Sunday, January 31, 2010

Remaining Questions


The following questions are those that we do not have adequate information (In my mind) on in order to make a final determination.

1. Who is the Man in Orange?

2. Did Mutallab know the Sharp Dressed Man?

3. Was it intended that the bomb explode?

4. Did the U.S. Government know that Mutallab had a bomb when it allowed him to board Flight 253?

5. Why is the U.S. Government seeking a plea deal for Mutallab?

6. Why did a fellow passenger call me to discuss changing my story?

7. Why are the important questions being ignored by the mainstream media?

1. Who is the Man in Orange?

The story of the Man in Orange has been previously discussed at length, so I will not state it again in this article, but who was he?

The following evidence supports the theory that we know the identity of the Man in Orange:

The Detroit Free Press released an account of Flight 253 passenger Samuel Pappy on January 29, 2010. It stated the following:

"Two bomb-sniffing dogs named Jordi and Brenda checked out hundreds of bags and carry-ons that had been deposited in Customs. They cleared every bag except one: The dogs keyed in on a soft-sided black carry-on belonging to Pappy, the Indian born man who said he helped calm other passengers during the flight.
Pappy, who lives in Georgia, said he was hand cuffed in front of other passengers, which he said he found humiliating. A police report said his bags were searched and cleared. He was released with other passengers later that afternoon".

The Free Press account verifies the following aspects of the Man in Orange:

1. Indian Man
2. Bomb-sniffing dogs were alerted to his carry-on bag and no other bags.
3. He was taken away and questioned.

There is further evidence that Pappy may have been the Man in Orange. When a fellow passenger called me in an apparent attempt to get me to change my story, he did not attempt to change my story in regards to the Man in Orange. He actually concurred with my account.

While the evidence indicates strongly that Pappy was the Man in Orange a few questions are raised in my mind.

The following evidence supports the theory that we still do not know the identity of the Man in Orange:
1. Ron Smith, spokesperson for U.S. Customs, changed the official story of the Man in Orange 5 times. Each story appearing after a public statement from myself, which discredited the official version. Why?
2. My account of the Man in Orange indicated that he was NOT handcuffed when he was taken away, but he was handcuffed after he emerged from questioning. This appears to not correspond with version 6 of the official story, which appeared in the Free Press.
3. As he was exiting Flight 253, Mutallab indicated that another bomb was on the plane.
4. How often do bomb-sniffing dogs indicate a false positive?

2. Did Mutallab know the Sharp Dressed Man?

The story of the Sharp Dressed Man has previously been discussed at length and his identity has been proven(To my satisfaction) as an agent of the U.S. Government. However, did Mutallab know the Sharp Dressed Man?

The following evidence supports the theory that Mutallab did know the Sharp Dressed Man:

1. The two men approached the final ticket gate together.
2. The Sharp Dressed Man did all of the talking.
3. The Sharp Dressed Man indicated that Mutallab was from "Sudan", which was an obvious lie.
4. The Sharp Dressed man advocated for Mutallab to board without showing a passport.
5. The U.S. Government is now admitting that Mutallab may have had help in making sure he did not get cold feet when boarding.

The following evidence supports the theory that Mutallab did not know the Sharp Dressed Man:

1. Mutallab was nervous and fidgety as he stood by the Sharp Dressed Man.
2. The account of Shama Chopra, the Montreal passenger who also saw Mutallab before boarding, also described Mutallab as being very nervous as he went through security.

3. Was it intended that the bomb explode?

The only reason I am here today is that Mutallab's bomb did not explode. We have to ask whether it was ever intended to explode?

The following evidence supports the theory that the bomb was intended to explode:

1. Mutallab went all the way to Yemen to obtain the bomb.
2. It was stitched into his underwear.
3. The quantity of explosive was enough to blow up the plane.
4. Mutallab purchased a one-way ticket without luggage (except for one small carry-on bag).

The following evidence supports the theory that the bomb was not intended to explode:

1. The bomb required a detonator to explode. This bomb did not have (Or had a malfunctioning detonator) a detonator.
2. It is difficult to believe that Mutallab would plan for this event in such great detail, but not assure that it would work.
3. A camera man filmed the entire attack from before it started until after it ended.
4. The U.S. Government allowed Mutallab on the plane in order to track him in the U.S. and catch potential accomplices.

4. Did the U.S. Government know that Mutallab had a bomb when it allowed him to board Flight 253?

This is possibly the most important question to be answered.

The following is evidence that the U.S. Government knew Mutallab had a bomb when he boarded Flight 253:

1. The U.S. Government had pre-purchased body scanning machines.
2. The U.S. Government had already begun bombing Yemen.
3. The camera man on the plane. Although, this would indicate that the U.S. Government knew Mutallab had a defective bomb.
4. The extensive evidence over the months leading up to the flight, which included wire tapped intercepts indicating that someone named "Umar Farouk" would be attempting a terrorist attack.
5. Michael Chertoff's ties to the company that produces the body scanning machines.

The following is evidence that the U.S. Government did not know that Mutallab had a bomb when he boarded Flight 253:

1. It is almost incomprehensible to believe that the U.S. Government would intentionally allow it's citizens to be blown up (Although, this would not be the case if it knew that Mutallab's bomb was defective).
2. The bomb was in Mutallab's underwear and may have been difficult to find.

5. Why is the U.S. Government seeking a plea deal for Mutallab?

One has to wonder why the government wants a plea deal when the U.S. Government has plenty of evidence to convict Mutallab.

The following evidence supports the theory that the U.S. Government has a legitimate reason for seeking a plea deal:
1. To seek additional evidence from Mutallab to catch accomplices.
2. To spare the cost of a trial (However, this trial would be very short and not too costly).

The following evidence supports the theory that the U.S. Government does not have a legitimate reason for seeking a plea deal:

1. There is plenty of evidence to convict Mutallab.
2. His crime was particularly heinous and he does not deserve a lenient sentence.
3. Anything less than a life sentence without the possibility of parole would be ridiculous.
4. Mutallab could have been treated as an enemy combatant and denied a court appointed attorney, which could have had the same result as a plea deal, as far as obtaining additional evidence. The U.S. Government already admitted that Mutallab was telling all until his attorney arrived.
5. The truth of the story would be known when evidence was presented at trial.

6. Why did a fellow passenger call me to discuss changing my story?

Approximately one week after Flight 253, and after I had been telling my story to the media, I received a call from a fellow passenger. The important parts of the conversation were as follows:

1. "Kurt, I think you should stop telling your story about the 'Sharp Dressed Man'. It was an unaccompanied minor that you saw. I am sure of it. He was escorted on the flight by an airline employee. I saw him after we landed with the employee. You will look stupid when the truth comes out".
2. "Remember when we took the buses from the plane to the terminal"?
3. "I thought you were crazy when I heard you in the media, but yesterday(One week after the flight) I had a revelation and remembered what happened".

Lets look at the reason this call was made and the importance of the above statements.

The following evidence indicates that the call was made from a concerned fellow passenger:

1. The caller was pleasant and appeared to be concerned.
2. My wife verified that he was, in fact, on our plane.
3. Maybe he did see something, but was something different than what I saw.
4. He did not say that he saw the Sharp Dressed Man before boarding.
5. He provided, on its face, a seemingly believable story.

The following evidence indicates that the call was made from someone trying to "shut me up".

1. The call was made after the caller had a revelation one week after the flight. This would be a highly unlikely event.
2. I have since discovered that the caller has ties to the U.S. Government.
3. U.S. Customs has indicated that there were no unaccompanied minors on our flight.
4. To have an airline employee as an escort, the minor must be age 11 or younger. Although Mutallab looks young (15 or 16 by my estimation), he does not look 11.
5. Why the call out of the blue to me?
6. The statement that we took buses to the terminal was not true. This statement could have been made in an effort to make me believe that the plane landed far away from the terminal. This, if true, would cover up the post-landing gaffes indicated in the January 29, 2010, Detroit News article.
7. Why indicate that he thought I was crazy? Possibly as a subliminal put down to me to make me not talk to the media.
8. Although I have since spoken to many passengers, none have indicated that they saw an unaccompanied minor either before or after landing. One passenger, however, did indicate to me that she saw Mutallab escorted by another individual to the final ticket counter.
9. The numerous amount of evidence that has since come out and now indicates that the U.S. Government intentionally let Mutallab on Flight 253.
10. The U.S. Government knew at that time, that I could not be intimidated by a government official and knew it had to try an alternative means to stop my story from getting out to the public.
11. The caller has since made the following peculiar statement (Which may not be an exact quote but it is close), which is odd considering that it is coming from a victim of a recent terrorist attack:

"The American public should forget about Flight 253 and focus on health care and the economy".

This statement appears to be a statement more attributable to a government official then a passenger of Flight 253.

7. Why are the important questions being ignored by the main stream media?

It would seem that in a free country the press would be investigative on all important questions, including those that may show corrupt/grossly negligent activities by its own government. However, as often has been the case, the mainstream media is all too quick to put the "official" story out to the public and not ask the difficult questions. As I am finding out, it is very difficult for a normal everyday citizen to have his concerns heard in the media. Any official statement from the government, however, is immediately reported worldwide. One has to wonder whether the ties between the large corporations that run the media and the U.S. Government itself, have become so tight as to jeopardize the freedom and safety of the U.S. citizens. It has come to the point that some are calling my wife and I heroes for insisting on the truthful reporting of this story. That is a very sad statement, because we are not heroes, but only eyewitnesses. The belief that we are heroes, speaks of the current sad state of affairs in this country. Those that have something to say are scared to come forward with the truth. The United States of America is no longer a free country.

I look forward to hearing the responses to this post. I know some of you will feel strongly in support of one side or the other on each of the above questions. However, I take no position on these questions at this time. I also look forward to hearing any other questions anyone would like me to blog about, as this is a very involved story and I acknowledge that I may have missed some further unresolved questions.

58 comments: said...

Speak truth, remain in integrity and stay safe. I am going to post a more detailed comment at my blog about what concerns me about all of this from a long view.

Anonymous said...

Here is some food for thought. I would love to know what you and Kurt think about this.
Yemen: Behind Al-Qaeda Scenarios, a Geopolitical Oil Chokepoint to Eurasia
I co-host a show on Patriot's Heart Network called Fan The Fire with CJ and Tallulah. We air on BlogTalkRadio every Saturday evening from 9:00 to 11:00 EST. We would love to have you as our guest this coming Saturday. How may I contact you to speak about this?
Thank you and Kurt for keeping this story from being buried. You are doing a great job. It is a sad state of affairs when the mainstream media is any administration's propaganda machine.

Anonymous said...

If someone was video tapping this ON the airplane, what do you suppose was going to happen to this video IF the plane exploded. Wouldn't the video be destroyed along with everything else? Which kind of verifies that the plane was not going to explode. Is it possible that the "terrorist" was also dupped into beleiving this was for real? Is it possible that the US government has someone placed strategically within this group who could make this bomb ineffective. Possibly this is why this event is being covered protect the under cover person within the terrorist group???

robert said...

Kurt, a word of advice. You are plumbing your experience in a rational manner, which is taking you into a maze of unresolved questions. The problem is that you will not get rational feedback, only evasion and contradictory "information".

I had this experience while working for the Canadian House of Commons. To my detriment, I discovered that you cannot bring people who are essentially drugged with the feeling (delusional in almost all cases) that they are "insiders" to deal with you as just a fellow human being. And there appears to be an intentional policy of filling management positions in bureaucracies with such suggestible persons, with whom objective communication is impossible.

If you continue your campaign without understanding the above, then you will simply exhaust yourself with unresolved paradoxes.

We have all been conditioned. You state: "It is almost incomprehensible...that the U.S. Government would intentionally allow it's citizens to be blown up". This is conditioned thinking. Escaping it is crossing the Rubicon, made all the harder by the natural resistance of the mind to admitting unpleasant possibilities that will be hurtful to it forever after.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for keeping this story alive.

Another reason for the Govt doing a plea deal is to prevent additional information from getting out to the public that would call into question the 'official' story.

My opinion is the bomb was never intended to explode nor could it without a detonator. Further, I believe this man was set up to carry this explosive material by agents of the US Govt, the motive being to keep alive the war on terror and give a nice push to the naked body scanners.

Why does the govt need to lie about what happened except to cover their own tracks?

The whole idea of putting explosive in ones underwear is ludicrous and I keep scratching my head about that one.

PismoPam said...

What a relief to have people like you speaking up, posting online where we can see what is going on. My question is this: if the sharp dressed man was allowed into the airport because of his US security did Mutallab find him/know him?? If the government says that sometimes people are allowed in the country even though they are on the watch list, in order to be followed, how in the world does that add up to him arriving at the airport with a guy who has US security clearance? Is the sharp dressed man a double agent? I am so impressed with the courage you are showing, and so glad that in many ways the internet will protect you.

Anonymous said...

Where's the sketch?

Rudy Dekkers said...

Wow. The passenger in your question #6 is "Beau Taylor" right?

I wonder if he is sort of a makeshift "Gerald Posner" for flight 253--only actually claiming to be at the scene of the crime. said...

I have begun to deconstruct the above anonymous comment and have both initial and additional concerns with what looks to me to be the 8th government fabrication. My initial concerns are this: If a client tells me 7 lies in 30 days and then tells me the reason that he told you 7 lies is "this", I am going to look at the 8th story with skepticism and critical thinking. My 2nd initial concern is a sense that if people "solve" their problems by lying (or any other means), they have a tendency to continue their initial pattern. I have additional concerns about the claim of "cover up" to hide the "hidden operative" and want to think them through clearly before presenting them. I grew up in the up in the U.P, and sometimes I have to translate Northern Michigan into English so that others can understand what I am saying. Bottom Line: There are somethings about this claim just ain't right, in light of evidence and facts.

Anonymous said...

Hi Kurt,
In regards to the sharp dressed man, you say...
"his identity has been proven(To my satisfaction) as an agent of the U.S. Government"

and on the person who called you a week after the incident...
"I have since discovered that the caller has ties to the U.S. Government"

Can you elaborate on these two comments... i.e what discovery/info has led you to believe these two individuals have ties to, or are part of the US Gov't?


KurtHaskell said...

I have decided to not go back to the hypnotist and obtain a sketch for two reasons.

1. My first visit uncovered only a few more details. I don't believe I saw enough of the facial characteristics of the Sharp Dressed Man in order to make an accurate sketch.

2. It was very hard for me to relive the entire episode under hypnosis once, and I am not too anxious to do it again. This has been a very difficult experience, and at this point, I don't even like looking at airplanes or even driving by the Detroit airport. Reliving the entire experience for a third time is not what I want to do right now.

KurtHaskell said...

Anonymous, please note the following:

1. The Refernce to the Sharp Dressed Man being an agent of the government was described by me in detail in a recent blog post. Look back a few articles.

2. I would consider someone who has and continues to receive his income from a federal government source as someone with ties to the government.

Anonymous said...

Should we believe the US government wanted to find out who Mutallab was going to meet with in the US but were caught by surprise when he tried to detonate a bomb? This appears to be Patrick Kennedy's suggestion.

It doesn't make sense.

1)One of the controversies was all the information in the intel chain that presumably wasn't shared with the TSA.

2)Evidently Mutallab had an intel handler to get him on the plane.

3)Perhaps one or two intel agents on the plane. The video man and the man in orange.

Should we believe that despite all the electronic/human intel, nobody discovered or suspected Mutallab had an explosive? It's not credible. We are supposed to believe US intel are keystone cops. While it may be reassuring it doesn't ring true at all.

Greg Bacon said...

7. Why are the important questions being ignored by the main stream media?

Why, because CNN, FOX, NYT and the WaPo are nothing more than government propaganda outlets posing as news outlets

When this story broke on the cable news channels, I had the feeling that something had been comprised, since they ran with the story non-stop, repeating endlessly the same scraps of news.

Tell the Big Lie long enough and loud enough and people will believe.

Anonymous said...

Are the Haskells, and even Alex Jones tasked with protecting the Israeli role in this potential false flag? It would appear so, considering we have YET ANOTHER story that fails to point out that, just like on 9/11, the airport in question had its security handled by ISRAELI company ICTS. Just like on 9/11, same Israeli company. Seems some questions are not being asked…….

KurtHaskell said...

Anonymous, I am not protecing anyone. It is ridiculous for you to make that statement. Perhaps you should read the last sentence of this post. I will blog about your concerns when I get a second.

SteveG said...

"Health care and the economy!!!"

For a victim of the attack to suggest you stop talking is HIGHLY suspicious. This is indeed a sign of an incompetent insider. What an insult to your intelligence.

If indeed this person was on the plane perhaps he was the one filming the event!

Human said...

I understand it's a difficult process you are going through, but I'm very happy that you are beginning to understand. Because of your experience, coupled with your desire for fairness and knowledge, you have been forced to accept certain facts. I call it Situational Awareness. Because of the false propaganda that has been instilled in generations of Americans, most do not have the capability or desire. Keep up the thoughts and deeds. You are obviously making a difference. Or else the racketeers would not go to such lengths to ignore, discredit and persuade you. Their greatest fear is that the general populace will not only realize that they are indeed slaves, but will do something about it.
Peace. said...

My sense is that Mr Anon is connected with US intelligence and is working hard to lay down false trails so that the foxes elude the hounds. His first scenario could only come from the business. Careful examination of it, taking each government lie one by one and trying to imagine how the lie would protect uncover officers, leads to the conclusion that scenario is the 8th governmen lie. Previous government lies would protect no one undercover. All of what the government has spoken, either lie or truth, would not protect under cover officers. That 300 would be put at risk to save 1 person really doesn't make sense either. When I took a course from a former CIA officer for my master's degree, I remember him teaching that in constructing operations,the CIA plans its retreat before it plans its advance. My sense is that Flight 253 operation went so badly and that it was a US intelligence operation was so transparent, that the after stories of lies were not planned,and are stories being made up as the news goes along, that concede aspects of truth but hide the core truth. I guess that is why we have in our legal tradition the phrase "the whole truth". And that's likely the only place that the whole truth can emerge in this case, in court with a no nonsense judge who won't waver from the implications that the whole truth will bring. That Mr Anon's question about the sketches went straight to "where" bothered me and Daniel Ellsburg's office burglary came to mind. Last question I would ask about sketches would be "where". Kurt, it might not make sense to enter a public debate with a case being brought. With a likely annual budget of $500 billion, on books and off, US intelligence can pay people $70,000 a year to trouble people whose pursuit of truth and their own self interest, troubles them. Stay well and stay stay safe. Remember that experiencing the serious possibility of death at 20,000 feet has been difficult. Cut yourself a little slack and enjoy the parts of life that are enjoyable. They are still there.

canadian30 said...

I commend you two for getting this story out. I have left links to your blog in as many places as I could, I feel this can't get buried or forgotten. There was a documentary on a Canadian channel last friday on airport security. Under the comments section on the website, there is a man named Raman Chopra that claims to be in constant contact with you, Kurt. He says his wife was on the same flight. This might be nothing, but just found it interesting that he was the only other one that brought this up. My sincere thanks to you again...there are many behind you! Here is the link to that comments section

Anonymous said...

I believe that the intent was to blame Yemen for attacking us. recently, we and the Saudis have been firinf missiles in Yemen and this started after the Yemenis released the original people arrested for the attack on the USS Cole. They made a big bust in the Cole case where they arrested a bunch of Mossad agents. Ever since, our friends in Israel probably have teurned us onto beating up the Yemenis.

Anonymous said...

The issue here is the possibility that there are opportunities to get the "people" behind certain actions - those, for instance, that take away citizen rights to "protect" the "people." The more "terrorist" actions, the more the "people" need to be protected.

In particular, look at 9/11 and the three buildings that came down - Towers 1, 2 and Building 7 - Recently it was shown that unexploded nanothermite, an explosive used for planned detonation of buildings, as well as minute molten spheres of metal, showing that much of the nanothermite was exploded, were components of the dust of those demolished buildings. Coincidentally, the world's largest elevator renovation was going on at the World Trade buildings prior to 9/11. Opportunity for planting nanothermite at floor levels? The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) think tank wrote that a "new Pearl Harbor" would be required to get the "people" behind a war action and takeover of the Middle East.

Consider what new laws have come into effect to protect the people as a result of this event you experienced on the plane.

One must take off blinders, pre-conceived notions, belief structures and platitudes to see things more clearly.

Tony Ryals said...

Small world.Senator Carl Levin's cousin is U.S.Ambassador to Holland .Also interesting that the Dutch officials helping to cover up for ICTS also appear to have skeletons in their own closets.

Connections Count in Obamaland

U.S Ambassador to The Netherlands, Fay a cousin to
both senator Carl Levin and congressman Sandy Levin...

Christmas Amsterdam:
Obama's Drunken, Drug Running and Paedophile Helpers

The first Dutch actor to make a public statement was the Minister of Justice, Ernst Hirsch Ballin. It is a mystery how this man ever made it back to a cabinet position, after being forced to resign in 1994 as justice minister for his involvement in a billion dollar drug trafficking operation. The man is also suspected of paedophilia. Moreover, the highest ranking public servant in the justice ministry is a notorious paedophile.

Asilah said...

Firstly i would like to thank the Haskels for keeping this story alive, due to the fact that the bottom line is Islam is being looked at falsely. and Muslims are being targeted which is clear. Ok. My question is why every time there is a false flag event like this, it has to have planes involved. All of these Muslims in the U.S. who may so-called dislike its actions or polices etc.. and they so-called hate America, want to blow people up? They can just go into a crowded mall and make it happen. But this is not the case. Open your eyes. Look just a lil deeper. Its not hard to see who is pulling the strings. Why a plane? or in a place where there are really no strategic eye witnesses? Its either on a plane, on a army base i.e.(fort dix / ft hood) not to mention the timing (state of the union speech). Its going to keep happening, because the American people have no backbone. The constitution unfortunately is dying. The constitution is whats keeping you and I from being in control camps. The pesky constitution is in the way no doubt. Ask yourself. will u give up your liberties for freedom? HA! yes i know.. how can u when it means the same thing, but unfortunately alot of Americans dont know the difference. Look at this mutaalib guy. ARE u kidding me! Im not saying he is innocent, because I WASNT THERE and i dont know. Analyze the factors. I was amazed at the Haskells story, and i was happy. Happy that someone saw something. I will keep following your story. I believe you. I will spread your story.. no doubt! btw.. im a black woman who happens to be a muslim. Im mentioning this because I want the truth and i want the real perps who murdered on 9/11 and played with your lives to face justice.

Human said...

Anon 1:46pm Please provide the Mossad link(s).

Is it the following you refer to?
"Tuesday, 7 October 2008
BBC News
Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh has said the security forces have arrested a group of alleged Islamist militants linked to Israeli intelligence.
Mr Saleh did not say what evidence had been found to show the group's links with Israel, a regional enemy of Yemen.
The arrests were connected with an attack on the US embassy in Sanaa last month which killed at least 18 people, official sources were quoted saying.

Israel's foreign ministry has rejected the accusation as "totally ridiculous".

"A terrorist cell was arrested and will be referred to the judicial authorities for its links with the Israeli intelligence services," Mr Saleh told a gathering at al-Mukalla University in Hadramawt province.
"Details of the trial will be announced later. You will hear about what goes on in the proceedings," he added.
The 17 September attack was the second to target the US embassy since April. Militants detonated car bombs before firing rockets at the heavily fortified building.

Mr Saleh did not identify the suspects, but official sources were quoted saying it was the same cell - led by a militant called Abu al-Ghaith al-Yamani - whose arrest was announced a week after the attack."

My opinion for the questions
1)Who is the Man in Orange?
Most likely CIA/MOSSAD (for all intents and purposes they are the same w/Mossad dominant).

2)Did Mutallab know the Sharp Dressed Man?
Yes. In as much Mutallab knew that he was facilitating his boarding. And what a reassurance for young patsy.

3)Was it intended that the bomb explode? At 1st I was in the no cat. Then the makings and trigger of the device has been described in different ways. Then I think of video tape man. W/that man in mind, I say no.

4) Did the U.S. Government know that Mutallab had a bomb when it allowed him to board Flight 253?
Yes and No. The Racketeers knew. Low level Security is told "it's an "exercise"/"asset"/"we got him no worries", or something to that effect. We do know that the "authorities" at least found out that Mutallab was on bd. when flt. 253 was enroute.

5)Why is the U.S. Government seeking a plea deal for Mutallab?
No Discovery. Kill the story. The Plea Deal was made long ago.

6)Why did a fellow passenger call me to discuss changing my story?
Soft pressure. Maybe some more of that. Next come the Kiddie Traps, Beefcake Traps, Honey Traps, IRS audits, Client Traps(to create misconduct) etc. Or they kill you.
7)Why are the important questions being ignored by the mainstream media?
It's their job.
"The CIA owns everyone of any significance in the major media."
William Colby former CIA Director, later found dead after taking a Midnight Canoe ride. Just like the Mafia, there's only one way to leave the Racketeers Club. And sometimes the club is what is used. Think Goodfellas/Cornfield/Baseball Bat and you get the idea of the condition that Colby was found in.


Tony Ryals said...

In case no anyone has missed this story about Israeli airport spying in South Africa.Note that ICTS International and El Al Israeli airline have closer relations than one would believe at first.
In 1999 El Al was part of an ICTS press release claiming to be hiring ICTS in order to promote the sell of their worthless stock shares to buy Huntleigh and contracts on Logan Boston and Newark airports and bit more to line their offshore accounts.

November 23, 2009
Have Israeli spies infiltrated international airports?
by Jonathan Cook

South Africa deported an Israeli airline official last week following allegations that Israel’s secret police, the Shin Bet, had infiltrated Johannesburg international airport in an effort to gather information on South African citizens, particularly black and Muslim travellers.

The move by the South African government followed an investigation by local TV showing an undercover reporter being illegally interrogated by an official with El Al, Israel’s national carrier, in a public area of Johannesburg’s OR Tambo airport.

The programme also featured testimony from Jonathan Garb, a former El Al guard, who claimed that the airline company had been a front for the Shin Bet in South Africa for many years....

Tom said...

Hey Kurt & Lori,

I wanted to take a little time to fully think this through before posting. When I had to put it all in writing, I had a few revelations.

Quick Answers:

Who is the Man in Orange?
Most likely an uninvolved civilian but unresolved.

Did Mutallab know the Sharp Dressed Man?
Most likely, no.

Was it intended that the bomb explode?
Most likely, yes.

Did the U.S. Government know that Mutallab had a bomb when it allowed him to board Flight 253?
Trick question. U.S. Government in whole, definitely no. Key parts, most likely yes.

Why is the U.S. Government seeking a plea deal for Mutallab?
Most likely, to conceal implicating information.

Why did a fellow passenger call me to discuss changing my story?
He's a dork.

Why are the important questions being ignored by the mainstream media?
Power, money, and job retention.

Longer Answers:

Who is the Man in Orange?
Three possibilities: an accomplice, an agent, or an uninvolved civilian.

From everything that has been reported recently, it looks to me like there was no plan for after the incident. I see nothing that points to an operation once the plane landed. By how crappy they performed, it sadly appears to just be our everyday airport officials at work.

To answer the question, we have to look at how the Man in Orange incident occurred. It was over 2 hours after you got off the plane before the dogs arrived and he was taken away.

If it was a accomplice with actual explosives, he would have set it off by then or at least the arrest would have been a much bigger scene. They freak out when someone cuts a line, imagine what they would do after finding a real bomb in the airport. Also, the chances of them having another bomber in secret custody goes against logic considering their bumbling of everything else and reading Miranda rights to AM.

If it was an agent, there is no reason for his bag to trigger the dog. An agent would not be carrying anything detectable or using real identification, and would be trained to pass though with everyone else, no arrest. Also, the FBI showed you a photo of him. I would doubt the agents that visited you would have a picture of a govt asset with them knowing you could probably recognize him. It would only help your recollection, something they wouldn't want.

Uninvolved civilian seems most likely with a caveat. The news report said he had a soft bag. If you look at the pictures of the bomb, it is made of a powder and it did ignite, but not detonate. If his bag was on the floor near the incident it could have been contaminated during the scuffle. He says he watched it occur, but I don't know where he was sitting or where his bag was located. The dog is trying to find a particular smell to please it's master and get praised. It will react to even the slightest matching smell. It didn't have to be something in the bag. They don't get punished for being wrong, they just don't get the praise and treat during training so they try to be right.

The problems are the bag's unknown location, the handcuffs issue, and the MSNBC reporter saying it four days before the Chief of Customs. So while I consider it most likely, I also agree that it is unresolved.


Tom said...

Did Mutallab know the Sharp Dressed Man?
The SDM could be one of four possibilities: a figment of your imagination, an uninvolved civilian, an accomplice, or an agent.

According to the Dutch, it is a figment of your imagination. This is the most unlikely. You would still be asked to try to identify who thought you saw even if they didn't have video of him with AM at the exact time you say you saw them. There are thousands of cameras in that airport, impossible for SDM to not be on a few.

Your fellow passenger wants us to believe the SDM was an uninvolved civilian. For that to be true, the black guy you saw him with would have to not be AM. There is no reason to doubt you know it was AM, so this is unlikely. More on your fellow passenger later.

The same excuse from the Dutch eliminates the possibility of the SDM being a real accomplice. There would be no reason for authorities not to acknowledge him and you would be asked to identify him. All the Dutch have done is implicate themselves.

That makes the SDM most likely an agent. It does not mean that he is directly employed by the U.S. Government. It only means he performed as a friendly asset, and thus an agent in the definition sense. Who the SDM actually works for is not known, but he did play a roll. There is no reason to believe that the SDM wasn't there to actively help AM bypass security. There would be no reason to draw this attention otherwise. So if this is true then at a minimum, AM had to know the SDM would be there to help him, and AM had to participate in the deception through security. That makes the SDM a part of his training for the mission.

Considering the SDM is a part of his training and at the same time a friendly asset, the SDM is most likely someone he was told to expect, not someone he knew.

The key to the SDM is his roll and his costume. He is the Sharp Dressed Man. From your description, I am picturing a confident, dignified, man of means. That is the character AM would expect to get him through security. A person like his father or his father's associates. It would be normal for him. It is not normal for airport workers, though. That is why they were sent to see the manager. The only logical explanation of what you saw is that the SDM needed to convince AM he was helping him deceive security, when in fact he was being taken to see someone else who was also involved and had the authority to get him on the plane. No real manager would fall for that line of BS. It would be reasonable to assume it is known protocol. It is only their job to allow or deny boarding of that plane at that point, and they were probably instructed to refer any problems to this second person. As you can see by no airline employees ever being named or cited, they are easily controlled if needed after the fact.


Tom said...

Was it intended that the bomb explode?
This is the hardest question to answer. After thinking about it over and over, I have to say most likely, yes.

First, "Mutallab purchased a one-way ticket" is not correct. It was a round-trip ticket. Second, "The U.S. Government allowed Mutallab on the plane in order to track him in the U.S. and catch potential accomplices" is not established fact. I know about the Detroit News article you are referring to. The reporter is incorrect about Patrick Kennedy's testimony. He did say that they don't immediately revoke visas because of this reason, but he did not admit that this had occurred in this instance. You will find no other reporters saying he said that. It is a simple case of the DetNews reporter getting it wrong. It is possible and plausible, but not confirmed as fact. Neither of these are important to answering the question.

Here is a simple description of the bomb from Wiki: The bomb was more than 80 grams (3 oz) of pentaerythritol tetranitrate (PETN), a crystalline powder that is often the active ingredient of plastic explosives, the high explosive triacetone triperoxide (TATP), and other ingredients.

In order for the PETN to explode, it needs a smaller blast or "shock". This is what the normal detonators are for. That is most likely the reason for the TATP, which is the most volatile of all the explosives in the "plastic" family. The TATP and maybe some of the other ingredients were to act as the detonator for the PETN. I see no reasonable explanation for the bomb maker to go to the trouble and danger of adding TATP in such a complex formula unless the maker intended it to work.

Because of the firecracker sound heard, there was an attempt at detonation. The only possibilities are that this is what the bomb was supposed to do or that AM failed to implement correctly. With his "deer in headlights" behavior, AM either was surprised it didn't work or he froze when injecting the syringe and didn't inject enough of the liquid. The syringe was reported to be on fire and when recovered it was completely melted. Since he acted nervous the whole time before, I doubt he manned up and it was just surprise. That would make the most likely scenario that he inserted the syringe, started to press down on the plunger, a chemical reaction started, he tensed up and stopped pressing. Without enough of a chemical reaction present it only created a small pop and caused the remaining liquid in the syringe catch fire, but the TATP was not detonated.

There where multiple witness reports of the cameraman. The FBI even announced they wanted to find him and the video. There is every reason to believe he did record the entire attack from before it started until after it ended.

Who was the cameraman? Three possibilities: an uninvolved civilian, an accomplice, or an agent. If he was an uninvolved civilian he would have stepped up immediately, so this is highly unlikely. If he was an accomplice his roll in the mission was completely pointless, so this is also unlikely. That would make the most likely choice an agent.

But why would an agent be on board a plane essentially recording his own death? That is where the rubber meets the road.


Tom said...

To understand my conclusion, you need to understand the origin of the "underwear bomb". The first incident occurred four months earlier on August 28 during an assassination attempt against Prince Mohammed bin Nayef, the Saudi Deputy Interior Minister in charge of counterterrorism. Obama sent John Brennan over there who said that "right after that (August) attack, I went out, I met with Prince Mohammed Bin Naif. I, in fact, saw the room where the attempted assassination took place. That information was provided to us by the Saudi government. We disseminated information broadly. There was no indication, though, that al Qaeda was trying to use that type of attack and that modus operandi against aircraft. We were very concerned about it from an assassination standpoint, and we continue to look at all the evidence that is out there so we can take the steps necessary to prevent any types of attack from taking place." And that visit started the process by which we worked with Saudis on the forensics of the attack and the technique, which we did over the next several weeks.

The August Attempt on Saudi Prince Mohammed - and the Link to Flight 253

There is a key overlooked point here. The assassin was sitting a few feet away from the prince, got blown to smithereens, and the prince was unharmed.

Although we are told the quantity of explosive was enough to blow up the plane, that is only a half-truth. Yes it is enough to cause some serious damage, but it would have to be close to the actual plane to cause enough damage. Based on what everyone obviously knew, including the bomb maker, just having it in your pants sitting in a seat is not enough. Yet this is exactly what AM was told to do.

The other key point is the timing of when AM was told to do it. I have never bought in to the "he did it ten minutes before landing so the plane would be over America" line. For one thing it is crap. The plane would have been over Canada. There is a much more likely reason for this.

So what would have happen if the bomb exploded? AM would be a goner, the seat would be destroyed, others directly nearby injured, possible breach of the aircraft skin, and possible small fire. But the plane would not have been disabled or crashed. Anyone who knew what happened in Saudi knew this, which includes our govt and thus the camera man. That is the real reason for the ten minutes out timing. So the plane could land. Once this explosion happened, there was no need for any further secret operations on the ground. That was supposed to be handled "naturally".

So most likely, yes the bomb was intended to explode.

However, no you were not intended to die. It would have been a horrific scene, splattered terrorist guy everywhere, the video from the cameraman would been spread all over the world news, and the official story would have worked flawlessly. Remember, how would we know to be scared of underwear and need the nudie machines if the plane had crashed?


Tom said...

Did the U.S. Government know that Mutallab had a bomb when it allowed him to board Flight 253?
The U.S. Government as a whole is what you saw at the airport. 99.9% of the govt would be clueless of the actual operation. It's the 0.1% that perform these kinds of operations and of course top leaders, including Obama, knew.

Why is the U.S. Government seeking a plea deal for Mutallab?
Most likely, to conceal implicating information.

There were many witnesses so the government does not have to rely on a confession from him and he has no information we want. Every indication says we help him.

A terrorist in a few thousand pieces would not have been able to talk. Now they have a huge loose end.

Why did a fellow passenger call me to discuss changing my story?
From who you describe, it must be referring to Taylor. I read all the comments he left on mLive, and it is most likely that he is simply one of those people who absolutely refuses to think our govt would be involved in any kind of "conspiracy theory". These type of people have no understanding whatsoever of how the federal govt actually works and he appears to accept Double-Think without hesitation as long as it fits his world view. It is interesting to note that he said in one of his comments he saw the cameraman and even said where he was sitting. Yet even that doesn't spark any intellectual curiosity with him.

Bottom line, he's a dork. He has already proven himself wrong in every deduction and has disappeared back to the middle east. He is same kind person who would leave an anonymous message calling Lori a bimbo. Ignore him.

Why are the important questions being ignored by the mainstream media?
Power, money, and job retention. All the national media is owned by a few companies directly affected by politics. They stopped asking the important questions long ago.

So that's my take at this point in time. I can only go by what I read here on the internet, though. I would love to hear your thoughts on my conclusions.


Phil M. said...

Interesting analysis, Tom. I'm interested in what Kurt, Lori, and others think of it.

RotgutSaloon said...

Eyewitness accounts are notoriously inaccurate, don't put too much into whether others saw what you saw. Remember, you're trying to reconstruct events that you weren't paying much attention to at the time.

On the other hand, the level of deception (lies) that governments engage in just about makes your case.

Anonymous said...

Thank you for presenting this information in the way you did, in this case, the questions are just as importnat as the answers.

I've had a uncomfortable feeling in my gut since this event and your testimony and honest eyewitness accounting confirm my gut feelings on this. I hate to use the cliche but it sounds like a "false flag" type of event designed to cause even more fear than exists already. By standing up and telling the world what you witnessed, the rest of us can feel more secure in the hope that these plots will continue to be exposed and the real terrorists will be braught to justice in US courts, becuase they are US citizens. Thanks you! said...

Direct Answers:
1. Who was Orange Man? According to eyewitness reports, a sniffer dog determined that Orange Man had explosive. The FBI moved the other passengers from the danger. Orange Man was led away in handcuffs. Government says orange man doesn't exist. Too many passengers say he does. Government says Orange Man exists, was harmless and released.
2. Did Bomber know Sharp Dress Man? Bomber knew Sharp Dresser well enough to shut up while Sharp Dresser attempted to board him without passport...knew him well enough to follow to manager's office before boarding alone.
3.Was "Explosive Device", in Bomber's words,intended to explode? Not enough information to know if device was sabotaged. Bomber intended for it to explode.
4. Did Government know Mutallab was a bomber? Government knew he was flying. Newsweek Dec 25: US approves passenger list for take off. Government requested visa not be revoked and likely wanted him to fly. Father warned CIA Station Chief that son was dangerous. Government could reasonably expect Mutalab to have explosives.
5. Why a plea bargain in a simple case? The not so simple truth might come out in an open court. Less risk of that in plea bargain than in pursing a trial.
6.Why a call to tell a false story?
From all appearances, the request to bend the truth came from a person likely linked to US intelligence. That the bomber had an accomplice appears to be particularly difficult aspect of truth for the government. Hence the invitation to lie.
7. Why nothing of import in MSM? MSM presents information and misinformation bent to a purpose. It appears that the MSM is helping some portion of US government to get away with attempted murder of 300 crew and passengers.
It amazes me what a powerful story the facts tell without theoretic embellishment.

Mary S. said...

You guys are awesome. I am glad that someone on that flight is willing to stand up and call B.S. to the gibberish they typically spew in the papers and on TV. There are probably many other "Americans" that know information about the holes in this story but do not have the courage or compassion for their country to speak out. Every time I hear a new story about "terrorism" everywhere, I see it as another attempt to bludgeon US citizens into a state of fear. I am not a believer in Al-Qaeda and their threats, because there are factions of this government that are far more evil.
Keep up the good work and thank you!

three treasonists said...

Hi Kurt and Lori,

My question is this. Why didn't the underwear bomber go in the bathroom to ignite his bomb? Nobody could possibly stop him in there. Why take the chance of another passenger stopping you? Same question for the shoe bomber who was stopped by a 90 pound stewardess. I don't believe they were too stupid to figure this out, and I think there must be some other reason.

RealityZone said...

IMHO: This plan was designed to fail.
A cheap entry ticket into Yemen.

Tony Ryals said...

The 'white semites' at ICTS International may miss a beat now and then but they never quit or pretend to they noticed they missed a beat.Convicted Israeli government money launderer Menachem Atzmon is so full of himself and more confident than
ever post 9/11 that even his stock frauds against Americans are given
complete immunity.Below is ICTS's latest post flight 253
self promo from a coup le of days ago.
Also a quote from my comment re IRS and ICTS on the scammy 'sho' or 'naked short conspiracy' board that the SEC set up to distract from real shorting and organized stock crimes such as illegal pumping and dumping that can all be lumped into the SEC's
'naked shorting files'.Believe it or not the Securities Exchange Commission is colluding with stock
fraudsters including the CIA and its In-Q-Tel,etc.,Israeli mossad or mafia or whatever which is just like Russian mafia.
I can only conclude that stock fraud funded 9/11 no matter how you look at it.ICTS International would not have been at Logan Airport,
etc., had stock fraud not allowed them to buy Huntleigh airport security services.The Israeli Odigo firm was-is also incorporated in U.S. AND HAD U.S. government security responsibilities and contracts and yet they were the first to be informed in advance about Al Qaeda and first supposedly Osama bin Laden's 9/11 attack.It and its Comverse parent company were and are stock frauds against Americans by high level Israeli government connected individuals !And it appears stock fraud against Americans by well connected Israelis greatly exceeds that of official U.S.military aid to Israel.And this isn't even considering the danger of leaving America open to corporate sabotage.

February 01, 2010 04:00 PM Eastern Time
Experian PLC and I-SEC Technologies, B.V. to Provide Document Checking
Technology for the Fight against Fraud
AMSTELVEEN, Netherlands--(BUSINESS WIRE)--ICTS International N.V.
(ICTSF. OB) through its wholly owned subsidiary I-SEC Technologies
B.V., a global leader in identity document authentication and
management and Experian, the global information services company,
today announced a partnership to provide document checking technology,
commonly used in airports, to private and public sector organizations
in the UK....


Subject: File No. S7-19-07
From: Tony Ryals
Affiliation: 9/11:U.S.IRS,SEC,AG Mukasey,Homeland Security Michael Chertoff,Israeli ICTS International Fraud


I ONLY DISCOVERED LAST NIGHT THAT THE IRS COMMISSIONER(Douglas Shulman) APPEARS HIMSELF TO BE AN OFFSHORE HEDGE FUND KIND OF GUY AND SO INVOLVED IN NASDAQ AND STOCKS THAT HIS WILLINGNESS TO SWEEP ICTS International's penny stock frauds under the rug(while Menachem Atzmon insists the IRS owes them over $2 million in refunds is outrageous.Note that Inksure is a penny stock that ICTS International is connected to and it claimed ICTS was putting pressure on them to sell stock in one SEC filing and also they later claimed they were 'naked shorted' or at least paid Thomas Ronk to make the claim...

Anonymous said...

Hey. I don't normally leave comments, but I just wanted to say thanks for the great information. I have a blog too, though
I don't write as good as you do, but if you want to check it out here it is. Thanks again and have a great day!

Affliction Warlock Leveling Build

Frank D. Hopson said...

Kurt, thanx for writing back and I agree with your assesment that the caller was a gov. agent. Good luck to you and I will keep telling your story to any and all.

Anonymous said...

My friend and I were recently talking about technology, and how integrated it has become to our daily lives. Reading this post makes me think back to that debate we had, and just how inseparable from electronics we have all become.

I don't mean this in a bad way, of course! Societal concerns aside... I just hope that as technology further advances, the possibility of uploading our memories onto a digital medium becomes a true reality. It's one of the things I really wish I could encounter in my lifetime.

(Posted on Nintendo DS running [url=]R4 SDHC[/url] DS S3)

Anonymous said...

Well I acquiesce in but I contemplate the collection should secure more info then it has.

Phil M. said...

see also: Washington's Blog: "U.S. Counterterrorism Officials Insisted that Crotch Bomber Be Let Into Country", February 5, 2010

Anonymous said...


A bank is a financial institution that accepts deposits and channels those deposits into lending activities. Banks primarily provide financial services to customers while enriching investors. Government restrictions on financial activities by bank vary over time and location. Banks are important players in financial markets and offer services such as investment funds and loans. In some countries such as Germany, banks have historically owned major stakes in industrial corporations while in other countries such as the United States bank are prohibited from owning non-financial companies. In Japan, banks are usually the nexus of a cross-share holding entity known as the keiretsu. In France, bancassurance is prevalent, as most banks offer insurance services (and now real estate services) to their clients.

The level of government regulation of the banking industry varies widely, with countries such as Iceland, having relatively light regulation of the banking sector, and countries such as China having a wide variety of regulations but no systematic process that can be followed typical of a communist system.[url=]CLICK HERE[/url]

Anonymous said...

There are many things unclear about what happened before, during and after flight 253. But, the person who video taped the entire "event" in the plane is just a harmless Dutch passenger who had just bought a new camera and was trying it out as much as he could. In Detroit, he first handed over the memory card and later the camera to the FBI. I,a fellow passenger of Kurt (he knows who I am), spoke with the "camera man" and I am fully convinced he is not in any kind of plot. In fact he is feeling very unhappy and nervous because he is thought to be in some kind of plot.
I guess the video may turn up during the trial as evidence.

Anonymous said...

Ola, what's up amigos? :)
Hope to get any assistance from you if I will have any quesitons.
Thanks in advance and good luck! :)

Phil M. said...

Someone anonymously wrote, "I,a fellow passenger of Kurt (he knows who I am), spoke with the `camera man'"

Kurt, can you confirm this?

KurtHaskell said...

Phil M:

I know who left the anonymous message. He is a fellow passenger that has contacted me, but wants to remain anonymous. He has indicated to me what he said in his post. I have no reason to doubt his credibility. However, due to the above mentioned phone call I received(from a different passenger) that attempted to persuade my account of the events on Christmas Day, I am not 100% convinced that the cameraman is not involved. My current thoughts on this matter are that he is likely not involved and that the main person to focus on is the "Sharp Dressed Man". However, when you have the government covering up the facts, it is difficult to exclude any possibility. I am also not convinced that the "Man in Orange" is not involved in some capacity. I am convinced that the "Sharp Dressed Man" is involved, is a government agent, and is the reason for the pathetic cover up that the government is attempting.

Tom said...

According to Mr. Anonymous, the cameraman is "feeling very unhappy and nervous because he is thought to be in some kind of plot". That means Mr. Anonymous has been in further contact since that day with the "harmless Dutch passenger who had just bought a new camera and was trying it out as much as he could".

Hmmm, I wonder why these two have become such close pals and yet the cameraman doesn't call Kurt or comment himself?

Since you obviously know the cameraman so well, Mr. Anonymous, how about giving him a call so he can come here and correct all the lies that the govt and media have put out there that the FBI didn't get his video and don't know who he is.

Oh, and I would also love to hear how the prosecution plans to introduce a video into evidence at trial that they have told the world doesn't exist.

Anonymous said...

Hello everybody! I do not know where to begin but hope this site will be useful for me.
I will be glad to get any assistance at the start.
Thanks and good luck everyone! ;)

Anonymous said...

Someone above pointed out that Mutallab had actually bought a return ticket but gave no link. Here is where the NY Times corrected the original erroneous story:

The false information that it was a one-way ticket came from (those always useful) anonymous federal official sources. Why do you think that would be? See here for more information:

Thanks so much for pursuing this and your civil courage!

Anonymous said...

hellopeople this is a great forum hope im welcome :)

Anonymous said...

Great article you got here. It would be great to read a bit more concerning this topic. Thank you for posting that info.

Anonymous said...

nice post. thanks.

Anonymous said...

Hello. And Bye.

sicjedi said...

See the bigger picture of corruption between the media and the government. Check out http://MostCrucial.Info.

Anonymous said...

Very nice and intrestingss story.