Richard Clarke: CIA covered up ties to 9/11 hijackers

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Re: Richard Clarke: CIA covered up ties to 9/11 hijackers

Postby 8bitagent » Sun Sep 11, 2011 10:04 pm

thatsmystory wrote:
Ali Soufan, the Lebanese-American FBI agent whose questioning of Qaeda members after 9/11 gleaned valuable intelligence - including confirmation that Khalid Sheik Mohammed was the mastermind of the attacks - reveals his face for the first time in a "60 Minutes" interview with Lara Logan to be broadcast Sunday, September 11 at 7 p.m. ET/PT on the CBS Television Network.

Ex-FBI agent who interrogated Qaeda members speaks out


In the same article 60 Minutes puts Soufan's allegations in proper context:

According to several intelligence sources contacted by "60 Minutes," so-called "enhanced interrogation techniques" such as water boarding and sleep deprivation, were effective and they told us that in the case of Zubaydah, who was water boarded 83 times, the techniques did lead to additional information.


Who are you going to believe? Several intelligence sources vetted by 60 Minutes or a lone disgruntled FBI agent?


Noone in the media talks about how Abu Zubayda was mutilated and almost killed by CIA...or how he said high level Saudi and Pakistanis were involved in 9/11, and how all of them mysteriously died a few weeks apart.
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Richard Clarke: CIA covered up ties to 9/11 hijackers

Postby 8bitagent » Sun Sep 11, 2011 10:11 pm

JackRiddler wrote:
8bitagent wrote:I re-read your reply to me in the other thread. It IS an interesting idea that the damn could be on the verge of breaking...though some may still label it "limited hangout".


That little pack would not concern me.

Still, even if something massively UN-Lihop/incompetence spilled out, the public wouldnt even pay attention. Maybe Job Stewart and SNL Seth Myers would give a one liner reference. That's it.


This is the problem. And the latter vintages of "truthers" are largely to blame. A real "big tent" should have been a coalition from those seeing blowback and "unanswered questions" all the way to most radical ideas. Instead, government and insider foreknowledge with deliberate inaction or facilitation for the purpose of transforming the US and starting wars of aggression -- a crime against humanity actually equal to full orchestration! -- is now practically the fall-back position for those defending the official story and the status-quo policies under Obama. So they knew? They let it happen intentionally? So what! And that's just pathetic. And I do blame the latter-day "truthers," the LC/WAC/Jones and demolitions approach, for having helped to create this atmosphere. Because "9/11 truth" is now equated with demolitions, and if you can deny demolitions, there was no other crime committed on the American side.

.



Well more over, if you do not place blame squarely on Cheney and PNAC as the architects of 9/11, youre a disinfo sheep!

This is a question I've posted since 2005 online to my fellow deep researchers...why does it seem a lot of times the CIA, and even people like Cheney have convinced themselves of the fear or threat of jihadists? Is it all a ruse? Wouldn't more CIA/NSA/etc speak out?

Is it possible they genuinely think there's a threat, at the same time as inflating the threat via Tom Ridge? I just dont buy the "al CIA-da" meme.

What if the "trick" is that these agencies, FBI, etc(I want to think many are just unassuming or good people) actually believe theres a terror threat AND the Islamic jihadists believe in what they do...BUT BOTH sides are controlled by the same forces?

It's a theory Ive had that seems to anger both regular people and truthers. But I just feel after years of research that to keep the plan working, "they" have to make ordinary CIA, law enforcement, etc believe there is an outside external threat. And they have to keep the jihadis brainwashed. In my view even if every word of the 'official narrative' is true, its still an "NWO Job".
And yeah, as Ive always said 9/11 Truth died in 2006 with the Bullhorn Brigade.

I don't agree with badgering Daniel Ellsberg and Edmonds into "accepting" that "9/11 was an inside job". Im now sick to death of hearing that. "inside job! Inside job!"
Get people to ask the wrong questions...

Sometimes I say fuck it and joke that 9/11 was a big elaborate performance art piece called "The Aristrocrats" put on by an avant garde troupe in New York.
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Richard Clarke: CIA covered up ties to 9/11 hijackers

Postby bks » Sun Sep 11, 2011 10:57 pm

JackRiddler wrote:

Instead, government and insider foreknowledge with deliberate inaction or facilitation for the purpose of transforming the US and starting wars of aggression -- a crime against humanity actually equal to full orchestration! -- is now practically the fall-back position for those defending the official story and the status-quo policies under Obama.


Got recent links for this? Be interested to see who you have in mind.

Cockburn's recent effort simply regurgitates his anti-complicity screed of a few years ago, word for word in places. There's little evidence he's read a single thing germane to the subject since the Archive was opened. He thinks "fatal slowness to act" was responsible for the intelligence 'failure', so he clearly knows nothing or is ignoring the Alec Station and FBI obstructionists whose names we know, and whose behavior is simply not explainable by reference to an incompetence argument.

But who are you thinking of here?
bks
 
Posts: 1093
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 2:44 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Richard Clarke: CIA covered up ties to 9/11 hijackers

Postby 8bitagent » Sun Sep 11, 2011 11:05 pm

bks wrote:
JackRiddler wrote:

Instead, government and insider foreknowledge with deliberate inaction or facilitation for the purpose of transforming the US and starting wars of aggression -- a crime against humanity actually equal to full orchestration! -- is now practically the fall-back position for those defending the official story and the status-quo policies under Obama.


Got recent links for this? Be interested to see who you have in mind.

Cockburn's recent effort simply regurgitates his anti-complicity screed of a few years ago, word for word in places. There's little evidence he's read a single thing germane to the subject since the Archive was opened. He thinks "fatal slowness to act" was responsible for the intelligence 'failure', so he clearly knows nothing or is ignoring the Alec Station and FBI obstructionists whose names we know, and whose behavior is simply not explainable by reference to an incompetence argument.

But who are you thinking of here?



But Bks, this what confuses me...Cockburn wrote that huge "Was Israel connected to 9/11" article back in 2007...and linking Israel to 9/11 is a big no no within both leftist and conservative circles
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12244
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Richard Clarke: CIA covered up ties to 9/11 hijackers

Postby bks » Mon Sep 12, 2011 9:03 am

8bitagent wrote:
But Bks, this what confuses me...Cockburn wrote that huge "Was Israel connected to 9/11" article back in 2007...and linking Israel to 9/11 is a big no no within both leftist and conservative circles


Cockburn is one of the few on the US-UK left with a defensible position regarding Israel, and is willing to take the flak for it. He publishes Gideon Atzmon, Jeffrey Blankfort, Michael Neumann and other 'beyond-the-pale' leftists on Israel. He and Jeff St. Clair also published "The Politics of Anti-Semitism",

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/190259 ... HFTK9R06PK

so it's a good reminder that people aren't monolithic and that real disagreements obtain even between political allies. That said, Cockburn is an asshole on 9/11 whose basic problem is that his actual view of the attacks puts him dangerously close to the LIHOP theorists, and he'd rather die than be lumped in with the ungewaschen in their ranks.
bks
 
Posts: 1093
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 2:44 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Richard Clarke: CIA covered up ties to 9/11 hijackers

Postby Bruce Dazzling » Tue Feb 14, 2012 1:26 pm

Susan Lindauer was on Cost to Coast the other night, THANKFULLY without Noory...







[/quote]
"Arrogance is experiential and environmental in cause. Human experience can make and unmake arrogance. Ours is about to get unmade."

~ Joe Bageant R.I.P.

OWS Photo Essay

OWS Photo Essay - Part 2
User avatar
Bruce Dazzling
 
Posts: 2306
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 2:25 pm
Location: Yes
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Richard Clarke: CIA covered up ties to 9/11 hijackers

Postby Bruce Dazzling » Tue Feb 14, 2012 2:20 pm

I'm reposting this on behalf of Nordic, from this thread, which is now locked.

Nordic wrote:CIA Told New York Times About 9/11 Warnings, Command Negligence: NY Times Lied
By Susan Lindauer
The Intel Hub
September 9, 2011

9/11 denialists like to swear smugly that the official 9/11 story must be true, because the government could never keep such an important secret without getting caught.

Somebody would spill the beans, right? In fact, a number of us tried. Media watchers should savvy up, as the air waves get blitzed this weekend with 9/11 emorials.

If the corporate media had done its job as a watch dog, the world would have got an earful reliable intelligence sources debunking the official 9/11 story.

Unhappily, the corporate media has been a co-conspirator in the 9/11 Cover Up from day one. They have actively abetted the government with its dirty work. Say a truth teller got arrested on the Patriot Act—like me— and locked in prison on a military base, while the public debate raged over 9/11 and Iraq without access to knowledgeable sources.

The government could rely on corporate media to squash the story, while the Justice Department fought my demands for a trial, playing every dirty trick in the book to stop a New York jury from hearing testimony about 9/11 and Iraq.

My nightmare is described in Extreme Prejudice: The Terrifying Story of the Patriot Act and the Cover Ups of 9/11 and Iraq. It was a frightening ordeal with secret charges, secret evidence, secret grand jury testimony, and threats of indefinite detention on a Texas military base.

However the Patriot Act by itself was not enough to silence facts about the command failure before 9/11 or Iraqi Pre-War Intelligence. Over and over, friends and colleagues reached out to the corporate media, delivering independent confirmations about my 9/11 warnings, the Iraqi peace framework and my work on the Lockerbie case, which proved my status as an Asset.

Supporters pleaded for the media’s help to expose the government’s manipulations, so I could get my day in court, and bring that truth to the people.

Over and over again, the corporate media in New York itself mounted a wall of silence to buttress America’s leaders.

Most New Yorkers and New Jersey residents would be appalled to discover that the worst media whore in the 9/11 Cover Up turned out to be the New York Times.

By May, 2004, the New York Times received no fewer than four confirmations of our Intelligence team’s 9/11 warnings to U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and the Office of Counter-Terrorism at the Justice Department. Confirmation was made six months before release of the 9/11 Commission report, when public discussion could have impacted the findings.

Most importantly, a discourse of the facts about 9/11 would have educated voters before the November 2004 elections, holding leaders in Washington accountable to the people. For this reason, I offered to waive my Fifth Amendment rights under indictment, so the 9/11 Commission could take my testimony under oath.

Most critically, the New York Times gained two of those all important confirmations about the 9/11 warnings from the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency. Both of my handlers, Dr. Richard Fuisz and Paul Hoven men freely volunteered our 9/11 warnings and the Iraqi Peace option to the New York Times.

They also explained my work as a U.S. intelligence Asset engaged in the Lockerbie negotiations with Libya, and my role spearheading talks to resume weapons inspections with Iraqi Ambassador Dr. Saeed Hasan. The journalist, David Samuels, called me excitedly, after the interviews.

You read that correctly. The CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency both gave information about the 9/11 warnings to the New York Times, expecting the newspaper to alert its readers of the command negligence before the attack. The New York Times’ readership was most personally impacted by the tragedy, after all.

They made an effort to inspire discussion while the 9/11 Commission was hearing testimony. The New York Times acquired two more confirmations of our 9/11 warnings from Dr. Parke Godfrey, a highly respected computer science professor of York University in Toronto, and my brother, John Lindauer of Los Angeles.

That took guts for the Intelligence Community. By this time, writing was on the wall that Republican Leaders would punish anyone who spoke against them.

One would expect the New York Times to rush to press with such a hot story. Think about it: a long-time U.S. Intelligence Asset, second cousin to President Bush’s Chief of Staff, Andrew Card warns about 9/11 and has full knowledge of Iraq’s cooperation with the 9/11 Investigation— then gets arrested on the Patriot Act, after requesting to testify before Congress.

Wasn’t that newsworthy? Not according to the editors of the New York Times. Instead of objectively reporting independent confirmations of the 9/11 warnings and properly identifying me as an Asset, the New York Times engaged in gross public fraud.

They abetted the government in concealing information of critical significance to the paper’s home town. They manipulated the people of New York City into believing the CIA gave no advance warnings of 9/11 at all. While the American public screamed for impeachment, the New York Times blocked information that showed President Bush and Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez engaged in active public deception.

The people were left believing the government had simply made mistakes before 9/11 and the Iraq War.
Advertisement

In other words, the New York Times acted like an old whore, clinging to GOP leaders like a last client, seeking assurances of her waning attractiveness to the public.

When one of Washington’s most stellar attorneys, Brian Shaughnessy, forced the Court to grant my request for a single, pre-trial hearing—four years after my arrest— Parke Godfrey delivered shocking testimony about my 9/11 warnings less than a thousand feet from where the World Trade Center once graced the New York skyline.

Yet again, New York Times reporter, Alan Feuer, fraudulently and libelously invented a phony lead sentence: “She stuck her tongue out at the prosecutor.” And the New York Times parroted the Justice Department’s line that “half a dozen psychiatrists” had declared me incompetent to stand trial—a blatant deception.

Ignoring a morning’s worth of testimony, Feuer suggested that I was a “religious maniac,” something hysterically funny to everyone who knows me. There’s no reality contact in the one and only psychiatric report that postulated such claims. (That single evaluation was presented by the Justice Department’s psychiatrist and tossed by the Bureau of Prisons in the first hour of my arrival at Carswell).

If the New York Times had scratched the surface in its reporting, journalists would have recognized the Justice Department was running what’s called “a psy-op” designed to hide a major government deceptions from voters.

A quick examination of the record would have revealed that half a dozen psychiatrists had challenged the Justice Department, and declared me fully competent in all areas of life.

Even psychiatrists at Carswell Prison acknowledged I suffered “no evidence of hallucinations,” “no depression.” They said I socialized well, posed “zero behavioral problems.” Weekly reports stated consistently that I was “cooperative, smiling, with good eye contact.”

Notably, psychiatrists at Carswell Prison ruled out delusional disorder, citing first-hand observation, witness interviews, and diagnostic testing.

The slightest attention to witness testimonials would have exposed the whole public fraud. Yet the New York media carefully ignored evidentiary testimony that exposed the 9/11 warnings and denied symptoms of mental instability.

While my attorney, Brian Shaughnessy protested for my right to a trial, the New York media assured the public that the Court finding was “gift wrapped for my defense.”

Casting journalists as “controlled opposition–” might be overly generous given these circumstances, since it implies they have any backbone at all. Alas, most of them don’t. They whine for pity for their low ratings. Then they let government officials write their news scripts in exchange for political access.

Hey, it’s a tough job defending the official story of 9/11. You have to overcome janitorial crews, fire fighters and emergency rescue teams who all reported hearing explosions pop through the towers. They had to ignore damage to the front lobby— windows that exploded before the first plane hit the building.

You have to ignore what your own eyes see—a neat, clean controlled demolition of the Towers, which dropped free-fall into a pile of thermatic dust— and fires that burned under the Towers until December, months after jet fuel would have gasped its last flame.

Airplanes crashed into the Towers that day, sure enough. However I can testify myself the U.S. had significant advance warnings about the airplane hijackings, back to April and May, 2001. The decision to go to War with Iraq, in the aftermath of the terrorist strike, was already made “at the highest levels of government above the CIA Director and Secretary of State.”

I know that firsthand, because I was instructed to deliver that message, precisely worded, to Iraqi diplomats, and to demand “any fragment of actionable intelligence that would pinpoint the attack.” And I did so.

Iraq had no intelligence. However, the CIA’s advance knowledge of the conspiracy and advance threats against Iraq created powerful motivation and opportunity for a separate orphan team, domestic or foreign, to wire the Towers with military grade explosives.

The New York media never investigated reports that security cameras in the parking garage had photographed mysterious trucks/vans arriving at the World Trade Center at about 3 a.m and departing at 5 a.m, before Type AAA personalities arrived to start their days on Wall Street.

The vans were different than the janitorial trucks, in make, model and decal. They arrived at the World Trade Center from August 23 to September 3.

Those are important missing pieces of how the 9/11 tragedy unfolded. Myself, I have concluded that airplane hijackings were used as a public cover for a controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7. From that point, it’s up to explosives experts to determine the sorts materials applied to the detonation.

I won my freedom when the blogs and alternative radio took up my cause. In a practical sense, 9/11 marked the changing of the media guard. And it proved the internet boasts some fine journalists of its own, like Michael Collins and radio host Bob Tuskin at The Intel Hub.

No thanks to the government’s top dogs at the New York Times. But perhaps that’s not fair. A dog would have shown more loyalty to the people of Manhattan and New Jersey.
"Arrogance is experiential and environmental in cause. Human experience can make and unmake arrogance. Ours is about to get unmade."

~ Joe Bageant R.I.P.

OWS Photo Essay

OWS Photo Essay - Part 2
User avatar
Bruce Dazzling
 
Posts: 2306
Joined: Wed Dec 26, 2007 2:25 pm
Location: Yes
Blog: View Blog (0)

another 911 FBI dot connected

Postby fruhmenschen » Thu Mar 08, 2012 12:44 am

see link for full story
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03 ... i-in-2002/

Mueller grilled on FBI's release of al-Awlaki in 2002

By Catherine Herridge

Published March 07, 2012

|

Several congressional committees want the FBI director to explain why one of his agents ordered the release of Anwar al-Awlaki from federal custody on Oct. 10, 2002, when there was an outstanding warrant for the American Muslim cleric’s arrest.

“There are a number of committees interested in the facts of what happened early on with al-Awlaki, and we'd be happy to give you a briefing of what we know. We've done it before, we'll do it again,” FBI Director Robert Mueller told Republican Rep. Frank Wolf of Virginia.



Wolf first wrote to Mueller in spring 2010, based on the Fox News’ ongoing investigation of al-Awlaki, who was killed last year in a CIA-led drone strike in Yemen, on Sept. 30. Fox News was told that the congressman, whose district once included the cleric’s Virginia mosque, was not satisfied by the FBI’s earlier briefings.

Now that the cleric is dead, Wolf urged Mueller to be more transparent about the bureau’s interactions with al-Awlaki.

“I believe the bureau could, hopefully, be more forthcoming with regard to the 2002 incident. It is important that we look at how past incidents were handled so we're better prepared for the future," Wolf said. "And I can't help but think how history could've been different, especially at Fort Hood, if al-Awlaki had been arrested and prosecuted back in October 2002.”

Thirteen peole were killed at Fort Hood and more than 30 injured. Mueller said he was “painfully aware” of the facts. The alleged Fort Hood shooter, Maj. Nidal Hasan, was in contact, via email, with al-Awlaki, who may have inspired the massacre.

“Our sympathy to the victims' families, it's, you know, very painful and every one of us feels badly that it occurred and that we could not stop it,” Mueller explained.

Fox News' Specials Unit reported that the cleric was held by customs agents at JFK International Airport in New York City in early morning of Oct. 10, 2002, until FBI Agent Wade Ammerman ordered his release – even though a warrant for the cleric’s arrest on passport fraud was still active.

The warrant was generated by the Joint Terrorism Task Force in San Diego, which considered the cleric a “tier one” target because of his connections to at least three of the 9/11 hijackers. The passport fraud warrant was described to Fox News as a holding charge that would allow federal investigators to pressure al-Awlaki over his 9/11 contacts.

The warrant was pulled by a judge in Colorado, after the cleric entered the U.S. A U.S. attorney in Colorado who oversaw the warrant and the Justice Department claimed the cleric’s earlier lies to the Social Security Administration, the basis of the charge, had been corrected. But new documents obtained by Fox News through the Freedom of Information Act show otherwise.

After al-Awlaki re-entered the U.S. in the fall of 2002 with the FBI’s help, the cleric then appeared in a high-profile investigation, in which Agent Ammerman was a lead investigator. The FBI has not made the agent available to Fox News to interview, nor has the Department of Justice made the U.S. attorney on the case available. Former FBI agents say Ammerman would have needed permission from higher up in the bureau to let al-Awlaki go.
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5977
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: another 911 FBI dot connected

Postby Infernal Optimist » Fri Mar 09, 2012 5:52 pm

"Every one of us feels badly that it occurred and that we could not stop it,” Mueller explained.


But, wait, you could have stopped it. Here. let me correct that for you:

"Every one of us feels badly that we got caught and you found out we could have stopped it,” Mueller complained.
Infernal Optimist
 
Posts: 146
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 11:27 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: another 911 FBI dot connected

Postby Belligerent Savant » Fri Mar 09, 2012 9:02 pm

Infernal Optimist wrote:
"Every one of us feels badly that it occurred and that we could not stop it,” Mueller explained.


But, wait, you could have stopped it. Here. let me correct that for you:

"Every one of us feels badly that we got caught and you found out we could have stopped it,” Mueller complained.


Allow me to revise further:

"Every one of us dutifully complied and were complicit; we would not stop it,” Mueller thought, in the recesses of his subconscious.
User avatar
Belligerent Savant
 
Posts: 5573
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:58 pm
Location: North Atlantic.
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: another 911 FBI dot connected

Postby fruhmenschen » Tue Mar 13, 2012 11:22 am

I know there is already a post about this story


Daniel Hopsicker and his website MadCow has done the best work
presenting evidence showing FBI agents were one of the leading forces in creating 911.

2 stories
you and god can sort out the truth

1st story
http://www.madcowprod.com/truth/books.html

2nd story

Classified documents contradict FBI on post-9/11 probe of Saudis, ex-senator says

see link for full story
http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_news/ ... nator-says

Former New Jersey Gov. Thomas Kean, left, greets former Sen. Bob Graham in a Dec. 17, 2004 file photo. Graham, who co-chaired the joint congressional investigation of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, says the FBI did not inform his panel or a separate investigation co-chaired by Keane, about suspicious contacts between Saudi citizens living in Florida and some of the 9/11 hijackers.
By Anthony Summers and Dan Christensen
Special to msnbc.com

Former Florida Sen. Bob Graham, who co-chaired Congress’ Joint Inquiry into the 9/11 terrorist attacks, has seen two classified FBI documents that he says are at odds with the bureau’s public statements that there was no connection between the hijackers and Saudis then living in Sarasota, Fla.

“There are significant inconsistencies between the public statements of the FBI in September and what I read in the classified documents,” Graham said.

“One document adds to the evidence that the investigation was not the robust inquiry claimed by the FBI,” Graham said. “An important investigative lead was not pursued and unsubstantiated statements were accepted as truth.”
Advertise | AdChoices

Whether the 9/11 hijackers acted alone, or whether they had support within the U.S., remains an unanswered question -- one that began to be asked as soon as it became known that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi citizens. It was underlined when Congress’s bipartisan inquiry released its public report in July 2003. The final 28 pages, regarding possible foreign support for the terrorists, were censored in their entirety -- on President George W. Bush’s instructions.

Graham said the two classified FBI documents that he saw, dated 2002 and 2003, were prepared by an agent who participated in the Sarasota investigation. He said the agent suggested that another federal agency be asked to join the investigation, but that the idea was “rejected.”

Graham attempted in recent weeks to contact the agent, he said, only to find the man had been instructed by FBI headquarters not to talk.

FBI: 'No credible evidence'
The FBI-led investigation a decade ago focused on Abdulaziz al-Hijji and his wife, Anoud, who moved out of their home in the upscale, gated community of Prestancia, near Sarasota, and left the country in the weeks before 9/11. The couple left behind three cars and numerous personal belongings, such as furnishings, clothes, medicine and food, according to law enforcement records. After the 9/11 attacks, a concerned neighbor contacted the FBI.

Analysis of Prestancia gatehouse visitor logs and photographs of license tags showed that vehicles driven by several of the future hijackers had visited the al-Hijji home at 4224 Escondito Circle, according to a counterterrorism officer and former Prestancia administrator Larry Berberich.

Al-Hijji, who now lives and works in London, recently called 9/11 “a crime against the USA and all humankind” and said he was “saddened and oppressed by these false allegations.” He also said it was “not true” that Mohamed Atta and other 9/11 hijackers visited him at his Sarasota home.

The FBI has backed up al-Hijji. After initially declining to comment, the bureau confirmed that it did investigate but said it found nothing sinister. Agents, however, have refused to answer reporters’ specific questions about its investigation or its findings about the Prestancia gate records.

The FBI reiterated its position in a Feb. 7 letter that denied a Freedom of Information Act request seeking records from its Sarasota probe. The denial said their release “could constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

“At no time during the course of its investigation of the attacks, known as the PENTTBOM investigation, did the FBI develop credible evidence that connected the address at 4224 Escondito Circle, Sarasota, Florida, to any of the 9/11 hijackers,” wrote records section chief David M. Hardy.


Newly released Florida Department of Law Enforcement documents, however, state that an informant told the FBI in 2004 that al-Hijji had considered Osama bin Laden a “hero” and may have known some of the hijackers. The informant, Wissam Hammoud, also said al-Hijji once introduced him to Adnan El Shukrijumah, the ex-Broward County resident and suspected al-Qaida operative on the FBI’s Most Wanted list.

Last September, FBI spokesmen also disputed Graham’s assertion that Congress was never told about the Sarasota investigation.
fruhmenschen
 
Posts: 5977
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 7:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Richard Clarke: CIA covered up ties to 9/11 hijackers

Postby JackRiddler » Tue Mar 13, 2012 11:24 am

Latest on Graham and Saudi connection.

Thanks to 2012 Countdown for posting this as new thread here.


http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_news/ ... nator-says

Classified documents contradict FBI on post-9/11 probe of Saudis, ex-senator says

(Tuesday, March 13, 2012)

By Anthony Summers and Dan Christensen
Special to msnbc.com

Former Florida Sen. Bob Graham, who co-chaired Congress’ Joint Inquiry into the 9/11 terrorist attacks, has seen two classified FBI documents that he says are at odds with the bureau’s public statements that there was no connection between the hijackers and Saudis then living in Sarasota, Fla.

“There are significant inconsistencies between the public statements of the FBI in September and what I read in the classified documents,” Graham said

“One document adds to the evidence that the investigation was not the robust inquiry claimed by the FBI,” Graham said. “An important investigative lead was not pursued and unsubstantiated statements were accepted as truth.”

Whether the 9/11 hijackers acted alone, or whether they had support within the U.S., remains an unanswered question -- one that began to be asked as soon as it became known that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi citizens. It was underlined when Congress’s bipartisan inquiry released its public report in July 2003. The final 28 pages, regarding possible foreign support for the terrorists, were censored in their entirety -- on President George W. Bush’s instructions.

Graham said the two classified FBI documents that he saw, dated 2002 and 2003, were prepared by an agent who participated in the Sarasota investigation. He said the agent suggested that another federal agency be asked to join the investigation, but that the idea was “rejected.”

Graham attempted in recent weeks to contact the agent, he said, only to find the man had been instructed by FBI headquarters not to talk.

FBI: 'No credible evidence'
The FBI-led investigation a decade ago focused on Abdulaziz al-Hijji and his wife, Anoud, who moved out of their home in the upscale, gated community of Prestancia, near Sarasota, and left the country in the weeks before 9/11. The couple left behind three cars and numerous personal belongings, such as furnishings, clothes, medicine and food, according to law enforcement records. After the 9/11 attacks, a concerned neighbor contacted the FBI.

Analysis of Prestancia gatehouse visitor logs and photographs of license tags showed that vehicles driven by several of the future hijackers had visited the al-Hijji home at 4224 Escondito Circle, according to a counterterrorism officer and former Prestancia administrator Larry Berberich.

Al-Hijji, who now lives and works in London, recently called 9/11 “a crime against the USA and all humankind” and said he was “saddened and oppressed by these false allegations.” He also said it was “not true” that Mohamed Atta and other 9/11 hijackers visited him at his Sarasota home.

The FBI has backed up al-Hijji. After initially declining to comment, the bureau confirmed that it did investigate but said it found nothing sinister. Agents, however, have refused to answer reporters’ specific questions about its investigation or its findings about the Prestancia gate records.

The FBI reiterated its position in a Feb. 7 letter that denied a Freedom of Information Act request seeking records from its Sarasota probe. The denial said their release “could constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.”

“At no time during the course of its investigation of the attacks, known as the PENTTBOM investigation, did the FBI develop credible evidence that connected the address at 4224 Escondito Circle, Sarasota, Florida, to any of the 9/11 hijackers,” wrote records section chief David M. Hardy.

Newly released Florida Department of Law Enforcement documents, however, state that an informant told the FBI in 2004 that al-Hijji had considered Osama bin Laden a “hero” and may have known some of the hijackers. The informant, Wissam Hammoud, also said al-Hijji once introduced him to Adnan El Shukrijumah, the ex-Broward County resident and suspected al-Qaida operative on the FBI’s Most Wanted list.

Last September, FBI spokesmen also disputed Graham’s assertion that Congress was never told about the Sarasota investigation.

That prompted Graham to ask the FBI for assistance in locating in the National Archives the Sarasota-related files that were allegedly turned over to Congress. Instead, after what Graham said were two months in which the FBI was “either unwilling or unable” to help find the records, the bureau suddenly turned over two documents to the Senate Intelligence Committee, which Graham once headed and where he still has access. It is those documents that Graham has said are inconsistent with the FBI denials.

Meeting abruptly canceled
Graham shared this development with the Obama White House, which responded by setting up a meeting between Graham and FBI Deputy Director Sean Joyce. According to the former senator, Joyce told Graham he “didn’t want to talk” about the Sarasota episode. Graham said he was assured, however, that he would shortly be shown material that supported the FBI’s denials, and a further meeting was arranged with an FBI aide.

In December, Graham said, the scheduled meeting was abruptly canceled and he was told he would be allowed no further access to FBI information about Sarasota.

Graham believes the joint congressional inquiry into the 9/11 attacks was not the only national investigative body kept in the dark about Sarasota. He said the co-chairs of the later 9/11 Commission, Republican Thomas Kean and Democrat Lee Hamilton, have told him they also were unaware of it.

Kean, a former New Jersey governor, told Graham the commission would have “worked it hard,” because the hypothesis that the hijackers completed the planning alone was “implausible,” the former senator said.

Kean did not return several phone messages seeking comment. But Hamilton, a former Indiana congressman, confirmed this month that he learned nothing about the Sarasota matter while serving as vice-chair of the 9/11 commission.

Graham sees the information now emerging about Sarasota as ominously similar to discoveries his inquiry made in California. Leads there indicated that the first two hijackers to reach the U.S., Saudis Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, received help first from a diplomat at the Saudi consulate in Los Angeles and then from two other Saudis, one of whom helped al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi find a place to live. Multiple sources told investigators they believed both the latter Saudis had been Saudi government agents.

Later, when 9/11 Commission staff gained limited access to these individuals in Saudi Arabia, the aides’ reaction was caustic. One memo described the testimony of one of them as “deceptive ... inconsistent ... implausible.” The testimony of another displayed an “utter lack of credibility,” it said.

Graham is troubled by what he sees as FBI headquarters’ apparent effort to conceal information, including the fact that al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi lived for months in California in the home of a paid FBI informant. Even when that emerged, the FBI denied his inquiry access to the informant. Graham wonders if that was merely because of the bureau’s embarrassment, or because the informant knew something that “would be even more damaging were it revealed.”

The newly surfaced FDLE documents containing informant Hammoud’s troubling 2004 information about al-Hijji have reinforced Graham’s concerns because they conflict with the FBI’s public statements.

Hammoud’s statement that al-Hijji introduced him to Saudi terror suspect Shukrijumah is consistent with the report that Prestancia gate logs showed Shukrijumah had visited the al-Hijji house – and buttresses longstanding official suspicion that he was linked to the hijackers. When Mohamed Atta visited a federal immigration office in Miami to discuss a visa problem in May 2001, a 9/11 Commission footnote reports, a man who closely resembled Shukrijumah accompanied him.

Graham sees what he believes to be the suppression of evidence pointing to Saudi support for the 9/11 hijackers as arising from the perceived advantages to the West, at the time and now, of keeping Saudi Arabia happy.

In late December, the U.S. announced a new $30 billion defense deal with the Saudis.

“This agreement serves to reinforce the strong enduring relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia,” said U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs Andrew Shapiro. “It demonstrates the U.S. commitment to a strong Saudi defense capability as a key component to regional security.”

Graham said he was taken aback by that announcement.

“I think that in the period immediately after 9/11 the FBI was under instructions from the Bush White House not to discuss anything that could be embarrassing to the Saudis,” he said. “It is more inexplicable why the Obama administration has been reticent to pursue the question of Saudi involvement. For both administrations, there was and continues to be an obligation to inform the American people through truthful information.”

-
Anthony Summers is co-author, with Robbyn Swan, of “The Eleventh Day: The Full Story of 9/11 & Osama bin Laden.” Dan Christensen edits the Miami-area investigative Website Broward Bulldog, in which this article first appeared.

--
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Richard Clarke: CIA covered up ties to 9/11 hijackers

Postby JackRiddler » Tue Mar 13, 2012 11:41 am

seemslikeadream wrote:
Saudi Arabia May Be Tied to 9/11, 2 Ex-Senators Say

By ERIC LICHTBLAU
Published: February 29, 2012

WASHINGTON — For more than a decade, questions have lingered about the possible role of the Saudi government in the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, even as the royal kingdom has made itself a crucial counterterrorism partner in the eyes of American diplomats.

Now, in sworn statements that seem likely to reignite the debate, two former senators who were privy to top secret information on the Saudis’ activities say they believe that the Saudi government might have played a direct role in the terrorist attacks.

“I am convinced that there was a direct line between at least some of the terrorists who carried out the September 11th attacks and the government of Saudi Arabia,” former Senator Bob Graham, Democrat of Florida, said in an affidavit filed as part of a lawsuit brought against the Saudi government and dozens of institutions in the country by families of Sept. 11 victims and others. Mr. Graham led a joint 2002 Congressional inquiry into the attacks.

His former Senate colleague, Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, a Democrat who served on the separate 9/11 Commission, said in a sworn affidavit of his own in the case that “significant questions remain unanswered” about the role of Saudi institutions. “Evidence relating to the plausible involvement of possible Saudi government agents in the September 11th attacks has never been fully pursued,” Mr. Kerrey said.

Their affidavits, which were filed on Friday and have not previously been disclosed, are part of a multibillion-dollar lawsuit that has wound its way through federal courts since 2002. An appellate court, reversing an earlier decision, said in November that foreign nations were not immune to lawsuits under certain terrorism claims, clearing the way for parts of the Saudi case to be reheard in United States District Court in Manhattan.

Lawyers for the Saudis, who have already moved to have the affidavits thrown out of court, declined to comment on the assertions by Mr. Graham and Mr. Kerrey. “The case is in active litigation, and I can’t say anything,” said Michael K. Kellogg, a Washington lawyer for the Saudis.

Officials at the Saudi Embassy in Washington, who have emphatically denied any connection to the attacks in the past, did not respond Wednesday to requests for comment.

The Saudis are seeking to have the case dismissed in part because they say American inquiries — including those in which Mr. Graham and Mr. Kerrey took part — have essentially exonerated them. A recent court filing by the Saudis prominently cited the 9/11 Commission’s “exhaustive” final report, which “found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi individuals funded” Al Qaeda.

But Mr. Kerrey and Mr. Graham said that the findings should not be seen as an exoneration and that many important questions about the Saudis’ role had never been fully examined, partly because their panels simply did not have the time or resources given their wider scope.

Terry Strada of New Vernon, N.J., whose husband died in the World Trade Center, said it was “so absurd that it’s laughable” for the Saudis to claim that the federal inquiries had exonerated them.

Unanswered questions include the work of a number of Saudi-sponsored charities with financial links to Al Qaeda, as well as the role of a Saudi citizen living in San Diego at the time of the attacks, Omar al-Bayoumi, who had ties to two of the hijackers and to Saudi officials, Mr. Graham said in his affidavit.

Still, Washington has continued to stand behind Saudi Arabia publicly, with the Justice Department joining the kingdom in trying to have the lawsuits thrown out of court on the grounds that the Saudis are protected by international immunity.

State Department officials did not respond to requests for comment on Wednesday on the impact of the court declarations.

The senators’ assertions “might inject some temporary strain or awkwardness at a diplomatic level,” said Kenneth L. Wainstein, a senior national security official in the George W. Bush administration. Even so, he said, “the United States and the Saudis have developed strong counterterrorism cooperation over the last decade, and that relationship will not be undermined.”


Saudi Arabian millionaire 'with links to 9/11 terror attacks' living in luxury London home while working for state oil company

By ALEX GORE
Last updated at 3:53 PM on 18th February 2012

A Saudi Arabian accused of having links to some of the 9/11 terrorists is working for his country's state oil company in London.
Abdulaziz al-Hijji, 38, works for the European branch of Saudi Aramco and lives in a posh central London flat, having left his US home in Florida just weeks before the horrific attacks on September 11, 2001.
Registration numbers of vehicles passing through a checkpoint at the Prestancia gated community in Sarasota, in the months before 9/11, and the identifications shown by drivers, suggest three of the terrorists had visited al-Hijji's home.
Image
Terrorists: Al-Hijji is accused of having links with 9/11 hijackers Mohamed Atta, left, and Marwan Al-Shehhi
Mohamed Atta, a ringleader of the atrocities and the hijacker pilot who smashed American Airlines Flight 11 into the World Trade Center's North Tower, was named as one of the men.
Marwan Al-Shehhi, who flew United Airlines Flight 175 into the South Tower, and Ziad Jarrah, who crashed United Airlines Flight 93 in a Pennsylvanian field, are also thought to have visited.

More...
'Unrepentant would-be mass murderer': Underwear bomber jailed for life without parole for failed Christmas Day plane attack
U.S. officials fear sanctions on Iran will fail as fears grow over military action and imminent attack on U.S. soil
Osama bin Laden 'had stoned fantasies about marrying Whitney Houston and murdering Bobby Brown'
All three men learned to fly at Venice Airport, less than 20 miles from the house at 4224 Escondito Circle.
A fourth man, Adnan Shukrijumah, an al-Qaeda operative on the FBI's most wanted list, with a $5m bounty on his head, is also believed to have visited the property.

Carnage: Thick smoke pours across the New York sky on September 11, 2001, from the World Trade Centre
In an email to The Daily Telegraph, al-Hijji wrote: 'I have neither relation nor association with any of those bad people/criminals and the awful crime they did. 9/11 is a crime against the USA and all humankind and I’m very saddened and oppressed by these false allegations.
'I love the USA. My kids were born there, I went to college and university there, I spent a good portion of my life there and I love it.'
The FBI also ruled out a connection between al-Hijji and the hijackers or the 9/11 plot but former US senator, Bob Graham - who chaired the US Senate intelligence committee at the time - said he has seen two secret documents which cast doubt on the FBI's claim.
He told The Daily Telegraph: 'Both documents indicate that the investigation was not the robust inquiry claimed by the FBI.'

Oil rich: Al-Hijji is said to work for the London-based European branch of Saudi Aramco, pictured above
The al-Hijjis are said to have aroused suspicion because of the 'manner and timing' of their departure from the US, having left behind a number of personal possessions, including three cars.
They moved to Saudi Arabia before settling in a four-bedroom detached house in Totton, near Southampton, in 2003, but returned to America briefly in 2005.
Al-Hijjis works for the Aramco Overseas Company UK Limited, based in New Oxford Street, London



Democrat Bob Kerrey to run for his former Nebraska Senate seat
Associated Press
Posted: 02/29/2012 12:01:00 AM CST
Updated: 02/29/2012 06:43:56 PM CST

OMAHA, Neb. - Former Sen. Bob Kerrey said Wednesday he will seek the Democratic nomination for the Nebraska seat he once held, reversing course just weeks after publicly rejecting a run he previously called a longshot.

Kerrey earlier this month had opted out of the race to replace retiring Democratic Sen. Ben Nelson, saying not running was in his and his family's best interest.

"It just felt wrong," Kerrey, 68, said during a telephone call to declare his candidacy. "I wasn't happy with the decision."

The latest move by the 1992 presidential candidate and former Nebraska governor comes just a day before the state's candidate filing deadline. Coupled with Republican Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe's announcement Tuesday that she will not seek re-election this year, it gives new hope to national Democrats desperate to stop Republicans from netting four Senate seats this fall and regaining control of the chamber.
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby JackRiddler » Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:25 pm

Oi, I didn't mean to get the other threads locked, people might get mad at me.

If this is to be the consolidation, and since it's the boss who started it, can we retitle it something more generic, like:

New 9/11 stories: Blee, Clarke, Fenton, Graham, Sarasota...
We meet at the borders of our being, we dream something of each others reality. - Harvey of R.I.

To Justice my maker from on high did incline:
I am by virtue of its might divine,
The highest Wisdom and the first Love.

TopSecret WallSt. Iraq & more
User avatar
JackRiddler
 
Posts: 16007
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:59 pm
Location: New York City
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: Richard Clarke: CIA covered up ties to 9/11 hijackers

Postby 2012 Countdown » Tue Mar 13, 2012 2:42 pm

Thanks for the repost Jack. I was simply posting a 'hot off the press' article that I noticed and read that appeared on MSN's homepage this morning. I see now its nothing more than a text hotlink there, now buried among many.

And SLAD, no offense should be taken or any slight made or implied. I take no offense in the topic being locked, but yes, if these are going to be consolidated, maybe a better title should be issued.

Just posting a recent website article on our favorite subject.

Apologies to all.
:eeyaa
George Carlin ~ "Its called 'The American Dream', because you have to be asleep to believe it."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q
User avatar
2012 Countdown
 
Posts: 2293
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 1:27 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests