Why we can't move on from the events on 9/11?

Skip to first unread message


Sep 17, 2008, 3:21:24 AM9/17/08
to Eventson911
The events on 9/11 were the most traumatic for the United States in
this century. We cannot move on until we have learned the lessons of
9/11 and effected the changes needed to keep the American people safe
from future terrorist attacks. So what are the real lessons of 9/11,
what lessons can we learn?

The 9/11 Commission told us we need to have more imagination. But from
the account of 9/11 in "Prior Knowledge of 9/11" it is clear that a
criminal element had taken over at the CIA, and had subjugated groups
at FBI Headquarters so they could shut down all of the investigations
of the Cole bombing and later shut down all investigations of al Qaeda
terrorists that were known to be inside of the US.

The investigation of Mihdhar and Hazmi was shut down by CIA officer
Tom Wilshire and FBI HQ Agent Dina Corsi by hiding the photograph of
Khallad, taken at Kuala Lumpur. The FBI knew Khallad had been the
mastermind of the Cole bombing. Without that photograph Bongardt could
not directly connect Mihdhar and Hazmi to the planning of the Cole
bombing, even though he knew both Mihdhar and Hazmi had been at an al
Qaeda meeting in Kuala Lumpur. In spite of not having this photograph,
Bongardt still felt , since all of these terrorists were known to have
been in Kuala Lumpur at the exact same time, that he had enough
information to investigate and search for Mihdhar and Hazmi, He
clearly knew when he found out that they were inside of the US on
August 28, 2001 that they were here to take part in a huge al Qaeda
attack since both of these long time al Qaeda terrorists had been
involved in the east Africa bombings that had killed over 200 people.

But Corsi told Bongardt on August 28, 2001, that he could not take
part in any investigation of Mihdhar because the information on
Mihdhar would have to come from the NSA and caveats on the front page
of NSA information said that this information could not be shared with
FBI criminal investigators, due to the fact it may have been obtained
using a FISA search warrant.
But Corsi told Bongardt this on August 28, 2001, after she had already
received the release from the NSA caveats directly from the NSA that
very morning she is telling Bongardt he has to stop any investigation
of Mihdhar. Since it was clear in Bongardt's eyes that the NSA
information was not connected to a FISA warrant he requested that
Corsi get a legal opinion from the NSLU attorneys at FBI Headquarters
on this issue. He was confident because no FISA information was
involved, that they would rule he could immediately investigate and
find Mihdhar before Mihdhar had time to carry out some horrific
terrorist attack inside of the US.

But Corsi called the next day, on August 29, 2001 and said the NSLU
had ruled that Bongardt could have nothing to do with any
investigation of Mihdhar. We now know that Corsi had fabricated
completely this legal opinion from the NSLU attorneys and that they
had ruled just the opposite and said Bongardt could take part in any
investigation for Mihdhar since the NSA information had not been
obtained using a FISA warrant.

Bongardt was unaware that Corsi had fabricated this ruling, and
destroyed all of the information he had on Mihdhar as he had been
requested to do by Dina Corsi, and gave up any hope that he and his
team could find Mihdhar in time to head off what was clearly going to
be a huge al Qaeda attack inside of the US.

The process of getting a ruling from NSLU attorneys was tragically
flawed. FBI HQ agents in this case Dina Corsi were able to talk to
NSLU attorneys at FBI HQ when a ruling was requested by FBI field
agents with no input to this process from the field agent, Bongardt in
this case, and then give the legal running back to Bongardt orally,
with no written record. Because she was clearly working with Tom
Wilshire, CIA former deputy chief at the Bin Laden unit at the CIA,
and both were involved in out and out criminally obstruction of
Bongardt's Cole bombing investigation and then his investigation of
Mihdhar, she was able to shut down his investigation by fabricating
the NSLU ruling.

This process has to be fixed. In the future both the FBI field
investigators that want a NSLU ruling and the FBI HQ agent who is
shutting down his investigation should both be present at the NSLU
hearing where this issue is argued in front of a NSLU attorney, and
this hearing transcribed with a written ruling given back to the FBI
field agent.

Had this been done in this case, Corsi never could have taken this
investigation of Mihdhar away from Bongardt and the 3000 people killed
on 9/11 would be still alive today. Had this new process been in
effect with the investigation of Harry Samit in Minneapolis of
Zacarias Moussaoui, it is entirely possible that criminal elements at
FBI HQ who at the very same time were also sabotaging Samit's
investigation by denying him a search warrant for Moussaoui's
possessions would not have gotten away with blocking this
investigation, an investigation that also could have prevented the
attacks on 9/11.

Why did the 9/11 Commission not come up with this very obvious change
to FBI procedures to obtain a legal ruling at FBI HQ?

For the 9/11 Commission to recommend this they would have had to show
that Corsi had criminally fabricated this ruling from the attorney at
the NSLU, Sherry Sabol, and they were chartered to do an investigation
of 9/11 that blamed no one, even people at the CIA and FBI HQ who they
found had criminally allowed the al Qaeda terrorists to carry out
these attacks by shutting down all investigations of al Qaeda
terrorists that were found inside of the US!

See the book "Prior Knowledge of 9/11" at http://www.eventson911.com/
for more in depth information on this.
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages