Bombshell: Underwear Bomber Calls Haskell As Defense Witness
"...It is outrageous! It's outrageous to the extent that the media is going to in order to cover-up this story. This should be a bombshell front page story everywhere across the United States. They are doing their best to hide it -- not cover it at all and paint me as a nut... ...I'm going to tell the truth and I am going to expose everything that there is in this case... ...is Bin Laden also an undercover U.S. intelligence officer?... ...you can see where this is going...you just keep pulling the string and pretty soon everything unravels. That's how big this story could be. Huge. Huge...."--- Kurt Haskell
Bombshell: Underwear Bomber Calls Haskell As Defense Witness
Detroit lawyer saw well-dressed man aid Abdulmutallab through security
Paul Joseph Watson - Infowars.com - Monday, October 10, 2011
In a shocking development in the trial of the accused underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, Delta Flight 253 eyewitness Kurt Haskell has been called by Abdulmutallab as a witness for the defense, a move that could blow the whole case wide open.
Detroit Lawyer Haskell has been a prominent skeptic of the government’s official version of events, having witnessed a well-dressed man help Abdulmutallab clear security before the incident on Christmas Day 2009 despite the fact that the bomber had no passport, in addition to the fact that his own father had warned U.S. intelligence officials of the threat posed by Abdulmutallab a month before the attempted attack.
It later emerged that the State Department was ordered not to revoke Abdulmutallab’s visa by “federal counterterrorism officials” ( http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17505 ) even though the accused bomber had known terrorist ties.
Haskell maintains that Abdulmutallab was carrying a fake bomb and was the unwitting dupe in a case of government entrapment.
“Chambers indicates that I may be the only defense witness called,” writes Haskell on his blog. ( http://haskellfamily.blogspot.com/2011/10/looks-like-ill-be-witness-for-... ) “How ironic is it that I will have Umar’s life in my hands just as Umar had my life in his hands (or underwear) on Christmas Day 2009? I will be up to the task. I realize that some may not agree with me and may attempt to harm me. Nevertheless, I will speak the truth and not be intimidated. I will do this for the common good of all of the citizens of the United States.”
Abdulmutallab’s court “outbursts,” in which he shouts clichéd rhetoric about the mujahadeen, Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda, suggest that he is being coached on how to behave and what to say, suggests Haskell. The outbursts are in complete contradiction to how he behaved during the Flight 253 incident, Haskell told the Associated Press. ( http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/airline-attack-suspect-starts-trial-o... )
“I saw him before boarding and he never said anything, I’ve seen him in court several times, and I even saw him when he lit his fake bomb and his crotch was burning and he never makes a peep. This is totally out of character for him,” Haskell told AP writer Ed White, although White later edited the quote.
During his interview on the Alex Jones Show today, Haskell pointed out that if Abdulmutallab chooses to reveal what he knows about the entire plot, it could be more damaging to the Obama administration than the Fast and Furious scandal, and would undermine the entire foundation of the war on terror and the TSA grope downs and body scans that were introduced in the aftermath of the event.
Abdulmutallab could reveal which intelligence agents gave him the dud bomb, while also lifting the lid on the role of Anwar al-Awlaki, who as we have documented ( http://www.prisonplanet.com/al-qaeda-mastermind-invited-to-pentagon-afte... ) was clearly a double agent posing as an Al-Qaeda leader while doing the bidding of the US intelligence community.
Aware that his involvement in the case and his assertions of government complicity in the aborted attack could put his life in danger, Haskell made it clear on air that he was not planning on committing suicide.
( At the end of the 2nd video, Kurt Haskell mentions how the prosecutors office had hid evidence in a previous terrorist trial.)
...In 2003, two North African immigrants were convicted of providing material support and resources to terrorists, but the convictions were thrown out at the request of the U.S. Attorney’s Office after it discovered prosecutors had withheld evidence favorable to the defendants.
One of the prosecutors in the case was tried and acquitted of prosecutorial misconduct.
The government’s star witness in that case was a convicted credit card thief of questionable credibility.
TIMELINE AND RUNNING RECORD
For new readers, here are a few early news stories:
Last Updated: December 29. 2009 2:47PM
Flight 253 passengers believe others involved in plot
Paul Egan The Detroit News
Taylor -- A Taylor attorney who was aboard a terrorist-targeted Christmas Day flight to Detroit says he was not surprised to hear al-Qaida claim responsibility for the attempted bombing Monday because he does not believe the man now in federal custody acted alone.
Kurt Haskell said he and his wife, Lori, were playing cards near the boarding gate in Amsterdam when he saw a well-dressed man who appeared to be of Indian descent come to the assistance of the man he later learned was Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. The 23-year-old Nigerian was having trouble boarding the plane he is accused of trying to blow up because he had no passport, Haskell said.
"I think what I saw was his handler ... getting him on the plane," said Haskell, who was returning from a safari in Uganda.
The Indian man, who looked about 50 years old, told ticket agents Abdulmutallab did not have a passport but needed to get on the plane, the Haskells said.
The ticket agent told the man nobody was allowed to board without a passport, to which the well-dressed man replied: "We do this all the time; he's from Sudan," Lori Haskell said, adding she and her husband believe the man was trying to pass Abdulmutallab off as a Sudanese refugee.
The two were then directed down a corridor to talk to a manager, she said.
"This meant nothing to me until this man tried to blow up the plane," Kurt Haskell said.
Abdulmutallab is charged with attempting to destroy an aircraft and placing a destructive device aboard an aircraft. He allegedly had chemical explosives concealed under his clothing. His attempt to detonate them as the plane approached Detroit created a fire, but he was restrained by passengers and flight crew who put out the blaze, federal authorities say.
The FBI and federal prosecutors would not comment Monday on the Haskells' story, but foreign media reports said military police in the Netherlands were examining security video to check the account of an airport accomplice. Some foreign media reports quoted the military police as saying Abdulmutallab boarded the flight without going through passport control.
U.S. officials have said Abdulmutallab had a multi-entry visa to the United States. They have not specifically said whether he had a passport, but visas are typically, though not always, stamped into passports.
Travel path questionable
Edward Hasbrouck, author of the travel book series "The Practical Nomad" and an expert on international travel, said something about the story does not add up.
If Abdulmutallab did not have the proper travel documents, it is not clear how he got from Lagos, Nigeria, to the Netherlands, because someone from KLM, as well as government officials, would have checked his documents, Hasbrouck said.
In-transit passengers in Amsterdam are subjected to searches of their carry-on bags and pat-downs and sometimes, but not always document checks, he said. If Abdulmutallab's travel documents became an issue in Amsterdam, airline officials would have a strong incentive not to let him board because they would be charged with the costs of detainment and deportation, plus administrative fines, if he was refused entry to the United States, he said.
Still, refugees who lack proper documentation are sometimes permitted to enter the United States without a passport, Hasbrouck said.
"Maybe he had some evidence that he had a visa to the U.S., but not the actual visa or not the passport," he said.
Claim: Other man detained
Kurt Haskell said he does not believe the well-dressed man ever boarded the flight because he looked for him when the FBI gathered all the passengers for questioning at Detroit Metropolitan Airport.
"I think that it was all completely planned," Lori Haskell said.
"I totally don't think it was one guy."
She said that as the plane approached Detroit, she heard a popping sound she first thought was ice on the landing gear. Then a flight attendant walked by and said, almost to herself: "Does anyone hear that buzzing sound? I think I smell smoke."
Commotion then followed as smoke began to fill the cabin, flames shot up the wall of the plane, and passengers jumped on Abdulmutallab and, along with cabin crew, put out the fire, Haskell said.
Kurt Haskell said he saw a third man, who also appeared to be of Indian descent and looked about 30 years old, get taken away for FBI questioning and later led away in handcuffs after dogs detected something in his luggage after the flight landed.
He said one FBI agent later told passengers authorities had "those responsible" in custody.
The FBI in Detroit said only one man was arrested, and prosecutors in Detroit have refused to say whether there are other suspects in the case.
firstname.lastname@example.org (313) 222-2069 Staff Writers Nathan Hurst and Deb Price contributed.
From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20091229/METRO01/912290365/Flight-253-passeng...
Flight 253: US Complicity?
February 11, 2010 The Muslim Observer - By Adil James
Michigan Attorney Kurt Haskell discusses the events of Flight 253 and Underwear-Bomber Mutallab
February 10—Farmington—The attempted Underwear Bombing has already taken on the aspect of a familiar tableau, with all involved taking their usual hackneyed positions—the gallant police and intelligence authorities, the heroic passengers, all duped by the diabolically wicked Muslim anti-hero, who despicably and cleverly circumvented all the hurdles in his path in order to do the unthinkable.
But there is another dimension to this story, which shows the extent to which, nearly 10 years after 9/11, there is apparently no thought-through system in place to deal with cases of attempted airline hijackings and bombings, where shadowy people who appear to be affiliated with government agencies interfere with the functioning of airport security, where other shadowy people who appear to be terrorists are allowed to slip through the cracks, and where government officials from top to bottom appear either to lie about events or to be simply incredibly misinformed, or inept.
Attorney Kurt Haskell was on Flight 253. He is a vocal bankruptcy and divorce attorney who has a blog (haskellfamily.blogspot.com). According to his law firm’s website, he graduated from Saginaw Valley State University with a degree in Biology, Thomas M. Cooley Law School, and Wayne State University Law School where he earned an LLM in Taxation. He was a tax attorney for the IRS and opened the Haskell Law Firm in 2001 with his wife, Lori, who is also an attorney—she graduated from Davenport University and Wayne State University Law School.
Kurt and Lori Haskell were together on the eventful trip to and return from Africa; this trip to Africa led him through Amsterdam’s airport and onto flight 253, only a few rows away from a man who had come from Africa towards Detroit but with a very different purpose.
“I saw almost everything,” he explains, as he was sitting only 8 rows away from the bomber. “He was in row 19, we were in row 27.” “The whole thing took maybe a minute, it was really quick.”
As he recounts the event, it happened in the final minutes of the flight to Detroit, “only five or ten minutes from landing.” A female flight attendant walked past Mr. Haskell saying “it smells like smoke,” and a few moments later Haskell looked and saw a fire in what had been Umar Farouk Abdul Mutallab’s row. People were yelling “Fire! Fire!” Someone was yelling “Terrorist!” A different flight attendant, who Haskell said was a black man named Dionne, put out the fire with a fire extinguisher. Haskell saw two passengers escorting Mutallab, who was then wearing a blanket where his pants had been, towards first class.
Mutallab has been described as in a “trance-like” state by one first class passenger who saw him after the event, but the word Haskell uses to describe Mutallab, after what must have been a terrifying and adrenaline-soaked event for all concerned, is “emotionless.”
But this was not the first time Haskell had seen Mutallab. He had seen him before getting on the plane in Amsterdam—and it was this previous brief encounter which strikes the jarring note of discord between the generally accepted story and the truth of the events of Flight 253.
“We had gone through the security checks,” he was sitting on the ground with his wife playing cards, very close to the ticketing agent who allows people to board the airplane, and he noticed what he described as an oddball pair approaching a ticket agent together. What was striking about the pair was that they were together. One was an “Indian-looking” man, dressed sharply, described in Haskell’s blog as the “sharp-dressed man.” He looked about 50 years old, looked wealthy, was wearing a suit. The other was Mutallab, looking maybe 15 years old, with “raggy jeans and a white T-shirt.”
“They went to the ticket agent together,” explains Haskell, who said he overheard the sharp-dressed man say to the ticketing agent “This man needs to board the plane, he has no passport.” “He’s from Sudan,” said the sharp-dressed man, “We do this all the time.”
At the time Haskell understood this to mean that the man (Mutallab) was a refugee. Mutallab said nothing during the exchange.
The ticketing agent said the sharp-dressed man would have to go to the manager, and she pointed down the hallway, then the “oddballs together” walked down the hall towards where the manager had pointed. “It meant so little to me at the time that I didn’t even mention it to my wife,” said Haskell.
It would only become significant in the light of the events that unfolded in the last few minutes of Flight 253. Fast forward to a blanketed Mutallab being escorted to the front of the airplane.
The plane had nearly finished the flight when Mutallab attempted to ignite the explosive in his underwear… and the ensuing pandemonium only lasted about a minute. The pilot requested emergency clearance to land, and it was only a short time before the passengers of the flight were all on land, however this is where Haskell witnessed “all [the] screwups” of security personnel in dealing with this attempted bombing.
First the plane spent about 20 to 30 minutes on the runway, explained Haskell. “We taxied to the gate, which was a big mistake—we didn’t know if there were other bombs on board, or accomplices.” “They could have blown up the entire terminal,” Haskell said.
That seems unlikely, since if the terrorists wanted to bomb an airport terminal it seems unnecessary to fly several thousand miles after getting through airport security in Amsterdam.
Haskell explained that the police got on the plane. Haskell said he had expected an emergency evacuation. “We don’t know how dangerous the situation is,” he said. The police said nobody could get off the plane. Haskell was apprehensive that there was another bomb on board.
“The police never came out of first class,” he said, “they didn’t check on the welfare of the other passengers.” “The police escorted Mutallab off the plane—he stood in the aisle for about 10 seconds, and I got a good look—he was wearing handcuffs.” That was the first time that Haskell knew Mutallab was a terrorist, he said.
“Then we were allowed to get off the plane, they let us take all carry-ons off. Big mistake. Disturbing the crime scene.” Mutallab had told the police, Haskell later learned (from news reports and from a client of his who works at the airport), that there was a bomb still on board the plane—but the police never searched the carry-on bags.
“We walked onto the runway, and were escorted to an evacuated baggage claim. Nobody else was around. We stood there for an hour. There were bomb sniffing dogs, 3 of them. One of them sniffed something in the bag of an Indian man, the ‘man in orange,’ who was wearing an orange shirt. The dog sat down, which indicates he found an explosive.”
“Immediately the man was taken away, but not handcuffed.” He was interviewed in a room, “we couldn’t see inside the room but we could see the door. Then he was taken out, handcuffed, and taken away.”
An officer came and moved the passengers to another area, saying it was “not safe here,” saying that everyone had seen what had happened earlier (with the man in orange) and could draw their own conclusions about why it wasn’t safe there.
The Flight 253 passengers were then moved, Haskell explained, to “a long narrow hallway, where we were held for four hours. We couldn’t talk on cell phones, or text anybody.” They were not allowed to eat or drink. “Mostly we were not allowed to use the bathroom,” he said.
Then, after several hours, a man came up to the passengers and said, “We believe we have those responsible in custody”—the passengers were then “free to go” after short interviews with the FBI. Haskell did his interview with the FBI and went home.
Haskell emphasizes their use of the plural “those involved” rather than the singular “the one involved.”
The passengers of Flight 253 do not have any formal organization, however Haskell explains that many of the passengers have emailed him through his website, and being in contact with the other passengers he has found one woman who publicly said that she saw Mutallab during his security exam (during which she said he appeared nervous and sweated profusely and ran his hands through his hair) and learned of another passenger whose name has not been made public—who is said to have video-taped the entire terrorist incident on the airplane.
Haskell explains that the video recording was made by a Dutch man who bought a camcorder on his way to visit New York City, and was operating it during the incident because he wanted to learn how to use it, or test it. According to Haskell’s sources this man’s video is now in the possession of government authorities, however the man has several photographs from the flight still in his possession, and Haskell believes there is a good chance those stills include at least one of the man in orange.
Haskell is astonished at the lack of interest in his story from mainstream media outlets. Haskell’s eyewitness account strongly indicates government complicity in transporting Mutallab, and also strongly indicates at least one other bomber was on Flight 253.
However, there is minimal interest in his story, and Haskell feels he has been maligned and his story undermined by official reports. According to what Haskell saw, either there was another bomber involved, or there was a case of mistaken attribution of terrorist intent against the man in orange—and if so that man must have a motive to expose what has happened to him. Haskell fully believes there was another terrorist whose involvement is being covered up by law enforcement authorities.
What does all this mean? Haskell discounts several popular theories, namely first that the government wanted the plane to be blown up to justify widespread body scanners and to justify making war on Yemen; second that the government wanted a failed bombing in order to justify the same two results above.
However, Haskell does believe, based on what he saw and based on cryptic statements from government officials that intelligence officials sometimes let known terrorists into the country in order to track them and see who they contact, that the US government did fully intend to let Mutallab into the country in order to watch him, but did not know that Mutallab never intended to actually arrive at Detroit airport and had stuffed explosives in his underwear in order to kill everyone onboard his airplane before ever touching down in Detroit.
Haskell’s feeling about the incident seems to be primarily one of astonishment at the actions of his own government and the American press to the incident.
If Haskell’s story is wrong, he argues, why is it that no Dutch security video has been released of the events at Amsterdam airport?
“Why aren’t they releasing the video, if my story is not true? Why is the media totally ignoring what I have to say?”