, May 20, 2002 issue, story by Michael Isikoff].

46. Sept. 1-10 2001 - In an exercise, called Operation "Swift Sword" and planned for four years, 23,000 British troops are steaming toward Oman. Although the 9-11 attacks caused a hiccup in the deployment, the massive operation was implemented as planned. At the same time two U.S. carrier battle groups arrive on station in the Gulf of Arabia just off the Pakistani coast. Also at the same time, some 17,000 U.S. troops join more than 23,000 NATO troops in Egypt for Operation "Bright Star." All of these forces are in place before the first plane hits the WTC. [Sources: The Guardian; CNN; Fox; The Observer; International Law Professor Francis Boyle, the University of Illinois.]

47. Sept. 4-5, 2001 - A freshman at Brooklyn's New Utrecht High School who had recently emigrated from Pakistan reportedly predicts the destruction of the World Trade Center a week prior to the 9-11 attacks, according to the JournalNews newspaper in White Plains, N.Y. Citing "three police sources and a city official familiar with the investigation" as well as confirmation from the FBI that the bureau had received this information, the paper reported that in the midst of a heated class discussion the student pointed to the World Trade Center from a third story window and said, "Do you see those two buildings? They won't be standing there next week." New York City Board of Education spokeswoman Catie Marshall confirmed for the JournalNews "that school officials reported the matter to police within minutes of the Sept. 11 attack" and students told the paper that "FBI agents and NYPD detectives descended on the school on Sept. 13 to interrogate the student [who made the prediction] and others in his class," which was "an English class for Arab-American students." [Source: The JournalNews, Oct. 11, 2001, http://www.thejournalnews.com/newsroom/ ... umors.html]
48. Sept. 5, 2001 - "Five hundred websites -- many of them with an Arab or Muslim connection -- crash when an anti-terrorism taskforce raids InfoCom Corp. in Texas," reported Britain's the Guardian on Sept. 10, 2001. A taskforce of approximately 80 federal agents and officials from the FBI, Secret Service, INS, Customs, Bureau of Diplomatic Security, IRS, and Commerce Department occupied InfoCom's office building in the Dallas suburb of Richardson, Texas for four days, "copying every hard disc they could find." InfoCom hosts many websites for Middle Eastern clients and is located across the street from the Holy Land Foundation, a charitable organization which has been alleged to have connections with terrorist groups. InfoCom's vice president of marketing, Ghassan Elashi, is also the chairman of the Holy Land Foundation. [Source: The Guardian, Sept. 10, 2001, http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/jou ... 90,00.html]

49. Sept. 7, 2001 - Florida Governor Jeb Bush signs a two-year emergency executive order (01-261) making new provisions for the Florida National Guard to assist law enforcement and emergency-management personnel in the event of large civil disturbances, disaster or acts of terrorism. [Source: State of Florida website listing of Governor's executive orders]

50. Sept. 6-7, 2001 - Put options (a speculation that the stock will go down) totaling 4,744 are purchased on United Air Lines stock, as opposed to only 396 call options (speculation that the stock will go up). This is a dramatic and abnormal increase in sales of put options. Many of the United puts are purchased through Deutschebank/A.B. Brown, a firm managed until 1998 by the current executive director of the CIA, A.B. "Buzzy" Krongard. [Source: The Herzliyya International Policy Institute for Counterterrorism (ICT), http://www.ict.org.il/, Sept. 21, 2001 (Note:The ICT article on possible terrorist insider trading appeared eight days *after* the 9/11 attacks.); The New York Times; The Wall Street Journal; The San Francisco Chronicle, Sept. 29, 2001]

51. Sept. 10, 2001 - Put options totaling 4,516 are purchased on American Airlines as compared to 748 call options. [Source: Herzliyya Institute - above]

52. Sept. 6-11, 2001 - No other airlines show any similar trading patterns to those experienced by United and American. The put option purchases on both airlines were 600 percent above normal. This at a time when Reuters (Sept. 10) issues a business report stating, "Airline stocks may be poised to take off."

53. Sept. 6-10, 2001 - Highly abnormal levels of put options are purchased in Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, AXA Re(insurance) which owns 25 percent of American Airlines, and Munich Re. All of these companies are directly impacted by the Sept. 11 attacks. [Source: ICT, above;
FTW, Oct. 18, 2001, http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/w ... 52001.html]

54. 2001-2002 - It has been documented that the CIA, the Israeli Mossad, and many other intelligence agencies monitor stock trading in real time using highly advanced programs reported to be descended from Promis software. This is to alert national intelligence services of just such kinds of attacks. Promis was reported as recently as June 2001 to be in Osama bin Laden's possession and, as a result of recent stories by Fox, both the FBI and the Justice Department have confirmed its use for U.S. intelligence gathering through at least summer 2002. This would confirm that CIA had additional advance warning of imminent attacks. [Sources: The Washington Times, June 15, 2001; Fox, Oct. 16, 2001;
FTW, Oct. 26, 2001, - http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/w ... arpet.html
FTW, Vol. IV, No. 6, Sept. 18, 2001 - http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/w ... 1801.html;
FTW, Vol. III, No. 7, Sept. 30, 2000 - http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/p ... romis.html]

55. Sept. 9, 2001 - President George W. Bush is presented with detailed war plans to overthrow Al Qaeda, according to U.S. and foreign sources speaking to NBC News. [Source: MSNBC, May 16, 2002. Thanks to Prof. Peter Dale Scott]

56. Sept. 10, 2001 - This item has been removed solely at the request of the party previously named in this entry. Recent court proceedings – which occurred after the news story we had cited - have indicated that there was no connection between the story listed here, the person named therein and the attacks of 9-11-01. At the request of the previously named party, FTW has replaced the $1,000 reward with a $1,000 donation to The Childrens Defense Fund on behalf of the named party and the issue is now amicably resolved without any hard feelings between that party and FTW.

57. Sept. 10, 2001 - According to Newsweek, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly cancelled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns. [Source: Newsweek, Sept. 24, 2001]

58. Sept. 10, 2001 - The Houston Chronicle reports the FBI was notified of a fifth grader from a Dallas suburb who told his teacher, "Tomorrow, World War III will begin. It will begin in the United States, and the United States will lose." The Chronicle was unclear on specifically when Garland, Texas school district officials told the FBI about the incident, but it was some time between Sept. 13, 2001 and the story's publication date of Sept. 19, 2001. [Source: Houston Chronicle, Sept. 19, 2001 http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/m ... an/1055222]

59. Sept. 10, 2001 - San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown receives a call from what he described as "his security people at the airport" eight hours before the terrorist attacks "advising him that Americans should be cautious about their air travel," as reported by the San Francisco Chronicle. Brown was scheduled to fly to New York from San Francisco International Airport. He told the Chronicle the call "didn't come in any alarming fashion, which is why I'm hesitant to make any alarming statement." [Source: San Francisco Chronicle, Sept. 12, 2001, http://www.sfgate.com/today/0912_chron_mnreport.shtml]

60. Sept. 11, 2001 - The National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), the federal agency that runs many of the nation's spy satellites, schedules an exercise involving a plane crashing into one of the agency's buildings. "On the morning of Sept. 11, 2001," according to a website advertising a homeland security conference in Chicago run by the National Law Enforcement and Security Institute, CIA official John Fulton and his team "were running a pre-planned simulation to explore the emergency response issues that would be created if a plane were to strike a building. Little did they know that the scenario would come true in a dramatic way." Fulton is the head of the NRO's strategic gaming division. [Source: National Law Enforcement and Security Institute, http://www.nlsi.net, http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... exercise_1]

61. Sept. 11, 2001 - After the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon occur, National Public Radio's congressional correspondent David Welna reports, "I spoke with congressman Ike Skelton, a Democrat from Missouri and a member of the Armed Services Committee, who said that just recently the director of the CIA warned that there could be an attack -- an imminent attack - on the United States of this nature. So this is not entirely unexpected." [Source: http://www.thememoryhole.org/updates.htm]

62. Sept. 11, 2001 - United Air Lines flight 23, scheduled to fly from New York City to Los Angeles was delayed after four Muslim passengers began demanding that the plane take off immediately. This happened apparently after the first plane had hit the WTC. The passengers were thrown off the flight. [Source: The Globe and Mail, June 13, 2002]

63. Sept. 11, 2001 - Gen. Mahmud of the ISI (see #16), friend of Mohammed Atta, is visiting Washington on behalf of the Taliban. He is meeting with the Chairmen of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, Rep. Porter Goss, R-Fla., and Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla., [Source: MSNBC, Oct. 7, 2001; The New York Times, Feb. 17, 2002]

64. Sept. 11, 2001 - Employees of Odigo, Inc. in Israel, one of the world's largest instant messaging companies with offices in New York, receive threat warnings of an imminent attack on the WTC less than two hours before the first plane hits. Law enforcement authorities have gone silent about any investigation of this. The Odigo research and development offices in Israel are located in the city of Herzliyya, a ritzy suburb of Tel Aviv that is the same location as the Institute for Counter Terrorism, which eight days later reports details of insider trading on 9-11. [Source: CNN's Daniel Sieberg, Sept. 28, 2001; MSNBC Newsbytes, Brian McWilliams, Sept. 27, 2001; Ha'aretz, Sept. 26, 2001]

65. Sept. 11, 2001 - For 50 minutes, from 8:15 AM until 9:05 AM, with it widely known within the FAA and the military that four planes have been simultaneously hijacked and taken off course, no one notifies the President of the United States. It is not until 9:30 that any Air Force planes are scrambled to intercept, but by then it is too late. This means that the National Command Authority waited for 75 minutes before scrambling aircraft, even though it was known that four simultaneous hijackings had occurred. [Source: CNN; ABC; MSNBC; Los Angeles Times; The New York Times; http://www.tenc.net]

66. Sept. 11-12, 2001 - Nearly a month before the first reported outbreak, White House officials start taking the powerful antibiotic Cipro to treat anthrax. By the end of the year it will be known that the Ames strain of anthrax used in the attacks against Sens. Leahy and Daschle was produced by CIA programs coordinated through Fort Detrick, the Batelle Memorial Institute and the Dugway Proving Ground. [Source: NBC; CNN; http://www.tetrahedron.org, http://www.judicialwatch.org]

67. Sept. 13, 2001 - China is admitted to the World Trade Organization quickly, after years of unsuccessful attempts. [Source: The New York Times, Sept. 30, 2001]

68. Sept. 14, 2001 - Canadian jailers open the sealed envelope from Mike Vreeland in Toronto and see that is describes attacks against the WTC and Pentagon. The U.S. Navy subsequently states that Vreeland was discharged as a seaman in 1986 for unsatisfactory performance and has never worked in intelligence. [Source: The Toronto Star, Oct. 23, 2001; Toronto Superior Court records]

69. Sept. 15, 2001 - The New York Times reports that Mayo Shattuck III has resigned, effective immediately, as head of the Alex Brown (A.B.) unit of Deutschebank.

70. Sept. 29, 2001 - The San Francisco Chronicle reports that $2.5 million in put options on American and United airlines are unclaimed. This is likely the result of the suspension in trading on the New York Stock Exchange after the attacks, which gave the Securities and Exchange Commission time to be waiting when the owners showed up to redeem their put options.

71. Oct. 10, 2001 - The Pakistani newspaper The Frontier Post reports that U.S. Ambassador Wendy Chamberlain has paid a call on the Pakistani oil minister. A previously abandoned Unocal gas pipeline project from Turkmenistan, across Afghanistan, to Pakistan is now back on the table "in view of recent geopolitical developments."

72. Oct. 11, 2001 - The Ashcroft Justice Department takes over all terrorist prosecutions from the U.S. Attorneys office in New York, which has had a highly successful track record in prosecuting terrorist cases connected to Osama bin Laden. [Source: The New York Times, Oct. 11, 2001]

73. mid-October 2001 - The Dow Jones Industrial Average, after having suffered a precipitous drop has recovered most of its pre-attack losses. Although still weak and vulnerable to negative earnings reports, a crash has been averted by a massive infusion of government spending on defense programs, subsidies for "affected" industries and planned tax cuts for corporations.

74. Oct. 29, 2001 - The Bush Administration drafts "an executive order that would usher in a new era of secrecy for presidential records and allow an incumbent president to withhold a former president's papers even if the former president wanted to make them public," wrote the Washington Post. The order also required members of the public to prove "at least a demonstrated, specific need'" for a president's papers to be released. Critics contend this would overturn the 1978 Presidential Records Act, which releases documents after 12 years. The White House maintained that a Supreme Court decision in 1977 allows presidents various privileges for their records. [Source: Washington Post, Nov. 1, 2001, http://washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A2 ... ge=printer]

75. Nov. 21, 2001 - The British paper The Independent runs a story headlined, "Opium Farmers Rejoice at the Defeat of the Taliban." The story reports that massive opium planting is underway all over the country.

76. Nov. 25, 2001 - The Observer runs a story headlined "Victorious Warlords Set To Open the Opium Floodgates." It states that farmers are being encouraged by warlords allied with the victorious Americans are "being encouraged to plant as much opium as possible."

77. Dec. 4, 2001 - Convicted drug lord and opium kingpin Ayub Afridi is recruited by the U.S. government to help establish control in Afghanistan by unifying various Pashtun warlords. The former opium smuggler who was one of the CIA's leading assets in the war against the Russians is released from prison in order to do this. [Source: The Asia Times Online, Dec. 4, 2001]

78. Dec. 25, 2001 - Newly appointed Afghani Prime Minister Hamid Karzai is revealed as being a former paid consultant for Unocal. [Source: Le Monde]

79. Jan. 3, 2002 - President Bush appoints Zalmy Khalilzad as a special envoy to Afghanistan. Khalilzad, a former employee of Unocal, also wrote op-eds in the Washington Post in 1997 supporting the Taliban regime. [Source: Pravda, Jan. 9, 2002]

80. Jan. 4, 2002 - Florida drug trafficking explodes after 9-11. In a surge of trafficking reminiscent of the 1980s the diversion of resources away from drug enforcement has opened the floodgates for a new surge of cocaine and heroin from South America. [The Christian Science Monitor, Jan. 4, 2002]

81. Jan. 10, 2002 - In a call from a speaker phone in open court, attorneys for Mike Vreeland call the Pentagon's switchboard operator, who confirms that Vreeland is indeed a naval lieutenant on active duty. She provides an office number and a direct dial phone extension to his office in the Pentagon. [Source: Attorney Rocco Galati; Toronto Superior Court records]

82. Jan. 10, 2002 - Attorney General John Ashcroft recuses himself from the Enron investigation because Enron had been a major campaign donor in his 2000 Senate race. He fails to recuse himself from involvement in two sitting federal grand juries investigating bribery and corruption charges against ExxonMobil and BP Amoco, which have massive oil interests in Central Asia. Both were major Ashcroft donors in 2000. [Source: CNN, Jan. 10, 2002; FTW, "The Elephant in the Living Room, Part I," April 4, 2002,
http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/w ... phant.html]

83. Jan. 23, 2002 - Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl is kidnapped in Pakistan. Pearl is reported dead on Feb. 21. Lead suspect Ahmad Umar Sheik, former colleague of Gen. Ahmad, is arrested on Feb. 12 and named as the lead suspect in the kidnapping and murder. Legal sources close to the Pakistani government tell FTW that Pearl was investigating the ISI. [Source: CNN.com]

84. Feb. 9, 2002 - Pakistani leader Gen. Musharraf and Afghan leader Hamid Karzai announce their agreement to "cooperate in all spheres of activity," including the proposed Central Asian pipeline. Pakistan will give $10 million to Afghanistan to help pay Afghan government workers. [Source: The Irish Times, Feb. 9, 2002]

85. Feb. 18, 2002 - The Financial Times reports that the estimated opium harvest in Afghanistan in the late-spring 2002 will reach a world record 4,500 metric tons.

86. mid-April, 2002 - World Bank chief James Wolfensohn, at the opening of the World Bank's offices in Kabul, states he has held talks about financing the Trans-Afghanistan gas pipeline. He confirms $100 million in new grants for the interim Afghani government. Wolfensohn also states that a number of companies have already expressed interest in the project. [Source: Alexander's Gas and oil Connections, citing an Agence France-Presse story]

87. May 13, 2002 - The BBC reports that Afghanistan is about to close a deal for construction of the $2 billion gas pipeline to run from Turkmenistan to Pakistan and India. The story states, "work on the project will start after an agreement is expected to be struck" at a summit scheduled for the end of the month. Unocal will build the pipeline. [Source: BBC, May 13, 2002]

88. May 2002 - A number of sources report progress on both oil and gas pipelines. Regional sources state that Unocal will re-emerge as a pipeline contender after withdrawing from the CentGas pipeline project in 1998. Unocal denies plans to revive the gas pipeline but curiously neglects to mention whether or not it has any interest in the oil pipeline, which local sources say is moving ahead. [Source: The Dawn Group of Newspapers, May 7, May 17, May 22, 2002]

89. May 30, 2002 - Afghanistan's interim leader, Hamid Karzai, Turkmenistan's President Niyazov, and Pakistani President Musharraf meet in Islamabad to sign a memorandum of understanding on the trans-Afghanistan gas pipeline project. The three leaders will meet for more talks on the project in October. The Turkmen-Afghan-Pakistani gas pipeline accord has been published and can be viewed at the following website: http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/news/nts22622.htm. [Source: NewsBase, June 5, 2002]

90. May 16, 2002 - White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer states unequivocally that while President Bush had been warned of possible hijackings, "The president did not -- not -- receive information about the use of airplanes as missiles by suicide bombers." [Source: CBS News, May 15, 2002]

91. May 19, 2002 - Former FBI Agent Tyrone Powers, now a professor at Anne Arundel Community College states on radio station KISS 98.7 that he has credible evidence suggesting that the Bush Administration did in fact allow the Sept. 11 attacks to further a hidden agenda. [Source: http://www.indymedia.org - May 20, 2002]

92. May 31, 2002 - FBI Agent Robert Wright delivers a tearful press conference at the National Press Club describing his lawsuit against the FBI for deliberately curtailing investigations that might have prevented the 9-11 attacks. He uses words like "prevented," "thwarted," "obstructed," "threatened," "intimidated," and "retaliation" to describe the actions of his superiors in blocking his attempts to shut off money flows to Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. These are not words of negligence. They are words describing deliberate and malicious actions. [Source: C-SPAN website]

93. June 4, 2002 - Air Force Lt. Col. Steve Butler, who had called President Bush a joke and accused him of allowing the Sept. 11 attacks to happen, is suspended from his post at the Defense Language School in Monterey, Calif. and could face a court martial. [Source: Associated Press, June 4, 2002]

94. June 14, 2002 - Common Dreams website publishes an account from a former member of the 1/118th Infantry Battalion of the South Carolina National Guard: "My unit reported for drill in July 2001 and we were suddenly and unexpectedly informed that all activities planned for the next two months would be suspended in order to prepare for a mobilization exercise to be held on Sept. 14, 2001. We worked diligently for two weekends and even came in on an unscheduled day in August to prepare for the exercise. By the end of August all we needed was a phone call, which we were to expect, and we could hop into a fully prepared convoy with our bags and equipment packed." [Source: Common Dreams, http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0614-02.htm]

95. June 17, 2002 - Reuters reports that Butler's case has been resolved without the necessity of a court martial. (I guess so. There's enough material here to prove him right. -- MCR) [Reuters, June 17, 2002]

96. July 2, 2002 - Motions from Zacarias Moussaoui are unsealed in federal court, indicating that Moussaoui wants to testify before both a grand jury and Congress about the Sept. 11 attacks. Moussaoui claims to have information showing that the U.S. government wanted the attacks to happen. [Source: The Washington Post, July 3, 2002]

97. July 3, 2002 - The first-ever shipment of Russian oil, 200,000 metric tons, arrives in Houston. [Source: The Moscow Times, July 6, 2002].

98. July 6, 2002 - Afghan Vice President Hajji Abdul Qadir is assassinated by Afghan warlords. The New York Times reports that Qadir may have been assassinated by opium warlords upset by Qadir's efforts to reduce the rampant opium farming and processing that has taken place since the U.S. occupation. Qadir had been overseeing a Western-backed eradication program, according to the Times. However, the opium warlords of the region are same ones sponsored, protected, and in some cases released from prison by the CIA and who have been protected by President Bush's special envoy, Zalmay Khalilzad. It is reported that the raw opium is being refined near U.S. bases at Kandahar. [Sources: The New York Times, July 8, 2002; Far Eastern Economic Review, April 18, 2002]

99. July 26, 2002 - White House security prevented the legal watch-group Judicial Watch from serving Vice President Cheney with a lawsuit filed on behalf of Halliburton shareholders. Before becoming vice president Cheney was CEO of Halliburton, which has filed for bankruptcy. [Source: Cybercast News Service, cnsnews.com]

100. Aug. 2, 2002 - The FBI asked members of the House and Senate intelligence committees to take lie-detector tests as investigators try to determine who leaked information to CNN about communications in Arabic that made vague references to an impending attack on the United States. The communications were intercepted by the National Security Agency on Sept. 10 but weren't translated until Sept. 12. [Source: Associated Press story published in the Boston Globe, Aug. 2, 2002, http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/08.03A. ... .det.p.htm]

101. Aug. 5, 2002 - The Associated Press reported Russia's major role over the last five years in the trafficking of Afghan heroin into Europe. [Source: Santa Fe New Mexican, Aug. 5, 2002, http://www.sfnewmexican.com]

102. Aug. 16, 2002 - A Knight Ridder story discloses that members of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's staff have created a special planning unit for an invasion of Iraq. The unit is composed primarily of civilians and was spearheaded by conservative members of Rumsfeld's staff, such as Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz. The story was headlined, "White House Methodically Preparing for Iraq Campaign." [Source: Knight Ridder Newspapers, http://www.truthout.org/docs 02/08.17B.wh.prep.irq.p.htm]

103. Aug. 28, 2002 - The Globe and Mail of Canada reports Afghanistan will become the world's top producer of opium this year, surpassing Southeast Asia. [Source: the Globe and Mail, Aug. 28, 2002]

Now, let's go back to the Oct. 31 story by Le Figaro -- the one that has Osama bin Laden meeting with a CIA officer in Dubai in July 2001.

The story says, "Throughout his stay in the hospital, Osama Bin Laden received visits from many family members [There goes the story that he's a black sheep! --MCR] and Saudi Arabian Emirate personalities of status. During this time the local representative of the CIA was seen by many people taking the elevator and going to bin Laden's room.
"Several days later the CIA officer bragged to his friends about having visited the Saudi millionaire. From authoritative sources, this CIA agent visited CIA headquarters on July 15, the day after bin Laden's departure for Quetta.
"According to various Arab diplomatic sources and French intelligence itself, precise information was communicated to the CIA concerning terrorist attacks aimed at American interests in the world, including its own territory.

"Extremely bothered, they [American intelligence officers in a meeting with French intelligence officers] requested from their French peers exact details about the Algerian activists [connected to bin Laden through Dubai banking institutions], without explaining the exact nature of their inquiry. When asked the question, What do you fear in the coming days?' the Americans responded with incomprehensible silence.

"On further investigation, the FBI discovered certain plans that had been put together between the CIA and its 'Islamic friends' over the years. The meeting in Dubai is, so it would seem, consistent with 'a certain American policy.'"

Even though Le Figaro reported that it had confirmed with hospital staff that bin Laden had been there as reported, stories printed on Nov. 1 contained quotes from hospital staff that these reports were untrue. On Nov. 1, as reported by the Ananova press agency, the CIA flatly denied that any meeting between any CIA personnel and Osama bin Laden at any time.







I'm going to go ahead and paste this piece from Intelligence Review, on the strength of its worthwhile data points.

This article appears in the December 20, 2002 issue of Executive Intelligence Review.
Mossad Exposed in Phony `Palestinian Al-Qaeda' Caper

by Michele Steinberg and Hussein Askary


The United States government has been provided with concrete evidence that the Israeli Mossad and other Israeli intelligence services have been involved in a 13-month effort to "recruit" an Israeli-run, phony "al-Qaeda cell" among Palestinians, so that Israel could achieve a frontline position in the U.S. war against terrorism and get a green light for a worldwide "revenge without borders" policy. The question: Does the United States have the moral fiber to investigate?

Evidence of the Israeli dirty tricks burst onto the public scene on Dec. 6, when Col. Rashid Abu Shbak, head of the Palestinian Preventive Security Services in the Gaza Strip, held a press conference revealing the details of the alleged plot, as his agency had put the pieces together. The revelations undermine the "big lie" that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has used to justify new brutal attacks on Palestinian civilians in the Gaza Strip and other occupied areas. Sharon claimed on Dec. 4 that Israeli intelligence had "hard evidence" of al-Qaeda operations in the Gaza Strip. Now, the top Palestinian leadership has shown the United States and other nations how Israeli intelligence entities were creating that al-Qaeda link!

American leader Lyndon LaRouche, a Democratic Presidential pre-candidate in 2004, commented that these revelations, if confirmed, could be "of strategic importance" in stopping the American, British, and Israeli warhawks pushing for a Middle East war, beginning with an invasion of Iraq. A war would justify the Sharon government's plan to annihilate the very idea of a Palestinian state. LaRouche warned that if institutions of the American Presidency and the international community successfully block an American pre-emptive war on Iraq, the biggest danger would be that a "mega-terror" attack, blamed on Palestinians, or an "Iraqi-linked" al-Qaeda, would be staged by Israel's ruling Jabotinskyite fanatics, to put the war back on the agenda.

News about the Mossad-run attempt to create an al-Qaeda cell came when well-informed intelligence sources based in Washington had already told EIR that there are many doubts about the Mossad's hasty declaration that "al-Qaeda" had been responsible for the Nov. 28 attack on a hotel in Mombasa, Kenya, where three Israelis were killed, and the failed rocket attack on an Israeli chartered jet that was departing from Mombasa airport. There was no identification of the bombers within the first five days of the incident, the sources pointed out, yet Sharon's government ministers went on an immediate propaganda rampage announcing worldwide revenge (see article in this section). Authorities in Kenya also denied the al-Qaeda link. But the usefulness of blaming al-Qaeda, for the Israeli right, was palpable, when Foreign Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called the Kenya attacks "a golden opportunity" to prove to the United States that Bush's war on terrorism, and Israel's war with the Palestinians is the same thing. Netanyahu's faction has violently rejected the Palestinian Authority's revelations, and so far, the American and European press have followed suit, despite the dramatic nature of these charges, and the documents that the Palestinians have provided to the international press.

Chronology of the Revelations

On Dec. 7, the British news service, Reuters, the Israeli daily Ha'aretz, and Qatar-based Al-Jazeera TV network, all reported that the Palestinian Authority had accused the Mossad of creating a phony al-Qaeda cell in the Gaza Strip. Ha'aretz reported, "the head of Palestinian Preventive Security" in the Gaza Strip, Col. Rashid Abu Shbak, said on Dec. 6, "that his forces had identified a number of Palestinian collaborators who had been ordered by Israeli security agencies to 'work in the Gaza Strip under the name of al-Qaeda.' He said the investigation was ongoing and evidence would be presented soon." Al-Jazeera TV added that the Palestinian authorities had arrested a group of Palestinian "collaborators with Israeli occupation" in Gaza, involved in the operation.

Reuters' reporter Diala Saadeh, under the headline, "Palestinians: Israel Faked Gaza al-Qaeda Presence," quoted a number of Palestinian Authority (P.A.) senior officials, including President Yasser Arafat, who told reporters at his West Bank Ramallah headquarters, that Sharon's claims of al-Qaeda operations in Palestinian territories "is a big, big, big lie to cover [Sharon's] attacks and his crimes against our people everywhere." P.A. Information Minister Yasser Abed Rabbo detailed the case: "There are certain elements who were instructed by the Mossad to form a cell under the name of al-Qaeda in the Gaza Strip in order to justify the assault and the military campaigns of the Israeli occupation army against Gaza."

Palestinian officials promised to provide detailed evidence, and did so on Dec. 8, in a press conference addressed by Colonel Shbak, and by Palestinian Minister for Planning and International Cooperation Nabil Shaath. Shbak told the international representatives that, "Over the past nine months, we've been investigating eight cases in which Israeli intelligence posing as al-Qaeda operatives recruited Palestinians in the Gaza Strip." Colonel Shbak said that 3 men were under arrest, and 11 had been released. He explained that those released had voluntarily provided information going back to May 2002, about the contacts that had been made asking them to operate as an "al-Qaeda" group. The alleged al-Qaeda recruiters were traced to Israeli intelligence, said Colonel Shbak. He detailed incidents, some of which were described in official documents, of cell phone calls and e-mails, where Palestinians were asked to "join al-Qaeda." Shbak said, "We investigated the origin of those calls, which used [wireless phone] roaming, and messages, and found out they all came from Israel," reported the publication, IslamOnline. He said that the potential "recruits," had been given money and weapons, "although most of these weapons did not even work." He also noted that the money for these targetted Palestinians "was transferred from bank accounts in Jerusalem or Israel."

Minister Shaath announced at the press conference that the P.A. had "handed ambassadors and consuls of the Arab and foreign countries, documents revealing the involvement of the Israeli intelligence in recruiting citizens from Gaza Strip in a fake organization carrying the name of Qaeda." He said the ploy was intended "to create a new excuse to escalate the aggression on Gaza Strip."

The international community was jolted again on Dec. 10, when Colonel Shbak held another press conference and the Preventive Security Agency presented the Mossad's potential recruiter himself to the international media. According to reports in the Arabic press in Dubai, London and Ramallah, the man appeared in disguise (for security reasons,) and was identified only as "Ibrahim," but explained in great detail that he was one of the "key recruiters" for the potential cell. He said the story started in October 2001, when, after he sent his photo and mobile phone number to a "contact page" in a Jerusalem magazine, he was contacted by a person calling himself "Youssef," and nicknamed "Abu Othman." After building up a personal relationship with "Ibrahim," and telling him how much he resembled his own son, who had been killed, Youssef sent him $2,000, and began encouraging the Gaza man—who appeared to be in his early 20s—to become a more observant and practicing Muslim.

In May 2002, five months after the initial contact, said Ibrahim, Youssef "told me frankly, 'you are a good candidate to work for us in the company of Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaeda group.' " This Youssef also claimed to have already created an al-Qaeda cell inside Israel. Ibrahim said that he then approached the Palestinian security services and told them about the transactions with Youssef, and that the security services asked him to continue the communications, which they would monitor. He said that the specific instructions were that Ibrahim was to announce through a communiqué—directly from Gaza—that al-Qaeda claimed credit for a bombing attack, or attacks, that Youssef indicated his network was about to carry out in Israel. Ibrahim stressed that the man also said that he (the Mossad officer) "had the capability to carry out major bombing operations inside Israel, but that the al-Qaeda group in Gaza should claim responsibility for the attack and no other group." In an interview with the London-based Arabic daily Al-Hayat, after the press conference, Ibrahim stated, that "the man told him that mega military operations will be conducted inside Israel, and that these operations would be announced through Ibrahim." This would mean that as soon as he gets the signal after a major terrorist act against Israeli civilian targets, Ibrahim and his group would send a communiqué to the press or a videotape, similar to the ones sent by bin Laden to Al-Jazeera, claiming responsibility for the attack.

Ibrahim was also asked to gather specific information for Youssef about a number of persons in Gaza, some of them known to be members of Hamas. When asked why he wanted this information, Youssef said, "I want them to join al-Qaeda." At that point, Palestinian security services cut off the "Ibrahim-Youssef" contact, because it was becoming too dangerous.

At the same press conference, Colonel Shbak said direct money payments "transferred from Israel," had been received by five out of the eight Palestinians who have been giving information to the Preventive Security Agency about this operation. Shbak also explained that his agency traced and obtained a number of telephone numbers, registrations, and bank receipts for money transferred to some of those persons.

Now, said Shbak, the United States and a number of international intelligence and security organs had been supplied with documents and evidence refuting the Israeli allegations about Palestinian connections to al-Qaeda. "These documents prove without any doubt that the ones who are behind this alleged al-Qaeda group are the various Israeli intelligence organizations," Shbak added. He told Al-Hayat Al-Jadidah daily that the "Americans have not responded yet to the documents ... as provided by the Palestinian Preventive Security agency."

The 9/11 Cover Story

The question is whether the U.S. government and other governments will take up the evidence given to them. It is well established that several top Cabinet officials in the current Sharon caretaker government, including Sharon himself, have a long, jaded history of staging precisely these kinds of "countergang" operations, using Israeli covert operatives and Arabs tortured and brainwashed in Israeli jails and recruited as false-flag terrorists. Sharon, Mossad chief Moshe Dagan, and Gen. Effie Eitam are proponents of such dirty-war tactics. As EIR reported in several extensive articles on the Hamas organization, that terrorist capability was actually created by Ariel Sharon and the Israeli right wing, for the purpose of supplanting Yasser Arafat and the organizations of the Palestine Liberation Organization (see EIR, Dec. 6).

Even more to the point, the Osama bin Laden authorship of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks has been a cover story from the first moments the media began reporting it as fact. Interviewed on the morning of Sept. 11 as the attacks were unfolding, LaRouche made clear that the breadth and sophistication of these attacks showed that it was "an inside job," involving U.S. military and intelligence operatives capable of defeating or neutralizing all existing and backup security systems. Bin Laden was named as the culprit, explains LaRouche, because his name provided entry into the policy of a Clash of Civilizations against Islam, which right-wing neo-conservatives in the Bush Administration have as their goal. LaRouche has also pointedly asked when Osama bin Laden stopped being an American agent—a reality that the "Islamic card" networks of Zbigniew Brzezinski and the Iran-Contra financiers of the Afghansi mujahideen, want to bury. It must also be asked, when did al-Qaeda stop working for British intelligence? EIR has documented that British foreign intelligence, MI6, worked closely with so-called Islamist terrorist groups safe-housed in Britain, to destabilize Arab and Muslim nations, in the geopolitical service of Her Majesty's government, and an Anglo-American imperial faction.

As recently as November, this coverup of British/U.S. covert support for terrorism continued, with the case of David Shayler, a former MI5 agent who was sentenced to six months in jail for disclosing "government secret information." Shayler told London Guardian reporter Martin Bright that MI6 hired one of Osama bin Laden's closest collaborators—Anas al-Liby, who remains on the U.S. government's Most Wanted List, with a reward of $25 million for his capture—to assassinate Libya's Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi in 1996. Bright, who could not publish the article in the Guardian, but did so in the Pakistani daily, The Dawn, on Oct. 30, received a gag order from the British Attorney General, threatening him with prison, if he publishes any more information from Shayler.

With this background in mind, the public revelations about the Mossad attempts to set up al-Qaeda cells, could have strategic consequences for the discredited Sharon government—and even more broadly for the Clash of Civilizations zealots covering up the truth about Sept. 11. The Palestinian revelations could become the "straw that broke the camel's back," in this dirty war.







[Art Students, Movers, "Dancing Israelis" &tc]

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/2020/Dai ... 20621.html

June 24, 2002
ABC NEWS

The White Van

Were Israelis Detained on Sept. 11 Spies?


June 21 — Millions saw the horrific images of the World Trade Center attacks, and those who saw them won't forget them. But a New Jersey homemaker saw something that morning that prompted an investigation into five young Israelis and their possible connection to Israeli intelligence.

Maria, who asked us not to use her last name, had a view of the World Trade Center from her New Jersey apartment building. She remembers a neighbor calling her shortly after the first plane hit the towers.

She grabbed her binoculars and watched the destruction unfolding in lower Manhattan. But as she watched the disaster, something else caught her eye.

Maria says she saw three young men kneeling on the roof of a white van in the parking lot of her apartment building. "They seemed to be taking a movie," Maria said.

The men were taking video or photos of themselves with the World Trade Center burning in the background, she said. What struck Maria were the expressions on the men's faces. "They were like happy, you know … They didn't look shocked to me. I thought it was very strange," she said.

She found the behavior so suspicious that she wrote down the license plate number of the van and called the police. Before long, the FBI was also on the scene, and a statewide bulletin was issued on the van.

The plate number was traced to a van owned by a company called Urban Moving. Around 4 p.m. on Sept. 11, the van was spotted on a service road off Route 3, near New Jersey's Giants Stadium. A police officer pulled the van over, finding five men, between 22 and 27 years old, in the vehicle. The men were taken out of the van at gunpoint and handcuffed by police.

The arresting officers said they saw a lot that aroused their suspicion about the men. One of the passengers had $4,700 in cash hidden in his sock. Another was carrying two foreign passports. A box cutter was found in the van. But perhaps the biggest surprise for the officers came when the five men identified themselves as Israeli citizens.
‘We Are Not Your Problem’

According to the police report, one of the passengers told the officers they had been on the West Side Highway in Manhattan "during the incident" — referring to the World Trade Center attack. The driver of the van, Sivan Kurzberg, told the officers, "We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem." The other passengers were his brother Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner and Omer Marmari.

When the men were transferred to jail, the case was transferred out of the FBI's Criminal Division, and into the bureau's Foreign Counterintelligence Section, which is responsible for espionage cases, ABCNEWS has learned.

One reason for the shift, sources told ABCNEWS, was that the FBI believed Urban Moving may have been providing cover for an Israeli intelligence operation.

After the five men were arrested, the FBI got a warrant and searched Urban Moving's Weehawken, N.J., offices.

The FBI searched Urban Moving's offices for several hours, removing boxes of documents and a dozen computer hard drives. The FBI also questioned Urban Moving's owner. His attorney insists that his client answered all of the FBI's questions. But when FBI agents tried to interview him again a few days later, he was gone.

Three months later 2020's cameras photographed the inside of Urban Moving, and it looked as if the business had been shut down in a big hurry. Cell phones were lying around; office phones were still connected; and the property of dozens of clients remained in the warehouse.

The owner had also cleared out of his New Jersey home, put it up for sale and returned with his family to Israel.


‘A Scary Situation’

Steven Gordon, the attorney for the five Israeli detainees, acknowledged that his clients' actions on Sept. 11 would easily have aroused suspicions. "You got a group of guys that are taking pictures, on top of a roof, of the World Trade Center. They're speaking in a foreign language. They got two passports on 'em. One's got a wad of cash on him, and they got box cutters. Now that's a scary situation."

But Gordon insisted that his clients were just five young men who had come to America for a vacation, ended up working for a moving company, and were taking pictures of the event.

The five Israelis were held at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, ostensibly for overstaying their tourist visas and working in the United States illegally. Two weeks after their arrest, an immigration judge ordered them to be deported. But sources told ABCNEWS that FBI and CIA officials in Washington put a hold on the case.

The five men were held in detention for more than two months. Some of them were placed in solitary confinement for 40 days, and some of them were given as many as seven lie-detector tests.


Plenty of Speculation

Since their arrest, plenty of speculation has swirled about the case, and what the five men were doing that morning. Eventually, The Forward, a respected Jewish newspaper in New York, reported the FBI concluded that two of the men were Israeli intelligence operatives.

Vince Cannistraro, a former chief of operations for counterterrorism with the CIA who is now a consultant for ABCNEWS, said federal authorities' interest in the case was heightened when some of the men's names were found in a search of a national intelligence database.


Israeli Intelligence Connection?

According to Cannistraro, many people in the U.S. intelligence community believed that some of the men arrested were working for Israeli intelligence. Cannistraro said there was speculation as to whether Urban Moving had been "set up or exploited for the purpose of launching an intelligence operation against radical Islamists in the area, particularly in the New Jersey-New York area."

Under this scenario, the alleged spying operation was not aimed against the United States, but at penetrating or monitoring radical fund-raising and support networks in Muslim communities like Paterson, N.J., which was one of the places where several of the hijackers lived in the months prior to Sept. 11.

For the FBI, deciphering the truth from the five Israelis proved to be difficult. One of them, Paul Kurzberg, refused to take a lie-detector test for 10 weeks — then failed it, according to his lawyer. Another of his lawyers told us Kurzberg had been reluctant to take the test because he had once worked for Israeli intelligence in another country.

Sources say the Israelis were targeting these fund-raising networks because they were thought to be channeling money to Hamas and Islamic Jihad, groups that are responsible for most of the suicide bombings in Israel. "[The] Israeli government has been very concerned about the activity of radical Islamic groups in the United States that could be a support apparatus to Hamas and Islamic Jihad," Cannistraro said.
The men denied that they had been working for Israeli intelligence out of the New Jersey moving company, and Ram Horvitz, their Israeli attorney, dismissed the allegations as "stupid and ridiculous."

Mark Regev, the spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, goes even further, asserting the issue was never even discussed with U.S. officials.

"These five men were not involved in any intelligence operation in the United States, and the American intelligence authorities have never raised this issue with us," Regev said. "The story is simply false."


No ‘Pre-Knowledge’

Despite the denials, sources tell ABCNEWS there is still debate within the FBI over whether or not the young men were spies. Many U.S. government officials still believe that some of them were on a mission for Israeli intelligence. But the FBI told ABCNEWS, "To date, this investigation has not identified anybody who in this country had pre-knowledge of the events of 9/11."

Sources also said that even if the men were spies, there is no evidence to conclude they had advance knowledge of the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11. The investigation, at the end of the day, after all the polygraphs, all of the field work, all the cross-checking, the intelligence work, concluded that they probably did not have advance knowledge of 9/11," Cannistraro noted.

As to what they were doing on the van, they say they read about the attack on the Internet, couldn't see it from their offices and went to the parking lot for a better view. But no one has been able to find a good explanation for why they may have been smiling with the towers of the World Trade Center burning in the background. Both the lawyers for the young men and the Israeli Embassy chalk it up to immature conduct.

According to ABCNEWS sources, Israeli and U.S. government officials worked out a deal — and after 71 days, the five Israelis were taken out of jail, put on a plane, and deported back home.

While the former detainees refused to answer ABCNEWS' questions about their detention and what they were doing on Sept. 11, several of the detainees discussed their experience in America on an Israeli talk show after their return home.

Said one of the men, denying that they were laughing or happy on the morning of Sept. 11, "The fact of the matter is we are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event."

ABCNEWS' Chris Isham, John Miller, Glenn Silber and Chris Vlasto contributed to this report.



http://ww1.sundayherald.com/37707
Five Israelis were seen filming as jet liners ploughed into the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001

Were they part of a massive spy ring which shadowed the 9/11 hijackers and knew that al-Qaeda planned a devastating terrorist attack on the USA? Neil Mackay investigates


THERE was ruin and terror in Manhattan, but, over the Hudson River in New Jersey, a handful of men were dancing. As the World Trade Centre burned and crumpled, the five men celebrated and filmed the worst atrocity ever committed on American soil as it played out before their eyes.

Who do you think they were? Palestinians? Saudis? Iraqis, even? Al-Qaeda, surely? Wrong on all counts. They were Israelis – and at least two of them were Israeli intelligence agents, working for Mossad, the equivalent of MI6 or the CIA.

Their discovery and arrest that morning is a matter of indisputable fact. To those who have investigated just what the Israelis were up to that day, the case raises one dreadful possibility: that Israeli intelligence had been shadowing the al-Qaeda hijackers as they moved from the Middle East through Europe and into America where they trained as pilots and prepared to suicide-bomb the symbolic heart of the United States. And the motive? To bind America in blood and mutual suffering to the Israeli cause.

After the attacks on New York and Washington, the former Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, was asked what the terrorist strikes would mean for US-Israeli relations. He said: “It’s very good.” Then he corrected himself, adding: “Well, it’s not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy [for Israel from Americans].”

If Israel’s closest ally felt the collective pain of mass civilian deaths at the hands of terrorists, then Israel would have an unbreakable bond with the world’s only hyperpower and an effective free hand in dealing with the Palestinian terrorists who had been murdering its innocent civilians as the second intifada dragged on throughout 2001.

It’s not surprising that the New Jersey housewife who first spotted the five Israelis and their white van wants to preserve her anonymity. She’s insisted that she only be identified as Maria. A neighbour in her apartment building had called her just after the first strike on the Twin Towers. Maria grabbed a pair of binoculars and, like millions across the world, she watched the horror of the day unfold.

As she gazed at the burning towers, she noticed a group of men kneeling on the roof of a white van in her parking lot. Here’s her recollection: “They seemed to be taking a movie. They were like happy, you know ... they didn’t look shocked to me. I thought it was strange.”

Maria jotted down the van’s registration and called the police. The FBI was alerted and soon there was a statewide all points bulletin put out for the apprehension of the van and its occupants. The cops traced the number, establishing that it belonged to a company called Urban Moving.

Police Chief John Schmidig said: “We got an alert to be on the lookout for a white Chevrolet van with New Jersey registration and writing on the side. Three individuals were seen celebrating in Liberty State Park after the impact. They said three people were jumping up and down.”

By 4pm on the afternoon of September 11, the van was spotted near New Jersey’s Giants stadium. A squad car pulled it over and inside were five men in their 20s. They were hustled out of the car with guns levelled at their heads and handcuffed.

In the car was $4700 in cash, a couple of foreign passports and a pair of box cutters – the concealed Stanley Knife-type blades used by the 19 hijackers who’d flown jetliners into the World Trade Centre and Pentagon just hours before. There were also fresh pictures of the men standing with the smouldering wreckage of the Twin Towers in the background. One image showed a hand flicking a lighter in front of the devastated buildings, like a fan at a pop concert. The driver of the van then told the arresting officers: “We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.”

His name was Sivan Kurzberg. The other four passengers were Kurzberg’s brother Paul, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Ellner and Omer Marmari. The men were dragged off to prison and transferred out of the custody of the FBI’s Criminal Division and into the hands of their Foreign Counterintelligence Section – the bureau’s anti-espionage squad.

A warrant was issued for a search of the Urban Moving premises in Weehawken in New Jersey. Boxes of papers and computers were removed. The FBI questioned the firm’s Israeli owner, Dominik Otto Suter, but when agents returned to re-interview him a few days later, he was gone. An employee of Urban Moving said his co-workers had laughed about the Manhattan attacks the day they happened. “I was in tears,” the man said. “These guys were joking and that bothered me. These guys were like, ‘Now America knows what we go through.’”

Vince Cannistraro, former chief of operations for counter-terrorism with the CIA, says the red flag went up among investigators when it was discovered that some of the Israelis’ names were found in a search of the national intelligence database. Cannistraro says many in the US intelligence community believed that some of the Israelis were working for Mossad and there was speculation over whether Urban Moving had been “set up or exploited for the purpose of launching an intelligence operation against radical Islamists”.

This makes it clear that there was no suggestion whatsoever from within American intelligence that the Israelis were colluding with the 9/11 hijackers – simply that the possibility remains that they knew the attacks were going to happen, but effectively did nothing to help stop them.

After the owner vanished, the offices of Urban Moving looked as if they’d been closed down in a big hurry. Mobile phones were littered about, the office phones were still connected and the property of at least a dozen clients were stacked up in the warehouse. The owner had cleared out his family home in New Jersey and returned to Israel.

Two weeks after their arrest, the Israelis were still in detention, held on immigration charges. Then a judge ruled that they should be deported. But the CIA scuppered the deal and the five remained in custody for another two months. Some went into solitary confinement, all underwent two polygraph tests and at least one underwent up to seven lie detector sessions before they were eventually deported at the end of November 2001. Paul Kurzberg refused to take a lie detector test for 10 weeks, but then failed it. His lawyer said he was reluctant to take the test as he had once worked for Israeli intelligence in another country.

Nevertheless, their lawyer, Ram Horvitz, dismissed the allegations as “stupid and ridiculous”. Yet US government sources still maintained that the Israelis were collecting information on the fundraising activities of groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Mark Regev, of the Israeli embassy in Washington, would have none of that and he said the allegations were “simply false”. The men themselves claimed they’d read about the World Trade Centre attacks on the internet, couldn’t see it from their office and went to the parking lot for a better view. Their lawyers and the embassy say their ghoulish and sinister celebrations as the Twin Towers blazed and thousands died were due to youthful foolishness.

The respected New York Jewish newspaper, The Forward, reported in March 2002, however, that it had received a briefing on the case of the five Israelis from a US official who was regularly updated by law enforcement agencies. This is what he told The Forward: “The assessment was that Urban Moving Systems was a front for the Mossad and operatives employed by it.” He added that “the conclusion of the FBI was that they were spying on local Arabs”, but the men were released because they “did not know anything about 9/11”.

Back in Israel, several of the men discussed what happened on an Israeli talk show. One of them made this remarkable comment: “The fact of the matter is we are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event.” But how can you document an event unless you know it is going to happen?

We are now deep in conspiracy theory territory. But there is more than a little circumstantial evidence to show that Mossad – whose motto is “By way of deception, thou shalt do war” – was spying on Arab extremists in the USA and may have known that September 11 was in the offing, yet decided to withhold vital information from their American counterparts which could have prevented the terror attacks.

Following September 11, 2001, more than 60 Israelis were taken into custody under the Patriot Act and immigration laws. One highly placed investigator told Carl Cameron of Fox News that there were “tie-ins” between the Israelis and September 11; the hint was clearly that they’d gathered intelligence on the planned attacks but kept it to themselves.

The Fox News source refused to give details, saying: “Evidence linking these Israelis to 9/11 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.” Fox News is not noted for its condemnation of Israel; it’s a ruggedly patriotic news channel owned by Rupert Murdoch and was President Bush’s main cheerleader in the war on terror and the invasion of Iraq.

Another group of around 140 Israelis were detained prior to September 11, 2001, in the USA as part of a widespread investigation into a suspected espionage ring run by Israel inside the USA. Government documents refer to the spy ring as an “organised intelligence-gathering operation” designed to “penetrate government facilities”. Most of those arrested had served in the Israeli armed forces – but military service is compulsory in Israel. Nevertheless, a number had an intelligence background.

The first glimmerings of an Israeli spying exercise in the USA came to light in spring 2001, when the FBI sent a warning to other federal agencies alerting them to be wary of visitors calling themselves “Israeli art students” and attempting to bypass security at federal buildings in order to sell paintings. A Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) report suggested the Israeli calls “may well be an organised intelligence-gathering activity”. Law enforcement documents say that the Israelis “targeted and penetrated military bases” as well as the DEA, FBI and dozens of government facilities, including secret offices and the unlisted private homes of law enforcement and intelligence personnel.

A number of Israelis questioned by the authorities said they were students from Bezalel Academy of Art and Design, but Pnina Calpen, a spokeswoman for the Israeli school, did not recognise the names of any Israelis mentioned as studying there in the past 10 years. A federal report into the so-called art students said many had served in intelligence and electronic signal intercept units during their military service.

According to a 61-page report, drafted after an investigation by the DEA and the US immigration service, the Israelis were organised into cells of four to six people. The significance of what the Israelis were doing didn’t emerge until after September 11, 2001, when a report by a French intelligence agency noted “according to the FBI, Arab terrorists and suspected terror cells lived in Phoenix, Arizona, as well as in Miami and Hollywood, Florida, from December 2000 to April 2001 in direct proximity to the Israeli spy cells”.

The report contended that Mossad agents were spying on Mohammed Atta and Marwan al-Shehi, two of leaders of the 9/11 hijack teams. The pair had settled in Hollywood, Florida, along with three other hijackers, after leaving Hamburg – where another Mossad team was operating close by.

Hollywood in Florida is a town of just 25,000 souls. The French intelligence report says the leader of the Mossad cell in Florida rented apartments “right near the apartment of Atta and al-Shehi”. More than a third of the Israeli “art students” claimed residence in Florida. Two other Israelis connected to the art ring showed up in Fort Lauderdale. At one time, eight of the hijackers lived just north of the town.

Put together, the facts do appear to indicate that Israel knew that 9/11, or at least a large-scale terror attack, was about to take place on American soil, but did nothing to warn the USA. But that’s not quite true. In August 2001, the Israelis handed over a list of terrorist suspects – on it were the names of four of the September 11 hijackers. Significantly, however, the warning said the terrorists were planning an attack “outside the United States”.

The Israeli embassy in Washington has dismissed claims about the spying ring as “simply untrue”. The same denials have been issued repeatedly by the five Israelis seen high-fiving each other as the World Trade Centre burned in front of them.

Their lawyer, Ram Horwitz, insisted his clients were not intelligence officers. Irit Stoffer, the Israeli foreign minister, said the allegations were “completely untrue”. She said the men were arrested because of “visa violations”, adding: “The FBI investigated those cases because of 9/11.”

Jim Margolin, an FBI spokesman in New York, implied that the public would never know the truth, saying: “If we found evidence of unauthorised intelligence operations that would be classified material.” Yet, Israel has long been known, according to US administration sources, for “conducting the most aggressive espionage operations against the US of any US ally”. Seventeen years ago, Jonathan Pollard, a civilian working for the American Navy, was jailed for life for passing secrets to Israel. At first, Israel claimed Pollard was part of a rogue operation, but the government later took responsibility for his work.

It has always been a long-accepted agreement among allies – such as Britain and America or America and Israel – that neither country will jail a “friendly spy” nor shame the allied country for espionage. Chip Berlet, a senior analyst at Boston’s Political Research Associates and an expert in intelligence, says: “It’s a backdoor agreement between allies that says that if one of your spies gets caught and didn’t do too much harm, he goes home. It goes on all the time. The official reason is always visa violation.”

What we are left with, then, is fact sullied by innuendo. Certainly, it seems, Israel was spying within the borders of the United States and it is equally certain that the targets were Islamic extremists probably linked to September 11. But did Israel know in advance that the Twin Towers would be hit and the world plunged into a war without end; a war which would give Israel the power to strike its enemies almost without limit? That’s a conspiracy theory too far, perhaps. But the unpleasant feeling that, in this age of spin and secrets, we do not know the full and unadulterated truth won’t go away. Maybe we can guess, but it’s for the history books to discover and decide.

02 November 2003

Neil Mackay is the Sunday Herald's multi-award winning Home Affairs and Investigations Editor. Beginning his career in Northern Ireland before moving to Scotland in the mid-90s, Neil has been with the newspaper since its launch in February 1999. He is a regular guest on current affairs programmes on TV & radio both nationally and internationally.



Five Men Detained As Suspected Conspirators

by Paulo Lima
The Bergen Record
September 12, 2001

http://www.bergen.com/news/2bombvan200109125.htm

Eight hours after terrorists struck Manhattan's tallest skyscrapers, police in Bergen County detained five men who they said were found carrying maps linking them to the blasts. The five men, who were in a van stopped on Route 3 in East Rutherford around 4:30 p.m., were being questioned by police but had not been charged with any crime late Tuesday.

However, sources close to the investigation said they found other evidence linking the men to the bombing plot. "There are maps of the city in the car with certain places highlighted," the source said. "It looked like they're hooked in with this. It looked like they knew what was going to happen when they were at Liberty State Park."

Sources also said that bomb-sniffing dogs reacted as if they had detected explosives. The FBI seized the van for further testing, authorities said. Sources said the van was stopped as it headed east on Route 3, between the Hackensack River bridge and the Sheraton hotel. As a precaution, police shut down Route 3 traffic in both directions after the stop and evacuated a small roadside motel near the Sheraton.

Sources close to the investigation said the men said they were Israeli tourists, but police had not been able to confirm their identities. Authorities would not release their names.East Rutherford officers stopped the van after the FBI's Newark Office broadcast an alert asking surrounding police departments to look for a white Chevrolet van, police said.

"We got an alert to be on the lookout for a white Chevrolet van with New Jersey registration and writing on the side," said Bergen County Police Chief John Schmidig. "Three individuals were seen celebrating in Liberty State Park after the impact. They said three people were jumping up and down."

East Rutherford officers summoned the county bomb squad, New Jersey state troopers, and FBI agents, who waited alongside the van as prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney's Office tried to obtain a warrant to search the van late Tuesday, Schmidig said. The FBI alert, known as a BOLO or "Be On Lookout," was sent out at 3:31 p.m. It read:

"Vehicle possibly related to New York terrorist attack. White, 2000 Chevrolet van with New Jersey registration with 'Urban Moving Systems' sign on back seen at Liberty State Park, Jersey City, NJ, at the time of first impact of jetliner into World Trade Center. "Three individuals with van were seen celebrating after initial impact and subsequent explosion. FBI Newark Field Office requests that, if the van is located, hold for prints and detain individuals."

State police Col. Barry W. Roberson confirmed the traffic stop at a late night news briefing at state police headquarters in Trenton. He would not elaborate, however. A business traveler staying at the Homestead Studio Hotel said she watched state troopers drive the suspects away in a procession of state police cars about 5 p.m. "First, they told us we could hang out in the lobby, but then they told us to leave," the traveler said.

At 10 p.m., the hotel guest said she could see at least two police officers searching through the van while a crowd of other officers kept their distance.



http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?

5 Israelis detained for `puzzling behavior' after WTC tragedy

Haaretz
By Yossi Melman

Five Israelis who had worked for a moving company based in New Jersey are being held in U.S. prisons for what the Federal Bureau of Investigation has described as "puzzling behavior" following the terror attack on the World Trade Center in New York last Tuesday. The five are expected to be deported sometime soon.

The families of the five, who asked that their names not be released, said that their sons had been questioned by the FBI for hours on end, had been kept in solitary confinement for three days, and had been humiliated, stripped of their clothes and blindfolded.

The mother of one of the young men explained the chain of events as she understands it to Ha'aretz:

She said that the five had worked for the company, which is owned by an Israeli, for between two months and two years. They had been arrested some four hours after the attack on the Twin Towers while filming the smoking skyline from the roof of their company's building, she said. It appears that they were spotted by one of the neighbors who called the police and the FBI.

The mother said that the families and friends of the five in Israel had known nothing of the men's whereabouts for a number of days.

"When they finally let my son make a phone call for the first time to a friend in the United States two days ago, he told him that he had been tortured by the FBI in a basement," the mother said. "He was stripped to his underwear; he was blindfolded and questioned for 14 hours. They thought that because he has citizenship of a European country as well as of Israel that he was working for the Mossad [Israel's secret service]."

Seven FBI agents later stormed the apartment of one of the Israelis, searched it and questioned his roommate. The Israeli owner of the company, who has U.S. citizenship, was also questioned. Both men were subsequently released.

The families here complained that the Israeli consulate in New York and the situation room set up by the Foreign Ministry there to locate missing Israelis had done nothing to help their sons. The Foreign Ministry told the families that the FBI had denied holding the five and that the consulate had chosen to believe the FBI, the mother said.

The five were transferred out of the FBI's facility on Saturday morning and are now being held in two prisons in New Jersey by the Immigration and Naturalization Services. They are charged with illegally residing in the United States and working there without permits.

The Foreign Ministry said in response that it had been informed by the consulate in New York that the FBI had arrested the five for "puzzling behavior." They are said to have had been caught videotaping the disaster and shouting in what was interpreted as cries of joy and mockery.




TRIO WHO CHEERED ATTACK FACE BOOT AS ILLEGAL ALIENS

By AL GUART (NEW YORK POST)
http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/

September 13, 2001 -- Three men who celebrated as the Twin Towers crumbled are facing deportation, The Post has learned. The men, described as illegal immigrants from the Middle East, were arrested Tuesday afternoon in a white Chevy van near the Meadowlands based on a tip from witnesses who saw them "cheering" and "jumping up and down" in Liberty State Park after the attack, a source said.

Witnesses took the plate number and the FBI sent out an alert to area cops, reading: "Vehicle possibly related to New York terrorist attack . . . Three individuals with van were seen celebrating after initial impact and subsequent explosion."

Port Authority cops nabbed the three as they drove along Route 3 in East Rutherford in the van, which had the words "Urban Moving Systems" painted on it. After grilling the men and searching the van in vain for explosives, the FBI turned the men over to the Immigration and Naturalization Service for deportation.

The feds declined to release the men's identities or nationalities. "The agency has decided it will not make any comments about this at this time," said INS spokesman Kerry Gill. Officials at "Urban Moving" claimed to be unaware of what had happened.



THE SUSPICIOUS "MIDDLE EASTERN MOVERS" WERE ISRAELIS WITH BOXCUTTERS, EUROPEAN PASSPORTS AND $4000 CASH
SOURCE: ISRAEL NATIONAL NEWS

Arutz Sheva News Service IsraelNationalNews.com 10-26-1

Five young Israelis are "on the verge of collapse," according to family members, as their incarceration in New York on charges relating to the Bin Laden attacks continues. They were arrested on Sept. 11, only hours after the World Trade Center attack, on charges of "plotting to blow up" a New York bridge. Katie Shmuel of the Galilee town of Yokne'am, says that her son Yaron is in "a very critical psychological situation," given that they are not allowed to have visitors and the difficult conditions in which they are being held. "The Israeli Consul-General in New York was allowed to visit only after asking several times and receiving a special permit," Katie told Arutz-7's Yosef Zalmanson today. "He was allowed to talk to them only in English, and only from behind a glass partition. The Consul told me that the boys are in a bad state and that they are being held under difficult conditions."

When asked why the five youths, aged 22-26, are being held, Katie replied with despair: "It's ludicrous. They were on the George Washington Bridge at the time of the bombing, and the FBI had warnings of a terrorist plot, of guys in a white van, to blow up the bridge. So when the FBI saw this van, with my son and his four friends - one of them had a large sum of money, there were two razor knives in the van, and one of the boys is named Omer, which the FBI guys thought was Omar - they put one and one together and got three, and immediately arrested them... For the first few days, the boys were held in an FBI dungeon, tied up, with no clothes and no food."

*The Israeli newspaper Ha'retz revealed on Sept 17 that these were the same men who were seen "celebrating" and "making mocking gestures" as the Twin Towers collapsed.
** The Jerusalem Post reported on October 26 that the Israelis were smiling as they photograhed themselves with the collapsed towers in the background.



MARCH 15, 2002

Spy Rumors Fly on Gusts of Truth
Americans Probing Reports of Israeli Espionage

By MARC PERELMAN
FORWARD STAFF

Despite angry denials by Israel and its American supporters, reports that Israel was conducting spying activities in the United States may have a grain of truth, the Forward has learned.

However, far from pointing to Israeli spying against U.S. government and military facilities, as reported in Europe last week, the incidents in question appear to represent a case of Israelis in the United States spying on a common enemy, radical Islamic networks suspected of links to Middle East terrorism.

In particular, a group of five Israelis arrested in New Jersey shortly after the September 11 attacks and held for more than two months was subjected to an unusual number of polygraph tests and interrogated by a series of government agencies including the FBI's counterintelligence division, which by some reports remains convinced that Israel was conducting an intelligence operation. The five Israelis worked for a moving company with few discernable assets that closed up shop immediately afterward and whose owner fled to Israel.

Other allegations involved Israelis claiming to be art students who had backgrounds in signal interception and ordnance. (See related story, Page 8.)

Sources emphasized that the release of all the Israelis under investigation indicates that they were cleared of any suspicion that they had prior knowledge of the September 11 attacks, as some anti-Israel media outlets have suggested.

The resulting tensions between Washington and Jerusalem, sources told the Forward, arose not because of the operations' targets but because Israel reportedly violated a secret gentlemen's agreement between the two countries under which espionage on each other's soil is to be coordinated in advance.

Most experts and former officials interviewed for this article said that such so-called unilateral or uncoordinated Israeli monitoring of radical Muslims in America would not be surprising.

In fact, they said, Israeli intelligence played a key role in helping the Bush administration to crack down on Islamic charities suspected of funneling money to terrorist groups, most notably the Richardson, Texas-based Holy Land Foundation last December.

"I have no doubt Israel has an interest in spying on those groups," said Peter Unsinger, an intelligence expert who teaches justice administration at San Jose University. "The Israelis give us good stuff, like on the Hamas charities."

According to one former high-ranking American intelligence official, who asked not to be named, the FBI came to the conclusion at the end of its investigation that the five Israelis arrested in New Jersey last September were conducting a Mossad surveillance mission and that their employer, Urban Moving Systems of Weehawken, N.J., served as a front.

After their arrest, the men were held in detention for two-and-a-half months and were deported at the end of November, officially for visa violations.

However, a counterintelligence investigation by the FBI concluded that at least two of them were in fact Mossad operatives, according to the former American official, who said he was regularly briefed on the investigation by two separate law enforcement officials.

"The assessment was that Urban Moving Systems was a front for the Mossad and operatives employed by it," he said. "The conclusion of the FBI was that they were spying on local Arabs but that they could leave because they did not know anything about 9/11."

However, he added, the bureau was "very irritated because it was a case of so-called unilateral espionage, meaning they didn't know about it."

Spokesmen for the FBI, the Justice Department and the Immigration and Naturalization Service refused to discuss the case. Israeli officials flatly dismissed the allegations as untrue.

However, the former American official said that after American authorities confronted Jerusalem on the issue at the end of last year, the Israeli government acknowledged the operation and apologized for not coordinating it with Washington.

The five men — Sivan and Paul Kurzberg, Oded Ellner, Omer Marmari and Yaron Shmuel — were arrested eight hours after the attacks by the Bergen County, N.J., police while driving in an Urban Moving Systems van. The police acted on an FBI alert after the men allegedly were seen acting strangely while watching the events from the roof of their warehouse and the roof of their van.

In addition to their strange behavior and their Middle Eastern looks, the suspicions were compounded when a box cutter and $4,000 in cash were found in the van. Moreover, one man carried two passports and another had fresh pictures of the men standing with the smoldering wreckage of the World Trade Center in the background.

The Bergen County police immediately handed the suspects to the INS, which turned them over to a joint police-FBI terrorism task force set up after September 11 to deal with all possible links with the attacks.

The five Israelis were detained in the high-security Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn in solitary confinement until mid-October. On September 25, they all signed papers acknowledging violations of U_immigration law. At the end of October, the INS issued a deportation order which was enforced a month later after a review by the Justice Department and prodding by Jewish and Israeli officials.

However, the former official said, this is just the official story.

In fact, he said, the nature of the investigation changed after the names of two of the five Israelis showed up on a CIA-FBI database of foreign intelligence operatives, he said. At that point, he said, the bureau took control of the investigation and launched a Foreign Counterintelligence Investigation, or FCI.

FBI investigations into possible links to the September 11 attacks are usually carried by the bureau's counterterrorism division, not its counterintelligence division.

"An FCI means not only that it was serious but also that it was handled at a very high level and very tightly," the former official said. That view was echoed by several former FBI officials interviewed.

Steven Gordon, an American lawyer hired by the families to help secure their release, said he could not confirm which FBI division was in charge of the investigation. However, he acknowledged that "there were a lot of people involved, including counterintelligence officials from the FBI."

The men all underwent at least two polygraph tests each, the lawyer added. He said one of the Israelis took the test seven times, a very unusual total according to several polygraph experts interviewed by the Forward.

After the men were arrested, FBI agents searched the warehouse of Urban Moving Systems in Weehawken, N.J., seizing computer hard drives and documents. The warehouse was closed on September 14, said Ron George, a spokesman for the New Jersey State Division of Consumer Affairs.

On December 7, a New Jersey judge ruled that the state could seize the goods remaining inside the warehouse. The state also has a lawsuit pending against Urban Moving Systems and its owner, Dominik Otto Suter, an Israeli citizen.

The FBI questioned Mr. Suter once. However, he left the country afterward and went back to Israel before further questioning. Mr. Suter declined through his lawyer to be interviewed for this article.

Earlier this year, the New York State Department of Transportation revoked Urban Moving System's license after discovering that the company's midtown Manhattan base was only a mailing address.

After they returned to Israel at the end of November, the five men told local media that they were kept in solitary confinement, beaten, deprived of food and questioned while blindfolded and in their underwear.

Mr. Ellner, one of the five Israelis, said on two occasions in recent weeks that the five men had decided not to grant any interviews right now "because we went through a very difficult period and we are not ready for this."

Their Israeli lawyer, Ram Horwitz, told the Forward he was still waiting for the results of the medical tests undertaken by the men in Israel to make a decision on an eventual lawsuit in the United States for mistreatment.

Mr. Horwitz insisted the men were not intelligence officers.
Irit Stoffer, an Israeli Foreign Ministry spokeswoman, said the allegations were "completely untrue" and that there were "only visa violations."

"The FBI investigated those cases because of 9/11," Ms. Stoffer said.
Charlene Eban, a spokeswoman for the FBI in Washington, and Don Nelson, a Justice Department spokesman, said they had no knowledge of an Israeli spying operation.

"If we found evidence of unauthorized intelligence operations, that would be classified material," added Jim Margolin, a spokesman for the FBI in New York.

One leading expert in American intelligence operations, Chip Berlet, a senior analyst at the Boston-based Political Research Associates, explained that there "is a backdoor agreement between allies that says that if one of your spies gets caught and didn't do too much harm, he goes home. It goes on all the time. The official reason is always a visa violation."

http://www.forward.com/issues/2002/02.03.15/news2.html



October, 2001

"MOVERS" DETAINED WITH DETAILED VIDEO OF SEARS TOWER

SOURCE: THE MERCURY (PHILADEPHIA AREA NEWSPAPER), POTTSTOWN, PENNSYLVANIA
http://www.zwire.com/site/mercury_101801.html

MICHELLE MOWAD, Special to The Mercury, October 17, 2001

PLYMOUTH (PA) -- Two men whom police described as Middle Eastern were detained in the township by federal immigration authorities after being found with detailed video footage of the Sears Tower in Chicago.

Plymouth Police encountered the men after an officer responded to Pizzeria Uno on West Ridge Pike at 2:40 p.m. Thursday for a report of illegal dumping.

A manager there advised the police officer that a tractor-trailer was observed backed up to the dumpster at the rear of the restaurant. The manager noticed a freshly dumped pile of furniture adjacent to the Dumpster, according to police. The manager confronted the vehicle's operator, a Middle Eastern man, police said.

The man, who later identified himself as Moshe Elmakias, 30, denied that he did anything and fled the scene, heading west on West Ridge Pike... The manager was able to provide township police with the Florida registration number of the tractor-trailer and said that a sign posted on the side of the vehicle read "Moving Systems Incorporated" police said.

The area was searched by township police, and the vehicle was spotted parked on the curb in front of John Kennedy Ford on Ridge Pike. An officer proceeded to make contact with the occupants of the truck by knocking on the cab, according to reports.
A Middle Eastern man, later identified as Ron Katar, 23, exited the sleeper area of the cab and said that the operator was across the street as he pointed toward the Don Rosen Porsche dealer, reports said.

Elmakias and a white female, Ayelet Reisler, 23, were approaching the vehicle from the dealership, but the female then began walking in a different direction, acting as if she were not with Elmakias, according to reports. Reisler was detained and checked for identification. She had a German passport in her name and medication in a different name, police said. Plymouth Police Sgt. Thomas Longo was notified and responded to the incident.

Elmakias allegedly admitted to being behind Pizzeria Uno, although he said that he did not dump furniture, he was only turning around. Elmakias said that his destination was New York and that he was also coming from New York. He said he was in Plymouth because he was supposed to make a pickup in the morning and pointed toward the Storage USA facility on Belvoir Road , police said. Elmakias could not, however, provide a name or telephone number of the customer.

Township police dispatched a request for a Motor Carrier Program Inspector. Officer Gerald Schwartz of the Whitpain Police Department responded. Schwartz discovered through his investigation that the operator's log had been falsified and put the truck out of service due to violations. Inspection of the tractor-trailer's contents revealed a load three-quarters full containing household items, including furniture and boxes. Among the items in the truck was a Sony video camera. Plymouth Police Officer David McCann reviewed the tape found inside the camera. The tape had video footage of Chicago with zoomed-in shots of the Sears Tower, according to police.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation was notified of the incident and all three subjects were transported to the Plymouth Police station. FBI Agents James Sweeney and Richard Tofani arrived at the station and proceeded to investigate both the subjects and their belongings with the assistance of Immigration and Naturalization Services. All evidence collected by Plymouth and Whitpain officers was transferred to federal facilities. Special Agent Linda Vizi, a spokeswoman for the Philadelphia FBI, could not be contacted for comment on further investigations.



THE MIAMI HERALD

http://www.miami.com/herald/special/new ... 088964.htm

Nuclear plants tighten security
FBI seeking 6 men seen in Midwest


BY MARTIN MERZER, CURTIS MORGAN AND LENNY SAVINO

mmerzer@herald.com OCTOBER 3,2001

WASHINGTON -- As the nation stands on high alert, the FBI is searching for six men stopped by police in the Midwest last weekend but released -- even though they possessed photos and descriptions of a nuclear power plant in Florida and the Trans-Alaska pipeline, a senior law enforcement official said Tuesday.

The Federal Aviation Administration imposed new flight restrictions around nuclear plants nationwide Tuesday, and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission advised the nation's 103 nuclear plants late Monday to fortify security. On Tuesday, agency spokesmen said the FAA's flight restrictions and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's security recommendations were based on Ashcroft's general alert rather than a specific threat. Ashcroft warned that Americans could be struck by another terrorist attack this week.

The incident in the Midwest apparently contributed to the new warning. The six men stopped by police were traveling in groups of three in two white sedans, said a senior law enforcement official, who requested anonymity.

SUSPICIOUS MATERIAL

In addition to the photographs and other suspicious material, they carried "box cutters and other equipment,'' the official said. They appeared to be from the Middle East and held Israeli passports. They were let go after the Immigration and Naturalization Service determined that the passports were valid and that the men had entered the United States legally, the official said.

The FBI declined to comment. An INS spokesman called the report unfounded. ``We have absolutely no information at this point in time to substantiate that story,'' said the agency's Russ Bergeron. It could not be learned in what state the six men were stopped or how they aroused suspicion. It was not known whether their true identities matched those on the passports, or why the FBI was not releasing their names or descriptions.

Investigators think the men almost certainly have changed cars by now and have fled to Canada or elsewhere. Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller were ``furious'' that the INS allowed the men to be released without consulting the FBI, the official said. Ashcroft and Mueller appeared Monday evening at a news conference to announce that the government had ``credible'' but vague information that another wave of terrorist attacks could strike Americans within a week.

ON ALERT

Spokeswoman Rachel Scott said FPL's plants remained at the highest level of alert. ``We are in very close communication with all levels of law enforcement, including the FBI, to ensure we have the security measures in place to protect the plants,'' she said. Also Tuesday, the FAA restricted all flights below 18,000 feet and within 10 miles of 86 "sensitive nuclear sites'' , the agency said. Exceptions can be made for law enforcement, medical and firefighting flights. The 800-mile-long Trans-Alaska Pipeline runs from Prudhoe Bay on the Arctic Ocean to Valdez on the Pacific.
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5821
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 9/11 Info Dump

Postby Elvis » Sun Sep 17, 2017 5:58 am

[p.20 of dump]


Wayne Madsen at his best?

http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/Artstudents.htm

THE ISRAELI ART STUDENTS AND MOVERS STORY

By Wayne Madsen

The presence in the United States of a number of young Israelis, most of whom had specialized military and intelligence backgrounds, in the months prior to 911 is a subject that has received inadequate attention from the major U.S. media and government investigators. The activities of the Israelis fell into two main areas: the casing of the offices and homes of Federal law enforcement officials, U.S. military bases, and other sensitive sites by Israeli “art students” during 2000 and 2001 and the unusual activities of Israeli “movers” around sensitive areas during and after 911. These incidents occurred in tandem with the suspiscious activities of other former Israeli military and intelligence officials in neighboring countries, including Canada and Mexico, after 911. In addition, a number of Israeli intelligence agents were apprehended abroad for passport violations and other illegal activities.

The possibility that the suspicious Israeli activity was linked to the movements of Al Qaeda cells cannot be brushed aside as merely coincidental. For example, a number of the Israelis arrested for suspicious activities involving selling bogus Israeli art and driving moving vans were concentrated in some of the same neighborhoods where a number of the 911 Saudi and other Arab hijackers lived and trained at flight schools.

Two internal U.S. government documents revealed that among the 120 Israeli “art students” who attempted to penetrate the security of dozens of Federal office buildings and who visited the homes of scores of U.S. law enforcement personnel during 2000 and 2001 were some who used addresses and mail drops in southern Florida and Texas near those used by a number of the 911 hijackers. The information came from a Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Report drafted in June 2001 on the activities of the art students and a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) list of the hijackers and other terrorist suspects, accidentally released in early October 2001 on a Finnish government web site. The DEA memo specifically stated that the Israelis may have had ties to an “Islamic fundamentalist group.”

As a journalist, it has become increasingly difficult since the 911 terrorist attacks to cover the more secretive aspects of the U.S. intelligence and law enforcement communities. Many government officials have readopted the famous World War II missive of “Loose Lips Sink Ships,” in refusing comment on anything deemed sensitive. Journalists who rely on the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to obtain copies of documents also face unprecedented challenges. After 911, Attorney General John Ashcroft issued a memorandum that states his Justice Department will use its enormous legal might to defend any refusal by any government agencies to withhold information requested under the FOIA.

Coming into possession of a sensitive Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) report on the activities of Israeli “art students” was, therefore, a welcome surprise. DEA, the chief agency that investigates drug cartels, dangerous work under any circumstance, is traditionally very secretive about its investigations. However, some members of the agency, frustrated that their concerns were not being taken seriously by senior officials of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Justice Department, apparently decided to leak the report. Their decision was supported by the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), another agency involved with the DEA in the joint task force set up to investigate the Israeli “students.”

Being presented with a document such as the DEA report, titled “Suspicious Activities Involving Israeli Art Students at DEA Facilities,” posed unique problems in itself. For example, the document had to be verified as authentic and not a hoax. Many times, government agencies will merely state they “can neither confirm nor deny” the genuineness of leaked documents. However, in the case of the DEA report, confirmation of its genuineness came from the DEA in relatively quick fashion.

One amazing element of the story was the fact that a number of DEA, INS, and FBI agents had discovered, as had I, that several of the known addresses of the Israeli students were very close to those of the Al Qaeda terrorists and their supporters. These included addresses in Hollywood, Florida; Miami, Florida; and Irving, Texas. Speaking off-the-record, some of the agents told me that the fact that the Israelis and Al Qaeda were living in the same neighborhoods at the same time--January through May 2001--led the agents to believe the real mission of the Israelis was not to sell art at federal facilities but to spy on the Al Qaeda members.

As rock solid as the story about the true nature of the art students remains--it has had to face another, even more insurmountable problem than getting federal agents to talk. Immediately after the story appeared in Intelligence Online, Le Monde, and the Associated Press, the sizeable pro-Israeli lobby in the United States began to gear up for a counter punch. They had been through this in December 2001 when the Fox News Network, in a four part series by Carl Cameron, referred to Israelis being arrested and detained in the United States for espionage. Cameron also stated, “Evidence linking these Israelis to 911 is classified. I cannot tell you about evidence that has been gathered. It’s classified information.” No sooner had Fox put the story on its web site it was pulled down without explanation. A similar story on Houston’s CBS affiliate, KHOU-TV, provided the following introduction:

“10/02/2001 - Fifteen People Arrested in March in Dallas, Suspected of Casing Federal Buildings. 11News reported how people claiming to be “Israeli art students” might be trying to sneak into federal buildings and defense sites, and even doing surveillance. In Dallas, the so-called students hit early this year at the city’s FBI building, the Drug Enforcement Administration and at the Earle Cabell Federal building, where guards found one student wandering the halls with a floor plan of the building.”[1]

When trying to access the full story on the TV station’s web site, one receives the following message: “The page you requested could not be found.” However, Channel 11 News’ terrorism expert and former Defense Department analyst Ron Hatchett said the Israeli activity was “obvious surveillance” and “not a bunch of kids selling artwork.” A Federal Protective Service memo, obtained by KHOU after Israelis were seen casing the Leland Federal office building in Houston, stated, “Federal sites have experienced an inundation of art solicitations at office buildings by students claiming to be selling Israeli art.”[2]

Federal agents in Dallas were also concerned that the Israeli art students had other intentions. The office manager for a Plano physician reported that after being told to leave, the Israelis kept returning to her building, which had a no soliciting policy. Channel 8 in Dallas reported that a number of Israelis were caught casing Federal buildings in Dallas and being involved in suspicious behavior in north Texas.[3]

The author’s own colleagues reported that aggressive Israeli art students paid visits during late 2000 and early 2001 to the offices of the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) in Washington, DC and the headquarters of the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) in Arlington, Virginia.

Other suspected Israeli intelligence activity surrounding 911, including the arrest by New Jersey police near Giants Stadium of five Israelis who were seen celebrating, high-fiving, jumping up and down, and videotaping the collapse of the World Trade Center, was reported by the media. A New Jersey apartment resident named Maria, who declined to give her last name, told ABC News about several Israelis she saw celebrating the attack on the Twin Towers in her parking lot. The Israelis were later linked to an Israeli-owned office moving company called Urban Moving Systems headquartered in Weehawken, New Jersey at 3 West 18th Street. Another Urban Moving office was located on West 50th Street in Manhattan. Urban Moving’s owner, Dominik Otto Suter, fled to Israel shortly before he was to be re-questioned by the FBI. [4] One of the five Israelis had a ticket for Bangkok and was due to fly out on September 13.[5] The New York Department of Transportation revoked Urban Moving Systems’ license after it was discovered that its Manhattan business address was merely a post office box.

At 3:31 P.M. the FBI issued a nationwide alert called “Be On Lookout” or “BOLO” for the Israelis. Drafted by Special Agent Dave O’Brien, it read:

“Vehicle possibly related to New York terrorist attack. White, 2000 Chevrolet van with New Jersey registration (JYJ 13Y) with ‘Urban Moving Systems’ sign on back seen at Liberty State Park. Jersey City, NJ, at the time of the first impact of jetliner into World Trade Center.”[6]

According to FBI sources, Urban Moving Systems and the activities of its employees on 911 did not sit too well with one member of the FBI’s New York Joint Terrorism Task Force, Special Agent Michael Dicks. He pursued the Israeli angle but soon found himself transferred to Karachi, Pakistan to help rescue Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl who had been kidnapped by Al Qaeda functionaries. There was one hitch. The FBI was already aware that Pearl had been brutally murdered by his captors.



Urban Moving Systems Weehawken, NJ bomb making and anthrax storage warehouse.

Moments after Maria felt the ground shake from the impact of the first plane into the World Trade Center and she received a phone call from a neighbor to look out her window at the southern Manhattan skyline, she noticed a white Chevy van parked in the lower parking lot with three of the five men in the van jumping on the roof of the vehicle and videotaping each other with the carnage in the background. Maria was also shocked that the men were celebrating the horrific scenes across the Hudson River. After writing down the license plate number of the van, Maria and her husband Pat phoned the police.[7]

Subsequently, Information Spectrum, Inc. (ISI) of Cherry Hill, New Jersey, a subsidiary of the Fairfax, Virginia-based defense contractor, Anteon, took over the operation of the Jersey City police computer system that handled all incoming emergency phone calls on September 11. The system had been maintained by Larimore Associates, a company that specializes in archiving police emergency calls. However, Larimore’s contract was abruptly canceled by Jersey City authorities and awarded to Information Spectrum after the sudden death from a heart attack of Jersey City’s first African-American mayor, Democrat, Glenn D. Cunningham, himself a former Jersey City police officer. According to Jersey City Police officials, after the emergency call system was changed from a Wang to a Windows environment, 8000 emergency 911 system calls registered on September 11 were scrubbed from the archives. In fact, archives dating back to 1989, including those dealing with the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center, were similarly affected. Information Spectrum’s running of the computer system resulted in a number of server crashes. When Larimore volunteered to help recover the lost data, there was no response from the police department.[8] Some Jersey City police sources speculated the change from Larimore to ISI/Anteon was prompted by orders from Trenton and the administration of Governor James McGreevey. They termed the changeover as “political.” Governor McGreevey resigned in 2004 after it was discovered he had an alleged gay relationship with his chief of Homeland Security, Golan Cipel. An Israeli citizen, Cipel, a former diplomat assigned to Israel’s Consulate General in New York City, was thought by many intelligence experts to be a junior Mossad case officer who lured McGreevey into a “honey trap.”

Jersey City was a major base of operations for the 1993 World Trade Center attack. The Ryder van used in that attack was rented from a Jersey City rental agency. As for the 911 attacks on the World Trade Center, there were no records of a call by Maria or any other witness to the Israeli activity in Maria’s building parking lot or at Liberty State Park. The only call remaining in the system was a late night call on September 11 about a suspicious vagrant in a south Jersey City neighborhood.[9]

However, there was a call placed to the Jersey City Police Department that claimed “Palestinians” in Arab clothes were seen celebrating the attacks. Although the Jersey City Police discovered their 911 system tapes on September 11, 2001 disappeared from their servers and achives after ISI took over the contract, some tapes implicating “Arabs” found their way into the hands of WNBC-TV in New York in June 2002. WNBC played transcripts of 911 calls from the Jersey City Police:

Dispatcher: Jersey City police.
Caller: Yes, we have a white van, 2 or 3 guys in there, they look like Palestinians and going around a building.
Caller: There’s a minivan heading toward the Holland tunnel, I see the guy by Newark Airport mixing some junk and he has those sheikh uniform.
Dispatcher: He has what?
Caller: He’s dressed like an Arab.[10]

It is clear that the Jersey City Police Department’s 911 call tapes were manipulated to delete any calls that might implicate the Israelis. The one call provided to WNBC was cleatly an attempt at a “false flag” operation implicating “Palestinians” wearing “sheik uniforms” as the culprits in at least one of the white vans driven by Israeli “movers” on the morning of September 11.

After the van was traced to the Israeli moving company, the BOLO went out for the arrest of the vehicle’s driver and passengers. An East Rutherford policeman directing traffic away from the closed Lincoln Tunnel on Route 3 East noticed the van was driving slowly on the service road towards the tunnel. The tag of the vehicle was only off by one letter from what was contained in the BOLO (JRJ 13Y) and the front New Jersey plate had been removed. It is very possible that to confuse the police, the Israelis were using NJ plate JRJ 13Y as the rear tag on two white vans – the one sighted in Liberty State Park and the other in Maria’s apartment building parking lot. In fact, local police reported a number of white van sightings during September 11, with a number of them phoned into the police. Maria told ABC News she phoned tag number JRJ 13Y to the Jersey City Police after seeing the Israelis driving in a white van celebrating the first plane’s impact, while Liberty State Park witnesses said the same tag number -- JRJ 13Y -- had been passed to the police and FBI after a white van with “celebrating Arabs” had been chased from the park by the park’s chief ranger after the first plane impact.[11] It was clear that officials of New Jersey’s Department of Environmental Protection in Trenton, which has authority over the state’s parks, ordered Liberty State Park officials not to talk to the media about September 11 and the Israeli van.[12]

The East Rutherford Police report on the Israeli van states:

“Officer assigned to Special Detail on Route 3 was rerouting traffic on Highway 3 East to Hwy 120 and 3 West. Lincoln Tunnel was shut down and officer was diverting traffic. Officer notified by dispatch of a National Broadcast to be on lookout for 2000 Chevy Van White, NJ tag JYJ 13Y. 3 to 4 occupants. Officer noticed van traveling at slow speed east towards Lincoln Tunnel on the Service Road with 2 occupants visible. Officer informed sergeant of possible match. No front license plate but JRJ 13Y tag may have one letter off from National Broadcast. Sergeant told officer to stop vehicle because van seen in Liberty State Park at time of first impact. Driver did not exit vehicle. He fumbled with a black “fanny pack.” Officer removed driver and van was searched. County bomb squad and FBI notified. FBI Newark ordered occupants to be held for prints because occupants were seen in Liberty State Park at time of first impact. 5 individuals were detained. Vehicle registration and insurance card were obtained. Officer spoke to FBI Special Agents Robert F. Taylor, Jr., Bill Lloyd, and Dave O’Brien. Prior to transportation to NJ State Police Barracks at Giants Stadium, driver said, “We are Israelis, we are not your problem. Your problems are our problem. Palestinians are the problem.” [13]

After the Israelis were arrested they misrepresented their location to one of the arresting police officers, Scott DeCarlo, claiming they were driving on West Side Highway in Manhattan when the planes struck the Trade Center. Dogs provided by the Bergen County Police K-9 unit alerted to the presence of explosives in the van. The nearby Homestead Studio Suites Hotel was evacuated for several hours. Asked about the Israelis in the van being present at Liberty State Park at the time of the first World Trade Center impact, one East Rutherford officer responded, “sure they were there.”[14] Another confidential source told the Bergen County Record, “There are maps of the city in the car with certain places highlighted . . . It looked like they’re hooked in with this. It looked like they knew what was going to happen when they were at Liberty State Park.”[15] According to several Weehawken neighbors of the Urban Moving Systems warehouse, the FBI, upon searching the the warehouse, discovered fertilizer, other chemicals for making explosives, pipes, caps, and traces of anthrax. After anthrax was discovered, investigators wearing hazardous material suits went through the warehouse. Residents around Urban Moving Systems who had connections to the local police also reported that helicopters with infrared radar swooped in over the warehouse on several occasions.[16]

According to the ABC 20/20 report and echoing the East Rutherford police report, the van’s driver, Sivan Kurzburg, told DeCarlo, “We are Israeli. We are not your problem. Your problems are our problems. The Palestinians are the problem.”[17] The Israelis also reportedly told police they were tourists.[18] When the FBI developed the photos taken by the Israelis of the World Trade Center carnage, one photo depicted Kurzburg flicking a cigarette lighter in a celebratory manner with the burning buildings in the background.[19]



The Liberty State Park vantage point the five Urban Moving Systems celebrants had of lower Manhattan on the morning of September 11.

On the morning of September 12, the FBI canvassed the residents of the Israelis’ apartment building, The Doric, in Union City. They asked the residents if they could identify photographs of the five Israelis.[20] The three Newark-based FBI agents on the case were Robert F. Taylor, Jr., Bill Lloyd and Dave O’Brien, the same agents who questioned the van drivers arrested in East Rutherford. All have subsequently been transferred from the Newark Field Office. A Union City off-duty policemen, who saw three people at Union Park next to the Doric Temple at the corner of 9th Street and Palisades Avenue in Union City. The three, who matched the description of other Israeli “false flag” teams, were filming New York City’s skyline before the first plane hit the World Trade Center. The officer also witnessed the three high-fiving each other. The officer chased the celebrants on foot but was unable to apprehend them. The officer later reported the three headed into Jersey City by car.[21]

Another van carrying explosives was stopped by police on an approach ramp to the George Washington Bridge from the New Jersey side. Police suspected the perpetrators were trying to blow up the bridge.[22]

According to Jersey City police sources, another FBI agent, Monica Patton, investigated the activities of Israeli “movers” and four of the hijackers, Mohammed Atta, Marwan al Shehhi, and two Saudi brothers – Waleed M. and Wail Al-Shehri -- at the same video rental store in Jersey City. One of the videos the Saudi brothers rented was an HBO documentary on the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. Another video they rented was “The Towering Inferno.” The video storeowner said his video rental records were later stolen after the FBI interviewed him and he told them about the Saudis’ rental history. The Al Shehri brothers also purchased phone cards from the video store for special use in calling Dubai. The Jersey City intrigue does not stop with the Saudis and Israelis. Jersey City Police also reported that the business card of a Jersey City municipal government social worker had been found on Timothy McVeigh after his arrest for the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City in 1995.[23]

After serving two and a half months in prison and after a barrage of official complaints from the Israeli government, the five Israeli “movers” (Kurzberg, his brother Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Shmuel, Oded Elner, and Omer Marmari) were released over the objections of the CIA and permitted to return home. However, when Jersey City police checked the Israelis’ van they found $4,700 hidden in a sock, two foreign passports and a Stanley-knife box cutter (the same brand used by the 911 hijackers). Paul Kurzberg, refused for ten weeks to take a polygraph and then flunked it when he did. His lawyer said his client once worked for Israeli intelligence in “another country.”[24] Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert interceded twice with his good friend New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani to have the Israelis released. On September 14, 2004, the five “dancing Israelis” filed suit against the United States in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn for wrongful arrest and imprisonment.

In their complaint, Silvan Kurzberg, Paul Kurzberg, Yaron Shmuel, Omer Gavriel Marmari, and Oded Oz Elner cited the following defendants:

JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General of the United States; JAMES W. ZIGLAR (Former Commissioner of the Immigration and Naturalization Service); MICHAEL ZENK (Warden of the Metropolitan Detention Center); DENNIS HASTY (former Warden of the Metropolitan Detention Center) KATHLEEN HAWK SAWYER (former Director of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); LINDA THOMAS (former Associate Warden of Programs of the Metropolitan Detention Center); ROBERT MUELLER (Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation); KEVIN LOPEZ (believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); S. CHASE (believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); “JORDAN” (believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons, whose true first and last names are unknown to the plaintiffs, who believe they heard him being called “Jordan”) MARIO MACHADO (believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); WILLIAM BECK (believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); RICHARD DIAZ (believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); C. SHACKS (first name unknown first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); SALVATORE LOPRESTI (believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); STEVEN BARRERE (believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); JON OSTEEN (believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); J. MIELES (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); MICHAEL DEFRANCISCO (believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); F. JOHNSON (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); CHRISTPHOR WITSCHEL (believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); MOSCHELLO (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); NORMAN (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); HOSAIN (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); MOUNBO (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); M. ROBINSON (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); TORRES (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons) COUNSELOR RAYMOND COTTON (believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); DR. LORENZO (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); LIEUTENANT BIRAR (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); LIEUTENANT BUCK (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); LIEUTENANT T. CUSH (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); LIEUTENANT GUSS (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); LIEUTENANT D. ORTIZ (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); LIEUTENANT J. PEREZ (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); UNIT MANAGER C. SHACKS (first name unknown, believed to be an employee of the Federal Bureau of Prisons); JOHN DOES 1-30, Metropolitan Detention Center Corrections Officers, “John Doe” being fictional first and last names, intended to be the corrections officers at the Metropolitan Detention Center who abused the plaintiffs and violated their rights, and whose identities are known to the defendants but at this time unknown to the plaintiffs; JOHN ROES 1-30, Federal Bureau of Investigation and/or Immigration and Naturalization Service Agents, “John Roe” being fictional first and last names, intended to be the corrections officers at the Metropolitan Detention Center who abused the plaintiffs and violated their rights, and whose identities are known to the defendants but at this time unknown to the plaintiffs.

A number of interesting facts are stated in the Israelis’ complaint. It states that some of the Israelis were classified as being “of high interest” to the government’s terrorism investigation, “Witness Security” and/or “Management Interest Group 155.” They were “housed in one of the most highly restrictive prison settings possible, the Administrative Maximum Special Housing Unit (“ADMAX SHU”) of the Metropolitan Detention Center (“MDC”).” The government was also interested in the Israelis’ possessions. The complaint states the government “confiscated personal identification, money, and valuable personal items” from the Israelis. In addition, the government searched the homes of the Israelis and confiscated additional personal items.

One intriguing complaint was that the U.S. government detained the Israelis precisely because they were Jewish Israelis. The court filing states: “Defendants and others have also engaged in racial, religious, ethnic, and/or national origin profiling. Plaintiffs’ race, religion, ethnicity, and/or national origin played a determinative role in Defendants’ decision to detain them initially, to subject them to a blanket non-bond policy, to subject them to punishing and dangerous conditions of confinement, and then to keep them detained beyond the point at which removal or voluntary departure could have been effectuated . . .”

Silvan Kurzberg was required to provide a blood sample while in prison, an indication that federal authorities may have had some DNA evidence they wanted to match. At the time of their arrest, all the Israelis had plane tickets back to Israel. When they were first detained, the Israelis were not permitted to meet with a Rabbi. Later access to a Rabbi was granted under “severely limited” circumstances. Prayer books and a bible given to the Israelis by the Rabbi were inspected by prison guards. During their first two weeks of detention, the FBI prohibited the Israeli Consul in New York from meeting with the Israelis.

One of the most astounding claims of the Israelis was that the FBI, Bureau of Prisons, and Immigration and Naturalization Service did not umderstand the difference between Arab Muslims and Jewish Israelis. The complaint states: “The plaintiffs are Jewish Israelis, not Moslems, but due to the similarity of language and the geographical location of Israel in the Middle East, and the ignorance or lack of understanding of the Arab-Israeli conflict and the fact that Israel is an ally of the United States, the defendants mentally placed the plaintiffs in the same category as Moslems, and discriminated against them the same way.”[25]

***

At around noon on September 12, 2001, Roy Barak, a former Israeli paratrooper, and Motti Butbul, both employed by Urban Moving Systems as drivers, were stopped by police near York, Pennsylvania. They were en route from Chicago to New York City. Police discovered Barak had an expired visa and Butbul had no work permit. FBI agents were soon on the scene and grew suspicious when a box cutter was found inside the truck. The FBI polygraphed Barak and showed him a picture of his five colleagues arrested in New Jersey and asked him why they were smiling. Barak responded that they were not smiling. The FBI thought Barak was a possible terrorist and a Mossad spy. The FBI was particularly interested if someone sent Barak to the United States and if, at the time, he held a security clearance in the Israeli army. Barak spent his second week in solitary confinement without a television, radio, or any books.[26]

Vince Cannistraro, the former operations chief for counter-terrorism for the CIA, said that a search of the CIA’s national intelligence database turned up some of the names of Israelis arrested in New Jersey. He said a number of people in the U.S. intelligence community concluded that Urban Moving was a Mossad operation and the Israelis were pursuing Islamist radicals in the New Jersey-New York area and particularly in Patterson, New Jersey. Pauline Stepkovich, who lived across the street from Urban Moving, told ABC News that FBI agents removed about a dozen boxes and computers, enough to fill up two SUVs. Cannistraro told ABC News that the FBI was concerned that the Israeli movers had some advanced knowledge of the 911 attacks but failed to warn the United States. “The fear of some of the FBI investigators in this particular case was that this group had some advanced knowledge of what was going to happen on 911. And once they understood there was an Israeli connection--an Israeli intelligence connection--they became very disturbed, because the implication was that the Israelis may have had some advanced knowledge of the events of 911 and hadn’t told us,” Cannistraro said.[27] Israeli intelligence foreknowledge about the 911 attacks was confirmed by two senior-level intelligence officials at the CIA and FBI.[28]

In Washington, Israeli embassy spokesman, Mark Regev, dismissed the espionage charges, claiming the excitement of the Israelis seeing the World Trade Center collapse was due to “youthful foolishness.”[29] A lawyer for one of the Israelis said his client denied celebrating the terrorist attack on the Trade Center, however, after the FBI developed their film it clearly showed three of the Israelis on top of the van “smiling and clowning around” with the buildings burning in the background.[30] The evidence bolstered what Maria and Pat told the police and proved that the Israelis lied to the police when they claimed they were in Manhattan during the attack.

The Jewish weekly newspaper, The Forward, reported that a top U.S. government official told it, “The assessment was that Urban Moving Systems was a front for the Mossad and operatives employed by it… the conclusion of the FBI was that they were spying on local Arabs.”[31] ABC 20/20 host Barbara Walters commented on how the story of the Israeli movers was received in the Arab world, “The story is that Israel knew more than it would like to admit about the terrorist attack in this country. It's a rumor, but in some Arab countries--including Saudi Arabia, which I visited earlier this year--even educated people told me that they believe it is absolutely true.”[32]

Perhaps the young Israelis were only mirroring the feelings of former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who when asked how the 911 attacks would affect U.S.-Israeli relations, said, “It’s very good… Well, it’s not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy for Israel from Americans.” Bergen County Police Chief John Schmidig was not as serene. He said, “We got an alert to be on the lookout for a white Chevrolet van with New Jersey registration and writing on the side. Three individuals were seen celebrating in Liberty State Park after the impact. They said three people were jumping up and down.”[33]

It is no coincidence that both Fox News and KHOU-TV had to pull down their web stories on the Israeli art students (based on the exposés in Intelligence Online and Le Monde, Fox began referring to its original December 2001 story on its web site). According to a number of Washington journalists, any time an article critical of Israel appears in the U.S. press, reporters and editors can expect to hear from a Boston-based group called the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America or “CAMERA.” The Kafkaesque group makes no secret of its aggressive intimidation methods. Its web site states: “CAMERA systematically monitors, documents, reviews and archives Middle East coverage. Staffers directly contact journalists and publishers concerning distorted or inaccurate coverage… CAMERA members are encouraged to write letters both to the publication or network, and to the sponsors or advertisers… If corrections and improved coverage are not forthcoming, we publicize the faulty reporting and the journalist’s refusal to admit error.”

As an example, CAMERA cited a Washington Post story that refuted the legitimacy of the DEA’s investigation and report on the Israeli art students. The story by reporters John Mintz and Dan Eggen questioned the motive behind the DEA’s report by claiming, without offering any proof, that the agent who wrote it was disgruntled. Moreover, there was more than one author of the report. Apparently, CAMERA’s “fact checkers” were only interested in checking out stories with which they disagreed or found embarrassing.

Neither the Washington Post or CAMERA seemed all that much interested in a warning about the Israeli “art students” and their “aggressive” visits to the offices and homes of U.S. federal agents that was circulated in March, 2001 by the White House Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive. The warning stated:

“In the past six weeks, employees in federal office buildings located throughout the United States have reported suspicious activities connected with individuals representing themselves as foreign students selling or delivering artwork. Employees have observed both males and females attempting to bypass facility security and enter federal buildings.

If challenged, the individuals state that they are delivering artwork from a studio in Miami, Florida, called Universal Art, Inc., or that they are art students and are looking for opinions regarding their work. These individuals have been described as aggressive. They attempt to engage employees in conversation rather than giving a sales pitch.

Federal police officers have arrested two of these individuals for trespassing and discovered that the suspects possessed counterfeit work visasand green cards. These individuals have also gone to the private residences of senior federal officials under the guise of selling art.”[34]

The nature of reporting on Israeli espionage in the United States can result in sources drying up rapidly. In the case of the DEA, the spokesman who originally confirmed the veracity and validity of the DEA Report was suddenly sent away on “vacation.” Other DEA agents and employees of other Justice Department agencies began to seal their lips. Attorney General John Ashcroft refused on two occasions to comment on the DEA investigation. Congress was also unwilling to look into the matter. Asked why, a senior congressional staffer replied, “You’ve got to be kidding… This is an election year!” He was referring to the 2002 congressional elections.

Ashcroft was portrayed as “disinterested” in counterterrorism during the summer of 2001, according to internal FBI memos written by Acting Director of the FBI Thomas Pickard.[35] Ashcroft’s “disinterest” in terrorism did not affect his looking out for his own safety. At the end of July 2001, Ashcroft broke with precedence and flew in a private G-3 Gulfstream to go on a fishing trip to Missouri. Ashcroft had previously flown on commercial planes. When asked why Ashcroft did not fly commercial, the Justice Department said that because of a “threat assessment” by the FBI, Ashcroft would “travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term.” Neither the FBI nor the Justice Department would identify what the threat was, when it was detected or who made it. However, the FBI security detail for Ashcroft determined that the threat was critical enough for Ashcroft not to fly on commercial aircraft.[36]



The FBI ignored both the warnings about Israeli art students and Arab hijackers. The two groups’ paths crossed in a number of U.S. cities in 2000.

After the DEA Report was leaked, I met with a journalist colleague who was also covering the art student story and had high level contacts within the Justice Department and FBI. During our meeting at the Navy Memorial just across the street from the National Archives, he summed up the problem: the cover-up went right to the top and the primary culprits were John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller.

The Israelis were described in the DEA Report and other security advisories as being part of an “organized intelligence gathering activity.” According to the FBI list, the Arab terrorist and suspect cells lived in the same neighborhoods as the Israeli cells in Irving, Texas and Hollywood and Miami, Florida from Dec. 2000 to April 2001. In the case of Irving, the Israeli cell used a rental mailbox in a shopping center just one block away from an Arab suspect’s apartment. In Hollywood, the terrorists, including lead hijacker Mohammad Atta, the Egyptian who piloted American Airlines Flight 11 into the North Tower of the World Trade Center, used a rental mailbox drop two blocks from an apartment rented by an Israeli “art student” team leader.

If the Israelis were stalking the hijackers, they would have also likely known about their interest in the World Trade Center. Speaking at a press conference in Washington, DC on March 22, 2004, William Rodriguez, the President of the Hispanic Victims Group and a 20-year veteran employee of the World Trade Center, revealed that he spotted Mohand Al-Shehri (alias Mohammed al Shehhi), one of the terrorist hijackers of United Flight 175 that crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Center, two and a half months before September 11. Rodriguez said he saw Al-Shehri, a Saudi citizen, casing the North Tower of the World Trade Center. Rodriguez’s comments were part of the press conference partly organized by family members of 911 victims. The family members were calling for a full accounting by members of both the Clinton and Bush administrations about what they knew about the Al Qaeda threat to hijack planes prior to 911.
Rodriguez was a building manager for the World Trade Center and he held the master key for the North Tower. He was the last survivor pulled by rescue workers from the rubble of the building after it collapsed.
Rodriguez said Al-Shehri asked him how many public bathrooms were in the building and, in retrospect, Rodriguez believed the terrorist was looking for ways to place additional explosives in the building prior to the airplane attack. Rodriguez also said as he was climbing the stairs to help rescue people after American Airlines Flight 11 struck his building he heard heavy equipment being moved around on the 34th floor, which was closed and locked for renovation. In the chaos, Rodriguez did not have time to open the doors to the 34th floor to find out who was there but he believed there might have been additional explosives placed inside the building. Rodriguez also claimed that while assisting evacuees he heard non-aircraft-related explosions coming from floors below his location on the 33rd floor. The former chief economist for the Bush Labor Department, Morgan Reynolds, believed the Bush administration’s story about the World Trade Center collapse was “bogus.” Reynolds, who was the director of the Criminal Justice Center at the National Center for Policy Analysis in Dallas and later professor emeritus at Texas A&M University, opined that “if demolition destroyed three steel skyscrapers [the Twin Towers and Building 7] at the World Trade Center on 9/11, then the case for an ‘inside job’ and a government attack on America would be compelling.” Reynolds added, “The government’s collapse theory is highly vulnerable on its own terms. Only professional demolition appears to account for the full range of facts associated with the collapse of the three buildings.”[37]

Moreover, Rodriguez passed along several of his tips about pre-911 surveillance of the World Trade Center to the FBI but he said the agency never bothered to talk to him. However, according to the August 6, 2001 President’s Daily Brief, the FBI was aware that suspected terrorists were conducting surveillance of buildings in New York. The White House revealed that prior to 911, the FBI interviewed two Yemenis it detained for taking photographs of buildings in Federal Plaza in New York City. The FBI released them after determining the Yemenis were “tourists.”[38] Yemen is the birthplace of Osama bin Laden and a number of Al Qaeda operatives hail from Yemen.

Of course, not everyone within the FBI was asleep at the wheel. Minneapolis Special Agent Coleen Rowley tried in vain to get a wiretap on Zacarias Moussaoui. Phoenix Special Agent Kenneth J. Williams reported flight training by Arab students connected to Bin Laden. John P. O’Neill, the FBI’s top counterterrorism agent, constantly raised the problem of Saudi support for Al Qaeda, only to be rebuffed, and eventually, hounded out of the bureau by his superiors.

The internal DEA report from June 2001 dealt with attempts by teams of Israeli “art students” to penetrate the security of various Federal buildings and offices throughout the United States. The DEA refused to officially comment on the report but a high-level source within the agency reports that it was the product of a larger investigation conducted jointly by a DEA and Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) Operational Task Force set up in 2000 specifically to investigate the Israelis.

A number of the art students, who claimed they were from either Bezalel University in Jerusalem or the University of Jerusalem, said they answered ads in Israeli newspapers but could not give details of the identities of their bosses when interviewed by Federal agents. A number of the male and female art students, who were mainly in their early to mid 20s, had recently served in Israeli military and intelligence service, according to the report. Their activities were concentrated during the February-March 2001 time frame. More important, there was no University of Jerusalem and Bezalel said it had no record of any of the students having ever been enrolled there.

The DEA compiled an extensive list of the Isreali art students as an appendix (Indexing Section) to its report [LNU means “last name unknown”]:

“INDEXING SECTION:

1. BLAIN, Gat NADDIS negative, occupation: Israeli art student, sold painting to DEA employee in Dallas, TX on 01/04/2001 (Identified in paragraph 22)

2. FREIDMAN, Shabar NADDIS - Negative driver’s license (#6728447), ID (#033056433)

3. AVRAHAM, Gerzon Ofir NADDIS - Negative. DOB (08/12177), Israel passport (#6315574), Israeli Ministries of Transport ID (#034193615)

4. L.N.U., Shahar NADDIS - Negative

5. BARAM, Lior NADDIS - Negative. Florida driver's license (#B650-520-76-047-0), 10733 Cleary Blvd., #206, Plantation, Florida, 33324-0000, (DOB 02/07/76), 5'9", dark eyes and black hair

6, COHEN, Hammutal NADDIS - Negative DOB (01/29/62), Israeli passport (#6077838), Immigration departure (#41060016307 02/12/01), 5'8", 145 lbs.

7. RUBINSTEIN, Itay NADDIS - Negative DOB (01/17/79), US, visa (#39127358), date of entry 12/23/00, Israeli passport (#39127358) [sic, see visa], 6'0", 165 lbs.

8. AHARON, Ohad NADDIS - Negative

9. SEGAL, Yafit NADDIS - Negative

10. TOV, Yaniv Sheni NADDIS - Negative DOE (06/02/74) NADDIS negative

11. DOR, Sahlev NADDIS - Negative DOB (08/08/77) NADDIS negative AJ

12. GROSS, Hagit NADDIS - Negative DOB (09/30/78), Israeli passport (#5111696)

13. SHLOMO, Rony NADDIS - Negative approximately 21 yoa

14. KOCHAVI, Inbar NADDIS - Negative Israeli passport (#7674731)

15. DRORE, Rani NADDIS - Negative approximately 27 yoa

16. YOCHAI, Legurn NADDIS - Negative 13 753 SO 90th Ave., Mami, Florida 33176

17. MEYTAL, Cohen NADDIS - Negative. Address: c/o Calmanovic, 3575 N. Beltline Rd,, P.0, Box 316, Irving, Texas 75062. Addressed used by Michael Calmanovic, identified below

18. SISSO, Rosie NADDIS - Negative.

19. BURKHOLDER, Seth Thomas NADDIS - Negative. 3329 Bartlett Rd., Orlando, Florida, 1995 white Nissan pickup bearing Florida license plate D36-TTQ.

20. L.N.U., Elsa NADDIS - Negative.

21. SMITH, Travis Wayne NADDIS - Negative. white male, DOB (11/09/74), FBI No. 530083DBS (Assault - Domestic Violence) address: 615 S. Hardy, 4210, Tempe, Arizona

22. ESTRADA, Ramon Hispanic male, NADDIS - Negative. DOB (07/26/63), arrested 12/82 “processing marijuana for sale,” 5/95 “transport/sell narcotics,” 7/95 “transport/sell narcotics, adult giving minor narcotics, “ 8/95 “domestic violence.” FBI No. 7643 5FAG, CASID No. CA07401218, WASID No. WA17692473

23. GILOR, Yaniv Zacoravich NADDIS - Negative. registered owner of a 1997 Chevy van in San Diego, CA

24. MENDEL, Leviella NADDIS - Negative. 83 77 Tamar Drive, #37, Columbia, Maryland, DOB 10/29/75, Maryland driver's license #M-534-514-009-032, 5'7", 150 lbs. Additional inquiries revealed MENDEL has a new residential address, 4733 Haskell Ave., #46, Encino, California.

25. SILVER, Danny NADDIS - Negative. (NFI)

The Tampa, Fforida District Office identified the following individuals (#26-942):

26. BENDALAK, Orit: NADDIS negative, DOB 10-28-78, WF, POB Israel, 5'7", 140 lbs., brown hair, brown eyes.

27. BEZALEL ACADEMY OF ARTS AND DESIGN: NADDIS negative, Jerusalem, 011-972-2-589-3333, http://www.bezalel.ac.il.

28. COHEN, Eli: NADDIS negative, 701 S. 21 Ave. #207, Hollywood, FL 33020, DOB 11/04/1977, FL DL C500-200-77-404-0, State of Israel Ministry of Transport card number 03379722

29. HARARI, Ilana: NADDIS negative, W/F, DOB 4-29-79, 9-29-79, 2-9-79, 14 Jerico Itolon Israel, attends University of Jerusalem, 5'3", 90 lbs., brown hair, blue eyes, tattoo of sun on right foot.

30. KENDEL, Rachel: NADDIS negative, White/Female, State of Israel Ministry of Transport card number 7095201 and 034807727, Israeli passport number 6614254.

3 1, KUZNITZ, Keren: NADDIS - Negative. 1818 E. Oakland Park Blvd. #98, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33306, DOB 02/09/1979, 5'5"; FL driver's license: K253-500-79-549-0, State of Israel Ministry of Transport card number 7121535 and 035721844.

32. L.N.U, Nadav NADDIS - (NFI)

33. L.N.U., Tom NADDIS - Negative. White, male. Address: Hollywood/Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. Reportedly sells artwork to Israeli art students.

34. MARZIANO, Assaf or Asaf NADDIS negative, DOB 2-4-78, state of Israel Ministry of Transport # 034086959, passport #552306S, POB Israel, WM, 5'7", 150 lbs,

35. MATATIA, Keren: NADDIS negative (NFI)

36. OSHRA, Sussie: NADDIS negative. (NFI)

37. SASSOON, Sarah Minna: NADDIS negative, 2916 Pierce St., 94, Hollywood, FL 33020, DOB 11/8/1978, FL DL# S250-793-79-908-0.

38. SELLA, Livnet: NADDIS necgative, DOB 12/24/1978, State of Israel Ministry of Transport number 7023400 and 036208023, International Student Idenitity card number S972-204-776-601.

39. SERFATY, Hanan, aka Hanane SARFATI: NADDIS negative, 4220 Sheridan St., #303, Hollywood, FL 33.021, and 701 S. 21 Ave., Hollywood, FL, DOB 06/03/1977, 6', FL DL S613-320-77-203-0, registered owner of red mini-van FL tag # U71 DLD, phone number (954) 478-1006, cellular phone number (954) 478-0961.

40, SIMON, Michael: NADDIS negative, w/m, 11-23-78, Aliebenliezel 82, Jerusalem, telephone number 97226768256, Israeli passport no. 8660008, POB Jerusalem, 6'1", 180 lbs., black hair, brown eyes.

41. VAKSHI, Inbal: NADDIS negative aka Bella POLLCSON, State of Israel Miriistry of Transport License number 7098663 and 036444842, International Student Identity Card number S972-204-775-487, DOB 02/03/1979.

42. ZAGURI, Oshirt: NADDIS negative, 701 S. 21 Ave., 4205, Hollywood, FL 33020, DOB 07/11/1977, 5'6", FL DL #Z260-640-77-75 1 -0..

43. WEISFELNER, Odfd NADDIS - Negative. (NFI)

44. KEDEM, Guy. NADDIS -Negative. This female left a business card stating EAG-Guy Kedem, European Art Group, Oil Paintings; phone number (720) 581-7076; Fax number (303) 336-7006. The (720) number is unlisted and the (303) number is a fax number for Heritage Creek Apartments, 650 South Dahlia Circle, Denver, Colorado. (NFI)

The following individuals were identified by the Ft. Meyers, Florida Resident Office (#45-48):

45. MEIRAV, Zwaig, NADDIS - Negative. w/f, thin build, short long dark hair, DOB: 2/9/76, US VISA control # 20003205620012, Israeli passport 97831088

46. MACHBUBI, Hilda, NADDIS - Negative. w/f DOB: 5/4/79, US VISA control # 2000397210011, Israeli passport # 6530284, FL ID #M211-320-79-664-0

47. SIMKIN, Nimrod, NADDIS - Negative. w/m, over 6' tall, curly hair, DOB: 9/2/77, FL DL# S525-620-77-3220

48, KEREN, Inbal, NADDIS - Negative. w/f, DOB: 7/17/79, US VISA control # 20001710300009, Israeli passport # 6082073

The following individuals were identified by the Richmond, Virginia District Office (#49-54):

49. KEDEM, Eran, NADDIS - Negative. w/m, Israel, dob 10/15/75, 5'11", 1601bs., 12990 SW 74th St., Pine Crest, FL, Israeli ID 4031820079, Israeli driver's license #651007

50. PERLAS, Limor NADDIS - Negative. (NFI)

51. ASE, Shiri NADDIS - Negative. (NFI).

52. KEMETCH, Omit, a.k.a. KIMCHY, Ornit, NADDIS - Negative. w/f, dob 02/04/74, passport 96814521

53. MER, Shmrt NADDIS - Negative. (NFI)

54. BOUZAGLO, Kobi, NADDIS - Negative. cellular telephone 1-888-321-6213 (NFI)

The following individuals were identified by the Montgomery, Alabama District Office:

55. VALANSI, Marcelo, NADDIS - Negative. dob 11/24/77, Argentina passport #26316660, 901 S.E. 1st Ave., #2, Gainesville, FL., 617 E. University Ave., Gainesville, FL., 1436 Washington Ave., Miami, FL., registered owner of 1984 GMC Custom Van, Florida tag T11YZX., Argentina DNI26316660 card 4190961, speaks English and Spanish, Tel # (352)378-1485 (Identified in Paragraph 6)

56. VALANSI, Roberto, NADDIS - Negative. father of Marcelo VALANSI. Salguero 2468, Apartment 15, Buenos Aires (NFI) (Identified in Paragraph 10)

57. VALANSI, Graziela, NADDIS - Negative. mother of Marcelo VALANSI, Salguero 2468, Apartment 15, Buenos Aires (NFI) (Identified in Paragraph 10)

58. SAGES, Ester, NADDIS - Negative. dob 9/30/77, Israeli passport 96470399, Attornet 161, New York City, NY., Hotel Carlton, New York City, NY (Identified in Paragraph 6)

59. SAGES, Elyahu NADDIS - Negative. (deceased), father of Ester SAGES, (NFI) (Identified in Paragraph 9)

60. SAGES, Marjalit, NADDIS - Negative. Mother of Ester SAGES (NFI) (Identified in Paragraph 8)

61. DARDIC, Vanina Erika, NADDIS - Negative. dob 3/5/78, Argentina passport #10581811, 901 S.E. 1st Ave., Gainesville, FL. . Argentina DN126473227 card #J8557, speaks English, Hebrew, and Spanish, girlfriend of VALANSI, citizen of Argentina and Israel (Identified in Paragraph 4)

62. DARDIC, Mario, NADDIS Negative. father of Vanina DARDIC (NFI) (Identified in Paragraph 9)

63. COHEN, Judith (maiden name) NADDIS - Negative. mother of Vanina DARDIC (NFI) (Identified in Paragraph 9)

64. GAVISH, Yael NADDIS - Negative. W/F Brown hair, Brown eyes, DOB: Oct 03, 1978. Citz: Israel Passport Number: 5013766 issued 12-03-92, expires 3-12-2002 US Visa number 20001818940002 Class B-1/B-2 issued July 05, 2000 Expires June 28, 2010.

65. BALHAMS, Meirav NADDIS - Negative. W/F Brown hair, Brown eyes, 5'03" DOB: 10-03-78 Citz: Israel. New York ED Card 4 140-614-039. Address: 354 Paterson Plank Road #1, Jersey City, NJ 07650

The following individuals were identified by the Orlando D.O. on May 3, 2001:

66. SEGALOVITZ, Peer - NADDIS Negative, White, male, Nationality: Israeli, DOB: 03-16-1974, POB Israel, Address: 8187 N. University Drive Apt. 4129, Tamarac, FL, entered the U.S. on B-2 class visa on January 17, 2001. Former officer in Israeli Special Forces 605 Battalion. Israeli Military ED # 5087989. Encountered May 3, 2001 at the Orlando D.O. Occupation: Israeli Art Vendor/Student. (Identified in Paragraph 96)

67. SEGALOVITZ, Dror - NADDIS - Negative. White, Male, Brother of Peer Segalovitz. ADD: Address 8187 N. University Drive, Apt. Nationality: Israel. Identified in Paragraph 98)

68. SABGUNDJIAN, Kathy - NADDIS: Negative. (626) 358-6453 (626) 256-1027

69. SAGIV, Akyuz Shmuel - NADDIS: Negative. White, Male, Israeli Passport # 8710426; DOB: 09-27-1976; POB: Maaloot, Israel; Entered US In New York; PN: 954712-2126. Associate of Peer Segalovitz and Dror Segalovitz. (Identified in paragraph #99).

The following were identified at the Volk Field ANG Base, Camp Douglas, Wisconsin:

70. WATERMANN, Tsvi NADDIS - Negative, AKA: Watermann, Zvi; white, male, DOB: June 7, 1979; Address: Pri Megadim 36 Mevaseret Zion, Isreal; Israeli Passport # 5728101 expiration date July 20, 2002; U.S. visa class B1/B2 expiration date March 20, 2011; Israeli Ministry of Transport driver's license, number 7046942.

71. KANTOR, Gal Kal NADDIS - Negative. white, male, DOB: Sep 08, 1975, Address: Kibbuts Eilon NO Western Galilee, Israel 22845; Israeli Passport 8261507 expiration date of Oct 20, 2004; U.S. B1/B2 visa, control number 19993358160012, expiration date of Nov 30, 2009.

The following were identifed at Tinker AFB, Oklahoma:

72. OHANA, Yaron NADDIS - Negative. DOB: 02-04-78; POB: Haifa, Israel; Passport Number: 8421721 U.S. Visa Number:42252049.

73. KALFON, Ronen NADDIS - Negative. DOB: 04-13-76; POB: Haifa, Israel Passport Number :8168262; U.S. Visa Number: 3 5966019.

74. COHEN, Zeev NADDIS - Negative. DOB: 03-26-78; POB: Haifa, Israel, Passport Number: 5524033: U.S. Visa Number: 33331965.

75. TOPAZ, Naor NADDIS - Negative DOB: 06-08-77; POB: Haif, Israel Passport Number: 8081705; U.S. Visa Number: 33306515.

The following were identified by the Euless, TX Police Department on January 2nd, 2001, (refer to page 10):

76. LIFSHITZ, Gilad, NADDIS - Negative. W/M, DOB'09/17/1978

77. YANAY, Betzalel, NADDIS - Negative. W/M, DOB 09/04/1978

78. BITON, MoriN Miryam, NADDIS - Negative. W/F; DOB 07/14/1980

79. SASSON, Dana, NADDIS - Negative. W/F, DOB 08/10/1980

80. TOUYZ, Keren, NADDIS - Negative. W/F, DOB 08/20/1978

81. TZOR, Noam, NADDIS - Negative. previous owner of 1GAHG39K5SF112662, a 1995 Chev/Spt owned by Gilad LIFSHITZ of 7535 N. Beltline Rd, APt 316, Irving, Texas 75062.

82. ROTEM, Sharon, NADDIS - Negative. described as a white male, DOB 03 -12-77, Israeli passport number 7948317, street address: 6023 Moshe Dayan, Holon, Israel.

83. MAIMON, Maya, NADDIS - Negative. Nationality: Israel. Israeli passport number as 5467894, US B1/B2 visa, DOB 26Dec1978, Issue Date: 18Oct2000, Expiration Date: 15Oct2010.

84.BADIHI, Nofar, NADDIS - Negative. Nationality Israel. Israeli passport number 5640993, DOB 21/03/1979 (sic), Place of Birth: Israel, date of issue: 05/12/1993, date of expiry (sic): 04/12/1995; US Visa B I/B2, issue date: 05Jul 1996, Expiry Date: 02JUL2006.

85. MARABOTTO, Marco NADDIS - Negative. Airline tickets were found reflecting the travel of Maya MAIMON and Marco MARABOTTO from DFW airport to Albuquerque, NM via Delta flight 2238 on March 24, 2001. Each ticket also reflected Delta flight 1944 from Las Vegas to DFW on April 1, 2001.

86. FERNANDEZS, Marco, NADDIS - Negative a.k.a. Marco Antonio FERNANDEZ De Castro Marabotto, DOB 13Apr1977, passport number 99390039611, Issuing State: Mexico; place of birth: Mexico, date of issue: 16Jul1999, expiration date: l6Jul2000.

87. REGEV, Gadi, NADDIS - Negative described as DOB: 17Dec1975, Nationality: Israel, passport number 5454338, visa type: B1/B2, issuing post: Tel Aviv, issue date: 05Nov1998, expiration date: 04Nov2008

88. ARTZI, Eyal, NADDIS - Negative Texas DL 19554509, and an expiration date of 06-27-07. address: 10334 Sandra Lynn Dr., Dallas, TX 75228. DOB 05-27-1977, commercial database shows that ARTZI is the owner of a 1993 Plymouth Acclaim, Texas plate: J75FYB, date registered 08/21/2000, expiration date: 07/31/2001

89, SUSI, David, NADDIS Negative DOB 01/09/1975, boyfriend of Maya MAIMON

The following were identified by I&NS - Dallas:

90. ELDAD, Dahan, NADDIS - Negative. W/M Israeli, add: Oak IEH Apts. 1913 Estrada Parkway, #228, Irving, TX. Arrested by I&NS March 26 2001. (Identified in paragraph 39)

91. AFRICANO-Leon, Elsa Beatriz, NADDIS - Negative. W/F Nationality: Colombia Add: Oak Hill Apts. 1913 Estrada Parkway, #228, Irving, TX. Arrested by I&NS March 26, 2001. (Identified in paragraph 39)

92. LIVNI, Eran, NADDIS - Negative. W/M Israeli Add: Oak Hill Apts. 1913 Estrada Parkway, #228, Irving, TX Arrested by I&NS March 26, 2001. (Identified in paragraph 40)

93. OFEK, Aran, NADDIS - Negative. W/M Israeli, ADD: Oak Hill Apts. 1913 Estrada Parkway, #259, Irving, TX., father is 2-star general in Israeli Army. Arrested by I&NS March 26, 200 1. (Identified in paragraph 40)

94, GAL, Michal, NADDIS - Negative. W/F, Israeli, DOB 08/10/1979, POB Afula, Israel, INS A 75-894-941, ADD: Oak Hill Apts. 1913 Estrada Parkway, 4259, Irving, TX, Alt add.: 22 Palisade Terrace, Edgewater, NJ 01020 Tel: (201)224-0797 Arrested by I&NS March 26, 2001. (Identified in paragraph 40)

95. GAVRIEL, Noam, NADDIS - Negative. Nationality: Israel (Identified in paraggraph 40)

96. KRITZMAN, Netta, NADDIS - Negative. Nationality: US Citizen (Identified in paragraph 40)

97. BAER, Ophir, NADDIS - Negative. W/K DOB 11/11/1956, Nationality: Israel, employed by AMDOCS, Ltd., add: 7845 La Cabeza Drive, Dallas, TX 75248, former add: 1125 East Campbell Rd., Richardson, TX, Tel: (972) 392-0473 & (214) 576-5741, SSN: 627-70-0979- (Identified in paragraph 42)

98. AMDOCS, Limited., NADDIS - Negative. add: 1390 Timberlake Manor Parkway, Chesterfield, MO, Tel: (314) 821-3242 (Identified in paragraph 43)

99. DOTAN, Boaz, NADDIS - Negative. 23 Abba Hillel, St. Ranat Gan, Israel, TX president of AMDOCS, Ltd. (Identified in paragraph 43)

100. WHITMAN, Beverly A., NADDIS - Negative. SSN: 400-88-4097, Treasurer of AMDOCS, Ltd. (Identified in paragraph 43)

101. CHRISTOFFEL, Gregory, NADDIS - Negative. SSN: 389-52-850, Secretary of AMDOCS, Ltd. (Identified in paragraph 43)

102. MOSHE, Eran, NADDIS - Negative. Israeli, I&NS A 75-894-459, averted by I&N on 03/26/2001, occup. Israeli art student (Identified in paragrph 44)

103. VAINSHTEIN, Julia, NADDIS - Negative. W/F Israeli, DOB 11/12/1978, POB: Russia, arrived DFW on 03/27/2001, Assoc: Michael CALMANOVIC (Identified in paragraph 46)

104. BORENSTEIN, Dilka, NADDIS - Negative. Israeli, DOB 03/15/1979, POB: Israel, former Israeli Military Intelligence Officer, Assoc: Michael CALMANOVIC (Identified in paragraph 46)

105. NAVAR, Ofir, NADDIS - Negative. Israeli, DOB 09/02/1979, POB: Israel, former Israeli Military Demolition/Explosive ordnance specialist (Identified in paragraph 46)

106. CALMANOVIC, Michael, NADDIS - Negative. W/M, Israeli, DOB 09/06/1-975, POB: Israel, registered owner of TX: L44-CVD, add: 3575 N. Beltline Rd., Apt. 316, Irving, TX., alt. add: 312 Rochelle Rd., Irving, TX, alt. add: 1103 Hidden Ridge #3018, Irving, TX alt. Add: 1913 Estrada Parkway, Irving, TX 75061, alt. add: 11012 Ventura Blvd., Studio City, CA 91604 Tel: (214)882-5196, alt, add: 319 S. 177 Place, 4201, Seattle, WA 98148 Tel: (206) 244-7705, Tel: (214) 882-5196 / (214) 837-3574 / (469)446-1248 (214) 837-5996 (214) 876-1235 (217) 837-2056 former Israeli electronic intercept officer. Arrested by I&NS on April 4th, 2001, Posted $50K bond, (Identified in paragraph 46)

107. SIMON, Itay, NADDIS - Negative. W/M, Israeli, DOB 02/27/1978, POB: Israel, former Israeli military, add: 1103 Hidden Ridge #3018, Irving, TX, alt add: California Associate of Michael Calmanovic. Arrested by I&NS April 4, 2001 for violation of status, posted $50,000 bond. (Identified in paragraph 50)

108. LNU, Gilad, NADDIS - Negative. Tel: (214) 882-5196 (214) 876-1235 (Identified in paragraph 50)

109. LNU, Roy, NADDIS - Negative. Tel: (214) 837-3574 (Identified in paragraph 50)[39]

110. LNU, Mosh, NADDIS - Negative. Tel: (469) 446-1248 (Identified in paragraph 50)

111. LNU, Gil, NADDIS - Negative. Tel: (214) 837-5996 (Identified in paragraph 50)

112. LNU, Gasaf, NADDIS - Negative. Tel: (217) 837-2056 (Identified in paragraph 50)

113. ENGEL, Yoni, NADDIS - Negative. W/K DOB 09/14/1979, POB: Israeli Citzen, Israel, former company commader in Israeli military, arrived DFW on 03/28/2001, arrested by I&NS, St. Louis, MO on April 4th, 2001 (Identified in paragraph 51)

114. DAGAI, Yotam, NADDIS - Negative. DOB 04/06/1978, POB: Israeli Citzen, Israel, arrested by I&NS, St. Louis, MO on April 4th, 2001, arrived DFW on 03/28/2001. (Identified in paragraph 51)

115. ALROEI, Or, W/M DOB 08/08/1978, POB: Israeli Citizen, Israel, visited DEA St. Louis on 04/04/2001, Had Tel: (214) 882-5196 in his possession, Associate of Michael CALMANOVIC & Gil LNU. (Identified in paragraph 51)

116. RABINOVITZ, Eli, NADDIS - Negative. W/M, DOB 03/27/1979, U.S. passport E3701329518, 5'6", 175 lbs., brown hair (Identified in paragraph 51)

17. ADESA Golden Gate, NADDIS - Negative. add: 6700 Stevenson Blvd., Fremont, CA, registered owner of CA: 3LVAO1P (Identified in paragraph 51)

118. SADAN, Ben, NADDIS - Negative, W/M Israeli, approx. 24 yoa, Tel: (214) 562-1110, driver of Israeli art students encountered April 4, 2001 in St. Louis, MO.

119. BEN DOR, Tomer, NADDIS - Negative. W/M Israeli,'DOB 08/24/1975, occup: Computer software engineer, employer: NICE, former Israeli military officer for patriot missile defense (Identified in paragraph 55)

120. GLIKMAN, Marina, NADDIS - Negative. W/F Nationality: Israel, DOB 12/15/1972 (Identified in paragraph 53)

121. AKIVA, Ronen, associate of Marina GLIKMAN, occup: computer programm employer: RETALIX, former Israeli military officer (Identified in paragraph 55)

122. RETALIX, USA, NADDIS - Negative. add: 8081 Royal Ridge Parkway, Irving, TX, formerly known as Point of Sale, Limited. (Identified in paragraph 55).

123. DOR, Hillel, NADDIS - Negative. W/M Israeli, DOB 04/06/1971. Associate of Marina GLIKMAN (Identified in paragraph 55)

124. MILLER, Zeev, NADDIS - Negative. W/M Israeli, DOB 09/04/1971, occup: student/software engineer, employer: RETALIX Israel (Identified in paragraph 55).

125. SHAKED, Barry, NADDIS - Negative, CEO of RETALIX (Identified in paragraph 55).

On April 30, 2001, the Air Force issued a security alert from Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma City concerning a “possible intelligence collection effort being conducted by Israeli art students.” DEA, INS, FBI, and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) offices received similar alerts. The FBI office in New Orleans reportedly received a “Counter terrorism Advisory Report regarding suspicious activities around Federal buildings that related to Israeli students” in February 2000. The FBI also reported that an Israeli art student attempted to sell art at the residences of a U.S. District Judge and U.S. Magistrate in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. However, according to knowledgeable U.S. government sources, the FBI stayed away from the ongoing DEA-INS investigation for “political reasons.”

The Israeli students operated in groups of between 4 to 8 individuals led by “Team Leaders.” The team leaders controlled the teams’ visits, drove the vehicles, and often had in their vehicles cameras and recording equipment. A number of the students had significant Israeli military experience in demolitions, explosives, and signals intelligence.

The team active in the Irving, Texas area (near Dallas-Fort Worth Airport) had links to the Chesterfield, Missouri-based Israeli communications software firm AMDOCS, which has an outsourcing agreement with Nextel; RETALIX, an Israeli company involved in software for the retail food industry; and NICE, an Israeli software engineering firm. The report cites Michael Calmanovic as the leader of the Irving group and states he “was a recently discharged electronic intercept operator for Israeli military.” Calmanovic and his Israeli supervisor from California were arrested on April 4, 2001 in Irving, Texas, while vacating their apartment. The DEA report states Calmanovic used a mailbox drop at Mailboxes, Etc. located at 3575 N. Beltline Rd. Apt. 316, Irving,Texas. The FBI list dated 3 Oct. 2001, which was sent to national financial control authorities to freeze the accounts of the Saudi hijackers and their associates, states the address for suspect Ahmed Khalifa, also known as Almad Khafefa, as 4045 N. Beltline Rd. Apt. 314, Irving, Texas (Marbletree Apartments), just a few blocks from the Israeli mail drop.

There are a number of possible explanations about why the Israeli art students were living so close to the hijackers, especially in Florida where much of the terrorists’ flight training occured. One is that the Israelis had penetrated Al Qaeda with two cells comprising six Egyptian- and Yemeni-born Jews and that some of these agents posed as Israeli art students and were shadowing the Al Qaeda cells inside the United States and reporting their movements back to Mossad or a “cut out” intelligence unit in Ariel Sharon’s office. Another explanation is that, like the Israeli “movers” in the New York-New Jersey area, the art students were providing an operational decoy and even material support to the hijackers. This theory arose when several Israeli art students in Canada were arrested for selling bogus Chinese art that they were passing off as Israeli. Two Canadian newspapers reported that U.S. counter-intelligence officials had warned Canadian authorities that the Israeli art students were funneling proceeds from the art sales to Islamist radical groups.[40] If the Florida and Texas Israeli art rings discovered prior to 911 were providing such financial support to the hijackers, it would explain why they closely located their mail drops so close to one another.

The involvement of the Israeli cells with communications companies raised serious concerns at the DEA and Justice Department, which were both using Israeli communications intercept software in their field operations. The DEA used a T2S2 intercept system provided by Comverse and JSI, two Israeli companies. Comverse was very close to the Israeli government, which reimbursed it up to 50 percent for its research and development costs. The FBI’s Communications Assistance to Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) Implementation Office in Chantilly, Virginia was extremely concerned about the threat posed by Comverse’s intercept system. But the worries of the Chantilly office and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) were overridden by the FBI’s engineering office in Quantico, Virginia, which was supported by such contractors as Booz Allen Hamilton.[41] The nexus of art students, intelligence surveillance, and possible involvement in Ecstasy trafficking set off alarm bells at the highest levels of the DEA about the “art students.” The reason was simple. T2S2 systems were used in what the DEA, Coast Guard, Customs, and other counter narcotics agencies called High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTAs) and associated wiretap centers and surveillance teams (STs).


The following internal DEA memo points to the worries about the Israeli systems:

From: [DELETED]

Sent: (DELETED]

To: [DELETED]

Subject: [DELETED]

I’m not sure what is meant by “Bottom line we should have caught it.”

------Original message-------

From: Raffanello, Heidi M.

Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:04 PM

To: Zeisset, Dale M.

Cc: Newton, Otis L; Howard, JP

Subject: Comverse

As you may have heard Security Program is briefing the Administrator[42] tomorrow morning on the Israeli students investigation to include T2S2 Comverse and JSI. This was a result of the Fox network expose on Israeli counterintelligence activities. In our discussions about remote maintenance for JSI and Comverse, we realized that Comverse remote maintenance for field systems was not addressed in the C & A process. We will approach it in the similar fashion as we did in the JSI issue, however the foreign national factor doesn’t apply. It remains unclear if Comverse personnel are security cleared and if so, who are they and what type of clearances are on record. If you have names, I can run their status in Personnel Security. If not, we will need to have Comverse and ST identify a short list of personnel that will require clearances. Obviously, if they have existing clearances with other agencies, this will facilitate the process. Due to the fact that at the time that we conducted the original interim CA for Comverse, the requirements differed than 2640.2D. Bottom line we should have caught it. Please let me know what the status of Comverse remote maintenance past efforts and what direction we need to go to resolve this for CA process. I will have Otis reach out to you to work this out. In light of the Administrator’s concern for vulnerabilities to out T2S2 systems, we want to resolve this in time for the January 25th deadline for the review of the conditional.

As of this date, ISI is waiting for the Comverse equipment to arrive at ST so that a C-2 compliance test can be done. Any idea when ST will be in a position to have this done?

On March 4, 2002, Robert F. Diegelman, the acting Assistant Attorney General for Administration, issued a Justice Department memo reiterating that standing Justice Department Order 2640.2D, dated July 12, 2001, prohibited non-U.S. citizens from access to Department of Justice information technology. The order and memo reiterated the policy, “Foreign Nationals shall not be authorized to access or assist in the development, operation, management or maintenance of Department IT systems, unless a waiver has been granted by the Department CIO.”

Small teams of Mossad agents found with eavesdropping equipment are nothing new to European or American law enforcement. In February 1998, five Israelis, three men and two women, were arrested in an apartment in the suburbs of Berne, Switzerland. The Israeli team managed to convince the police that they did not break and enter into the apartment but were there legally. The apartment was the residence of an Islamic activist. Four of the Israelis, two men and two women, were released. However, the fifth Israeli was later discovered with sophisticated surveillance equipment and a number of false passports. He was arrested, detained, and held for 65 days until Israel paid 3 million Swiss francs for his release with a promise he would return from Israel to stand trial. In July 2000, Isaac Bental, the cover name under which the Mossad allowed the Swiss to prosecute their agent, stood trial for espionage before the Swiss Federal Court. It was the first time a Mossad agent had gone on trial outside Israel.[43]

In December 1998, Cypriot police arrested two Israeli agents, Uri Argov and Yisrael Damari, for the illegal possession of communications intercept equipment and espionage. In March 1998, three Mossad agents aborted a wiretapping operation in London after they were tipped off to the police. The Mossad had operated illegally in London since 1987. That year, a furious Margaret Thatcher ordered Israel to close its Palace Green, Kensington Mossad station after its role in the assassination of a Palestinian cartoonist on a South Kensington street was revealed.[44]

In 1999, Shalom Shaphyr, an Israeli national having residences in Vancouver, Washington and Portland, Oregon was arrested by the FBI in Alexandria, Virginia for trying to buy computer intercept equipment from undercover FBI and Customs Service agents. Shaphyr was accused of trying to illegally export the equipment to Vietnam. Shaphyr possessed a business visa that permitted him to enter and leave the United States at will.[45]

On May 31, 2005, it was announced in Israel that Israeli police and Interpol discovered a huge computer espionage ring involving a number of former Israeli intelligence officers and Israeli companies, including AMDOCS. Israeli police questioned AMDOCS computer security manager Eitan Shiron in the investigation that surrounded the use by over a dozen Israeli companies of a sophisticated hacking software program, called a Trojan horse, which bypassed the security controls on targeted computer systems.[46] The Israeli investigation also focused on four major Israeli telecommunications companies – Cellcom, Israel’s largest mobile phone company; two subsidiaries of the largest telecommunications company Bezeq Israel Telecom; mobile phone company Pelephone; and satellite television company Yes.[47] Scotland Yard also participated in the take down of the Israeli espionage ring, arresting dual Israeli-German citizen Michael Haephrati and his wife Ruth Brier-Haephrati in London on an Israeli extradition warrant. The Israeli couple was charged with”unauthorized modification of the contents of a computer” between December 12, 2004 and February 28, 2005.” Police said they wrote the Trojan horse computer program and provided it to a middleman. The Trojan horse in question was believed to be a derivative of the PROMIS software program illegally procured from Inslaw, Inc. in Washington, DC in the early 1980s and re-engineered by a number of intelligence agencies, including Israel’s, to perform computer espionage. Oddly, The Scotsman newspaper reported that Haephrati was questioned about a “separate matter” by detectives with Britain’s National Hi-Tech Crime unit on May 25, before his arrest on the Israeli warrant. The Haphraetis were remanded in the Bow Street Magistrates Court in London.[48]

Yet another possible Israeli intelligence link to electronic eavesdropping on the U.S. government was unearthed in the questionable awarding by the U.S. Congress of a wireless contract to a company owned by Israel. In 2000, LGC Wireless, a San Jose, California-based firm was considered in the lead to provide wireless connectivity for the U.S. House of Representatives. A year earlier, the House Administration Committee, then headed by Republican Representative Bill Thomas of California, granted LGC authority to conduct a design and securityn survey of the Capitol. In addition, the FBI and NSA reviewed LGC’s system design to ensure that foreign intelligence agencies could not penetrate the House’s wireless network. By December 2000, LGC had cleared its plans with the Capitol Architect, the House Information Resource Office, and the House Administration Committee. However, soon a new Israeli co,pany named Foxcom Wireless, which changed its name to MobileAccess, began making an end run to secure the Capitol wireless contract. The new chairman of the House Administration Committee, Republican Representative Bob Ney of Ohio, clearly favored MobileAccess over LGC and in 2002, the Israeli company received the House wireless contract. Ney had a close poltical and financial relationship with GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff, an extreme pro-Israeli political insider, who came under Justice Department investigation for questionable ties to Ney and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay. It was later revealed by The Washington Post that in 2001 MobileAccess donated $50,000 to the Capital Athletic Foundation, which was run by Abramoff. In 2004, MobileAccess paid $240,000 in lobbying fess to Greenberg Traurig, Abramoff’s former firm. The ranking member on the House Administration Committee, Democratic Representative Steny Hoyer of Maryland, said he was not kept fully informed of the wireless contract by either Thomas or Ney. LGC also cried foul when, in 2004, the U.S. Senate awarded MobileAccess a $3.9 million contract to install a wireless network for the Senate.[49] As with the questions surrounding Information Spectrum Inc. abruptly replacing Larimore Associates as the Jersey City Police Department computer system contractor, similar complaints were aired by LGC. Ian Sugarboard, LGC’s CEO told The Hill newspaper, “. . . it appeared that lobbyists had exerted undue influence on the deal.” In addition, the House Administration Committee did not specify what security criteria MobileAccess had to meet. The FBI and NSA had previously approved LGC’s security countermeasures.[50]

Abramoff’s strong connection to Israel and his influence in the Bush administration serve as yet another nexus between Israel, the Bush administration, and officials closely connected with Saudi Arabia. Top GOP adviser and Abramoff friend Grover Norquist, who was Abramoff’s campaign manager when he ran for President of the College Republicans (a post also once held by Karl Rove), also maintained close links to a number of Saudis, some of whom were implicated in funding terrorism. Norquist was a cofounder of the Islamic Institute, co-located in Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform offices in Washington, DC. Norquist was a key player in the Bush 2000 outreach for Muslim and Arab voters. Sami al Arian, a University of South Florida professor, was an ardent supporter of Bush’s Florida campaign to woo Muslim and Arab voters and his support likely helped tip the close election to Bush. The Islamic Institute was founded in 1999 with start up money from Kuwait; Qatar; other Arab countries; the founder of the American Muslim Council, Abdurahman Muhammad Al Amoudi; and two Islamic non-profits, the Safa Trust and the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT). In 2002, as part of Operation Greenquest, the FBI raided Safa and IIIT for their role in financing international terrorism. Another one of Al Amoudi’s groups, the International Relief Organization, was suspected of laundering Saudi money to terrorist groups. Although Arian and Al Amoudi were later charged by the federal government with supporting terrorist groups, they maintained close ties to the Bush campaign. Just a few months before the 911 attacks, Arian attended a June 2001 White house briefing with Karl Rove. Suhail Khan, the White House point man for arranging access to Bush by prominent Muslim-Americans and a former director of the Islamic Institute, was the son of the late imam of the Santa Clara, California mosque. The mosque had once hosted Dr. Ayman al Zawahiri, the second in command of Al Qaeda. Norquist and his friends were clearly part of a Saudi- and Wahhabi-funded political machine that sought to marginalize moderate Muslims in the United States. Agha Jafri, a Sh’ia leader in New York, said there was in the United States a Saudi “mafia” that was “intent on crushing moderate Sufi and Shiite Muslims in the United States.”[51] In addition, Norquist’s friend Al Amoudi was also discovered to have links to the 911 hijackers. German police files indicated that Al Amoudi met in the fall of 2000 Mohammed Belfas, an Islamic leader in Hamburg who once shared an apartment with Ramzi bin al-Shibh, a kingpin behind the 911 attacks. One of Belfas’s colleagues, Agus Budiman, had accompanied Belfas on a scouting mission to Washington, DC in late 2000. Budiman pleaded guilty to helping Belfas obtain a phony identification card using a non-existent address in Arlington, Virginia. German police obtained a photograph from Belfas’s Hamburg apartment showing a meeting between him, Budiman, and Al Amoudi in Al Amoudi’s Arlington, Virginia office. [52]

***

Texas was not the only case where the Israelis were found to be in the same location as the Saudi hijacker cells. According to the DEA Report, another Israeli team operating out of Hollywood, Florida, led by team leader Hanan Serfaty lived at 4220 Sheridan St., #303, Hollywood, Florida 33021 (Emerald Greens Apartments) while the Saudi hijackers Khalid Al Midhar, Abdulaziz al Omari, Walid Al Shehri, and UAE national Marwan al Shehhi, operated from a mail drop at Mailbox Rentals, 3389 Sheridan St. #256, Hollywood, Florida 33021-3608. Another Serfaty residence at 701 S. 21st Ave., Hollywood was located near the homes of Atta and Al Shehhi, including a residence on Jackson Street, just a few blocks away, and the Bimini Motel Apartments, Apartment 8, at 1600 North Ocean Drive. On September 7, just days before their terrorist attack, Atta and Al Shehhi spent several hours at Shuckums Oyster Bar and Grill at 1814 Harrison St., just a few blocks away from Serfaty’s 21st Ave. residence. A Miami-based Israeli unit, led by Legum Yochai, operated from 13753 SW 90th Ave., Miami while hijacker Al Shehri lived nearby at Horizons Apartments, 8025 SW 107th Ave.

During the time the Israelis and Arabs were living in Hollywood, Atta and his team were attending flight training and inquiring about crop dusting planes in southern Florida. According to a source with high-level contacts within the Mossad, Israeli agents based in southern Florida were able to successfully penetrate the Arab cells in southern Florida and informed their Tel Aviv headquarters that an attack on the east coast of the United States was being planned and that it involved commercial aircraft. Although it is not known if these agents were art students, they were Yemeni and Egyptian-born Jews who spoke fluent Arabic and were trained at a secret base in Israel’s Negev Desert. Although Mossad chief Efraim Halevy warned CIA Director George Tenet of an “imminent attack,” the warning contained no details about the terrorists training on commercial aircraft. Tenet was said to have dismissed the warning because it was not specific. The Mossad units reportedly left the United States after the September 11 attack on El Al flights and were listed on sky marshal manifests as El Al employees.

It is likely that some of the Mossad warnings about hijackings in the United States did reach some people. Officials at Odigo, an instant-messaging company with offices in New York and Herzliya (where the headquarters of Mossad is located) admitted that two of its employees said they received e-mail warning of the attack two hours before the planes careened into the twin towers. Alex Diamandis, Odigo’s vice president for sales and marketing, confirmed that Odigo employees in New York and Israel received a warning two hours before the attack. The warning appeared to be anonymous but Odigo programmers recorded the Internet protocol address of the message’s sender. Odigo also notified Mossad and the FBI but the FBI failed to take action and notify occupants of the World Trade Center.[53]

By September 3, 2001, Zim-American Israeli Shipping Company, completed its move from the World Trade Center to Norfolk, Virginia after suddenly canceling its lease in April 2001 and forfeiting a $50,000 lease cancellation penalty. World Trade Center and New York-New Jersey Port Authority Police had previously determined that Zim’s World Trade Center office was an intelligence operation that involved Mossad and CIA agents. Unlike other tenants in the World Trade Center, Zim’s stairwell access door were covered by security cameras.[54]

The major media largely failed to report the story of Israeli intelligence teams masquerading as art students. Only Fox News referred to it in a four-part investigative series in December 2001 but soon removed it from its web site. At the time, reporter Carl Cameron stated, “There is no indication that the Israelis were involved in the September 11 attacks, but investigators suspect that the Israelis may have gathered intelligence about the attacks in advance, and not shared it.”[55]

However, Cameron’s report was somewhat bolstered by news reports in early 2002 that Mossad chief Efraim Halevy, in early September 2001, sent the CIA a warning of an impending Arab terrorist attack on the East Coast of the United States. Two three- man Mossad units consisting of Yemeni- and Egyptian-born Jews had apparently tracked some of the September 11 hijackers in Hamburg and south Florida. CIA chief George Tenet referred to the Mossad report as “too non-specific” and decided not to order any higher alert level throughout the CIA’s network of stations. Follow-up reports from the Mossad units referred to their quarry attending flight training. After the attacks, the Mossad teams left the United States on board El Al flights.[56]

Newspapers across the United States also reported Israelis being arrested around U.S. military installations. In May 2001, two Israelis, Gal Kantor and Tsvi Watermann, were arrested at the Volk Field Air National Guard base at Camp Douglas in Juneau County, Wisconsin. They said they were going to visit a museum on the base but instead began taking photographs on the runway. When an Air Force security guard asked the young men if they were selling art, Kantor became upset and demanded to know why the question was being asked. Obviously, the Volk Field security personnel had been warned about the suspicious activities of Israeli art students. Three days before the two Israelis were arrested at Volk Field, four Israelis were arrested and deported after they were discovered selling art door-to-door in a neighborhood close to Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma. Reflecting some sort of official sensitivity about the Volk Field incident, the base sent a news release to the Capital Times of Madison marked “for release on request only.”[57]

The Tinker Air Force Base incident was confirmed by Midwest City Police Chief Brandon Clabes who said his police officers “were on alert” because they received a national security advisory warning that “Israeli nationals were posing as students selling artwork… to gain information about the U.S. military and security.” Clabes said his officers encountered the Israelis on May 17, 2002, shortly after 7:15 PM. Two of the Israelis were on foot conducting “unusual door-to-door solicitations” in the Oakwood East housing area. A third Israeli was acting as a driver. In addition to several other photo identification cards, all three had Israeli Air Force identification. Clabes identified the three Israelis as Naor Topaz, Zeev Cahen, and Yaron Ohana. The three Israelis and a fourth member of their team were later arrested by the police on visa violations. The Israelis denied they were selling their artwork. Although the Air Force Office of Special Investigations later denied the Israelis were involved in espionage, Clabes said higher authorities in U.S. law enforcement believed the Israelis were using the selling of art to get people to divulge additional information by first engaging in “casual conversation about art, and then start slipping in questions about who lived there, is their family in the military--those types of things.”[58]

Around 8:10 AM on September 11, 2001, American Airlines flight attendant Madeline Amy Sweeney, a 13-year veteran of the airline, used her cell phone to report to her supervisor at Logan Airport in Boston about the hijacking and murders occurring on her aircraft. A Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Memorandum written the same day stated that one of the hijackers assigned to seat 10B (reportedly Satam Al Suqami) shot and killed the passenger assigned to seat 9B. The passenger shot was reported to have been Daniel C. Lewin, an Israeli-American agent with the top secret Israeli anti-terrorist Unit 269 of the counter-terrorism Sayeret Matkal branch of the Israeli Defense Force. Lewin also served as the chief technology officer of Akamai Technologies, Inc., a software company based in Cambridge, Massachusetts.[59] The 911 Commission Report stated that Lewin was stabbed and not shot by Suqami. While Lewin and Israel were praised in the report no mention was made of Sweeney’s last words to her superiors.

The FAA Memo, which was later reported by the FAA to be alternately erroneous and a first draft, was eventually scrubbed from the FAA’s internal e-mail system. The original FAA memo stated:



CONTINUED next page of this dump.
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5821
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 9/11 Info Dump

Postby Elvis » Sun Sep 17, 2017 6:12 am

[p.21 of dump]

CONTINUED from here: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=40695&p=643629#p643629

PART 2:
THE ISRAELI ART STUDENTS AND MOVERS STORY
Wayne Madsen http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/Artstudents.htm

The FAA Memo, which was later reported by the FAA to be alternately erroneous and a first draft, was eventually scrubbed from the FAA’s internal e-mail system. The original FAA memo stated:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

September 11, 2001

On September 11, 2001, several commercial air carrier incidents, believed to be terrorist-related, occurred in various locations in the United States. As numerous U.S. passenger air carriers were involved, this has impacted many passengers as well as numerous persons on the ground in these various crash sites. The following is a summary of the events, which have occurred:

American Airlines Flight 11, departed today from Boston Logan International Airport (BOS), bound for Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). The aircraft type was a Boeing 767-200 with eighty-one passengers, nine flight attendants and two crew in the cockpit, which totaled 92 persons on this flight. At approximately 9:18 AM, it was reported that the two crew members in the cockpit were stabbed. The flight then descended with no communication from the flight crew members. The American Airlines FAA Principle Security Inspector (PSI) was notified by Suzanne Clark of American Airlines Corporate Headquarters, that an on board flight attendant contacted American Airlines Operations Center and informed that a passenger located in seat 10B shot and killed a passenger in seat 9B at 9:20 AM.[60] The passenger killed was Daniel Lewin, shot by passenger Satam Al Suqami. One bullet was reported to have been fired. The flight headed in the direction of John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFK). At 9:25 AM, this flight crashed directly into one of the towers at the World Trade Center. At 11:26 AM, a passenger manifest was obtained. The status of any selectees is as yet undetermined.

United Airlines Flight 93 departed this morning, from Newark International Airport (EWR) bound for San Francisco International Airport (SFO). The aircraft type is Boeing 757, confirmation pending. The flight consisted of thirty-eight passengers, two pilots and five crew members, which totaled 45 persons on this flight. Two selectee passengers (Christine Adams and Nicole Miller) were boarded on this flight with no unusual behavior noted per the air carrier personnel and screeners.[61] No cargo was on board this flight. One unit load device (ULD), was on board containing U.S. mail. At 9:42 AM, there was a report of a bomb threat on board this flight. Passengers’ screams were heard in the cabin. At 10:05 AM, the Illinois State Police received a 9-1-1 telephone call from a passenger on that flight, who reported that three hijackers were on board with knives and reportedly made a bomb threat. The three hijackers were reported to be rushing to the cockpit area. At 10:12 AM, the flight crashed near Sommerset, PA. This location is approximately 70-90 miles from Pittsburgh near Route 30.

United Airlines Flight 175, departed from Boston-Logan International Airport (BOS), bound for Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). This aircraft type was a Boeing 767. There were no selectee passengers on this flight. The flight consisted of nine crew members and forty-seven passengers, which totaled fifty-six persons on this flight. At 9:30 AM, radar contact with FAA air traffic control was lost. At 9:45 AM, United Airlines reported that one flight attendant was stabbed and two crew members were killed. This flight crashed into the second World Trade Center Tower.

Page 2

American Airlines Flight 77, departed Washington-Dulles International Airport (IAD), destined for Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). This flight departed Gate D26 of the IAD mid-field terminal at 8:09 a.m., and was airborne at 8:21 AM. The aircraft type was a Boeing 757. Number of selectee passengers is unknown at this time; ramp personnel noticed two selectees checked bags on the ramp. One non-selectee passenger did not board due to confusion of gate location. This flight consisted of fifty-eight passengers and six flight crew members, which totaled sixty-four persons on this flight. There was no cargo being transported on this aircraft. There were a total of thirty-five checked bags. It is presumed that this flight crashed into the Pentagon located in Washington, DC at approximately 10:00 AM.

Additional information is continuously being gathered on each of the four incidents described above.

911/01 5:31 PM

In November 2001, the INS arrested several Israelis, including some with military backgrounds, selling Puzzle Car and Zoom Copter toys from shopping mall kiosks and veding carts. Many of the malls were located near U.S. government facilities, including the Pentagon and CIA. A majority of the Israelis, arrested for visa violations instead of espionage, worked for a Florida-based company called Quality Sales. A spokesman for the company admitted the company hired vacationing Israeli students but they had thr wrong visas. The spokesman also revealed the Israelis were deemed “special interest” cases by INS – a new government designation applied to terrorism suspects in the wake of 911.[62] Federal authorities suspect the Israelis were using the kiosks as intelligence fronts in the same manner that Israelis were using door-to-door art sales as covers. The National Counterintelligence Center (NCIX) stated in a report issued in March 2001 that, “In the past six weeks, employees in federal office buildings located throughout the United States have reported suspicious activities connected with individuals representing themselves as foreign students selling or delivering artwork. Employees have observed both males and females attempting to bypass facility security and enter federal buildings.” The report was temporarily removed from the NCIX web site.

One of the malls where the Israeli “toy sellers” based their operations was the Pentagon City Mall, just across Intersate 395 from the Pentagon. In July 2004, the mall served as the rendezvous point for alleged Israeli Pentagon spy Larry Franklin and Keith Weissman, an AIPAC official. Franklin warned Weissman that Iranian agents were going to start attacking American soldiers and Israeli agents in Iraq. Weissman then went to brief the account of the meeting to Steve Rosen, another senior AIPAC official. They both informed the Israeli embassy in Washington and Glenn Kessler, a reporter for The Washington Post. Those phone calls were being wiretapped by the FBI as part of its investigation of a major Israeli spy ring in the United States, an investigation that had been going on since before the 911 attacks. The FBI was also monitoring meetings between Franklin, Weissman, and Rosen, including one held in February 2003 at the Arlington, Virginia Ritz-Carlton hotel, which adjoins the Pentagon City Mall. [63]

In February 2005, an Israeli man named Ohad Cohen was deported, along with four other Israelis, from Omaha, Nebraska. In what was becoming a common occurrence in the United States, a total of ten Israelis, who were working at shopping mall kiosks in the Omaha and Lincoln areas, were deported by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials for illegally working in the United States on tourist visas. The Israelis operated out of Omaha’s Oak View Mall and Lincoln’s Gateway Westfield Mall. The Federal government probe was reported to be part of a wider probe of Israeli shopping mall kiosk activity throughout the Midwest. In December 2004, FBI and immigration officers arrested 15 Israelis in Minnesota and three operating from a mall kiosk in Grand Forks, North Dakota.[64] Omaha is also the headquarters of the U.S. Air Force Strategic Air Command (SAC).

The International Association of Counter-terrorism and Security Professionals wrote in a May 2000 report that “U.S. law enforcement reports ‘numerous encounters’ with Middle Eastern ‘art students’ with ‘fraudulent documents’ who attempted to ‘gain unauthorized access’ to federal buildings.”[65]

The unusual casing of sensitive locations continued after 911. According to informed sources in Corpus Christi, Texas, young Israelis were seen conducting surveillance of the Port of Corpus Christi in January 2002. The report was contained in the U.S. Coast Guard’s Corpus Christi Marine Safety Office Intelligence Bulletin. The bulletin stated:

…There were four significant events in the Port of Corpus Christi in the past four weeks. Each event is under current investigation by the FBI. They may or may not be cases of actual or potential surveillance.

Ø Three men of Middle Eastern descent on board a charter boat in Port Aransas were asking unusual and very nosy questions about the operation of the ship’s machinery and equipment.

Ø Five men of Middle Eastern descent taking photographs of the Clark Flagship charter boat at 11:30 at night.

Ø A man and a woman of Middle Eastern descent were taking pictures outside the fence of Citgo East. Upon questioning by security personnel, the female stated they were art students. She further added they were photographing a “pipe rack.” The term is one that would only be used by someone in the industry. Coupled along with several other suspicious indicators, the picture taking did not seem legitimate.

Ø Two men of Middle Eastern descent drove through a gate at Citgo West after it was opened to let a delivery truck out. The men drove straight down to the oil docks where a ship was moored. Before security personnel could arrive, the men boarded the ship for several minutes, and were en-route back out of the facility. The men claimed to be selling electronic equipment. In a search of their truck by the sheriff’s office, a loaded pistol was found in the cab. They had also been denied access at an adjacent facility shortly before this incident.[66]

The FBI investigated a case of a “Middle Eastern-looking” man photographing the Ultramar Diamond Shamrock refinery in Three Rivers, Texas, near Corpus Christi. On November 22, 2001, a refinery employee saw the man taking pictures from Highway 281. The man sped away when refinery employees approached his vehicle, a Dodge van rented from McAllen, Texas. The FBI was called in to investigate. Live Oak County Sheriff Larry Busby said the FBI never followed up with his office after the incident. Busby and Three Rivers police chief Ace Robbins had been on the alert ever since September 11 when a suspicious aircraft was seen circling the Ultramar refinery.[67]

In June 2004, groups of young and neatly dressed “Middle Eastern-looking” men were also spotted near the U.S.-Mexican border in Arizona’s Cochise County near Tombstone and the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command at Fort Huachuca. A spokesman for the U.S. Border Patrol in Tucson said he was not at liberty to discuss the country of origin of the Middle Eastern-looking men.[68] According to FBI sources, “Middle Eastern-looking” or “Middle Eastern descent” are internal code words used to describe Israelis without having to face the inevitable political problems of identifying them as such.

Copies of Department of Homeland Security morning briefs, classified “For Official Use Only,” were mistakenly leaked to the public from an Energy Department web site. The briefs contain a number of references to suspicious “Middle East looking” persons seen around sensitive U.S. facilities. The descriptions match identically the behavior of Israeli “art students” cited in the DEA Report and various other law enforcement encounters with Israeli “movers.”

The September 27, 2004 brief stated:

FOUO) MAINE: Suspicious Persons in Southwest Harbor. According to 23 September USCG reporting, a concerned citizen reported suspicious behavior by three men of possible Middle Eastern descent at a convenience store located in Southwest Harbor. The men were asking if any local businesses rented power boats, kayaks, or bikes. The men were driving a maroon-colored van with Florida license plates. The reporting citizen stated that although he initially thought the men’s behavior was suspicious, he did not think to report it, until he learned that the Queen Mary II would be making a port visit to Bar Harbor on 27 September. An investigation is ongoing. (COGARD Southwest Harbor; 23 Sep 04; HSOC 3577-04)

MASSACHUSETTS: Possible Video Surveillance of Interstate Highway. According to military reporting, on 22 September, in Lexington, a military member reported observing four Middle Eastern individuals standing on an I-95 overpass videotaping the northbound traffic and recording information into a notebook. Reportedly, the same military member recalled observing two of the individuals on the same overpass in late February or early March 2004. (AFOSI Talon 102-23-09-04-2297; 23 Sep 04; HSOC 3579-04)[69]

From the September 29, 2004 briefing there were additional reports of suspicious “Middle Easterners,” in addition to a report from San Francisco about suspicious activity by two individuals whose van was traced to a jewelry store in Seattle:

FLORIDA: Suspicious Photographing and Videotaping of High-Rise Buildings Including the Main Street Bridge and the Skyway. According to 25 September Jacksonville Regional Domestic Security Task Force reporting, in downtown Jacksonville, an off-duty police officer reported seeing one of three people, whom he described as Middle Eastern in appearance, photographing and videotaping high-rise buildings, to include the Main Street Bridge and the Skyway. When the off-duty police officer pulled alongside the minivan, the individual with the camera immediately put it down, and the minivan departed the area. The off-duty police officer reported the minivan’s license plate and description. The registration showed the minivan was maroon, while the vehicle the officer saw appeared gray. An investigation is on-going. (FDLE Daily Brief, 28 Sep 04; HSOC 3629-04)

(FOUO) WASHINGTON / CALIFORNIA: Suspicious Activity at USCG Group San Francisco. According to USCG reporting, on 23 September, Coast Guard members observed two individuals in a blue van taking pictures of the Bay Bridge and surrounding area in front of USCG Group San Francisco’s main gate. The license plates were traced to a jewelry store address in Seattle, Washington. Additional checks revealed that the two individuals were not owners, employed or had any association with the store. An investigation is on-going. (COGARD San Francisco, 28 Sep 04; HSOC 3630-04)[70]

From the September 30, 2004, Homeland Security brief, there were further descriptions of “Middle Eastern” activity:

FOUO) WASHINGTON: Suspicious Activity of Two Middle Eastern Males on Ferry. According to USCG reporting, on 27 September, in Seattle, two Middle Eastern males were observed studying the schematic of the Wenatchee Ferry for an extended period of time. As soon as the two males noticed an employee approaching, they immediately walked away from the schematic and picked up a magazine to ward off attention. At the end of the voyage, the two males returned to their vehicle. A license plate check revealed the vehicle belonged to a rental company. Information from the rental company on the vehicle indicated that it was a rented to a business located in Tukwila. The business was unable to be located. An investigation is on-going. (COGARD FIST Seattle, 28 Sep 04; HSOC 3657-04)[71]

On October 14, 2004, a further report on “Middle Eastern” activity:

Suspicious Activity at Andrews AFB Main Gate. According to military reporting, on 12 October, Andrews AFB security officers observed a possible Middle Eastern male photographing the main gate area using what appeared to be a small, disposable camera. When a security officer approached the individual to question him, the unidentified male left the gate area, walked across the street, met up with another individual believed to also be of Middle Eastern origin, entered a white, late-model Pontiac Grand Am and quickly departed the area. Reportedly, a possible Middle Eastern female was sitting in the back of the vehicle. (AFOSI Talon 331-12-10-04-2484, 12 Oct 04; HSOC 3876-04)[72]

A particularly suspicious report was found in the October 19, 2004 brief. Several teams of Israeli art students had cased U.S. Air Force bases, including Tinker Air Force Base in Oklahoma City:

MISSOURI: Suspicious Telephone Calls. According to military reporting, on 15 October, at Whiteman Air Force Base [home base for the B-2 bomber], an unknown male, described as having a heavy Middle Eastern accent, telephonically contacted the 509 th Munitions Squadron, claiming that he represented a not-for-profit organization and wanted to confirm the squadron’s address. Reportedly, when questioned about his organization, the unknown caller became belligerent and ended the phone call. On 16 October, another member of the 509 th Munitions Squadron received a call at his residence on his personal cellular telephone from an unknown individual—also described as having a Middle Eastern accent—who solicited information related to Whiteman AFB, where the military member worked, and other operationally related questions. The military member did not provide any information to the caller and hung up. An investigation is on-going. (USAF Talon Report, 207-18-10-04-2533, 18 Oct 04; HSOC 3953-04)[73]

From the October 26, 2004 brief:

(FOUO) ILLINOIS: Possible Surveillance Activity. According to the Illinois State Terrorism Intelligence Center (STIC), on 22 October, in Joliet, at a worksite at the McDonough Street Bridge, a construction foreman observed a male of possible Middle Eastern origin taking photographs of the bridge. When the foreman told the unidentified male to leave, the individual became upset and continued to photograph nearby buildings before departing the area. Reportedly, the individual left in a Chevrolet Cavalier with Minnesota plates which have been traced back to a finance company in Boca Raton, Florida. (Illinois State Police STIC, 25 Oct 04; HSOC 4065-04)[74]

From the December 9, 2004 brief yet another incident involving a U.S. Air Force Base:

TEXAS: DoD Lesson Plans Stolen from USAF Member Hotel Room / Possible Surveillance Activities. According to 7 December military reporting, in San Antonio at Lackland AFB, on 30 November, USAF personnel arrived at a local hotel and noticed four possible Middle Eastern males behaving suspiciously. Approximately three to four days later, the men were observed counting and photographing the doors to the rooms belonging to the USAF members. Reportedly, the men always traveled together, and appeared to be purposely present when the USAF members gathered for breakfast. The men were also noted to have the “No Service” door magnets posted on their doors throughout the day. On 6 December, one USAF member reported that his lesson plans were stolen from his room. The other USAF members reported that nothing was missing, but personal items were seemingly out of place in their rooms to include open drawers and closet doors. An investigation is on-going. (AFOSI Talon #409-07-12-04-2968, 7 Dec 04; HSOC 4701-04)[75]

Another suspicious case was reported in the December 28, 2004 briefing involving two “Middle Easterners” with Florida connections:

(FOUO) NEW JERSEY: Suspicious Activity at Critical Infrastructure. According to a Call-in report, on 20 December, at a Dam in Morris County, a Vehicle occupied by two males of possible Middle Eastern descent entered a restricted area. A Dam employee approached the vehicle and advised the subjects that they were on private property. The two subjects claimed that they wanted to take one last look at the reservoir and dam before they relocated to Florida. The Dam employee ordered the subjects to leave the premises, informing them that local law enforcement had been contacted. The vehicle took off at a high rate of speed leaving the premises. (Call in, 27 December 04: HSOC 4929-04)[76]

The December 30, 2004 brief actually contained a report concerning Israeli-Ukrainians detained in Buffalo for passport fraud:

(FOUO) NEW YORK: Ukrainian Nationals Attempt Entry with Photo-Substituted Passports and Visas. According to BTS reporting, on 29 December, Ukrainian nationals Ivan SERNOWSKIY (DOB: 10/25/1968, A97914917) and Maria FESTUK (DOB: 06/20/1975, A97914918) arrived by bus at the Buffalo, NY Port of Entry (POE) claiming to be an Israeli couple named Vyesheslav and Marya URMANOV. The couple applied for admission as visitors for pleasure. SERNOWSKIY presented Israeli passport 8400058 in the name of Vyesheslav URMANOV (DOB: 03/12/1965) with a visa issued in Tel Aviv on November 29, 2000 (foil 41200881). FESTUK presented Israeli passport 6830276 in the name of Marya URMANOV (DOB: 06/20/1975) with machine-readable visa (20011717790001). The Automated Biometrics Identification System (IDENT) checks resulted in a fingerprint mismatch on Mr. URMANOV. The couple was referred to secondary for further examination. NTC research revealed a recent photo of Vyesheslav URMANOV which was forwarded to CBP officers for comparison. SERNOWSKIY was confronted with the fingerprint and photograph discrepancies and admitted his true identity. The U.S. Attorney’s Office accepted this case for prosecution. CBP determined both aliens were inadmissible to the U.S. (willful misrepresentation of material fact), refused their admission, and detained them for prosecution. (BTS Daily Operations Report, 30 Dec 04; HSOC 4958-04)

The December 30 brief also included a report reminiscent of Israeli art student surveillance of Federal buildings and offices:

(FOUO) MARYLAND: Possible Surveillance of Federal Building in Baltimore. According ICE reporting 28 December, a Special Agent from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General (HUD-OIG) observed three individuals conducting possible surveillance of two federal facilities in Baltimore, MD. The two male and one female subjects, described as being of Middle Eastern descent, were seen videotaping the US Customs House and the Appraiser Building. Each of the subjects had their own camera. The agent notified contract guards inside the Appraiser Building. When the agent and guards went outside to contact the subjects, the three individuals hid their cameras and departed the area, with each subject traveling in a separate direction. The Baltimore City Police Department Intelligence Unit was notified, and the matter has been referred to an FPS Special Agent for further investigation. (ICE Daily Summary, 29 Dec 04; HSOC 4962-04)[77]

The January 5, 2005 brief also mentioned an incident involving a named Israeli citizen:

ISRAEL: Citizen of Israel Subject of TIPOFF and TSA No Fly has Visa Revoked on January 3. According to BTS reporting on 5 January, Samuel COHEN (DOB: 07/20/1969) arrived at LAX on COPA airlines from Lima, Peru, seeking admission as a visitor for pleasure. At LAX, the CT Watch determined that COHEN was a TIPOFF and NO FLY match. Close coordination resulted in the Department of State (DOS) revoking COHEN's visa on the spot. As a result of this revocation, COHEN was found to not be in possession of proper documents and was processed for an Expedited Removal. He is scheduled to depart 5 January, from the United States on COPA airlines flight CM303. (BTS Daily Operations Report, 5 Jan 05, HSOC 0033-05)[78]

On July 27, 2005, it was revealed that New York’s Metropolitan Transportation (MTA) Authority's Interagency Counter Terrorism Task Force was maintaining a database of individuals stopped and questioned for filming bridge and tunnel crossings around New York City. Some of the people in the database were stopped on more than one occasion for filming and photographing bridges and tunnels and in one case an individual who was stopped for filming a New York area bridge was discovered to be driving the same vehicle as another person who was stopped earlier for filming the Verazano Narrows Bridge. An MTA source revealed that much of the filming did not involve regular tourists, but much more. The source said the filming “appear[ed] to be more than just casual filming.” The filmers and photographers were concentrating on bridge beams (as in the case of the Memphis I-40 bridge) and security checkpoints. The MTA database includes individuals stopped for filming the bridges and tunnels under the control of the MTA: Verrazano, Triborough, Throgs Neck, Whitestone, Henry Hudson, Marine Parkway, Cross Bay Veterans Memorial, the Midtown Tunnel and the Battery Tunnel.[79] A number of Federal law enforcement authorities report that suspicious Israelis continue to be stopped around the nation photographing and filming sensitive facilities and infrastructures but are not charged and brought to trial.

In October 2004, a suspicious Israeli was detained by the Delaware County, Oklahoma Sheriff’s Department. Two miles of State Highway 20, east of Jay, were closed down while an Oklahoma State Police Bomb squad searched the Israeli’s car for “possible terrorist activities.” As has been the modus operandi in such cases, the FBI from Tulsa questioned the Israeli, who could not produce either a passport or a visa, and released him after seven hours. The Israeli had an Arizona driver’s license showing an address in Gentry, Arkansas. The FBI said they were familiar with the Israeli. Delaware County Undersheriff Dale Eberle did not disclose the Israeli’s identity since he was never arrested. The 40-year old Israeli, who was married to a U.S. citizen, had been traveling around the Tulsa area with a tubular camera on the roof of his car. Police were notified that the camera looked like a pipe bomb. Eberle said police were concerned that the Israeli may have been targeting the Pensacola Dam and two watersheds that feed Tulsa. The Israeli had recording devices and tools in his car, according to a police inventory. The Israeli had been asking questions about local industries in Jay and when he stopped at a local diner he refused to use a glass or silverware because he did not want to leave fingerprints.[80]

On May 15, 2003, Cloudcroft, New Mexico Police Chief Gene Green stopped a U-Haul van in Cloudcroft, New Mexico, near the White Sands Missile Test Range, for speeding. According to the Alamogordo Daily News, the two truck drivers had Israeli driver’s licenses and claimed they were hauling furniture from Austin to Chicago. Yet the rental agreement had expired two days earlier and New Mexico was way off track from the Austin to Chicago route. The Israelis then changed their story--they claimed they were dropping off furniture in Deming, New Mexico. But they could not provide a delivery address in the town. Also, their rental agreement was only for intrastate use in Illinois. Inside the truck, Chief Green found junk furniture not worth moving anywhere and 50 boxes that the Israelis claimed were a “private delivery.” The Israelis were turned over to INS and nothing more was heard about them or their “cargo.”[81] Consumers who have hired them have complained about suspicious behavior and illegal practices of Israeli-owned moving companies from Wisconsin to Florida to Pennsylvania. Advanced Moving Systems of Sunrise, Florida, an Israeli-owned moving company, complained that police in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and North Carolina stopped several of its crews. The firm’s owner, Zion Rokah, claimed the police were “xenophobic and racist.”[82]

Almost one year earlier, on May 7, 2002, two Israelis were arrested in Oak Harbor, Washington, near Naval Air Station Whidbey Island. Police and Naval law enforcement investigators found traces of TNT and plastic explosives in a rental truck driven by the Israelis after they were stopped for speeding. One of the Israelis had an expired visa, an international driver’s license, and no identification. They claimed they had delivered furniture in Oak Harbor and were on their way back to Canada. A bomb-sniffing dog reacted to traces of explosive material on the truck’s steering wheel and gear shift. The FBI later said the explosive tests were negative and the INS, in keeping with tradition, refused to comment on the case.[83] In the days following September 11, a number of residents of Island County called emergency centers to report sightings of “Middle Eastern” looking men driving Canadian trucks.[84]

In a similar incident on May 21, 2004, two Israeli men, Tamir D. Sason and Daniel Levy, both of Metar, Israel, and reported to have been working for an Atlanta moving company, attempted to enter the King’s Bay, Georgia U.S. Naval Submarine base. They were supposedly contracted to move someone from the base. As with the Whidbey Island incident, a bomb-sniffing dog alerted to a briefcase in the truck. Security guards became suspicious when one of the Israelis could not provide proper identification. The base went into a three-hour security lockdown and a bomb squad inspected the truck. As in the other cases involving Israelis trying to penetrate security perimeters, the Israelis were handed over to immigration authorities and the FBI refused comment. In addition to the FBI, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation and Navy Criminal Investigate Service were called in to investigate the Israeli incident.[85] King’s Bay is close to Sea Island, Georgia, the site of the June 2004 G-8 Summit, a fact that obviously piqued the interest of law enforcement officials in the area.

On May 10, 2004, two other Israeli “movers” were apprehended suspiciously close to the Oak Ridge National Laboratories in Tennessee and the Federal Correctional Institution in Butner, North Carolina where convicted Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard was incarcerated. Driving a Ryder rental truck leased in Plantation, Florida, Shmuel Dahan and Almaliach Naor, led Unicoi County Sheriff Kent Harris on a high-speed chase. The Israelis claimed they were delivering furniture to West Virginia but Harris wondered why they would have been on the more remote two-lane U.S. Highway 23 rather than the faster Interstate 26. The Israelis also possessed false identification documents, Dahan a bogus Florida driver’s license issued in Plantation, Florida and Naor a fake identification card. Harris also searched a storage facility the Israelis rented in Mars Hill, North Carolina. The FBI was called in to investigate but in typical fashion they turned the matter over the U.S. immigration officers who scheduled a deportation hearing. An FBI spokesman said the Israelis were guilty of nothing more than littering. Agents of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms also joined the investigation. While chasing the Israelis, Harris noticed they threw a vial out of the truck. The Israelis later denied they threw anything out of the truck. The ejected container was reported to have contained a suspicious “fuel source” that was sent to the Tennessee Emergency Management office in Sevierville, Tennessee. It was later discovered to have contained a mixture of a cleaning fluid called Astromid 18, Gluconic acid, and water. Harris said he was not sure why the substances were mixed together. The Israelis also had a “Learn to Fly” brochure in their truck. Harris said he “got a sick feeling” when he saw the brochure and the business card of a Fort Launderdale, Florida-based flight instructor named Nissan Giat, another Israeli citizen. Police feared the Israelis might have been targeting the Nuclear Fuel Services plant in nearby Erwin, Tennessee. A lawyer for the Israelis later claimed they meant no harm, that Naor possessed a fake identification card so he could get into a Miami nightclub. Naor’s age was never given.[86] Although the Federal government said the Israelis posed no danger, the state of Tennessee kept the case open. The DEA report on the activities of Israeli “art students” cited a case in which the Federal Protective Service arrested two Israeli art students in Plantation, Florida for possession of fake Social Security cards. Plantation was also the base of operations for Dahan.

On October 17, 2001, three Israelis driving a truck were discovered by Plymouth, Pennsylvania police with possession of a close-up videotape of the Sears Tower in Chicago. Plymouth Police Chief David McCann reviewed the tape and then found the Sony camera inside the truck. The police had responded to a call that the Israelis were illegally dumping furniture into a dumpster behind a Pizzeria Uno restaurant from a tractor-trailer truck registered in Florida. When the restaurant manager confronted the Israeli driver he drove off quickly from the scene. The leader of the team who drove the truck sporting the sign “Moving Systems Incorporated” was Moshe Elmakias. Two other Israelis, a woman named Ayelet Reisler, and a man named Ron Katar, were also questioned by Plymouth police after the truck was seen parked. Reisler had a German passport in one name and a prescription in another name. Whitpain, Pennsylvania Police later discovered that the truck’s operator log had been falsified. All the evidence of the Whitpain and Plymouth police was collected by the FBI, which then deep-sixed the investigation in typical FBI fashion when it came to Israeli surveillance and espionage activity in the United States. Elmakias and Katar were turned over to the INS but Reisler was released.[87]

The Interstate 40 Hernando De Soto Bridge in Memphis was also an apparent surveillance target for the Israelis. According to the Arkansas State Police, a few days after 911, the FBI and Memphis police were alerted to two Israelis (officially reported to be of “Middle Eastern” appearance) taking photographs of the De Soto span and the older Interstate 55 Bridge. The Israelis were particularly interested in the undersides of the bridges. They had seven cameras of different sizes and makes. Upon being detained by the FBI, the men claimed to have diplomatic immunity and one produced a diplomatic passport. After the Israelis were turned over to the INS, the FBI dropped any further investigation.[88]





The Hernando de Soto Bridge in Memphis. Surveilled by Israelis a few days after 911.

In early October 2001, the FBI was on a nationwide search for six Israelis stopped by the police in the Midwest and found to be in possession of box cutters and “other equipment.” The Israelis also had photos and descriptions of a Florida nuclear power plant and the Trans-Alaska Pipeline. The Israelis were traveling in groups of three in two white sedans. Although the INS ordered the men released, the FBI was reported to be furious that the Israelis were allowed to flee, possibly to Canada. The INS refused to reveal in what state the Israelis were stopped. Although their Israeli passports were reported valid, there was no way to know if their true identities matched those in the passports. The FBI refused to release the names and descriptions of the Israelis. FBI Director Robert Mueller and Attorney General John Ashcroft held a news conference on October 2, 2001 warning that a new wave of terrorist attacks could be expected in the United States. Their warning came after the Israelis were stopped in the Midwest.[89] In what may have been a related case, six Israelis were arrested in Cleveland in mid-October and were held incommunicado. A seventh Israeli woman was also reported to have been arrested.[90]

On October 10, 2001, two Israelis, one a former Israeli Army Colonel and the other a Mossad agent, were arrested in the Mexican Congress with 9mm pistols and dynamite. According to the Mexican Justice Department official web site “the head of Congressional Security Salvador Alarcón verified that the Israelis had in their possession nine hand grenades, sticks of dynamite, detonators, wiring and two 9mm ‘Glock’ automatics.” The Israelis were subsequently released after the intervention of the Israeli embassy in Mexico City.[91]

In 1990, the head of Colombia’s secret police, General Miguel Maza Marquez, blamed Israeli paramilitary training for a wave of terrorist attacks in Colombia during the entire year. These included the bombing of an Avianca passenger jet in November 1989 that killed 117 people, assassinations of local political leaders, and two attempts on his own life. A bombing of Maza’s police headquarters killed 63 people. Colombia responded to the Israeli involvement with terrorism by abrogating a 1962 no visa travel agreement with Israel.[92]

In April 2004, New Zealand’s Foreign Minister called in Israel’s ambassador to that nation to complain about two suspected Mossad agents arrested at Auckland airport after trying to obtain false New Zealand passports. The Australian Security Intelligence Organization (ASIO) and the New Zealand Security Intelligence Service (NZSIS) had cooperated in the sting of the Israelis, identified as Elisha Cara and Uri Zoshe Kelman. New Zealand and Australian police and intelligence services tied the Israelis to the Russian-Israeli mafia. Police were looking for a third suspected Mossad spy, Zev William Barkan, who was believed to have fled New Zealand for Israel, and a fourth unidentified Israeli believed to have gone into hiding in New Zealand. Barkan was later discovered to have served at Israeli embassies in Austria and Belgium. Police later identified a New Zealander named Anthony David Resnick, a 13-year veteran of the Israeli Defense Force and a member of Auckland’s Jewish Council, as another conspirator in the Mossad operation. Resnick reportedly fled to Israel. Cara and Kelman were both released on bail with the provision that they remain at two separate Auckland hotels but both Israelis violated their bail and checked out of their hotels.[93] They were eventually sentenced to six months in jail and New Zealand protested the illegal Mossad operation in New Zealand by suspending relations with Israel.[94] There were reports that the Israeli operation extended to Australia and that the Australian Security Intelligence Organization (ASIO) may have tipped off its New Zealand counterpart about the espionage ring. After tipping off New Zealand about Cara and his accomplices, Australian agents raided Cara’s rental home on Sydney’s north shore. Cara’s front was a Haifa-based travel agency called Eastward Bound.[95] After it was discovered that Kelman, an Israeli-Canadian, used a Canadian passport to enter New Zealand, Canada lodged a protest with Israel. In 1997, after two Mossad agents on an assassination mission were caught in Jordan using Canadian passports, Israel agreed to refrain from using Canadian passports in its intelligence operations.[96]

In February 2005, it was reported that Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade ordered a senior Israeli embassy officer in Canberra to leave the country for his intelligence ties to Cara and Kelman. Although the opposition Australian Labor and Green parties demanded details of the explusion of the suspected Mossad agent, the John Howard government remained tight lipped about the matter.[97] Israeli President Moshe Katsav cancelled a March 2005 trip to New Zealand over the affair but he visited Australia on schedule.

On January 12, 2000, Indian Central Bureau of Intelligence (CBI) agents arrested 11 Israelis disguised as Islamic preachers (“tabliqis”) before they boarded a Bangladesh Biman Airlines flight from Calcutta to Dhaka. The 11 Israelis, reported at first to be Afghans who spent some time in Iran, were to attend an Islamic conference in Dhaka but the government of Bangladesh denied them a visa. They all had one-way tickets to Dhaka, something that triggered alarms in Bangladesh. CBI officials were surprised when they discovered the arrested Islamic preachers were actually Israelis from the West Bank. After the Israelis were arrested, Israel exerted enormous pressure on the Indians to release them and permit them to return to Tel Aviv. A CBI official said, “It appeared that they could be working for a sensitive organization in Israel and were on a mission to Bangladesh.” It was suspected that the Israelis, who could have been Afghan Jews, may have been recruited by Mossad to penetrate Al Qaeda cells in Bangladesh.[98]

On January 11, 2000, India’s Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS) issued a Top Secret circular (NO: ER/BCAS/PIC/CIRCULAR/99), regarding a possible hijacking attempt on a Bangladesh Biman aircraft in India. The circular was signed by India’s regional civil aviation security chief at Calcutta Airport and copies were sent to other Indian agencies as well as to the Bangladesh Biman office in Calcutta. It was this alert that helped India and Bangladesh nab the 11 Israelis the following day.[99]

***

The DEA-INS continued to have a “keen interest” in the activities of the Israeli art students. The DEA believed there may have been links between the Israeli espionage teams and trafficking in the drug Ecstasy. Although the Israelis denied any espionage activity in the United States, some of their supporters in the Bush administration have defended the art students claiming, “It is quite normal for young Israelites to travel around the world for one year after they complete their military service.”

A March 8, 2002, an editorial in the Albuquerque Journal summed up the general angst and suspicion over the activities of the Israeli art students:

When U.S. authorities suspect an organized team of spies is seeking to infiltrate sensitive federal office buildings and the homes of government employees, they should arrest and interrogate to get to the bottom of the plot. Instead, a draft report from the Drug Enforcement Administration reports that young Israelis posing as art students but suspected of espionage activities were merely deported.

DEA first said the youths’ actions “may well be an organized intelligence-gathering activity.” But immigration officials deported the suspicious Israelis, said to number in the dozens, for visa violations.

Perhaps the officials had forgotten the case of Jonathan Pollard, a civilian Navy intelligence officer who gave classified information to the Israelis. It was an operation that Israel eventually acknowledged was known and approved of in the highest reaches of the Israeli government. Pollard has served some 13 years of a life sentence.

The recent arrests were made in a number of major U.S. cities from California to Florida, amid public warnings from U.S. intelligence agencies about suspicious behavior by people posing as Israeli art students and “attempting to bypass facility security and enter federal buildings.”

The United States owes no duty to Israel to ignore spying. Israel, it could be argued, should at least be grateful enough to the United States that it should be reluctant to try to steal secrets.[100]

Perhaps the espionage incident would have faded entirely had it not been for the fact that similar art students, with unbelievable alibis, were caught in 2003 by Canadian security police around the Houses of Parliament in Ottawa.

On September 12, 2003, nine Israeli art students were arrested by Canadian Immigration officers and Ottawa police on Lisgar Street, just a few blocks from Parliament Hill, the day after the second anniversary of the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. The Canadian police were tipped off by the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service (CSIS) that the Israelis, who were reported selling paintings in downtown Ottawa, were possible Mossad agents. The Israeli embassy spokesman in Ottawa used the same sort of language used by his Washington, DC counterpart to brush aside the arrests as routine, “We don't know full details about what the paintings were but it was a completely commercial matter,” said Ben Forer, the spokesman for the Israeli embassy.[101] The arrests followed similar arrests of Israeli art students in Calgary, Toronto, and Saskatoon, according to Canadian Immigration officials. Residents of the Ottawa suburban district of Centrepoint had complained about Israelis selling fake art in 2001. Canadian authorities issued exclusion orders for all nine Israelis arrested in Ottawa and ordered them deported. Residents of the Ottawa suburban district of Centrepoint had complained about Israelis selling fake art in 2001.

In August 2004, two ringleaders of an Israeli “art student” door-to-door sales scam, Guy Grinberg and Yukov Senior, were deported from Canada for operating an art sales ring in Alberta. The “art student” ring operated in Calgary, Edmonton, and Red Deer. Eight others were rounded up with the art sales ringleaders. Three apparently escaped Canadian law enforcement arrest.[102] In neighboring Manitoba, twelve Israelis – six men and six women – were arrested in Winnipeg for selling the junk art.[103]

It is interesting to note the answers that some of the Israelis gave when they were questioned by the immigration court. Thanks to the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board, transcripts of the hearings were made available and they permit the reader to have an inside view of how the Israeli art selling rings operated, both in Canada and the United States. Five transcripts were provided but two provide interesting details of the art selling rings. The Canadian immigration authorities did not believe most of the evasive explanations provided by the Israelis. The answers of the team leader, Roy Laniado, are extremely interesting, especially his discussion of his “boss,” an unnamed individual who traveled from the United States to Canada. As a result of the secrecy surrounding the INS roundup of some 120 Israeli “art students” in the United States, Americans never had the opportunity to know the inside story of how the operation worked:

Minutes of a hearing

The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Le ministre de la Citoyenneté et de l’Immigration

and / et

EINAV SOFER

AMIT YEHUDAI

September 17th, 2003, Ottawa

BY MEMBER:

- So, I'll state that my name is Pierre Turmel. I am a member of the Immigration Division. Today is September the 17th, 2003, and I've been asked to preside an admissibility hearing concerning Einav Sofer.

BY MEMBER (to persons concerned)

- I'm sorry maybe for the pronunciation of your name.

A. You pronounce it good.

- And Amit Yehudai.

Q. That is you?

A. Yeah.

Q. Okay. First, I'd like to know if you fully understand English?

A. Yes.

Q. Or if you'd like to have the assistance of a Hebrew interpreter?

A. We understand everything.

- You understand everything.

Q. What about you, Mr. Yehudai?

A. I understand.

- Okay.

Q. Now, do you consent to the holding of this hearing in the presence of one another? Would you like to have your hearing separately, or if you are in agreement to have your hearing at the same time than Mr. Yehudai?

A. We agree.

Q. It is okay?

A. (Mr. Cole) Yeah.

- Okay, then.

The person to my right is the Minister's counsel, Madame Sybill Powell.

Q. Now, you have been told that a hearing was to take place today. Am I correct?

A. (Ms. Sofer) Yes.

Q. You've received the documents to that effect?

A. Yes.

A. Yes.

- On that Notice to Appear for the hearing there is a mention to the effect that you may be represented by a lawyer.

A. (Ms. Sofer) No, we don’t want to be represented by a lawyer.

- You talk for yourself.

A. I don't want to be represented.

Q. You don't want to have a lawyer?

A. I'm sorry.

A. (inaudible)

- You don't want a lawyer too. Okay, if you change your mind, you just let me know, okay, and I will act accordingly, okay.

There's another person in this room who is Mr. Yehudai's girlfriend. She is here as an observer. I will only state that observers cannot intervene in any way during the course of the hearing. Okay.

Now, I have received documents. You have copies of the same. I will file these documents into the record of the hearing. The referral under subsection 44(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, dated the 15th of September 2003, at Ottawa, will form Exhibit C-1 into your respective file.

EXHIBIT C-1 - SUBSECTION 44(2) REFERRAL - SEPT. 15TH, 2003
And the other document, which is the report made under subsection 44(1), dated the 12th of September 2003, at Ottawa, will form Exhibit C-2.

EXHIBIT C-2 - SUBSECTION 44(1) REPORT - SEPT. 12TH, 2003
Q. Now, Ms. Sofer, you've read that report?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you fully understand its contents?

A. Yes.

Q. And what about you, Mr. Yehudai, have you read it in full?

A. (no verbal reply)

- You're nodding your head in an affirmative way.

A. Yes.

- But you have to speak up. Everything is being recorded.

A. Okay.

- Okay.

Q. And do you fully understand the content of the report?

A. Yes, sir.

- Yes.

Now, I’ll tell you what I’m here for, okay. I first have to determine if you have a right to enter and/or remain into Canada. This right is restricted to Canadian citizens and permanent residents of Canada. If you are not such a person, I will then have to look at the report made against you in order to determine if you have contravened any of the dispositions of the Immigration Act, and more precisely, the ones appearing on the report.



If I find you have not, I'll say it and the inquiry will end there. However, if I find that you have contravened the dispositions of the Immigration Act, I'll have no other choice but to make an Exclusion Order in your cases. This will mean that you will have to leave the country, and you will be prohibited from coming back to this country for a certain period of time. I'll tell you at the end of the hearing depending on the breaches to the Immigration Act how long you'll be prohibited from coming back.

Q. Okay, understood?

A. (Mr. Yehudai) Yes, sir.

Q. Following my explanations, are you still ready to proceed now...

A. Yes.

A. Yes.

Q. ...without a lawyer?

A. Yes.

A. Yes.

- Yes, okay.

BY MEMBER (to Minister's counsel)

Q. Madame Powell, do you wish to call these persons as witness?

A. Yes.

- Okay.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. Ms. Sofer, would you please stand up and raise your right hand. Do you solemnly affirm that the evidence you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

A. Yes, your honour.

- Thank you.

A. Can I sit?

- Yes.

Q. Do you solemnly affirm that the evidence you will give at this hearing will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

A. Yes, sir.

- Thank you.

BY MEMBER (to Minister's counsel)

- Your witness.

Q. Who do you want to start with?

A. Ms. Sofer.

- Ms. Sofer.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

- Please state your full name for the record.

A. Einav Sofer. It's. E.I.N.A.V. the first name, and the last name is S.O.F.E.R.

Q. And do you have any other names?

A. No.

Q. What is your date of birth?

A. The 26th of December 1976.

Q. And where were you born?

A. In Israel, Vesai (phonetic), the name of the town.

Q. Okay, and what is your citizenship?

A. Israeli.

Q. Are you Canadian citizen?

A. No.

Q. Are you permanent resident of Canada?

A. Am I?

Q. Do you have any permanent residency in Canada?

A. No.

Q. When did you enter Canada?

A. The 6th of August.

Q. Where?

A. Toronto.

Q. What was your purpose for coming to Canada?

A. Travel in the beginning, then to go to work.

Q. What did you tell the Port of Entry you were going to do in Canada?

A. That I came to visit.

Q. Just to visit?

A. Yes.

- Okay.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. You did not reveal you were coming here to...

A. No.

Q. ...engage in employment?

A. No.

Q. Why not?

A. Because in the beginning when I came I didn’t thought that I’m going to work. I thought (inaudible) in Canada because I'm student and I came only for two months, and then I met one guy who told me about this law, and I went to work and I didn’t thought from the beginning to come to work. Because I was working as my money. And then he told me about this, and I thought why not. I didn’t check this.

Q. Did not you know before coming here that you...

A. Coming to work, no.

Q. That there was, this activity going on in Canada...

A. No, I heard about.

- There is advertising being...

A. In Israel.

- ...being made in Israel, yes.

A. I heard from people that came here. They told me. Now I don't need to change everything.

Q. You had not seen that ad before?

A. Because didn't thought about coming to work because I was working in (inaudible) Service in Israel while studying. And I thought to myself, okay, this is too much, I'm going to come on vacation. I will come for two months, and then my boyfriend also will come to join me. And that's it. And then I heard about this here. I met one Israeli guy and he told me about this thing that they doing and I thought to myself why not. And it was a big mistake, excuse me.

Q. And you intended on departing Canada at which date?

A. With my boyfriend (inaudible).

Q. When were you originally scheduled to depart Canada?

A. We're supposed to be on 20 October, on the 20 of October because I'm starting my school on 26th.

- Okay.

A. So, my (inaudible). So until the end of summer vacation.

- Okay.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. Who is, there's a note left Shara.

A. Shahaman (phonetic), this is the Israeli guy that I met.

Q. Okay, when did you meet him?

A. In a bar. He told me about this thing.

Q. Why did you come to Ottawa?

A. Because I started in Montreal and... No, I started in Toronto, and then I went to Montreal, and then to Ottawa, and I thought to go after that maybe to Vancouver and to keep on travelling. And also to go after that to North. I can tell you, to see the Northern Lights in Alberta, in Saskatchewan. Just travelling in the big city in the beginning.

Q. Did you know anybody in Ottawa?

A. No, nobody. I didn't know anybody when I came to Canada actually. I know this family here, a family.

Q. Who’s Dan?

A. Dan?

- There’s note that you spent two weeks in Montreal at a friend’s house, Dan.

A. Ah, this is a friend from Israel that I spent with there. I was staying with Isabel house, in Isabel house, and also with my friend Dan. But he's a guy I met also on the street. I didn’t know him from Israel. Like, you know, Israeli people we always know one each other. If you go on the street and you just start to speak with people and that's it.

- All right.

Q. Now, when did you start to work in Ottawa?

A. I don't remember the correct date.

- Approximately.

A. Around two weeks ago, something like that.

Q. And what did you do?

A. Like it's written.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. I’m sorry?

A. Like it's written, selling (inaudible).

- Okay.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. And how many did you sell?

A. I don't know exactly how much. But I can tell you how much I believe around, like around eight-hundred (800), six-hundred (600).

Q. Eight-hundred (800) dollars in total or per week?

A. No, per week.

Q. Did you have an employment authorization?

A. No.

Q. Did you apply for an employment authorization?

A. No.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. So you were making between six-hundred (600) and eight-hundred (800) dollars a week?

A. Yeah.

Q. You were doing good?

A. (inaudible).

- You were doing good.

A. Yes.

- You're a good saleswoman.

A. Actually I didn't do it for the selling, but it was important.

Q. I'm sorry?

A. I didn't do it for the selling because I thought about something else. I didn’t do it for the money actually.

- No, no, yeah, yeah.

Q. But I mean it was easy for you to sell those paintings?

A. Yes, because I can explain about art, and I know a lot about art because I’m offering art in Israel my country. So (inaudible), and like I said in the beginning my main idea wasn’t to sell them. My main idea was to come to people and talk to them about the thing that I know, to give them maybe a small knowledge about art, what I’m doing. And (inaudible) because this.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. Were these your paintings?

A. No, no. I’m doing my own painting in Israel. I’m doing my own art.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to member)

- Those are all the questions I have for her.

A. Okay.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

- Now, sir, could you please state your name for the record.

A. My name is Amit Yehudai, Y.E.H.U.D.A.I.

Q. Okay. You have any other names?

A. No.

Q. So what is your date of birth?

A. Sixth of August 78.

Q. Sixth of August?

A. Seventy-eight.

- Okay.

Q. So where were you born?

A. In (inaudible).

Q. What is your citizenship?

A. Israeli.

Q. Are you a Canadian citizen?

A. No.

Q. Are you permanent resident of Canada?

A. No.

Q. When did you enter Canada?

A. Fifth of August.

Q. Where?

A. Toronto.

Q. And what did you tell the Port of Entry your purpose of coming to Canada was?

A. For visiting.

Q. And what was your purpose of coming to Canada?

A. My purpose was to see (inaudible)

Q. Had you met before?

A. Yes.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. Where?

A. In Toronto.

Q. You've been here before?

A. (no verbal reply)

Q. When was that?

A. Probably two years ago.

Q. Two years ago?

A. (no verbal reply)

Q. Have you kept in touch over the past two years?

A. (no verbal reply)

BY PERSON CONCERNED-MS. SOFER (to member)

- Sir, (...inaudible...)

A. Yeah.

- I'm sorry.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. Do you know each other?

A. (Ms. Sofer) (inaudible).

Q. You’ve travelled together?

A. No.

Q. You arrive on the same day?

A. Yes. We met in the airport, sir.

- Okay.

A. And then (inaudible).

- Okay.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned-Mr. Yehudai)

Q. Who met you at the airport?

A. Who met me, Roy.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. I'm sorry?

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. Roy?

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. You met Roy Maniato?

A. Yes.

Q. At the airport. You knew him?

A. I knew him from Israel but in another situation.

Q. Why was he at the airport to meet you on arrival?

A. No, he was just picking me up and then I went to Montreal.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. Did he take you to Montreal?

A. What?

Q. Did he take you to Montreal?

A. No, I rented a car.

Q. How long did you stay in Montreal?

A. Like one month, something like that.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned-Ms. Sofer)

Q. Have you also got picked up at the airport by Roy Maniato?

A. No. I went, I took a taxi because I didn't know where. I took a taxi to hotel, and then Amit came to the hotel, and that I arrived, (inaudible). And then it was after I came with him to Montreal.

Q. With Roy?

A. No, with Amit. Because I didn't know (inaudible).

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned-Mr. Yehudai)

Q. So Roy picked you up at the airport and you went back to his house?

A. No, to hotel.

Q. To his hotel?

A. Not this hotel. I look (...inaudible...) hotel next to the airport.

A. (Ms. Sofer) I can, if (inaudible) to talk, or you can check also on the ticket. I can and I went, nobody came to pick me. I took a cab to one place that my friend that she was travelling, she told me to go in Toronto. That it's a very good place and a cheap one. And then Amit also came to this place. And then the day after we went together to Montreal.

Q. So you just met in the airport, or you met at the hotel?

BY MEMBER (to person concerned-Ms. Sofer)

Q. At the hotel, not at the airport?

A. Yes, at the airport.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned-Ms. Sofer)

Q. So you just went to Montreal then?

A. Yeah, because, you know, I didn’t know anybody, so he said that he was going to Montreal, so I went.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned-Mr. Yehudai)

Q. All right, so you went to Montreal and visited your girlfriend?

A. Yes, my girlfriend.

Q. And that was your reason for coming to Canada?

A. Yes.

Q. What was your… why did Roy pick you up? Did you contact him before you were coming to Canada?

A. It was like, like it you said about the advertisement, something there in advertisement. So it was like kind of, like an option, like an (inaudible).

Q. Okay, so you had answered the ad in Israel?

A. What?

Q. You called the ad in Israel?

A. Yes, yes. I just want, you know, it was like my summer vacation, I like to travelling, so I called them to say an option. Maybe it could, you know. This could be just an option.

Q. And when did you find out Roy was involved?

A. I didn't know that Roy. They told me like okay, if you want, you can come, some guy named Roy will wait for you. That's it.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. The person you talked to told you...

A. No...

Q. ...told you could come and a person by the name of Roy ...

A. Will pick me up, exactly.

Q. ...will pick you up...

A. Exactly.

Q. ...at the airport?

A. Exactly, because this kind of service they offer.

- Yeah.

A. Like small (inaudible) for you like when you come.

- Uh-hum.

A. But then the first and the main reason I came (...inaudible...) and I told him I go to Montreal and I need to think about it like this, to see if I want to go.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. But he was picking you up, but you knew that a person that you had contacted about work was picking you up at the airport?

A. He pick me up.

- Okay.

Q. So at the Port of Entry did you mention that you were going to be meeting with a future employer?

A. He wasn’t my employer. I met him also in Israel. He was my friend. I didn’t know. They told me Roy, but I knew him from Israel two years ago. When I talked with him...

Q. When you knew that they told you that someone from their work would pick you up at the airport and meet you, is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Okay, and his name was Roy?

A. Yes.

- You didn't know you knew him before. This is somebody named Roy that picked you up at the airport and he was involved in selling paintings, okay.

A. This is true.

Q. So when you came to the airport and the Port of Entry person said why are you here, you said?

A. For visiting.

- Okay.

A. But I want to explain something. When he picked me up I wasn’t like in a status of a (inaudible). I told him also in the beginning that I come for Canada for my reason, and if it’s like, if I can combine go with him then it’s okay. But my reason coming was to see the (inaudible). So when he picked me up, it wasn’t like he picked up to work. He picked me up like this service, like this company like it’s doing like a favour for you. They can (inaudible) you want to do. They treat you nice. So, you know, it’s like kind of (inaudible).

Q. How much did you make selling paintings?

A. Like six-hundred (600), seven-hundred (700).

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. When did you start selling paintings?

A. What?

Q. When did you start selling paintings?

A. I sell frames not paintings.

Q. I’m sorry?

A. I sell frames not paintings.

Q. When did you start selling frames?

A. After like (...inaudible...)

Q. How long after you had arrived?

A. Like three weeks and a half, something like that.

Q. And in which city have you sold those frames?

A. In Ottawa.

Q. Here only, not in Montreal?

A. Not in Montreal.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. When did you meet up with Roy again?

A. After I had no contact with him, and I came Toronto.

Q. Did you have an employment authorization?

A. (inaudible).

Q. Did you ever apply for employment authorization?

A. (inaudible).

Q. Pardon?

A. No.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to member)

- I have no further questions.

A. Thank you.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. Mr. Yehudai, ...

A. Yes.

Q. ...where is your girlfriend living?

A. My girlfriend?

- Yes.

A. In Montreal.

Q. Where? What's her address?

A. It's Rue Cuvillier.

Q. I'm sorry?

A. Rue Cuvillier.

- Would you spell that out for me.

A. I don’t know the spelling in French. It’s Rue Avenue East Cauvillier, it's C.A.U.V.I.L.L.E.R. Rue Cauviller it’s near Sherbrooke.

- Okay, she is in the back of the room, I’ll ask her.

BY OBSERVER (to member)

- La rue Cuvillier.

A. Cuvillier.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. Okay, is she living alone there or with her parents or?

A. No, she live alone.

- Alone.

Q. Is she employed, would you know?

A. Yes.

Q. What does she do for a living?

A. She work in a bookstore, in a bookstore.

Q. In a bookstore?

A. Yes.

Q. Is full-time employer?

A. I don’t know what is the status, but I think so.

Q. Was she working five days a week?

A. Five days, yes, four or five days.

- Four, five days a week, okay.

Q. And was she working during the time you were at her place?

A. Yes.

Q. She was?

A. ...

Q. She didn’t take any holidays?

A. She had sometimes like three days off so we could be together. But otherwise when she’s working she work like from ten to six or nine to ten. So still we have the day.

- Uh-hum.

A. And sometimes I go to meet her at her work (inaudible).

Q. I'm sorry?

A. Sometimes I go to meet her at her work and (inaudible). So then (inaudible).

- Yeah, okay.

Q. And when you came to Ottawa in order to engage in employment did she come to Ottawa with you?

A. If she come with me?

- Yeah.

A. No, I go on the weekends to Montreal.

Q. In a weekend, during the weekend?

A. Yes.

- Yeah, okay.

BY MEMBER (to Minister's counsel)

- Madame Powell, I’d like to hear you with regards to the misrepresentation allegation concerning both of them.

A. Of what Ms. Sofer has told us…

Q. I’m sorry?

A. From what Ms. Sofer...

- Yes.

A. ...has told us today...

- Yes.

A. ...she basically says that she came to Canada and within a few short hours met up with someone. They both went to Montreal the next day. A few weeks later they end up in Ottawa not knowing that they would end up in Ottawa, I don’t believe, together. She says that she knew nothing about this, about this painting before she came to Canada. She met somebody on the street who told her about it. And yet she would have been driving in a car the day after she arrived with someone that was very knowledgeable about it all the way to Montreal.

I find that what she said today that she came to travel, and that she just basically meet people on the street and move in with them. Difficult to believe in 2004, and I don't believe that her only purpose to come to Canada was to solely travel and would like to see her described as misrepresentation, as well as (inaudible).

In terms of...

- Hold on a second. I'll give her immediately an opportunity to respond.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. You’ve heard what Madame Powell said?

A. What can I do now? I did something wrong. I know that I did something wrong. In the end the most important thing that I did something wrong. The most important thing if I would say that I come to visit, nobody would believe me because everybody is looking on the last thing, the last thing was very terrible, is very wrong. And I can understand why she find it hard to believe me. I can understand her and I respect what she’s saying because it sound to her very strange and she don’t know how the Israeli people like us how we talk to one each other. When we see one people in the street and just start talking one to each other. So, but the main important thing is that I did something wrong and I know it.

- Okay.

BY MEMBER (to Minister's counsel)

- As concerns Mr. Yehudai.

A. Mr. Yehudai had contacted this company before he left Israel. He had agreed to have someone from the company pick him up at the airport. Someone who he says that he later found out he already knew and someone that was very involved in the painting business. I find it difficult to believe that he didn’t have at least some plan to take part in working when he came. And I believe that although it may not have been his main reason, certainly it was part of... part of what he planned to do here, and I believe that he should be described for misrepresentation (inaudible).

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

- Yes.

A. Regarding what she say, quite agree with, you know, just want to say it again that like she said the main reason come was not for work. I didn’t talk before about the work. It was only like an option, possibility. Because I’m a student. And then the thing that they pick me up, you know, it's like to save the twenty-five bucks for the taxi, which for me it’s not worth it. And that’s it till I come to Montreal. I'm not saying after I work, and (inaudible). That’s it.

- Ms. Sofer and Mr. Yehudai, you have both testified during the course of the admissibility hearing. Your testimony, firstly, permits me to conclude that you have no right to enter and/or remain into Canada given that you are not Canadian citizens nor permanent residents of Canada. You both are citizens of Israel by birth in that country.

You have both testified having arrived in Canada on the 5th of August 2003, at Toronto. And you have both subsequently engaged in employment without having first obtained the written authorization from the Immigration Department. You were selling paintings, and frames for you, Mr. Yehudai, and received a commission as a remuneration. You earned just between six to eight-hundred dollars per week.

So obviously there's an allegation that has been established in that you contravened the dispositions of paragraph 41(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act in that on a balance of probabilities there are reasons to believe you are a foreign national who is inadmissible for failure to comply with a requirement of the Act. That was the requirement of obtaining a written authorization before engaging in employment.

Now, there was another allegation in both cases to the effect that you would also be inadmissible into Canada by reason of having exercised, whether directly or indirectly, a misrepresentation relating to a relevant matter which induced or could have induced in error in the administration of the Act.

Now, you have testified, Ms. Sofer, that you had no clue of this working activity before reaching Canada. That you have learned about this once in Canada, and then decided to engage in employment. But I'll come back on your testimony at a later time during the course of this decision. I want first to turn to Mr. Yehudai who said that prior to his coming to Canada he had seen an ad in a newspaper and contacted a person. He was explained what the work was all about and has agreed to meet a person at the airport on the day of his arrival. So a representative of the company was there by the name of Roy, but it happened that he was someone he already knew for some years. He didn't know at first that Roy would have been the person he knew for some years.

So, I do not know if I'm going to believe that part of his testimony. But if I were to believe it, what I realize is that Mr. Yehudai contacted the company, inquired about what was involved as a work, agreed to be met the very day of his arrival in Canada. And notwithstanding the fact he is trying to convince me that the only reason for his coming to Canada was to pay a visit to his girlfriend. His girlfriend lives in Montreal and three weeks after his arrival he moves to Ottawa and engage in employment for that person called Roy who is acting as a supervisor, and his girlfriend stays in Montreal where she is fully employed and had no holidays but is returning every weekend to see her. So I would say that we might be playing on words here, Mr. Yehudai, when you say that the main reason for your coming to this country was to see your girlfriend.

Well, I may use the same tactic here. It might have been true that the major reason for your coming was to see your girlfriend, but there was a secondary and a complementary reason to your coming, which was to make money during your stay by working in Canada. Otherwise you would not have prior to departing Israel contacted the company in order to see what involved the work you could perform while visiting Canada. So I believe in all likelihood that you had the intention, even it is true to say you were coming here first to see your girlfriend at the same time you had the intention of engaging in employment which you have not revealed. So I find the second allegation has been established.

Now, as concerns Ms. Sofer, there are very strange coincidences in that she arrives here on the same day that Mr. Yehudai, though on a different flight, and she happens to meet also Mr. Roy because she met Yehudai at the hotel where she went. And quite curiously it is the same hotel where Roy brought Yehudai when he picked him up at the airport. And you happen to travel to Montreal together, and you happen to be now working both of you for the same Roy.

So I think I can conclude on a balance of probabilities, I might be wrong, but I’m looking at the odds, and when examining all these facts, I conclude on a balance that your coming into Canada was not only to do tourism, but while doing tourism, work at the same time to maybe make some bit of money to help your tourist visit. So I find this allegation to have been also established.

So I’m ordering in both of your cases exclusions from Canada, and you are prohibited from coming back to this country for a period of two years. If you want to come back to Canada within that two year period, you first present yourself to a Canadian Embassy and ask for the written consent of the Immigration Minister. So a Canadian visa officer will examine the reasons why you want to come back here, and if he finds you have valid reasons for coming back and you are acting out of good faith, then you'll be issued the special consent.

A. (Ms. Sofer) Just a question, sir.

- Yes, you can.

A. Maybe you can give me two years and Amit only one year because, sir, maybe we don't know but it's the law, you know.

- No, no, no, that is the law. That is two years for each of you. I cannot give you one of his years.

A. Why not, sir?

- No, no, I can’t. That’s how it goes.

Today’s hearing is now terminated.



Minutes of a hearing

The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Le ministre de la Citoyenneté et de l’Immigration

and / et

ROY LANIADO

September 17, 2003, Ottawa

BY MEMBER:

- Good Morning. My name is Pierre Turmel. I am a member of the Immigration Division. Today is September 17, 2003, and I’ve been asked to preside an admissibility hearing concerning Roy Laniado.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. That is you?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. Mr. Laniado, I understand you are fluent in English. You did not have the services of a Hebrew interpreter?

A. No, I don’t.

- No. Okay.

The lady to my right is the Minister’s counsel, Madame Sybill Powell.

Q. Now, Mr. Laniado, I guess you have been told that an admissibility hearing was to take place today. Am I correct?

A. Yes, sir.

- On the Notice to Appear for this hearing, which you received, there’s a mention to the effect that you have the right, if you want, to retain the services of a lawyer. It is a right that you have. It is not an obligation as you may choose to proceed on your own.

Q. So what do you want to do today?

A. I think I can explain myself in most of the case.

- Good. I till then proceed. However, if any time during the course of the hearing you change your mind and you feel that the presence of a lawyer would become necessary, all you have to do is let me know. Okay.

A. I have a question.

- Yes.

A. After the hearing conclude,...

- Yes.

A. ...could then I come to a lawyer and appeal upon this hearing?

- No, there's no appeal.

A. No appeal.

- There's no appeal.

A. Okay.

- That there be a lawyer here or not, there won't be any appeal against the outcome of the hearing.

A. Okay.

- Okay.

Now, you have a package of documents. I have the originals here. The very one is a referral for inquiry under subsection 44(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. This document was made at Ottawa, on the 15th of September 2003. This document only gives me jurisdiction to proceed with the hearing. I will file it as Exhibit C-1.

EXHIBIT C-1 - SUBSECTION 44(2) REFERRAL-SEPT. 15, 2003
The other document which is most important to you is the report made under subsection 44 sub (1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. It is also dated, well, it is dated the 12th of September 2003.

Q. Have you read that report in full?

A. I read it briefly. Now I go...

Q. You want to have a couple of minutes?

A. Sure.

- There are two pages. While you’re reading I’ll say that I will file this report as Exhibit C-2.

EXHIBIT C-2-SUBSECTION 44(1) REPORT-SEPT. 12TH, 2003
A. There is one thing that is not copy right.

- Okay, do not explain immediately. You will be given an opportunity during the course of the hearing to testify, okay.

Q. Now, you’ve read it in full. Now, do you understand what it says in there?

A. Yes, I do.

- Okay. Let me give you a bit of explanations as to the purpose of the hearing and its possible consequences for you. First of all, I'm here to determine if you have a right to remain into Canada. Canadian citizens and permanent residents of Canada have a right to stay here. If you are not such a person, I will then have to look at the well-foundedness of the allegations appearing on the report. And if I find these allegations to be true, I’ll have no other choice but to make an Exclusion Order in your case. This is a removal order. This will mean that you will have to leave Canada, and you will also be prohibited from coming back to his country for a certain period of time.

If I were to find that the first allegation, the only first allegation is founded, you'll be prohibited from coming back to Canada for one year. If I find that both are, that is the last one too, then you'll be prohibited for two years. If you ever want to come back here within that period of time, you will firstly have to present yourself to a Canadian Consulate or Embassy in any country where Canada has official representatives, and this in order to ask for and obtain the Minister's written consent.

Q. Are those explanations clear to you?

A. Yes.

- Okay.

Q. Following my explanations, are you still ready to proceed on your own?

A. Yes, sir.

- Okay. Now, the Minister’s counsel, Madame Powell, has the burden of proof. She will most likely call you as a witness. She may call other witnesses. She may present documentary evidence. On your side, you'll have the opportunity to examine all the evidence, cross-examine witnesses, if any persons are being called to testify.

A. Okay.

- And at your turn, you'll be given an opportunity to present your own evidence. Okay.

A. Yes, sir.

BY MEMBER (to Minister's counsel)

- Madame Powell.

A. Yes, Mr. Member.

Q. You wish to call him as a witness?

A. Yes, please.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

- Mr. Laniado, you’re being called as a witness to this hearing. I’d like you to please stand up and raise your right hand.

Q. Do you solemnly affirm that the evidence you are about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

A. Yes, sir.

- Thank you. Have a seat.

BY MEMBER (to Minister's counsel)

- Your witness.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

- Please state your full name for the record.

A. Mr. Roy Ezra Laniado.

Q. Any other names?

A. No.

Q. What is your date of birth?

A. February 7, 1979.

Q. And where were you born?

A. Israel.

Q. What is your citizenship?

A. Israeli.

Q. Are you a Canadian citizen?

A. No.

Q. Are you permanent resident of Canada?

A. No.

Q. When did you enter Canada?

A. March 23rd.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. Of which year?

A. 2003.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. And where was that?

A. Toronto.

Q. When you came to Canada what did you tell the Port of Entry officer what’s your reason for coming?

A. Travelling.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. I’m sorry?

A. I told him I’m coming to travel.

Q. As a tourist?

A. Yes.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. Why were you coming to Canada?

A. To travel.

Q. Was that your sole reason for coming to Canada?

A. Yes.

Q. On the 12th of September you were arrested with a number of others. Can you tell me why you were with this group of people?

A. Yes, I came here to meet the guys.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. You came here to meet who?

A. To meet the persons that were arrested.

- With you, okay.

A. To give them frames, paintings. To leave the same day to Toronto.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. Why were you giving them frames and paintings?

A. For them to sell them.

Q. Was that the first day you met them?

A. No.

Q. How often had you supplied them with frames and paintings?

A. Once a week, once in two weeks.

Q. Did you charge them for these frames and paintings?

A. I wouldn’t charge them in advance, no.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. You would not charge them in advance, but would they have to pay you back?

A. Yes, after they sold them, they would have to pay, to pass me the, yes.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. How much would they give you like per painting, or was there a set amount each week they had to give you, or?

A. They were amount to be give me for the painting, 80 dollars painting, and 85 dollars frame.

Q. How long were you doing this? How many weeks?

A. Approximately between 16 to 18 weeks.

Q. How many weeks after coming to Canada would that have been?

A. Eight weeks.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. You started eight weeks after having entered Canada?

A. Yes.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. How did you get this job?

A. There was a ad in the newspaper in Israel.

Q. When was that?

A. The beginning of March.

Q. Before you came to Canada?

A. Yes.

Q. So you had the job before you came to Canada?

A. Yes. But it was just an option for me. I came here originally to travel. And then because of my lack of cash, a lot of money, I started working. I was supposed to work for a period of time and then to continue my travelling. To leave Canada to South America.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. Okay, how much are you getting for yourself out of these ...

A. This money?

- Yeah.

A. I would get eventually between two to three and half thousand dollars a month. Like I get it every...

Q. That’s for your own?

A. That’s for myself, yes.

- Okay.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. The people that worked for you how much did they get?

A. It’s something you won’t be able to say because some of them they don’t sell anything, so they wouldn't get anything. Some of them sold a few I cannot really say.

Q. Did they get a percentage of the profits per painting?

A. From their sales, yeah.

Q. Did you have any expenses...

A. Yes.

Q. ...other than... what were your expenses?

A. Cell phone, vehicle, accommodation.

Q. Accommodation for yourself...

A. Yes.

Q. ...or accommodation for them?

A. For myself.

Q. Cell phone, you said cell phone.

A. Cell phone.

- Car.

A. Car and accommodation, vehicle and obviously fuel. I’m driving a rental. It's not my vehicle. Everything just to support myself.

Q. Who made their room?

A. They did.

Q. They paid their room?

A. I paid it in advance and they returned me the money. They couldn’t afford a month in advance.

Q. So you paid a month in advance?

A. Yes.

Q. All right, so...

A. It’s not came, it didn’t came from my pocket, but yes.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. Where did it come from?

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. Where did the money come from?

A. Like I explained the officers from immigration, I’m not in charge of this business. I’m not the head of this group of students. There was another guy, there is actually another guy or two or twenty, I don’t know what. The one that I’m aware of on top of me. I would take the money from them and I had to, give him the money after I got my share. And from this money I could rent their houses, and then when they return me, I would add this to the sum and give it to him.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. Who is that person?

A. (inaudible) I don't have any specific information on him. You must understand it’s the owners of this kind of business wouldn’t like to expose themself into any...

- Okay.

A. Any problem with the law. So it’s usually they stay, like in the case, they stay in the dark, no names, no phone numbers, no address.

- Well...

A. Even if I wanted to...

- ...you have to get in touch with him. You have to return the money.

A. He would have called me to my cell phone, let me know when can I meet him in Toronto. Most of the time in Toronto. He would give me the money and...Excuse me, I give him the money.

- Yes.

A. He give me the frames and the paintings. So.

Q. Does that person lives in Canada? Would you know if that person is a Canadian citizen or a foreigner, or?

A. He’s an Israeli.

- Yeah.

A. He told me he lives in the States. I wouldn’t take his word of.

- Yeah.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. Why were you hired as the group leader of this group?

A. He liked me I guess in some sort of way. I met with him in Israel and I spoke with him for a while and he...

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. You met with him in Israel prior to coming to Canada?

A. Yes. The way I got into this job is through his help. I called him and I got the message they will come to me if I (inaudible) the job. I met him at (inaudible).

- Yes.

A. He explained to me, first of all, I was supposed to call him as if I would work as a salesman going door to door trying to sell the paintings. Then he asked me about my military service. What I did here, what did I did there. And my military service, has a certain...

- Background.

A. ...experience, background. It was sufficient for this kind of job. That’s why eventually he wanted me to do this job and not other. Want to be salesman or something else just...

- Be a kind of a supervisor.

A. Yes. And I must say that at least for the concern of taking care of the employees after you found out they’re not Musad [sic] agents and I hope that it’s clear for everyone.

Q. That?

A. We’re not Musad [sic] agents. That they were taken care of very good. I took care for everything they needed starting accommodation, going onto all sorts of problems they had, all sorts of issues they needed to solve as foreigners in a country. And they were treated in the most decent way I could manage.

- Uh-hum.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. How much money did you bring to Canada with you?

A. I came with me with four-thousand U.S. dollars and a very big ...not a lot of Canadian dollars. But when I met my, my parents were already in Canada last week actually, so they brought me another sum of Canadian.

Q. How much money did you have when you were arrested?

A. First of all, I never got a report from the police on how much money did they seized us.

Q. How much do you think was there?

A. There was three-thousand and four-hundred or five-hundred U.S. dollars, and between seven to eight thousand in Canadian dollars.

Q. How did you have four-thousand dollars U.S. to come to Canada? Were you working in Israel?

A. First of all, I used to work, not in the last year, but I lived and worked in Israel. I’ve been working since I was 16.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

Q. But how long have you been out of employment?

A. Two years, two years and something.

Q. Out of employment prior to your coming here?

A. But I, once again I was working since I was 16.

- Yes.

A. Providing myself.

- Yes.

A. And I didn't let... I do have a wealthy family that has put some money aside. So this state of my life when I do mostly travelling I'm using this money to travel.

- Okay.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. Where have you travelled?

A. Oh, no.

Q. No, no, but where?

BY MEMBER (to Minister's counsel)

- Well, Madame...

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

- Sir, do not answer the question.

BY MEMBER (to Minister's counsel)

- That question is not real...

A. Relevant.

- ...relevant to the allegation.

A. All right.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to person concerned)

Q. How long had this group been in Ottawa? Not all members of the group but this group of sales people.

A. Approximately a month and a half.

Q. Did you have a work permit, an employment authorization to do this work?

A. No.

Q. Where did you travel in Canada?

A. All over. East coast, West coast, all over.

Q. Did you know anybody in Canada?

A. Yes.

BY MINISTER'S COUNSEL (to member)

- That's all my questions.

A. Thank you.

BY MEMBER (to person concerned)

- Madame Powell, has ended her presentation of evidence, and she believes that your testimony is sufficient to establish the well-foundedness of the allegations brought against you.

Q. Is there anything you would like to add on your side?

A. I don't have any question, but I have a few things to say if your honour is willing to hear it.

- Go ahead.

A. I would like to say first of all that I really appreciate and love your country. I think it’s one of the greatest country in the world if you look at it, and I travelled a great, a lot. I travelled a lot so I can tell the difference between a state to another. Since I started working with this here I had a lot of ideas and lot of thoughts about opening here a business in Canada. I do not want to get a Canadian citizenship. I would like to spend the rest of my life in Israel. I'm satisfied with my citizen, my Israeli citizenship and yet I think that Canada has a lot to offer to foreign investors. And I think that me with my, if I can say, talent and my will to work, I can help Canada a lot.

- But this, Mr. Laniado, you’ll have to do through the proper channels.

A. I know. That’s...

- That is you’ll have to file for permanent residency...

A. A week in advance.

- ...at an embassy.

A. A week in advance to the incident, to the arrest, actually I started doing some, going to lawyer and this and that to try and open a business. Legal business, to stop doing the monkey business stuff, and to open it legally to pay taxes like everyone else and do everything right, on the right way. I’m aware that what I have done is wrong and I can see why the Canadian government is doing us this hearing and eventually will probably send us to our main land.

- Yes.

A. I would like to at least have the opportunity to say that I would like some day to come back to Canada, and on a legal permit, of course, to open a business and to try and do something which I know can be very nice here. Can help me, can help Canada, can help the people of Canada. Because after all Canada is a growing country and you need both young men to work here, or women. And I would like to add something else that is relative to this case, if I can.

- Yeah.

A. That when we got arrested, so eventually when we set off to our homes, (inaudible) so some of our belongings wasn't returned to us. I had a wallet, a leather wallet, 35 dollars inside the wallet with two credit cards, two debit cards, an Israeli Driving License, my International Driving License.

Q. Those documents were seized by the cops, by the policemen?

A. They weren't seized. They were, I have downstairs you can, over here maybe you can see photographs of all these documents. But somehow they weren't returned to me. I came here, we were released on Friday evening. Saturday, Sunday I came here there was no one here. There was no one to talk to. I left messages.

- Okay, okay.

A. Impossible. And right now nobody finds it by the way.

Q. Oh, the documents are lost?

A. The documents are here, but my credit cards, my Driving License, I don't have any four or five...

Q. Where are those documents? Do you have them on file?

A. The police and the immigration blame each other for losing them. Basically it's...

- Well…

A. Right now when you seize all the money.

- Yeah.

A. And all my documents and my passport is here, in Canada I’m stuck.

- Unfortunately, I cannot intervene in this matter, but I understand your concerns and you will certainly have to inquire before immigration and the policeman in order to find out what happened to those cards. And someone will have to certainly answer and give reasons why those cards have suddenly disappeared. That's all I can say on this.

A. I'm not saying for anything other than reason that right now I don't have any ID. I can...

- No, ...

A. Because my family...

- ...immigration has seized your passport. The passport will be returned to you when you will leave Canada.

A. But the thing that until then I don’t have anything. A few days ago I was pulled over by a cop. It took almost three hours until, like for a traffic violation.

- Yes.

A. ...it took two hours until he finally understood who I am, what am I doing here, and what can he do to me or whatever. He could arrest me immediately if he wanted. He was just nice trying to solve this thing in a good way. I don’t have any credit cards, so I need to make new ones. I cannot do it. I don't have any ID. I don't have any money. I cannot get any Western Union money transfers. And please get me my passport back. I'm not asking you to find the wallet, but any kind of ID. I’m not gonna run from Canada with anything. I have bond of fifteen-thousand dollars.

- Yes, Mr. Laniado, this will have to be discussed with immigration. I cannot order immigration to return you the passport. They’re the only ones who are to decide on whether they will keep it on their file or they will return it to you. Okay. But I’m sure Madame Powell is taking good notes of what you’re saying at this time, and I hope immigration or the policemen will be able to trace your credit cards and the rest of your belongings.

A. Thank you, sir.

- Mr. Laniado, the evidence adduced during the course of today's admissibility hearing consisted of your sole testimony which reveals at first that you are a citizen of Israel by birth in that country on February 7th, 1979. You are not a Canadian citizen nor a permanent resident of Canada, and this is sufficient for me to conclude that you have no right to remain into country.

Now, you testified having entered Canada, on March 23rd, 2003, at Toronto. At that time you said, you told the examining immigration office at the Port of Entry that you were coming here as a tourist. You also said during the course of today’s admissibility hearing that this was, as a matter of fact, the sole reason for you coming to Canada. You said it was the sole reason for your coming to Canada when the question was asked of you.

A. Ah, to travel.

- Yeah.

A. Ah, yes.

- Now, you got arrested on the 12th of September 2003, and you have now admitted that you've been working in Canada as a supervisor. You're getting between two to three, or thirty-five-hundred a month, plus you have expenses that are being paid. That is your cell phone, accommodation, vehicles, fuel and all that kind of things. You never asked for nor obtained a working authorization.

You said that prior to your coming to Canada, you had seen ad in a newspaper in Israel and you called someone, met you in Tel Aviv and discussed what the work was all about. And because of your qualifications, it was determined that you would not act as a salesman door to door but you would rather supervise a team of salesmen. And you started working eight weeks after your arrival in Canada.

Having fully considered the evidence before me, I find, Mr. Laniado, that you are a person described in Paragraph 41(1)a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act in that, on the balance of probabilities, there are grounds to believe you are a foreign national who is inadmissible for failing to comply with the Act through an act or an omission which contravenes directly or indirectly a provision of the Act, and that is the requirement of Section 30 sub (1) which states that you cannot work in Canada unless authorized to do so under the Act.

Now, there was another allegation to the effect that, on a balance of probabilities, you would be inadmissible for misrepresentation of a material fact. You said that when examined at the Port of Entry you told the immigration officer you were coming here in order to sightsee the country. And you answered Madame Powell’s question by saying that this was the only reason why you had come here. However, when considering that prior to initiating your trip to Canada, you contacted someone who had put an ad in a newspaper about work in Canada. So to inquire about the details of that job, you even met with the person who, following discussions, has offered you to be a supervisor rather than selling paintings door to door. So I think in all likelihood you weren’t only coming here to sightsee Canada, but you were coming here so to engage in employment as well. Maybe doing both at the same time. But you also had the intention of engaging in employment since you had already... you have already discussions prior to your coming to Canada about this kind of job.

So I find that the second allegation is also established on a balance of probabilities, and consequently I am hereby making an Exclusion Order against you. And this will mean that you will be removed from Canada. You will be called to leave, and you will be prohibited from coming back to Canada for two years.

A. For two years.

- For two years you can't come back. If you want to come back though, you may come back within that two year period of time, but you need to obtain the Canadian Immigration Minister's written consent which could be obtained any Canadian Embassy in any country where Canada has a delegation.

A. In how much time should I leave?

- This immigration will tell you how long they’ll give you to make arrangements and leave the country. Okay.

Today’s hearing is now terminated. I’ll have you sign the order.

The transcripts of the deportation hearings of the art students are revealing. Former and well-educated former members of the Israeli military acted as if they never knew it was against the law to work in another country without a permit. There were references to an unnamed “boss” who lived in the United States and owners of the art selling operation who wanted to avoid run-ins with law enforcement. Perhaps the art students in Canada were merely unaware but couple the Canadian art operation with the American operation carried out just two years prior and a pattern of deception emerges. The motto of the Mossad is noteworthy when pointing to its foreign operations: “By way of deception, thou shalt do war.”

There was an interesting postscript to the Israeli espionage activity in the United States before, during, and after 911. In December 2004, it was reported that a former senior U.S. government official, commenting on the FBI’s raid of AIPAC’s Washington offices, stated that in 2001 the FBI discovered a “massive” Israeli espionage operation on the East Coast, specifically including New York and New Jersey.[104] National Security Adviser Rice and her deputy Stephen Hadley were both briefed on the FBI investigation of Israeli espionage in the United States shortly after they took office in early 2001.[105] A Justice Department source confided that it was Attorney General John Ashcroft who personally ordered the investigation of the Israelis stopped in the months prior to 911 – a decision that proved fateful for the thousands of people who persished on September 11.



NOTES are on next page of this dump, here: viewtopic.php?f=23&t=40695&p=643632#p643632
Last edited by Elvis on Sun Sep 17, 2017 6:15 am, edited 1 time in total.
"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5821
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 9/11 Info Dump

Postby Elvis » Sun Sep 17, 2017 6:15 am

[p.22 of dump]

NOTES for: THE ISRAELI ART STUDENTS AND MOVERS STORY
By Wayne Madsen http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/Artstudents.htm


[1] Anna Werner, “Federal Buildings Could Be In Jeopardy - In Houston and Nationally; Government guards have found so-called students trying to get into secure buildings, KHOU-TV 11 News, October 1, 2001.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Brett Shipp, “News 8 Investigates ‘Art Students,’” October 3, 2001.

[4] Neil Mackay, “Five Israelis were seen filming from the van on the right as jet liners ploughed into the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. Were they part of a massive spy ring which shadowed the 911 hijackers and knew that al-Qaeda planned a devastating terrorist attack on the USA?” Sunday Herald, November 2, 2003, p. 1.

[5]Jim Galloway, “Innocent Israelis Caught Up in Arrests,” Palm Beach Post, November 18, 2001, p. 21A.

[6] Information from East Rutherford Police Department.

[7] John Miller, “Five Israeli men arrested soon after 911 might have been working for Israeli intelligence, but likely did not know beforehand about the attacks,” ABC News, 20/20, June 21, 2002.

[8] Confidential source, Larimore Associates.

[9] Confidential sources, Jersey City Police Department.

[10] “911 Tapes tell Horror of 9/11,” WNBC-TV, June 17, 2002 <http://www.wnbc.com/news/1315651/detail.html>

[11] Management and residents of Liberty State Park Marina and personnel of Liberty State Park Water Taxi.

[12] Repeated phone calls, October 2004, with Liberty State Park and Department of Environmental Protection officials.

[13] East Rutherford Police information.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Paulo Lima, “Five Men Detained as Suspected Conspirators,” The Record (Bergen County), September 12, 2001.

[16] Interviews with residents of “The Shades,” the Weehawken neighborhood where Urban Moving Systems was located.

[17] Miller, op. cit.

[18] Lima, op. cit.

[19] Doug Saunders, “U.S. arrests of Israelis a mystery Most charged with immigration violations either have been deported or will be,” Globe and Mail (Toronto), December 17, 2001, p. A7.

[20]Robert Rudolph, Kate Coscarelli, and Brian Donohue, “Evidence takes investigators through Wayne and Fort Lee,” Newark Star-Ledger, September 15, 2001.

[21] Interviews of Union City and Weehawken witnesses to 911 attack, October 2004.

[22] “Car bomb found on George Washington Bridge,” Jerusalem Post, September 12, 2001.

[23] Interviews in Jersey City, October 2004.

[24] Miller, op. cit.

[25] First Amended Complaint, filed September 14, 2004 U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York, 04 Civ. 3950 (JG) (CP).

[26] Galloway, op. cit.

[27] John Miller, op. cit.

[28] Confidential information.

[29] Miller, op. cit.

[30] John Miller, op. cit.

[31] Marc Perelman, “Spy Rumors Fly on Gusts of Truth; Americans Probing Reports of Israeli Espionage,” The Forward, March 15, 2002.
[32] John Miller, op. cit.

[33] Mackay, op. cit.

[34] <http://www.ncix.gov/news/2001/mar01.html#a1>

[35] Philip Shenon, “FBI and Ashcroft to Come under Fire,” International Herald Tribune, April 6, 2004.

[36] Jim Stewart, “Ashcroft Flying High,” CBS News, July 26, 2001.

[37] John Daly, “UPI Hears,” June 13, 2005 < http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking ... -6408r.htm?

[38] Edward Alden, “White House publicizes CIA briefing to Bush,” Financial Times, April 11, 2004.

[39] A Roy Laniado surfaced as a team leader with regard to Israeli art students arrested in Canada in 2003. Roy Barak, a driver for Urban Moving Systems, was arrested on September 12, 2001 by police in Pennsylvania.

[40] Bob Holliday, “Fundamentalist link in cheap art scam?” Winnipeg Sun, August 8, 2004, p. 6; Paul Cowan, “Door-To-Door Scam ‘Artists’ Busted; Local Art Dealers Warn Of Cheap Reproductions,” Edmonton Sun, August 8, 2004, p. 6.

[41] Carl Cameron, Fox Special Report with Brit Hume, December 13, 2001; Wayne Madsen, “Homeland Security, Homeland Profits,” CorpWatch, December 21, 2004.

< http://www.corpwatch.org/issues/PID.jsp?articleid=1108>

[42] Administrator refers to Asa Hutchinson, the then DEA Administrator. He subsequently was named as the Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security under Secretary Tom Ridge.

[43] Swissinfo Web Site, “Swiss court begins hearing charges in case of Israeli secret agent,” July 3, 2000.

[44] “Cyprus reportedly refuses to hand over suspected Mossad agents,” Ma’ariv (Tel Aviv), December 29, 1998; Uzi Mahnaimi, “Mossad moves to re-open UK spy base,” Sunday Times (London), April 5, 1998.

[45] “Israeli National Charged in Spy Case,” Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, FL), July 11, 1999.

[46] Noam Sharvit, “AMDOCS exec questioned in industrial espionage,” Globes Online (Israel), May 31, 2005 <http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=919329&fid=942>

[47] “Spyware espionage ring cracked; Israeli companies infiltrated by Trojans,” Reuters, June 1, 2005.

[48] DEBKAFile Special Update, May 29, 2005; David Stringer, “Israel Extradition: Couple Remanded in Custody,” The Scotsman, May 26, 2005.

[49] Patrick O’Connor and Jonathan E, Kaplan, “Wi Fi fight involves Abramoff,” The Hill, March 3, 2005, p. 11.

[50] Ibid.

[51] Mary Jacoby, “Friends in high places; Sami Al-Arian isn't the only prominent Muslim leader who posed for chummy pictures with President Bush. Many conservative Republicans are uneasy at the way GOP power broker Grover Norquist curries support from the Muslim community,” St. Petersburg Times, March 11, 2003.

[52] Michael Isikoff and mark Hosenball, “Who, and What, Does He Know? New evidence suggests that a leading Muslim spokesman in the U.S. associated with terror suspects,” Newsweek, October 1, 2003.

[53] Brian McWilliams, “Instant Messages To Israel Warned Of WTC Attack,” Newsbytes, September 27, 2001.

[54] Confidential information from World Trade Center and New York-New Jersey Port Authority Police.

[55] Carl Cameron, Fox Special Report with Brit Hume, December 11, 2001.

[56] Gordon Thomas, “Bush: The Ignored Warning That Will Come to Haunt Him,” Globe-Intel, May 21, 2002. <http://www.gordonthomas.ie/104.html>

[57] Doug Moe, “Israeli Spies Lurking in State?” The Capital Times, May 10, 2002, p. 2A.

[58] Randy Ellis, "Four Israelis deported after Tinker incident," Daily Oklahoman, March 8, 2002.

[59] UPI Hears, March 2, 2002. <http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=06032002-121706-8744r>

[60] The 9:20 AM entry was an obvious typographic error and likely should have been 8:20 AM because at 8:46 AM, Flight 11 crashed into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. The shooting of Lewin at 8:20 AM was simultaneous to the time that Logan Airport flight control determined that Flight 11 had been hijacked. A gunshot report by the flight attendant may have contributed to that determination since all communications with the cockpit had ceased at around 8:15 AM. The FAA memo was prepared at 5:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time at the end of a working day when most of Washington’s government employees had evacuated the city in panic and confusion; ABC News Prime Time Thursday, “Calm Before the Crash Flight 11 Crew Sent Key Details Before Hitting the Twin Towers,” July 18, 2002. <http://abcnews.go.com/sections/primetime/DailyNews/primetime_flightattendants_020718.html>

[61] Under the Computer-Assisted Passenger Pre-Screening System (CAPPS), “selectee passengers” were those subject to additional security screening. A selectee passenger was identified based on a lack of knowledge about him or her, use of cash to pay for a ticket, and other parameters. While two women with common names, Adams and Miller, were “selected,” the hijackers apparently boarded Flight 93 without any arousal of suspicion.

[62] Saunders, op. cit.

[63] Jerry Markon, “FBI Tapped Talks About Possible Secrets,” The Washington Post, June 3, 2005, p. A07.

[64] Cindy Gonzalez, “Mall kiosk probe ends in Israelis’ deportation,” Omaha World Herald, February 9, 2005, p. 5B; Cindy Gonzalez, “Mall kiosk probe ends in Israelis' deportation An Israeli man was accused of using illegal "tourist" workers,” Omaha World-Herald, February 8, 2005, p. 5B.

[65] Werner, op. cit.

[66] U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Office, Corpus Christi, Intelligence Bulletin, TIN #7, January 17, 2002.

[67] J. R. Gonzalez, “FBI is looking into person taking photos of refinery; snapping pictures is fairly common, authorities say; patrols increased since man spotted doing so Nov. 22,” Corpus Christi Caller Times, December 14, 2001, p. B1.

[68] “Two Groups of Middle Eastern Invaders Caught in Cochise County in Past Six Weeks,” Tombstone Tumbleweed, < http://www.tombstonetumbleweed.com/tomb ... sp#iframe1>

[69] Homeland Security, Homeland Security Operations Center, Homeland Security Operations Morning Brief, 27 September 2004.

[70] Homeland Security, Homeland Security Operations Center, Homeland Security Operations Morning Brief, 29 September 2004.

[71] Homeland Security, Homeland Security Operations Center, Homeland Security Operations Morning Brief, 30 September 2004.

[72] Homeland Security, Homeland Security Operations Center, Homeland Security Operations Morning Brief, 14 October 2004.

[73] Homeland Security, Homeland Security Operations Center, Homeland Security Operations Morning Brief, 19 October 2004.

[74] Homeland Security, Homeland Security Operations Center, Homeland Security Operations Morning Brief, 26 October 2004.

[75] Homeland Security, Homeland Security Operations Center, Homeland Security Operations Morning Brief, 9 December 2004.

[76] Homeland Security, Homeland Security Operations Center, Homeland Security Operations Morning Brief, 28 December 2004.

[77] Homeland Security, Homeland Security Operations Center, Homeland Security Operations Morning Brief, 30 December 2004.

[78] Homeland Security, Homeland Security Operations Center, Homeland Security Operations Morning Brief, 5 January 2004.

[79] Pete Donohue, “MTA has a secret film file,” New York Daily News, July 27, 2005.

[80] Sheila K. Stogsdill, “FBI familiar with mysterious traveler,” The Daily Oklahoman, October 5, 2004, p. 6A.

[81] Michael Shinabery, “New Mexico Police Stop Israelis with Suspicious Cargo,” Alamagordo Daily News, May 19, 2003.

[82] Mitch Lipka, “Rogue movers increasingly rip off consumers,” Philadelphia Inquirer, February 1, 2003.

[83] Mike Barber, “Case of Whidbey Island ‘terrorists’ is a dud, FBI says,” Seattle Post-Intelligencer, May 14, 2002.

[84] Ibid.

[85] News4Jax.com, “King’s Bay Naval Base Locked Down,” May 21, 2004; Associated Press, “Suspicious Moving Van Prompt King’s Bay Shutdown,” May 23, 2004.

[86] Associated Press, “Israeli men arrested after high-speed chase in Unicoi County,” May 10, 2004; Julie Ball, “Contents of Vial Linked to Israelis Not a Threat,” Asheville Citizen-Times, May 12, 2004.

[87] Michelle Mowad, “2 found with video of Sears Tower,” The Mercury, October 17, 2001.

[88] Confidential information.

[89] Martin Merzer, Curtis Morgan, and Lenny Savino, “Wanted By FBI: Still More Suspicious Men With Israeli Passports, Box-Cutters, Oil Pipeline And Nuclear Power Plant Plans,” Miami Herald, October 3, 2001.

[90] Jim Galloway, “Israelis trapped in terror roundups cause worry at home, anger at U.S.,” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, November 18, 2001, p. 15A.

[91] “La PGR Informa Sobre La Situación De Los Sujetos Detenidos En La Cámara De Diputados,” Justice Department of Mexico, October 12, 2001.

< http://www.pgr.gob.mx/cmsocial/bol01/oct/b69701.html>; Ernesto Cienfuegas, “Army general and head of the PGR releases two Israelis arrested with guns and explosives inside the Mexican Congress,” La Voz de Aztlan, October 15, 2001.

[92] Knut Royce, Peter Eisner, and Timothy M. Phelps, “Gacha Got Assault Rifles From Israel; Weapons sold to Antigua found at druglord’s home,” Newsday, May 23, 1990, p. 4.

[93] Fran O’Sullivan and Bridget Carter, “Government demands Israel return any bogus passports,” New Zealand Herald, April 19, 2004.

[94] Yossi Melman, “NZ: 2 more passport suspects may have fled to Israel,” Ha’aretz, July 25, 2004

< http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/455480.html>

[95] Francis Till, “Fourth ‘Israeli Spy’ a Kiwi Academic,” National Business Review (New Zealand), July 24, 2004

< http://www.nbr.co.nz/home/column_articl ... %20Pacific>

[96] Yossi Melman, “Canada to probe use of its passport in New Zealand affair,” Ha’aretz, August 1, 2004.

[97] “Aussies Tight-Lipped Over Israeli Diplomat's Departure,” New Zealand Press Association, February 6, 2005.

[98] Subir Bhaumik, “Aborted Mission; Investigation: Did Mossad attempt to infiltrate Islamic radical outfits in South Asia?” The Week (India), February 6, 2000.

< http://www.the-week.com/20feb06/events2.htm>

[99] Ibid.

[100] “Don’t Ignore Spy Ring,” Albuquerque Journal, March 8, 2002, p. A14.

[101] John Steinbachs and Andrew Seymour, “Nine Israelis Face Deportation; Spy Agency Suspects They May Be Foreign Agents,” Ottawa Sun, September 19, 2003, p. 8.

[102] Paul Cowan, op. cit., Edmonton Sun, August 8, 2004, p. 6.

[103] Holliday, op. cit., Winnipeg Sun, August 8, 2004.

[104] Richard Sale, “FBI Steps Up AIPAC Probe,” UPI, December 9, 2004.

[105] Richard H. Curtiss, “New Spy Investigation Supressed at Crucial Juncture,” Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, November 2004, pp. 26-27.



"Frankly, I don't think it's a good idea but the sums proposed are enormous."
User avatar
Elvis
 
Posts: 5821
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2008 7:24 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: 9/11 Info Dump

Postby Elvis » Sun Sep 17, 2017 6:25 am

[p. 23 of dump]


Report on traveling Israeli "art students," evidently written by DEA agents, detailing their efforts to record and get inside of federal facilities and federal agents' homes etc.

IN TWO POSTS.

PART ONE:

[60 pages. No date.]

Suspicious Activities Involving Israeli Art Students at DEA Facilities

Backgound:

In January, 2001, the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Office of Security Programs (IS), began to receive reports of Israeli art students attempting to penetrate several DEA Field Offices in the continental United States. Additionally, there have been reports of Israeli art students visiting the homes of numerous DEA employees. These incidents have occurred since at least the beginning of 2000, and have continued to the present. The number of reported incidents increased in November/December 2000, and has continued to date. These incidents have involved several other law enforcement and Department of Defense agencies, with contacts made at other agencies' facilities and the residences of their employees. Geographically, these incidents are very widespread, ranging from California to Florida. The majority of the incidents have occurred in the southern half of the continental U.S. with the most activity reported in the state of Florida. Since April 2001, the number of reported incidents has declined, however, the geographic spread of the incidents has increased to Wisconsin, Oklahoma, and Los Angeles.

The activities of these Israeli art students raised the suspicion of IS and other field offices when attempts were made to circumvent the access control systems at DEA offices, and when these individuals began to solicit their paintings at the homes of DEA employees. The nature of the individuals' conduct, combined with intelligence information and historical information regarding past incidents involving Israeli Organized Crime, leads IS to believe the incidents may well be an organized intelligence gathering activity. It is believed by IS that these incidents should not be the basis for any immediate concern for the safety and security of DEA personnel, however, employees should continue to exercise due caution in safeguarding information relating to DEA investigations, or activities.

DEA Orlando has developed the first drug nexus to this group. Telephone numbers obtained from an Israel Art Student encountered at the Orlando D.O. have been linked to several ongoing DEA MDMA (Ecstasy) investigations in Florida, California, Texas, and New York. The Orlando D.O. has opened an investigation that is being coordinated with DEA HQs.

In general, these individuals appear to be organized in teams of 8 to 10 people, with one person described as the "Team Leader". They are usually encountered in pairs or individually carrying a makeshift art portfolio. Several times, they have, been seen or admitted to being dropped off in an area by the Team Leader, who returns later to pick them up. The females are usually described as very attractive, and all are generally in their early to mid-20s. Most admit to having served in the Israeli Military. This is not surprising given the mandatory military service require in Israel, however, a majority of those questioned has stated they served in military intelligence, electronic signal intercept, or explosive ordinance units. Some have been linked to high-ranking officials in the Israeli military. One was the son of a two-star general, one served as the bodyguard to the head of the Israeli Army, one served in a Patriot missile unit. That these people are now traveling in the U.S. selling art seems not to fit their background.
Their stories are remarkable only in their consistency. At first, they will state that they are art students, either from the University of Jerusalem, or the Bezalel Academy of Arts in Jerusalem. Other times they will purport to be promoting a new art studio in the area. When pressed for details as to the location of the art studio or why they are selling the paintings, they become evasive. Some claim to be the artist who painted the artwork, others claim they promoting the work of others or of Israel. Information has been received which indicates the art is actually produced in China. When told that they cannot solicit on federal facilities, they will claim that the paintings are not for sale, but that they are soliciting interest in the paintings, either for an art studio or for a future art sale.

An incident report by DEA Tampa has revealed much information relating to these individuals. DEA Agents at the Tampa District Office questioned the Team Leader of a group of 9 individuals at length, The Team Leader stated he purchases the paintings for $8 to $10 dollars from an individual in the Hollywood/Ft. Lauderdale, Florida area. The paintings are then sold for $50 to $80 dollars. (Other offices have reported the paintings selling for $150-$200 dollars.) The individuals come to the U. S. on tourist visas, and finance their stay here by selling the paintings. The Hollywood, Florida area seems to be a central point for these individuals with several having addresses in this area.

There have been incidents where criminal and/or suspicious activity has been associated with these individuals. Two were arrested by FPS in Plantation, FL with counterfeit Social Security Cards. Baton Rouge, LA discovered a small amount (personal use amount) of marijuana in the residence of one group, and some of the individuals interviewed by DEA/Tampa admitted to smoking marijuana. Criminal records checks have revealed some arrest history on persons associated with these groups. Passport irregularities have been reported. A review of their passports shows travel to several other countries, to include Thailand, Laos, India, Kenya, Central and South America, Australia, Germany, Amsterdam, and Canada. One individual presented a Canadian citizenship card along with his Israeli passport. A report from EPA/Denver involved a female art student going to the house of an EPA Special Agent to sell art, and returning later to photograph the house. There is a report of one of these individuals being seen diagramming the layout of a federal facility. This information has not been directly reported to DEA, and has not been confirmed by first-hand observation.

When encountered at residences, some of these individuals are persistent in trying to get inside the home. Some have asked to use the telephone when leaving. Some employees have reported that they came only to their house, while others have reported that the students approached the entire neighborhood.

IS requested that all DEA Field Divisions canvas their employees to determine if these activities have occurred in their area. Additionally, information has been received from several other federal law enforcement acencies. The following is a summary, by DEA Division Offices, of the events that have taken place:

Atlanta Division

1. Sometime in July or August 2000, a woman claiming to be a student from a foreign country attempted to enter the Chattanooga, Tennessee Resident Office. The woman was attempting to sell homemade pins that she hand painted and put together herself. An Office Assistant advised the woman that she was on Federal Property and solicitation was prohibited. The Office Assistant claimed the woman was from the Middle East, but cannot recall the exact location.

2. In mid to late December 2000, a male and female subject described as being in their mid-twentles arrived at the residence of a Special Agent. The male subject spoke fluent English, however the female subject had a heavy accent. Both subjects claimed to be Israeli art students. The Special Agent examined some of the artwork, but became suspicious when the students would not provide him with a contact telephone number in case he should decide to buy something. Subsequently, the Special Agent saw some of the exact same artwork for sale at kiosk in the Mall of Georgia. The Special Agent questioned the salesperson about the origin of the artwork, but the salesperson was uncooperative.

3. During the first week of January 2001, an individual identifying himself as an Israeli art student attempted to bring artwork into the Columbus, Georgia Resident Office. The individual was not permitted to enter the office.

4. The following was received by the Montgomery, Alabama District Office:

On 3/27/2001, approximately 1:45 p.m., Montgomery District Office Group Supervisor John W. Wall was exiting the elevator on the first floor of our building enroute to a meeting. Our building is a small two-story office building that also contains the offices of the U.S. Bureau of Prisons, U.S. Geological Survey, Dyncorp and a small investment company (Newman Investments). As G/S Wall got out of the elevator, a white female was getting on. G/S Wall noticed she was carrying a large blue artist portfolio. GIS Wall [not redacted] engaged her in conversation and asked if she was in our building on government business to which the female stated that she was an art student from Austria and was promoting her work. G/S Wall asked if she was actually from Israel and the female later identified as Vanina Erika DARDIC, DOB 3/5/78, stated again that she was from Austria. DARDIC got on the elevator for the second floor and G/S Wall went to his OGV and notified me with instructions to re-interview the female.

5. Several minutes passed and DARDIC never came to our office. (Investigation later revealed that DARDIC did not visit any of the offices in our buildling. Moments later an administrative assistant observed DARDIC walking through the parking lot in the direction of other buildings.

6. At that point, agents set out on foot to find DARDIC. The agents observed another white female later identified as Ester SAGES, DOB 9/30/77, walking through the office complex, also carrying a large blue portfolio. SAGES was followed on foot a short distance to a van that was parked on a side road where the agents made contact with a white male, identifitd as Marcelo VALANSI, DOB 11/24/77. VALANSI took SAGES' portfolio and placed it into the van, a 1984 GMC full-size custom van bearing Florida tag T11YZX, registered to Marcelo VALANSI at 901 SE 1st Ave., #2, Gainesville, Florida.

7. The agents approached SAGES and VALANSI, identified themselves and separated the two for interviews. VALANSI stated that he was an art student at the University of Florida and stated that they were traveling around to "'promote" the work of new artists. Information revealed that VALANSI was registered at Santa Fe Community College in 1999 and not the University of Florida. VALANSI produced an ID card from Argentina, DNI 26,316,660, card #190961, and stated that he was on spring break from the University of Florida where he has been a student for three years. VALANSI stated his passport was in his hotel room at the Governor's House Hotel, #180. VALANSI stated that he and approximately five other students had been in Montgomery about two days and planned to stay several more.

8. Ester SAGES produced an Israeli passport, #6470399, and stated that she had been in the U.S. approximately 3 weeks (Visa type R, class B1/B2). SAGES claimed to be an artist but does not attend school anywhere. SAGES admitted to having served in the Israeli Army for two years (mandatory service). SAGES identified her father as Elyahu SAGES (deceased) and her mother as Marjalit SAGES. SAGES gave the same story as being in Montgomery to "promote" the artists work.

9. While talking to VALANSI and SAGES, Vanina DARDIC walked up and was interviewed. DARDIC, provided an ID card from Argentina (DNI 26,473,227, card #J8557), but stated that she had dual citizenship (Argentina and Israel). DARDIC stated that she was born in Argentina to an Argentine father, Mario DARDIC, and an Israeli mother, Judith COHEN (maiden name). She moved to Israel when she was 12 years of age and served in the Israeli Army, DARDIC reported that she is the girlfriend of Marcelo VALANSI. DARDIC spoke English, Hebrew and Spanish. SAGES spoke English and, Hebrew. VALANSI spoke English and Spanish.

10. VALANSI was asked if the artwork was for sale, to which he stated "not really" that they were "promoting" their work and that it is important to artists that people like their work. VALANSI was asked if, hypothetically, someone liked his work and wanted to commission him to paint something, how would someone get in contact with him? VALANSI was very hesitant to provide a means of contact. When pressed, VALANSI provided Gainesville telephone #352-378-1435 as a contact nurniber. He was asked how their group could afford to travel around "promoting" artwork if they derive no income from it. He stated that his parents, Roberto and Graziela VALANSI finance his travels. The parent's address in Buenos Aires is reportedly Salguero 2468 Apartment 15.

11. Ester SAGES stated that one of their stops inMontgomery was going to be the Jewish Fcderation Office which is located adjacent to where their van was parked (2820 Fairlane Dr., Montgomery, telephone #334-277-5820). All of the subjects were photographed, however SAGES initially did not want her picture taken.

12. EPIC was contacted for information on their entries into the U.S. EPIC queries indicated the following:

VALANSI, Marcelo (Argentina passport #26316660)
1). Admission date: 2/01/2001
Admission Class: F1 (Student)
Port of Entry: Miami, FL
Arrival from: Tel Aviv Israel
Visa Issued: Buenos Aires (8/20/98)
Carrier: Al Israel Airlines (flt 201)
Intended address: 901 S.E. 1st Ave., Gainesville, FL
2). Admission date: 10/18/00
Admission to: 1/17/01
Admission Class: CP (Public Interest Parole)
Port of Entry: Miami, FL
Arrival from: unk (most likely Columbia)
Carrier: Avianca (flt 8)
Intended address: 901 S.E. 1st Ave., Gainesville, FL
Departure date: 12/28/00 from Miami
3). Admission date: 11/12/99
Admission Class: WT/VW (Visitor w/o Visa)
Port of Entry: Miami, FL
Arrival from: Santiago, Chile
Carrier: La Lan Chile (flt 500)
Intended address: 901 S.E. 1st Ave., Gainesville, FL
Departure date: unk
4). Admission date: 04/15/99
Port of Entry: Miami, FL
Arrival from: San Jose (Juan Santamari)
Carrier: LACSA (flt 620)
Departure clate: unk
5). Admission date: 01/11/99
Admission Class: F1 (Student)
Port of Entry: Marmi, FL
Arrival from: unk
Carrier: La Lan Chile (flt 500)
Intended address: 901 S.E. 1st Ave., Gainesville, FL
Departure date: unk
6). Admission date: 9/23/98
Admitted to: 12/31/98
Admission Class: Fl (Student)
Port of Entry: Miami, FL
Arrival from: unk
Carrier: A L Argentina (flt 1324)
Intended address: 617 E. University Ave., Gainesville, FL
Departure date: 12/19/98
7). Admission date: 05/04/98
Admitted to: 11/03/98
Admission Class: B2 (Visitor)
Port of Entry: Miami, FL
Arrival from: Unk
Visa issued: Buenos Aires 5/11/90
Carrier: E U Empresa Ecuatoriana (flt 800)
Intended address: 617 E. University Ave., Gainesville, FL
Departure date: 08/10/98
8). Admission date: 1/02/97
Admitted to: 7/01/98
Admission Class: B2 (Visitor)
Port of Entry: Maini, FL
Arrival from: unk
Visa issued: Buenos Aires 5/11/90
Carrier: La Lan Chile (flt 502)
Intended address: 143 6 Washington Ave., Miami, FL
Departure date: 03/13/98
13. SAGES, Ester (Israel passport 96470399)
1). Admission date: 3/03/01
Admission Class: B2 (Visitor)
Port of Entry: Newark International
Arrival from: Tel Aviv Israel
Carrier: Continental Airlines (flt 91)
2). Admission date: 12/23/99
Admitted to: 6/22/00
Admission Class: B2 (Visitor)
Port of Entry: Newark, N.J.
Arrival from: Tel Aviv Israel
Carrier: El Al Israel
Intended address: Attornet 161, New York City, New York
Departure date: 01/09/00
3). Admission date: 08/24/95
Admitted to: 2/23/96
Admission Class: B2 (Vishor)
Port of Entry: New York
Arrival from: Tel Aviv Israel
Visa issued: Buenos Aires 5/11/90
Carrier: El Al Israel
Intended address: Hotel Carlton, New York City, New York
Departure date: 9/20/95
14. DARDIC, Vanina Erika (Argentina passport #10581811)
1.) Admission date: 2/01/01
Port of Entry: Miami, FL
Arrival from: London (Gatwick Int'l)
Visa issued: Buenos Aires 5/11/90
Carrier: Virgin Atlantic Airlines (flt 5)
2). Admission date: 10/18/00
Admission Class: CP (Public Interest Parole)
Port of Entry: Mami, FL
Arrival from.: Bogota, Columbia
Visa issued: Buenos Aires 5/11/90
Carrier: Avianca (flt 8)
Intended address: 901 S.E. 1st. Ave., Gainesville, FL
Departure date: 12/25/00
3). Admission date: 12/23/99
Port of Entry: New York
Carrier: Tower Air (flt 31)
(no further info)
15. Regarding the groups story as art students, specifically VALANSI stating that he is a student at the University of Florida out on springbreak, RAC Dick McEnany, Gainesville R.O. inquired as to VALANSI's status as a student. RAC McEnany advised that VALANSI was last registered in the spring of 1999. RAC McEnany also stated that spring break was already over for this year.

16. It is noted that in addition to the three subjects contacted, another group of three alleged art students were documented workin another office complex on Perry Hill Road (Interstate Park) in Montgomery on the same day (3/27/2001). This group is known to have solicited several offices in that complex which are Department of Defense contractors (Maxwell Air Force Base is in Montgomery). Montgomery FBI agents made contact with that group at their hotel (La Quinta Inn) and identified them.

17. The local FBI office was contacted and provided with this information for follow-up as necessary. The FBI POC RAC Sharon Ormsby.

Boston Division

18. There have been no reports of suspicious activities by Israeli art students occurring, at DEA facilities or at the residences of any DEA Employee under the Boston Division.

Caribbean Division

No response,

Chicago Division

20. On or around June 26, 2000, a male and female claiming they were Israeli art students, visited the home of a Diversion Investigator, The male was described as Caucasian, 5'8", 160 lbs., dark brown hair, clean-shaven, brown eyes, and early 20's. The female was described as 5'6", 160 lbs., long curly dark brown hair with blonde highlights, early 20's. The students left the residence without incident.

21. On or around June 30, 2000, a second set of Israeli art students arrived at the home of the same Diversion Investigator. These students were confrontational when asked to leave and the police were called (16th District Chicago Police Dept.). The male was described as 5'6", 150 lbs., slim build, dark skin, no facial hair, very dark hair, early 20's. The female was described as 5'8", slim build, brown shoulder length hair, and early 20's. They did approach other homes in the Diversion Investigator's neighborhood. The Israeli students were seen entering a Chevy Astro van, steel gray in color, with darkened windows.

Dallas Division

22. On January 4, 2001, SPI Contract Guard William Armstrong purchased a painting for $200.00 from an Israeli art student.. The transaction took place outside of the Dallas Divisional Office. Mr. Armstrong wrote a check payable to a Gal BLAIN.

23. Sometime in January 2001, a male claiming to be an Israeli art student selling paintings visited the home of a DEA Intelligence Analyst and OPR Senior Inspector. The male was described as Caucasian, in his mid twenties. The DEA employees did not purchase any artwork.

24. On February 5, 2001, Security Guard Armstrong observed an individual matching the descriptions of the Israeli art student enter an office building directly East of the Dallas Divisional Office. Mr. Armstrong notified the Federal Protective Service Officers. The FPS Officers responded to the location, located the individual, and conducted an interview. The Israeli art student claimed he was selling paintings. NADDIS EPIC, INS Soundex, and state system checks were conducted for the above individual, with negative results.

25. As of March 26, 2001, local law enforcement continued to encounter Israeli Nationals, either alone or in groups, selling artwork in the Dallas area. The Israelis appeared to be organized and structured, with the lower level consisting of the artwork sellers while the next level consists of the drivers. The hierarchy above the drivers remains undefined. Many of the art sellers claim to be studerts of a Jerusalem art school, and several appear to have had prior Israeli military experience. A standard method of operation is for a driver to drop off three or four salespersons in an area, returning several hours later for pickup. Bank checks found in the possession of several of the students suggest that the artwork sells for between $50.00 and $150.00.

26. Several local law enforcement agencies have provided information to the DEA Dallas office pertaining to recent encounters. On January 2, 2001, an 6fficer of the Euless Police Department sighted a 1995 Chevy Van, white, California plate 3HXN005, parked with back doors opened behind a small office complex that was closed due to the Christmas/New Year holidays. The officer's initial inspection showed five persons present and that the rear of the van was filled with 40 to 50 framed artwork. Neither the frames nor the artwork appeared to be high quality, per the officer. The officer noted that the van and subjects were stopped in a non-residential area that consisted of a golf course, a chemical company and a storage facility for a defense contractor. When questioned, the subjects indicated they were selling paintings in the area, but were evasive in answering questions thereafter. For example, several subjects stated they were staying in Irving, Texas, but were not sure exactly where. The subjects were warned on the scene for selling paintings without a permit, and released. Although all five subjects possessed passports, only name and DOB information was recorded for each. All subjects were negative in law enforcement indices. The five subjects were identified as:
Gilad LIFSHITZ, W/M, DOB 09/17/1973 (Note: Lifshitz was the vehicle driver)
Betzalel YANAY, W/M, DOB 09/04/1978
Morin Miryam BITON, W/F, DOB 07/14/1980
Daria SASSON, W/F, DOB 08/10/1980
Keren TOUYZ, W/F, DOB 08/20/1978

27. At the time of the encounter Gilad LIFSHITZ, the driver of the van, was in possession of a Florida driver's license, number L123-280-78-337-0, that showed a DOB of 09/17/1978, and an address of 19115 Collins Ave # 102, Sunny Isles Beach, F1 33160. Sunny Isles Beach is in the Miami area. Perhaps coincidentally, per DEA's Office of Security Programs, two Israelis previously encountered in Miami were in possession of counterfeit US Social Security Cards. The cards were reportedly obtained in Miami from an unidentified person who was selling the cards near a Florida driver's license office.

28. As previously reported, LIFSHITZ was driving a 1995 Chevy Van with California plate 3HXN005. A California registration check showed that this van, VIN 1GAHG39K5SF112662, was apparently sold to B I Auto Inc, 31861, 854 Ackerman Dr, Danville, California, circa August 30, 2000. A check of vin 1GAHG39K5SF112662 showed that it is associated with a 1995 Chev/Spt owned by Gilad LIFSHITZ of 7535 N. Beltline Rd, Apt 316, Irving, Texas 75062. (Note: this may be the Irving address referred to by the Israeli art students). (ISP Note: Michael CALMANOVIC, identified by I&NS Dallas and arrested on Marcy 28, 2001, rented at least 5 apartments in the Irving, TX area, and used a mail drop located at 3575 N. Beltline Road, Irving, TX.) Current vehicle tag is TX/86YYF, title date is 02/10/2001, expiration date is 01/2002. The previous owner is listed as Noam TZOR. What, if any, relationship there may be between TZOR and B I Auto Iac is unknown.

29. In a separate but related matter, on March 16, 2001, the same officer from the Euless PD encountered Sharon ROTEM, aka Sharone, an Israeli art student, at a Kentucky Fried Chicken on Euless Blvd in Euless, Texas. ROTEM was described as a white male, DOB 031277, passport number 7948317, street address: 6023 Moshe Dayan, Holon, Israel. ROTEM claimed association with a Jerusalem art school and had approximately 20 paintings in his possession. The officer noted that ROTEM was an Israeli citizen who was selling "artwork" without a permit, and issued a warning. During the interview, ROTEM stated he was with two others and they were going to be picked up at 17:00 that afternoon. The pickup location was unspecified. ROTEM informed the officer that he (ROTEM) was out of the Israeli military and was doing "Good Deed" work. ROTEM also stated that he was staying in Irving, but didn't know where or the name of the hotel, and that he was going to drive to Austin Texas, later that day. ROTEM was negative in law enforcement indices. In ROTEM's possession were several airline tickets, as follows:
-9th of March: Continental Flight 91 from Tel Aviv to Newark, NJ.
-10th of March: Continental Flight 1133 from Newark, NJ to Dallas, TX. This ticket shows a return to Newark on May l4th via Continent al Flight 1138.
-Continental Flight 90 to Tel Aviv.

30. Sandwiched between the two Euless incidents was an incident in Richardson, Texas. Per a Richardson Police Department report, on March 15, 2001, officers were dispatched in reference to two females soliciting artwork. Once located, the subjects were identified via their Israeli passports as Maya MAIMON and Nofar BADIHI. Both subjects were arrested for soliciting without a city permit. Prior to being interviewed by police officers, an unidentified male called the jail to inquire about the two female subjects. The U/I male was told he could come to the station to get further information. Two subjects arrived and were identified as Gadi REGEV and Eyal ARTZI (Texas DL number 19554509). A conversation regarding bond and visitation issues ensued, after which the males left. During a search of the two female suspects' property, several checks were found. Most were filled in with the amount and signature, but the payee blank was void. Also during the search of MAIMON's purse a prescription of cloriazepam prescribed to Marco FERNANDEZ was found. It was determined that FERNANDEZ was MAIMON's boyfriend. Fourteen checks, the prescription, and $130 dollars cash were placed in property as evidence. The paintings that the suspects were selling were also impounded.

31. Maya MAIMON was in possession of documentation showing her passport number as 5467894, US B1/B2 visa, DOB 26Dec1978, Nationality Israel, Issue Date: 18Oct2000, Expiration Date: 15Oct2010.

32. Nofar BADIHI was in possession of documentation showing her passport number as 5640993, DOB 21/03/1979 (sic), Place of Birth: Israel, date of issue: 05/12/1993; date of expiry (sic): 04/12/1995; US Visa B1/B2, issue date: 05Ju11996, Expiry Date: 02Jul2006.

33. Among the various documents were airline tickets reflecting the travel of Maya MAIMON and Marco MARABOTTO from DFW airport to Albuquerque, NM, via Delta flight 2238, on March 24, 2001. Each ticket also reflected Delta flight 1944 from Las Vegas to DFW on April 1, 2001.

34. Additional documents showed Marco FERNANDEZ's to be the same as Marco Antonio FERNANDEZ De Castro Marabotto, DOB 13Apr1977, passport number 99390039611, Issuing State: Mexico; place of birth: Mexico, date of issue 16Jul1999, expiration date: 16Jul2000.

36. Gadi REGEV was described as DOB: 17Dec1975, Nationality: Israel, passport number 5454338, visa type: B1/B2, issuing post: Tel Aviv, issue date: 05Nov1998, expiration date: 04Nov2008.

37. Eyal ARTZI's driver's license shows DL # 19554509, DOB 05-27-1977, address: 10334 Sandra Lynn Dr., Dallas, TX 75228, and an expiration date of. 06-27-07. A commercial database shows that ARTZI is the owner of a 1993 Plymouth Acclaim, Texas plate: J75FYB, date registered 08/21/2000, expiration date: 07/31/2001.

38. Another incident involved an Israeli art student who attempted to sell paintings at the residence of S/A Michael Durr in Flower Mound, Texas, on March 25, 2001 at approximately 17:30. S/A Durr was slightly delayed and when he opened the door the art student had already departed and was approaching another house. S/A Durr called the Flower Mound police department, which responded. The art student was identified as David SUSI, W/M, DOB 01/09/1975, who was staying at an unspecified location in Irving, Texas. The student was not detained.

Role Name Desc DOB PP/DL# Visa Sgtd Nad
Driver Gilad Lifshitz W/M 09/17/1978 FLDL#L123-280-78-337-0 Euless Neg
Seller Betzalel Yanay W/M 09/04/1978 Euless Neg
Seller Morin Miryara
Biton W/F 07/14/1980 Euless Neg
Seller Dana Sasson W/F 08/10/1980 Euless Neg

Role Name Desc DOB PP/DL Visa Sgtd Nad
Seller Keren Touyz W/F 08/20/1978 Euless Neg
Seller Sharon Rotcrn W/M 08/12/1977 PP#7948317 Euless Neg
Seller Maya Maimon W/F 12/26/1978 PP#5467894 Bl/B2 Richardson Neg
Seller Nofar Badihi W/F 21/03/1979(sic) PP#5640993 Bl/B2 Richardson Neg
Unk Gadi Regev U/M 12/17/1975 PP#5454338 Bl/B2 Richardson Neg
Unk Eyal Artzi U/M 05/27/1977 TXDL#19554509 Richardson Neg
Unk Marco Fernandez U/M 04/13/1977 PP#99390039611 Richardson Neg
Note: Maya's Boyfriend
Seller David Susi W/M 01/09/1975 Flower
Mound Neg

Dallas I&NS Investigative Reports

(The following is information received by ISP from I&NS Special Agent George Putnam, Dallas, TX. This information is gleaned from I&NS reports, and is consolidated for this paper.)

39. On March 22, 2001, I&NS Dallas received a request from FPS Dallas S/A's Ellison and Stokes to assist in an investigation regarding Israeli art students. On March 26, 2001, agents went to the Oak Hills Apartment Complex in Irving, Texas to conduct interviews of Israeli nationals staying at those apartments. At approximately 11:30 pm, agents arrested Dahan ELDAD, an Israeli male, and Elsa Beatriz AFRICANO-Leon, a Colombia female at apartment 4228. ELDAD and AFRICANO were proceeding toward apartment # 173, where four Israeli nationals were in custody. ELDAD and AFRICANO were found to be nonimmigrant aliens in violation of their status, and placed under arrest by S/A Martini and Olivarez. A search of their apartment revealed a small amount of marijuana and a "bong" Additionally, checks in the amount of $150.00 (2) and $560.00, with the notation "For Paintings" were found in his possession.

40. At approximately 1:26 am on 3/27/01, S/A's arrested Eran LIVNI, an Israeli male, Aran OFEK, and Israeli male, and Michal GAL, DOB 8/10/79, POB: Afula Israel, I&NS #A75-894-941, an Israel female in apartment 216. OFEK and GAL were recognizedby FPS S/A Stokes as having been interviewed by FPS subsequent to attempting to sell paintings at the DEA Dallas F.D. on Regal Row. LIVNI admitted to the S/A's he had engaged in attempting to sell art. Also present in apartment 216 were Noam GAVRIEL an Israeli national, and Netta Kritzman, a U.S. citizen. Personal belongings were retrieved from apartment #259 for OFEK and GAL. Three other Israeli nationals were encountered in apartment 9259, however, they were not found to be in violation of I&NS status and not arrested (nor identified in the report).

41. Aran OFEK stated that his father was a retired two-star general in the Israeli Army. (NFI). (ISP note: Israel recently launched its 5th spy satellite, identified as the OFEK 5. It is unknown if the name of the satellite and these persons is related.)

42. Michal GAL was subsequently held on a $10,000 cash bond. The bond was placed by Ophir BAER, DOB: 11-11-56, an Israeli male on a nonimmigrant H1B1 class visa. BAER was petitioned to work in the U.S. by AMDOCS, Inc. on Sept. 7, 1999, which was valid from Dec 10, 1999 to Sept 30, 2002. The visa was issued in Tel Aviv. BAER listed his address as 7845 La Cabeza Drive, Dallas, TX 75248 with telephone numbers (home) 972-392-0473 and (work) 214-576-5741, SSN: 627-70-0979. BAER also is identified with an address of 1125 East Campbell Road, Richardson, TX. BAER's SSN is also identified with a John BAER and Annie BAER at the 7845 La Cabeza address. BAER stated he was a relative of GAL. On the bond papers, it was reflected that GAL would be staying at 22 Palisade Terrace, Edgewater, NJ 07020 Tel: 201-224-0797 / 210-310-3521. A cashier check #0001594012 from Bank of America in the amount of $ 10,000 was posted.

43. AMDOCS is an Israeli communications software company, based in the U.S. at 1390 Timberlake Manor Parkway, Chesterfield (St. Louis), MO 63017-6041, telephone number 314-821-3242. AMDOCS is traded on the NYSE under DOX. On April 17, 2001, AMDOCS released a statement that he had signed a five-year outsourcing agreement with BellSouth. AMDOCS also lists an address of #1 Bell Plaza, St. Louis, Mo, which is the address for Bell South. AMDOCS also has a seven-year outsourcing agreement with Nextel Communications, a provider of digital wireless telecommunications services. Under this agreement, AMDOCS will provide Nextel with a comprehensive billing and customer care information software and support services. The president of AMDOC in Texas is identified as Boaz DOTAN, address: 23 Abba Hillel, St. Ranat Gan, Israel. Treasurer is listed as Beverly A."WHITMAN, SSN: 400-88-4097. Secretary is listed as Gregory CHRISTOFFEL, SSN: 389-52-8560 at 91 Bell Plaza, St. Louis, MO.

44. Also arrested during this operation was Eran MOSHE (identified with I&NS #A75-894-459), who stated he was a former Israeli special operations soldier.

45. It is noted that following the arrests of the Israeli nationals on March 26/27th, the Israeli embassy was notified that citizens of its country had been arrested by I&NS. The Israeli embassy,arranged for air transportation out of the county on March 31, 2001.

46. On March 27, 2001, at approximately 2:30 pm, three Israeli nationals arriving frorn Frankfurt, Germany, were admitted as non-immigrant visitors through the Dallas / Ft. Worth Airport (DFW). They were identified as Julia VAINSHTEIN, an Israeli female, DPOB: 11-12-78/Russia, Dilka BORENSTEIN, DPOB: 03-15-79/Israel, and Ofir NAVON, DPOB: 09-02-79/Israel. BORENSTEIN stated to have been recently discharged as an Israeli Military Intelligence officer. NAVON claimed to be a former Israeli Army demolition/explosive ordnance disposal specialist. The three stated they intended to tour the Dallas area for a few days, and then go to Houston, New York, and Los Angeles. They claimed not to know anyone in the Dallas area. Surveillance was maintained on the three after they left the inspection area. They were seen being picked up by an individual subsequently identified as Michael CALMANOVIC, who was driving a black Jeep bearing, Texas tags L44-CVD. This tag comes back to CALMANOVIC at 3575 N. Beltline Road, Apt 316, Irving, Texas. Subsequent investigation revealed this address to be a mailbox.

47. In December of 2000, an Israeli art student by the name of Cohen MEYTAL was observed by a DEA employee sitting on the western street curb of the Dallas Divisional Office selling artwork. The student claimed that a group of Israeli art students (about 20) would paint works of art and them at local places of business. The employee purchased a painting and was offered to have it framed by an acquaintance of the Israeli group. The check was made out to Cohen MEYTAL and mailed to the following address:
Cohen Meytal
c/o Calmanovic
3575 N. Beltline Road
P.O. Box 316
Irving, Texas 75062
This address is identified with Michael CALMANOVIC. See report under LABORATORIES, paragraph #161.)

48. On March 31, 2001, I&NS Deportation Officer Michael L. Bush was assigned escort duties for the 13 Israelis arrested on March 26/27, 2001 in Irving, Texas. At that time, one of the Israelis (not identified in the report) stated that five individuals in Israel were responsible for recruiting Israeli nationals to come to the U.S. for the purpose of selling art door-to-door. The detainee identified "ITAY' who lives in California, (subsequently identified as Itay SIMON), as the direct link between the five persons in Israel, and the U.S. operation. The detainee stated that the Texas contact for the organization is "Michael", who lives in the Dallas area and drives a black Jeep. The detainee stated that Michael (CALMANOVIC), is subordinate in the art-vending scheme to Itay (SIMON).

49. Based on investigative leads developed by I&NS S/A R. Marra and R. Martini, the Rochelle Plaza Apartments, located at 312 Rochelle Road, and the Hidden Ridge Apartments, located at 1103 FEdden Ridge, both in Irving, Texas, were identified as possible residences used by CALMANOVIC. On April 14, 2001, I&NS and FPS S/As interviewed Ms. Mary Stanton, Property Manager for the Rochelle Apartments. Ms. Stanton stated that CALMANOVIC had rented five (5) apartments in the complex, and that these apartments were occupied by 25 Israelis. Ms. Stanton stated that all of the Israelis left suddenly and vacated the apartments on the week of March 26/27th, (the time of the arrests of the 13 other Israelis). Ms. Stanton stated she believed CALMANOVIC was still in the Dallas area, as he had recently called regarding his security deposits. Copies of the lease agreements and copies of Israeli passports were provided by Ms. Stanton.

50. Following this, the agents went to the Hidden Ridge Apartments, and at approximately 1:00 pm encountered CALMANOVIC and Itay SIMON in apartment #3018. Thev were in the process of vacating that apartment at the time. CALMANOVIC was identified as an Israeli citizen, DPOB: 09-06-75/Israel. SIMON was identified as an Israeli citizen, DPOB: 02-27-78/Israel. I&NS S/A Martini positively identified CALMANOVIC as the driver of the black Jeep Cherokee that picked-up VAINSHTEIN, BORENSTEIN, and NAVON at DFW on March 27th. (See paragraph #46 above). CALMANOVIC stated he was a recently dicharged electronic intercept operator for the Israeli military, and SIMON stated he was recently discharged from the Israeli Army, where he did "classified work for Israeli national security". SIMON refused to answer further questions regarding his military service. Both CALMANOVIC and SIMON were both arrested by I&NS and held on $50,000 bond. This bond was subsequently posted.
Telephone number 214-882-5196 was identified as a possible contact number for CALMANOVIC in Dallas. This number is owned by NEXTEL Communications. Through an administrative subpoena, the subscriber was identified as Michael CALMANOVIC, 11012 Ventura Blvd, Studio City, CA 91604, business phone number 469-446-7777, SSN 613-23-1430, CA DL # 0077480. The service was established on March 29, 2001. NOTE: 11012 Ventura Blvd, Studio City, CA is associated in MSQ with telephone number 818-980-6955, subscribed to SOTERE, Christopher C. in case file number R1-96-0160. MSQ also lists 11012 Ventura Blvd apartment #68, Studio City, CA with JACOBS, Peter, NADDIS #3539920, from case file R3-93-0098.

Prior to the service start date of March 29, 2001 for Michael CALMANOVIC, the phone number 214-882-5196 was used by N Lal MUMITH and Talal MUMITH (NADDIS Negative) DBA American Limo and Transportation (NADDIS Negative), 415 E. Airport Freeway, Suite 280, Irving, TX 75062, business phone number 972-256-0546 (all NADDIS Negative). Telephone number 214-882-5196 was changed to 214-882-8534 on February 13, 2001 and effective March 29, 2001 the phone was assigned to CALMANOVIC.

In addition to telephone number 214-882-5196, there are six (6) additional phone numbers assigned to the account (all NADDIS Negative) with the assigned users name. The following list is all the phone numbers on account number 3231266 subscribed to Michael CALMANOVIC with a users name:

Phone Number User
214-882-5196 Gilad
214-837-3574 Roy
469-446-1248 Mosh (likely Eran MOSHE, para 944)
214-837-5996 Gil
214-876-1235 Gilad
214-837-7449 Michael
217-837-2056 Asaf


A nationwide search of available commercial databases for Michael CALMANOVIC, identified one Michael CALMANOVIC at 319 S. 177th Place 4201, Seattle, Washington 98148, home phone number 206-244-7705 (all NADDIS Negative). A search against the social security number was negative. CREF indicates that one Michael CALMANOVIC is associated with 310 S. 177th Place, Apt3 04, Seattle, WA (206) 242-3484, and 317 S. 177th Place, Apt 104, Seattle, WA (206)-277-8303. All NADDIS Negative.

51. On March 28, 2001 at approximately 2:00 pm, three-Israeli nationals arrived at DFW again from Frankfurt, Germany. They were identified as Yoni ENGEL, male, DPOB: 09-14-79/Israel, Yotam DAGA1, DPOB: 04-06-78/Israel, and Or ALROEI, DPOB 08-08-78/Israel. ENGEL identified himself as a former company commander in the Israeli Army. Arriving on this same flight was Eli RABINOVITZ, a U.S. citizen, DOB 03-27-79, U.S. Passport E3701329518. RABINOVITZ was described as a white, male, approximately 5'6" in height, 175 pounds, with brown hair in long dreadlocks and a small patch of hair beneath his bottom lip. RABINOVOTZ was seen waiting outside of the I&NS area, and seemed to be impatient. He was observed speaking to a white female who was waiting by the curb. She was not identified, but is described as being approximately 35-40 yoa, 5'6", 150 pounds, with short reddish-brown hair. She was dressed in European style clothes, and appeared to SA Putnam to be possibly German. Once an I&NS Inspector escorted one of the above Israelis out of the I&NS area, RABINOVITZ starting speaking to the Israeli in Hebrew. Once ENGEL, DAGAI and ALROEI had collected their bags, they walked outside and spoke with RABINOVITZ, and then split into groups. During this time, ENGEL was seen to be the leader of the group, giving orders to the DAGAI and ALROEI. The unidentified white female stayed with RABINOVITZ at the curb, while ENGEL, DAGAI and ALROEI walked down the sidewalk to the next terminal. DAGAI then quickly walked into the terminal at the same time as a blue GMC Safari Van, bearing California tags 3LVA018 arrived at the curb and picked-up ENGEL and ALROEI. The van then quickly departed. DMV records indicate this van is registered to ADESA GOLDEN GATE, Address: 6700 Stevenson Blvd., Fremont, CA, transfer date 11-28-00:, receipt date: 12-11-00. In a few minutes, the van returned and stopped quickly at the curb. DAGAI then came from the terminal door-way and entered the van. The van then quickly departed. Again, the van returned to the area, and RABINOVOTZ got into the van and the unlidentified female spoke to the occupants, then it again departed. S/A4 Putnam attempted to locate the van, however it could not be found. When he returned to the area, the unidentified female had also departed.

52. On April 4, 2001, four (4), and possibly six (6), Israelis were arrested in by the Ladue Missouri Police Dept. for peddling without a license. Three of these individuals were identified ay Yoni ENGEL, Yotam DAGAI, and Or ALROEI. During interviews conducted by I&NS St. Louis, three of the subjects claimed to have traveled directly from New York City, NY to Dallas, TX. A fourth subject claimed to have arrived at Dallas by way of New York City, Minneapolis, and Seattle. All then claimed to have met in San Antonio, TX with a fifth subject, identified as Ben SADAN, an Israeli national approximately 24 yoa, who acted as their driver. SADAN reportedly uses a cellular telephone with number 214-562-1110. The group claimed they then traveled from San Antonio, TX to Oklahoma City, OK, Tulsa, OK, Wichita, KS, Topeka, KS, Kansas City, MO, Springfield, MO, and then to St. Louis for the purpose of "showing" art produced by art students from the University of Art at Jerusalem. All admitted opening bank accounts at various branches of Bank of America. They further stated that the money collected from the sale of any art was normally deposited into various Bank of America accounts with an unspecified amount going to the individual seller. (See paragraph #129, under St. Louis Division).

53. On an unspecified date, (but believed to be on or about May 9, 2001 three Israeli nationals arrived at DFW via Air France Flight #40 from Paris, France. Two were sent for secondary inspection and interviewed by I&NS Agents. They were identified as Tomer BEN DOR, male, Israeli, DOB: 08-24-75, Marina GLIKMAN, female, Israeli, DOB: 12-15-72. BEN DOR stated he planned on being in the Dallas, TX area for approximately two weeks and then was planning on traveling to Mexico, New York City, and Canada before returning to Israel. BEN DOR was in possession of a return ticket to Israel dated July 8, 2001 and a rental car reservation through Hertz for May 9, 2001 to June 9, 2001. BEN DOR stated he works for NICE, a software engineering company in Israel. BEN DOR stated he served in the Israeli military on a unit that was responsible for Patriot missile defense.

54. BEN DOR stated he intended to stay at the La Quinta Inn, 14925 Landmark Blvd, Addison, TX, however a check of the hotel revealed no reservations under his name. BEN DOR was in possession of $1500 in cash and a credit card, which he stated he was going to use to help pay his expenses while in the U. S. BEN DOR stated he is a friend of GLIKMAN and traveled to the U.S. with her, but might travel throughout the U.S. alone. During a search of BEN DOR's luggage a printout from a Windows readme file named "WinPOS-53-readme" was found that has some reference to a file named "DEA Groups".

55. Marina GLIKMAN stated she would be visiting the U.S. for two months in the Dallas area. She originally claimed to be traveling alone, but later claimed to be traveling with BEN DOR. GLIKMAN stated that an individual named Ronen AKIVA or "HILLEL" (subsequently identified as Hillel DOR) would pick her up. GLIKMAN did not know the address of AKIVA or HILLEL, but had home and cellular telephone numbers for both, (not identified). GLIKMAN stated she did not know whom AKIVA worked for. GLIKMAN also stated she was planning on staying at the La Quinta Inn, and was in possession of $1500 in cash and a credit card. Again, a check of the hotel revealed no reservation under her name. GLIKMAN claimed to be a computer programmer for RETALIX RAANANA in Israel, and a prior intelligence officer in the Israeli military. During a search of her personal luggage, a Declaration for Personal Effects Shipping to Overseas was found which reflected she has shipped personal effects, to include furniture and clothing, to 8081 Royal Ridge Parkway, Irving, TX, the address used by RETALIX USA.

56. While GLIKMAN and BEN DOR were being processed, I&NS Inspectors went to the lobby of DFW to attempt to identify any individuals who were present to meet GLIKMAN and BEN DOR. The Inspectors identified Hillel DOR, male, Israeli, DOB: 04-06-71 and Zeev MILLER, male, Israeli, DOB: 09-04-71. MILLER had also arrived on the same flight as GLIKMAN and BEN DOR. MILLER claimed he was a student at Tel Aviv University studying software engineering while working part-time for RETALIX in Israel. MILLER stated he intended to travel to Mexico, New York, and Canada while on vacation. MILLER stated he was an explosive ordinance/combat engineer while in the Israeli military. MILLER was in possession of $1200 in cash and a Visa credit card. Hillel DOR stated he was at the airport to pick-up GLIKMAN. I&NS S/As verified that DOR had entered the U.S. in January, 2001 as an H-1B nonimmigrant, working for RETALIX USA.

57. RETALIX provides integrated, enterprise-wide software for the retail food industry. It has headquarters in the U.S. and Israel. RETALIX, USA Inc is the U.S. subsidiary of the parent company, based in Israel. It was founded in 1982 as POINT OF SALE LIMITED and changed its name in November 2000. It is trades on the NASDAQ market under RTLX. The company has over 450 einployees, with subsidiary offices in the U.S. and the United Kingdom. The chairman and CEO is Barry SHAKED, who replaced Lawrence ALLMAN as the president and CEO of RETALIX USA on January 31, 2001.

Denver Division

58. Sometime in July or August 2000, on two separate occasions, a male described as Caucasian, 5'8", black hair, wearing baggy clothing, entered the reception area of the Denver Divisional Office. The unidentified male spoke with a heavy accent and was carrying a black artwork brief case. The unidentified male asked to speak with anyone interested in purchasing artwork. The unidentified rriale was asked to leave and did so without incident.

59. Sometime in December 2000, an unidentified white male, 20-25 years of age entered the Colorado Springs, Colorado Resident Office in an attempt to sell artwork, He was asked to leave and did so without incident.

60. Four separate incidents involving unidentified persons attempting to sell artwork at the Salt Lake City, Utah Resident Office were reported by a Receptionist. These incidents occurred during the 2000 calendar year. In each incident, all suspicious persons entered the reception area of the Salt Lake City, Utah Resident Office asking to speak to anyone interested in purchasing artwork. All subjects spoke with a heavy accent believed to be French. All subjects were asked to leave and did so without incident.

61. A second receptionist at the Salt Lake Ciiy, Utah Resident Office reported one male and two female subjects attempted to sell artwork in the reception area. The receptionist asked the male subject where he was from. Apparently, he claimed he was from Israel. The receptionist purchased a painting, for $100.00 and was not issued a receipt. This incident occurred sometime in January 2001.

Detroit Division

62. A Vehicle Technician at the Detroit Division reported that during the fall of 2000, a female appearing to be either Jewish or Arabic in her twenties visited her home in Southfield, Kentucky in an attempt to sell her artwork. The Vehicle Technician declined to purchase any paintings and the female left. The Vehicle Technician said it appeared the female was going door to door.

63. A DEA-6 Report of Investigation was received from the Louisville, Kentucky Resident Office detailmig the suspicious activities of Israeli art students. On February 12, 2001, an individual who identified himself as an Israeli art student visited the residence of a Special Agent. The individual stated he was selling artwork door to door. He claimed he and other Israeli students were staying at a Motel 6 in Lexington, Kentucky. The Special Agent examined the individual's Israeli Ministries of Transport photo ID. The ID indicated that the individual was Shabar FREIDMAN, driver's license number 6728447 and ID number 033056433. On February 13, 2001, a Special Agent made contact with an individual outside the Lexington, Kentucky Resident Office. The individual claimed to be an Israeli art student. The individual was identified as Gerzon Ofir AVRAHAM, (DOB 08/12/77). AVRAHAM presented his Israeli passport (96315574) and a Ministries of Transport ID number 034193615. Contact was made with AVRAHAM after ATF personnel observed him walking around the property of the Lexington, Kentucky Resident Office. During an interview with AVRAHAM he stated that he did not enter the Resident Office and that he was trying to sell his artwork to individuals in the area. AVRAHAM also stated that he and seven other Israelis were in the U.S. traveling and selling artwork. AVRAHAM claimed that he and the others go to businesses and residenes in an attempt to have people buy their artwork. Apparently, the Israelis were staying at a Motel 6 located in Lexington, Kentucky and are planning to travel to Cincinnati, Ohio. AVRAHAM told the Special Agents that there are two groups of Israeli students currently in the U.S. The second group was then currently in Memphis, Tennessee and Houston, Texas. The Israelis plan to stay in the U.S. until the end ofMarch or the beginning of April. AVRAHAM also claimed that one of the members of his group, SHAHAR (LNU), visited the residence of a police officer. SHAHAR told AVRAHAM that the police officer questioned him about the purpose of his visit.

El Paso Division

64. On February 28, 2001, at approximately 6:30 p.m. the Albuquerque District Office Duty Agent received a phone call from Patrick Dawson in Phoenix, Arizona (606) 664-5647. Dawson stated that their respective office had received a Teletype stating that a terrorist organization from the Middle East has been attempting to obtain information about the layout of different law enforcement agencies throughout the United States. According to Dawson the organization sends college students with framed paintings/prints to law enforcement buildings in an attempt to gather information about the layout of the buildings.

65. On or around January 28, 2001, a young man attempting to sell artwork approached a DEA Receptionist for the Albuquerque District Office. The Receptionist advised the young man that the District Office was a federal building and that she or anyone else was not interested. The Receptionist observed: the young man leave; however, she does not remember the description of the individual.

66. On Tuesday, March 6, 2001, a young female came to the IRS office trying to sell artwork. The woman was dressed neatly in an "American style" dress. The woman spoke very quietly and with a heavy accent, which made her very difficult to understand. She advised one of the IRS employees that she was Mongolian and that she had to sell a certain amount of artwork to get an art scholarship. She carried a small portfolio type container and produced a childish and unframed painting of some sort of animal with glitter. One of the witnesses described it as something the girl might have done herself. The girl was told that soliciting wa