Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

9/11, David Schippers and FBI foreknowledge

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 » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Minstrel Boy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 12:24 AM
Original message
9/11, David Schippers and FBI foreknowledge
I'm wondering what the rest of you make of the Schippers story of FBI foreknowledge, particularly since Schippers is the former Chief Investigative Counsel for the US House Judiciary Committee and head prosecutor responsible for conducting the Clinton impeachment. It made my head swim when I first read it, and yet it seems to be underreported even within LIHOP/MIHOP circles.

This, from Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed's The War on Freedom, pg 107:

"Schippers received information from 'impeccable' US intelligence sources, including FBI agents, that a massive attack was being planned by terrorists targeting the financial district of lower Manhattan. (He went public with this two days after the attack in an interview with WRRK in Pittsburgh.) He said he had tried warning Ashcroft and other officials six weeks before the attacks.

"According to Schippers, these agents knew, months before the attacks, the names of the hijackers, the targets of their attacks, the proposed dates, and the sources of their funding, along with other information. At least two weeks prior to 11th September, the FBI agents again confirmed that an attack on lower Manhattan, orchestrated by Osama bin Laden, was imminent. However, the FBI command cut short their investigations into the impending terrorist attacks and those involved, threatening the agents with prosecution under the National Security Act if they publicised information pertaining to their investigations.

"The agents subsequently sought the council of David Schippers in order to pressure elements in the US government to take action to prevent the attacks. Schippers warned many Congressmen and Senators, and also attempted to contact US Attorney General John Ashcroft without success, managing only to explain the situation to a lower-ranking Justice Dept. official who promised a return call from Ashcroft the next day. The Attorney General did not return the call despite the gravity of the situation."

Schippers is now representing one of those FBI special agents, Robert Wright. Whistleblower Wright has been muzzled by the agency, and has been subjected to four investigations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The Zanti Regent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 12:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. Schippers D Adulterer?
Any man who has both his wife and mistress in attendence before the House Judiciary committee and demand's Clinton's impeachment over sex has NO credibility!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kskiska Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. And the National Enquirer printed photographs
to prove it. He has 10 or so kids, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
antineocon1 Donating Member (130 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 12:35 AM
Response to Original message
2. Do you have a link?
I'd like to read the article. I think that this gets more and more confusing every day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minstrel Boy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. no link for that
I lifted it from the book The War on Freedom, by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed. But there are transcripts and audio files online of Schippers being interviewed about his allegations by Alex Jones (someone I'd rather avoid).

Here's Robert Novak on the FBI's muzzling of FBI Special Agent Wright:
http://us.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/06/19/column.novak.opinion.fbi/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
antineocon1 Donating Member (130 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. Thanks...
I'll have to read that book.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #4
20. What We Make of It? It's True and Apparently Nobody Cares
Count NOVAKula's column (your link) underscores the credibility:

********QUOTE********
.... The FBI would soon find out that Bob Wright is not easily silenced. In September 1999, he had hired Chicago lawyer David Schippers, famed as House investigative counsel in the Clinton impeachment.

When the FBI retaliated against Wright, Schippers contacted Judicial Watch, the conservative watchdog organization. The FBI has had to face Judicial Watch's redoubtable Larry Klayman ever since.

The 2001 investigation and two subsequent internal probes all cleared Wright, who passed a polygraph test, of charges he leaked classified information. Nevertheless, the FBI hierarchy has been implacable in its attitude toward Wright. It has banned publication of his manuscript which Wright calls "a blueprint of how the events of September the eleventh were inevitable." He describes himself as the only FBI agent "banned from working in the investigation" of 9-11. ....
******************UNQUOTE******

The book dates back before Sept 2002. Truthout and intrepid DU-er PITT were all over this story when it broke. WRIGHT appears to have withstood so far. NOVAKula's column is recent, a hopeful sign. Hope WRIGHT stays out of small planes. Maybe SOMEday...sigh...the national Will will stir out of its slumber.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maccagirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 12:56 AM
Response to Original message
5. Why didn't he go to the media?
If he had such credible, specific info and was being intimidated or at best, ignored by the DOJ, and Congress why the hell didn't he have the guts to exposed it to the NYT or CNN et al? Something doesn't sound right here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minstrel Boy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 01:04 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. he was on the radio Sept 13
"He went public with this two days after the attack in an interview with WRRK in Pittsburgh"

But still - why didn't he go national? He was a figure of national prominence. Was the lack of coverage his fault or that of the media?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maccagirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 01:10 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Good question
"Was the lack of coverage his fault or that of the media?"

Talk about the mother of all "What did they know and when did they know it."

Did he contact the media before 9/11? Who is covering their butts? Everyone?

My head is spinning.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherine Vincent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 01:35 AM
Response to Original message
9. I have forgotten about that jackass!
And now you have to mention him. There are so many jackasses that pissed me off during the Clinton years that I have forgotten about....Schippers is one of them.

I can't imagine any female that would have sex with that prick! Yuck!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 03:13 AM
Response to Original message
10. Sources for Schippers
Edited on Sat Aug-02-03 03:21 AM by paulthompson
Here's the 9/11 Timeline entry I have about his claim:

Late July 2001 (B): David Schippers, noted conservative Chicago lawyer and the House Judiciary Committee's chief investigator in the Clinton impeachment trial, claims two days after 9/11 that he had tried to warn federal authorities about plans to strike buildings in lower Manhattan. Schippers says, "I was trying to get people to listen to me because I had heard that the terrorists had set up a three-pronged attack:" an American airplane, the bombing of a federal building in the heartland and a massive attack in lower Manhattan, He tries contacting Attorney General John Ashcroft, the White House, and even the House managers with whom he had worked, but nobody returns his phone calls. "People thought I was crazy. What I was doing was I was calling everybody I knew telling them that this has happened," he says. "I'm telling you the more I see of the stuff that's coming out, if the FBI had even been awake they would have seen it." He also claims to know of ignored warnings about the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and evidence that Middle Easterners were connected with that attack. (Indianapolis Star, 5/18/02) Other mainstream sources have apparently shied away from Schipper's story, but he has added details in an interview on the partisan Alex Jones Show. He claims that it is FBI agents in Chicago and Minnesota who first contact him and tell him that a terrorist attack is going to occur in lower Manhattan. A group of these agents now want to testify about what they know, but want legal protection from government retribution. (Alex Jones Show, 10/10/01)


As you can see, about the only mainstream source for his claim is the Indianapolis Star, and I checked Lexis Nexus very thoroughly. Here's the link:

http://www.indystar.com/library/topics/opinion/patterson/columns/2002_0518.html

I think no mainstream source wants to touch it because it's just way too controversial. He also simultaneously gets deep into the Oklahoma bombing and claims there was foreknowledge of that too, and that evidence of a larger conspiracy is being kept hidden.

Why one newspaper then, the Indianapolis Star? My guess is because a prominent Indiana politican, Dan Burton if memory recalls, has been trying to dredge up the Oklahoma bombing again and tie the Iraqis to it. So there has been a lot more in the local media about that there than anywhere else. The timing of the Star article is also key: May 18, 2002. May 15, 2002 was the date of the big "Bush Knew" headline and revelations, and for a few days after that there was a whole rash of interesting stories about 9/11, but the window closed again around May 20 when a slew of new terror alerts got everyone to tow the fearful line again. For instance, Time magazine writes about these new alerts from May 20-24: "Though uncorroborated and vague, the terror alerts were a political godsend for an Administration trying to fend off a bruising bipartisan inquiry into its handling of the terrorist chatter last summer. After the wave of warnings, the Democratic clamor for an investigation into the government's mistakes subsided."

When Schippers says Minnesota FBI agents, my guess is he's talking about the ones involved in the Moussaoui case. One such FBI agent wrote before 9/11 that Moussaoui might "fly something into the World Trade Center." So that fits in with Schippers' claim that they were worried about an attack on lower Manhattan.

When he says Chicago FBI agents, he's probably talking about Robert Wright, John Vincent and others on the Chicago FBI team investigating terrorism finances. Wright in particular has become a whistleblower in a number of cases since 9/11. For instance he claims that days after Bush became Pres, his group of agents were told to "let sleeping dogs lie" in their investigation of rich Saudis funding terrorism. But that's probably just the tip of the iceberg. He's been quoted as saying, "There's more, God there's so much more." Unfortunately, Wright is still an FBI agent and will only say publically as much as the FBI allows him to, which isn't much. He's written a book as well (which he mostly wrote before 9/11), and the FBI won't allow any of it to be published.

It sounds like he and other FBI agents are afraid of going to jail for a long time if they talk about what they know on 9/11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Minstrel Boy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. thanks Paul
And thanks for all your work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Glad to be of help
I hope the others in this thread saw my post also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lostnote03 Donating Member (850 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
13. David Schippers as well as Larry ???
.......I forget the name of the other high profile GOP attorney that has gone public with some of his claims regarding FBI/Govt. foreknowledge....I believe that his first name is Larry(?)....in any case he is representing some of the surviving family members in their lawsuit......also he was legal council for Sen Bob Doles staff.....in any case these are TWO credible GOP voices whose stories need to be repeatedly mentioned.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 05:18 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Who is this Larry guy?
Doesn't ring a bell for me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lostnote03 Donating Member (850 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 05:34 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. Paul....
.....I could be wrong on the first name however he has stated that he has interviewed the ex-wife of one of the 911 collaborators and that she has stated on record that he was in contact with undercover FBI agents.....I will dig up some imfo and get it posted to you although I believe that you are already probably aware of the story .....I am just having a difficult time remembering the story and that is probably what has you confused....I do know that he was legal council for Sen Bob Dole at one time and has stated that he has proof through legal discovery of Govt foreknowledge along with Schippers.....I can't believe that his name escapes me because I continually hammered my local talk radio with his name as well as Schippers.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karlschneider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 05:26 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Klayman? Is that who you're thinking of? n/t
Edited on Sat Aug-02-03 05:29 PM by karlschneider
Meant to mention...if it is, here's his URL
http://www.judicialwatch.org/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lostnote03 Donating Member (850 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 05:35 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. No......
.....I'm sorry for being forgetful but it is not Klayman
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lostnote03 Donating Member (850 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 05:38 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Stanley Hilton!!!!!!
......Does that sound familiar???......geesh, I'm still sexy however very forgetful.....lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulthompson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. Yes
I'm glad to hear at least that you're still sexy. ;)

Stanley Hilton is a San Francisco lawyer who is suing the Bush Administration for its foreknowledge of 9/11. And he did claim to have an inside scoop from the wife of one of the hijackers (but doesn't say which one). But personally I'm very doubtful about this guy and his suit. Even though I strongly approve the idea of such a suit, everything I hear about it rubs me the wrong way, making me wonder if he's purposely trying to lose (and thus send some 9/11 victim's relatives on a wild goose chase). For instance that interview where he talked about the wife and so forth could make much of that evidence inadmissible in court, according to some legal friends of mine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UTUSN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Aug-02-03 08:33 PM
Response to Original message
19. Sending This to My Local Wingnut Talkshow Host
Edited on Sat Aug-02-03 08:37 PM by UTUSN
since he was so incredulous about another link about LIHOP.

This one:

******QUOTE*****
http://www.lowcountrynow.com/stories/080103/LOCrose.shtml
If you want to know why 9/11 was allowed to happen you may not have to look any further than the Oval Office.

---------AND HIS RESPONSE: ---------
So Bush knew this was in prospect but did nothing so it could happen to galvanize the people to get what he/his manipulators wanted?

********UNQUOTE********
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 Sun Oct 25th 2020, 06:15 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) 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