Interview with former FBI agent Mark Rossini

[Cosmic Yak]

Read DE 650. This is a real eye opener.

This is the FBI outline and summary of the information they had prior to the attacks on 9/11. This document was never intended for public distribution.

DE 950 was an out line in Power Point, it was never intended to be a exhaustive account of 9/11. I pointed it out only since it was the only document that detailed FBI Agent Dina Corsi's refusal to give permission to Fuller to get Khalid al-Mihdhar's credit card number. Fuller told Corsi that without this number his search for Mihdhar was getting no where.

Why she refused to allow him to get this number has never been explained.

And from that, you jump to this:

No one ever made the claim that the CIA or agents and managers at the FBI HQ's knew that their actions would allow the al Qaeda terrorists to murder exactly 3000 people. This is nothing but a Red Herring.

What is claimed is that the CIA and agents and managers at the FBI HQ's knew that their actions would allow the al Qaeda terrorists to carry out a massive and horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack inside of the US that both agencies and the Bush administration had been warned about since April 2001.

Lets simplify this. You are warned a huge al Qaeda terrorist attack is just about to take place inside of the US. You are told that al Qaeda terrorists Khalid al Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi are inside of the US, clearly in order to take part in this attack. You then shut down the only criminal investigation of these al Qaeda terrorists, that could have found them and stopped this attack, before it took place, knowing full well that when you do this this will allow these terrorists to take part in this terrorist attack.

This makes a lot of sense?

Since all of these actions were deliberate, and since all of these people not only knew a huge al Qaeda terrorist attack was just about to take place inside of the US, but also knew that al Qaeda terrorists Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi were inside of the US in order to take part in this huge attack, one can conclude that the CIA and the agents and managers that they had corrupted at FBI HQ’s had deliberately allowed the al Qaeda terrorists to carry out this attack. At this point there is no rational circumstance that would allow anyone to conclude otherwise, and to this date no one has come up with any even semi-rational explanation for their actions.

Leaving aside the obvious contradiction in your first two paragraphs (a point you have yet to answer, BTW), there is a vast gulf between your evidence and your conclusions, a gulf you fill with paranoid speculation and unsupported assertions.
There is general agreement that there were major failures in intelligence-gathering and sharing prior to the attack. The 9/11 Commission was set up for this very reason, and has made recommendations aimed at avoiding a repeat of the situation. This is on the record and, as far as I know, undisputed by anyone.
What you are doing is something altogether different. You appear to have assumed a CIA conspiracy, and have dredged through all the official documents looking for whatever scraps you think will support this idea. So far, you have shown us nothing. Do you think that this is possibly because there is in fact nothing there, and that you were simply mistaken?

 

[Axxman300]

Just to throw in some real-world context...

Right now we are seeing Washington D.C. leaking everything that is not nailed down to the press vis a vis Trump and his junta. The FBI has been getting memos to the WaPo and NYT almost every day, as have sources in DoJ.

So if criminal wrong-doing by high ranking officials has generated a mountain of leaked materials in FOUR months then where is the leaked CIA and FBI documentation to prove MIHOP and LIHOP in the case of 9/11?

 

[paloalto]

Where is it stated that Fuller told Corsi that his search was going nowhere without it?

It says she recommended that it would not be prudent to ask for that information from Saudi Airlines. This appears to be in-line with recommendations from the National Security Law unit.

"This appears to be in-line with recommendations from the National Security Law unit."

LINK?

 

[benthamitemetric]

"This appears to be in-line with recommendations from the National Security Law unit."

LINK?

Exhibits 469, 681 & 682, which detail the scope of the investigation and how it was decided that the matter was to be treated as an intel investigation, not a criminal investigation. Since it wasn't a criminal investigation, there wouldn't have been grounds to subpoena the airline for the credit card info and, had Fuller done so, he would have been violating protocol and potentially jeopardizing the later admissibility of any materials received from the airline.

Remember "the wall" you tried to claim had no role in frustrating the investigation? Yah.

 

[DGM]

Exhibits 469, 681 & 682, which detail the scope of the investigation and how it was decided that the matter was to be treated as an intel investigation, not a criminal investigation. Since it wasn't a criminal investigation, there wouldn't have been grounds to subpoena the airline for the credit card info and, had Fuller done so, he would have been violating protocol and potentially jeopardizing the later admissibility of any materials received from the airline.

Remember "the wall" you tried to claim had no role in frustrating the investigation? Yah.

This is how I read it as well.

In exhibit 682 both Corsi and Fuller express their frustration and concern over how following protocols was eventually going to bite us in the arse.

 

[benthamitemetric]

*crickets*

 

[paloalto]

Exhibits 469, 681 & 682, which detail the scope of the investigation and how it was decided that the matter was to be treated as an intel investigation, not a criminal investigation. Since it wasn't a criminal investigation, there wouldn't have been grounds to subpoena the airline for the credit card info and, had Fuller done so, he would have been violating protocol and potentially jeopardizing the later admissibility of any materials received from the airline.

Remember "the wall" you tried to claim had no role in frustrating the investigation? Yah.

The poster on the forum are really good, really good at proving my points. Thank you for doing this.

You are conveniently misreading DE 682, or only partially reading DE 682.

HOW CONVENIENT!

It was not the wall that frustrated these two investigations of Mihdhar and Hazmi by first FBI Agent Steve Bongardt and then by Robert Fuller, by FBI HQ’s agent Dina Corsi and her boss SSA Rod Middleton. It was their now obvious and utterly criminal use of this phony excuse that was used to illegally shut down these investigations.

If you read DE 682, email from Dina Corsi to FBI Agent Steve Bongardt on August 29, 2001, the day after she illegally shut down his criminal investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi, she states:

“…if at such time as evidence is developed of a substantial Federal crime, [by Mihdhar and Hazmi], that evidence will be passed over the wall per the proper procedures for follow up criminal investigations, [by you and your team].”

You might think that would back up your assertion that the “wall”, frustrated these investigations.

But it doesn’t. Sorry you are dead wrong.

FBI Agent Dina Corsi admitted to DOJ IG investigators that she, [Dina Corsi] knew on August 22, 2001, and perhaps well before that, that the CIA had a photograph of Walid bin Attash taken at Kuala Lumpur at the same time Mihdhar and Hazmi were at this al Qaeda planning meeting in Kuala Lumpur, (according to the DOJ IG report, page 301), knew as did the CIA on January 4, 2001 that this clearly meant that both Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the crime of planning of the Cole bombing.

So this clearly renders the “wall” as an excuse why Robert Fullers investigations and even Steve Bongardt’s investigations could not proceed or why Fuller was not allowed to call Saudi Arabian Airlines to get Mihdhar’s credit card number completely asinine and absurd.

This literally blows your argument that the wall was a legitimate reason to shut down FBI Agent Steve Bongardt’s investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi and then block Robert Fuller's request for Mihdhar's credit card number from Saudi Arabian Airlines, “all to hell in a hand basket”!

This literally proves for once and for all time that the so called wall was nothing but a fiction used by agents and managers at FBI HQ’s to criminally withhold material information from the investigations of Bongardt and Fuller.

There are several other reasons why the wall does not apply. To re-summarize:

This caveat says:

“This NSA cable could not be given to FBI criminal investigators without written permission from the NSA General Council, unless there was imminent danger to people or property in the US.”

This was to prevent criminal FBI agents from using the information in a NSA cable in a criminal trial since the information could have been obtained using a FISA warrant instead of a criminal search warrant. This caveat did not apply to the NSA cable on Mihdhar and Hazmi and the Kuala Lumpur meeting, or to any information on Mihdhar or Hazmi for the following reasons.

First Mihdhar and Hazmi were already connected to the east Africa bombings, and the FBI had already opened a FBI criminal investigation into everyone connected to the east Africa bombings, which allowed the east Africa FBI criminal investigators, Bongardt and Fuller, to find and arrest Mihdhar and Hazmi. Corsi had the NSA cable that detailed this connection, so she knew full well that this caveat did not apply to Mihdhar and Hazmi.

Second, both Mihdhar and Hazmi were directly connected by the CIA on January 4, 2001, to the planning of the Cole bombing, a substantial Federal crime which immediately eliminated any requirement to get NSA approval to give this NSA cable with this caveat to FBI criminal investigators. The CIA knew this on January 4, 2001, Corsi was aware of this on August 22, 2001, three weeks prior to 9/11, and Middleton was sent the photo of Walid bin Attash on August 30, 2001, over two weeks prior to the attacks on 9/11.

Third, it was obvious that the information in this NSA cable had no connection to any FISA warrant, so this caveat never applied to the information in this cable. FISA warrants are only needed for NSA cables describing phone conversations when one party to the conversation was inside the US, in this phone conversation, both parties were outside of the US. The reason this caveat was on this cable and all cables at the NSA was due to bureaucratic laziness, all cables regardless if they were connected with a FISA warrant had this caveat.

Forth, Bongardt told Corsi, when she was shutting down his investigation, that since this NSA cable clearly had no connection to any FISA warrant, that she was confused, and that this caveat only applied to information that had come from a FISA warrant. He asked her to get an opinion from the FBI NSLU attorneys to see if he could start a criminal investigations and find them before they had time to carry out some horrific terrorist attack inside of the US. She and Middleton took this NSA cable to a NSLU attorney on August 28, 2001,and was told by Attorney Sherry Sabol, that since the information in this cable had no connection to any FISA warrant, FBI Agent Steve Bongardt could take part in any criminal investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi that he wanted. But she lied and told Bongardt on August 29, 2001, that the NSLU attorney had ruled he could not have any anything to do with an investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi. She even told him that if Mihdhar was captured that he could not take part in any interrogation of him?

Fifth the NSA General council had already given FBI Agent Dina Corsi written permission to give this NSA cable to FBI criminal Agent Steve Bongardt and his team on August 27, 2001, even though this was totally unnecessary, the day before she claimed to Bongardt, that she did not have this permission.

Sixth, Robert Fuller was an FBI intelligence agent, not a FBI criminal agent, so this NSA caveat never applied to him or any FBI intelligence agent, only to criminal agents.

You literally cannot makes this stuff up. Again, FBI Agent Robert Fuller was a FBI intelligence FBI agent, not a FBI criminal agent. Claiming that the wall allowed Corsi to block FBI Intelligence Agent Robert Fuller from getting Mihdhar’s credit card number just shows how little people of this forum are aware of even the most basic facts with regard to the attacks on 9/11.

Tom Wilshere, the CIA and even Dina Corsi and Rod Middleton, were all well aware of a huge an horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack about to take place inside of the US. They all were clearly aware that shutting down Bongardt’s and then Fuller’s investigation would block them from stopping this attack. Corsi and Middleton shut down these investigation anyway even when Bongardt told her and Middleton that people will die because she and Middleton were shutting down his investigation.

All of these people were well aware that their deliberate actions in shutting down Bongardt’s and Fuller's investigation of al Qaeda terrorists found inside of the US, would allow the huge al Qaeda terrorist attack to take place that these people were well aware of.

 

[benthamitemetric]

The poster on the forum are really good, really good at proving my points. Thank you for doing this.

You are conveniently misreading DE 682, or only partially reading DE 682.

HOW CONVENIENT!

It was not the wall that frustrated these two investigations of Mihdhar and Hazmi by first FBI Agent Steve Bongardt and then by Robert Fuller, by FBI HQ’s agent Dina Corsi and her boss SSA Rod Middleton. It was their now obvious and utterly criminal use of this phony excuse that was used to illegally shut down these investigations.

If you read DE 682, email from Dina Corsi to FBI Agent Steve Bongardt on August 29, 2001, the day after she illegally shut down his criminal investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi, she states:

“…if at such time as evidence is developed of a substantial Federal crime, [by Mihdhar and Hazmi], that evidence will be passed over the wall per the proper procedures for follow up criminal investigations, [by you and your team].”

You might think that would back up your assertion that the “wall”, frustrated these investigations.

But it doesn’t. Sorry you are dead wrong.

FBI Agent Dina Corsi admitted to DOJ IG investigators that she, [Dina Corsi] knew on August 22, 2001, and perhaps well before that, that the CIA had a photograph of Walid bin Attash taken at Kuala Lumpur at the same time Mihdhar and Hazmi were at this al Qaeda planning meeting in Kuala Lumpur, (according to the DOJ IG report, page 301), knew as did the CIA on January 4, 2001 that this clearly meant that both Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the crime of planning of the Cole bombing.

So this clearly renders the “wall” as an excuse why Robert Fullers investigations and even Steve Bongardt’s investigations could not proceed or why Fuller was not allowed to call Saudi Arabian Airlines to get Mihdhar’s credit card number completely asinine and absurd.

This literally blows your argument that the wall was a legitimate reason to shut down FBI Agent Steve Bongardt’s investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi and then block Robert Fuller's request for Mihdhar's credit card number from Saudi Arabian Airlines, “all to hell in a hand basket”!

This literally proves for once and for all time that the so called wall was nothing but a fiction used by agents and managers at FBI HQ’s to criminally withhold materials information from the investigations of Bongardt and Fuller.

There are several other reasons why the wall does not apply. To re-summarize:

This caveat says:

“This NSA cable could not be given to FBI criminal investigators without written permission from the NSA General Council, unless there was imminent danger to people or property in the US.”

This was to prevent criminal FBI agents from using the information in a NSA cable in a criminal trial since the information could have been obtained using a FISA warrant instead of a criminal search warrant. This caveat did not apply to the NSA cable on Mihdhar and Hazmi and the Kuala Lumpur meeting, or to any information on Mihdhar or Hazmi for the following reasons.

First Mihdhar and Hazmi were already connected to the east Africa bombings, and the FBI had already opened a FBI criminal investigation into everyone connected to the east Africa bombings, which allowed the east Africa FBI criminal investigators, Bongardt and Fuller, to find and arrest Mihdhar and Hazmi. Corsi had the NSA cable that detailed this connection, so she knew full well that this caveat did not apply to Mihdhar and Hazmi.

Second, both Mihdhar and Hazmi were directly connected by the CIA on January 4, 2001, to the planning of the Cole bombing, a substantial Federal crime which immediately eliminated any requirement to get NSA approval to give this NSA cable with this caveat to FBI criminal investigators. The CIA knew this on January 4, 2001, Corsi was aware of this on August 22, 2001, three weeks prior to 9/11, and Middleton was sent the photo of Walid bin Attash on August 30, 2001, over two weeks prior to the attacks on 9/11.

Third, it was obvious that the information in this NSA cable had no connection to any FISA warrant, so this caveat never applied to the information in this cable. FISA warrants are only needed for NSA cables describing phone conversations when one party to the conversation was inside the US, in this phone conversation, both parties were outside of the US. The reason this caveat was on this cable and all cables at the NSA was due to bureaucratic laziness, all cables regardless if they were connected with a FISA warrant had this caveat.

Forth, Bongardt told Corsi, when she was shutting down his investigation, that since this NSA cable clearly had no connection to any FISA warrant, that she was confused, and that this caveat only applied to information that had come from a FISA warrant. He asked her to get an opinion from the FBI NSLU attorneys to see if he could start a criminal investigations and find them before they had time to carry out some horrific terrorist attack inside of the US. She and Middleton took this NSA cable to a NSLU attorney on August 28, 2001,and was told by Attorney Sherry Sabol, that since the information in this cable had no connection to any FISA warrant, FBI Agent Steve Bongardt could take part in any criminal investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi that he wanted. But she lied and told Bongardt on August 29, 2001, that the NSLU attorney had ruled he could not have any anything to do with an investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi. She even told him that if Mihdhar was captured that he could not take part in any interrogation of him?

Fifth the NSA General council had already given FBI Agent Dina Corsi written permission to give this NSA cable to FBI criminal Agent Steve Bongardt and his team on August 27, 2001, even though this was totally unnecessary, the day before she claimed to Bongardt, that she did not have this permission.

Sixth, Robert Fuller was an FBI intelligence agent, not a FBI criminal agent, so this NSA caveat never applied to him or any FBI intelligence agent, only to criminal agents.

You literally cannot makes this stuff up. Again, FBI Agent Robert Fuller was a FBI intelligence FBI agent, not a FBI criminal agent. Claiming that the wall allowed Corsi to block FBI Intelligence Agent Robert Fuller from getting Mihdhar’s credit card number just shows how little people of this forum are aware of even the most basic facts with regard to the attacks on 9/11.

Tom Wilshere, the CIA and even Dina Corsi and Rod Middleton, were all well aware of a huge an horrific al Qaeda terrorist attack about to take place inside of the US. They all were clearly aware that shutting down Bongardt’s and then Fuller’s investigation would block them from stopping this attack. Corsi and Middleton shut down these investigation anyway even when Bongardt told her and Middleton that people will die because she and Middleton were shutting down his investigation.

All of these people were well aware that their deliberate actions in shutting down Bongardt’s and Fuller's investigation of al Qaeda terrorists found inside of the US, would allow the huge al Qaeda terrorist attack to take place that these people were well aware of.

Going to ignore all of this garbage and go straight to the point: Identify exactly (a) the federal crime perpetrated by Mihdhar for which there existed probable cause to subponea records concerning Mihdhar, (b) the evidence providing the basis for such probable cause, and (c) the non-intel source of such evidence.

 

[paloalto]

Going to ignore all of this garbage and go straight to the point: Identify exactly (a) the federal crime perpetrated by Mihdhar for which there existed probable cause to subponea records concerning Mihdhar, (b) the evidence providing the basis for such probable cause, and (c) the non-intel source of such evidence.

Conspiracy to murder 12, US citizens in the east Africa bombings and conspiracy to murder 17 US sailors in the Cole bombing.

HELLO. Is conspiracy to commit the murder of 29 US citizens good enough for you?

 

[paloalto]

Going to ignore all of this garbage and go straight to the point: Identify exactly (a) the federal crime perpetrated by Mihdhar for which there existed probable cause to subponea records concerning Mihdhar, (b) the evidence providing the basis for such probable cause, and (c) the non-intel source of such evidence.

Of course you will. This just shows how little you actually know about the attacks on 9/11.

 

[beachnut]

Of course you will. This just shows how little you actually know about the attacks on 9/11.

You know everything, then make up a fake conclusion based on reading minds.

 

[benthamitemetric]

Conspiracy to murder 12, US citizens in the east Africa bombings and conspiracy to murder 17 US sailors in the Cole bombing.

HELLO. Is conspiracy to commit the murder of 29 US citizens good enough for you?

I know you can make stupid, unthikning assertions based only on what you want to believe. Everyone here knows that. I'm trying to move past that. What was the actual EVIDENCE from which you surmised there was probable cause that MIHDHAR committed the crime you cite? Of such EVIDENCE, how much came from non-intel sources?

(Hint: associating with people who commit crimes does not make you a conspirator to their crimes.)

 

[paloalto]

I know you can make stupid, unthikning assertions based only on what you want to believe. Everyone here knows that. I'm trying to move past that. What was the actual EVIDENCE from which you surmised there was probable cause that MIHDHAR committed the crime you cite? Of such EVIDENCE, how much came from non-intel sources?

(Hint: associating with people who commit crimes does not make you a conspirator to their crimes.)

You wrote:

“I know you can make stupid, unthikning assertions based only on what you want to believe.”

First it just shows the complete weakness of your position when you have to resort to name calling.

Second, every one of my conclusions has been backed up with facts taken right from the official US government reports on the attacks on 9/11. You have backed up your assertions with absolutely nothing. If you believe that my facts are wrong, you should refute these facts, if you can, with your own facts and documentation. If this is just what you actually believe with no facts, you should start your own religion.

You write:

“What was the actual EVIDENCE from which you surmised there was probable cause that MIHDHAR committed the crime you cite? Of such EVIDENCE, how much came from non-intel sources?”

The FBI already had, in late 2001, a criminal investigation into the people behind the east Africa attacks, and everyone who was connected to these attacks, (per the DOJ IG report, p264)

Bin laden had already been indicted in November 1998 for the embassy bombings, making anyone who was a known part of his organization, subject to arrest. Since both Mihdhar and Hazmi had been photographed at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting, this alone made them subject to arrest. The DOJ IG report even stated that the fact that there was already an open FBI criminal investigation into the embassy bombings was enough to have allowed Bongardt to find and arrest Mihdhar and Hazmi.

Second when FBI HQ’s reviewed Mihdhar’s visa application from June 2001, it stated that he had never been in the United States before. But the State department had his earlier visa application and the IC was well aware at this time, August 2001, of his entry into the US in January 2000. This was a Federal crime, and he could have been arrested just for this.

In addition even according to FBI Agent Dina Corsi, in an August 29, 2001 email to FBI Agent Steve Bongardt she stated that: “…if at such time as evidence is developed of a substantial Federal crime, [by Mihdhar and Hazmi], that evidence will be passed over the wall per the proper procedures for follow up criminal investigations, [by you and your team].”

Since according to the DOJ IG report, page 301, she was well aware on August 22, 2001, that the CIA had a photo of Walid bin Attash, mastermind of the Cole bombing, taken at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting at the very same time that Mihdhar and Hazmi had attended this meeting, she, the CIA and the FBI HQ’s were all aware that both Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the planning of the Cole bombing. This by anyone’s thinking was the “evidence developed of a substantial Federal crime”, by Mihdhar and Hazmi. This by itself could have allowed the FBI criminal investigators, FBI Agent Steve Bongardt and his team, to find and arrest Mihdhar and Hazmi, had this information not been criminally withheld from him and his team.

Almost 3000 people were murdered because this information was withheld from FBI Agent Steve Bongardt and his team.

If you had bothered to read my earlier post instead of dismissing it and calling it garbage, you would have already known this, but it looks like you did not.

Is this enough evidence for you?

 

[benthamitemetric]

Since both Mihdhar and Hazmi had been photographed at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting, this alone made them subject to arrest. The DOJ IG report even stated that the fact that there was already an open FBI criminal investigation into the embassy bombings was enough to have allowed Bongardt to find and arrest Mihdhar and Hazmi.

You are misrepresenting the DOJ IG report. Anyone can read the section that pertains to Mihdhar here. It says NOTHING about Mihdhar being subject to arrest as a result of his attendance of the Kuala Lumpur meeting or as a result of any alleged connection he had to previous terrorist attacks. This is because his attendance of such meeting is not sufficient evidence that he committed a federal crime. This is why your posts are just stupid: you write walls of text that are laden with multiple fabrications--fabrications you are constantly and consciously adding to nearly every aspect of the fact pattern you are discussing--and then you expect people to take you seriously and read past the first lie into the mountains of lies that lay beneath.

Second when FBI HQ’s reviewed Mihdhar’s visa application from June 2001, it stated that he had never been in the United States before. But the State department had his earlier visa application and the IC was well aware at this time, August 2001, of his entry into the US in January 2000. This was a Federal crime, and he could have been arrested just for this.

Yes, it appears that Mihdhar could have been arrested for this visa issue. In fact, this is the only potential crime that was knowable to the FBI re Mihdhar prior to 9-11; however, as the DOJ IG report makes perfectly clear, there is no evidence that the FBI discovered this crime prior to 9-11. Hard to make an arrest if you don't deduce the existence of a crime. I'll let the report speak for itself, which is something you never do because it gets in the way of your lies: "We also noted that there was a clear predicate for a criminal investigation that no one appeared to notice at the time. In her EC, Donna noted that Mihdhar had previously traveled to the United States, according to information she had obtained from the INS. After the FBI’s intelligence investigation was opened, she obtained and forwarded to Richard a copy of Mihdhar’s June 2001 visa application on which he stated that he had not previously been issued a visa and had never traveled to the United States. Thus, there was a clear basis to charge Mihdhar criminally with false statements or visa fraud. Significantly, this information had been provided to the FBI without the restrictive caveats placed on NSA reports and other intelligence information. As a result, if Mihdhar had been found, he could have been arrested and charged with a criminal violation based on the false statements on his visa application. However, the FBI did not seem to notice this when deciding whether to use criminal or intelligence resources to locate Mihdhar."

In addition even according to FBI Agent Dina Corsi, in an August 29, 2001 email to FBI Agent Steve Bongardt she stated that: “…if at such time as evidence is developed of a substantial Federal crime, [by Mihdhar and Hazmi], that evidence will be passed over the wall per the proper procedures for follow up criminal investigations, [by you and your team].”

Since according to the DOJ IG report, page 301, she was well aware on August 22, 2001, that the CIA had a photo of Walid bin Attash, mastermind of the Cole bombing, taken at the Kuala Lumpur al Qaeda planning meeting at the very same time that Mihdhar and Hazmi had attended this meeting, she, the CIA and the FBI HQ’s were all aware that both Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the planning of the Cole bombing. This by anyone’s thinking was the “evidence developed of a substantial Federal crime”, by Mihdhar and Hazmi. This by itself could have allowed the FBI criminal investigators, FBI Agent Steve Bongardt and his team, to find and arrest Mihdhar and Hazmi, had this information not been criminally withheld from him and his team.

Again, Mihdhar's attendance of the Kuala Lumpur meeting was NOT evidence of a substantial federal crime. Nothing in the DOJ IG report states it was. The photo of Mihdhar was clearly foreign intel under terms of the wall and practices of the FBI thereunder.

Is this enough evidence for you?

Nope. Enough lies, though.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

FBI Agent Dina Corsi admitted to DOJ IG investigators that she, [Dina Corsi] knew on August 22, 2001, and perhaps well before that, that the CIA had a photograph of Walid bin Attash taken at Kuala Lumpur at the same time Mihdhar and Hazmi were at this al Qaeda planning meeting in Kuala Lumpur, (according to the DOJ IG report, page 301), knew as did the CIA on January 4, 2001 that this clearly meant that both Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the crime of planning of the Cole bombing.

Utterly untrue.

In early July 2001, based on recent intelligence information, the CIA had concerns about the possibility of a terrorist attack in Southeast Asia. On July 5, 2001, John sent an e-mail to managers at the CTC’s Bin Laden Unit noting “how bad things look in Malaysia.” He wrote that there was a potential connection between the recent threat information and information developed about the Malaysia meetings in January 2000. In addition, he noted that in January 2000 when Mihdhar was traveling to Malaysia, key figures in the failed attack against the U.S.S. The Sullivans and the subsequent successful attack against the U.S.S. Cole also were attempting to meet in Malaysia, and that one or more of these persons could have been in Malaysia at that time. Therefore, he recommended that the Cole and Malaysia meetings be re-examined for potential connections to the current threat information involving Malaysia. He wrote, “I know your resources are strained, but if we can prevent something in SE Asia, this would seem to be a productive place to start.” He ended the e-mail by stating that “all the indicators are of a massively bad infrastructure being readily completed with just one purpose in mind.”

On July 13, John wrote another e-mail to CTC managers stating that he had discovered the CIA cable relating to the source’s identification of “Khallad” from the Kuala Lumpur surveillance photographs in early January 2001. John began the e-mail by announcing “OK. This is important.” He then described Khallad as a “major league killer who orchestrated the Cole attack and possibly the Africa bombings.” The e-mail recommended revisiting the Malaysia meetings, especially in relation to any potential information on Khallad. Significantly, John ended the e-mail asking, “can this [information] be sent via CIR to [the FBI]?”

https://oig.justice.gov/special/s0606/chapter5.htm

Moreover, their names do not appear on the list of those deemed responsible by the US. The DOJ report says that they met with the alleged mastermind, and nothing more. The fact that these men were part of the same organisation does not prove they were all involved in every operation carried out by that organisation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Cole_bombing#Responsibility

First Mihdhar and Hazmi were already connected to the east Africa bombings, .....

Second, both Mihdhar and Hazmi were directly connected by the CIA on January 4, 2001, to the planning of the Cole bombing, a substantial Federal crime which immediately eliminated any requirement to get NSA approval to give this NSA cable with this caveat to FBI criminal investigators.

Again, complete tosh. They met Khallad, whom they suspected of being the organiser of the African embassy bombings: there is no evidence (that I am aware of) of their involvement in these attacks. Their names do not appear on the list of indictments issued for this crime:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_United_States_embassy_bombings

Conspiracy to murder 12, US citizens in the east Africa bombings and conspiracy to murder 17 US sailors in the Cole bombing.

HELLO. Is conspiracy to commit the murder of 29 US citizens good enough for you?

With reference to my points above, please provide evidence that Mihdhar and Hazmi were involved in either of these attacks, and that the FBI had this evidence prior to 9/11.

 

[carlitos]

Thanks for poring through that stuff, guys. I appreciated the reading and links.

 

[Cosmic Yak]

"Connect the dots" is usually conspiracy-speak for "create wild unfounded allegations". Let's see if your post is any different.





What I have said, and others have said repeatedly, is that it was not possible to precisely predict what kind of attack, or the time and place of said attack, Al Quaeda was planning. No-one disputes that the CIA and the FBI were aware of these people.



None of which goes to show that anyone knew when, where and what was planned. America is quite a big place, you know.



Please cite the evidence you have to support the allegation that members of the CIA and/ or FBI knew when, where, and what was planned. Please show, given the information available to them at the time, how you would have deduced what was being planned.



Again please show how the information you have mentioned above could have been used to predict that Al Qaeda would hijack 4 planes and use them as missiles to attack the WTC, the Pentagon and (we presume) the White House, on September 11th. That would be a good way to show your case has merit.
Otherwise, we are back in CT-land, pretending that unevidenced assertions, paranoia and hindsight represent legitimate historical investigation.

paloalto, when you return, perhaps you'd like to address these questions?
If you can demonstrate how you would have been able to predict and prevent the 9/11 attacks, based on information available at the time to the FBI, or the CIA, please do so. You have claimed it would be easy, so show us.

 

[benthamitemetric]

Palo Alto spent a long, long time preparing huge amounts of copy pasta walls of text that did not directly link to the sources they were purportedly based on. Because many of the things he included in such walls of text were ridiculous on their face or just otherwise logically tortured, I think few people bothered to even follow-up and verify that his purported sources support any of his assertions. Lo-and-behold, when Cosmic Yak and I took him seriously enough to put aside the obvious logical fallacies and bother going back to such sources, his fabrications were easily laid bare. Apparently he doesn't have a copy pasta wall of text at the ready in response.