Michael Isikoff
The 9-11 Report: Slamming the FBI
Mon Jul 21 19:12:21 2003
208.152.73.85

Exclusive—The 9-11 Report: Slamming the FBI
By Michael Isikoff NEWSWEEK

Bruce DeCell, whose son-in-law was killed on September 11, listens to testimony on Capitol Hill last May
http://www.msnbc.com/news/941425.asp?cp1=1 

July 28 issue — The FBI blew repeated chances to uncover the 9-11 plot because it failed to aggressively investigate evidence of Al Qaeda’s presence in the United States, especially in the San Diego area, where two of the hijackers were living with one of the bureau’s own informants, according to the congressional report set for release this week.

THE LONG-DELAYED 900-page report also contains potentially explosive new evidence suggesting that Omar al-Bayoumi, a key associate of two of the hijackers, may have been a Saudi-government agent, sources tell NEWSWEEK. The report documents extensive ties between al-Bayoumi and the hijackers. But the bureau never kept tabs on al-Bayoumi—despite receiving prior information he was a secret Saudi agent, the report says. In January 2000, al-Bayoumi had a meeting at the Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles—and then went directly to a restaurant where he met future hijackers Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi, whom he took back with him to San Diego. (Al-Bayoumi later arranged for the men to get an apartment next to his and fronted them their first two months rent.) The report is sure to reignite questions about whether some Saudi officials were secretly monitoring the hijackers—or even facilitating their conduct. Questions about the Saudi role arose repeatedly during last year’s joint House-Senate intelligence-committees inquiry. But the Bush administration has refused to declassify many key passages of the committees’ findings. A 28-page section of the report dealing with the Saudis and other foreign governments will be deleted. “They are protecting a foreign government,” charged Sen. Bob Graham, who oversaw the inquiry.
The report criticizes the Pentagon for resisting military strikes against Al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan prior to 9-11, and the CIA for failing to pass along crucial information about Almihdhar and Alhazmi at a terrorists’ summit in Malaysia. But the FBI gets the toughest treatment. A few months after al-Bayoumi took them to San Diego, Almihdhar and Alhazmi moved into the house of a local professor who was a longtime FBI “asset.” The prof also had earlier contact with another hijacker, Hani Hanjour. But even though the informant was in regular touch with his FBI handler, the bureau never pieced together that he was living with terrorists. The bureau also failed to pursue other leads, including a local imam who dealt with several key 9-11 figures. The report, one congressional investigator said, “is a scathing indictment of the FBI as an agency that doesn’t have a clue about terrorism.” Furious bureau officials say the report misstates the evidence. They say the bureau checked out al-Bayoumi—now back in Saudi Arabia—and concluded he had not given the hijackers “material support.” As for Almihdhar and Alhazmi, “there was nothing there that gave us any suspicion about these guys,” said one FBI official.

2. Conventional Wisdom: Baked Yellowcake Edition
http://www.msnbc.com/news/744311.asp?0sp=W5b2

WTC INVESTIGATION
(discussing the pictures at the bottom of this message, and
http://thewebfairy.com/911/

http://thewebfairy.com/whatzit /

Pup wrote:

Yes, I think your analysis is correct. With the sun shining almost exactly at right angles to the camera the only way to generate such a reflection would be from a spherical object facing toward the camera, while the nose of the plane is facing away. And the color is wrong too - such a red-orange would be seen only if the sun was just rising or setting.

And as you say, "sparks" wouldn't create this kind of glow, and anyway aluminum striking steel would not create sparks. Is there any way of telling if the plane is just about to hit the building or has already contacted it?

As for the disintegration, it's not a question of whether there is enough energy to cause it, but just what it would look like if it did. In the picture of the collision from below
(http://ontario.indymedia.org/local/webcast/uploads/2nd_plane_crash_from_below_with_repeat_in_slo-mo__interview_with_cameraman.avi )
http://shorterlink.com/?ZA82E4
when seen in slow motion the remarkable thing is that there is no visible change in the plane as it passes through the wall. The shape of the plane remains completely unchanged as it passes through , with not a hint of crumpling or breaking up. There's something very insubstantial looking about the whole event, as if the plane was entering a shadow instead of a steel wall.

For starters the wings should have folded forwards as the fuselage hit - it takes a lot of energy to punch a hole in the wall, and that translates into a sudden deceleration of the fuselage. And the fuselage should have showed some crumpling as it passed through, with buckling and telescoping of the longitudinal stringers that hold the bulkheads together. After all, the plane is a lot softer than the wall, and it's only the relative motion that matters, not which one is "actually" moving. That means that we would see the same thing as if the plane were standing still and was hit by a wall going 500 mpg. In that situation I would expect the plane to be reduced to rubble rather than smoothly passing through the wall.

What we see in that video is the completely smooth entry of the plane as if passing through a bead curtain. No deformation, no hint of breaking up, nothing backscattered from the point of entry. All we see is a small line of dust (splashing fuel?) emerging from the point of entry as the plane disappears.

One other odd fact about the plane impact that I came across in one of the official analyses of the crash (I can't find it right now) is that the plane debris actually converged as it passed through the building. In other words the path of the debris narrowed down almost to a single point while travelling through the building. This would help explain why almost nothing comes out the east side, but in itself is very hard to explain. If the debris is hurtling through the largely empty spaces between the floors I would expect it to spread out as it travels, not "focus down" to a point. After all, every time a piece of debris hits something inside it will be deflected in a random direction, and this should on average cause the debris fan to widen. Only if every collision caused the debris to be deflected toward the midline of the path would such a narrowing to take place. But if it was truly random half the collisions should deflect pieces away from the midline, resulting in an overall widening of the debris fan.

Best wishes,

Pup
-----------------
plane entering the S tower


No, that is definetely not a sun flare, nor any reflection. Sun was at azimuth of 109°12.399' and altitude of 27°12.375'. So, almost shining at E facade under 90° angle. S facade just came into shadow. Plus, the flare would be yellow, and lot bigger. At first, I thought that it might be the sparkling. Like when you try driving without tyres. :) But everything was too fast for it. I can't believe that I wasn't paying attention to it before. And may I express my surprise by one thing. That "fuselage" that's coming out from N wall of S tower didn't affect the facade! I thought that much of the plane material exited through one/few hole/s, but there are no holes big enough.<6169.jpg & 7916.jpg>

E facade is virtually unaffected! <5708.jpg>

What the heck happened there?! Plane sure comes in like a sharp knife into watermellon. :-D lol It couldn't be cause the high velocity caused great stresses in fuselage=disintegration. Could it? I believe the tail should stay out, or fall down on the street. Now, I don't say I embrace the holo-plane theory (it is ridiculous to me - holograms are much more complex than in Star Trek - there has to be a media for spreading, denser than air). I say that explosives might have been detonated inside the plane/tower. As a matter of fact, this idea was always familiar to me, only LARED was always making me shut my mouth.

Stay well.
>
p.s.: news for everyone. Controlled Demolition's web site is back online.
Check the videos. They are great.
http://www.controlleddemolition.com/ 
--------------
http://thewebfairy.com/whatzit /  

• The 911 Commission is DIRTY — Ron Harold, Tue Jul 22 02:48
• Top Officials Admit 9/11 Was Preventable — Russ Kick, Tue Jul 22 02:36
• Call for Regime Change in the United States of America — Dr. Judah Ben-Hur, Mon Jul 21 20:04
• The Jews of Iraq — Naeim Giladi, Mon Jul 21 21:23
• Declaration of Independence from United States of America — Dr. Judah Ben-Hur, Mon Jul 21 22:25