 | |  | |  | |  |
Democracy Fails 2
The following is the account of Michigan lawyer, Kurt Haskell, a sworn officer of the court, a man with no
prior reputation for mischief, who happened to be a passenger on NWA Flight 253 the day that the
“Undiebomber” was prevented from blowing up the Detroit bound aircraft. Attorney Haskell made the
news by insisting that he saw the bombing suspect receive assistance in getting onto the flight from an
Indian “sharp dressed man.” Since then, he has been visited by the FBI. Starting from the beginning, in
his own words, as presented originally on MLive.com, read carefully and see if you don’t hear the ring of
truth:
Today is the second worst day of my life after 12-25-09. Today is the day that I realized that my own
country is lying to me and all of my fellow Americans. Let me explain.
Ever since I got off of Flight 253 I have been repeating what I saw in US Customs. Specifically, 1 hour
after we left the plane, bomb sniffing dogs arrived. Up to this point, all of the passengers on Flight 253
stood in a small area in an evacuated luggage claim area of an airport terminal. During this time period,
all of the passengers had their carry on bags with them. When the bomb sniffing dogs arrived, 1 dog
found something in a carry on bag of a 30 ish Indian man. This is not the so called "Sharp Dressed"
man. I will refer to this man as "The man in orange". The man in orange, who stood some 20ft away from
me the entire time until he was taken away, was immediately taken away to be searched and
interrogated in a nearby room. At this time he was not handcuffed. When he emerged from the room, he
was then handcuffed and taken away. At this time an FBI agent came up to the rest of the passengers
and said the following (approximate quote) "You all are being moved to another area because this area
is not safe. I am sure many of you saw what just happened (Referring to the man in orange) and are
smart enough to read between the lines and figure it out." We were then marched out of the baggage
claim area and into a long hallway. This entire time period and until we left customs, no person that
wasn't a law enforcement personnel or a passenger on our flight was allowed anywhere on our floor of
the terminal (or possibly the entire terminal) The FBI was so concerned during this time, that we were
not allowed to use the bathroom unless we went alone with an FBI agent, we were not allowed to eat or
drink, or text or call anyone. I have been repeating this same story over the last 5 days. The FBI has,
since we landed, insisted that only one man was arrested for the airliner attack (contradicting my
account). However, several of my fellow passengers have come over the past few days, backed up my
claim, and put pressure on FBI/Customs to tell the truth. Early today, I heard from two different reporters
that a federal agency (FBI or Customs) was now admitting that another man has been held (and will be
held indefinitely) since our flight landed for "immigration reasons." Notice that this man was "being held"
and not "arrested", which was a cute semantic ploy by the FBI to stretch the truth and not lie.
Five days later, Mr. Haskell continued to defend his honor by repeating his account of what happened in
the airport that resulted in Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab being allowed past security and onto the plane.
For the last five days I have been reporting my story of the so called "sharp dressed man." For those of
you who haven't read my account, it involves a sharp dressed "Indian man" attempting to talk a ticket
agent into letting a supposed "Sudanese refugee" (The terrorist) onto flight 253 without a passport. I
have never had any idea how it played out except to note that the so called "Sudanese reefugee" later
boarded my flight and attempted to blow it up and kill me. At no time did my story involve, or even find
important whether the terrorist actually had a passport. The importance of my story was and always will
be, the attempt with an accomplice (apparently succesful) of a terrorist with all sorts of prior terrorist
warning signs to skirt the normal passport boarding procedures in Amsterdam. By the way, Amsterdam
security did come out the other day and admit that the terrorist did not have to "Go through normal
passport checking procedures".
Amsterdam security, please define to the American public "Normal passport boarding procedures".
You see the FBI would have the American public believe that what was important was whether the
terrorist in fact had a passport.
Seriously think about this people. You have a suicide bomber who had recently been to Yemen to but a
bomb, whose father had reported him as a terrorist, who supposedly was on some kind of U.S. terror
watchlist, and most likely knew the U.S. was aware of these red flags. Yet, he didn't go through "Normal
passport checking procedures." What does that mean? Maybe that he flashed a passport to some sort
of sympathetic security manager in a backroom to avoid a closer look at the terrorist's "red flags"? What
is important is that the terrorist avoided using normal passport checking procedures (apparently
successfully) in order to avoid a closer look into his red flags. Who cares if he had a passport. The
important thing is that he didn't want to show it and somehow avoided a closer inspection and "normal
passport checking procedures." Each passport comes with a bar code on it that can be scanned to
provide a wealth of information about the individual. I would bet that the passport checking procedures
for the terrorist did not include a bar code scan of his passport (which could have revealed damning
information about the terrorist).
Please note that there is a very easy way to verify the veracity of my prior "sharp dressed man" account.
Dutch police have admitted that they have reviewed the video of the "sharp dressed man" that I
referenced. Note that it has not been released anywhere, You see, if my eye witness account is false, it
could easily be proven by releasing the video. However, the proof of my eyewitness account would also
be verified if I am telling the truth and I am. There is a reason we have only heard of the video and not
seen it. dutch authorities, "RELEASE THE VIDEO!" This is the most important video in 8 years and may
be all of two minutes long. Show the entire video and "DO NOT EDIT IT"! The American public deserves
its own chance to attempt to identify the "sharp dressed man". I have no doubt that if the video indicated
that my account was wrong, that the video would have already swept over the entire world wide web.
Got a point, don’t you think? If the security video showed that Kurt Haskell was mistaken, it would have
been all over the nightly news at least.
Kurt Haskell has the credibility and the reputation to be taken seriously. He’s not asking for money. He
didn’t try and sell his story to the tabloids. He isn’t some kind of zealot who is mixing in any other
agenda other than he knows what he saw and believes that his own government is not taking him
seriously, rather, trying to intimidate him into keeping quiet.
We will never know the whole truth until some accounts for what this credible witness saw.
In the meantime, as both an officer of the court and an American, Mr. Haskell is living up to this moral,
ethical and civic duty.
Should we ever meet, Mr. Haskell, the next round is on me. Whatever it is that you're drinking . . .
Next
The following is the account of Michigan lawyer, Kurt Haskell, a sworn officer of the court, a man with no
prior reputation for mischief, who happened to be a passenger on NWA Flight 253 the day that the
“Undiebomber” was prevented from blowing up the Detroit bound aircraft. Attorney Haskell made the
news by insisting that he saw the bombing suspect receive assistance in getting onto the flight from an
Indian “sharp dressed man.” Since then, he has been visited by the FBI. Starting from the beginning, in
his own words, as presented originally on MLive.com, read carefully and see if you don’t hear the ring of
truth:
Today is the second worst day of my life after 12-25-09. Today is the day that I realized that my own
country is lying to me and all of my fellow Americans. Let me explain.
Ever since I got off of Flight 253 I have been repeating what I saw in US Customs. Specifically, 1 hour
after we left the plane, bomb sniffing dogs arrived. Up to this point, all of the passengers on Flight 253
stood in a small area in an evacuated luggage claim area of an airport terminal. During this time period,
all of the passengers had their carry on bags with them. When the bomb sniffing dogs arrived, 1 dog
found something in a carry on bag of a 30 ish Indian man. This is not the so called "Sharp Dressed"
man. I will refer to this man as "The man in orange". The man in orange, who stood some 20ft away from
me the entire time until he was taken away, was immediately taken away to be searched and
interrogated in a nearby room. At this time he was not handcuffed. When he emerged from the room, he
was then handcuffed and taken away. At this time an FBI agent came up to the rest of the passengers
and said the following (approximate quote) "You all are being moved to another area because this area
is not safe. I am sure many of you saw what just happened (Referring to the man in orange) and are
smart enough to read between the lines and figure it out." We were then marched out of the baggage
claim area and into a long hallway. This entire time period and until we left customs, no person that
wasn't a law enforcement personnel or a passenger on our flight was allowed anywhere on our floor of
the terminal (or possibly the entire terminal) The FBI was so concerned during this time, that we were
not allowed to use the bathroom unless we went alone with an FBI agent, we were not allowed to eat or
drink, or text or call anyone. I have been repeating this same story over the last 5 days. The FBI has,
since we landed, insisted that only one man was arrested for the airliner attack (contradicting my
account). However, several of my fellow passengers have come over the past few days, backed up my
claim, and put pressure on FBI/Customs to tell the truth. Early today, I heard from two different reporters
that a federal agency (FBI or Customs) was now admitting that another man has been held (and will be
held indefinitely) since our flight landed for "immigration reasons." Notice that this man was "being held"
and not "arrested", which was a cute semantic ploy by the FBI to stretch the truth and not lie.
Five days later, Mr. Haskell continued to defend his honor by repeating his account of what happened in
the airport that resulted in Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab being allowed past security and onto the plane.
For the last five days I have been reporting my story of the so called "sharp dressed man." For those of
you who haven't read my account, it involves a sharp dressed "Indian man" attempting to talk a ticket
agent into letting a supposed "Sudanese refugee" (The terrorist) onto flight 253 without a passport. I
have never had any idea how it played out except to note that the so called "Sudanese reefugee" later
boarded my flight and attempted to blow it up and kill me. At no time did my story involve, or even find
important whether the terrorist actually had a passport. The importance of my story was and always will
be, the attempt with an accomplice (apparently succesful) of a terrorist with all sorts of prior terrorist
warning signs to skirt the normal passport boarding procedures in Amsterdam. By the way, Amsterdam
security did come out the other day and admit that the terrorist did not have to "Go through normal
passport checking procedures".
Amsterdam security, please define to the American public "Normal passport boarding procedures".
You see the FBI would have the American public believe that what was important was whether the
terrorist in fact had a passport.
Seriously think about this people. You have a suicide bomber who had recently been to Yemen to but a
bomb, whose father had reported him as a terrorist, who supposedly was on some kind of U.S. terror
watchlist, and most likely knew the U.S. was aware of these red flags. Yet, he didn't go through "Normal
passport checking procedures." What does that mean? Maybe that he flashed a passport to some sort
of sympathetic security manager in a backroom to avoid a closer look at the terrorist's "red flags"? What
is important is that the terrorist avoided using normal passport checking procedures (apparently
successfully) in order to avoid a closer look into his red flags. Who cares if he had a passport. The
important thing is that he didn't want to show it and somehow avoided a closer inspection and "normal
passport checking procedures." Each passport comes with a bar code on it that can be scanned to
provide a wealth of information about the individual. I would bet that the passport checking procedures
for the terrorist did not include a bar code scan of his passport (which could have revealed damning
information about the terrorist).
Please note that there is a very easy way to verify the veracity of my prior "sharp dressed man" account.
Dutch police have admitted that they have reviewed the video of the "sharp dressed man" that I
referenced. Note that it has not been released anywhere, You see, if my eye witness account is false, it
could easily be proven by releasing the video. However, the proof of my eyewitness account would also
be verified if I am telling the truth and I am. There is a reason we have only heard of the video and not
seen it. dutch authorities, "RELEASE THE VIDEO!" This is the most important video in 8 years and may
be all of two minutes long. Show the entire video and "DO NOT EDIT IT"! The American public deserves
its own chance to attempt to identify the "sharp dressed man". I have no doubt that if the video indicated
that my account was wrong, that the video would have already swept over the entire world wide web.
Got a point, don’t you think? If the security video showed that Kurt Haskell was mistaken, it would have
been all over the nightly news at least.
Kurt Haskell has the credibility and the reputation to be taken seriously. He’s not asking for money. He
didn’t try and sell his story to the tabloids. He isn’t some kind of zealot who is mixing in any other
agenda other than he knows what he saw and believes that his own government is not taking him
seriously, rather, trying to intimidate him into keeping quiet.
We will never know the whole truth until some accounts for what this credible witness saw.
In the meantime, as both an officer of the court and an American, Mr. Haskell is living up to this moral,
ethical and civic duty.
Should we ever meet, Mr. Haskell, the next round is on me. Whatever it is that you're drinking . . .
Next
The Polbot Political Site