The Sharp Dressed Man Who Aided Mutallab Onto Flight 253 Was U.S. Government Agent

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by earthdude
I now will never believe anything my government tells me. I will not help to make this a better country. I will not abide by the rules if they don't.

You feel betrayed. You have to punish someone and get attention to your pain.

Meanwhile you'll believe every pronouncement by propaganda machines of psycho dictators, warlord, corrupt despotic regimes, religious fanatics. Or any high school kid with a lunatic fringe idea on a conspiracy site.

They would never steer you wrong, would they?



[edit on 2-2-2010 by mmiichael]

On this one incident, I believe Kurt Haskell and not the propaganda machine. I did consider punishment but have opted out of the whole mess. Attention to wrong doings is needed, the pain is just part of being a free thinker. You deal with it if you wish. Remember, just because a person believes in one conspiracy theory, he does not alway believe in them all.

Originally posted by JJay55

Meanwhile looks like there's been a pullback on attempts on planes. That worries me a little.

Can you elaborate? What have you seen/heard/read that's an indicator to a "pullback on attempts on planes"? And, why does it worry you?

Is it the most recent media statement of 'attack imminent in next 3 to 6 months'? My first thought was the statement being more of a CYA, and we're really looking at days/weeks for intel purposes. (They'll do what they can to thwart those they have intel on, but the 3-6 month statement is in case they're not 100% successful.)

Originally posted by JJay55

Originally posted by mike dangerously
I don't think this was the work of those shadowy "Islamic-fascists."

That's because you don't believe Islamic fascists. So you rationalize.

Whoever they are they are really stupid. How did they think the SDM would not be remembered? Is the bomber slightly retarded? Why use a retarded guy? Where were they escorted to and what happened there? How did these spooks get so many people to clam up about it? Are most humans that submissive?

Originally posted by earthdude
On this one incident, I believe Kurt Haskell and not the propaganda machine. I did consider punishment but have opted out of the whole mess. Attention to wrong doings is needed, the pain is just part of being a free thinker. You deal with it if you wish. Remember, just because a person believes in one conspiracy theory, he does not alway believe in them all.

I agree with you in principle. I don't think Haskell started out with any agenda. But he's getting attention and some low level celebrity status. This inevitably skews his observations and memories.

The Conspiracy community has picked up on him. To sustain his visibility he has to constantly feed them.

He may be a lawyer by profession, but like anyone, is capable of misreading situations, getting false impressions, filling in blanks and
filling in blanks with his own speculations.

I'm sure there was a sharply dressed man as a handler in Amsterdam. But the 'no passport' thing just doesn't wash. It conflicts with what has been established and credibility. No organization, terrorist or even supposed US affiliated agents would try to get someone through customs without documentation.

Fake passports are not that hard to produce or obtain.

Haskell bases his story on a couple pieces of the puzzle, but not enough to know what really happened.

The rest is spin and embellishment.


M

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by earthdude
On this one incident, I believe Kurt Haskell and not the propaganda machine. I did consider punishment but have opted out of the whole mess. Attention to wrong doings is needed, the pain is just part of being a free thinker. You deal with it if you wish. Remember, just because a person believes in one conspiracy theory, he does not alway believe in them all.

I agree with you in principle. I don't think Haskell started out with any agenda. But he's getting attention and some low level celebrity status. This inevitably skews his observations and memories.

The Conspiracy community has picked up on him. To sustain his visibility he has to constantly feed them.

He may be a lawyer by profession, but like anyone, is capable of misreading situations, getting false impressions, filling in blanks and
filling in blanks with his own speculations.

I'm sure there was a sharply dressed man as a handler in Amsterdam. But the 'no passport' thing just doesn't wash. It conflicts with what has been established and credibility. No organization, terrorist or even supposed US affiliated agents would try to get someone through customs without documentation.

Fake passports are not that hard to produce or obtain.

Haskell bases his story on a couple pieces of the puzzle, but not enough to know what really happened.

The rest is spin and embellishment.


M

I agree that Mr. Haskell's memories of that day could have been skewed. This does not explain the attempts to keep the security footage from him. If a tape is released and it looks undoctored, then I will eat my words. Too many mistakes were made by this bumbling false flag operation for me to believe anything else. It saddens me to think our agents are so inept.

reply to post by JJay55
Rationalize? there's no real evidence of terrorist involvement in this case other then someone claiming to be Osama Bin Ladin taking responsibility for the attempted attack on a tape yet another coincidence in this story.Sorry,I am not some myopic patriotic drone who believes that the Taliban are in the closet waiting to eat me. JJay55 if you have such a dislike for conspiracy theories then why continue to post here if all it does is upset you ?

[edit on 102828p://3226 by mike dangerously]

Originally posted by earthdude

I agree that Mr. Haskell's memories of that day could have been skewed. This does not explain the attempts to keep the security footage from him. If a tape is released and it looks undoctored, then I will eat my words. Too many mistakes were made by this bumbling false flag operation for me to believe anything else. It saddens me to think our agents are so inept.

Haskell is a nobody ambulance-chaser lawyer in Chicago. Exactly what obligation does a security firm or any intelligence agency have to give him tapes being used in an ongoing investigation?

Go to your nearest police station and tell them they have to give you tapes from an armed robbery they're checking out. See what they say.

About all we can say for sure is this wasn't US agents. If they ever wanted to set up a false flag it would be something credible with some dramatic impact, not a fizzle in a pair of underpants.

And maybe you can explain how exactly the Big Bad Government agencies manage to retro-engineer 6 years of documented contacts with terrorist organizers, multiple testimonies from teachers and classmates, online messages, trips to various countries, etc?

It may be a revelation but there are people willing to blow themselves up for a religious cause. Do you really think the other 4000 suicide attacks like the Jordanian doctor who blew himself up taking 6 CIA agents was also a false flag?




[edit on 3-2-2010 by mmiichael]

Originally posted by mike dangerously
reply to post by JJay55

 

Rationalize? there's no real evidence of terrorist involvement in this case other then someone claiming to be Osama Bin Ladin taking responsibility for the attempted attack on a tape yet another coincidence in this story.Sorry,I am not some myopic patriotic drone who believes that the Taliban are in the closet waiting to eat me.

JJay55 if you have such a dislike for conspiracy theories then why continue to post here if all it does is upset you ?

[edit on 102828p://3226 by mike dangerously]

I'm not sure you know me.
Unless you work for homeland security you don't have any idea of what you are talking about.

Originally posted by mmiichael
And maybe you can explain how exactly the Big Bad Government agencies manage to retro-engineer 6 years of documented contacts with terrorist organizers, multiple testimonies from teachers and classmates, online messages, trips to various countries, etc?

Wannabes can never answer this question... realistically.
Good luck mmiichael.
xoxoxoox

reply to post by mmiichael

The problem is that we really don't know who these people are being funded by. Those who have profited the most from the fear of terror are the same ones deceiving the general public. I cannot say this is for sure a false flag operation but it seems to contain a cover up. I deem suspect the warmongers, more than the fanatics.

Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by mmiichael

 

The problem is that we really don't know who these people are being funded by. Those who have profited the most from the fear of terror are the same ones deceiving the general public. I cannot say this is for sure a false flag operation but it seems to contain a cover up. I deem suspect the warmongers, more than the fanatics.

Maybe you personally don't know who is funding these people. There are others whot know exactly.

Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by mmiichael

 

The problem is that we really don't know who these people are being funded by. Those who have profited the most from the fear of terror are the same ones deceiving the general public. I cannot say this is for sure a false flag operation but it seems to contain a cover up. I deem suspect the warmongers, more than the fanatics.

This is an Internet forum. It is dominated by college kids and other politically naive people who buy into any claim of there being a Big Bad Government conspiracy behind everything. Amazing the number of people dumb enough to actually believe the US would destroy the most valuable property assets in all history as a so-called 'false flag' A couple factories in Trenton, New Jersey would have done just fine.

We know very well who funds and sponsors the terrorist networks. The money used to flow through phony Muslim charities from the Saudi royal family primarily. Iran had it's own network. The new generation Muslim drug import/export cartels indirectly often controlled by the same regimes now use their cash overflows.

This information is available for those who want it. But conspiracists tend to adhere to the same fantasy beliefs of the US govt being behind everything.


M

Originally posted by mmiichael

Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by mmiichael

 

The problem is that we really don't know who these people are being funded by. Those who have profited the most from the fear of terror are the same ones deceiving the general public. I cannot say this is for sure a false flag operation but it seems to contain a cover up. I deem suspect the warmongers, more than the fanatics.

This is an Internet forum. It is dominated by college kids and other politically naive people who buy into any claim of there being a Big Bad Government conspiracy behind everything. Amazing the number of people dumb enough to actually believe the US would destroy the most valuable property assets in all history as a so-called 'false flag' A couple factories in Trenton, New Jersey would have done just fine.

We know very well who funds and sponsors the terrorist networks. The money used to flow through phony Muslim charities from the Saudi royal family primarily. Iran had it's own network. The new generation Muslim drug import/export cartels indirectly often controlled by the same regimes now use their cash overflows.

This information is available for those who want it. But conspiracists tend to adhere to the same fantasy beliefs of the US govt being behind everything.


M

If you study history, you will find that the government was behind everything, well almost everything. I can't wait 50 years for the documents to be unsealed. I will be dead. I want transparency now.

Originally posted by earthdude
If you study history, you will find that the government was behind everything, well almost everything. I can't wait 50 years for the documents to be unsealed. I will be dead. I want transparency now.

I studied history. If you confine yourself to Googling conspiracy sites and Youtube you might get the impression the US govt is behind everything.

If you instead use credible sources like historians and writers who use documentation, interviews, records, primary source material and provided citations, you get a different impression.

There are many countries, institutions, industries, powerful individuals. Their interractions, sometimes collaboratively, sometimes adversarially, account for much of modern history.

The US govt is inordinately powerful but not the only one on the planet. They may respond to many things but do not cause anywhere near the number of political and economic conflicts that are routinely attributed to them.

reply to post by mmiichael

The money used to flow through phony Muslim charities from the Saudi royal family primarily. Iran had it's own network. The new generation Muslim drug import/export cartels indirectly often controlled by the same regimes now use their cash overflows. This information is available for those who want it. But conspiracists tend to adhere to the same fantasy beliefs of the US govt being behind everything.

You're right, there is a lot of people who believe this. I don't know though, have you done the research?

Terrorist supporting Muslim professors green lighted into America by OBAMA. Feel safer now?

Less than a month after the suicide underwear terrorist bomber almost blew up nearly 300 people in a plane over Detroit; less than a month after all the US security agencies solemnly promised to make us terror proof by stripping travelers of their dignity the US is so blissfully safe that President Barack Obama (D) and his Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton, have decided that two Muslim supporting terrorists who have funded terrorist organizations, spread hate America lies, and thus were barred from entering the country are now welcome to the US according to Larry Neumeister of the AP. Mid East scholar Daniel Pipes rips apart and provides background on the flimsy excuses offered for allowing the Muslim terrorists, who are professors, into the US.

www.congress.org...

Who Funds Islamic Terrorism?

Terrorist organizations, taking a page from the operations manual of the drug cartels, simply adjusted their operations to accommodate the new restrictions. Yet, the source of funding has morphed throughout the years. Today terrorist funds appear to come from a combination of private charities, nation-state oil revenues, and organizations like the UN. So the answer to "Who funds Terrorism?" has to be - You and I do. Our government does it in our name when it funds the UN with our taxes. We do it again every time we use imported oil. Am I the only one who is just a bit bothered by this system?

rofasix.blogspot.com...

"Islamic Terrorists" supported by Uncle Sam: Bush Administration "Black Ops" directed against Iran, Lebanon and Syria

The destabilization of Lebanon supports the US-NATO-Israeli military agenda directed against Syria and Iran. US intelligence sets loose its Islamic brigades, while also accusing the enemy of sponsoring terrorist groups, which are in fact covertly supported and financed by Uncle Sam.

www.globalresearch.ca...

These are just a few. I'm not saying you are wrong, but these sources can be checked too.

Originally posted by jackflap
You're right, there is a lot of people who believe this. I don't know though, have you done the research?

Let's just say I know an awful lot about Terrorist Financing.

There are involved real world conspiracies that unfortunately don't interest people on this site.

Try looking up the term "Libel Tourism." Khalid bin-Mahfouz, for years the banker for the Saudi Royal family, employed a full-time staff isolating books and articles that mentioned his name or examined Saudi funding of terrorist organizations via front charities. Over 50 cases were launched in Britain to suppress the publication or distribution of books and articles on the subject. Publishers were regularly faced with nuisance suit legal fees and potential punitive damages, even if their information was demonstrably factual. The Internet via conventional search engine queries has also largely been expunged of references to this network of terrorist funding laundering.

This is covered on this blog by the one authors who managed to confront the bin-Mahfouz legal machine successfully.

www.terrorfinance.org...

A summary overview here.

www.nysun.com...

Welcome to the world of libel tourism. When the American researcher Rachel Ehrenfeld published "Funding Evil: How Terrorism Is Financed — and How to Stop It," she suddenly found herself slapped with a libel suit — but not in America. A Saudi banker, Khalid bin Mahfouz, brought the suit in England. Even though the book was not distributed in Great Britain, a British judge ruled that Ms. Ehrenfeld must apologize and pay Mr. Mahfouz £110,000.

Not only did Ms. Ehrenfeld refuse, she promptly countersued in New York, asking the federal courts to rule that the British judgment contravened the First Amendment. Though the Second Circuit seemed sympathetic to her plight, Ms. Ehrenfeld's claim depended upon whether, as a matter of New York State law, the court had jurisdiction over Mr. Mahfouz. Just before Christmas, New York's highest state court ruled that jurisdiction was lacking. That decision leaves Ms. Ehrenfeld in legal and professional limbo: discouraged from writing about Mr. Mahfouz or traveling to countries where he might seek to collect on the British judgment, and damaged in her ability to find publishers who will have to weigh the risks of being dragged into foreign courts. Mr. Mahfouz is an energetic libel tourist. His Web site lists successful actions against three other books: "Reaping the Whirlwind: The Taliban Movement in Afghanistan," "Forbidden Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy and The Failed Hunt for Bin Laden," and "Alms for Jihad: Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World."

The case against "Alms for Jihad" by Robert O. Collins, a professor emeritus of history at the University of California, and J. Millard Burr, a retired employee of the State Department, was especially egregious. The publisher, Cambridge University Press, instantly capitulated to Mr. Mahfouz's demands. Not only did it pulp all unsold copies of the 2006 book, but it paid "substantial damages" to Mr. Mahfouz and even went so far as to contact libraries worldwide to ask them to remove the book from their shelves.

Enter the copycats. Several weeks ago, a former Crown Attorney named Faisal Joseph filed a human rights complaint for the Canadian Islamic Congress against Maclean's, the distinguished Canadian magazine. Why? Because Maclean's had published "The Future Belongs to Islam," an excerpt from Mark Steyn's best-selling book "America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It." The article, according to the complaint, was "flagrantly Islamophobic" and exposed Muslim Canadians to "contempt and hatred."

The editor of Maclean's, Kenneth Whyte, published 27 responses to Mr. Steyn's article, but rejected a demand that he publish, unedited, a five-page article by Muslim students. "I told them I would rather go bankrupt than let somebody from outside our operations dictate the content of the magazine," he said in a statement published in Maclean's on December 5, 2007. It may come to that. Canada's "human rights commission," like the despotic tribunals of yesteryear, is endowed with the power to fine and imprison those who trespass against their dictates.

Responding to the complaint, Mr. Steyn cautioned against the commission's effort "to criminalize debate. That's the way they do things in Sudan and Saudi Arabia, not Canada." Let's hope so. But I recommend we remember those little warnings that accompany financial prospectuses: "Past results are no guarantee of future performance." As of this writing, the commission's prosecutors have won 100% of the cases they've brought. The observation that the triumph of evil will happen when good men stand by and do nothing has special relevance at a time, like now, that is inflected by terrorism.

Our new enemies are not political enemies in any traditional sense, belligerent in the service of their own certain interests. Their violence is focused on the very existence of an alternative to their vision of beatitude, namely on Western democracy and its commitment to free speech and economic prosperity.

What can we do about it? On January 14, Assemblyman Rory Lancman of Queens and Senate Deputy Majority Leader Dean Skelos of Long Island introduced the "Libel Terrorism Protection Act" in New York. The legislation, which was recently passed and now awaits the governor's signature, would overrule New York's highest court and, as Mr. Lancman put it, would give journalists "the tools they need to continue to fearlessly expose the truth about terrorism and its enablers."