FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Hijacker - Mohammed Atta
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 7495

PostPosted: Tue Aug 01, 2006 6:44 pm    Post subject: Hijacker - Mohammed Atta Reply with quote

Reply to this topic with evidence about Mohammed Atta.

-------------------
S U M M A R Y
-------------------

A summary of the thread will be updated here as evidence
is presented in this topic.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 4:28 am    Post subject: Mohamed Atta Reply with quote

I'm starting this over. I read the comments below from Deep, and listened to Fintan's talk again and I got some new ideas. I was going to erase this meandering embarrassment, but I'll leave it here as a scratchpad of sorts.

revamped Atta Article:
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5966#5966


It might be better to review the summary printed below, before attempting to digest this long, convoluted explanation.
http://breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3991#3991

I actually found a MUCH MORE concise numbered account on this very website, posted by the webmaster, Fintan Dunne, compiled by "Minstrel Boy". I like it. I can add a few items and comments.
http://www.breakfornews.com/Mohammed-Atta.htm
Mohamed Atta loved pork chops, and 49 other things you may not know

Much of the info on Mohamed Atta and friends is NOT clear information about THEM specifically, but about their associates and the trail of contacts and eyewitnesses they left in Florida --- a story which creates a HUGE credibility gap in the official myth of "Islamic Fundamentalists who hate our freedom" or any other semi-official myth.

Although Fintan discounts much of the Amanda Keller interview by Hopsicker, and of the story she presents he says "I'm not buying any of it" --- she certainly presents a dubious character and suspicious style of storytelling --- some of her info IS corroborated by other people who are apparently not connected to this wild caper, and have no particular axe to grind or reason to lie.

One of the more striking aspects of "The Amanda Keller Story" by Daniel Hopsicker is the COMPLETE LACK OF MEDIA ATTENTION, despite a very juicy story, and regardless what parts of the story are fact, rumor, or fantasy. Certainly everyone knows that bad taste and irresponsible rumor does not present any moral barrier to our media. There are many lurid TV shows in the US (and Britain), including everything from Montel and Springer and Oprah to the Nightly News. That none of these has shown the slightest interest in "The Terrorists Stripper-Prostitute Girlfriend" despite the huge entertainment and titillation value, speaks volumes about how much more important it is to keep certain facts from the wider public domain, than the profit potential of large viewership.

In addition, a chunk of Hopsicker's research comes from public records, law enforcement records, interviews with law enforcement officials and people close to both law and the airport, etc., plus newspaper accounts of Rudy Dekkers about his dubious financial wreck of a flight school business. One point is made that the entire flight school charade was a huge money pit, and made no sense whatsoever from a business standpoint, yet despite lack of revenue, the owner(s) found themselves flush with cash and money to burn, as did the "stars" of the show, Atta and friends. So if it made no sense as a business, something else about it made sense. The whole story is rife with examples of Mafia and other criminal connections, as well as connections to shadow CIA front companes, big name politicians, and people with strong political connections for securing illicit favors.




Quote:
http://www.madcowprod.com/05022005.html
The 'Second' Mohamed in Venice?

According to statements the FBI made to Amanda Keller while questioning her, “Mohamed Arajaki” was an alias of Atta’s. And the FBI Terrorist List—mistakenly released to the public a month after the attack by the Finnish Government, to the Bureau’s consternation—also listed “Mohamed Arajaki” as one of Atta’s numerous aliases.

But Amanda Keller was far from alone in identifying Mohamed Atta as the man she had lived with for several months. In the days after the attack every one of the local newspapers in the area—the Sarasota Herald Tribune, Charlotte Sun, and Venice Gondolier—ran eyewitness accounts of Atta at the Sandpiper, across the street from the Venice Airport.

"Charles Grapentine, the manager of Sandpiper Apartments on Airport Avenue in Venice, said he remembers seeing Atta at the complex for about three weeks in April. He said Atta was living in the apartment of Amanda Keller."

"In a telephone interview late Friday, Keller said she met Atta through a friend and let him stay in the apartment with her and her then-boyfriend, Garrett Metts, because she felt sorry for him. She said authorities told her not to say anything at all about Atta," the paper reported.

"I can't really discuss anything," she said. "I'm afraid I'll get in trouble."

Another story just three days after the attack reported: ”FLIGHT SCHOOL MAY HAVE CHARGED SUSPECTED TERRORISTS EXTRA RENT.” The local Venice Gondolier reported Huffman Aviation rented an apartment for $550 a month at the Sandpiper, and then turned around and sublet it to students at an outrageously high markup. Rudi Dekkers had been gouging the terrorists. We couldn’t muster any indignation over it.


Again, break-thru television. Excitement. Intrigue. Money. Greed. Drugs. Conspiracies. A combination of Miami Vice, CSI, and 24. Yet not a peep from Entertainment Tonite.

------ {I'll edit and clean this up shortly. -gg}

I just got done looking at Chapter One (online) of Hopsicker's book, Welcome to Terrorland. JEESH, what a mess. It's written like some fictional sing-song story. There IS a story, but he doesn't have to write it like Vanity Fair or something.

Hopsicker uncovered a lot of FACTS about Atta and friends, but his conclusion is they WERE actual hijackers, even though his own findings are that their personal profiles are the opposite of Islamic Fundamentalist kooks and they were knee-deep in organized crime, narcotics, and the FBI-CIA, with ties to key Republicans (and Dems?). Yet Hopsicker's stupid conclusion is that the FBI were "remiss" in chasing them due to some other reason ... covering up drug operations. This is ridiculous, and I can see why Fintan put Hoppy on the "fakes" list, (yet there seems to be some valid data there).

Sure, drugs do help fund clandestine ops. So what?! We know that because the CIA Inspector General finally admitted that Gary Webb was correct, and that Webb actually understated his case .. but the public disclosure of that was quiet. Hopsicker seems to purposely draw the most illogical and LIMITED conclusions, ignoring his own findings.

So apparently Hopsicker's role was to uncover ALL this ORGY OF EVIDENCE, then put a "LIHOP or Incompetence" spin on it. In a more recent archive on Dave Emory's show, Hopsicker tells about "Makram Chams", a Kwik-Mart owner who received and cashed the large checks ($70,000) the alleged hijackers received from abroad (according to FBI documents), and then this man disappears after Sept 11. Seriously. Hopsicker says he later learned that this same Kwik-Mart owner popped up in a story about suing his employer in Saudi Arabia for $23 million --- Titan, a US defense contractor. In this talk, Hopsicker ventured the possibility that perhaps just maybe this was MIHOP rather that LIHOP. (In other words, perhaps the govt Made It Happen, rather than just Let It Happen On Purpose.)

How can he grab such good stuff and be SO horribly lame about it? EVERYTHING (below) points to the CIA to FBI to shadowy Intelligence and criminal syndicates with govt ties as being directly involved in (though not ultimately responsible for) the hijackings, yet Hopsicker hedges his bets, waiting for (what?) more proof, and he pretends that the "hijackers" he uncovered in this stew of intrigue were still actually rogue Jihadists at War with America, capable of and willing to fly suicide missions, working for the Saudis.


A bunch of coked-out Arabs from Germany, drinking and carousing, eating pork, hanging out with strippers in Miami, Venice, and Sarasota, and gambling on Jack Abramoff's gangster Republican friends' casino ship, SunCruz (and in Las Vegas). (I think witnesses also saw them getting drunk in New Jersey, but that would only confirm all this.)

Except at the last minute they became devout Muslims intent on Jihad. No, they must have ALWAYS been devout Muslims intent on Jihad, from long before they set foot in Florida, but they decided to party their asses off and live Islamically-sinful lifestyles for a year, hang out a bunch of CIA-related gangsters and Republican cronies, before finally staging Holy Suicide for Allah due to hatred for Americans freedom to drink and live impure lives --- or, alternately, because of a deep concern for how Islamic culture was being polluted by Western culture --- or, alternately, due to a deep concern for the Arab People sufficient to generate a willingness to become a human fireball.

WHAT?!!

Hello Daniel: Hedonistic playboys who fly with narco-traffickers and gamble with Republicans would seem like LEAST likely candidates for a mission which is guaranteed to end in death. Perhaps some risk-taking, hard-drinking Seals --- but wimpy coked-out Arab playboys? How much money would the Saudis have to PAY YOU TO KILL YOURSELF in the prime of your life, while youre having FUN?

Do witnesses who quoted a drunk Atta swearing "F#ck God!" have any bearing on the implausibility of the Jihadism story?


(But other aspects of Hopsicker's video "Mohamed Atta and the Venice Flying Circus" seem solidly researched, with lots of interviews, which is one more thing that makes his conclusions so maddening.)



OK. So here goes from me, as I recall the jumbled mess.

M.A. and friends lived a playboy lifestyle. Atta came from Hamburg, Germany, and I think so did his friends.
They had connections to Intelligence and Organized Crime, including Mafia type men and women, and people with close ties to the Bushes and other Republican gangsters, (this is not to exclude Democrats, just so happens to be Rethugs in this case).

Atta and crew bounced around Florida hotspots, being loud and obnoxious, leaving paper trails and witnesses everywhere, and apparently witnesses and neighbors knew the stripper girl (Amanda Keller) and verified that he was dating her, though some of her story stretches credibility. They spent a lot of time in Venice, Sarasota, and Miami, Florida. At some point, an informant for the FBI reportedly was paying their rent.

Were they ALL informants for FBI too? Was Able Danger their management team? Who managed them when they had access to and mailing addresses at secure U.S. military bases, such as Pensacola Naval Air Base?

If this U.S. Military part of the story is true (revealed, but later denied and dropped), they would be operating in a pattern similar to Ali Mohamed, an unrelated Egyptian Intelligence officer who acted as a top Al-Qaeda leader for a 15-year period, with an overlapping stint as a Green Beret/U.S. Army Special Forces. In a separate story, he was convicted of five counts of "terrorism" then disappeared from Federal Prison while awaiting sentencing. The website www.cooperativeresearch.org has an extensive chronological "rap sheet" on Ali Mohamed, and www.rotten.com sums it up, but the roots of the story appear on a "conspiracy site" published by the U.S. Dept of State.


Part of the paper trail Hopsicker discovered was the unexplainable decision to switch credit cards on their long-term car rental, just days before Sept 11. Why worry about credit limits if you're going to explode and die? Will "late fees" be a problem after your date with death?

Obviously, the point was TO leave a paper trail and have multiple names on it. Who wanted a paper trail? These guys who allegedly have "a date with death"? Surely not. No, other people who wanted to create the story afterwards are the ones who need the paper trail. Possibly, they had some unexplained credit limit issue and they did not know that dying was in their future. That means dying was not their plan. More likely, somebody (who provided them with credit cards? who paid their expenses, car rental, etc.?) ordered them to switch cards. SOMEBODY wanted a paper trail, and it sure wasn't "insane fundamentalist terrorists for Allah". (I think Hopsicker never says this, but he implies it.)

Also, the car rental agency owner stated on camera that he once worked for the FBI, and that the "terrorists" found his agency in the phone book, yet his agency was unlisted. There is no explantion about this, except "weird", i.e. somebody's lying!!



The rest of this story is mostly describing the den of criminals (not terrorists, but govt-connected crime conspiracies) with which the "hijackers" were involved. This is just a fraction of the blur that Hopsicker gets into, and what jumped out at me. It mostly confirms more evidence that says these guys were LEAST LIKELY hijackers and were NOT rogue agents (Lone Gunmen), and were instead part of a clandestine network of ... something ... with ties to prominent US officials, some who also have ties to crime and narco-trafficking.



The "hijackers" attended Huffman Aviation flight school in Venice, FL, ostensibly to learn to fly planes, though some already knew how to fly. The school was owned by a Dutch national felon who had no legal right to own it, Rudy Dekkers. Dekkers' character was impugned by colleagues and associates at the airport, as well as newspaper articles about his deadbeat behavior. He was known as a liar, a pervert (charges were filed for sexual harassment), a braggart, and initially a broke business operator in trouble with his lease --- Dekkers' colleague at the airport said Rudy asked for a coutesy flight across the State, but he didn't even have $80 to buy fuel. A year later, Dekkers was waving around $2 million, later confirmed to be OPM, other people's money. Most people don't get that kind of money falling in their laps overnight. Clearly this was not normal "earnings", and clearly this money arrived through channels related to the silent partner in his business, Wally Hilliard (below).

Dekkers appeared as a 9-11 celebrity on CNN and other news, declared himself 'exonerated' at one point, and even addressed Congress advising them how to prevent future terrorism. Who do you have to be to get to address Congress on terrorism? An innocent bystander at a flight school? A deadbeat? A known liar? Apparently so.

Jeb Bush said Dekkers was 'a victim', yet it was reported by a witness at Huffman that Jeb Bush and FBI removed all the files from Dekker's business, put them on a plane and flew them either a) out of the country or b) to Washington.

Dekkers' actually had a silent partner named Wallace Hilliard, who furnished the funds for the purchase of the flight school in 2000, they used no due diligence (business-wise) on their instant purchase, and Hilliard was apparently the source or conduit of the "big cash" Dekkers' was waving around. The "big money" tie-in would appear to be suspiciously linked to Hilliard's Lear Jet being busted with "the largest narcotics seizure in the history of Central Florida".

Hilliard appeared at the airport from time to time. He claimed not to know "student Atta" but was identified visually by Atta's girlfriend Keller as having mentioned Atta, while flirting with her. The framework of the Hilliard story stands up on paper evidence, the anecdotal statements by Keller DO add flavor and confirmation, but are not critical.

Dekker's moneyman partner, Wally Hilliard, appeared in a photo with Jeb Bush. But Hilliard's Lear Jet was busted carrying 43 lb of heroin in 2000, no report of any person busted for possession, yet it was Hilliard's jet. How did he escape justice? Obviously, he was "well-connected". But not just well-connected as in 'favors', a lot of that goes on all over, but Hilliard was a narco-trafficker of substantial size, and connected to the Governor. 43 lbs is not petty crime.

Per Hoppy, Hilliard had been flying regular runs to Venezuela for 30 weeks, and yet he was also financially linked to Jerry Falwell, when he helped bail out Falwell's church. Gives you an idea how Falwell is connected to organized crime and terrorism, as well as the govt.

Hilliard's company was also singled out for special praise from Jeb's Sec of State, Katherine Harris, a State endorsement for his company. I've seen that endorsement ad in writing (online).


Hilliard may have also linked semi-conclusively (I forget how) to Adnan Khashoggi, the Saudi arms dealer who was accused of much financial crime over the decades, and lived a similar playboy lifestyle as the terrorists, but in more celebrity circles. Khashoggi was the middleman for Oliver North's Iran-Contra operation, via Israeli Intelligence, which also funded Al-Qaeda, and which was authorized by Colin Powell above North. Everyone knows Powell's boss at the time was George H. W. Bush / Ronald Reagan, though neither of whom knew a thing about it ... except for scraps of transcripts indicating they did discuss it.


Although I can't locate more at the moment on the Hilliard connection (I think Hilliard was flying some Saudis around), Adnan Khashoggi IS part of the funding behind the tawdry 'infomercial' side of the 9/11 Truth Movement. Without going into too many details -- Hopsicker covers that too well -- there ARE apparent financial links.

Most particularly, Khashoggi is said to "own" John Gray, PhD, of the sugary "Mars and Venus" book on relationships, and other "love connection" websites. These have been funded by Khasshogi for years, maybe to "make a buck" directly from infomercials, but considering his role in international arms deals, Venus and Mars doesn't seem to fit, unless there's another psyop/cover/angle which Hopsicker explores. Yet there is John Gray, funding and speaking at 9/11 Truth, and there is Barrie Zwicker ASKING Gray about his connections to "anti-life" Khashoggi, and then faithfully vouching for Gray and saying he takes him at his word. Zwicker plays the role of a ridiculously earnest man, and he was recently featured with Alex Jones on CSPAN, publicly (and earnestly) demanding to the Ford/CIA-funded Left that they begin to cover Sept 11. Fat chance. It's not plausible that Zwicker, a media head himself, is still unaware of Left Gatekeepers, and WHY they are Left Gatekeepers. (We should now expect that on Zwicker's orders, the CIA-Left will begin paying more attention to the CIA fakes, as CSPAN has now given official permission.)


So Hopsicker apparently has something there. It's hard to say exactly what in this kaleidescope of info, but it makes no sense for Khashoggi to be funding BOTH Iran-Contra AND the 9/11 Truth Movement, without definite ulterior motives. But Khashoggi's web of Intelligence connections leads me AWAY from the conclusion that "the Saudis did it and the White House, FBI, CIA, Military, etc. is merely guilty of looking the other way for some unknown reason"
. It seems rather obvious: To the degree that Khashoggi owns Gray, the CIA owns Khashoggi and Saudi Arabia. Maybe not exactly to the same degree, but my assumption is that Ollie North picked Khashoggi and not the other way around. (There is also some story about a Saudi monarch Faisal I think who challenged Kissinger's orders (to jack up oil prices) and suffered a fatal crash shortly thereafter ... so it seems clear btw Saudi and the US who is the dog and who is the tail.)


So this is full circle from Atta, to Iran-Contra, and back to the Reagan-Bush White House and to the CIA a.k.a the Nazi Fourth Reich. WE all know that the CIA was born out of the Nazi SS, but there's no room for that whole story in this story.

Poppy Bush was the former CIA Director (and apparently joined the CIA right after Yale, though he claims it was a different Bush on Hoover's infamous but obscure 1963 memo entitled "Assassination of John F. Kennedy" --- a file clerk of the same name, and he claims this despite the fact that his father and grandfather both worked for the CIA Director Dulles. In other words, Poppy Bush lied about his CIA connection and service. (see www.jfkii.com for more info on that matter) This would connect the Sept 11 *web of intrigue* directly back to Poppy Bush.

(Several other events, such as Bush's lifelong family lawyer and business partner James A. Baker III getting legal immunity for the Saudis, and Poppy Bush's connection to other people tied to Sept 11 characters and to various lies, also ties the Sept 11 *web of intrigue* directly back to Poppy Bush in other ways. Poppy Bush, however, does not appear to be the top of the pyramid, though very close to it and a member of various "committees" on world affairs and clandestine/covert operations.)


A wavy line appears going from 9-11 to Venice to Iran-Contra and to the CIA and I think this appears to be a credible series of links.



And on top of that, Hilliard had a contract to repair planes for some CIA proprietary private company.


Hilliard's Huffman Aviation had a sister company at one point called Florida Air or Flair, but that was really a DBA owned by another company out of Utah, but that was also a shell and the real company was in Arizona, where it had received millions in Federal grants to set up a commuter airline for the elderly, yet it was never flew a single flight and the Flair company went bankrupt. Where did all the money go? Hmm.

Well all good conspiracy buffs know that it's a FACT that the CIA traditionally hides clandestine operations in "fronts" and "shell companies" and uses the corporate shell game and privacy laws to conceal it's operations. A CIA inspector once demanded an accounting of all these shell operations and/or planes, as I recall, but he was told that this answer was impossible. Too many rogue operations to count, and everything "off the books".

This information and other info paints "Huffman Aviation" as one of these "CIA proprietaries": criminals, drugs, financial crimes, violence, govt connections, layers of separation and plausible deniability. And so if they "hijackers" were training at a CIA proprietary ... well then, draw your obvious conclusions.

I forget the details but one of the links to Hilliard and Hilliard's business partners included Jackson Stevens, notorious attorney and CIA-soaked political player, who loaned vast sums to Bill Clinton's election effort (and who also loaned money to Sam Walton to expand Walmart). Turns out Stevens owns a nursing home in Venice, which operates as a nursing home, but is also a shell for CIA money laundering and covert operations. Stevens is also a partner in a law firm near the nursing home.

The reason that the "Flying Circus" is named as the title of the documentary, is that Ringling Brothers' (which was connected somehow to Stevens) was a combination of entertainment for kiddies and a CIA front, and it's located in Venice, Florida right near the nursing home, near Stevens law firm, near the Italian-American Club (a Mafia hangout) and near the Huffman flight school. Hopsicker added the useful anecdote the clowns taught sleight of hand to CIA, and Ringling also spied for CIA when the Circus went to Moscow.


So there is giant web of links between Hilliard and Organized Crime and Intelligence and also between Hilliard and the "Arab Hijackers", but also between the "Hijackers" and Republican cronies.

(In a later development, a taxicab driver told Hopsicker of another taxicab driver driving around Atta and Dekkers for lunch meetings, after a date when they had supposedly had no further contact, and the 2nd driver, who only worked there one week, had some type of high-level military or Intelligence background which would make him an unlikely cab driver, and more likely a govt operative -- like everyone else around them.)



As mentioned above, the gambling cruise ship:

Lobbyist Jack Abramoff used his influence with Tom Delay to push through a loan for his friends to buy a cruise ship. Adam Kidan and partners (devout militant Jews with Israeli ties, like Abramoff) either did not have or did not want to put down the required $23 million down payment. So they gave the owner Gus Boulis (who was trying to dump the thing because the IRS was after him) an IOU for $23 million, and Boulis signed some bogus affidavit to the lender that he got paid the down.

This little $23 million scam allowed Kidan and friends to get the loan and buy the boat, and it allowed Boulis to get rid of it.

Of course it is illegal as hell to knowingly falsify a lending application, and I imagine big lenders like the Blackstone Group don't play around with getting cheated like this, even by big shots. Jack Abramoff was deeply involved as a middleman. This implies that Tom Delay was also involved (almost certainly), but no official investigation has come up with anything on "the Hammer".

To conclude the gangster story, Gus Boulis got angry and started to demand payment of the missing $23 million. He got in a physical altercation with Kidan. He probably threatened him with legal action, a nasty mess. But when Boulis was later shot to death, Adam Kidan had a perfect alibi. He was in Israel. However, before Kidan left, he or one of his partners wrote two checks for a total of $20,000 for "catering services" -- catering which was never performed --- and the checks went to a former bodyguard for John Gotti (and the man's daughter). I wanted to get their number for next time I throw a soiree.

This is a paper trail of financial fraud, conspiracy, and murder which is nasty in and of itself, and is barometer of the health of our nation.


But moreso, this is the CHARACTER OF THE MEN who Atta and friends decided to spend their "last days" with, just a week or so before they "decided" to fly jetliners into buildings and meet Allah, to "strike back against the Great Satan", to "hate our freedoms", whatever you believed.


Needless to say, this is NOT credible, but assuming Hopsicker's right and they WERE on the ship, then they had a different role in the world of organized crime other than "holy war". They seem to be "extras" in a large clandestine operation.


One minor tidbit is the unconfirmed statement made by Mohamed Atta's professional-looking father in Egypt, that his son was ALIVE on Sept 12, apparently trying to hide, and was killed by Mossad. However his father had some shady connections, as I recall, but this MAY be true, or it may be a minor cover story. In addition, seven others of the nineteen hijackers have been interviewed -- alive -- in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere in 2001 or 2002, long after the Event.


One major tidbit is that Mohamed Atta's real name is Mohamed Atta-Elamir, with one or more additional middle names, as I recall. He began using "Mohamed Atta" later, as a cover, supposedly "after Able Danger began tracking him". One report I saw described his father's last name is Elamir. Another newspaper report detailed a cash loan, unsigned with no collateral, which Mohamed Atta made to a friend. In this article, the friend is quoted as saying "I don't know where Elamir got that money, but I wasn't asking questions."

With Mohamed Atta's last name established conclusively as "Elamir", this could suspiciously link him to an Egyptian doctor in New Jersey named Dr. Magdy Elamir -- but the Doctor has not been PROVEN to be his uncle or relative. Is anyone checking?

What's up with this Doctor Elamir? Well this doctor opened a brand new HMO, and despite a stunning LACK of experience, he got a huge govt slush fund in the form of a contract to process Medicaid or Medicare for New Jersey, 44,000 clients, some $60+ million a year in flow-through, as I recall. He got this despite (or because of?) known connections to Al-Qaeda or possibly Osama Bin Laden. (That is, to the Al-Qaeda Project of the USG.)

Anyhow, all Dr. Elamir had to do was keep records, get the money in and send it out, skimming his profits off the top, just like any HMO.

He began siphoning off money, stole $15 million of the State's money which was owed to hospitals and clinics. Dr. Elamir GOT CAUGHT .. of course, all this missing money, all these angry clients. He was up for both civil and criminal charges, and it was found that $6 million had been wired to an offshore account, unknown party. Part of the missing money was "found" or accounted for at least.

The court apparently believed that this money went to Al-Qaeda! (I'm not saying the court was not serious and alarmed about this, or maybe they just had to go thru motions, but in any case it seems clear that justice was attempted with regards to this doctor.)

Elamir's defense attorney got all these criminal charges dropped, AND his civil charges. Despite the fact that $6 million was never accounted for, the loss either fell to a) taxpayers or b) to other HMO's who were assigned joint responsibility to make up the difference, like a "pool". Dr. Magdy Elamir got to keep his fancy house and cars and other clinics, and got to KEEP the missing money, i.e. was not forced to come up with funds to repay it.

This fact of escaping an embezzlement conviction, that alone is incredible, let alone the Al-Qaeda connection.

What a lawyer, huh?!!!! The defense attorney in 1999 for this relatively 2-bit no-name doctor from Bergen County was the ace Federal Proscutor next to Ken Starr, Michael Chertoff, now Director of Homeland Security. This is a matter of public record and the public documents are available today.

This is insane, even from a non-Sept11 viewpoint. Why would he get off scot free? Why was he given the Medicaid slush fund in the first place, given his apparently lack of qualifications and experience with large fiscal dealings? And the biggest question, why would any Fed. Prosecutor, let alone Michael Chertoff, lend his weight to defending this guy AND put enough pressure on the courts to absolve him completely? Chertoff was "Whitewater". He presumably hadn't acted as a defense attorney for years. If he did, you'd expect his clients to have homes worth upwards of $10 million, not $1 million. And if Chertoff was a rogue lawyer, why did he get promoted to DHS? Didn't anyone screen him? If Hopsicker found it, surely THEY could have.

This is insane whether or not it's proven that Elamir is a relative of "the Mastermind", but it adds more flavor if he is.

In a separate story, Michael Chertoff was also one of the lead prosecutors in the 1993 WTC bombing case which named "Al-Qaeda" as the guilty party, and put several Arabs (Wahabbis?) in prison, as well as the lawyer who defended one of them. But the catch is that court transcripts which were publicly quoted and described in the NYT and LA Times revealed a scenario where the operation was entirely conceived, planned, and executed under the direction of an FBI informant who was an Egyptian Intelligence officer, who was taking orders (including the use of live explosives) directly from his FBI handlers. The convicted were described as mere patsies incapable of conceiving, planning, and executing this crime on their own, due to lack of intelligence and personal initiative.
The FBI later got the court to accept that this was merely a 'sting' operation that went just a wee little bit too far, despite the fact that the 'sting' were mostly incompetent and allegedly "retarded" or of very low IQ. So this is an outlying connection to Al-Qaeda (and Mohamed Atta) which involves gross dishonesty on the part of govt officials, and is part and parcel of the myth of MOOslim terrorists (see below for def. of MOOslim).



This is why I've been telling people, it's NOT a matter of "unanswered questions' around Sept 11. Hopsicker may pretend these are "unanswered questions', if he chooses. These are UNANSWERABLE QUESTIONS, except at the gallows. Chertoff is not going to answer these questions, EVER, and nobody in power above him is going to ask. That is, I seriously doubt that anyone in a position of responsibility will ever ask all the serious questions, and if someone ever does go beyond the limited hangout, I doubt they will remain alive long enough to pursue the question to it's conclusion. The only worthwhile caveat is that WE are in power over Michael Chertoff and WE can demand answers if enough of WE ever get it together to figure out what these questions are, and organize to demand answers.


OBVIOUSLY this "official story" or "stories" make no sense whatsover, no matter how you slice or dice them. These Arabs did NOT pull of Sept 11, and they were deep in Intelligence and organized crime, so they were either (a) shuttled away somewhere with plastic surgery or (b) killed. Probably (b) killed, because plastic surgery is expensive and life is cheap. Odds are they did not even know what was going on, or perhaps thought they were working for the govt on some 'sting', or perhaps they were just into gangsterism and moving narcotics with rich white Republicans and bit off more than they could chew. Mohamed Oswald.


If the Arabs didn't fly the planes (which everyone saw, and no Holograms) into the buildings, WHO FLEW THE PLANES? It makes a LOT more sense that this operation used remote control technology.
One, videos show that the military was able to fly and land and even intentionally crash planes, as far back as 1984. This is ONE part of Loose Change 2 which is accurate.
Two, the govt and media is pretending they still don't have that capability, though over in the military site they plainly show that they DO have it. Most recently, the military crossed the Pacific with an unmanned flight, so clearly it's possible to fly planes remotely, and so clearly they are LYING about the inability.
Three, remote control eliminates variables such as human error and sudden bouts of cowardice.


Remote control on Sept 11 cannot be proven yet, but it just FITS! And as I said, the denials and deception add more weight.


The facts and even these rumors-connected-to-facts --- despite how JUICY they are --- have been kept OUT of the mainstream media. The story itself is a Circus. It's wild, it's hairy, it's full of adventure. Yet not a peep from the same lurid media system which had round-the-clock fun with Monica Lewinsky and her cigar. Is it because the media scrupulously avoids unsubstantiated or partly-substantiated rumors until EVERY aspect can be proven? Of course not.

Needless to say, the FBI has also scrupulously avoided all these leads and clues, though they have the manpower and the power of subpeona and search warrants, while neither we nor Hopsicker have that power.

This fact of media silence and FBI silence is evidence of a conspiracy to cover up "the truth", and a coverup of this proportion is tantamount to GUILT. Not little guilt. Big guilt.

Note: The story of Mohamed Atta "the Man" is sparse and relies on the memories of his stripper girlfriend, the lingerie model who supposedly served prominent Floridians who required beatings and humiliation to get off sexually. While parts of this or even all of this may be true, I agree with the consensus here that this woman's story appears unreliable and overwrought. What remains is the most important parts of the story, the amazing web of links between the "hijackers" and politicians, govt officials, govt contractors, CIA contractors and associates and shells, and their shadowly acquaintances in the criminal underworld.

But Daniel: As accomplices, not authors.

Not every aspect of this story can be proven 100%, but with part of it told by a paper trail, and parts of told by provably false official statements, and other parts filled in by named or "anonymous" people (some on camera in the video), including various store clerks and managers and people with no apparent agenda, this story is a massive trail leading directly to a shadow indictment of "covert/clandestine Intelligence operations" and their accomplices all the way to the White House and --- more importantly --- ABOVE the White House.

Again, I say "shadow indictment" because I cannot imagine a real indictment where these people indict themselves, UNLESS it is preceded by powerful and conclusive "shadow indictment" by a body politic which is reawakened to remember their Rights and reject their subservience to "the authorities".

I think this is the ONLY reasonable conclusion about the Mohamed Atta story, which is only one angle in this whole saga of lies.

(I may edit this in the future to add details or clarify.) (There is FAR more details that Hopsicker unearthed over time, connections to San Diego, to Heaven's Gate, to other FBI informants in California, and even the fact that the "2nd guy" in OK City (and Iraqi named Al-Husseini) was seen at some motel which later hosted Atta and friends -- a "safe house" of some type. It's a bottomless pit, but at a certain point, more details obscure.)


Last edited by dilbert_g on Sun Sep 03, 2006 1:00 pm; edited 22 times in total
Back to top
Continuity



Joined: 16 Jul 2006
Posts: 1712
Location: Municipal Flat Block 18A, Linear North

PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 5:25 am    Post subject: It figgers... Reply with quote

It all figgers, especially after what Neo observed at the March 2003 9/11 convention in S.F.:

Quote:
So Hopsicker gets up on the podium, and the practically the first words out of his mouth were, “Any of you who want to talk to me about the video, I’ll be available afterwards, but don’t even bother if you’re going to tell me their weren’t Arab hijackers piloting those planes, and how the towers were brought down with controlled demolitions. I don’t want to hear any of that.” And then he gives a little intro about how he went down to Florida and talked to a bunch of cops, and then found this girlfriend of Mohammed’s, and la dee da. It was just a big giant joke. And anybody who’s even going to bring that rubbish to a discussion about 9/11 is obviously either not on your side, or not swift enough to matter one way or the other.


I think that's it with Hoppy - kind of a limited hangout line involving a load of players completely peripheral to the central events, but with enough detail and plausability to make everyone waste their time looking.

It's not that it's not *interesting* - that's the point IMHO, but it doesn't tell us *anything* about what happened on 9/11.

_________________
The rule for today.
Touch my tail, I shred your hand.
New rule tomorrow.

Cat Haiku
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
dilbert_g
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Aug 07, 2006 11:50 am    Post subject: SUMMARY, distilled Reply with quote

I think the Atta story -- what is KNOWN tells us sumpin'. It tells us, very simply, that

a) the guvmint is Lyin', cuz they ain't tellin' it all straight about them MOOslims.

(Lest there be any confusion, it shall stand here, that the word "Muslim" or "Moslem" shall represent an actual human being who is a believer in and/or member of one of the various branches of the Islamic faith. The word "MOOslim" shall represent a fictional entity created by the United States govt/media oligarchy as a totem to which they attach evil spirits and intent. A third category is people who belong to actual sects of Islam, or to sects which claim to be Islamic, which believe in strict totalitarian cultures and are prone to violence. I shall refer to them as Wahabbis, for lack of more detailed understanding of nuances. It shall be stated that "Wahabbis" are not accused in Sept 11, rather the Wahabbi govt ministers of Saudi Arabia received legal immunity from high US officials, and the Wahabbi-Taliban govt of Afghanistan were merely replaced with oil executives, and the Wahabbi govt in Pakistan has been transfigured to be "allies" in the War on Terror, though they were once (are) THE main conduit for arming and training Al-Qaeda Jihadist fighters. The Sept11 "hijackers" were this fictional branch of Islam called "MOOslims", which are claimed to be a combination of party-boy apostates and super-devout Wahabbis.)

b) the cited MOOslims are all connected to the guvmint, one way or a-nuther, most obviously by attending flight training (or "flight training") at a company which upon examination appears to be what is known as a "CIA proprietary", a shell or front company for clandestine/covert operations.

c) If the cited MOOslims are connected to the guvmint, then the guvmint did 9-11 even IF the MOOslims did fly (as do pigs). But in this scenario, the guvmint can wriggle and say "we wuzn't watchin' them MOOslims right" even tho they WERE watchin' them, officially with Able Danger and the FBI agents who testified they were on MOOslim watch, but the guvmint's given themselves a wrigglin hole they can try to wriggle out of.

d) If the cited MOOslims are connected up one side and down the other to guvmint folks, if their allies, contacts, and handlers were ALL guvmint folks -- OR guvmint folks one-step-removed --- as in Abramoff's partners, FBI informant, Jeb Bush's ole buddy, etc. --- and got various other police protection cited in the video, like local sheriffs who APPEAR to have purchased and "laundered" military helicopters for the CIA --- than at a certain point you say, "Well gosh-danged, those ARE the guvmint's MOOslims. The guvmint owned them."

e) But if we can give good reasons that the MOOslims never did fly those planes, and the guvmint cannot give ANY reasonable proof that the MOOslims did, and respond rationally to any of the sound objections that the MOOslims didn't, then that would mean that these MOOslims are the guvmint's MOOslim actors or patsies.

That second scenario is worse, by several magnitudes of LYING, although functionally, the difference between hiring MOOslim terrorists and hiring MOOslim terrorist actors seems an equally hangable offense to me.

Maybe this summary should have gone first. Should I put it up there first?

I did not know that Hoppy went so far as to say, "don’t even bother if you’re going to tell me their weren’t Arab hijackers piloting those planes ... ".

Obviously Hoppy is ignoring the several pieces of evidence which strongly suggest that the MOOslims were not/could not have been on them planes, evidence which is NOT arbitrary wishful thinking:
a) the character description of MOOslim radical fanatics is completely bogus, a creation of guvmint story-tellers
b) not on the passenger manifests
c) not capable of flying that stunt flight over the Pentagon

Explosives and Global Hawk aside, can anyone think of any other *specific evidence* that the MOOslims could not have been on them planes? If not, then a, b, and c are still sufficient reasons to DEMAND that the guvmint PROVE that the MOOslims WERE on the planes.

Unless I missed sumpin' here, the guvmint has NEVER provided anything resembling PROOF that the MOOslims were on the planes, only tall tales about MOOslims.

Can anyone think of any PROOF or EVIDENCE the guvmint has provided which can be addressed as either fictional or factual or contradictory?

As in good ole country moonshine, I'd say this is the distilled facts about the MOOslim terrorists.
Back to top
DeepLogos



Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 259
Location: Geostationary orbit around myself, sipping at a cup of DM Tea...

PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 6:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Regarding Mohammed (el-Amir Awad al Sayed) Atta and Flight 11:

The first photo is from Jet Tech gas station, Portland, Main, the following four are from Portland Airport. (notice the date on the first picture and the resemblace between the person in the first picture and the person in the blue shirt. The last four are supposed to be Atta, the first presented in the same gallery next to the others in RCFP's Moussaoui section)










(More photos: http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/ )

Here's a thing that has been confusing me a little bit, though...

I am sure I have heard an audio clip somewhere that was recorded from the cockpit of Flight 11... It was supposedly a brief recording of "Mohammed Atta's" voice instructing the passengers to stay quiet, and that they were going back to the airport. I think I have it in my audio library somwhere, and a general search produced no immediate links. It may have been from The Memory Hole I downloaded it, but I could find no references for the audio clip there now.

After reading that cockpit recordings from Flight 93 were played at the Moussaoui trial ( http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0412061hijack1.html ), I came to think about this.. It may be disinformation or a hoax, so if anyone has more info on this it would be great... If it has allready been discussed or proven to be a hoax, please accept my appologies.

I may be way off here, but as I can remember, a analysis of the voice proved that the accent was not Arabic, but rather with the spesific German/ Jiddish rolling 'r's. I know that Atta lived in Germany, but when speaking another foreign language the accent tends to be that of you native language. I can't help but think that, as with the cheering israelis watching the collapse of the twin towers, that this is a little too "good" to be true, and meant to divert attention (or rather spread attention). The Mossad part of the counter intelligence perhaps...

We know that Mossad is involved in many things, and most certainly took part ,in one way or the other, on the operative side of the 911 operation and the theatrics surrounding it before and after the actual execution of the plan. Many pieces of information (and common sense) proves this. The whole mess with inconsistent passengers lists was most certainly deliberate disinformation, most likely also the information that Flight 11 was't scheduled for flight that day. The rapidity with which the hijackers were identified, with "Mohammed Atta" as the ring leader, knowing that people would investigate this and find inconsistencies, probably was a part of the plan to blame it on poor intelligence (like the poor intelligence of the IDF in Lebanon these days [Bullocks!]), the list being created in advance to provide a semi-credible list of "evil-doers" to go with the coming managed 911 "investigation" (alternative, mainstream and official), Mohammed Atta being the one with most "history" to investigate (abroad and in the US), and hence a good candidate for public scrutiny. A "created" person for a created purpose...

The whole flight school/Atta/naval base/etc scenario reeks of narrative and managed disinformation, facts and fiction mixed together to "soft-focus" the truths about Atta.

So what do we know about Atta (generally)?:

1) He is a real person.
2) He has a "father" that claimed that he called him on the 12th of September 2001.
3) He has a commercial pilot license.
4) He has attended flight schools.
5) He had connections to official sources.
6) He played some kind of part in what was about to happen.
7) He has lived in Germany and the US.
8 ) He has been observed many times before 9/11-2001.
9) Nobody knows for certain what happend to him just before or on that day.
10 He is dead now.
(more...)

What do we not know about Atta?:

1) The specifics of his stay in the US
2) If he was observed on 9/11. (the photos above is not conclusive)
3) If the real Atta was on the plane.
4) If he hijacked the plane.
5) If air traffic control recorded anything from the cockpit (as stated earlier)
6) If his "father" in fact talked to him on the 9/12-2001.
7) If anyone supposedly connected to him in the US are speaking the truth.
(more...)

Many people has been investigating Atta, but if one investigates a partially created scenario, you most certainly get to know a lot about that scenario, but it is not neccessarily the truth, nor is it neccesarily the right point of focus.

The evidence about Mohammed Attas involvment is circumstantial, yet indicative of some sort of acting role, deliberate or not, though.

Since we at present cannot prove that he in fact boarded or hijacked the plane, even if someone bearing that name might have boarded the plane, we are at present only left with evidence that wouldn't prove either side of that particular aspect of the case.

What is needed to prove the government story regarding Mohammed Atta:
1) Clear CCTV footage (analysed) proving that the man on the widely distributed picture actually boarded the plane.
2) Actual recordings from the cockpit corresponding with recoded conversations Mohammed Atta has had previously (NSA archive Wink proving that he was in the cockpit.
3) Documents, documents, documents + money trails.
(Motive is provided through mainstream and official propaganda)

Needless to say this will never be provided, so we are left with circumstantial evidence, of which some of the most important aspects are how the information has been/are being used and by whom, not the actual information as it is presented or continue to grow by collective narration and official silence.

Mohammed Atta is of course more important in that he can lead us to the puppet masters. Establishing the motive for using Mohammed Atta as an essencial pawn, a captivating "story" as it is, is fairly easy. Stripping the Atta story of it's mythology and revealing what is of importance is more difficult. If he didn't hijack the plane or if he wasn't on, this is only important to disprove the government's Atta-story (corner them) and partially clear his name post mortem. Regardless, everything went mostly according to plan, and still does.

All in all I think it's a red herring, but he never the less is a post-operational ghost piper of some sort, rendering an investigation of the man an obviously neccesity. He may have played the flute, but he didn't make it...

_________________
"I'm pulling the plug on you now, Jmmanuel... I hope your resurrection ship is nearby..."

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Mona
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Aug 08, 2006 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Deep Logos,

I'm glad you posted those photos. I've always questioned how the government would think anyone would believe that was Atta. It doesn't look anything like other pictures that have been shown to us, ie. the famous mug shot. It sounds like you are uncertain.

I've pointed this out to other people, but I get no reaction. Does anyone else think this doesn't look anything like Atta? Also, how can they show a scene that is dated 11-10-01??
Back to top
DeepLogos



Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 259
Location: Geostationary orbit around myself, sipping at a cup of DM Tea...

PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 11:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

You are correct in assuming that I am uncertain, Mona. These picture does not look like Atta 'the mugshot', at least not conclusively. I'm not sure if these pictures represent the best quality of the CCTV footage, nor do I know the usual bitrate of that particular camera. It would be strange if they showed these pictures as conclusive proof of Atta's presence at the airport at that particular time, if they had better quality footage.

Another thing is the risk of taking this early flight from Maine if you were to hijack a plane that same day. What if the flight was postponed? If you consider the planning involved in pulling off one hijacking, let alone four or more, it wouldn't have jeopardized the entire operation by taking this flight, especially if he might have worked for the government. I also remember reading that the man on the picture was calm and casual (I'll have to check that), something that is unnatural if you are parttaking in an hijacking operation of this size (not that I know by experience though Wink).

Another thing, if the first picture is not Atta, and certainly not Moussaoui or any of the other highjackers, who is it, and why is it in the government exhibition next to the pictures of Atta? I f we are to asssume that the real Atta acually spoke with his "father" on the 12th of September 2001, is it likely that he would have survived in Maine until 11/10-2001? Given that he was most likely a patsy, having been trained in the US for seemingly other purposes that the "highjackings" of 9/11, this is highly unlikely. Killed as soon as possible is more likely. Killing someone known or famous, like Kennedy Jr or senator Wellstone, is risky; killing a Patsy like Atta is done without thinking twice. On the other hand many of the "hijackers" have been proven to be alive, which lends credence to the scenario that his identity was stolen and that he precious little to do with what happened on 9/11.

Then who is the man in the picture? Could this CCTV footage be staged? There doesn't seem to be that many people in any of the photos (it is early though). Is the man in the picture really an agent or an ordinary man with an unknowing part in the 9/11 theatre? Since I obviously don't buy into the Hopsicker story, allthough there might be some truth to it, the story of hookers, airbases, FBI assest and drugs being a little over the top as if pertains to the highjacking scenario, I can't escape the thought of there being two Attas, so to speak. One real, and one created for a purpose. Could the real Atta and maybe his cousin Marwan have been hired in for a purpose, maybe something to do with Amalgum Virgo or other exercises, where one of these exercises continued and became a reality? And does Moussaoui fit into this picture? After the disaster was a fact, the "created" Atta was fed to the media, and various researchers blended the real Atta with that of a determined highjacker and unknowingly they created the "mythological" Atta who drank heavily, hung out with hookers, attended flight school, visited navy bases, left his Quran in the bar and other stuff in the car, then pulled off a "perfect hijacking" in symphony with three other flights after gambeling with the entire chronology of the operation by taking an early flight from Maine. Come on! This reeks of narrative and quasi documentary...

It would be intersting to ask a Hollywood producer if he could have pulled off something like this, like in "Wag the Dog"! What always staggers me are people who say "They wouldn't do that? Not in a million years", and at that same time knowing what G8 policy, in colusion with big business and media, have done to the world around them, killing and maiming en masse. Of course they would do something like this, if it served them in the bigger picture. History clearly shows this. All the while the UN sings it siren song like Chris Rock says "That ain't right!", knowing very well that the organisation is as effective as brandy for the common cold.

In a thriller, Atta would be the guy everybody think did it, but the ending would show otherwise. The "producers" of 9/11 has of couse written the script of a never ending story (documentary). Even if many of the "highjackers" are found alive, the scitzo Atta will always represent the 'castle in the air' (no pun intended) of the story, and must be exposed as such. Separating fiction from faction as it pertains to Atta is the paramount task at hand here. I have rerun the scenario in my head many times, and two things always comes to mind; 1) Something ain't right, 2) I need more knowledge about it. Certainty and humbleness in determined communion.

(more later...)

-EAK-

_________________
"I'm pulling the plug on you now, Jmmanuel... I hope your resurrection ship is nearby..."

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Mona
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

To me, this is not Atta in these frames, pure and simple. This man doesn't have the same facial features. It should be argued that the government needs to prove that this is Atta by showing other pictures of him that match the man in these frames. Until it does, all involved in 9/11 Truth should publicize the discrepancy.

I don't think we ask enough of the government to prove it's case. We don't need to prove all these things, that's a dangerous route ... the gov needs to present the proof while we keep making noise about all that's wrong and doesn't make sense. We just need to insist that questions get answered.

and you should find out why the first picture (11-10-01) was presented to the grand jury? What is it about anyway?
Back to top
Ozregeneration



Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 479
Location: Big Island Down Under

PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mona wrote:
I don't think we ask enough of the government to prove it's case. We don't need to prove all these things, that's a dangerous route ... the gov needs to present the proof while we keep making noise about all that's wrong and doesn't make sense. We just need to insist that questions get answered.

Correct Mona, "He who affirms bares the burden of proof". Because the public is so dumbed down they rarely question what is put before them.

_________________
Choices For Your Soul
http://www.choicesforyoursoul.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mona
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 5:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Another thing, in the last two frames, why weren't we shown a view when the supposed Atta was closer to the camera, but not out of view as in the last one. Look at all the steps he took between view #3 and view #4. This in itself makes it clear they don't want us to get a good look at him.

This should be classed with the 5 Pentagon frames as evidence of the desire to mislead.
Back to top
DeepLogos



Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 259
Location: Geostationary orbit around myself, sipping at a cup of DM Tea...

PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 6:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mona wrote:
Another thing, in the last two frames, why weren't we shown a view when the supposed Atta was closer to the camera, but not out of view as in the last one. Look at all the steps he took between view #3 and view #4. This in itself makes it clear they don't want us to get a good look at him.

This should be classed with the 5 Pentagon frames as evidence of the desire to mislead.


I most certainly agree Mona, this is not evidence but misdirection. If I dyed my hair, it would look like me too. One more frame in the Pentagon "film" showing an aircraft, and they could have used that as proof of flight 77 hitting the building. All this goes to show that there is something they want to hide. Their behaviour is strange, and they know it. That troubbles me.

As to the recording from the cockpit of flight 11 as I eluded to in my first post in this thread, I found a transcript of it. I am still sure I have head this spoken and that the english accent was not that of an arab, but rather more jiddish/german. I also remember reading about a voice analysis claiming the same. I'll have to look further.

I may well be that this recording is a hoax as well, I just want to hear it again.

Quote:
American Flight 11

Boston to Los Angeles (crashed into north tower of World Trade Centre)

8.00 Plane takes off from Logan international airport, Boston.

8.13 Boston control centre: "AAL11 turn 20 degrees right."

Pilot of AAL11: "20 right AAL11."

Controller: "AAL11 now climb maintain FL350 [35,000 feet]."

Controller: "AAL11 climb maintain FL350."

Controller: "AAL11 Boston."

8.14:33 Controller A: "AAL11 ah the American on the frequency how do you hear me?"

Controller B breaks in: "This is Athens."

A: "This is Boston. I turned American 20 left and I was going to climb him. He will not respond to me now at all."

B: "Looks like he's turning right."

A: "Yeah, I turned him right."

B: "Oh, OK."

A: "And he's only going to um I think 29."

B: "Sure that's fine."

A: "Eh, but I'm not talking to him."

B: "He won't answer you. He's nordo [no radar] roger. Thanks."

8.24:38 Hijackers' voices heard: "We have some planes. Just stay quiet and you will be OK. We are returning to the airport. Nobody move, everything will be OK. If you try to make any moves you'll endanger yourself and the airplane. Just stay quiet."

8.25:00 The control tower notifies several air traffic control centres that a hijack is taking place.

8.33:59 Hijackers' voices heard: "Nobody move, please, we are going back to the airport. Don't try to make any stupid moves."

8.47:00 Plane crashes into the north tower of the World Trade Centre


http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,575518,00.html

-EAK-

_________________
"I'm pulling the plug on you now, Jmmanuel... I hope your resurrection ship is nearby..."

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
DeepLogos



Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 259
Location: Geostationary orbit around myself, sipping at a cup of DM Tea...

PostPosted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 3:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Prague Connection?

Some people on the net, in an effort to tie Saddam Hussain to the 9/11 operation and justify the war, claim that the picture below is Mohamed Atta, at least one of them... Wink I have included them in my effort to establish who he is, and to point out inconsistencies:

1) From The X-Report:

This is the mugshot we all have been indoctrinated with:



Now who is this man? John Holmes? Atta in the 70'? Looks a bit like my father's wedding picture:



Saddam's intelligence official Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani meeting with "Atta" in Prague:



(Comment: If anybody have seen a picture of a moose here, I have no explanation for it. The URL for the picture on The X Report must suddenly have changed. I have no explanation for it. Weird! I had to substitute it with a picture of lower quality from somewhere else.)

I refer you to http://www.thexreport.com to check this out

How did X-Report reach this conclusion?:

Quote:
This picture was taken during the winter of 2000. The person on the left I believe is Atta and the person on the right was, Saddam's intelligence official Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani who was stationed in Prague before he was expelled from the Czech Republic in 2001.

Anyone with good eyes can see the moles located just to the right of the eyebrow (Atta's right hand side) in the large picture that was taken in Prague matches with the moles in the smaller driver license photo's above.

Case closed.

TW 04/04/2006

How I arrived at my conclusion First, I found a passport photo that was plastered all over the net and made a copy. I then compared the facial structure of Mohamed Atta's passport photo to the picture taken in Prague. What I have concluded is the following. 1) the hairlines are exactly the same. 2) the raised eyebrow bone structure is the same as the Prague picture below. 3) the recessed eyes exist in both pictures, both show shadows from being recessed. 4) the nose on both pictures appear to have the same shape and size. 5) the upper lip extrudes over the lower lip on both pictures. 6) the ears on both pictures appear to have the same shape as well as dimensions and placement on the head when compared. 7) upon magnification of the photo's, I determined that the adams apple located on the neck of both pictures appear to be identical both is size and shape. 8 ) the bottom of the jaw bone appears to have the same shape with the only difference being that in the passport photo, he had his head cocked back whereas in the Prague photo he was looking down at AL-ANI. 9) I then copied a second passport photo and applied a mustache (see below) and I then definitely came to the conclusion that this was Mohamed Atta in the photo taken in Prague. I drew this conclusion on my own. No one, told me that. TW 10/22/2002


I cannot see the apparent resemblance. The man in the picture is too thin.

2) This picture is of Atta when he was young. Here I can see the resemblance with the mugshot (Source: MadCowProd):



3) As it pertains to the Flight 11 "highjackers":
The Unjust Media wrote:
Abdulaziz Al-Omari: Possible Saudi national. Dates of birth used: Dec. 24, 1972 and May 28, 1979. Possible residence: Hollywood, Fla. Believed to be a pilot.



On 10 September 2001 Atta and Al-Omari were photographed by a Fast Green ATM located in the parking lot of UNO's restaurant, 280 Maine Mall Road, South Portland, Maine [FBI press release]. Here's the ATM photograph issued by the FBI:



If you compare the above photographs released by the FBI you'll see they show the same person. The problem is they don't show Abdulaziz Al-Omari because he is still alive.

'"I couldn't believe it when the FBI put me on their list. They gave my name and my date of birth, but I am not a suicide bomber. I am here. I am alive. I have no idea how to fly a plane. I had nothing to do with this."

Mr Al-Omari said his passport was stolen when his apartment in Denver, Colorado, was burgled in 1995. He had been studying engineering at Denver University since 1993. He was given a new passport in Riyadh on December 31, 1995 and returned to America to resume his studies in January 1996.' [Telegraph]

Why isn't the FBI seeking the true identity of the person shown above?


The picture above clearly show the two persons together. Atta also looks like the mugshot. The CCTV from Logan Airport is still inconclusive (I will need to see it in motion with all frames present), but the man in the picture above does vaguely resemble the man behind "Atta" at the airport in the picture below. He also seems to be wearing the same shirt.



For reference:

Wikipedia wrote:

The wrongly accused Abdul Rahman al-Omari, photographed after the 9/11 attacks.

On September 10, Mohamed Atta al Sayed picked up Omari from the Milner Hotel in Boston, Massachusetts, and the two drove their rented Nissan to a Comfort Inn in South Portland, Maine, where they spent the night in room 232 for unknown reasons, although it was within sight of Portland International Jetport. It was initially reported that Adnan and Ameer Bukhari were the two hijackers who had rented and driven the car.

The two spent their last night pursuing ordinary activities: making an ATM withdrawal, a shared meal at Pizza Hut, and a 20-minute stop at Wal-Mart.

In the early morning hours of September 11, they boarded a commuter flight to Boston to connect to American Airlines Flight 11. al-Omari's luggage never made the connection onto Flight 11, which resuletd in his passport and belongings being found after the attacks. On Flight 11, al-Omari helped hijack the plane, and assisted Mohamed Atta al Sayed in crashing it into the World Trade Center part of an attack that killed thousands of people.

(...)

Controversy over al-Omari's identity erupted shortly after the attacks. At first, the FBI had named Abdul Rahman al-Omari, a pilot for Saudi Arabian Airlines, as the pilot of Flight 11. It was quickly shown that this person was still alive, and the FBI issued an apology. It was also quickly determined that Mohamed Atta was the pilot among the hijackers. The FBI then named Abdulaziz al-Omari as a hijacker.

A man with the same name as those given by the FBI turned up alive in Saudi Arabia, saying that he had studied at the University of Denver and his passport was stolen there in 1995. The name, origin, birth date, and occupation were released by the FBI, but the picture was not of him. "I couldn't believe it when the FBI put me on their list", he said. "They gave my name and my date of birth, but I am not a suicide bomber. I am here. I am alive. I have no idea how to fly a plane. I had nothing to do with this." [3][4][5] This individual was not the same person as the hijacker whose identity was later confirmed by Saudi government interviews with his family, according to the 9/11 Commission Report.


What is strange is that the man behind "Atta" in the picture below (as said before, look at the date) also vaguely looks like Al Omari. (by no means conclusively), and he too seems to be wearing the same kind of shirt. Is that date on the CCTV camera fucked up, or did both "highjackers" survive Flight 11?



This picture shows the same man leaving a suicide message (source: Al Jazeera), or is it him? I havent seen the footage, nor read any transcript from it.



I am left with the feeling that the two of them did something that day, and that official sources not only had them under survelliance but failed (cover story), but that they were employed to do something relating maybe to an exercise taking place that day.

Two possibilities present themselves:
1) They didn't know that the exercise would go live.
2) They were employed in another capacity, and never boarded the plane that crashed into the north tower (and then was framed and possibly killed)

That they can caugh up footage from Logan airport, and not from Boston boarding Flight 11, is enough for now to counter the officia story and ask that they present the evidence for their claims.

(more later...)

_________________
"I'm pulling the plug on you now, Jmmanuel... I hope your resurrection ship is nearby..."

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.