When will FBI agents create their next Terrorist Event.

[msfreeh]

http://whowhatwhy.com/2014/06/27/fbi-ha ... 1-mystery/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

FBI Hanky-Panky on Guantanamo—Part of Larger 9/11 Mystery?
By Russ Baker on Jun 27, 2014
FBI Hanky-Panky on Guantanamo—Part of Larger 9/11 Mystery?

Something strange is going on between the FBI and the defense team that represents Guantanamo inmates who are being prosecuted in connection with 9/11.

[msfreeh]

http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/ ... og5U.email" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



EXCLUSIVE: FBI had human source in contact with bin Laden as far back as 1993
U.S. learned of plans to finance terror attacks

By Guy Taylor and John Solomon

-

The Washington Times

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

Old Enemy: Osama bin Laden told an FBI source in 1993 that he was looking to finance terrorist attacks on U.S. soil. (Associated Press)

Enlarge Photo
Old Enemy: Osama bin Laden told an FBI source in 1993 that ... more >

Photo Gallery:

FBI documents

12 PhotosFBI documents



EXCLUSIVE:

In a revelation missing from the official investigations of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the FBI placed a human source in direct contact with Osama bin Laden in 1993 and ascertained that the al Qaeda leader was looking to finance terrorist attacks in the United States, according to court testimony in a little-noticed employment dispute case.

SEE ALSO: Special congressional panel to investigate FBI contact with bin Laden

The information the FBI gleaned back then was so specific that it helped thwart a terrorist plot against a Masonic lodge in Los Angeles, the court records reviewed by The Washington Times show.

“It was the only source I know in the bureau where we had a source right in al Qaeda, directly involved,” Edward J. Curran, a former top official in the FBI’s Los Angeles office, told the court in support of a discrimination lawsuit filed against the bureau by his former agent Bassem Youssef.

Mr. Curran gave the testimony in 2010 to an essentially empty courtroom, and thus it escaped notice from the media or terrorism specialists. The Times was recently alerted to the existence of the testimony while working on a broader report about al Qaeda’s origins.

Members of the Sept. 11 commission, congressional intelligence committees and terrorism analysts told The Times they are floored that the information is just now emerging publicly and that it raises questions about what else Americans might not have been told about the origins of al Qaeda and its early interest in attacking the United States.

“I think it raises a lot of questions about why that information didn’t become public and why the 9/11 Commission or the congressional intelligence committees weren’t told about it,” said former Rep. Peter Hoekstra, Michigan Republican, who chaired the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence from 2004 through 2007 when lawmakers dealt with the fallout from the 9/11 Commission’s official report.

“This is just one more of these examples that will go into the conspiracy theorists’ notebooks, who say the authorities are not telling us everything,” Mr. Hoekstra told The Times in an interview last week. “That’s bad for the intelligence community. It’s bad for law enforcement and it’s bad for government.”

Former Rep. Lee Hamilton, an Indiana Democrat who co-chaired the 9/11 Commission with former New Jersey Gov. Thomas Kean, said that as far as he can remember, the FBI never told the commission that it had been working a source so close to bin Laden that many years before 9/11.

“I do not recall the FBI advising us of a direct contact with Osama bin Laden,” Mr. Hamilton told The Times in a recent interview.

Exactly how the information was omitted from the various congressional reviews and the 9/11 Commission report is a mystery. FBI officials and staff involved in the review said they couldn’t determine definitely so many years later whether the information was kept from the various investigations or whether it was simply overlooked by staff in the thousands of pages of documents and electronic records made available during the exhaustive reviews of al Qaeda’s history.

“Both the commission and the U.S. government compiled a fair amount of evidence about the activities of the set of groups later best known as al Qaeda during [the early-1990s], when the group was settling into Sudan. We did not delve as deeply in this period because it was so distant from the plotting that led directly to the 9/11 attack,” said Philip Zelikow, who served as the 9/11 Commission’s executive director and now teaches history at the University of Virginia.

Like Mr. Hamilton, Mr. Zelikow said he does not recall ever being told by the FBI about the 1993 source and that Mr. Curran’s disclosure appeared to involve “valuable intelligence gathered in 1993 and 1994.”

But Mr. Zelikow cautioned against reading too deeply into the revelation, asserting that bin Laden’s activities that long ago would be viewed as “pretty attenuated in relation to 9/11.”

FBI officials told The Times that the bureau could not say for certain that its agents specifically briefed the 9/11 Commission about the 1993 asset or plot but was proud that it gave unfettered access to its records to the various investigators.

[BroJones]

“I think it raises a lot of questions about why that information didn’t become public and why the 9/11 Commission or the congressional intelligence committees weren’t told about it,” said former Rep. Peter Hoekstra, Michigan Republican, who chaired the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence from 2004 through 2007 when lawmakers dealt with the fallout from the 9/11 Commission’s official report.

“This is just one more of these examples that will go into the conspiracy theorists’ notebooks, who say the authorities are not telling us everything,” Mr. Hoekstra told The Times in an interview last week

PS - they're not...

[freedomforall]

“I think it raises a lot of questions about why that information didn’t become public and why the 9/11 Commission or the congressional intelligence committees weren’t told about it,” said former Rep. Peter Hoekstra, Michigan Republican, who chaired the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence from 2004 through 2007 when lawmakers dealt with the fallout from the 9/11 Commission’s official report.

“This is just one more of these examples that will go into the conspiracy theorists’ notebooks, who say the authorities are not telling us everything,” Mr. Hoekstra told The Times in an interview last week

PS - they're not...

When will people finally understand that the globalists will do anything and everything to pull wool over the eyes of America.
The warning in the Book of Mormon to watch for and avoid getting tangled up in secret combinations and evil practices wasn't written for us, in our day, for nothing.
i wonder how many people have read "An Enemy Hath Done This" by Ezra Taft Benson. He didn't write the book just as a pasttime, or for the mere fun of it.
Conspiracy exists, big time. Now false flag operations are a huge part of it, including the deaths of many Americans entangled within them. The globalists could care less, their goal is one od destruction and chaos until they get comp[lete control.
Even the puppets used for the means of accomplishing the false flags and other evil, are eliminated when the use of them is expired.

SEE:
http://www.ldsfreedomnetwork.com/none-d ... piracy.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[msfreeh]

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Victoria Ashley, STJ911 committee member
Phone: 510-769-5109
Site: http://www.STJ911.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Email: [email protected]
Study: Scientists Discover Active Thermitic Material in WTC Dust

Berkeley, CA, April 3, 2009 -- A new study by independent scientists and researchers suggests the cause behind the catastrophic destruction of World Trade Center Towers on September 11th can be seen in the dust itself: active thermitic material, a highly engineered explosive.

The study, published today in The Open Chemical Physics Journal, describes a finding of "red/gray bi-layered chips" in samples of dust taken from vicinity of the World Trade Center following its destruction. Using tools such as a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and x-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS) to analyze the material, the study authors concluded that, "the red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic."

The study's finding lends new support to the demolition theory put forth by critics of the official reports.

At a time when the American public is finding it difficult to understand the full story behind the current economic crisis, findings of a demolition raise new questions about how the 'War on Terror' -- an enormous source of recent American spending -- was started.

Officials with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), charged with establishing the cause of the buildings' destruction, have stated that they "did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel," and that thermite, "or another incendiary compound," would be too difficult to have placed in the buildings without notice.

NIST has stated that such difficulties make demolition unlikely. They concluded that aircraft impacts and the subsequent fires led to the building failures.

Dr. Steven Jones, physicist and author on the paper, says that NIST has refused to test the dust for thermite, super-thermite, or any other accelerant or explosive.

"We've repeatedly asked them to follow standard investigative procedure, to perform these tests and release the results. They haven't."

Jones says such tests may be required by fire protection codes.

Kevin Ryan, chemist and co-author on the paper, explained why he thinks NIST is wrong. "What we've discovered is not conventional thermite -- which is what NIST continues to refer to -- but a highly engineered thermitic material, or 'super thermite', probably designed for just this type of application."

Pre-planned demolition, supporters say, is the 'best-fit' model for the many unusual and unexplained characteristics of the building failures, such as the speed and symmetry of the collapses, and the extreme pulverization of the materials leading to clouds of micron-sized dust particles, described in one insurance report as behaving similar to a "volcanic eruption".

"One of the unusual features that piqued my interest," Jones said, "was the pools of molten metal seen in all three rubble piles, WTC 1, 2 & 7."

NIST officials have published a response stating that the condition of the steel was "irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse."

Jones, formerly a Professor of Physics with Brigham Young University and known for his work in muon-catalyzed fusion, published in Nature, Scientific American, and the Journal of Physical Chemistry, began researching the 9/11/01 attacks in 2005.

Jones discovered the curious thermitic material in 2007, when he ran a magnet over a dust sample given to him by a Manhattan resident survivor of the attack, and found that some particles were attracted to the magnet.

"That was very odd to me," he said.

Those particles turned out to be iron-rich microspheres, partially described in a 2001 USGS study of the dust.

But to fully analyze, describe and report on the thermitic material would take longer.

Jones was joined in that effort by several others including Dr. Niels Harrit, a chemistry professor with the University of Copenhagen for over 30 years and author of numerous research papers in journals such as Nano Letters, the Journal of the American Chemistry Society, and the Journal of Physical Chemistry A.

Harrit says that he is frequently asked why he researches the September 11th attack. and says has two answers.

"First, I am opposed to crime, and second, when my 6 grandchildren ask me, 'Grandfather, which side were you on?' I will be able to answer them, 'I was on your side'."

Co-author Dr. Jeffrey Farrer, a materials scientist and Director of the TEM (Transmition Electron Microscopy) laboratory at BYU, says he hopes the paper will "change the way the 9/11 truth movement is viewed by the mainstream public and media."

And chemist and co-author Kevin Ryan, a former Underwriters Laboratories manager, challenged the NIST report in public statements in 2004, and was consequently fired.

"This finding really goes beyond anything that has previously been shown," says Jones. "We had to use sophisticated tools to analyze the dust because this isn't just a typical explosive, RDX or CD4 or something -- this is a highly engineered material not readily available to just anyone."

In a 2006 interview with Deseret News, Jones noted that commercial explosives must contain tag elements for traceability, but that no law requires tagging of advanced forms of thermitics.

In 2008, several of these authors published three articles challenging the official reports in US scientific journals, The Open Civil Engineering Journal, The Environmentalist, and The Journal of Engineering Mechanics Dozens of other papers making similar challenges have been published in the sister publication of the Scholars group, The Journal of 9/11 Studies

Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice is a non-partisan organization of over 700 independent researchers analyzing the September 11, 2001 attacks with a strong emphasis on the scientific method.

For information: http://www.stj911.com" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; or
Contact: [email protected]
Phone: 510-769-5109

[msfreeh]

SURVEY


9 out of 10 FBI Informants surveyed feel normal after setting off
nano thermetic exolosives like used by the FBI in the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center during 911
Well the question Dr Jones needs to answer is
Was Tsarnaev a FBI informant?

Was Tsarnaev acting normal because he did
not create the Boston Marathon bombing?

Why has Dr Jones not given a lie detector test
to Lee Harvey Tsarnaev?




http://homenewshere.com/news/state/arti ... 963f4.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Ex-roommate: Tsarnaev seemed normal after bombings

Story
Comments

Boston Marathon Suspects Friends

HOPD
Boston Marathon Suspects Friends

In this undated law enforcement agency photo released by the U.S. Attorney's Office and presented as evidence Tuesday, July 8, 2014, during the trial of Azamat Tazhayakov in U.S. District Court in Boston, name tags are affixed to the former dorm room door of Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev at the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth. Tazhayakov, a friend of Tsarnaev, is on trial on obstruction of justice charges, accused with another friend of removing items from Tsarnaev's dorm room. He is not charged with participating in the bombing or knowing about it in advance. (AP Photo/U.S. Attorney's Office)

Posted: Wednesday, July 9, 2014 11:51 am

By DENISE LAVOIE AP Legal Affairs Writer | 0 comments

BOSTON (AP) — Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did not seem nervous or agitated in the days after the deadly attack, his former college roommate testified Tuesday during the trial of a Tsarnaev friend accused of obstructing the investigation.

In the few days after the April 2013 bombing, Andrew Dwinells said, Tsarnaev spent much of his time the same way he always did: sleeping, texting and going on his computer.

"He slept a little bit more, but that was it," Dwinells said.

Dwinells' testimony came during the trial of Azamat Tazhayakov, who is accused with another friend, Dias Kadyrbayev, of removing items from Tsarnaev's University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth dorm room three days after the bombings and hours after the FBI posted video and photos of Tsarnaev as a suspect.

His description of Tsarnaev's behavior after the bombings was elicited by Tazhayakov's attorneys during cross-examination and appeared designed to underscore the defense's contention that none of the people who knew Tsarnaev — including Tazhayakov — had any idea that Tsarnaev was a suspect in the bombings until after the FBI released his photo.

During questioning by prosecutors, Dwinells said he and Tsarnaev shared a room but didn't talk much and never socialized together.

Dwinells described the night of April 18, 2013, when prosecutors say Tazhayakov, Kadyrbayev and another friend went to Tsarnaev's dorm room after Tsarnaev texted Kadyrbayev and said they could "take what's there."

Dwinells said a man he later learned was Kadyrbayev "said he needed to get into the room to get something."

After getting a small bag of marijuana out of a desk drawer, Kadyrbayev continued to look around the room for another 10 minutes, but Dwinells said he did not see any other items being taken. Dwinells said the other men — Tazhayakov and Robel Phillipos — sat down and watched TV while Kadyrbayev searched the room.

Prosecutors contend that Tazhayakov agreed with Kadyrbayev's plan to take a backpack containing altered fireworks and to throw away the items to protect Tsarnaev.

Tazhayakov's lawyers insist that he sat passively in the dorm room while Kadyrbayev took the backpack and did not participate in the decision to throw it away.

Two bombs placed near the marathon finish line killed three people and injured more than 260.

In other testimony Tuesday, an FBI agent said Tazhayakov initially denied knowing what was in Tsarnaev's backpack but eventually said he saw fireworks that appeared to have been emptied of powder.

Agent Sara Wood said he told her he said "I agree" when Kadyrbayev suggested throwing away the backpack.

During cross-examination by Tazhayakov's lawyer, Wood acknowledged that Tazhayakov told her it was Kadyrbayev who actually took the backpack and threw it away.

Ex-roommate: Tsarnaev seemed normal after bombings



Boston Marathon Suspects Friends

HOPD
Boston Marathon Suspects Friends

In this undated law enforcement agency photo released by the U.S. Attorney's Office and presented as evidence Tuesday, July 8, 2014, during the trial of Azamat Tazhayakov in U.S. District Court in Boston, name tags are affixed to the former dorm room door of Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev at the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth. Tazhayakov, a friend of Tsarnaev, is on trial on obstruction of justice charges, accused with another friend of removing items from Tsarnaev's dorm room. He is not charged with participating in the bombing or knowing about it in advance. (AP Photo/U.S. Attorney's Office)

Posted: Wednesday, July 9, 2014 11:51 am

By DENISE LAVOIE AP Legal Affairs Writer | 0 comments

BOSTON (AP) — Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did not seem nervous or agitated in the days after the deadly attack, his former college roommate testified Tuesday during the trial of a Tsarnaev friend accused of obstructing the investigation.

In the few days after the April 2013 bombing, Andrew Dwinells said, Tsarnaev spent much of his time the same way he always did: sleeping, texting and going on his computer.

"He slept a little bit more, but that was it," Dwinells said.

Dwinells' testimony came during the trial of Azamat Tazhayakov, who is accused with another friend, Dias Kadyrbayev, of removing items from Tsarnaev's University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth dorm room three days after the bombings and hours after the FBI posted video and photos of Tsarnaev as a suspect.

His description of Tsarnaev's behavior after the bombings was elicited by Tazhayakov's attorneys during cross-examination and appeared designed to underscore the defense's contention that none of the people who knew Tsarnaev — including Tazhayakov — had any idea that Tsarnaev was a suspect in the bombings until after the FBI released his photo.

During questioning by prosecutors, Dwinells said he and Tsarnaev shared a room but didn't talk much and never socialized together.

Dwinells described the night of April 18, 2013, when prosecutors say Tazhayakov, Kadyrbayev and another friend went to Tsarnaev's dorm room after Tsarnaev texted Kadyrbayev and said they could "take what's there."

Dwinells said a man he later learned was Kadyrbayev "said he needed to get into the room to get something."

After getting a small bag of marijuana out of a desk drawer, Kadyrbayev continued to look around the room for another 10 minutes, but Dwinells said he did not see any other items being taken. Dwinells said the other men — Tazhayakov and Robel Phillipos — sat down and watched TV while Kadyrbayev searched the room.

Prosecutors contend that Tazhayakov agreed with Kadyrbayev's plan to take a backpack containing altered fireworks and to throw away the items to protect Tsarnaev.

Tazhayakov's lawyers insist that he sat passively in the dorm room while Kadyrbayev took the backpack and did not participate in the decision to throw it away.

Two bombs placed near the marathon finish line killed three people and injured more than 260.

In other testimony Tuesday, an FBI agent said Tazhayakov initially denied knowing what was in Tsarnaev's backpack but eventually said he saw fireworks that appeared to have been emptied of powder.

Agent Sara Wood said he told her he said "I agree" when Kadyrbayev suggested throwing away the backpack.

During cross-examination by Tazhayakov's lawyer, Wood acknowledged that Tazhayakov told her it was Kadyrbayev who actually took the backpack and threw it away.

In this undated law enforcement agency photo released by the U.S. Attorney's Office and presented as evidence Tuesday, July 8, 2014, during the trial of Azamat Tazhayakov in U.S. District Court in Boston, name tags are affixed to the former dorm room door of Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev at the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth. Tazhayakov, a friend of Tsarnaev, is on trial on obstruction of justice charges, accused with another friend of removing items from Tsarnaev's dorm room. He is not charged with participating in the bombing or knowing about it in advance. (AP Photo/U.S. Attorney's Office)

Posted: Wednesday, July 9, 2014 11:51 am

By DENISE LAVOIE AP Legal Affairs Writer | 0 comments

BOSTON (AP) — Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev did not seem nervous or agitated in the days after the deadly attack, his former college roommate testified Tuesday during the trial of a Tsarnaev friend accused of obstructing the investigation.

In the few days after the April 2013 bombing, Andrew Dwinells said, Tsarnaev spent much of his time the same way he always did: sleeping, texting and going on his computer.

"He slept a little bit more, but that was it," Dwinells said.

Dwinells' testimony came during the trial of Azamat Tazhayakov, who is accused with another friend, Dias Kadyrbayev, of removing items from Tsarnaev's University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth dorm room three days after the bombings and hours after the FBI posted video and photos of Tsarnaev as a suspect.

His description of Tsarnaev's behavior after the bombings was elicited by Tazhayakov's attorneys during cross-examination and appeared designed to underscore the defense's contention that none of the people who knew Tsarnaev — including Tazhayakov — had any idea that Tsarnaev was a suspect in the bombings until after the FBI released his photo.

During questioning by prosecutors, Dwinells said he and Tsarnaev shared a room but didn't talk much and never socialized together.

Dwinells described the night of April 18, 2013, when prosecutors say Tazhayakov, Kadyrbayev and another friend went to Tsarnaev's dorm room after Tsarnaev texted Kadyrbayev and said they could "take what's there."

Dwinells said a man he later learned was Kadyrbayev "said he needed to get into the room to get something."

After getting a small bag of marijuana out of a desk drawer, Kadyrbayev continued to look around the room for another 10 minutes, but Dwinells said he did not see any other items being taken. Dwinells said the other men — Tazhayakov and Robel Phillipos — sat down and watched TV while Kadyrbayev searched the room.

Prosecutors contend that Tazhayakov agreed with Kadyrbayev's plan to take a backpack containing altered fireworks and to throw away the items to protect Tsarnaev.

Tazhayakov's lawyers insist that he sat passively in the dorm room while Kadyrbayev took the backpack and did not participate in the decision to throw it away.

Two bombs placed near the marathon finish line killed three people and injured more than 260.

In other testimony Tuesday, an FBI agent said Tazhayakov initially denied knowing what was in Tsarnaev's backpack but eventually said he saw fireworks that appeared to have been emptied of powder.

Agent Sara Wood said he told her he said "I agree" when Kadyrbayev suggested throwing away the backpack.

During cross-examination by Tazhayakov's lawyer, Wood acknowledged that Tazhayakov told her it was Kadyrbayev who actually took the backpack and threw it away.

[msfreeh]

http://whowhatwhy.com/2014/07/10/four-i ... g-account/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


FRESH TAKES | news, content and perspective you might not find elsewhere
Four in Ten Bostonians Skeptical of Official Marathon Bombing Account
Print This Post Print This Post
By James Henry on Jul 10, 2014
Dzohkhar Tsarnaev in 2010.

Dzohkhar Tsarnaev in 2010.

A recent poll conducted by Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s defense team, part of an effort to force a change of venue for his trial, found that a majority of Bostonians—58 percent—are already convinced the accused Marathon bomber is “definitely guilty.”

That may be persuasive to the presiding judge. But what’s perhaps more interesting is that the poll found a sizable number of Boston residents—42 percent—are still “unsure,” indicating that even the population with the closest proximity to the April 15, 2013, act of terrorism still harbor doubts about the “official” version of events.

Without seeing the evidence the government claims to have of the younger Tsarnaev’s guilt, and due to many anomalies and lingering questions about the bombing and its aftermath, we’re siding with the 42 percent who just aren’t sure yet.

Kevin Cullen of the Boston Globe recently expressed surprise about the poll’s results in a column in which he wrote: “Call me Pollyanna, but I’m shocked they were able to find the 42 percent who don’t think he’s guilty.” While people answering that they’re unsure about Tsarnaev’s guilt isn’t the same as thinking he’s innocent, it does reflect a substantial feeling that the jury is still out in many Bostonians’ minds.

Cullen’s surprise makes sense when one considers the nature of the event, with its gut-wrenching imagery and suspenseful days-long manhunt. After an experience like that, it’s understandable that Bostonians would want someone to hang.

And from the beginning, law-enforcement along with the vast majority of the media have implied that the evidence against Tsarnaev is so airtight, and that his guilt is so self-evident, that it’s bordering on the absurd to assert some things in the official version may not be exactly as we’ve been told.

You Can’t Fool All the People All the Time

The problem, as 42 percent of Bostonians apparently recognize, is that nobody has seen any evidence of Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s involvement in the actual bombing. It appears to many that there is likely more to this story than the simplistic, “self-radicalized lone wolves” yarn being spun by law enforcement and the mainstream media.

It does appear that these brothers were somehow involved in the violence. However, serious doubts remain with the government’s version of events.

We’ve been told that the brothers:

• Built, placed and detonated the “highly sophisticated” bombs

• Killed Officer Sean Collier execution-style

• Hijacked a Chinese national who made a daring escape

• Set off a chase that culminated in the Watertown shootout, the death of Tamerlan, and the subsequent capture of Dzhokhar in a dry-docked boat

Most importantly, we’ve been told they did all of this alone.

We’ve also been informed that neither the FBI nor any other federal agencies had any contact with the brothers—directly or indirectly—after the agency closed its investigation into Tamerlan and his mother in 2011.

In the absence so far of hard evidence implicating the brothers as the sole perpetrators, many Bostonians appear to have kept an open mind.

In this, they may have been influenced by their familiarity with the FBI’s history of covering up embarrassing relationships to bad guys, like the one local agents had with the murderous Boston mobster Whitey Bulger—not to mention the Bureau’s less-than-stellar record of transparency regarding major events like 9/11. And that doesn’t even take into account some of the geopolitical and national security implications swirling around the case.

In other words—many reasonable doubts still exist.

Here’s a few of them:

• “Danny,” the main witness to Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s alleged confession to the Marathon bombing, and the shooting of Sean Collier, changed significant parts of his story over time, thereby undermining his credibility. And he is a budding entrepreneur with an uncertain immigration status—an easy target for law enforcement manipulation (For our two-part discussion on the reasonable doubts about Danny’s story, see here and here).

• As far as we know, there are no eyewitnesses to the shooting of Sean Collier. The security camera footage that supposedly recorded them attacking Collier has not been shown to the public. Additionally, at least three different law enforcement officials told the New York Times that the video in question does not show the attackers’ faces.

• There was an armed felon in the vicinity of Vassar Street around that same time who had just robbed a 7-Eleven at gunpoint. He’s still at large.

• The brothers supposedly shot and killed Collier for his gun, but didn’t take it. They also managed to avoid getting any blood on themselves, when one or both of them allegedly tried to wrestle Collier’s pistol from his bleeding body.

• The FBI initially denied knowing who the brothers were until Russia called them out on it. Was the FBI—or another federal agency—hiding something?

• The FBI’s assertions that its investigation of Tamerlan Tsarnaev was limited by a concern for his civil liberties are not credible. Since its inception, the FBI has routinely ignored the Bill of Rights, particularly, in recent years, when it comes to Muslims.

• Prior to the bombing, Tamerlan Tsarnaev somehow evaded being detained at the airport not once but twice, despite being on two different no-fly lists To get an idea of the frequency with which the government routinely allows individuals with questionable associations to travel in and out of our country as they please, see here and here.

• Why is it that the FBI appears to be relentlessly intimidating, punishing, deporting and in one case—that of Ibragim Todashev—shooting to death a person closely connected to the brothers? That pattern of behavior can easily call into question the FBI’s stated desire to get to the truth. Indeed, it can create the opposite impression. After the Todashev shooting, the FBI leaked to the media radically contradictory stories about how it happened: Todashev came at the agent with a knife, no, it was a sword, no, it was a pole. Even the Florida State Attorney’s investigation revealed mind-boggling contradictions between the stories of the FBI agent who did the shooting, and the Massachusetts state trooper who was in the room at the time. The trooper said Todashev charged him with a broom handle raised high like a javelin. But the FBI agent said Todashev ran at him with his left shoulder dropped in an attacking posture. For more details about the Todashev killing, please take a look here and here.

• The Tsarnaev’s uncle Ruslan and his apparent connections to retired CIA officer Graham Fuller and the CIA deserve further scrutiny.

• The fact that these immigrants were refugees from an area heavily contested between the United States and Russia, who were living in Cambridge, an established hotbed of espionage and international intrigue involving the United States, Russia and other countries, should give one serious pause before swallowing the “lone wolves” assertion.

• Even some law enforcement officials have expressed skepticism that the Tsarnaev brothers could have had the technical ability to construct and successfully detonate such highly sophisticated bombs in a flawlessly coordinated manner without help. The Tsarnaevs did not seem like criminal masterminds, as demonstrated by their boneheaded and panicky behavior once they were identified as the bombers.

And finally, the public has never seen the alleged video footage of Dzhokhar planting his backpack at the scene of the second explosion. What we have seen are grainy videos that show the brothers on Boylston St. carrying backpacks—like hundreds of other spectators that day.

[msfreeh]

http://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


* National Research Council issues report identifying needs for microbial forensics of sufficient quality to support legal proceedings and inform government decisions

Posted by Lew Weinstein on July 8, 2014

http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18737" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Science Needs for Microbial Forensics:
Initial International Research Priorities (2014)



Screen shot 2014-07-09 at 12.23.22 PM

18737-0309302455-covers450
Authors

Committee on Science Needs for Microbial Forensics: Developing an Initial International Roadmap; Board on Life Sciences (BLS); Division on Earth and Life Studies (DELS); National Research Council
Description

Microbial forensics is a scientific discipline dedicated to analyzing evidence from a bioterrorism act, biocrime, or inadvertent microorganism or toxin release for attribution purposes. This emerging discipline seeks to offer investigators the tools and techniques to support efforts to identify the source of a biological threat agent and attribute a biothreat act to a particular person or group. Microbial forensics is still in the early stages of development and faces substantial scientific challenges to continue to build capacity.



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: Microbial Forensics, National Research Council | 21 Comments »
* GAO expects to issue its report on the FBI anthrax investigation in the “later part of the summer or early fall”

Posted by Lew Weinstein on June 28, 2014

[msfreeh]

see link for full story

http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.s ... ns_fb.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Accused terrorist questions FBI's role in arrest that led to conviction, alleged torture
Doda Ljucaj
Mastermind Doda Lucaj, left, a US citizen from Michigan, enters the courtroom in Podgorica. Montenegro, Tuesday, Aug.5, 2008, where he was convicted of plotting a rebellion in the Balkan country. The court convicted a group of ethnic Albanians of plotting a rebellion in the Balkan country and issued prison sentences ranging from 3 months to 6.6 years, with four U.S. citizens, all from Michigan, among those convicted. (AP Photo/Risto Bozovic) (RISTO BOZOVIC)
Gary Ridley | [email protected] By Gary Ridley | [email protected]
Follow on Twitter
on July 11, 2014 at 5:30 PM, updated July 11, 2014 at 5:36 PM

FLINT, MI -- A Wixom man charged with terrorism in Eastern Europe has filed a lawsuit against the Federal Bureau of Investigation to discover what role the U.S. government played in the arrest that led to his conviction and alleged torture.

Doda Lucaj filed a lawsuit July 3 in Flint U.S. District Court alleging the FBI has failed to release records regarding the U.S. government's involvement in his 2006 arrest in Austria and eventual imprisonment in Montenegro.

FBI officials declined to comment on the lawsuit. The Bureau has not yet filed a response to the lawsuit.

Lucaj was one of 18 ethnic Albanians, including three other Michigan residents, indicted in 2006 by Montenegrin authorities who accused the group of plotting a rebellion to carve out an autonomous Albanian republic in the Balkan state, according to the Associated Press.

Prosecutors identified Lucaj as the mastermind of the plot, accusing him of financing and directing the group that was stockpiling weapons in caves in the nation's eastern region in anticipation of the insurgency.

Lucaj was arrested by Montenegrin authorities the day after the indictment was issued at a Vienna, Austria, airport as he was attempting to fly back to the Unites States, according to the Associated Press.

The Michigan men claimed that they were regularly beaten while in custody, the Associated Press reported. Their alleged treatment led to international criticism against Montenegro for police brutality.

Lucaj was convicted of a lesser charge of "conspiring against the constitution and planning acts against the security of Montenegro" and was sentenced to 6.5 years in prison.

He has maintained his innocence and calls his arrest and detention "illegal."

Lucaj claims in the lawsuit that he was interrogated by FBI agents roughly a year after his initial arrest, and the FBI and other U.S. agencies were involved in his arrest, interrogation and eventual prosecution.

The lawsuit claims Lucaj filed a Freedom of Information Act request in May 2012 with the FBI, seeking information related to his arrest and the U.S. government's involvement. The FBI responded in August 2012 that it had 1,922 documents related to the request, but the government has yet to release a single page of information.

Lucaj's attorneys from the Detroit-based Clark Hill law firm, who could not be reached for comment, claim in the lawsuit that their client needs the records to "protect his Constitutional rights and attempt to reclaim a normal life."

The lawsuit further claims that Lucaj believes he has been placed on a "no-fly" list after he was allegedly blocked earlier this year by an airline carrier from purchasing a ticket for reasons not disclosed by the company.

[msfreeh]

When you think terrorist event think FBI informant...




http://knba.org/post/defense-says-fbi-w ... -informant" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Defense Says FBI Wanted Marathon Bombing Suspect As Informant


Defense attorneys for suspected Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev say sometime before the bombing his older brother, Tamerlan, was approached by the FBI and was asked to be an informant.

In a letter from February made public in a motion filed in federal court today, the attorneys say the FBI made "more than one visit" to talk to Tamerlan and two of his associates.

The FBI "questioned Tamerlan about his internet searches, and asked him to be an informant, reporting on the Chechen and Muslim community."

Prosecutors responded that they had "no evidence" the FBI solicited Tamerlan.

The defense team says this evidence could provide insight into Tamerlan's mindset before the bombing and it could bolster the defense's case that his younger brother Dzhokhar was dragged into the bombing by Tamerlan.

If you remember, Tamerlan was killed in a shootout with police and Dzhokhar was captured after a manhunt that shut down most of Boston.

The defense attorneys say they learned of the alleged FBI solicitation through interviews with the family, notes from the FBI's own interviews and "other sources."

"We do not suggest that these contacts are to be blamed and have no evidence to suggest that they were improper, but rather view them as an important part of the story of Tamerlan's decline," the defense writes. "Since Tamerlan is dead, the government is the source of corroboration that these visits did in fact occur and of what was said during them. "

Last October, the FBI issued a statement denying that the brothers were informants.

[msfreeh]

see link for full story


http://www.vice.com/read/two-would-be-j ... he-fbi-715" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Two Would-Be Jihadists, Two Very Different Responses from the FBI



Jul 15 2014

Shannon Maureen Conley and Basit Javed Sheikh planned trips to Syria to join up with jihadists.

One is a 19-year-old citizen from Arvada, Colorado, named Shannon Maureen Conley. The other is a 29-year-old, Pakistani-born permanent US resident who lived in North Carolina named Basit Javed Sheikh. Both—entirely separately—planned to travel to Syria for love and jihad, according to public records, and both came under close scrutiny of the FBI and were eventually arrested.

But in Conley's case, the FBI gave the would-be jihadist every available out. Overt agents who identified themselves as being from the FBI repeatedly cautioned her against going through with her plans to travel to Syria and join the Islamic State in Iraq and al Sham (ISIS). According to a sworn affidavit, they warned her she would be arrested if she tried to board a plane to the region, but to no avail. Few, if any, targets in federal terrorism investigations have been given such apparently blunt warnings from openly identified agents. “That's a first as far as I know,” says Trevor Aaronson, author of The Terror Factory: Inside The FBI's Manufactured War on Terrorism.

Sheikh, however, wasn't so lucky. The FBI didn't openly try to talk him out of boarding a plane allegedly to join Jabat al Nusra, the al Qaeda–linked militant group fighting Bashar al Assad's regime in Syria. Sheikh has even gone so far as to claim that an FBI informant, posing as a nurse in Syria, engaged in a romantic relationship with him, and he was traveling to marry her. An undercover agent—as opposed to an openly identified one, like in Conley's case—told Sheikh he didn't have to go through with his plan, something investigators often do to prevent an entrapment defense. Both cases are currently in the pre-trial motions phase.

Though the FBI is often criticized for foiling terrorist plots of its own making, the cases of Conley and Sheikh are examples of what US officials repeatedly say is a growing problem: Americans traveling to Syria, training with militant groups, and returning as battle-hardened terrorists. Attorney General Eric Holder reiterated that threat last week before European officials in Oslo, and claimed there are “dozens of Americans” fighting in Syria and Iraq. The former head of the UK intelligence agency MI6, by contrast, said recently the threat of Islamist-based terrorism in the West has been dramatically overblown.

An FBI spokesperson told VICE in an email that in the last year FBI-led task forces have “arrested at least six US persons for attempting to travel to Syria to join extremist groups.”

Conley first attracted attention from law enforcement after roaming the grounds of a Faith Bible Chapel while taking notes. Church staff confronted her, at which point she allegedly became antagonistic. She told law enforcement that after the altercation, she thought: “If they think I'm a terrorist, I'll give them something to think I am.”

FBI agents met with Conley on a nearly weekly basis for a period of months. Conley never had a lawyer present, though she was advised of that right, according to the affidavit, and repeatedly made incriminating statements to the agents. “Conley was reminded, and acknowledged, that she had made statements to overt law enforcement about waging Jihad against the US,” according to the affidavit. “Conley was further advised, and acknowledged, that what she wanted to do is illegal.”
Recommended

ISIS Stole Some Shiny New Weapons From the Iraqi Army
ISIS Insurgents Have Almost Surrounded Baghdad
The Rise of British Jihadists in Syria
The All-American Life and Death of Eric Harroun

In another meeting, an “overt attempt to dissuade Conley from violent criminal activity,” an FBI agent “admonished Conley twice in the conversation that travel with intent to wage Jihad may be illegal and result in her arrest.” Conley was arrested roughly two weeks later, attempting to board a Turkey-bound flight to connect with a Tunisian ISIS fighter with whom she had begun an online romance. Conley was charged with material support of a terrorist organization, and faces up to 15 years in prison. In the affidavit, Conley comes across less as a sophisticated threat and more as a hapless teenager.

The FBI became aware of Basit Javed Sheikh, the North Carolina man, after he made repeated statements on Facebook praising Jabat al Nusra. In August 2013, according to court documents, Sheikh contacted someone through Facebook who claimed to be a nurse affiliated with al Nusra, but was in fact an FBI informant, also known as a confidential human source (CHS). Sheikh was arrested three months later.

The exact nature of their relationship isn't yet clear, but according to court transcripts reviewed by VICE, Sheikh may have thought he was traveling to Syria, at least in part, to marry the “nurse”—that is, the FBI informant. “Did the defendant ever show interest in marrying this confidential source, CHS?” Sheikh, representing himself, asked Special Agent Jason Maslow at a pre-trial hearing last November.

Maslow, the FBI agent who swore the affidavit against Sheikh, didn't offer a clear answer. “I'm not aware of any,” Maslow responded initially, then added, “There may have been” a romantic interest from Sheikh “towards the end,” as well as “towards the beginning on some of the initial contacts.”

Apparently not satisfied, Sheikh pushed the issue. “There may have been?” he repeated.

“Yes,” Special Agent Maslow said.

Moments later, Sheikh—not aware of criminal trial procedure—demanded that “that the full nature of the relationship between the CHS and the defendant be known so that the defendant's true motive of [sic] traveling overseas can be determined.” The judge stopped him and said that's called discovery, and happens later in the case. Like Conley, in court documents Sheikh came off as bumbling and perhaps depressed, obsessed with a fantasy of jihad as much as or more than the real thing.

Regardless of the veracity of Sheikh's marriage claims, there were never any attempts by overt agents to dissuade Sheikh from traveling to Lebanon, then to Syria. Rather, a clandestine, undercover agent at one point told him, “You don't have to do this,” and “If you are scared and don't want to [travel to Syria] then make jihad in other ways.” Sheikh responded that he wasn't scared, said “I'm ready,” and shortly afterward bought his ticket to Lebanon, according to the affidavit. (The undercover agent had previously suggested Sheikh ask his sister for money for the plane ticket, which Sheikh couldn't afford on his own at the time.)

The FBI did not offer comment on the seeming discrepancies between the two investigations despite multiple requests from VICE. Lawyers for Conley and Sheikh have previously declined to talk to the media.

For some observers there is a larger problem of how the FBI investigates terrorism cases, including the signs that make a person a threat. “The FBI has a problematic theory of radicalization, where someone goes from speaking out about an issue to becoming violent,” says the ACLU's Mike German, a former FBI agent, who was speaking about the FBI generally and not about the Sheikh or Conley case specifically. “They describe it as a funnel, and once you're in the funnel, there's no coming out of that.” He says the strategy is built on a fallacy that “if we just leave them alone,” they'll wind up radicalized and violent anyway. The result, in many cases, is a plot that almost certainly couldn't have happened without FBI involvement.

[msfreeh]

couple of reads





Law enforcement train to face domestic extremists

see link for full roundup


http://www.gadsdentimes.com/article/201 ... /140719847" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Published: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 at 10:08 p.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, July 16, 2014 at 10:09 p.m.

About 400 law enforcement officers from Northeast Alabama and Northwest Georgia will attend safety training Thursday in Oxford to better prepare them for potential encounters with domestic extremists, U.S. Attorney Joyce White Vance, FBI Special Agent in Charge Richard D. Schwein Jr., and Oxford Police Chief Bill Partridge announced.

The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Alabama, the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force and the Oxford Police Department will present the training at the Oxford Performing Arts Center.

The training is designed to give local, state and federal law enforcement officers and government security personnel survival skills and best practice tips in case they do encounter domestic extremists, such as members of the Sovereign Citizen Movement or militia groups. The training also will address deadly force survival and weapons of mass destruction.

“Law enforcement officers must, first, protect themselves in order to protect the communities they serve,” Vance said.

“The goal of this training is for each participant to gain a greater appreciation of the potential threats associated with domestic extremism and how best to protect himself or herself if ever confronted with such a situation.”

“As sovereign citizens’ numbers grow, so do the chances of contact with law enforcement and, thus, the risks that incidents will end in violence,” Schwein said.

“Law enforcement must understand the sovereign citizen movement, be able to identify indicators, and know how to protect themselves from the group’s threatening tactics and techniques.”

Partridge offered this advice: “Under pressure, you don’t rise to the occasion; you sink to the level of your training. You react the way you’re trained,” Partridge said. “Train hard and train often. Your life depends on it.


2nd read

The Palmer Raids

In 1919 Woodrow Wilson appointed A. Mitchell Palmer as his attorney general. Palmer recruited John Edgar Hoover as his special assistant and together they used the Espionage Act (1917) and the Sedition Act (1918) to launch a campaign against radicals and left-wing organizations.

Worried by the revolution that had taken place in Russia, Palmer became convinced that Communist agents were planning to overthrow the American government. His view was reinforced by the discovery of thirty-eight bombs sent to leading politicians and the Italian anarchist who blew himself up outside Palmer's Washington home. Palmer recruited John Edgar Hoover as his special assistant and together they used the Espionage Act (1917) and the Sedition Act (1918) to launch a campaign against radicals and left-wing organizations.

A. Mitchell Palmer claimed that Communist agents from Russia were planning to overthrow the American government. On 7th November, 1919, the second anniversary of the Russian Revolution, over 10,000 suspected communists and anarchists were arrested. Palmer and Hoover found no evidence of a proposed revolution but large number of these suspects were held without trial for a long time. The vast majority were eventually released but Emma Goldman and 247 other people, were deported to Russia.

On 2nd January, 1920, another 6,000 were arrested and held without trial. These raids took place in several cities and became known as the Palmer Raids. A. Mitchell Palmer and John Edgar Hoover found no evidence of a proposed revolution but large number of these suspects, many of them members of the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), continued to be held without trial. When Palmer announced that the communist revolution was likely to take place on 1st May, mass panic took place. In New York, five elected Socialists were expelled from the legislature.

When the May revolution failed to materialize, attitudes towards Palmer began to change and he was criticised for disregarding people's basic civil liberties. Some of his opponents claimed that Palmer had devised this Red Scare to help him become the Democratic presidential candidate in 1920.

[msfreeh]

google title if they change link



http://www.scotsman.com/news/uk/fbi-off ... s-1-694208" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


FBI agents offer Lockerbie bombing witness $4 million to lie
FBI offered me $4m: Lockerbie bomb witness
MICHAEL HOWIE HOME AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT ([email protected])

A WITNESS in the Lockerbie case has claimed he was offered $4 million (£2 million) by American investigators to lie to the trial judges.

Edwin Bollier, head of the Swiss company MEBO that was said to have manufactured the timer used to detonate the Pan Am bomb, claims he was offered the money by the FBI at its Washington HQ in exchange for making a statement that supported the main line of inquiry - that Libya was responsible for the bombing.

He has told Dr Hans Koechler, who was a UN observer during the trial of Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi in the Netherlands, that he was offered a "new life" in the United States if he testified that the timer found in the plane wreckage had been supplied to Libya.

"I rejected this and said this could not possibly be the case," he said. He added that there was a "loud dispute" after he rejected the offer.

The claim follows news that the Maltese shopkeeper Tony Gauci, whose evidence led to Megrahi's conviction, was offered $2 million by the CIA.

[msfreeh]

In 2003 I made the 325 mile round trip journey from Maine to Boston
to attend the Congressional hearings dealing with FBI agents running a murder incorporated with Whitey Bulger. see


http://www.boston.com/news/packages/whi ... script.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;





I cannot travel to Utah but I know someone on this forum
can cover this trial brought by Legal Warrior Jesse Trentadue from Salt Lake City. Shoot video ,update us daily , take pictures of the defendants
and interview Jesse Trentadue.

Make it a LDSFF. Team Effort so we can post to other forums and on YouTube


http://fox13now.com/2014/07/23/oklahoma ... k-in-utah/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Oklahoma City bombing video trial to begin next week in Utah
Posted 5:46 pm, July 23, 2014, by Ben Winslow

SALT LAKE CITY — A trial over videotapes that purport to show the 1995 bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City will begin here next week.

Jesse Trentadue is suing the CIA and FBI, demanding the agencies release surveillance video of the bombing that killed 168. But the federal government claims the tapes don’t exist anymore.

Read Trentadue’s lawsuit against the government:

[msfreeh]

http://m.sltrib.com/sltrib/mobile3/5823 ... s.html.csp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


see link for full story



FBI agents threaten witness in Oklahoma City bombing



| The Salt Lake Tribune) Lawyer Jesse Trentadue seeks documents and videotapes from the FBI probe of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing — he believes the records will provide information about the death of his brother, Kenneth Trentadue, in a federal prison.
Utah judge orders probe into why witness won’t testify at trial
Courts » Attorney claims FBI did inadequate search for Oklahoma City bombing documents and videotapes.

Jesse Trentadue, a Salt Lake City attorney, is shown in his office with a picture of his brother, Kenneth. Kenneth Trentadue was found hanging from a noose made of torn bed sheets in a federal prison cell on Aug. 21, 1995. The death was ruled a suicide, but Jesse Trentadue believes his brother was killed after being mistaken for an Oklahoma City bombing conspirator.

A Utah lawyer suing the FBI over its alleged inadequate search under the federal Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for videotapes related to the Oklahoma City bombing said Tuesday that one of his witnesses has backed out of testifying after being visited by government officials last week.

On the second day of a bench trial in Salt Lake City, attorney Jesse Trentadue told U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups that he had just learned John Matthews would not be testifying. He urged Waddoups to order an investigation into who allegedly contacted Matthews with suggestions that he not appear at the trial.

"I think this is a serious matter," Trentadue said, adding that in 40 years of practicing law nothing like this had happened to him.

Waddoups agreed and told the Department of Justice attorneys representing the FBI to "get to the bottom of this" by inquiring into whether anyone from the government interfered with Matthews’ planned court appearance.

The DOJ attorneys indicated they had not known about the alleged visit or the man’s decision not to testify.

According to court documents, Matthews was expected to testify about a major government investigation known as "Patriot Conspiracy," or PATCON, and how evidence was gathered and records pertaining to evidence were prepared or maintained by the FBI at the time of the Murrah Federal Building bombing.

Trentadue filed suit in 2008 against the FBI and the CIA, which since has been dropped as a defendant, claiming the agencies failed to locate and turn over all the materials he requested, including a videotape that he believes shows bomber Timothy McVeigh and another man exiting a Ryder truck in front of the Murrah building and the detonation of explosives.

He is asking for an order allowing him to search for videotapes and documents at FBI locations, including field offices in Oklahoma City and Los Angeles, and requiring the bureau to produce the records he requested. He knows more tapes exist from public documents he already has and news reports, Trentadue says.

The FBI says it has no tape of the explosion and insists it has done a reasonable search for the videotapes and other materials. The agency says if Waddoups does conclude its searches were inadequate, he should allow the agency, rather than Trentadue, to conduct one or more additional searches.

[msfreeh]

see link for full story




FBI agent blasts bureau for botched OKC evidence
Charges bureau's claims crucial video lost impossible



http://www.wnd.com/2014/07/ex-fbi-agent ... -evidence/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


August. 1 2014



Leo Hohmann is a news editor for WND. He has been a reporter and editor at several suburban newspapers in the Atlanta and Charlotte, North Carolina, areas and also served as managing editor of Triangle Business Journal in Raleigh, North Carolina

The Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City following the April 1995 bombing that killed 168 people.

The Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in downtown Oklahoma City following the April 1995 bombing that killed 168 people.

A retired FBI agent says it would be nearly impossible for federal agents to lose a videotape showing Timothy McVeigh and any possible accomplices on the scene of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building the day a bomb went off in 1995 in Oklahoma City, killing 168 people.

As WND reported, researchers for the FBI testified during a Freedom of Information trial this week in Salt Lake City, Utah, that they searched for hours but couldn’t find any videotapes other than the 30 tapes they have already handed over to Jesse Trentadue. The Salt Lake City lawyer alleges in his lawsuit that the FBI is holding back video footage of the crime scene that would prove McVeigh was not alone in setting off the blast.

Former longtime FBI agent Dan Vogel, who spent 25 years with the bureau including the last 14 at the field office in Oklahoma City, explained in a WND interview that the FBI has very strict guidelines for ensuring the integrity of evidence.

Vogel also said the Murrah building would have been only one source for the video footage, and he rejects the government’s earlier claims that it couldn’t find videotapes requested by Trentadue.

“All those federal buildings, they have security cameras all over the place, and then all those commercial buildings have security cameras as well, so you’re going to have tons and tons of video to look at,” Vogel told WND. “And then you have the bureau saying ‘well we can’t find it?’ That doesn’t speak to well of the bureau.”

Vogel, who retired in 2000, now works as a legal consultant in federal cases and is intimately familiar with the FBI’s policies and procedures.

“There are a couple of issues here that I think are pretty critical, and one is possible violation of FBI policies and procedures,” he said.

Nearly two dozen eyewitnesses have claimed they saw a second man in the truck with McVeigh or with him leading up to the bombing. Some say the man appeared to be Middle Eastern. The government insists McVeigh was by himself when he detonated the bomb and that his only assistance came from Terry Nichols, who is serving a life sentence.

None of the 30 videos provided to Trentadue show McVeigh or his infamous Ryder truck at the scene, and on Thursday FBI witnesses claimed that no such video exists. The trial was set to conclude Thursday, and U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups will rule at a later date.

‘Numerous other videotapes’

Richard Williams, the assistant building manager for the Murrah building in 1995, testified Thursday that outside surveillance cameras pointing at where the bomb was detonated had not been operational for at least two years before the bombing, the Associated Press reported.

What the AP fails to report, however, is the fact that in a Freedom of Information lawsuit in 2001, Judge Wayne Alley forced the FBI to document an inventory of materials from the bombing. The inventory list “includes numerous other videotapes, from April 19, 1995, from several sources,” Alley wrote in court documents obtained by WND.

The word “several” is key, because it confirms the belief of Trentadue and others who have investigated the bombing that cameras with the potential to capture damning evidence were mounted not just on the Murrah building but on several surrounding commercial buildings. So whether or not the cameras on the Murrah building were functioning does not address the issue of what the FBI did with the videotapes it took into custody from “several sources.”

One commercial property that had a surveillance camera was the Journal Record Building. The camera on the building would have been positioned to catch McVeigh’s exit from the bombing site in his getaway car, says Jayna Davis, one of the first reporters on the scene of the bombing 19 years ago and author of the New York Times-Bestseller “The Third Terrorist,” published by WND Books.

The head of security for the Journal Record building handed over a VCR loaded with a videotape to the FBI, and Davis still has a copy of the FBI’s Form 302 interview summary in which the security guard confirmed that he handed the VCR over to an agent. He did not watch the tape before giving it to the FBI, because the electricity to the Journal Record building went out as a result of the explosion.

“The defense team for Terry Nichols went through all the surveillance tape and they never got that tape,” Davis told WND. “So what I’m saying is, where’s that tape?”

“We worked very hard with our law enforcement sources to know that there were five tapes, and they all had critical information,” she said.

Davis said the downtown area of the city was crawling with FBI agents in the aftermath of the bombing.

“They were one step ahead of the local police, confiscating these videotapes from private businesses wherever they could find them,” she said.

In a gripping narrative style, Jayna Davis lays out the stunning evidence that Islamic conspirators worked with Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols. Get “The Third Terrorist” now at the WND Superstore.

Trentadue says he began investigating the bombing to seek justice for his brother, Kenneth Trentadue, 44, who was found hanged in his cell at the U.S. Bureau of Prisons’ Federal Transfer Center in Oklahoma City. He believes his brother, a convicted bank robber who was picked up for parole violations, was mistaken for a suspected co-conspirator in the bombing and died in an FBI interrogation that went awry and was covered up by prison officials.

Critical issues

Vogel explained to WND that the FBI has two large operating manuals that investigators must follow. They’ve been added to over the years and contain thousands of pages – the Manual of Administrative Operations and Procedures and the Manual of Investigative Operations and Guidelines.

“That covers all investigative activities. If you have a certain type of case, you go into the MIOG and find out how to work it,” he said. “When someone says, ‘Oh we lost this evidence,’ I don’t see how that’s possible, because evidence is handled in a very special way. It’s handled like nothing else at the FBI. First off, when you seize evidence you have to get it into the system as soon as possible, it must be stored a certain way, tracked a certain way, 24/7.”

He said any original documents would be copied before entered into storage.

“If I had original documents, for example, I would take them and I would copy them before I took them to the evidence room. Same with videotapes,” he said. “They would make copies of all videotapes, and they would take the originals and put them in evidence control, and they would be easily tracked, assigned a number in the file, so you can go in the file and say, ‘OK, where’s my videotape from such and such building.’”

In the evidence room, he said, “an attendant would get it for you or tell you if it’s been checked out by someone and who has it.

“It will show on the form where it is and who has it. At that point, anyone going in there is going to know agent so and so has those documents and he’s using them for trial. It’s called a chain of custody, and if you can’t show that then a good defense attorney is going to get that evidence thrown out of court.”

To lose a videotape, it would mean that the original and the copies would all have to fall through the cracks of the FBI’s elaborate system for tracking evidence.

“If you’re the case agent, you’re going to have copies, because you can’t run down to the evidence room every time you want to view the tapes; that wouldn’t make any sense,” Vogel said. “You don’t need the originals until the trial.”

Breaking the rules

By presenting a defense in this week’s trial that it can’t find videos that have been established to exist, according to the written ruling of Alley on July 10, 2001, the FBI is essentially admitting to breaking its own rules, found in its voluminous operating manuals, contends Vogel.

“No it wasn’t followed, it was broken because they should be able to tell you immediately where these (videotapes) were and should all be assigned numbers,” Vogel said. “When they tell the judge ‘we can’t find the videotapes’ what they’re telling him is, number one, we’re incompetent, or, number two, we’re not following our own policies and procedures. And that’s a huge deal for what has been called the world’s greatest law enforcement agency.”

Vogel concludes the FBI either committed the cardinal sin of violating the “chain of custody” on its evidence or something more sinister was at work.

“It’s either incompetence or … there’s something else going on that’s even worse,” Vogel said. “You can speculate on what that might be.”

The 1995 bombing of the federal building was the biggest case of domestic terrorism in U.S. history to that point, killing 168 people and injuring hundreds more. The trial has been called the largest criminal trial of the 20th century.

With those kinds of stakes, it’s even more unlikely the FBI would have botched the handling of evidence so bad that 19 years later it still can’t produce all of the videotapes.

“Unless it was intentional. That’s the only thing I can think. Unless there’s some other motive we don’t know about. I’m just speculating at this point, but I can’t think of any other reason they would lose evidence of this importance,” Vogel said. “They could claim there was a fire or flood, but that’s pretty far fetched.”

Vogel said the FBI’s strategy may be to outlive Trentadue.

“The problem is they don’t want to turn over the tapes, and what I think they are trying to do is keep this going so long that Mr. Trentadue will finally just give up,” Vogel said. “That is a legal strategy in some cases, to make it so expensive for you that eventually you will just give up, basically hope Mr. Trentadue gives up or dies. Because they have unlimited resources and he has limited resources.”

Davis also gives kudos to Trentadue for his persistence and hopes he continues the fight, regardless of the outcome of this week’s trial.

“Judge Alley clearly implied in the court record that the FBI possesses numerous tapes which were recorded on the day of the bombing – tapes the public has never seen,” she said. “The judge stopped short of stating what those tapes show and the location of the cameras which recorded the images of April 19, 2005.”

[msfreeh]

How convenient,eh?
http://reason.com/blog/2014/08/06/50000 ... er-be-able" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


50,000 FOIA Requests You’ll Never Be Able to Make From the FBI

Zenon Evans|Aug. 6, 2014 3:20 pm

DanielJPHadleyDanielJPHadleyThe indefatigable folks at MuckRock, a site dedicated to making freedom of information requests, has some bad news: A huge number of documents were permanently destroyed by flooding of the FBI building in Washington, DC last year.

"Last week, the FBI got back with their initial response, and it's disturbing, to say the least," explains MuckRock, which published their findings on Monday:

There's over five hundred pages, each listing fifty plus damaged/destroyed documents. And again, this is the initial response.

At MuckRock, we believe that digitization is an important component of promoting transparency, both in ensuring dissemination of information, and guaranteeing the long term survival of documents. Incidents like this - and the staggering loss to both history and accountability they incur - are regrettable examples of why.

There were so many documents, it took almost an entire year to put the request together.

This flood took place last April. It’s not the first time water damage has ruined FBI documents. When Hurricane Sandy hit New York, the FBI experienced what Salon described as a “huge and still unquantifiable loss of records” that “between 8,000 and 9,000 cardboard boxes, each capable of storing hundreds of documents from investigations and cases spanning at least two decades” were lost.

You can click here for the 500ish page list, but it's not exactly light reading.
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/ ... ocument/p2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[msfreeh]

What to do about FBI agents investigating terrorist events they just created....


https://news.vice.com/article/campaign- ... nvolvement" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Campaign Mounts to Declassify 9/11 Report’s References to Alleged Saudi Involvement

By Samuel Oakford
August 7, 2014 | 11:15 am

Nearly 13 years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the extent of Saudi involvement in the deaths of almost 3,000 people remains unclear — but according to members of Congress and the families of victims, information about this has been suppressed ever since the publication of a 2002 congressional investigation into the plot.

Prior to the release of the final report of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001, the Bush administration classified a 28-page section in the name of national security.

Though speculations, accusations, and denials have swirled around these pages over the past decade, the call for their declassification has steadily grown since December 2013, when House Representatives Walter Jones (R-NC) and Stephen Lynch (D-MA) introduced Resolution 428, a two-page document urging President Obama to release them to the public. Nine other representatives from both parties have co-sponsored the resolution.

Family of 'the terrorist that wasn't' prepares for his return from US. Read more here.

Conspiracy theorists and fringe publications have seized on suspicion surrounding the redacted pages, but experts and sources close to the investigation have acknowledged that the material’s release would help address significant questions.

In April, Jones and Lynch sent a letter to Obama reiterating their request. They are planning a September 11 press conference with relatives of victims to highlight the issue. Adding fuel to the campaign, various family members have recounted to the media how President Obama had promised them that he would release the material.

[msfreeh]

taxpayer funded terrorist organization that created 1993
1st World Trade Center bombing; Oklahoma City bombing; 911; Omargh bombing ; Mumbai attack not playing by the rules


FBI Targeted Mentally Disabled Muslim American Citizens
Lizabeth Paulat

Aug 10, 2014


http://www.care2.com/causes/fbi-targete ... izens.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



A Human Rights Watch report, documenting abuses in US terrorism investigations, has illuminated some incredibly dubious practices carried out by law enforcement.

The report looks at investigations that began shortly after 9/11 and have carried on until the present day.

One disturbing practice, which seems to pop up over and over in the report, is the targeting of those with mental disabilities to ‘create’ crimes. This occurs during ‘sting’ operations, when agents pose as members of the Muslim American community, infiltrating mosques.

In an average sting operation, an undercover agent finds a suspect who they think is, say, selling illegal arms. They approach them and gather information, waiting for a crime to unfold.

However, when it comes to counter-terrorism operations, law enforcement officers have been accused of breaching this time-honored system, using a subject’s mental disability to actually foster terrorism. You read that right, by the way — counter-terrorism efforts are being used to foster terrorism.

In one instance a man named Rezwan Ferdaus was targeted by an FBI agent who infiltrated his local mosque. Although the FBI concluded he had mental disabilities, the FBI agent worked to gain the trust of Ferdaus. As they grew closer, the FBI agent convinced him to participate in a plot to blow up the Pentagon and US Capitol.

Ferdaus was supplied with fake weapons but as the plan unfolded, he grew visibly distressed. As Ferdaus deteriorated, he lost control of his bladder in such a severe way he was forced to wear diapers during the day. He also began to suffer from seizures and extreme weight loss. Eventually his health suffered so terribly, his father had to quit his job to care for him.

Ferdaus was later convicted of supplying material support to terrorism and is now serving a 17 year sentence in prison.

Another case of exploiting the mentally disabled involved Shawahar Matin Siraj. Described by the FBI as being ‘extremely impressionable due to severe intellectual limitations,’ he liked to spend his time playing video games and Pokémon in his mother’s house.

An undercover FBI agent who claimed to have a terminal illness (which mirrored the illness of Siraj’s late father) cozied up to him, and wove an emotional web around the vulnerable man. After the agent broached the idea of a terrorist attack to him, which involved blowing up a local subway station, Siraj is on record as saying he ‘had to ask his mother first.’ Even by the FBI’s own reports, Siraj never actually agreed to participate.

Still, he was convicted on four counts of conspiring to attack a subway station. On his first day in prison, Siraj apparently asked the guard for access to play Pokémon.

The report also details cases of harsh detainment that fly in the face of due process.

Uzair Paracha, who was arrested in the United States, spent two years in solitary confinement before his trial, only allowed to speak to guards. What this means is, in our system of ‘innocent until proven guilty,’ he was given some of the harshest legal punishment available before he was even convicted of a crime.

Although many have been quick to blame the Muslim American community for allowing extremism to foster, the reality is, they have been responsible for stopping 40% of all Islamic terrorist plots, conceived on US soil, in the last 10 years. A study by MPAC also showed Muslims made up a minority of all terrorist plots hatched in the United States, most being attributed to right wing extremism.

However, despite these pesky facts, it seems the Muslim American community can’t catch a break. Human Rights Watch noted that appropriate sentencing, the right to a fair trial, freedom from coercion and fairly conducted investigations have all been thrown by the wayside in the past 13 years.

Other abusive methods involve targeting minors for sting operations, dismissing claims of torture and infiltrating mosques in ethnically targeted zones to conduct unwarranted surveillance on U.S. citizens.

These actions have created discord and mistrust between the US government and American Muslims. As Aziz Poonwalla writes, “Muslim Americans have the same vested interest in preventing terrorism as any other fellow citizen…American Muslims have arguably borne a greater responsibility in preventing attacks. That is a responsibility that the Muslim community has accepted and has faithfully u

[msfreeh]

Some of you already know I helped shoot the historic gathering at the National Press Club in June 2002. where Kyle Hence had gathered a honor rolll list of speakers detailing the evidence for 911 being created by the US Government.After the event I introduced Kyle Hence to my friend Danny Schecter at Globalvison and the Media Channel.
Kyle and Danny went on to produce 911 Press for Truth with Director Ray Nowielski.
Danny interviews Ray today and you can listen here
https://m.soundcloud.com/mediachannel/r ... -for-truth" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and herel

http://www.mediachannel.org/ray-nowosie ... for-truth/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[msfreeh]

http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent ... ly-ov.aspx" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Former head of information authority in the Egyptian General Intelligence, Major General Hossam Khairallah believes that what Habib El-Adly claimed in court on Saturday concerning Egypt's warning to the United States about 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks ‘lacked objectivity’.

Former interior minister Habib El-Adly claimed that he warned the Americans in 2001 about a terrorist attack twice but that they both ignored his warnings and plotted against his security apparatus in January 2011.

“There was cooperation in counterterrorism efforts between Egypt and the United States, there were warnings from Cairo that something may happen but we did not know what it was or how it would be or who would do it , nobody could have known then,” the former major general told Ahram Online.

In his speech in front of the court, El-Adly said that "In May 2001, we got a tip at the interior ministry in Egypt from a very well-connected informant inside Al-Qaeda that the terrorist group was planning for a huge attack inside the United States," Habib El-Adly said in statement during his retrial for killing protesters in the early days of the 25 January revolution on Saturday.

"I told president Mubarak after confirming this tip and he told us to inform the Americans so we told the CIA and FBI that there would be a terrorist attack in the United States soon," he added, saying that the Americans thanked him for the tip.

"Then in August 2001 we got a tip that Al-Qaeda’s attack for the United States was in process, again we informed the Americans and they thanked us for the information," he said.

According to Mubarak's longtime interior minister, when Mubarak was visiting the United States in 2002 he asked President Bush why the US ignored the tips allegedly given to American intelligence regarding Al-Qaeda’s threat. El-Adly claimed that Bush denied knowing that he was informed of such tips.

“He then confronted the CIA and FBI and they responded saying that the information was not communicated in a memo. What memo were they talking about?” he said in the court.

Khairallah on the other hand, questions whether Egypt really knew any details about 9/11 and whether the US would ignore such information even if it did. If Egypt truly had details on the attacks, he assumed it would have informed Germany where Egyptian Mohamed Atta was staying.

Khairallah also wondered why the former minister did not mention this earlier in the previous trial in front of the judge.

El-Adly accused the United States of orchestrating the 2011 Revolution to bring down the Egyptian state as well as his security apparatus.

"I warned you about a huge terrorist attack twice and you ignored it, yet you plot against my security apparatus and against my country," El-Adly said.

He also said that the Arab spring was a plot by the West to destroy Islam.

“El-Adly is using the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood were ousted and that people are still angry with them to claim whatever he wants without anyone paying attention.” Hossam Khairallah told Ahram Online.

Former interior minister, Habib El-Adly was sentenced to life in prison in May 2012 for killing protesters during the early days of 25 January revolution.

In March 2013 the conviction was overturned by the court of cassation and a new retrial was requested.

[msfreeh]

Just think: If taxpayer funded FBI. agents had never created the 1993 1st World Trade Center bombing, Oklahoma City bombing, 911,
Boston Marathon bombing, Mumbai Attack, Omargh bombing
this article would still have been written.
Yes I know I know! You are going to say " But the FBI budget would not
have been tripled."
Yes but every crime family needs a motive to commit a crime.

http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/nat ... 54400.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

National Intelligence Chief Clapper's comments pushed me to become leaker: Snowden
Last Updated: Wednesday, August 13, 2014, 21:17

Washington: Edward Snowden says dishonest comments to Congress by the US chief of national intelligence pushed him over the edge and prompted him to leak a trove of national security documents.

In a wide-ranging interview with Wired magazine over several days from Moscow, Snowden said he had been troubled for years by the activities of the National Security Agency but that national intelligence chief James Clapper's testimony prompted him to act.

The magazine, which published several photographs of Snowden including one showing him cradling an American flag, the former NSA contractor said he made his decision after reading in March 2013 about Clapper telling a Senate committee that the NSA does "not wittingly" collect information on millions of Americans.

"I think I was reading it in the paper the next day, talking to coworkers, saying, can you believe this...?"

Snowden told journalist James Bamford he had been troubled by other discoveries, including NSA spying on the pornography-viewing habits of political radicals.

"It's much like how the FBI tried to use Martin Luther King's infidelity to talk him into killing himself," he said. "We said those kinds of things were inappropriate back in the '60s. Why are we doing that now?"

Snowden also was disturbed by the NSA's effort to massively speed up data collection with a secret data storage facility in Bluffdale, Utah, which scanned billions of phone calls, faxes, emails, computer-to-computer data transfers, and text messages from around the world.

He put off his plan to leak NSA secrets at the time of the election of President Barack Obama, hoping for a more open government. But he became disenchanted with the president, and by 2013 was ready to spill the secrets he had acquired.

After Clapper's testimony to Congress, Snowden said his colleagues did not appear shocked, but he was concerned he was getting in too deep in an "evil" system.

"It's like the boiling frog," he says, in a reference to the fable of a frog placed in cold water who fails to realize the water is heating up gradually, until it is too late.

"You get exposed to a little bit of evil, a little bit of rule-breaking, a little bit of dishonesty, a little bit of deceptiveness, a little bit of disservice to the public interest, and you can brush it off, you can come to justify it," he told the magazine.

[msfreeh]

see link for full story

Putting a 9/11 Mystery on the Ballot



By Russ Baker on Aug 14, 2014


http://whowhatwhy.com/2014/08/14/puttin ... he-ballot/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


I was standing blocks from Building 7 of the World Trade Center complex and staring directly at it when it collapsed.

Working for the Los Angeles Times, I arrived that morning just in time to see an enormous cloud of dust and people running away. I had not yet known of the rapid and deadly descent of the South and North towers. That afternoon, I called in a series of reports to a staffer in the New York bureau.

I was literally on the phone with the office at 5:21 p.m., describing the fires burning in the structure as the building began—and completed

— its remarkably fast, smooth descent to the ground. I described the building neatly pancaking, and the Pulitzer Prize winner on the other end taking my dictation declared: “That sounds like a controlled demolition.”
Controlled Demolition

Controlled Demolition

In fact, I have seen controlled demolitions before and since—and indeed, that was exactly what the destruction of Building 7 looked like, except perhaps for a marginally slower collapse of the top portion

As with most people, I was baffled by how Building 7—a smaller, 47-story tower that had not been hit by a plane and was separated from the Twin Towers by low-rise buildings–would come down at all. It just made no sense.

How exactly the building did come down has never been properly explained. An investigation by the National Institute of Standards and Technology concluded that the building was hit by debris from the collapsing North Tower that started fires. However, it ruled out diesel fuel, structural damage from the debris and structural elements (trusses, girders, and cantilever overhangs) as causes of the collapse. It said the lack of water to the sprinkler system was an important factor in allowing fires to rage all afternoon. But the panel declined to state how the fires could bring down the building—and in such a rapid manner.

Reasonable Doubts

For many years, those who have been troubled by things that did not make sense regarding the 9/11 attacks have been marginalized as kooks. To be sure, some entertain enormously elaborate, complex scenarios that assume unspeakable evil carried out by a bewildering number of individuals, nations, and institutions.

However, fair-minded people who have carefully studied the evidence are troubled by the “official story,” just as they are troubled by the official explanations of the assassinations of American leaders over half a century, and other traumas ranging from the Oklahoma City bombing to the Boston Marathon bombing.

There is a reason so many people don’t trust the security apparatus and its allies in government, academia and the media, or the reassuring stories they tell us time after time that “there’s nothing to see here, folks.”Or to allow even the most reasonable question into the public discourse.

That kind of question hasn’t been possible with the mystery of Building 7. Until now.

123A small group, NYC Coalition for Accountability Now (NYC CAN), run and largely staffed by a young man named Ted Walter, has come up with a solution: Get the public to legislate a formal inquiry into building collapses.

Noting that no high-rise building has ever collapsed as a result of fire, and seizing on the official position that the destruction of Building 7 cannot be definitively explained, Walter’s group has proposed that the city explore all building collapses since and including 9/11. The proposed inquiry pointedly excludes Buildings 1 and 2, the collapses of which have been much investigated and debated. It does not explicitly mention Building 7—but then it does not have to. Building 7 is unique in that it was not hit by a plane. Any serious investigation of building collapses would start with Building 7.

The mechanism for this is to seek to have New Yorkers vote on a ballot measure, the High-Rise Safety Initiative. Its supporters face a tough challenge ahead, and have already hit some formidable road blocks. Still they persevere.

Not Your Run-of-the-Mill “Kooks”

Ted Walter does not fit the caricature of the unshaven, grumpy, shouting activist. He’s a calm, thoughtful, precise fellow. He grew up in Wisconsin and Mozambique, where his father was an official of a private aid group, got a BA at New York University and a Masters in Public Policy at UC Berkeley, and then worked for San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors.

He’d arrived in New York from Mozambique at age 19 to attend college two weeks before the attacks. “9/11 was essentially my introduction to New York,” he says.

The first thing that struck him was to wonder why, so long after the first planes hit the World Trade Center, another plane was unimpeded in hitting the Pentagon. Where were the U.S.’s vaunted defenses?

He also found it odd that a building collapse would involve entire structures virtually vaporizing in the air.

It was not until the spring of 2006 that Walter began determinedly researching the events. “During the course of a couple months of reading everything I could find, I came to the conclusion that the official account of 9/11 was false,” he says.

In 2008, others launched something called the NYC 9/11 Ballot Initiative. Walter volunteered as a petitioner, then managed paid canvassers. The next year, he founded a group, NYC CAN, along with some family members of 9/11 victims, and assumed control of the ballot initiative. Although they submitted 80,000 signatures, more than the required number, the city successfully challenged the initiative in court and kept it off the ballot.

This was hardly surprising. In certain parts of the country, especially in many Western states and municipalities, major policy is often legislated directly at the polls. Not so in New York City, which has long made it virtually impossible to qualify such a measure for the ballot. In fact, New York City voters have only seen two of them in half a century.

123Nonetheless, in the spring of 2013, Walter and his group talked with a top New York City election attorney, decided there might be a chance at prevailing despite the long odds, and began moving forward with another attempt. It became the High-Rise Safety Initiative.

Between May 1 and July 31, they gathered more than 100,000 signatures, far more than the 30,000 required to gain a place on the ballot. They submitted the first 67,000 of those on July 3, and plan to submit the remaining 33,000 on Sept. 4, which is more than double what’s required to override the City Council.

As anticipated, the City challenged the petition—claiming that not enough signatures are valid, and that the petition language is not legally valid. Walter and company filed suit against the City to have that determination annulled, and were due to go into court on Aug. 14.

The group believes that it has overcome the usual issue of invalid signatures by filing so many—and because even in its 2009 effort, it was able to prove that enough signatures did pass muster. Now, it must pass the arcane statutory hurdles the city created exactly to prevent such measures. Walter thinks they have a chance.

The case should be decided by mid-September. If the initiative is successful, it will be on the November ballot.

Officials Mortified

The mayor, a liberal named Bill DeBlasio, has not had kind things to say about the effort—presumably not unlike what his predecessors, Michael Bloomberg and Rudy Giuliani, might have had to say. As reported by Crain’s New York Business:

“From what I’ve heard it’s absolutely ridiculous,” a peeved Mr. de Blasio said in response to a reporter’s question. “And it’s inappropriate, after all the suffering that went on 9/11 and since. It seems to be this is a very insensitive and inappropriate action.”

Crain’s itself couldn’t help referring to the group as “conspiracy theorists,” an unfortunate term that instantly assumes no credibility to those asking what may in fact be legitimate—if uncomfortable—questions.

The speaker of the New York City Council, Melissa Mark-Viverito, a close ally of the mayor, lashed out: “Instead of wasting New Yorkers’ time and hard-earned taxpayer dollars humoring conspiracy theorists with wild fantasies, the City Council will continue to focus on passing sound legislation.”

A Skilled Communicator

Walter is very much a creature of the Internet Age. On the heels of Mark-Viverito’s statement, he was quick to put out an “Action Alert” email to his supporters:

Now we and the High-Rise Safety Initiative are calling on you to tell Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito that there are no wild fantasies here. The only wild fantasy is the one she chooses to believe—namely, that a 47-story skyscraper collapsed symmetrically, at free-fall acceleration, from small isolated fires.

Please take five minutes today to email the Speaker’s office with this message: The only “wild fantasy” is a skyscraper collapsing from fire. Explain to the Speaker and her staff why a 47-story steel-frame skyscraper cannot collapse from fire, and ask them to watch the 15-minute video Solving the Mystery of WTC 7, which features more than a dozen experts, who harbor not wild fantasies, but irrefutable scientific evidence.

If Walter and his group succeed in forcing a serious inquiry into the building collapse, they will have achieved what almost no one else in the 9/11 movement has: transforming a chaotic debate infused with powerful emotions and anger into a sober, methodical exploration of one portion of this sprawling, dark saga.

[msfreeh]

Sen Patrick Leahy is the FBI Best Buddy in the US Senate.
#1 Priority is to remove this perp and make sure FBI agents
do not replace him with another High Echelon FBI Informant

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/mon ... veillance/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Minimal minimization? More concerns about surveillance

Minimal minimization?

The following is a guest post by H.L. Pohlman, professor of political science at Dickinson College.

In my most recent post — as part of a rolling roundtable of sorts with the ACLU’s Gabe Rottman and civil liberties journalist Marcy Wheeler — I discussed some additional concerns about Sen. Patrick Leahy’s recent draft of the USA Freedom Act, which is designed to rein in government surveillance, but might not.

There, I focused on the language in the bill addressing search criteria. Here, I want to respond to Wheeler’s discussion of “minimization procedures,” that is, as the good people of Lawfare define it, the “requirements that the agency not retain or disseminate material it inadvertently sweeps up that it is not allowed to collect.”

Wheeler correctly observes that Rottman, in his own post, too quickly assumes that the newly mandated minimization procedures in Leahy’s draft will limit the collection of telephone metadata. Because of the secrecy surrounding FISA production orders, she explains, “we have no idea whether the minimization procedures mandated by Leahy’s bill are even as stringent as the procedures FISC has been imposing for years.” She is definitely right about that, but allow me to add a few of my own concerns.

To begin with, the bill establishes two standards of minimization. If the government applies for a FISA order compelling production on a “daily basis” of call records created “before, on, or after” the date of application, then it must use a “specific selection term” (again, see my previous post) that “specifically identifies an individual, account, or personal device” as the basis for collection. In these cases, the bill requires the FISA judge to “direct” the government to adopt minimization procedures that require “the prompt destruction” of the metadata if and when the government “determines” that they are not “foreign intelligence information” (see pp. 6-7 of the draft linked above) — though there is no explicit requirement that the government must likewise be prompt in actually making that determination.

However, if the government asks for the production of metadata on a different basis (non-daily, say), then it can use a search term based on a “broad geographic region, including a city, State, zip code, or area code” —so long as the term qualifies as a “specific identifier” that narrowly limits “the scope of the tangible things sought to the greatest extent reasonably practicable, consistent with the [government's] purpose for seeking the tangible things” (p. 17).

When the government uses this broad type of non-specific “specific identifier,” such as a Zip code, then Leahy’s bill would require that the attorney general’s minimization procedures “prohibit the dissemination” and “require the destruction” of the metadata within a “reasonable time period,” unless it has been determined to related to four kinds of “persons”: (1) a subject of an authorized investigation; (2) a foreign power or a suspected agent of a foreign power; (3) one who is “reasonably likely” to have information about the activities of a subject of an authorized investigation or a suspected agent of a foreign power who is associated with such a subject; or (4) someone who is “in contact” with or “known to” a subject of an authorized investigation or a suspected agent of a foreign power who is associated with such subject (pp. 11-13).

So far so good? But a few observations. First, there is no definition in the bill of what a “reasonable time period” would look like. Instead the bill says that the time period “shall be specified” in the production order signed by the FISA judge. Since these FISA orders are always classified, the American people will be kept in the dark about how long their government is keeping their call detail records.

Second, the categories of “persons” that justify retention of the telephone metadata beyond the “reasonable time period” seem to be quite broad. Surely many American academics, journalists, commentators, bloggers, and others are “reasonably likely” to have information about the activities of people who are subjects of investigations “to obtain foreign intelligence information not concerning a United States person.” The same could be said for those Americans who might be “in contact” with or “known to” such subjects of investigations.

Third, after the bill prohibits the FBI from disseminating the telephone metadata that the National Security Agency has collected on Americans who do not qualify as one of the four “persons,” it carves out an odd exception: It is allowed if the “sole purpose” of the dissemination is to determine whether the metadata relates to “one of the four “persons” (p. 12). This exception more or less swallows up the prohibition.

And finally, it is puzzling why the bill requires the “prompt destruction” of the telephone metadata that is determined not to be “foreign intelligence information” if the government uses a “specific selection term” but gives the government more latitude for an undefined “reasonable period of time,” if it uses a non-specific “specific identifier” such as a Zip code. Common sense suggests it should be the other way around, unless the bill’s objective is to give the government a built-in incentive to use broad non-specific “specific identifiers” as the primary basis for its telephone metadata collection program.

[msfreeh]

FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds provides compelling evidence
for FBI agents creating terrorist events.
After all how will the FBI stay in business now that Communism is dead?


This article is to long to post
see link for full story
It is imperative you read Sibel Edmonds book. see

http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;




http://fas.org/irp/agency/doj/oig/sedmonds.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of the Inspector General
A Review of the FBI's Actions in
Connection With Allegations Raised
By Contract Linguist Sibel Edmonds
UNCLASSIFIED SUMMARY

Office of the Inspector General
Office of Oversight and Review

January 2005
I. INTRODUCTION
This report describes the Office of the Inspector General's (OIG) investigation of allegations raised by Sibel Edmonds, a former Contract Linguist (CL) for the Federal Bureau ofInvestigation (FBI). Edmonds worked for the FBI from September 20, 2001, until March 2002, when her services as a CL for the FBI were terminated. Before that termination, she had raised a series of allegations regarding the FBI's CL program, including security concerns about actions by a co-worker related to potential espionage.

Our review found that Edmonds had written several memoranda to her supervisors raising her concerns about the co-worker. Edmonds prepared one of her memoranda, dated February 8, 2002, on her home computer, after first obtaining a supervisor's permission to write it at home. According to the FBI, that memorandum contained classified information, and Edmonds' use of her home computer to process classified information was a security violation.

Edmonds' supervisor referred Edmonds' February 8 memorandum containing her allegations to a Security Supervisor. The Language Supervisor also reported Edmonds' security violation to the Security Supervisor. After a cursory investigation of Edmonds' allegations, the Security Office concluded that Edmonds' allegations against the co-worker were unsubstantiated and that Edmonds' security violation was inadvertent.

Edmonds continued to complain about the co-worker, and asserted that FBI supervisors were protecting the co-worker. Edmonds also raised her concerns to higher-level officials in the FBI, to the OIG, and to Congress. In addition, Edmonds raised other allegations regarding the language program to the OIG. For example, Edmonds made allegations of travel voucher fraud and time and attendance abuse. Edmonds also alleged that the FBI had hired unqualified personnel and used one of them to translate military interviews despite that person's weak language skills.

On March 22, 2002, the FBI stopped using Edmonds' translation services, and on March 26 the FBI terminated her contract. Edmonds complained that the termination was in retaliation for her complaints, and the OIG agreed to investigate this matter.

II. SCOPE OF OIG INVESTIGATION
During the course of our investigation, the OIG interviewed more than 50 individuals, including FBI employees, contractors, and Department of Justice (DOJ) officials. The OIG interviewed Edmonds on three separate occasions, in April, June, and November of 2002. On January 28, 2004, the OIG wrote to Edmonds' attorney offering to meet with Edmonds again if she had additional relevant information to provide to the OIG. Her attorney said that Edmonds did not believe she had anything additional to provide the OIG, and the attorney did not request an additional meeting.

In addition, the OIG obtained and reviewed thousands of pages of FBI documents relating to Edmonds' allegations, including e-mails, notes, and other records. We also sought expert assistance with translations and other matters from another federal government agency outside the DOJ.

We closely examined nearly a dozen separate allegations by Edmonds against the co-worker which, when viewed together, amounted to accusations of possible espionage. We sought to determine, with respect to each individual allegation, whether the facts supported or refuted the allegation. However, the ultimate determination as to whether the co-worker engaged in espionage, as Edmonds' allegations implied, was beyond the scope of the OIG's investigation. We communicated to the FBI during our review that the OIG was not making such a determination, and that the potential espionage issue should be addressed by the FBI, not the OIG. Instead, our investigation focused on the FBI's response to the complaints Edmonds raised about her co-worker and other language translation issues.

According to some media accounts, Edmonds made additional allegations relating to the September 11 terrorist attacks and the allegedly inappropriate reaction by other FBI linguists to those attacks. However, Edmonds never raised those allegations to the OIG, and we did not investigate them in our review. Rather, we understand that staff from the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (9/11 Commission) interviewed Edmonds regarding these claims. Our review focused on the allegations made by Edmonds to the OIG, particularly Edmonds' allegations regarding the FBI's handling of the concerns about the co-worker, her allegations about inappropriate practices in the language program, and her allegation that the FBI retaliated against her for raising those allegations.

This report is an unclassified version of the OIG's full 100-page report on Edmonds' allegations. The OIG completed the full report in July 2004 and provided copies of it to the 9/11 Commission and several congressional committees that have oversight of DOJ. Subsequently, two members of the Judiciary Committee specifically requested that the OIG create a declassified version of the report for public release. The letter stated that releasing a "declassified" version of the report, "or at least portions or summaries, would serve the public's interest, increase transparency, promote effectiveness and efficiency at the FBI, and facilitate Congressional oversight." In response, the OIG created this unclassified summary of the full report.1

1 The FBI conducted a classification review of the full version of this report and classified it at the Secret level. Because the information was from the FBI, the OIG did not have the authority to declassify or publicly release the report on its own. We conferred with the FBI and the DOJ Civil Division in the creation of this unclassified summary of the report. We believe this unclassified version summarizes the core of the OIG report, although it does not include all of the facts in the full report or even all of the allegations addressed in the full report. Moreover, we recognize that, in some instances, it is difficult to understand this version of the report fully because much of the information from the full repo