Tuesday, September 27, 2011

Forged Passport In Underwear Bomber Case?

by Kurt Haskell

I spent much of this evening reading court documents from the underwear bomber (Umar) case. For those that are interested, you can read them at:

http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/hpc/

There are many gems in the documents, but I'll only focus on one of them tonight.
While reading the documents, I found what I believe to be another smoking gun. Since day one when Lori and I exited flight 253, I've maintained that Umar boarded flight 253 with the help of a sharp dressed man and WITHOUT A PASSPORT. Early on in this case, Judge Edmunds issued a protective order forbidding either side from discussing any of the evidence in the case. However, that didn't stop the U.S. Government from releasing propaganda pictures into the media. The most famous picture is a picture of Umar with law enforcement on the plane. The two that were the most obvious frauds were the picture of Umar's minimally damaged underwear and the picture of Umar's passport. The passport picture was released for no other reason then to attempt to discredit my eyewitness testimony. In no other case (to my knowledge) has the government released a picture of some one's passport to the media. I have taken great offense to the release of the passport and it is with great pleasure that I now believe I can show it was a fake. Interestingly enough, stand-by attorney Chambers indicated at the July 7, 2011 hearing that he had just received a copy of Umar's passport. Chambers referred to this (and some other evidence) document as "significant evidence". We must now ask why it is considered "significant evidence" by Chambers. I also have to wonder why such a seemingly insignificant document like a passport was withheld for 18 months from the defense (Maybe it took that long to create a good fake?).

When I looked for the picture of Umar's passport tonight, it was not easy to find. I did however, manage to find a copy of it here:

http://www.911oz.com/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=6651

I encourage everyone to take a very good look at Umar's signature, particularly the "m" and the "a" in Umar. Also note that it doesn't include his last name. Further, the picture doesn't particularly look like Umar and seems to show a man with a receding hairline. At this time, I will leave a discussion of the picture for another day.

Now take a look at this document filed by Umar and written in his own handwriting:

http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/hpc/docs/10.Defendant_Motion_for_Detention_Hearing.pdf

Note that the "a's" are completely different in that the "a" in the passport photo has a closed loop while in the court document, the "a's" are open at the top. Further, note that Umar's "m" is significantly larger than the "a" is in the passport photo. Also, note that the "m's" in the court document look significantly different then the "m" in the passport. Specifically, the "m's" in the court document are the same size as the "a's" are and are significantly more slanted and pointed then the "m's" in the passport. In the court document, you can also see that most of the "m's" contain a side arm while the "m" in the passport photo does not. Lastly, note that the passport appears to have very neat handwriting while the court document has very sloppy handwriting.

Of course, the conclusion is that one of the documents is a fake. It is much more likely that the passport photo is a fake as there would be no legitimate reason to fake the court document. If the passport photo, is in fact a fake, we must ask why the government would release a fake passport photo. The only logical explanation is that a real passport did not exist. Obviously, the U.S. Government felt a need early on to release a fraudulent passport to discredit my eyewitness account. The reason for the attempt to discredit me is obvious and points directly at my theory in this case.

Umar was escorted through security without a passport and with an intentionally defective bomb in order to stage a false flag terrorist attack.

Note that in this court document, Chambers has indicated that U.S. Government agents have given contradictory statements (see item 9):

http://www.mied.uscourts.gov/hpc/docs/05.Motion_for_Disclosure_of_Grand_Jury_Materials.pdf

Surprise, surprise, U.S. Government agents are giving false statements. Why should we be surprised when their employer releases a fraudulent document?


*** I am editing this post this morning (9-28-11) to make one comment about the passport photo. The passport appears to be issued on September 15, 2005. Umar was age 18 on that date. The man in the passport piture clearly has a receding hairline (and to me doesn't look like Umar). The possibility of an 18 year old having a receding hairline is remote at best. It appears that the U.S. Government has once again been exposed in this matter.

*** Second edit: See below for a copy of my fax to Anthony Chambers:

Facsimile Cover Sheet

To: Anthony Chambers, Esq.
Company:
Phone:
Fax: 313-xxx-xxxx
From: Kurt R. Haskell, J.D., L.L.M.
Company: Haskell Law Firm, P.C.
Phone: 734-285-5625
Fax: 734-281-0969
Date: September 28, 2011
Pages including this cover page:
3, RE: Umar Farouk Adbulmutallab

Comments: Tony, I am assuming that since I haven’t heard from you that I will not be testifying. I assume that to mean that Umar has chosen to not use the entrapment/excessive government involvement defense. That is unfortunate and leads me to believe that Umar is complicit with the government for some reason. Nonetheless, I am attaching my recent blog post to make you aware of some passport anomalies. Obviously, I was there when Umar was posed as a Sudanese refugee and boarded without a passport. Thus, I know that he didn’t have a passport. I doubt that you will have enough control in the trial to admit the passport anomalies into evidence. However, I am providing this evidence to you for impeachment purposes on the off chance that you can use it. I know there is a great deal of evidence in this case and I just wanted to make you aware of this information. Good luck with the trial. I am not envious of your position. I will be there whenever my schedule allows.

13 comments:

rembie said...

Interesting.
In the court document we do seem to see a signature, directly above his full name. I no way does it resemble the so called signature on the passport. Another anomaly is that the U extends much lower than the m, a and r in the passport signature. The passport signature has a bottom alignment of the U, m a and r.

stats said...

I think the passport photo looks like Umar, and to my untrained eye, I don't see that much difference in the signature on the passport or the motion. But then even if fake, I wouldn't expect the Feds to make it too obvious. I'm willing to believe he may have had a passport at all times, but for some reason all involved in the conspiracy thought it best that he not use it. Surely Umar had a passport. He traveled quite a bit it sounds like. And I still believe your story, but I think you're on the wrong trail with this "fake" passport.

I've been following the case with some interest. But some how missed the turning point when you decided that the "well-dressed" Indian man was an agent of the U.S. What evidence convinced you that he was a U.S. agent, rather than say an agent of the Pakistan ISI, or even an Al Qaeda sympathizer?

Thanks. Keep up the good work. Look forward to your next post.

TomT said...

For readers of this blog...

This link has a RUNNING RECORD TIMELINE of Events surrounding The Underwear Bomber.
http://911blogger.com/news/2009-12-30/accomplice

If you need to catch up on the basics in the beginning, you can read this article which has some wonderful links.
http://mathaba.net/news/?x=622472
There are a few details in the article which are slightly off (e.g. the camera guy was towards the rear of the plane, not in front of the bomber.)

TomT

Lori H said...

This is Kurt:

Stats, thanks for your honest opinion, but I very much disagree that the picture is Umar. Having seen him in person many times at court, I have to say that it isn't him. It does look similar to him, but it's not him. Do you really think it is a picture of an 18 year old? An 18 year old with a receding hairline to boot? Also, you really think the handwriting is similar? To me it is very obviously not. Having said that, remember I saw him attempt to board without a passport. Also, the prosecution withheld a copy of Umar's passport from the defense until June 2011? They did this to allow stand-by attorney Chambers the least amount of time and ability to hire experts to verify its authenticity. I don't mean to be argumentative, but we'll have to agree to disagree.

As to the reasons I believe the sharp dressed man (SDM) is a U.S. agent, see below in no particular order:

1. The SDM spoke perfect American English without an accent.
2. The FBI refused to have me identify SDM or show me his picture.
3. The U.S. Government refused to release the airport video.
4. U.S. Judge Nancy Edmunds ordered that all evidence including the video be sealed under a protective order.
5. The U.S. Government needed a terrorist attack to implement body scanners, increase the presence of TSA everywhere, continue the justification for two fraudulent wars (no terrorist attacks from 2001-2009) and renew the Patriot Act(up for renewal February 2010).
6. The FBI admitted to handing out fake bombs to the Portland Christmas Tree Bomber and Wrigley Field bomber in 2010 just months after the underwear bomber event (My theory is that U.S. intelligence agents gave Umar an intentionally defective bomb and led him through seurity to stage a fake terrorist attack).
7. U.S. media has actively concealed the truth about this case (for example, refusing to report the findings of the Congressional Hearings).
8. The Congressional testimony of Patrick Kennedy is telling. Watch his testimony on youtube. He squirms in his seat to not admit that U.S. intelligence did the attack intentionally. However, he did admit that U.S. intelligence was tracking Umar and wanted him to enter the U.S. to catch accomplices. Then he says "we'll talk about the rest in closed session". So they wanted Umar in the U.S. but didn't allow him on the plane. Yeah right. Note that I expect to see the SDM at the trial as a witness. I now have reason to believe that SDM was the person who conducted the "security interview" that is done at Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam.

There are probably more reasons, but these are just off the top of my head. Thus, I believe the U.S. staged the plot and not ISI or Mossad.

TomT said...

MAN IN ORANGE

I would love to see the "man in orange" called into court (if he is still alive).

A vast number of questions grow from the "man in orange". The incident draws out the clownish security efforts if there had been another live bomb while everyone is gathered together in the airport... ...and it draws out "why?" the bomb sniffing dogs went to him.
[Most of us think that the man in orange was the explosives handler who originally got the explosives through the airport security and into Umar's possession.]
The government does not want the "man in orange" to be in the spotlight. It would be a huge liability.
http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2009/12/flight_253_passenger_kurt_hask.html

Lori H said...

This is Kurt Haskell

Tom:

I agree with you. I would love to see both him and the sharp dressed man testify. I am pretty hopeful we will see the sharp dressed man. I am less hopeful about the man in orange. Interestingly enough, the cameraman will be there and he has pictures of the man in orange. I asked him to send me copies of the pictures and he has yet to do so. Maybe he will show me them at court. We will see. As of now, due to my conversation with the cameraman, I doubt that he was involved. I have been notified that 9 passengers will be present to watch the trial. I am hopeful that I can learn some more information from them. We'll soon find out.

Bruce Wm Sargent said...

Having briefly examined the passport photo and other online photos of Umar F Mutallab, I am in agreement that the passport photo isn't a match. As well as having a receding hairline, the head in the passport photo is too long to be that of UFM. I would suspect that a forensic anthropologist would be able to demonstrate that in a collection of photos of UFM, one being this passport photo, that "one of these pictures is not like the others, one of these pictures is not the same." You would think that if you were going to fake a passport that you would use a real photo of the man. You would also think that if you were to fake a presidential birth certificate from the 1960's that you would have the "typewriter" not kerning the letters. I find it some what reassuring that these folks are so bad at their craft, that their faked evidence is fairly transparent to a bit of critical thinking and scientific analysis.
Thanks again, Kurt and Lori, for all you have done. Keep on being Michigan strong and eventually the truth will emerge and we'll have our country back.
Bruce W Sargent

Bruce said...

Some additional thoughts referencing the signatures in court document and on the fake passport. The passport signature fails to have a flow of line and appears to have starts and stops, varying thicknesses to parts of the letters. All of this indicates a forgery. If you sign your own name ten times and analyze the result your observe what is meant by flow. Analyze the court document mentioned above and you will observe flow. Flow is absent from the "passport" signature. The letters of the passport signature were drawn in parts rather than in a single motion. Again, looks to me like a bad fake and a handwriting expert could confirm that the passport signature is fake. If the fake passport is a court document, somebody has some splainin' to do. If the court document is a second fake that doesn't match the first fake, then somebody has even more 'splainin' to do.
Regards
Bruce Sargent

Anonymous said...

KURT:

I searched your blog, but could not ascertain if you ever saw this report:

http://www.modernghana.com/news/256651/1/nigerian-bomber-bought-ticket-in-ghana.html

William Giltner said...

Kurt,

I would like you thought. A long time ago I captured pictures from the press of the underwear bomber. One looks like the son of the rich banker as alleged. The other, not so much.

Please browse to https://www.evernote.com/shard/s1/sh/e81a8e04-5c40-4b9c-af11-bea02c51214a/f2d049908dead3c39311d14f57c10669

and let me know if either one of the pics look like the guy in court.

Bill

stats said...

Hey, Kurt. The CIA is claiming that the Saudi militant killed in the drone attack in Yemen is the man who constructed the underwear bomb. Wow, isn't that timely. Here is a link to an AP story: http://news.yahoo.com/underwear-bomb-maker-believed-dead-yemen-strike-171458043.html

Anonymous said...

Hi Kurt.
Just two points. The fact alone a man allowed a flamable to be attached to his genitals, waited untill he was over US air space to ignite his groin?
The true perpetrators find this amusing, GWB's sence of humor.
That this was ruled an official terrorist attack doens't surprise me. Truly a benefit for the expansion of DHS & TSA etc.
Our MSM read their scripts, and Americans accepted this?
Please know I admire your stand for the truth. Bless your heart.
CJ

carlos said...

Kurt,
I tried to compare the two signatures(passport photo and court doc), but apparently now when you go to the Michigan Courts website, they say the file has moved and is not accessible.

I'm sure they're monitoring your blog, and don't want people like myself to do their own comparisons.

Great analysis and very informative. I hope you are involved in the trial. I'll be listening and watching for future developments.

Good luck,
CG