The special treatment
Everyone of the "six men apparently formed the conspiracy's leadership" received a suspicious treatment by federal authorities which could also be interpreted as protection.
Let's start with Hanjour:
Everyone of the "six men apparently formed the conspiracy's leadership" received a suspicious treatment by federal authorities which could also be interpreted as protection.
Let's start with Hanjour:
| QUOTE |
| Instructors at a flying school in Phoenix, Arizona express concern to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) officials about the poor English and limited flying skills of one of their students, Hani Hanjour.(...) They believe his pilot's license may be fraudulent.(...) The FAA finds it is genuine - but school administrators tell Mr. Hanjour he will not qualify for an advanced certificate." BBC (5/17/02) |
| QUOTE |
| "Months before Hani Hanjour is believed to have flown an American Airlines jet into the Pentagon, managers at an Arizona flight school reported him at least five times to the FAA. (...) They reported him not because they feared he was a terrorist, but because his English and flying skills were so bad...they didn't think he should keep his pilot's license. " I couldn't believe he had a commercial license of any kind with the skills that he had." Peggy Chevrette, Arizona flight school manager." Reacting to the alert in January 2001, an FAA inspector checked to ensure Hanjour's 1999 license was legitimate and even sat next to him in one of the Arizona classes. But he didn't tell the FBI or take action to rescind Hanjour's license, FAA officials said. "There was nothing about the pilot's actions to signal criminal intent at the time or that would have caused us to alert law enforcement," FAA spokeswoman Laura Brown said. CBS (05/10/02) |
Let's break here: it is not the job of the FAA to check if someone has a 'criminal intent'. Their job is to check if a person is skilled to be a pilot. And these skills were in question and that's why the FAA was alarmed. Though, Hanjour had obvisously great defiticites in speaking English and in flying an airplane, the FAA only explains his license as legitim, without making further tests on Hanjour. Imagine, on your test for the driving-license you take someone's right to way, you don't stop at a stoplight, etc. and then you pass the test, because your instructor couldn't find any 'criminal intent' in your behaviour!
| QUOTE |
| But one official said the inspector, John Anthony, did not suggest a translator and "did not observe any serious issue" with Hanjour's English, even though University of Arizona records show he failed his English classes with a 0.26 grade point average. Other Arizona flight schools he attended also questioned his abilities. "He didn't do his homework, didn't attend on time and he would sort of come and go," said Duncan Hastie of Cockpit Resource Management. Marilyn Ladner, the vice president of Pan Am Flight Academy in Miami – the company that owned JetTech before it closed in the aftermath of Sept. 11 – told CBS News, "We did everything we were supposed to do," in reporting Hanjour. Hanjour attended flight schools with two other Pentagon hijackers. And in July last year, an Arizona FBI agent alerted Washington that a large number of Middle Eastern men were taking flying lessons, but he was ignored. ..... Chevrette said Hanjour's English was so poor that it took him five hours to complete a section of a mock pilot's oral exam that is supposed to last just a couple of hours. Chevrette said she contacted Anthony again when Hanjour began ground training for Boeing 737 jetliners and it became clear he didn't have the skills for the commercial pilot's license. "I don't truly believe he should have had it and I questioned that," she said. CBS (05/10/02) |
| QUOTE |
| Federal Aviation Administration records show he obtained a commercial pilot's license in April 1999, but how and where he did so remains a lingering question that FAA officials refuse to discuss. His limited flying abilities do afford an insight into one feature of the attacks: The conspiracy apparently did not include a surplus of skilled pilots. Source |
We've already seen where Hanjour obtained his license, but why was the FBI so close-lipped about it three months later?
And Hanjour's English was so bad:
| QUOTE |
| When the school's manager Peggy Chevrette told the local FAA supervisor that Hanjour's bad English and appalling flight skills could end up hurting himself or others, the jury heard the official suggested providing him with a translator -- in contravention of his own agency's rules. Source |
| QUOTE |
| They said that, with the benefit of hindsight, it appears that the FBI and the FAA could have responded more vigorously. "From what I've heard, the school was clearly more alert than federal officials," Sabo said...... When Hanjour enrolled in January at Pan Am's Phoenix facility, Oberstar said, his instructor made a more critical assessment of his English. The FAA began clamping down on U.S. flight schools in recent years to ensure that no one who cannot speak conversational English receives a flight certificate. Oberstar and others said the Pan Am instructor questioned how Hanjour got a flight certificate with his English, felt it was inadequate to complete the firm's course and phoned the FAA. Oberstar said the instructor asked: "What do we do about this? We don't think we should continue a person in flight training whose English is so inadequate." Pan Am officials were dissatisfied by the FAA inspector's response: suggesting he might know of an Arabic-speaking person who could assist him with his English, Oberstar and others said. That approach apparently didn't work. Hanjour "flunked out" in March, a company executive told legislators. Oberstar said the FAA representative had no reason to believe that Hanjour was a terrorist. But, recalling that he held a subcommittee hearing a few years ago into a New York plane crash caused by the pilot's failure to understand instructions in English from air traffic controllers, he said Hanjour's language problem should have sounded "alarm bells" with the FAA. Jerry Snyder, an FAA spokesman in Los Angeles, said he could not comment because the matter is under investigation. Source |
The FAA clamped down flight schools to ensure that no one who cannot speak conversational English receives a flight certificate, but when they receive warnings from a flight school, they just made suggestions like providing with a translator, or asking for an arabic-speaking person! This was not incompetence - this was an explicit break of their own rules aka illegal!
Also note that
| QUOTE |
| Hanjour obtained his pilot's license in April 1999, but it expired six months later because he did not complete a required medical exam. Source |
Now let's look into the case of Mohammed Atta (alleged pilot of Flight 11) and Marwan Al-Shehhi (alleged pilot of Flight 175).
Atta and Alshehhi stall a small plane on a Miami International Airport runway. Not able to start the plane, they just walked away. Flight controllers had to guide the waiting passenger airliners around the stalled aircraft until it was moved away 35 minutes later.
| QUOTE |
| On December 24th, 2000, Atta and Alshehhi rented a Warrior (N555HA) from Huffman Aviation for a flight. They landed in Miami when the engine from the aircraft stalled (shutoff) on the taxiway where they abandoned it. They called Huffman Aviation for taxi fare back to Venice but were denied by Huffman Aviation. One to two days later, Huffman received a phone call from the Miami FAA regarding the Warrior that had been unattended for a half-hour on the runway. Dekkers got in contact with Bob Martin, the Operations Manager of Huffman Aviation, who then contacted the FAA. Martin had several phone conversations with the FAA and upon their request sent all maintenance records on the Warrior to the FAA. Nothing else was reported back from the FAA to Huffman regarding the Warrior. Source |
| QUOTE |
| On one occasion, a flying school instructor testified last week, 9/11 ringleader Mohammad Atta and fellow hijacker Marwan Al-Shehhi stranded a small single-engined plane on a taxiway at the busy Miami International Airport -- forcing a large jet to take avoiding action. Their transgression earned the flight school that rented them the plane a telling off from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) -- but no follow on action. Source |
| QUOTE |
| "Students do stupid things during their flight course, but this is quite stupid," Dekkers said. "They shut everything off like dumb ducks." Dekkers said the FAA told him the students would be fined. "But they can't do that any longer," he said. The FAA did not immediately return calls for comment. Source |
| QUOTE |
| Daniel Pursell, Huffman's chief flight instructor, told the jury the FAA called him for details but did not interview the pilots. "They might should have, but I don't think they did," Pursell said. Source |
The Clearwater Airpark incident January/February 2001
| QUOTE |
| Atta and Marwan al-Shehhi landed a single-engine plane at least twice at the Clearwater Airpark one night in January or February 2001, according to Daniel Pursell, chief instructor for a Venice flight school that rented planes to the pair. Source |
| QUOTE |
| It was a similar story when the pair decided to buzz a Florida airstrip to practice take-offs and landings after it was closed for the night. Source |
| QUOTE |
| A few months later, Atta and al-Shehhi landed a small plane at a Clearwater, Florida, airport after dark, breaking the airport's curfew. Pursell admonished them, but again, there was no investigation. Source |
| QUOTE |
| Why the two men chose the small Clearwater airpark 75 miles north of Venice remains a mystery. The incident, however, is another example of how closer scrutiny of Atta and the other 9/11 hijackers might have averted the 2001 disasters. "What were we supposed to think?" said Pursell, 47. "At that time, no one had a clue." After the landing, the police aide left a voice message with the Venice flight school, Huffman Aviation, complaining about the incident, Pursell said. Neither the FBI nor the Federal Aviation Administration ever was notified about the incident, officials from both agencies said. Clearwater police and city officials on Thursday said they did not know it took place, and city logs have no record of the illegal landings. Source |
Smells like a cover-up! And note the explanation why it wasn't considered as something very important:
| QUOTE |
| The reason the Clearwater flight is only now ( Besides the blocked runway in Miami, Atta overstayed his previous visa but was allowed to reenter the United States in January. And in April, he was ticketed in Florida for driving without a license. Source |
See also
And according to the Commission-Report, night-time-flights were not unusual for Atta and Alshehhi:
| QUOTE |
| "After passing this test, Atta and Shehhi were able to sign out planes. They did so on a number of occasions, often returning at 2:00 and 3:00 A.M. after logging four or five hours of flying time." Commission Report (p.239) (PDF) |
The Moussaoui-case
| QUOTE |
| When a Twin Cities flight instructor phoned the FBI last August to alert the agency that a terrorist might be taking lessons to fly a jumbo jet, he did it in a dramatic way: "Do you realize how serious this is?" the instructor asked an FBI agent. "This man wants training on a 747. A 747 fully loaded with fuel could be used as a weapon!" The aviation student he was talking about was Zacarias Moussaoui, who was arrested the following day. Source |
| QUOTE |
| Courtroom stunned: FBI agent Harry Samit for instance, testified he had warned his bosses a stunning 70 times, after nabbing Moussaoui at a flight simulator school, that he could be a terrorist planning to hijack an airliner. Source |
Finally, after 70 warnings, they arrested him, but the FBI Agents weren't allowed even to search his hard-drive!:
| QUOTE |
| Top Justice Department and FBI officials turned down a request by Minneapolis FBI agents early last month for a special counterintelligence surveillance warrant on a suspected Islamic terrorist who officials now believe may have been part of the Sept. 11 plot to attack the World Trade Center and Pentagon, NEWSWEEK has learned. ..other law enforcement officials are equally insistent that a more aggressive probe of Moussaoui—when combined with other intelligence in the possession of U.S. agencies—might have yielded sufficient clues about the impending plot. “The question being asked here is if they put two and two together, they could have gotten a lot more information about the guy—if not stopped the hijacking,” said one investigator. Source |
See also
The VISA-Express
Fifteen of the 19 Hijacker's Visa were issued by the U.S. consular office in Jiddah, Saudi Arabia. All of them should have been denied.
| QUOTE |
| If the U.S. State Department had followed the law, at least 15 of the 19 "dots" should have been denied visas - and likely wouldn't have been in the United States on Sept. 11, 2001. Six separate experts analyzed the simple, two-page forms (viewable only at NationalReview.com, starting today). All came to the same conclusion: Each of the 15 visa applications should have been denied on its face. Even to the untrained eye, it's not hard to see why. Consider, for example, the U.S. destinations most of them listed. Only one of the 15 provided an actual address - and that was only because his first application was refused. The rest listed such not-so-specific locations as "California," "New York," "Hotel D.C.," and "Hotel." One terrorist amazingly listed his U.S. destination as simply "No." But he still got a visa. The experts - who scrutinized the applications of 14 of the 15 Saudis and one of the two from the United Arab Emirates - include four former consular officers, a current consular officer stationed in Latin America, and someone with extensive consular experience who is now a senior official at Consular Affairs (CA), the division within the State Department that oversees consulates and visa issuance. All six strongly agreed that, even allowing for human error, no more than a handful of the visa applications should have managed to slip through the cracks. Nikolai Wenzel, one of the former consular officers who analyzed the forms, declares that State's issuance of the visas "amounts to criminal negligence." Source |
| QUOTE |
| Hani Hanjour, who also was on the plane that hit the Pentagon, had only a slight delay in acquiring his visa. A consulate employee flagged Hanjour's first application, noting that Hanjour wanted to "visit" for three years, although the legal limit is two. When Hanjour returned two weeks later, he simply changed the form to read "one year". Mowbray, who obtained the visas, said he was shocked by what he saw. "I mean, I really was expecting al Qaeda to have trained their operatives well, to beat the system," he said. "They didn't have to beat the system, the system was rigged in their favor from the get-go." The State Department would not allow interviews with current consular affairs employees. Source |
The article also states:
| QUOTE |
| At the very least, the CA executive points out, "The consular officers should not have ended the interview until the forms were completed." Which begs the question: Were 11 of the 15 terrorists whose applications were reviewed actually interviewed, as the State Department claims? The answer to the question is 'No', as it turned out two weeks later that: At least 13 of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers were never interviewed by U.S. consular officials before being granted visas to enter the United States, according to a congressional report issued yesterday. The finding contradicts previous assurances from the State Department that most of them had been thoroughly screened. None of 18 separate visa applications by 15 of the hijackers was completed properly, the report said. Thirteen of the 15, who were from Saudi Arabia or UAE, were never interviewed before being approved for a visa, the report found. Investigators were unable to review the applications for four other hijackers, including Atta, because they were destroyed. Source |
Senators Jon Kyl and Pat Roberts conluded:
| QUOTE |
| "the answer to the question - could 9/11 have been prevented - is yes, if State Department personnel had merely followed the law and not granted non-immigrant visas to 15 of the 19 hijackers in Saudi Arabia." Source |
See also
Michael Springman, former visa officer at the U.S. consular office in Jiddah claims that he is "repeatedly told to issue visas to unqualified applicants." He turns them down, but is repeatedly overruled by superiors. Springmann loudly complains about the practice to numerous government offices, but no action is taken. He eventually is fired and the files he has kept on these applicants are destroyed.
| QUOTE |
| In Saudi Arabia I was repeatedly ordered by high level State Dept officials to issue visas to unqualified applicants. I complained bitterly at the time there.... I was met with silence. What I was protesting was, in reality, an effort to bring recruits, rounded up by Osama Bin Laden, to the US for terrorist training by the CIA. They would then be returned to Afghanistan to fight against the then-Soviets. The attack on the World Trade Center in 1993 did not shake the State Department's faith in the Saudis, nor did the attack on American barracks at Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia three years later, in which 19 Americans died. FBI agents began to feel their investigation was being obstructed. Source |
| QUOTE |
| On another occasion, an unemployed refugee from Sudan showed up at the consulate. The person, Springmann said, had no good reason to go to the United States and only the most ephemeral ties to Saudi Arabia. In other words, Springmann said, the Sudanese was the sort who would have no compelling reason to leave the United States once he arrived. Springmann turned down the application but immediately encountered resistance. "I kept saying no," Springmann recalled. "But, again, the head of consular section gave him a visa. I asked why. He said national security reasons." ... He said the entire consular operation was run by the CIA. (AP, 07-17-02) |
| QUOTE |
| SPRINGMANN: According to "The Los Angeles Times," 15 of the 19 people who flew airplanes into buildings had got their visas at the CIA's consulate at Jetta (ph) where 15 to 20 of the people who worked there were Washington- based. Nearly everybody except myself and two other people worked for the CIA or the NSA or some other intelligence service. GIBSON: So what do you think was going on? Was this just -- the CIA didn't quite know what their own people were up to? Had they morphed into something else? SPRINGMANN: Well, I think they did know what they were doing. I think that... GIBSON: You're not suggesting they knew what -- that they were going to go fly airplanes into buildings in the United States, do you? SPRINGMANN: I don't think so, but, with the secrecy the CIA has got going for it and the protection it gets, anything is possible. GIBSON: Well, I mean, you really think it's possible. Even the CIA could have had its fingers in a terrorism directed against the United States? SPRINGMANN: Well, who knows? I've seen it suggested that it was one way of getting the Americans involved at bases not only in the Middle East but at bases surrounding Russia. Source |
On October 1st 2001 it's reported, that the US Embassy in Jeddah tightens visa rules. Source
And to Hanjour's visa:
| QUOTE |
| “Hani Hanjour, 29, entered the United States in December 2000 on an F-1 student visa. But he never attended the school he was admitted to in Oakland, Calif., to study English. The school did not notify authorities and, once in the country, Hanjour melted into obscurity, just another visa overstay, like Nawaf Alhazmi and Satam Al Suqami, who overstayed their B-1/B-2 visas. Source |
Hani Hanjour was illegal in the country. Why did he not seek a proper visa?
| QUOTE |
| “He never attended the ELS Language Center in Oakland, California, the stated destination on his second visa application of September 25, 2000. His records do not indicate the length of stay the primary immigration inspector gave him.” Commission Report - Terrorist Travel PDF) |
Under Surveillance
Atta under CIA-Surveillance: he and three other ringleader, Marwan Alshehhi, Khalid Almihdhar, and Nawaf Alhazmi were also under surveillance by a secret US Army intelligence program called Able Danger since early 2000. For more go here
See also this CNN TV CLIP
Hanjour had also an indirect connection to US-Intelligence.
And let's not forget the 'Phoenix-Memo' by FBI special agent Kenneth Williams, warning about suspect Middle Easterners training in Arizona flight schools:
Two of the supspects mentioned there, Ghassan al Sharbi and Abu Zubaida, had direct connections to Hanjour. Source
Last but not least, the FBI-Informant Aukai Collins monitored the Islamic and Arab communities in Phoenix between 1996 and 1999, and in his warnings Hanjour is mentioned: "They knew everything about the guy"
| QUOTE |
| Collins said he believes Sept. 11 could have been prevented. Based on a deep cynicism developed during years working undercover with the FBI and the CIA, he thinks it impossible both agencies could be caught unaware by the attack. It's entirely possible, he says, that they knew very well what was coming -- and that they let it happen anyway. For its part, the FBI has confirmed that Collins was an informant who provided valuable information on Muslim extremists -- but denies that he provided information that could have prevented Sept. 11. Source |
Taking this all into consideration (and there's much more): If this is not protection, than protection has no meaning.
The living pilots
How was the identity of the alleged hijackers uncovered?
This was explained under oath during a hearing of the 9/11 commission by Robert Bonner, the head of Customs and Border Protection:
| QUOTE |
| BONNER: On the morning of 9/11, through an evaluation of data -- by the way, this was the passing through manifest, which U.S. Customs was able to access from the airlines -- I would say, within about an hour of 9/11 U.S. Customs Office of Intelligence had identified the 19 probable hijackers as well as the complete list of the passengers on the aircraft. MR. BEN-VENISTE: Let me ask you briefly about your statement about the day on 9/11 which I found very interesting. You say that, on the morning of 9/11, through an evaluation of data related to the passenger manifest of the four terrorist hijacked aircraft, Customs Office of Intelligence was able to identify the likely terrorist hijackers within 45 minutes of the attack, Customs forwarded the passenger lists with the names of the victims and 19 probable hijackers to the FBI and the intelligence community. How are your people able to do that? BONNER (...) by 11:00 a.m., I'd seen a sheet that essentially identified the 19 probable hijackers. And in fact, they turned out(...) to be the 19. Commission Hearing |
Keep this, which was also confirmed by Richard Clarke, in mind, when it comes to the 'mysterious hijackers'. Why were they suspected when they've never been on the passenger manifests? And we will also see that left cars played an important role in (mis-)identifying the hijackers.
One of the first suspects was Lotfi Raissi, an Algerian pilot living in Britain.
| QUOTE |
| U.S. authorities began extradition proceedings in a London court Friday against a British-based Algerian pilot suspected of being the flight instructor for four of the 19 hijackers who attacked U.S. landmarks Sept. 11. Investigators consider the arrest a breakthrough in the search for living co-conspirators to the New York and Pentagon attacks. "We believe he is by far the biggest find we have had so far. He is of crucial importance to us," an FBI source told the Times of London. "What we say is that he was in fact a lead instructor for four of the pilots responsible for the hijackings," said the prosecutor, Arvinda Sambir. "He was in the background to facilitate training of these pilots. His job was to ensure the pilots were capable and trained." Source |
| QUOTE |
| Today, Raissi is being held in London on a U.S. extradition warrant, accused of training Hanjour and three other hijackers. British prosecutors have said that Raissi and Hanjour attended the same flight schools and that a computer seized in Raissi's apartment in England contained a video clip of the two men. During the past two summers, they were together at the Sawyer simulator, according to various employees who worked there after Fults had left. Source |
| QUOTE |
| One example, this man, Lotfi Raissi, entered the U.S. to begin flight training in 1996. He became a flight instructor. He's now being held in Britain. U.S. and British officials say Raissi made several trips between the U.S. and the U.K. He even flew with suspected hijacker pilot Hani Hanjour from Las Vegas to Phoenix on June 23 to oversee the flight simulator training of Hanjour and three other alleged hijack pilots. Source |
He was arrested in Britain and later, in April 2002:
| QUOTE |
| It turned out, the British court found, that the video showed Raissi with his cousin, not Mr. Hanjour, that Raissi had mistakenly filled in his air training logbook and had never flown with Hanjour, and that Raissi and the hijackers were not in Las Vegas at the same time. The US authorities never presented any phone records showing conversations between Raissi and Hanjour. Source |
As the US delivered their evidence, it turned out they have none! Maybe this is the reason why they refused to deliver evidence in the trails against Mzoudi and Motassadeq? Notice also this telling statement from the same article:
| QUOTE |
| Indeed, the difficulties of tracking down suspects and amassing sufficient evidence to convict them leads some experts to wonder whether it is worth it. "Is terrorism a crime or is it war?" asks Stephen Gale, a counterterrorism expert who teaches at the University of Pennsylvania. "If you think someone is going to take out your electrical grid, in a criminal investigation you arrest him. In a war you shoot first and ask questions later," he points out. |
Think of it! If they had shot Riassi first, there wouldn't have been a trial. So the US wouldn't be forced to deliver evidence. So the evidence wouldn't have turned out to be non-existant. So the official version would be until today: Raissi was a lead instructor of the hijackers... See also
The story of another suspect related to Hanjour became almost forgotten. Faisal M. Al Salmi was indicted for giving false statements to the FBI about his association with Hanjour. Al Salmi hired in April 20001 for a remedial flying course in Tempe, Arizona at Sunbird Aviation
One day Al Salmi appeared with a second man who later turned out to be of interest to the FBI. Asked about this second man, Oscar Casdorph
he did not recognize Hanjour from FBI pictures and does not know whether the second man...had a connection to any of the hijackers.
Casdorph said he only knew the second man's first name, but would not disclose it, at the FBI's request. Source
So it's not Hani Hanjour as the FBI would have no reason to not diclose his name. Unfortunately, we could not ask Casdorph for revealing this name as he is already dead. There's one thing Hanjour, Al Salmi and the unknown 'second man' have in common: their flying skills. Casdorph mentions the "poor flying skills" of Al Salmi and that "he did not feel comfortable flying with the second man and did not return calls when the man sought additional lessons."
Al Salmi denied any connections to Hanjour, and therefore was convicted and found guilty of making false statements in denying knowledge of Hanjour. Source
He was not convicted for 9/11, "he took a polygraph test that shows he was not involved in the Sept. 11 attacks." Source
There were also others suspected to be hijackers, like Adnan and Ameer Bukhari, both Saudi pilots. They "were believed to have been on of the two flights out of Boston." CNN
But when the FBI raided Adnan Bukhari’s house it turned out that he was alive. And that Ameer Bukhari "had died in an air collision above the St. Lucie County International Airport exactly a year before the attacks”. CNN
As the Bukhari's (who were misreported as brothers) were not on the passenger manifests. How did they became suspect within hours after the attacks? Here's the answer:
| QUOTE |
| “Law enforcement sources also tell CNN that the Bukhari brothers were believed to have been on of the two flights out of Boston, one of those two flights that wound up slamming into the World Trade Center. Also we can report to you that a car impounded in Portland, Maine, according to law enforcement authorities, was rented at Boston Logan Airport and driven to Portland, Maine.” (CNN, 9/12/01 3:00 p. m.) |
| QUOTE |
| "Evidence found in a rental car left in Portland, Maine, led investigators to two houses in Vero Beach, Florida. One had been rented by two brothers from Saudi Arabia." CNN |
| QUOTE |
| FedQUeral sources had initially identified the brothers as possible hijackers who had boarded one of the planes that originated in Boston. Their names had been tied to a car founded at an airport in Portland, Maine. But Bukhari's attorney said it appeared their identifications were stolen and said Bukhari had no role in the hijackings. Information found in another rental car left in Boston's Logan Airport -- where two of the hijacked flights originated -- led investigators to two more men who were pilots: Mohammed Atta and Marwan Yousef Alshehhii. CNN |
| QUOTE |
| "U.S. authorities found this letter handwritten in Arabic in the suitcase of Mohamed Atta. It includes Islamic prayers, instructions for a last night of life, and a practical checklist of reminders for the final operation. The FBI released an untranslated copy of the letter; the British newspaper The Observer published this translation. Additional copies of this letter were found at the crash site of United Airlines Flight 93 in Pennsylvania and at a Dulles International Airport parking lot in a car registered to one of the hijackers on American Flight 77. Source |
That's another one, now we have three cars left with evidence at airports. One found at Washington’s Dulles Airport registered to Nawaf Alhazmi Source
Another is discovered at Boston’s Logan Airport, registered to Marwan Alshehhi Source
And the third, with 'evidence' suggesting the Bukharis as hijackers, is the one found in Portland, Maine. Registered to Mohammed Atta.
| QUOTE |
| Before flying from Portland to Boston to carry out terror attacks on New York City, Mohamed Atta and Abdul Alomari rented a car at the Logan Airport Alamo and drove to Maine, police said. Source |
| QUOTE |
| Meanwhile, another investigator was interviewing a manager of Alamo Rent A Car at the jetport. A search of the company's computer records showed Atta had rented a blue Nissan Altima Sept. 9 in Boston and that it was due back Sept. 11 by 6 p.m. It was listed as overdue. Source |
The cars full of evidence were pretty comfortable for the FBI's investigation - directly presented to them on a golden plate. And don't forget the found passports at the WTC and in Shanksville (not to mention the red bandana and the boxcutter 'Made in China') and at the Pentagon. And Atta's bags at the airport. An the 'confirmation-video' of Osama Bin Laden coincidentally found in Jalalabad. And Jarrah's returned love-letter. Or they just left a box cutter together with a credit card here or together with manuals there.
They left a Koran hereand a Koran there.
(And btw., it's obvious how 'box-cutter' and 'koran' became signal-words after the attacks, associated to brandmark the traumatized minds of the people with anti-islamism. Beeing a moslem + a boxcutter is all you need to go to prison, think of Ayub Ali Khan)
"Never in the history of modern warfare has so much been found so opportunely." Guradian
Also notice this comment from the same article:
| QUOTE |
| Apart from the fact that the al-Qaida network seem to have a catastrophic way with lost property, isn't it strange that these most demonised and potent of terrorists seem unable to operate any weapons without a manual? |
| QUOTE |
| "The attacks were probably well planned, but they didn't do a good job covering their tracks," one federal agent said. Source |
Giving all these 'golden plates', what would Columbo say on that? Don't know, but here's what the Miami Herald said:
| QUOTE |
| “In the end, they left a curiously obvious trail—from martial arts manuals, maps, a Koran, Internet and credit card fingerprints. Maybe they were sloppy, maybe they did not care, maybe it was a gesture of contempt of a culture they considered weak and corrupt.” Source |
But maybe it's just that what it looks like: planted evidence. And you don't have to be Columbo to figure that out:
| QUOTE |
| „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.“ Source |
And we've just seen the proof for his statement in the case of the Bukharis. How could it be that the FBI revealed the names of the 19 hijackers five days later and furthermore "through an evaluation of data related to the passenger manifest of the four terrorist hijacked aircraft, Customs Office of Intelligence was able to identify the likely terrorist hijackers within 45 minutes of the attack" , but weeks later it's stated:
| QUOTE |
| On Friday (<28.>) Robert Mueller, the FBI's director, was forced to release photos of the suspected suicide hijackers and beg citizens to help his agents identify them. One hijacker, he was sure, was linked to the bin Laden network, but he wouldn't give his name. Mueller admitted that he wasn't clear about the identities of many of the rest. Guardian |
The article also notes:
| QUOTE |
| The Germans and others at the Nato meeting on Wednesday were convinced the US would arrive with a bulging dossier on bin Laden's complicity. They got so little that a desperate Lord Robertson was reduced to covering America's back by wondering aloud whether 'it is necessary for an ally to produce evidence?' |
My answer would be a simple 'yes, of course'. What would be your's?
Let's go back, there was also another commercial pilot suspected to be a hijacker: Ameer Taiyb Kamfar
| QUOTE |
| "Amer Kamfar, also suspected by the FBI of being among the World Trade Center hijackers, had both allegedly trained at the Vero Beach pilot school Flight Safety Academy" Source |
| QUOTE |
| Thursday night, police in Florida were searching for Kamfar, who was reported to be at large and armed with an AK-47 assault rifle. Source |
But he's not listed on the passengers-manifest. Where does his name come from?
Kamfar was linked to the hijacker Alomari:
| QUOTE |
| “Kamfar, 41, lived at the same Vero Beach address as Abdulrahman Alomari, who is listed in FAA records as having worked in flight operations for the Saudi airline and who was sitting next to Atta in the business section of American Airlines Flight 11, according to the passenger manifest.” Source |
Kamfar was also linked to Adnan Bukhari:
| QUOTE |
| Two alleged associates of the hijackers, Adnan Bukhari and Amer Kamfar, attended flight schools in Florida and had the Saudi Arabian Airlines post office box in the Saudi city of Jeddah, listed as their home addresses on their commercial pilots' licenses. Source |
And Bukhari has links to Al Omari, too:
| QUOTE |
| Bukhari helped Al Omari to rent the house next door. Source |
| QUOTE |
| “Bukhari lived in one house and Abdul Rahman Alomari, 38, in the other.” (Sun-Sentinel, 9/14/01) |
But then:
| QUOTE |
| “However, the FBI did say it no longer was looking for Amer Taiyb Kamfar, who lived at the same Vero Beach address as Abdul Rahman Alomari, identified as Abdulaziz Alomari on the list of suspected hijackers. The alert for Kamfar, put out to all law enforcement agencies on Wednesday, had described him as armed and extremely dangerous. FBI spokeswoman Judy Orihuela said she couldn't comment on why the bulletin was rescinded.” (Palm Beach Post, 9/15/01) |
Do you see a pattern here? We have four pilots, three of them suspected to be hijacker, one to be the 'lead instructor'. One turned out to be already dead. A second, Raissi, has been convicted with false evidence. And we have Adnan Bukhari and Kamfar, both linked to Al Omari, furthermore they've found links to Bukhari in the car rented by Atta and Al Omari. But their links turned to dust:
| QUOTE |
| In the interview with the FBI on September 12 Adnan Bukhari of course didn’t have to prove anymore that he wasn’t aboard an airplane on 911 but he had to answer tough questions about his close friendship to the hijacker Abdul Rahman Al Omari. But he had luck and once again was able to present a convincing proof of his innocence: “Just as the questions began, Bukhari's cell phone rang. It was Alomari. Bukhari turned to his attorney: "You're never going to believe who this is." Bukhari handed the phone to the FBI agent. "I think from that they started to realize I had nothing to do with it and it was just a mistake with the names." (Palm Beach Post, 9/21/01) |
This means, we have now FOUR men, three of them falsely suspected to be the pilots, one to be the 'lead instructor'.
And since then the hijacker on Atta's side is named as Abdulaziz Alomari , and not as Abdul Rahman Al-Omari. Just a name-confusion it's said here.
But why is it, that
| QUOTE |
| in the Justice Department list of hijackers released yesterday, Alomari's first name is spelled Abdulaziz. Federal investigators said they could not explain the discrepancy between the American Airlines passenger list and their list. Hijackers may have taken Saudi identities |
Furthermore, how could the car have contained evidence linking to Bukhari, when he has only links to the Saudi Airlines Pilot Abdul Rahman Al-Omari and not to Abdulaziz Alomari?
And the confusion expands:
| QUOTE |
| “Abdul Aziz al-Omari [Photo No. 4] was identified as one of the hijackers and the pilot who crashed American Airlines Flight 11 into the North Tower of the World Trade Center. Another man with the same name is an electrical engineer in Saudi Arabia. He lived in Denver after earning a degree from the University of Colorado in 1993. Coincidence? Consider this oddity. ABC News has reported that his Denver apartment was broken into and his passport and other documents stolen in 1995. In September 2001 he told the Telegraph, ‘I couldn't believe it when the FBI put me on their list. They gave my name and my date of birth, but I am not a suicide bomber. I am here. I am alive. I have no idea how to fly a plane. I had nothing to do with this.’” (Insight the News, 7/7/03) |
Sounds like stolen identity. Remember when Bukhari's attorney said "it appeared their identifications were stolen". Do you see a pattern here?
To summarize the mysterious four hijackers:
-Lofti Raissi: from "biggest breakthrough", "cruical importance" , a "in fact lead instructor" to verdict of not guilty (and who should have better been "shot first")
-Ameer Bukhari: from a hijacker pilot to dead since a year
-Adnan Bukhari: from a hijacker pilot to still alive, then from ties to the hijackers to "helping authorities".
-Ameer Taiyb Kamfar: from a hijacker pilot to still alive, then from armed with an AK47 to innocent person.
What evidence do we have that Hanjour was even on Flight 77?
First, he's on the passenger list, published in it's originally form in 2005. ZIP-File
But Ashcroft said on Sept.14 :"And American Airlines 77, Dulles to Los Angeles, four hijackers. That is our preliminary." Source
So maybe they had to that time no clue, that there were five hijackers. But in the first published list of the hijackers by the FBI from the same day (Sept.14), there were five hijackers. But Hanjour was missing. Instead, another hijacker was suspected to be on board of Flight 77 : Mosear Caned (note this is phonetic spelling). Here's the transcript of the CNN-Report from 09/14/01.
There are several names misspelled, but all other names are similiar to the FBI-list of the nineteen hijackers published four hours later. All out of one: "Mosear Caned" does not sound anything like "Hani Hanjour. (See for comparison this blog) How could 'Caned' occur on the CNN-list when he wasn't on the passenger-list? And why was his name never mentioned again? And how is it possible that within four hours out from nowhere Hanjour apeared and replaced Caned, who disappeared into nowhere? Maybe this could be the reason:
To summarize the mysterious four hijackers:
-Lofti Raissi: from "biggest breakthrough", "cruical importance" , a "in fact lead instructor" to verdict of not guilty (and who should have better been "shot first")
-Ameer Bukhari: from a hijacker pilot to dead since a year
-Adnan Bukhari: from a hijacker pilot to still alive, then from ties to the hijackers to "helping authorities".
-Ameer Taiyb Kamfar: from a hijacker pilot to still alive, then from armed with an AK47 to innocent person.
What evidence do we have that Hanjour was even on Flight 77?
First, he's on the passenger list, published in it's originally form in 2005. ZIP-File
But Ashcroft said on Sept.14 :"And American Airlines 77, Dulles to Los Angeles, four hijackers. That is our preliminary." Source
So maybe they had to that time no clue, that there were five hijackers. But in the first published list of the hijackers by the FBI from the same day (Sept.14), there were five hijackers. But Hanjour was missing. Instead, another hijacker was suspected to be on board of Flight 77 : Mosear Caned (note this is phonetic spelling). Here's the transcript of the CNN-Report from 09/14/01.
There are several names misspelled, but all other names are similiar to the FBI-list of the nineteen hijackers published four hours later. All out of one: "Mosear Caned" does not sound anything like "Hani Hanjour. (See for comparison this blog) How could 'Caned' occur on the CNN-list when he wasn't on the passenger-list? And why was his name never mentioned again? And how is it possible that within four hours out from nowhere Hanjour apeared and replaced Caned, who disappeared into nowhere? Maybe this could be the reason:
| QUOTE |
| "His name [Hani Hanjour] was not on the American Airlines manifest for the flight because he may not have had a ticket." Washington Post |
But later it's revealed that Hanjour purchased a ticket in cash on August 31, at Advanced Travel Service.
| QUOTE |
| “Hanjour and Moqed initially asked for two first class seats on a morning flight to Los Angeles, California. The agent told them a ticket cost $2,220 from Newark and $1,842 from Washington Dulles; they went with the Dulles flight. But they changed their mind and bought only one ticket--for Hanjour, requesting a front aisle seat; he got 1B. For identification, Hanjour presented a Virginia driver's license with a Falls Church address.” Source |
But the confusion doesn't stop, because according to the Commission Hanjour only had a Virginia ID, but not a Virginia driver’s licence. 9/11 Commission, 8/21/2004, pp. 32
If we believe the Commission Report, then he used a faked license. From the investigation we know that several of the hijackers used faked ID cards. But why should he use a faked license, as he obviously didn't want to hide his identity? This only results in more risk. Or does someone else used his identity to purchase the ticket? We don't know, maybe the Commission Report is just wrong on that. But if you want to look closer into the possibility that Hanjour and the other hijackers/pilots had doppelgänger (doubles), start here for Hanjour and here for the others. It's worth it!
Besides the passenger-list we have the recordings of the security-camera from Dulles Airport. It was first (mis-)reported that this man would be Hanjour, which he obviously not is.
In the Moussaoui trial it was stated that this man is Hanjour.
Indeed, he does match much better than the first one. But the footage-quality is too bad to make a decision in either way. The more important point is: why is there no data/time-branding on the video?
| QUOTE |
| First ask yourself where you ever viewed airport security camera footage completely devoid of camera identification numbers, and without any date:time clocks. Just this single terminal at Dulles Airport has well over 100 such cameras, every one of them with an individual camera ident number and date:time clock of its own. On-film data is essential of course, because it would be extremely difficult to track a target around the airport without these basic tools, and absolutely impossible to sort out the precise time and date of an event that occured more than two years before, which is exactly what the 9-11 Commission now claims to have done. Clever, huh? Those 'experts' who might wish to claim that the ident numbers and date:time clocks were edited out of every single frame for extra clarity, had best forget it. I have personally examined every available frame blown up over twenty times, and there is not a trace of editing. No matter where or when this footage was filmed, what you see is what you get. Source |
Fact is, even if a better footage quality would reveal that this man is Hanjour, it would prove nothing without data/time and therefore it's worthless. Even with a time/date-stamp but without better quality it wouldn't prove Hanjours presence. (The whole video is available here.)
And as third, we have the autopsy. And as we all know, all passengers had been identified through DNA-Examination. That's what is told, but in reality none of the hijackers has been identified until today. Read this from Pentagon-Research about the autopsy-report (have fixed the broken pdf-link):
| QUOTE |
| The most interesting thing about this report is the total absence of Arab names. Some people have suggested that the hijackers were not considered "passengers". We will look at the real reason they are not there. You can view Flight 77's press release passenger manifest (the official one is restricted by the FBI) here for comparison. Again no Arab names. The reason there are no Arab names on the autopsy is because they were never positively identified. "The remains of the five hijackers have been identified through a process of exclusion, as they did not match DNA samples contributed by family members of all 183 victims who died at the site. The hijackers' remains will be turned over to the FBI and held as evidence, FBI spokesman Chris Murray said. After the investigation is concluded, the State Department will decide what is to be done with the remains." (Source for the two paragraphs above.) "Some remains for each of the terrorists were recovered, as evidenced by five unique postmortem profiles that did not match any antemortem material provided by victims’ families. No identifiable remains for five of the victims known to have been killed in the attack were recovered." (Source - This PDF is worth reading to understand all of the other speculation that went into identifying the bodies.) So what we have here is 5 names on the list of people who were known to be missing from the Pentagon (4 Pentagon employees and one infant from Flight 77) that had no remains left to be identified. Then we have 5 sets of remains that didn't match the post-mortem DNA samples of the family members. So therefore those remains must be the hijackers. No positive ID required. Have you noticed yet that not ONE single aspect of this entire incident is straightforward and how it should be? So why have they not produced positive identifications for the "hijackers"? They published their names so they know who they are........right? They should then be able to locate the family members to get DNA samples and produce a positive identification. They could still do it because according to the top statement the FBI still has the remains. But they won't. The only report American citizens get from the FBI is right here. They didn't even confirm if the five non-matching remains were Arab. |
In fact, no positive identification is NO identification. The hijackers of Flight 93 were also not positive identified but passed through the "process of elimination". "The death certificates will list each as 'John Doe'." Source
So, even that Hanjour was actually on board of Flight 77 is questionable. My conclusion is, as he never turned out to be alive after Sept. 11, that he died on that day. And when he was on Flight 77, then he died not as pilot. As a patsy.
And before we finally come to the end: remember the book "Masterminds of Terror" by Nick Fielding and Yosri Fouda? In it, they claim that Atta wired thousands of dollars back to Ramzi Binalshib in Pakistan. Because Atta, who was responsible for the financing of the operation in the US, said that they didn't need it anymore because they were in the final preparation. (no source as I have the book only in german language).
Well, we began with a statement of flight-instructor Bernard, we end with an (indirect) statement of him. As we know it's said that Hanjour visited Bernard's flight school for 'final preparation' on his suicide mission.
| QUOTE |
| "The two last spoke on the phone a few weeks before the attacks, when Hanjour complained about an $80 no-show charge." Source |
Either Hanjour was not part of Atta's operation, or he believed that even the ticket to paradise has to be paid with money!
