Tag Archives: Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab

Kurt Haskell runs for Congress in 2012

If you have been following the story surrounding Michigan attorney Kurt Haskell and his wife, and fellow attorney, Lori, then you will already know them as passengers who were on board the Northwest Airlines Christmas Day Flight 253, and eyewitnesses to “the underwear bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab’s failed attempt to blow up the plane. Ever since their terrifying ordeal, the Haskells have been trying to pressure the US administration to make a full disclosure of what really took place that day. In particular, they have tried to establish the reason Abdulmutallab, who was already known to the CIA as an al-Qaeda sympathiser, had been escorted through passport and security checks at Amsterdam airport. Having personally witnessed this, and behaving as good citizens are supposed to behave, they immediately reported what they had seen to the authorities. To their astonishment, the authorities didn’t want to hear from them. So began their campaign for truth and justice; a campaign that the mainstream media has almost entirely ignored.

To find out more about the details of the case, there are two previous articles that offer a summary of the Haskells’ two year long battle for justice. Click on the tag at the bottom. Or better, listen to this extended radio interview (there are a few advert breaks) with Kurt Haskell giving his own account of both the failed attack and his subsequent part in Abdulmutallab’s trial:

Unsurprisingly, what happened to Kurt and Lori Haskell has radically shaken the trust they’d formerly held in their government, as well as in the process of American justice. When Obama signed the indefinite detention bill NDAA 2012 into law, just before the stroke of midnight New Years’ Day, they both decided they’d had enough. It was time to pull up sticks and emigrate to Costa Rica. But then something else happened that changed their minds.

In January, the boundaries of the local district for Congress were redrawn, the consequence being that Congressman John Dingell, a Democrat who had been in office for 56 years, was moved out of the district, and in his place, the “very vulnerable incumbent” Republican Tim Walberg, faced no challenge from any Democrat candidate. Kurt Haskell says that although he’d had no desire to run for office before, it was this unexpected circumstance that caused him to reconsider his position. And, as he also says, who better to speak out against the Patriot Act, the NDAA, CISPA and the increasing attack on basic human rights and the American Constitution than someone such as himself.

Click here to reach Kurt Haskell’s own campaign website for election to Congress in Michigan’s 7th District.



Unfortunately the embedded radio interview had been removed from youtube and I cannot find a freshly uploaded version. Here instead is an interview Kurt Haskell gave on Infowars a few months earlier in February.

At the time, he was preparing to deliver his victim impact statement at the close of Abdulmutallab’s trial. He also talks about why he has decided not to pursue a civil case, and the reasons his family are planning to exit the United States.

1 Comment

Filed under campaigns & events, USA

Kurt & Lori Haskell’s last stand for truth as victims of underwear bomber

On Thursday [Feb 16th] Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, aka “the underwear bomber”, received the maximum sentence, and now faces a life in prison for attempting to blow up a Delta Airlines flight from Amsterdam bound for Detroit on Christmas Day, 2009. Abdulmutallab, who had represented himself for most of the court proceedings, offered a guilty plea back in October, and so it might seem that the case against Abdulmutallab was an open and shut one. This is very much the way most of the news channels and press agencies have reported on his trial. Here, for instance, is a report from Reuters after his sentencing:
But the full story of Abdulmutallab’s trial is a great deal more complicated than it first appears, and to understand a little of what’s been going on behind the scenes, we need to go back to October.

I will begin with what the BBC news reported on October 11th:

A Nigerian man accused of an attempting to bomb a Detroit-bound flight with explosives sewn into his underwear has arrived at a Detroit court for trial.

Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, 24, originally planned to defend himself, but his court-appointed lawyer will instead deliver an opening statement.1

Although I say that this BBC report is from October 11th, if you search for it, you won’t find it (or at least I can’t), but will instead discover to a different article which appears to be a revised version. Does this matter? Well, the original BBC report, which is quoted above (and which I happened to have saved as a copy on my hard drive) continues as follows:

The 24-year-old is officially representing himself, after firing a team of four lawyers appointed by the Detroit Federal Defender office last year.

Mr Chambers is the “standby counsel” appointed by a federal judge.

He told the Associated Press news agency he had been authorised by Mr Abdulmutallab to deliver the opening statement.

Mr Chambers said his client was “driving the bus” on the ultimate decisions made in the courtroom.

“His self-representation certainly makes it more difficult strategically. But we’re doing the best we can with what we have to work with.”

Whereas in the current version this part is substantially reduced, as follows:

Mr Abdulmutallab is representing himself in this trial. He has been appointed a standby lawyer, Anthony Chambers, but Mr Chambers said his client was “driving the bus” in the trial.

He also conceded self-representation made the case “more difficult strategically”.

The new version therefore fails to recall the sudden and dramatic turn of events in the lead up to the trial when Abdulmutallab had suddenly fired his team of lawyers. The new wording diverting attention from questions about why he might have done this, and what impact this undoubtedly had on the outcome of his trial.

Kurt and Lori Haskell are two lawyers who have paid very close attention to the unfolding saga in the weeks and months prior to Abdulmutallab’s trial. They had a very personal reason for this. Both were aboard the same Christmas Day flight, sat just a few rows back from where Abdulmutallab had attempted to detonate his device. They were eyewitnesses to the attack and, just as importantly, to the events leading up to the attack.

They had personally witnessed Abdulmutallab being helped on to the plane without a visa and, not surprisingly, they wanted to know the reason for this. So their first surprise was to discover that the US authorities refused to accept either of their accounts, and were entirely dismissive of what ought to have been regarded as important eyewitness testimony. Why on earth wouldn’t the authorities be interested in following up their reports, which might very well have led to the uncovering of a much wider plot?

If you type ‘kurt haskell’ into the BBC search engine you find the familiar: Sorry, there are no results for ‘kurt haskell’ in the category ‘News’. The same search does, however, bring up a link from BBC news to ABC news, which mentions Haskell in its own report on sentencing of Abdulmutallab on Friday Feb 17th:

Kurt Haskell, a Michigan lawyer, praised Mason for damping the flames and also criticized what he characterized as lax security that allowed Abdulmutallab to get on the plane. Haskell, who has long promoted a conspiracy theory that asserts the U.S. government was complicit in the attack, repeated his assertion. “I am convinced that Umar was given an intentionally defective bomb by a U.S. agent to stage a false terrorist attack.”2

And this has been the mainstream media’s response almost since the beginning. Like the US authorities, the media simply haven’t wanted to know. Instead we hear that Kurt and Lori Haskell are ‘promoting a conspiracy theory’. It doesn’t matter that they are both key witnesses. It doesn’t matter that they are also lawyers with a reputation to preserve and nothing at all to gain by sticking to their account (which hasn’t changed since the day of the attack). And to get some idea of just how tenaciously the Haskells have pursued the truth, I advise you to read through the many posts on their own blog, or else read my own overview in an earlier post.

But now I come back to the question of why Abdulmutallab may have dismissed his appointed legal team. Here were Kurt Haskell’s thoughts just about a month prior to the trial [Sept 13th]:

Where are we now? We now have The Underwear Bomber (Umar) representing himself with the help of standby attorney Chambers. Attorney Chambers has indicated to me that if he were Umar’s attorney, that the defense would be entrapment and that I would be a key witness. Of course, such a defense would expose the U.S. Government’s involvement in the plot. It is much too convenient to have Umar represent himself and be in charge of what the defense will be, what evidence is presented, what witnesses are called and what questions each witness is asked. A trial with Umar representing himself will leave the relevant facts of this case unknown for generations.

I have quoted this before in my earlier post on the case, which I’d entitled “key witnesses will be excluded from the trial of the underwear bomber”. Soon afterwards, however, some hugely significant developments led to perhaps the most remarkable episode of all – and here is something else that the mainstream media has entirely failed to report on. So let’s forward move to Kurt Haskell’s post on October 6th , which was also the last day of jury selection. It was entitled “Looks like I’ll be a witness for the defense in the underwear bomber case”:

Today was the day for final jury selection in the Underwear Bomber case. I watched some of it on Tuesday and I was interested to see which jurors were picked. The final jury was set to be picked today at 1:30. I adjusted my schedule so that I could be down there at 1:30 today. I had a trial a few blocks away that was due to last until around 1:00 today. My plan was to head over there when I finished my trial. As my trial was ending, I got the following text from my brother “I hear that you will be testifying in the underwear bomber case”. This was news to me as my status as a witness was undetermined as of Tuesday. I gave my brother a call and he said he heard on the radio, that stand-by Anthony Chambers said in court this morning that I would be testifying. While walking to Federal Court to watch final jury selection, I ran into someone that works with stand-by attorney Chambers. He told me that final jury selection was done as it didn’t take as long as expected. He also told me that it was Umar that said he would call me as a witness, not Chambers. He then said Chambers is right there, go talk to him and he pointed across the street. Chambers was standing on the sidewalk across the street. I talked to Chambers for a minute and we agreed to talk again soon. He said I won’t be testifying for approximately another month as the trial is supposed to be lengthy.

Does Kurt Haskell have any further proof that he was about to be called as a witness? Well, there is a link to an article (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/10/05/2666662/final-jury-pool-settled-in-underwear.html)
by Ed White that Kurt Haskell describes as a ‘hatchet job’, but that now seems to have been removed altogether. Kurt Haskell writes:

Note, however, in the above article, Chambers indicates that I may be the only defense witness called. How ironic is it that I will have Umar’s life in my hands just as Umar had my life in his hands (or underwear) on Christmas Day 2009? I will be up to the task. I realize that some may not agree with me and may attempt to harm me. Nevertheless, I will speak the truth and not be intimidated.

Click here to read the full post.

But then roll forward just a week [to Oct 13th], and you’ll find this post by Lori Haskell:

Trial for the Underwear Bomber started this week, on Tuesday. Since neither Kurt or I had been contacted about being witnesses or being sequestered from the courtroom, we decided to head down to the trial in the hopes of being able to observe. Seats were reserved for all victims, and we really wanted to be there as much as possible. When going through security on the first floor of the court, we ran into someone who works for Anthony Chambers, who told us a pre-trial Motion had been filed that morning to exclude Kurt and I from being in the courtroom for the trial as we may be potential witnesses. We decided to head up and see what happened anyway, since the Motion was not ExParte and had not yet been granted.

Headed up to Floor 8, where Judge Edmunds is. Had to go through more security and obtain a pass to wear allowing us in the court. Sat down in the spot indicated for victims and waited for things to start. The trial started with the pre-trial motions, which one was filed by the prosecution and two by the defense. The prosecution actually filed a Motion that listed Kurt and I, by name, asking that we not sit in on trial as we may be witnesses for the defense. Judge Edmunds excluded Kurt from the courtroom, but said she was not excluding me since I was not on the witness list. I had to stand, and she told me that she did not want me to discuss anything with Kurt about the trial, which I agreed to.

And then we come to the bombshell:

Day two of trial, I could not attend first thing in the morning, but, I guess I did not miss much. Apparently, as soon as court was called to session, another long meeting happened between Chambers and Umar until around 10:50 AM. Once they came into the court, the Judge was informed that Umar was going to plead guilty to all 8 charges against him. I got there at 10:10 AM and walked into the overflow courtroom. I sat down, ready to take notes and watch, and heard the Judge say something to the effect “How do you plead to count 2…….” and hear Umar say “Guilty”. I think I almost fell over in shock at this point. I stepped back and sat down on a bench and after deciphering between calling Kurt and watching, I started to watch. I watched as he pled guilty on all 8 counts. I watched as he gave him statement to the court. I watched as he was taken away again by probation. I heard the Judge schedule a sentencing for January.

I was floored.

Lori Haskell continues:

So, how do I feel now about this? A variety of emotions, really. Relief is the biggest one. I am glad this guy is permanently off the streets and not able to harm anyone else. I am glad I don’t have to go to trial every day for the next month plus. I am glad I don’t have to worry about Kurt’s safety. I’m also disappointed. I really wanted Kurt to get to testify, however, neither one of us actually thought he ever would be allowed to. Curious–as to “why” he pled guilty, what was really going on behind the scenes that we may never know. I’m also saddened that the general public is never going to see as part of this trial the lies the government told, covered up and participated in. I’m saddened that people like Umar are allowed to travel to this country and put our lives at risk in order to allow the government to further their own personal agendas.

Finally then, we come back to last week and Abdulmutallab’s life sentence. Here is what Kurt Haskell wrote on Wednesday [Feb 15th] on the eve of that sentencing hearing:

Tomorrow at 1:00 P.M. is the sentencing hearing for the Underwear Bomber. This will likely be the final hearing in the case. The charges Umar took a plea to require a mandatory like sentence. Thus, this hearing is really a mere formality. However, Michigan law provides that any victim of a crime can give a victim impact statement before sentencing. Thus, as I am a victim I am entitled to give my statement. I wish I could take an hour to give a fully detailed statement about everything that happened, but Judge Edmunds has limited each passenger to 5 minutes. This will be the first time that I actually get to speak in Court regarding this matter. It will be interesting. I am sure the media will once again try and paint me as a nut job “conspiracy theorist”. Frankly, I don’t care and I will speak the truth. My statement is prepared and I will post it here tomorrow after the hearing.

Click here to read Kurt Haskell’s victim impact statement.

But I will leave the final words to Lori Haskell [posted Feb 16th]:

I was happy that Umar was sentenced to life in prison with no possibility of parole. even though I believe Umar is a patsy, I do believe that he wanted to kill us all, and I could see throughout all of this that he is not remorseful at all, and I don’t think he has a chance of being rehabilitated.

My favorite part of the hearing was when Umar addressed Kurt and said “Mr. Haskell, I am not a patty!” (in reference to something Kurt said to him during his statement).

Anyway, glad to close that chapter of my life. Hope everyone else had a less drama filled afternoon.



Here is Mickey McCarter, ‘Homeland Security Today’ Senior Washington Correspondent, dealing with callers’ questions about the underwear bomber during a phone-in on C-Span on Monday 20th February. Just count the times he says, “I’m not aware of that”:

Further Update:

That original video was taken down but here is another version:

1 From an article entitled “’Underwear bomber’ Abdulmutallab in Detroit trial”, published by BBC news on October 11, 2011. I can no longer find this article but instead there is one entitled “’Underwear bomber’ Abdulmutallab in Detroit trial”, apparently published by BBC news on the same day. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-15251738

2 From an article entitled “Underwear Bomber Abdulmutallab: “Proud to Kill in the Name of God”, written by Jason Ryan, published by ABC news on February 17, 2012. http://news.yahoo.com/abdulmutallab-proud-kill-name-god-154229013–abc-news.html

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized, USA

key witnesses will be excluded from the trial of the underwear bomber

On Christmas Day 2009 Northwest Airlines (although in Delta Airlines livery) Flight 253 to Detroit Michigan took off from Amsterdam. The 300 passengers aboard the flight included 23-year-old Nigerian Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

Umar had checked in with only hand luggage, but, it is alleged, had explosives stitched into his underpants, and about 20 minutes before the plane landed, had attempted to set off his bomb. As it happened, his attempt was unsuccessful, the device failing to detonate and only causing a relatively small fire that was quickly dealt with.

Two of the many eyewitnesses were Kurt and Lori Haskell. They say the events of that day, which took place a few seats away from them, have changed their lives forever, although “not in the way most would think”:

The Underwear Bomber attack has fundamentally changed my life. Not in the way most would think, but it has destroyed any faith I’ve had in the U.S. Government, the media and this country as a whole. To say that I believe the government is corrupt and the media is complicit doesn’t fully explain my beliefs. Not only have I come to those conclusions, but I’ve witnessed that an ordinary person who sees something important can be silenced despite his efforts to spread the truth. Such is the Underwear Bomber case. I can do nothing but laugh at the TSA’s new policy of “If you see something say something.” That is exactly what I did, and not only did the U.S. Government not want to hear what I had to say, but it actively lied about it, attempted to get me to change my story, and hid, by withholding (secret government) evidence or putting a protective order on the evidence and nearly everything that would support my eyewitness account.

Taken from a post on the Haskell Family blog entitled “The Colossal Deceit Known As The Underwear Bomber Case”.

Here is the account that Kurt Haskell gave on Fox News on the day of the attack:

And here is a local new report in the days following the attack:

A Newport couple had a Christmas they never will forget.

Kurt and Lori Haskell sat seven rows behind a 23-year-old Nigerian man on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 from Amsterdam who now has been charged with trying to destroy the plane in what is believed to be an attempted act of terrorism.

The Haskells were coming home from a safari vacation in Uganda and were on layover in Amsterdam on Christmas. While sitting on the floor waiting to board, Mr. Haskell said he noticed something unusual.

An Indian man who “looked wealthy and was dressed in a nice suit” approached the ticket counter with a young man.

“They looked like an odd couple because the Indian man was dressed so nice and the person, who I thought was a teen, was a scraggly dressed black guy,” Mr. Haskell said. “… The Indian man said he needed to get (the Nigerian man) on the plane, but he had no passport.”

Mr. Haskell, 38, said the Indian man told the woman at the ticket counter that “the man was from Sudan and that it was typical (to let him on the plane without a passport).”1

Their account continues:

Once he saw the smoke, Mr. Haskell unbuckled his beat and took a few steps forward.

“I saw the flames shooting up and saw the wall was on fire,” he said. “I thought we were going to die.”

A male flight attendant put out the flames. Fear took over as passengers realized the situation they just had faced.

“People were yelling ‘terrorist’ and ‘fire’,” Mr. Haskell said. “The flight attendants, who are usually calm, were screaming, and it was scary.”

That was when Mr. Haskell noticed the man who started the fire was the same man who he saw at the Amsterdam ticket counter.

The Haskells gave the same account on CNN:

As responsible citizens, and as it happens also lawyers, Kurt and Lori provided all this evidence to the authorities; their testimony being easily verifiable from security camera footage at the airport. They had seen something and so they said something. But the authorities didn’t want to know, and in particular, they didn’t want to know about “the smart dressed man”, possibly of Indian descent, who had helped Umar through the security checks without a passport.

Here is a post from the Haskell’s blog almost a year on, September 13th 2010:

For the first few months, Lori and I were very vocal over the media blackout and corresponding cover up to the real story of the Christmas Day events. If anyone is not familiar with our experience, our story can be read here in this blog. For the past few months, we have chosen to sit back and watch as the trial, or lack thereof, plays out in the courthouse we regularly practice in. While the media blackout to the true events continues, the failed attack on our credibility has been replaced with deafening silence as to our eyewitness account. To us, this matter has never been about seeking vengeance against the Underwear Bomber. When taking our eyewitness account and adding it to the small amount of honest facts that have come out, one can only recognize the Underwear Bomber as a mere patsy. It is quite shocking that, thus far, the Underwear Bomber hasn’t been forever silenced as other patsies that have come before him. What has led me to write this update is the following article:


It seems as though the Underwear Bomber has now decided to fire his attorneys and represent himself. I am actually not too surprised by this event. Being an attorney myself, I can see his attorneys trying to stuff a settlement down his throat while he argues in opposition that he was set up.

In the same post, Kurt Haskell continues:

It seems to me, that now that the Underwear Bomber is representing himself, or possibly using new attorneys, that the use of an entrapment defense is not out of the question. The use of such a defense could be one of the greatest moments in the history of the United States of America. Only through a defense such as this, could the full involvement of the U.S. Government be fully discovered and divulged. Please consider the following:

1. The Underwear Bomber was escorted through security without a passport by the Sharp Dressed Man who by all accounts, appears to be a government agent.
2. Congressional hearings have confirmed that the Underwear Bomber was likely let on flight 253 intentionally.
3. The bomb failed to detonate, and by many accounts, was designed so that it would not detonate.
4. The entire terrorist attack was filmed from before it started until after it ended.
5. The bomb was obtained in Yemen where the CIA has been known to have agents interacting with Al Qaeda.

Once you accept the above, it is not so far fetched to believe that the U.S. Government planted a defective bomb on the Underwear Bomber to:

1. Renew the Patriot Act
2. Get body scanners in the airports
3. Further the U.S. involvement in strategically located Yemen
4. Further the fraudulent war on terror
5. Provide further profit to the military industrial complex

Only through an entrapment defense that is fully litigated in open court could the American citizens get what they deserve, an open honest investigation into the Christmas Day events of 2009. Such a trial could possibly wake up the millions of American citizens that fail to even consider that its government is corrupt, dishonest, and working for those who only seek to consolidate their power and wealth.

Kurt Haskell also made the same allegations on Fox News:

Jury selection has now begun. Umar’s trial is set to commence on October 11th. So where are we now? asks Kurt Haskell in his latest post (in which he also outlines 33 anomalies2 in the case):

We now have The Underwear Bomber (Umar) representing himself with the help of standby attorney Chambers. Attorney Chambers has indicated to me that if he were Umar’s attorney, that the defense would be entrapment and that I would be a key witness. Of course, such a defense would expose the U.S. Government’s involvement in the plot. It is much too convenient to have Umar represent himself and be in charge of what the defense will be, what evidence is presented, what witnesses are called and what questions each witness is asked. A trial with Umar representing himself will leave the relevant facts of this case unknown for generations.

1 From an article entitled “Newport couple witnesses to airliner attack”, written by Danielle Portteus, published by Monroe News on December 26, 2009. http://www.monroenews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20091227/NEWS01/712279987/-1/NEWS

2 Anomalies of the case in no particular order:

1. In December 2010, Chambers told the Detroit Free Press that the Government’s own explosives experts indicate that the bomb was impossibly defective. The Free Press later erased this article from its online site, but did not erase earlier underwear bomber stories.

2. The FBI has admitted to supplying the Portland Christmas Tree Bomber and the Wrigley Field Bomber with intentionally defective bombs shortly after the underwear bomber event.

3. Janet Napolitano’s comment that “the system worked” was a Freudian slip.

4. The plane taxied to the gate. The passengers were not allowed off of the plane for 20-30 minutes (Was the bomb still on the plane?). There was bomb material that was supposedly explosive all over the cabin of the plane. Nobody took any action to make sure the passengers were safe or that the “explosives” were of no danger to the passengers. This is evidence of foreknowledge that there was no danger to the passengers.

5. TSA admitted knowledge of the threat while the flight was over Canada/Atlantic Ocean. No measures were taken to notify the pilot or to divert the flight for an emergency landing elsewhere.

6. My eyewitness account of the sharp dressed man and the related evidence as to this man. There is no other likely explanation for this man except for government involvement. The airport video has never been released and remains under protective order of the court.

7. The government’s continued release of Umar’s passport picture through the media. This was done for no other reason that to attempt to discredit me. Why such an effort to show a passport picture all over the media? In no other case has a passport picture been shown in the media. A copy of the supposed “passport” of Umar, however, was not released to Chambers until June 2011. The release of the passport to standby defense counsel was delayed 19 months in order to limit the amount of time Chambers would need to have experts verify its authenticity.

8. The explanation for the cameraman is near unbelieveable. He started filming the sky just before the attack started and then he turned to film the entire attack from beginning to end. We all thought we were going to die. The last thing on anyone’s mind at that time was to film something.

9. On 1-5-10 Breibart posted an article that indicated the Government had viewed over 200 hours of video from the airport and it showed no evidence of an accomplice. This article is contradicted by the 1-22-10 article of ABC News by Brian Ross that indicated that “The government is looking into the identity of a man that helped Umar at Schiphol.” The article fails to mention that this “sharp dressed man” escorted Umar through security without a passpot and instead tries to paint this man as Al Qaeda. The government is contradicting itself in both of these stories and is attempting weak coverups in each story.

10. Umar is charged with conspiracy. The accomplices names or contributions are never mentioned. They are not listed as wanted and they are never discussed. This is because they are U.S. Intelligence agents.

11. Customs spokesperson Ron Smith changed the official story about the 2nd man taken into custody in Detroit 5 times. Then he sent a half hearted apologetic email to the media. My story as to this man has never changed. Ron Smith eventually gave up lying and quit talking about this man who was witnessed by nearly all of the passengers.

12. Why were pictures of Umar’s underwear constantly released to the media? These pictures show Umar’s underwear is largely intact. I have information from a credible source that due to this incident, Umar “Will never have any kids”. This fact is not in line with undamaged underwear. The continued release of the underwear was used as a propaganda piece to reinforce the deceit.

13. The prosecution has continued to block evidence from Umar’s standby attorney and in some cases, has provided it late. Why? If Umar was a terrorist nut, what is it that the government does not want the defense to see? It seems to me that if the official story is true, then this is an open and shut case. It appears that the government feels a need to insulate itself from civil cases filed by the passengers.

14. Why has Chambers repeatedly indicated that Umar has a very valid defense? The answer is the entrapment defense.

15. Portions of the Patriot Act were set to expire just before Christmas Day 2009. The Congressional vote to extend them was delayed until February. Body scanning machines were already built and sitting in warehouses. Michael Chertoff, the former head of the Department of Homeland Security has ties to the body scanning manufacturers. The U.S. had no terrorist attacks from 2001 until Christmas Day 2009. A new terrorist attack was needed to get the body scanning machines in the airports.

16. If flight 253 had crashed, nobody would know that the bomb was in Umar’s underwear. An unsuccesful staged attack was necessary to show where the bomb was held. This was needed to sell the American public that body scanners were needed to prevent similar future attacks.

17. The story of Umar obtaining his bomb in another country and wearing it to Schiphol is not logical. It is much more likely that he was given the defective bomb at or near the airport. It is likely that the second man taken into custody in Detroit gave him the bomb at Schiphol. My theory is that the bomb sniffing dog (which we witnessed) in Detroit sniffed bomb residue in his bag after we landed.

18. Umar could have been stopped in Amsterdam after boarding and been charged with various charges that would have resulted in a life sentence. Instead he was allowed to fly into U.S. airspace and light his bomb there, over Detroit, on Christmas Day in order to make this a MUCH large media story to usher in the body scanners.

19. How did Umar pick his window seat over the gas tank when he paid cash for his ticket? (You must buy your ticket with credit in order to pick your seat).

20. Other terrorist attack videos are released within hours. The relevant video in this case has never been released. Note that Schiphol airport has more cameras than any airport in the world.

21. The bomb was lit in the cabin and not in the bathroom so that it could be filmed and make more of a media event than a dud bomb lit in a bathroom.

22. Obama’s “failed to connect the dots speech” is discredited by the Congressional testimony of Patrick Kennedy of the State Department. Kennedy indicated that, in so many words, that the government was tracking Umar and did not revoke his visa in order to track him into the U.S. This is almost, but not quite an admission that he was let into the U.S. on purpose.

23. The Congressional testimony of Michael Leiter indicated that the U.S. Government frequently lets terrorists into the U.S.

24. In early 2010, a Mr. Wolf appeared on the Keith Olberman Show and indicated that the Obama administration was looking into the possibility that this was an intentional plot by a U.S. intelligence agency.

25. Watch the Congressional testimony of Patrick Kennedy (available on the internet) and watch how he does vocabulary gymnastics to avoid saying that this was an intentional plot by U.S. intelligence.

26. Dutch military police initially indicated that Umar did not go through normal security measures. This was only reported once.

27. Why did a passenger call me in early January 2010 and attempt to convince me that I did not see Umar being escorted around security, but I instead witnessed a minor child being taken through security. This was untrue. I later found out that such passenger works for a contractor that receives a great deal of business from the Department of Defense.

28. Why does the mainstream media continue to not investigate this story and continue to not report my eyewitness account?

29. A second passenger contacted me and confirmed my account of the Sharp Dressed Man. She is scared and refuses to come forward.

30. Why have nearly all of the passengers refused to talk about this case?

31. Why were a great deal of the passengers, military personnel, government workers and government contractors?

32. Why did the prosecution indicate at a recent hearing that it was still withholding some evidence that was deemed to be secret (top secret?). What could be so secret if the government was not involved in the plot?

33. Why has the online Detroit Free Press site erased all underwear bomber articles that support my theory on the case, but retained older articles that support the official story?

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized, USA, Yemen