paloalto:
Can you explain why the conclusions of this report (p376) do not support your claim that the FBI and the CIA intentionally withheld information about the planned attacks, so these attacks could take place unhindered?
I read that also, and of course it seems to destroy his belief.
Only if you are unaware of what else is in this DOJ IG report. Have you read this whole report, and has anyone on this forum ever read this whole report?
Your post
Quote:
Martin told the OIG that he never heard Gary make a statement that he thought that Moussaoui was going to hijack an airplane and crash it into the World Trade Center. He said that the first time that he heard that statement was in October 2001 at a meeting in FBI Headquarters involving several Minneapolis agents and FBI Headquarters employees to discuss the Moussaoui investigation. He said that during the meeting Gary made a reference to having made this statement to Martin some time in August 2001, but that Martin had never before heard Gary make the statement.
Why did you omit this part? Seems quite important to me.
DOJ IG P. 178
After the first airplane hit, Martin tried to call Minneapolis ASAC Charles but reached Rowley instead. According to Rowley, she told Martin that it was essential to get a criminal search warrant for Moussaoui's belongings. Rowley said that Martin instructed her that Minneapolis should not take any action without FBI Headquarters approval because it could have an impact on matters of which she was not aware. In her May 20, 2002, letter to the FBI Director, Rowley wrote that in this conversation with Martin she had said "in light of what just happened in New York, it would have to be the 'hugest coincidence' at this point if Moussaoui was not involved with the terrorists."
Rowley wrote that Martin replied "something to the effect that I had used the right term 'coincidence' and that this was probably all just a coincidence." Rowley told the OIG that she agreed to follow Martin's directive not to immediately seek a criminal warrant, and she was told that FBI Headquarters would call her back.
Martin told the OIG that he recalled that there was a lot of confusion when he spoke to Rowley. Martin said that he did not recall making the statement about a coincidence to Rowley. He explained to the OIG that he did not feel comfortable giving legal advice about seeking a criminal warrant, so he went to the NSLU attorney who we call Tim, who advised that the Minneapolis FBI should seek the criminal search warrant.
This is incredible. Martin, aka Michael Maltbie, told Rowley that even after the WTC towers had been attacked by aircraft, he was not going to recommend Rowley get a criminal warrant for Moussaoui's possessions. Small wonder he can't remember that his actions had allowed the al Qaeda terrorists to murder approximately 3000 people.
DOJ IG report, p. 178
While Rowley was waiting for a return call from FBI Headquarters, Minneapolis ASAC Charles was on the telephone with Don. Because Acting SAC Roy was out of the office, Charles was responsible for the Minneapolis office and had called FBI Headquarters immediately after the first airplane hit the World Trade Center. Charles had reached Don and asked him for permission to seek a criminal search warrant for Moussaoui's belongings. According to Charles, Don responded that he still did not believe that there was enough evidence to support a criminal search warrant. Charles stated that, during the course of this conversation the Pentagon was hit by another hijacked airplane, and that Don then told Charles to go to the USAO for a criminal warrant.
Don confirmed that he spoke to Charles on the morning of September 11. He asserted that he immediately told Charles that the Minneapolis FBI could
seek a criminal warrant.
DOJ IG Report, p. 189
From our review, early on the RFU appears to have discounted the concerns of the Minneapolis FBI about Moussaoui. Don and Martin believed that Minneapolis was overreacting and couching facts in an "inflammatory" way to get people "spun up" about someone who was only "suspected" of being a terrorist. The RFU downplayed and undersold the field office's concerns about Moussaoui, even writing "that there is no indication that either [Moussaoui or Al-Attas] had plans for nefarious activity."
Let's see. Moussaoui's flight instructor for his Boeing 747 training told the FBI that they were sure he was a terrorist trying to take flight training to hijack this type of aircraft. Minneapolis FBI criminal agents, after interviewing Moussaoui, also thought he was a terrorist who was getting Boeing 747 training without even having a private pilot's license to get control of an airplane to crash it into the [World Trade Center]. Al-Attas even told the FBI that Moussaoui was an Islamic extremist who told him he could easily get 4-inch knives onto a commercial airplane.
DOJ IG Report, p. 189
In response to the Minneapolis FBI's concern that it wanted "to make sure Moussaoui doesn't get control of an airplane to crash it into the [World Trade Center] or something like that," Martin dismissed this possibility, stating "You have a guy interested in this type of aircraft. That is it." As we discuss below, we believe that the RFU did not fully consider with an open mind the evidence against Moussaoui and examine in a collaborative fashion with Minneapolis how to best pursue its investigation. Rather, it quickly and inappropriately dismissed Minneapolis' information as incomplete and its concerns as fair-fetched.
This testimony is right in the DOJ IG report. This pretty much proves Martin, aka Michael Maltbie, had been told Moussaoui might hijack an airplane and crash it into the WTC towers.
The post you refer to is typical of the FBI HQ agents after the attacks on 9/11. They all had amnesia. This also shows that the DOJ IG would put erroneous testimony in this report even when they knew it was false. This report largely details the testimony of the agents and managers who had deliberately allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place.
The following is in this report. Didn't you read the whole report? It is only a little over 400 words long.
DOJ IG report 179
Moussaoui's belongings did not reveal anything that specifically provided a warning or an indication of an imminent terrorist attack. There were no plans, correspondence, or names or addresses in his computer or notebooks that linked him directly to the September 11 terrorist attacks. However, information was obtained in the search that, through further traces, was used by the government to indict Moussaoui for conspiring in the September 11 terrorist plot.
However, at the Moussaoui trial, just before the release of the unredacted DOJ IG report, FBI SA Harry Samit, lead investigator on this investigation, said once they got the warrant and got into Moussaoui’s duffel bag, they found the receipt from Ramzi bin al-Shehab to Moussaoui, traced that back to his apartment at 54 Marienstrasse, and his three prior roommates, Mohammed Atta, Marwan Al Shehhi, and Ziad Jarrah, and then to the rest of the terrorists in a few days. This renders this whole report a complete fraud. There is no way the DOJ IG Glenn Fine did not know who the lead investigator was on the Moussaoui investigation and could not have asked him about his search of the duffel bag.
Let me repeat, this renders the whole FBI IG report a a complete fraud.
Does this render the DOJ IG report worthless? Absolutely not. Even though the accounts in this report have been edited by the DOJ IG to cover up the criminal malfeasance by the FBI HQ and the CIA that had allowed the al Qaeda terrorists to carry out the attacks on 9/11, it is easy to see exactly where, in most cases, this report had been obfuscated. This report is extremely valuable to show exactly how the DOJ IG had obfuscated the information that was known by the FBI HQ and CIA to cover up their criminal action to allow the al Qaeda terrorists to carry out the attacks on 9/11. This report is mainly testimony from the very people at the FBI HQ and the CIA who had allowed the al Qaeda terrorists to carry out the attacks on 9/11. It details their lies and false testimony and, in the case of this testimonial, their strange case of amnesia. Everything in this report must be re-confirmed as true only if it is backed up with documentation now publicly available from other sources.
On August 23, 2001, Tenet was informed that Minneapolis FBI had the INS arrest Zacarias Moussaoui who the FBI thought was a terrorist trying to learn how to fly a Boeing 747 in order to fly this type of plane into the WTC towers. Minneapolis FBI was asking the CIA and Tenet for help on order to get a FISA warrant for Moussaoui's possessions including his duffle bag. Tenet already knew on August 22, 2001, that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside the US, to take part a massive al Qaeda that would cause massive casualties, yet he and the CIA completely refuse to give any help at all, refusing to even give the FBI criminal investigators the information they already had on Mihdhar and Hazmi, including that they had taken part in the planning of the Cole bombing at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting, and that they were in the US to take part in the imminent al Qaeda terrorist attack. Tenet and the CIA have never explained aine why they withheld this information from the FBI criminal investigators when they clearly knew withholding this information would result in thousands of Americans being murdered!
Perhaps the most egregious action that had allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place was the email Maltbie sent to Tom Wilshere.
On August 24, the same day that Henry (Harry Samit) was exchanging e-mails with the CIA employee about obtaining information to connect Moussaoui to a foreign power, ITOS Deputy Chief Tom Wilshere, e-mailed David Frasca and Michael Maltbie, managers at the FBI RFU unit, about the Moussaoui case. Wilshere asked whether requests had been sent out for additional information on Moussaoui, including overseas numbers he might have called, and whether the FBI had obtained photographs of Moussaoui or his roommate] that could be provided to the CIA.
[DOJ/FBI IG report, p. 151, and DE #939 entered in the Moussaoui trial].
Maltbie concluded in one of the emails he sent back to Wilshere:
“Please bear in mind that there is no indication that either of these two had plans for nefarious activity as was apparently indicated in an earlier communication.” [Ibid].
It is now clear that on August 24, 2001, Wilshere, the number two person at the FBI ITOS unit, literally also had all of the information needed to prevent the attacks on 9/11. He not only knew that an al Qaeda terrorist attack was just about to take place inside the US, an attack that would murder a large number of Americans, but also knew since August 21, 2001, three days earlier, that two al Qaeda terrorists, Mihdhar and Hazmi, were already inside the US to participate in this attack. [Ibid.]
However, Wilshere withholds this information from Maltbie and Frasca and everyone in the FBI criminal investigation units, including FBI Agent Harry Samit and FBI Agent Steve Bongardt. While Wilshere was withholding this information from Maltbie and Frasca, he was also directing FBI ITOS Agent Dina Corsi to shut down Bongardt's investigation of Mihdar and Hazmi.
It is impossible to believe that Wilshere did not know that thousands of Americans would be murdered by his direct actions to withhold this information from the FBI criminal investigators. It is also clear that when Wilshere was withholding this information on Mihdhar and Hazmi, he was following secret orders from his prior CIA managers Blee, Black, and Tenet given to him in July 2001 to never give the Kuala Lumpur information on Mihdhar and Hazmi to the FBI.
Again, if anyone has any answer to Christiane Amanpour's question to Lawrence Wright, "We know that 3000 people were murdered because the CIA did not give the information they had on Mihdhar and Hazmi to the FBI. Lawrence, can you explain this?"
This is a very simple question, just answer this one question! Explain why the CIA allowed the al Qaeda terrorists to murder the 3000 people killed on 9/11.
