Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Important new information about the 9/11 hijackers

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-15-08 04:39 PM
Original message
Important new information about the 9/11 hijackers
KJF here applied for some Freedom of Information Act requests a while back, and finally one came through. We're posting what he got today on the Cooperative Research/History Commons website. Here's a summary of the interesting stuff that we put together. There's a LOT of new information here, some you may find more interesting, some less. You can find the below text on the web with pictures and links to the original documents, here:

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/fbi911timeline

(I hope other people here will take a good look at the original documents and find things that we may have missed.)


Newly Released FBI Timeline Reveals New Information about 9/11 Hijackers that Was Ignored by 9/11 Commission

Latest Findings Raise New Questions about Hijackers and Suggest Incomplete Investigation

A contributor to the History Commons has obtained a 298-page document entitled ''Hijackers Timeline (Redacted)'' from the FBI, subsequent to a Freedom of Information Act request. The document was a major source of information for the 9/11 Commission's final report. Though the commission cited the timeline 52 times in its report, it failed to include some of the document's most important material.

The printed document is dated November 14, 2003, but appears to have been compiled in mid-October 2001 (the most recent date mentioned in it is October 22, 2001), when the FBI was just starting to understand the backgrounds of the hijackers, and it contains almost no information from the CIA, NSA, or other agencies. This raises questions as to why the 9/11 Commission relied so heavily on such an early draft for their information about the hijackers.

Specific new information:

* New evidence suggests that some of the hijackers were assisted by employees of the Saudi government. It has previously been reported that Omar al-Bayoumi, a Saudi who was paid by the Saudi government despite not doing any work, assisted hijackers Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi when they first moved to the US. The FBI timeline shows that when these two hijackers moved into their first San Diego apartment, they indicated that they had been living with Bayoumi in the apartment next door for the previous two weeks. In fact, they had been with him in that apartment since January 15, 2000, the very day they first flew into the US, arriving in Los Angeles. The timeline also reveals that hijacker Hani Hanjour was seen in Bayoumi's apartment.

The new book ''The Commission'' by New York Times reporter Philip Shenon published last week further reveals that Bayoumi had close ties to Fahad al-Thumairy, a radical imam working in the Saudi consulate in Los Angeles. For instance, Bayoumi frequently called al-Thumairy while living next door to the two hijackers, and also frequently called the Saudi embassy in Washington, DC. The book also reveals that the 9/11 Commission was aware of "explosive" revelations about the ties between Bayoumi, Thumairy, and the two hijackers, but the commission's final report omitted "virtually all of the most serious allegations against the Saudis," due to diplomatic considerations. Now, thanks to this FBI timeline, we are discovering more of this suppressed evidence relating to Saudi Arabia.

* Security camera footage obtained by the FBI after 9/11 indicated that Khalid Almihdhar and possibly Salem Alhazmi cased Dulles Airport in Washington, D.C., the evening before 9/11. This fits the account of a security guard, related in ''Unsafe at Any Altitude'' by Joe and Susan Trento, who independently claimed to have seen two hijackers, Salem's brother Nawaf and Marwan Alshehhi, casing Dulles Airport the night before 9/11. This guard claims the two hijackers were part of a group of five men, three of whom were dressed in United Airlines ramp worker uniforms, that behaved suspiciously. Despite a lawsuit by 9/11 victims' relatives against United Airlines and others for negligence, the US government has never revealed the existence of this video footage which might support claims that the hijackers had inside help.

* Hijackers Marwan Alshehhi and Hamza Alghamdi purchased hundreds of dollars of "pornographic video and sex toys" in Florida. They spent $252 on video and toys in early July 2001, and then another $183 later that month. Furthermore, Satam Al Suqami likely paid for a sex escort in Boston on September 7, 2001. Alshehhi was also recognized by six dancers at Cheetah's, a nightclub in Pompano Beach, Florida. This fits in with other evidence of the hijackers alcohol, paying for lap dancers, watching pornographic videos, etc... -- hardly the expected behavior of religious radicals.

* On March 20, 2000, either Khalid Almihdhar or Nawaf Alhazmi used a phone registered to Alhazmi to make a call from San Diego to an al-Qaeda communications hub in Sana'a, Yemen, run by Almihdhar's father-in-law. The call lasted 16 minutes. According to the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry, the call was intercepted by the NSA, which had been intercepting Alhazmi and Almihdhar's calls for over a year, but the FBI was not informed of the hijackers' presence in the US. The call is only briefly mentioned as a family phone call by the 9/11 Commission in an endnote, and it is not mentioned that the call was monitored.

* When hijacker Satam Al Suqami's passport was recovered on 9/11 on the street near the World Trade Center, it was "soaked in jet fuel." Many have found it incredible that his passport survived the crash.

* Hijacker Hamza Alghamdi booked several flights after 9/11. He booked a continuation from Los Angeles to San Francisco later on the day of the attacks. Then, on September 20, he planned to fly from Rome to Casablanca, to Riyadh, to Damman, Saudi Arabia.

* It has been widely assumed that the hijackers did everything using their real names, or aliases close to their real names. But a still-classified CIA report found that the hijackers used 364 aliases and name variants. The FBI's timeline discloses what some of them were. For example, Hani Hanjour and Ahmed Alghamdi rented a New Jersey apartment using the names Hany Saleh and Ahmed Saleh. Fayez Ahmed Banihammad used the aliases Abu Dhabi Banihammad and Fayey Rashid Ahmed. Mohamed Atta frequently liked to use variants of the name El Sayed, for instance calling himself Awaid Elsayed and even Hamburg Elsayed. And when Majed Moqed flew into the US on May 2, 2001, the name Mashaanmoged Mayed was on the flight manifest. This suggests that some travel and actions of the hijackers could have been missed when they used unlikely aliases.

* There has been very little video footage released of the hijackers. So far, the only known footage has been two video stills of Hani Hanjour and Majed Moqed using an ATM machine, one still each of Waleed Alshehri and Satam Al Suqami, several stills of Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari in Portland, Maine, the night before 9/11, and a few more stills and footage of several hijackers in airports on the morning of 9/11. But the FBI's timeline reveals there is more video footage that has never even been publicly hinted at: Mohamed Atta used an ATM in Palm Beach, Florida, on July 19, 2001. Salem Alhazmi and Ahmed Alghamdi used an ATM in Alexandria, Virginia, on August 2. Hanjour and Mojed used a Kinko's for half an hour in College Park, Maryland, on August 10. Moqed and Nawaf Alhazmi shopped at an Exxon gas station in Joppa, Maryland, on August 28. Waleed and Wail Alshehri wandered around a Target store in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, on September 4. Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari were in a Florida bank lobby on September 4, and the audio of Atta calling Saudi Arabia was even recorded in the process. Fayez Ahmed Banihammad used an ATM on September 7 in Deerfield Beach, Florida. Salem Alhazmi was at the Falls Church DMV on September 7. Low quality surveillance video at the Milner Hotel in Boston showed Alshehhi and possibly Mohand Alshehri on multiple occasions in the days just before 9/11. Ziad Jarrah and possibly Saeed Alghamdi were videotaped using a Kinko's for about an hour near Newark on September 10.

* Some credit cards used by the hijackers were still used in the US after 9/11. For instance, a credit card jointly owned by Mohamed Atta and Marwan Alshehhi was used twice on September 15. This helps confirm news reports from late 2001 that hijacker credit cards were used on the East Coast as late as early October 2001. At the time, a government official said that while some of the cards might have been stolen, "We believe there are additional people out there" who helped the hijackers.

* The FBI timeline shows other intriguing hints that the hijackers had associates in the US. For instance, on September 8, 2001, hijackers Majed Moqed and Hani Hanjour went to a bank with an unnamed Middle Eastern male. This man presented a Pennsylvania driver's license for identification, but none of the 9/11 hijackers have been reported to have a driver's license from that state. There is also a highly redacted section hinting that a woman in Laurel, Maryland, was helping Middle Eastern men and may have had links to hijackers Mohamed Atta and Ziad Jarrah.

* Around 10:00 a.m. on the morning of 9/11, a housekeeper at the Park Inn in Boston went to clean the room that hijackers Wail and Waleed Alshehri used the night before. She was confronted by a foreign male who told her that someone was still sleeping in the room and that she should come back around 1:00 p.m. The FBI was obviously puzzled by this, as the FBI's timeline entry for this event ends with five question marks.

* It has previously been reported that shortly before 9/11, hijackers Nawaf Alhamzi and Khalid Almihdhar left a bag at a mosque in Laurel, Maryland, with a note attached to it saying, "Gift for the brothers." The FBI's timeline identifies this mosque as the Ayah Islamic Center. But the only contents mentioned in the bag were pilot log books, receipts, and other evidence documenting the brief flight training that Alhazmi and Almihdhar underwent in San Diego in early 2000. It is unclear why they would have kept the receipts, some mentioning their names, for over a year and then left them at a mosque to be found. After 9/11, a former high-level intelligence official told journalist Seymour Hersh that "Whatever trail was left was left deliberately--for the FBI to chase."

* On June 11, 2001, hijackers Saeed Alghamdi, Ahmed Alnami, Marwan Alshehhi, and Mohamed Atta checked in to the Deluxe Inn, in Dania, Florida. The manager of the hotel later identified Saeed Alghamdi as having been there at the time with the others. However, travel records indicate Alghamdi did not arrive in the US until June 27. Other previously released evidence has suggested that many other hijackers were in the US before they officially arrived.

* Several months ago, the London Times reported on an al-Qaeda leader imprisoned in Turkey named Luai Sakra. Sakra claims to have trained six of the hijackers in Turkey, including Satam Al Suqami. The FBI's timeline supports his account, because Al Suqami's passport record indicates he spent much of his time between late September 2000 and early April 2001 in Turkey. Furthermore, Sakra claimed that Al Suqami was one of the hijacker leaders, and not just another "muscle" hijacker as US investigators have alleged. The FBI's timeline supports this, because it shows that Al Suqami was frequently on the move from 1998 onwards, flying to Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Bahrain, Oman, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Iran, Malaysia, as well as Turkey, and he traveled to most of these countries more than once. This is particularly important because contributors to the History Commons have put together evidence suggesting that Sakra was a CIA asset before 9/11, which would suggest that Al Suqami and other hijackers were actually trained by a CIA asset.

* When Ahmed Alghamdi arrived in the US from London on May 5, 2001, an immigration inspector apparently noted that Alghamdi commented to him that the media was distorting the facts about Osama bin Laden and that bin Laden was a good Muslim. Alghamdi also indicated that he was traveling with more than $10,000 worth of currency. Shortly after 9/11, the New York Times, Washington Post, and other newspapers reported that by the spring of 2001, US Customs was investigating Alghamdi and a couple other future 9/11 hijackers for their connections to known al-Qaeda operatives. One British newspaper even noted that Alghamdi should have been "instantly 'red-flagged' by British intelligence" as he passed through London on his way to the US because of a warning about his links to al-Qaeda. It has not been explained how Alghamdi was able to pass through British and US customs, even as he was openly praising bin Laden.

* Hijacker Nawaf Alhazmi was mugged outside of his apartment in Alexandria, Virginia, by an "unknown black male" on May 1, 2001. He filed a police report about this and gave his correct name and address. In August 2001, Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar were watchlisted by the CIA, and an FBI investigator began looking for them in the US. But, as one news report later noted, the investigator "never performed one of the most basic tasks of a police manhunt. He never ran Almihdhar or Alhazmi through the NCIC computer," a widely used police database that should have listed this mugging, as well as a speeding ticket Alhazmi had received the month before.

* On August 26, 2001, Nawaf Alhazmi's car was queried by police in Totowa, New Jersey, just a few miles from where he was living in Paterson. Police took down details of his rental car and put all the information in the NCIC database. On August 29, with Alhazmi still living in Paterson, an FBI agent was assigned to look for him. But as mentioned above, he didn't search the NCIC database. On September 2, this agent did search a national motor vehicle database, and this, the mugging, and other encounters Alhazmi had with police should have shown up there as well, but for some inexplicable reason the agent still did not discover that Alhazmi was in the US.

* Hijacker Abdulaziz Alomari lost his plane ticket just before 9/11. He reported it lost on September 8, and picked a replacement ticket up from the American Airlines terminal at Logan airport in Boston the next day. The US government has generally promoted what one FBI official has called "the Superman scenario" - the idea that the hijackers made no mistakes. For instance, in 2004 one FBI official claimed, "These guys were pros. For us to have done anything, these guys had to make a mistake. And they didn't." But they made many mistakes, and this timeline reveals a few more. For instance, on July 24, 2001, Waleed Alshehri;s car was queried by police in Boynton Beach, Florida, and this incident also made it into the NCIC police database.

Unfortunately, much of the FBI timeline is heavily censored, with entire pages sometimes being completely redacted. But from what we do know, this timeline indicates that many questions remain about the hijackers and the 9/11 attacks. We know that the FBI's timeline was available to the 9/11 Commission, so why did the commission fail to mention any of the information listed above?

It's interesting to compare the results of the 9/11 Commission with the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry that proceeded it. For instance, while the 9/11 Commission downplayed any possible ties between the hijackers and the Saudi government, the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry wrote an entire chapter on the topic. Unfortunately, all 28 pages of that chapter were censored. But Sen. Bob Graham, co-chair of the inquiry, later claimed that evidence relating to the two hijackers who lived in San Diego "presented a compelling case that there was Saudi assistance" to the 9/11 plot. He alleged that Omar al-Bayoumi in fact was a Saudi intelligence agent. He also concluded that President Bush directed the FBI "to restrain and obfuscate" investigations into these ties.

Now, we're finally beginning to see some of what was in those missing 28 pages. One anonymous official who has seen the pages claims: "We're not talking about rogue elements. We're talking about a coordinated network that reaches right from the hijackers to multiple places in the Saudi government."

The 9/11 Commission also downplayed the idea that the hijackers had any assistance in the US. The 9/11 Congressional Inquiry, by contrast, noted that many people who interacted with the hijackers in the US, including Omar al-Bayoumi, were under FBI investigation even before 9/11.

Unfortunately, neither the 9/11 Commission nor the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry was a complete and unbiased investigation. If this timeline reflects just some of what only the FBI knew about the hijackers one month after the attacks, one can only guess at how much more all the US agencies combined know about the hijackers now. Why is that information being kept secret?

Here are the links to download the FBI Hijackers Timeline, divided into three PDF files:

FBI Hijackers Timeline, pp.1-105 (PDF)
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/sourcedocuments/2001...
FBI Hijackers Timeline, pp.106-210 (PDF)
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/sourcedocuments/2001...
FBI Hijackers Timeline, pp.210-297 (PDF)
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/sourcedocuments/2001...

The entire document in one PDF file:
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/sourcedocuments/2001... | FBI Hijackers Timeline, pp.1-297 (ZIP)


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-15-08 05:02 PM
Response to Original message
1. Great work getting this...
KJF is one of the true great researchers, as of course are you.

I'll go through it gradually but please note that Oct. 22 is actually a fairly late date for the FBI investigation - by then it was all being shut down, half the FBI personnel were shifted to anthrax, and the officials in charge were replaced at the end of that month, I believe. So it's great to have the raw data from then, rather than some later, more carefully managed version.

As this is a government document release, maybe you can try posting it on GD as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-15-08 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. A lot of people had FOIA requests in for this document.
Mike at 911Myths got this posted today as well.

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Image:Hijackers_Timel...

A searchable version is here:

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Image:Hijackers_Timel...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-15-08 05:58 PM
Response to Original message
2. Excellent work PT as usual!
Thanks. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CJCRANE Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-15-08 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
3. Very interesting.
This is what 9/11 truth should be about - focusing on the facts - the hijackers, their handlers, their financiers etc. This is a very important part of the puzzle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedSock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-15-08 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. wow!
Hey Paul! :hi:

Looks like some amazing stuff!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-15-08 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
5. Interesting
The thing that stands out is the possible presence of four alleged hijackers at Dulles on 9/10.

One theory is that al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar were double agents (actually working for Saudi GID). Perhaps they functioned like Emad Salem or Ali Mohamed in previous al Qaeda terrorist attacks. But instead of being protected they were declared al Qaeda terrorists and added to the list of 19 hijackers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosa Luxemburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-15-08 09:31 PM
Response to Original message
7. I think we now know there weren't any hijackers
and these guys (patsies) may have had a role in organizing 9/11 but that's as far as it goes.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-15-08 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. What accounts for the
pilots failing to respond shortly after takeoff, the planes changing course, the transponders turned off and content of the air phone calls?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-16-08 12:29 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Those are good questions but I hope you agree...
they become even more relevant if you can show that prevailing beliefs and official stories about the 19 named alleged hijackers are false, and the investigation was incomplete and hindered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-16-08 02:09 AM
Response to Reply #9
10. The whole thing is confusing
I find all these 9/11 authors' layers of accounts (patsies, terrorists (secular motive), martyrs (religious motive), state supported, Bin Laden supported, CIA assets, drug runners, etc.) extremely confusing. Why is there so much variance about who these alleged hijackers really were?

One example is someone like Tarpley who suggests the alleged hijackers were patsies, psychotics, dupes, etc. Maybe they were but one of the most popular theories to explain 9/11 is blowback...ie...US foreign policy (oil, destabilizing the Middle East, propping up corrupt regimes, etc.) led to the motive for retaliation. Another popular theory is the notion of radical Islamic beliefs. IMO, there is nothing extraordinary about either motive. Where I agree with Tarpley is in relation to capability. I think the record shows that the alleged hijackers were not skilled enough to evade detection by US (and other state intelligence agencies). Obviously someone like Tarpley takes it many steps further in terms of the attack being orchestrated by state intelligence agencies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr_Jefferson_24 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-16-08 03:09 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. Obfuscation is a very prevalent tactic...
...used by those trying to prevent the truth of the events of 9-11 from coming to light.

Those among the masses who try to take a look for themselves and do a little 9-11 research of their own are supposed to be confused -- this is no accident.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KJF Donating Member (792 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-16-08 02:25 AM
Response to Original message
11. Lost ticket, bin Laden is "good Muslim"
The lost ticket (Alomari's Flight 11 ticket) was one of the things that got me most. They're supposed to be these crack terrorists, but Alomari was so hopeless he couldn't even keep hold of his death flight ticket. I wonder what Atta said when when he learned the ticket was lost.

The Osama is a "good Muslim" comment by Ahmed Alghamdi to the customs inspector also made my jaw drop. You have to wonder what prompted him to make the comment, was it spontaneous? Presumably, it must have been to some extent - I doubt immigration inspectors asked all incoming Saudis whether they were supporters of Osama. The stamp he got - "immigration stamp 2097" - is also intriguing. It seems to be related to the comments Alghamdi made, but I have no idea whether it had any consequences or what it meant. Both the 9/11 CR and the Terrorist Travel monograph mention Ahmed Alghamdi's entry into the US, but fail to mention the comments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr_Jefferson_24 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-16-08 02:41 AM
Response to Original message
12. This document/report is from the FBI? Didn't the OCT fairytale...
Edited on Sat Feb-16-08 03:35 AM by Mr_Jefferson_24
...originate with this organization (the FBI)?

Aren't they the ones who amazingly somehow managed to name these 19 alleged Arab hi-jackers within 48 hours of the crimes of 9-11? How?

Did they not claim early on that they were in possession of the passport of one of the hi-jackers from the WTC site, that had somehow miraculously survived the crash and floated down, still intact, from one of the towers to be conveniently picked up by an alert NYPD officer?

Is this not the same organization (the FBI) with responsibility for bringing the anthrax perps to justice? What happened there?

And all the 2000, 2002, and 2004, national election theft crimes? Nothing to see here either I suppose, right?

Now of course, in all fairness, they did dig up a horsey farm in search of Jimmy Hoffa's skeletal remains a couple years ago -- no body was found, but big E for effort boys, keep up the good work.

The FBI, which I don't doubt does have some honorable and competent people under its employ, functions as a political investigative hackery arm for the Ruling Elites, and this is NOT a new development.

What possible reason could there be for us to place any credence in ANYTHING they have to say about the events of 9-11 -- so far they've given us NOTHING but obfuscation and lies. Do we really think, in these current times, with the most ruthless bunch of cut-throat criminals we've ever seen in the halls of power lording over our nation, that the FBI would dare release a report via FOIA that doesn't serve the interests of their 9-11 OCT agenda? This is nothing more than an effort to somehow reinforce the OCT fairytale, which they probably perceive, accurately I think, to be losing ground.


9-11 Coincidences - Part 16

http://youtube.com/watch?v=iFqYf-ID5oY

From the youtube video description:

We've been told again and again that 19 Islamic hijackers took over the 4 aircraft used on 9/11. But the passenger manifests from the airlines didn't contain any Arabic passenger names. Not to worry. The FBI corrected this little problem. The FBI's passenger manifests conveniently have about a half dozen more people on each plane than the airline's manifests. But then, there is another little problem with the FBI's version of the story. Amazingly, within a couple of days, the FBI knew who all the hijackers were. Names, pictures, everything we needed to know about them. Some of them were names of people known to be still living in Arab countries or known to have already been dead before 9/11. Just how did the FBI figure out who these alleged hijackers were so quickly when the physical evidence (their bodies) was well shredded and buried in mountains of rubble? Were there really any hijackers at all? Was there some other means to accomplish the control of those ill-fated flights? Is the whole story of the hijackers a concerted media spin effort to conceal the real people, and their goals, behind the terror of 9/11?

We must remember the historical conduct of our main source for our current information/misinformation. The FBI has been exposed for operating an evidence manufacturing laboratory which has been used to concoct evidence and fraudulently convict innocent Americans. The FBI is responsible for truckloads of lost or missing documents and countless bungled investigations, especially when the investigations begin to reveal that those within government are responsible for criminal activity. They continue to possess 22 high quality video surveillance tapes collected from cameras which recorded the Oklahoma City bombing. The FBI still refuses to release the tapes, even though the federal law enforcement agency has been court ordered to do so. And what about the 80 surveillance tapes which recorded the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon? Experience has shown the FBI can't be trusted with the truth. With the FBI's previous history of either manufacturing, falsifying or destroying evidence in critical, high profile cases, aren't these passenger manifest discrepancies, which led to the quick identification of the 19 alleged Arabic culprits of 9/11, a little suspicious?



Note: My remarks here are not meant as a shot at the OP, but rather the FBI -- I'm simply trying to remind, in my own clumsy way, that they (the FBI) have not been credible where 9-11 is concerned. That said, anything made available to us via FOIA relating to 9-11 should be widely circulated and discussed. Thanks to the OP for posting it.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-17-08 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #12
22. *Sigh* We've been over this dozens of times. The flight crews
Edited on Sun Feb-17-08 09:58 PM by Flatulo
on each hijacked plane told their ground authorities what seats the hijackers were sitting in. The airlines' simply looked at the names next to the seat numbers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organizers_of_the_Septembe...

Edited to add link
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andre II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 03:32 AM
Response to Reply #22
25. Sigh
"The flight crews on each hijacked plane told their ground authorities what seats the hijackers were sitting in."

Unfortunately this is simply factualy dead wrong! And quoting a source like wikipedia doesn't really help your case btw.
Care to point out where egfor UA 93 flight attendants gave seat numbers ???
Care to point out why in case of UA 93 all passengers and crew members only talk about three alleged hijackers?
Care to explain how Hani Hanjour was identified due to phone calls of the crew members?
Care to explain why Ong and Sweneey contradcit each other concerning the seat numbers (and heck again only talk of four alleged hijackers)?
Care to explain why almost every word of your short post is factually wrong?
Maybe you should look up a bit the facts before sighing......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #25
28. Am I allowed to cite the 9/11 Commission Report?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andre II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. It will be a pleasure n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #29
31. I am misinformed. Sorry. This is only documented for Flight 11.
On Flight 11, attendant Madeline Sweeney gave the seat numbers to the American Airlines officials on the ground, although her information differed from what the FBI released.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1556096.stm

"As Ms Sweeney was giving their seat numbers, they reached the cockpit and it was then, as the plane suddenly changed course, that she spoke her last reported words..."

> Care to point out where egfor UA 93 flight attendants gave seat numbers ???

My mistake here - at least I can't find it. Jeremy Glick told his wife that at least three 'middle-eastern looking men' had hijacked the plane. With that information, it would be pretty easy to identify them from the passenger list.

> Care to point out why in case of UA 93 all passengers and crew members only talk about three alleged
> hijackers?

They were mistaken. The 9/11 CR states that Jarrah most likely hung back until the cockpit was secured and the passengers under control.

> Care to explain how Hani Hanjour was identified due to phone calls of the crew members?

Renee May phoned her mom to tell her that the plane had been hijacked. Hanjour's name was on the passenger list, and it was known that he was a pilot.

This is from the governments case against Moussaoui.

http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exh...

You can download and play a flash application showing the calls made from each flight.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andre II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 06:19 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. No problem
It'snot the first time that I've seen this argument. Seems to be one of the myths....
Keep in mind that Ong and Sweeney gave different (!) seat numbers and only four hijackers (where is the fifths one?)
Keep also in mind that until September 14 Ashcroft only talked of 18 hijackers and in fact Hanjour was the last name to appear.
In fact in not a single plane any phone call mentions the exact number of the alleged hijackers. Never.
In view of the fact that Ashcroft talked of 12 -24 hijackers on Sep 12 and 13 should indicate that all the stories out there that the FBI knew within hours names and number are at least dubious to put it mildly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andre II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 06:20 PM
Response to Reply #31
33. No problem
It'snot the first time that I've seen this argument. Seems to be one of the myths....
Keep in mind that Ong and Sweeney gave different (!) seat numbers and only four hijackers (where is the fifths one?)
Keep also in mind that until September 14 Ashcroft only talked of 18 hijackers and in fact Hanjour was the last name to appear.
In fact in not a single plane any phone call mentions the exact number of the alleged hijackers. Never.
In view of the fact that Ashcroft talked of 12 -24 hijackers on Sep 12 and 13 should indicate that all the stories out there that the FBI knew within hours names and number are at least dubious to put it mildly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedSock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-20-08 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #33
40. 12-24
... or they went with the 12-24 for a few days because coming right out and saying it's these 19 guys at like noon on 9/11 would have been really suspicious.

But the FBI did seem to have a good idea who they were:

(After 10:00 a.m.) September 11, 2001: FBI Immediately Identifies Hijackers on Dulles Security Video

Shortly after arriving at Washington's Dulles Airport, from which Flight 77 took off, the FBI confiscates a security tape from a checkpoint through which the hijackers passed before boarding the plane. Airport security manager Ed Nelson will later say: "They pulled the tape right away. ... They brought me to look at it. They went right to the first hijacker on the tape and identified him. They knew who the hijackers were out of hundreds of people going through the checkpoints. They would go 'roll and stop it' and showed me each of the hijackers. ... It boggles my mind that they had already had the hijackers identified. ... Both metal detectors were open at that time, and lots of traffic was moving through. So picking people out is hard. ... I wanted to know how they had that kind of information. So fast. It didn't make sense to me." (Trento and Trento, Unsafe At Any Altitude, 2006, pp. 37)






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
noise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-20-08 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #40
41. It does make one wonder
Edited on Wed Feb-20-08 11:36 AM by noise
I find the FBI identification process of Khalid al-Mihdhar quite strange considering we are told CIA had a copy of his visa and surveillance photos. So how on earth was there any confusion?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Grateful for Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #31
34. Flatulo
It takes a big person to admit an inadvertant error.

I admire you for having done this.

:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 06:43 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. I have no problem admitting gaps in my knowledge. It was quite
a while ago that I had downloaded the Flash animation that the government created for the Massaoui trial. It had a somewhat detailed transcript of the calls from each plane. I hadn't looked at that presentation for over a year. I had assumed that what Sweeney had done was repeated on the other flights.

I'm afraid that I still don't see what the mystery is behind the FBI's fairly quick release of the hijackers' names. The passenger manifests were available to the authorities, and many of the hijackers were on watch lists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Grateful for Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. I understand where you are coming from
and, I still thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. Thanks for saying that Hope. No big deal for me to admit error.
I work with so many smart people that I got used to being wrong a lot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Andre II Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-19-08 03:18 AM
Response to Reply #35
38. Indeed it's a good thing that people
are still able to admit an error. Something that happens rather rarely down here .....
Certainly the identification of the alleged hijackers can't have been as simply as you believe.
Otherwise how do you explain all the contradictions surrounding it?
Of course the Commisssion and the FBI is too happy to present a simple brushed-up picture of the investigation.
Clean, simple and no contradictions.
Unfortunately this doesn't have anything to do with what really happened in the days after the attack even if people are too happy to forget that.
For all the problems surrounding the identification see:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-20-08 09:19 AM
Response to Reply #38
39. Wow, that is one convoluted timeline. I could really use a diagram of that. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sofa king Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-16-08 05:02 AM
Response to Original message
14. There's an interesting gap there.
In this paragraph right here:

* There has been very little video footage released of the hijackers. So far, the only known footage has been two video stills of Hani Hanjour and Majed Moqed using an ATM machine, one still each of Waleed Alshehri and Satam Al Suqami, several stills of Mohamed Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari in Portland, Maine, the night before 9/11, and a few more stills and footage of several hijackers in airports on the morning of 9/11. But the FBI's timeline reveals there is more video footage that has never even been publicly hinted at: Mohamed Atta used an ATM in Palm Beach, Florida, on July 19, 2001. Salem Alhazmi and Ahmed Alghamdi used an ATM in Alexandria, Virginia, on August 2. Hanjour and Mojed used a Kinko's for half an hour in College Park, Maryland, on August 10. Moqed and Nawaf Alhazmi shopped at an Exxon gas station in Joppa, Maryland, on August 28. Waleed and Wail Alshehri wandered around a Target store in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, on September 4. Atta and Abdulaziz Alomari were in a Florida bank lobby on September 4, and the audio of Atta calling Saudi Arabia was even recorded in the process. Fayez Ahmed Banihammad used an ATM on September 7 in Deerfield Beach, Florida. Salem Alhazmi was at the Falls Church DMV on September 7. Low quality surveillance video at the Milner Hotel in Boston showed Alshehhi and possibly Mohand Alshehri on multiple occasions in the days just before 9/11. Ziad Jarrah and possibly Saeed Alghamdi were videotaped using a Kinko's for about an hour near Newark on September 10.

_________________

There's something missing. It's this:

SunCruz Casinos turns over documents in terrorist probe

By VICKIE CHACHERE
Associated Press Writer

TAMPA, Fla. - SunCruz Casinos has turned over photographs and other documents to FBI investigators after employees said they recognized some of the men suspected in the terrorist attacks as customers.

...

The cruise line also is turning over to the FBI video from a Port Canaveral cruise ship of a man that an employee says also resembled one of the suspected terrorists.

...

One name on the passenger list from a Sept. 5 cruise is the same as one of the suspected terrorists', Hlavsa said. A cash advance was taken out on that passenger's credit card, he said.

The ship's extensive security systems, in place to protect its gaming operations and customers, will help confirm identifies, Hlavsa said.

http://www.jacksonville.com/apnews/stories/092601/D7EP5...

_____________________

SunCruz Casinos was formerly co-owned by Jack Abramoff. Wonder where those tapes went?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-16-08 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #14
16. Yes. That would be something to see, no? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Grateful for Hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-16-08 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
15. kick n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedSock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-16-08 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
17. Q about the tables in the document
The text in column D on many of the entries is cut off from view -- as though the table's cells were a fixed size and did not expand with the addition of text.

Check out these random entries: 1236, 1861, 2156, 2170, 2871

In each of these -- and many more -- the complete text from column D is not visible.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CGowen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-17-08 09:51 PM
Response to Reply #17
23. yep it's everywhere.....n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-17-08 02:12 PM
Response to Original message
18. kick to counteract latest dodge by those who prefer to distract with "no planes"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spooked911 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-17-08 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. do you think the hijackers really hijacked the planes?
Of course, I would argue that the hijackers are basically a distraction from what really happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-17-08 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. If so, then how the hijackers were constructed remains just as important. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-17-08 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Excellent point, Jack!
You, of course, have already got evidence that you can share with us all about how any single point in that document was "constructed."

The floor is yours. Show us how the hijackers were "constructed."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RedSock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #21
24. Show us how the hijackers were "constructed"
Well, for starters, there's a 297-page PDF file up top of this thread -- an incomplete timeline that has been "constructed" from various bits of information in an attempt to figure out where the hijackers were and when.

It's like solving a puzzle. It gives a fuller picture of the hijackers. You could call it "constructing" a back story or you could call it "constructing" a case against them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #24
27. Constructing a case against the hijackers is different from "constructing the hijackers."
Jack is quite aware of what he said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HamdenRice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 08:56 AM
Response to Original message
26. Very important! Thanks for your always productive work! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CGowen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-18-08 10:43 AM
Response to Original message
30. It's difficult to get information on who they called,

according to this article they were trying to get escorts on the 10th, but it ddn't work out.
Wouldn't it be nice if the FBI document could tell us who they were calling?


SEPT. 10
Hijackers said to seek prostitutes


By Shelley Murphy and Douglas Belkin, Globe Staff, 10/10/2001

Four alleged terrorists spent their last night looking for prostitutes in Boston before hijacking two planes out of Logan Airport and smashing them into the World Trade Center towers in New York, according to law enforcement sources.

The hijackers called several local escort services on Sept. 10, asking how much it would cost for prostitutes to have sex with the four men who were staying at the Milner Hotel in Boston's Park Square, but didn't make a deal.

''It was going to be really expensive and they couldn't come to a consensus on price, so that was the end of it,'' said one law enforcement official. ''Either they thought it was too extravagant or they didn't have enough money left.''

One of the services contacted was VIP Escorts, the official said.

A woman who answered the toll-free number for VIP Escorts, which does not advertise prostitution services, said she had been contacted by the FBI about whether the hijackers had solicited their services but declined to comment further.

...

http://web.archive.org/web/20011011012426/http:/www.bos...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Diane_nyc Donating Member (714 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jul-07-08 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
42. Thanks for posting about this here. Great work! nt
Edited on Mon Jul-07-08 04:40 PM by Diane_nyc
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Mar 25th 2017, 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC