Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the Underwear Bomber
“The effect this matter has had on my life has been astounding and due to this case, I will never trust the government in any matter, ever.”
I was watching the Jodi Foster movie, Flight Plan, in which her character, a widow, traveling from Europe to the United States for the burial of her husband, takes a nap only to awaken with her daughter missing. So a big hunt ensues to find the girl aboard the airliner inflight. Without giving away too much of the plot, the main bad guy is running a scam and (never explained) gets the girl hidden onboard. As part of his plot, he arms and attaches C-4 explosive. Okay, some parts of the plot are a bit of a stretch, but I was immediately reminded of the famous terror event form Christmas of 2009 featuring the “underwear bomber” Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Umar was supposed to have tried to blow up an airliner by trying to set fire to some explosive powder hidden in his underwear. It failed, he badly burned himself, and was later convicted and sent to prison.
I had originally heard it was packets of C-4 but as I have learned, it was PETN, a powered substance that needs a chemical catalyst of acid, which apparently Umar added while in the lavatory. However, his method of detonating it was way off as it is difficult to ignite and burns slowly. Basically, like C-4, it needs an mechanical or electrical detonator. Was Umar then, using a fake bomb? Apparently so, and it’s been documented in other terror related cases. Take a look at this one at the Huffington Post link. Do a study of terrorist arrests and it’s nearly all driven by government agencies using informants to coerce people, generally ne'er-do-wells and unfriendly immigrants of the Muslim faith, to commit acts that they generally wouldn’t have been involved with.
Ironically, the movie got it right–the bad guy is shown inserting an electrical detonator into the C-4. Setting it on fire will not cause an explosion. The government’s official account of the underwear bomber attempt to set off a bomb with fire was completely wrong. PETN will not explode if lit up either.
However, Something Is Off Here
The government’s narrative runs into difficulty with the eye witness report of Kurt Haskell, waiting with his wife to board his flight in Amsterdam, who claims to have seen Umar’s attempts to board the plane without a passport rebuffed till a “smart dressed man,” as Haskell describes him, negotiates with airline personnel to allow Umar onboard. Some news accounts stated that Umar did actually have a proper visa and passport and photos of a passport have been shown. If that was the case, then why did the man in the suit that Haskell saw, need to intervene? Haskell believes the passport is phony as is the picture of the underwear.
In fact, Umar is supposed to have been badly burned in the escapade. Ever seen any burn marks on that grungy pair of drawers? Of course not.
After the attempted bombing, Kurt Haskell documents a long, frustrating, aftermath of trying to get his story recognized by the authorities both at the Department of Homeland Security, FBI, and the news media. He is mostly dismissed, and sometimes called a liar. Dutch officials claim to have examined many hours of surveillance footage and never saw the man in the suit (no word if Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was spotted on their footage either). Haskell said he was shown a large batch of photos of the men suits, but none of them matched the guy he saw. Haskell also had a hard go of getting other witnesses to come forward. A lawyer such as Haskell knows what his rights are is not easily intimidated. Unfortunately, many people are.
Media’s Coverage of the Story
Kurt Haskell says that Chris Hanson of NBC’s Dateline, came to his office twice for interviews to later dismiss his account of events as “unsubstantiated rumor dispelled as myth.” That was harsh. Naturally, his story is ignored by Dateline on their report on the attempted bombing attack. This is typical of a mainstreamer such as Chris Hanson, to make sure the government’s wacky narrative stays in play.
Another story I found, by Lee Ferran of ABC News entitled, “Stink Bomb: Underwear Bomber Wore Explosive Undies for Weeks, FBI Says,” borders on the ridiculous. This bit of news reporting is basically an FBI release claiming the bomb failed to go off because Umar wore the underwear for three weeks, to presumably get used to wearing them. As FBI agent Ted Peissig states in the piece, “We think ultimately, that probably is what caused a little bit of separation in the sequence of events in the explosion.” Uh-huh, that makes sense. It’s amazing how these people can declare this hogwash with a straight face. It’s about as bad as Janet Napolitano saying “the system worked” after a bomber, or in this case a phony bomber, was allowed to get through security and board a commercial flight. They must think us dumb as sheep. And once again, we have a so-called journalist in Lee Ferran passing this rubbish off as news reporting.
Notice how the mainstream press functions these days–they just regurgitate a government press release without question. They have traded integrity and critical thinking for access. As Haskell said on his blog, “...the media is nothing but a mouthpiece for the U.S Government.” I think he’s right.
Ultimately, Kurt Haskell is restricted to his blog, a few articles here and there and a series of prominent radio interviews with Rollye James and Alex Jones, both friendly to conspiracy. When the trial of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab went down, Haskell was to be the only and hence, star witness till Umar suddenly declared his guilt and was put away in four consecutive 50-year sentences. Shades of James Earl Ray, pleading guilty to the murder of Martin Luther King. When a defendant does that, anything controversial, or for that matter, the real truth, gets buried.
The End Result
As freely admitted but authorities, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was on the terrorist watch list. Yet he was allowed to board. As Kurt Haskell wrote on Infowars.com:
“I became further saddened from this case, when Patrick Kennedy of the State Department during Congressional hearings, admitted that Umar was a known terrorist, was being followed, and the U.S. allowed him into the U.S. so that it could catch Umar’s accomplices. I was once again shocked and saddened when Michael Leiter of the National Counter terrorism Center admitted during these same hearings that intentionally letting terrorists into the U.S. was a frequent practice of the U.S. Government. I cannot fully explain my sadness, disappointment and fear when I realized that my government allowed an attack on me intentionally.”
I find Kurt Haskell’s account of what happened that day in Amsterdam to be highly credible. He’s always told the same story without contradiction. It’s similar to stories told by witnesses to events where authorities have another agenda and they do everything to sweep a conflicting witness testimony (and any evidence) under the rug. People like Haskell suffer the slings and arrows of intimidation, ridicule, slander, and probably the worst slight, to be simply ignored. His story is given no credibility or acknowledgement pertaining to the history of the event. Somebody even had one of the other passengers contact him to tell him he didn’t really see what he saw. To their credit, the editors of Wikipedia do mention Kurt Haskell’s experience but only in passing and they never say it was true.
Probably the lamest stunt ever done but with a coordinated government PR campaign, coupled with an unquestioning mainstream press it was actually easy to pull off. The underwear bomber represents the classic patsy. A gung-ho young man willing to self-sacrifice for his Holy War, he was told by handlers how to set off a bomb that wasn’t meant to go off. Similar to Oswald using a junky rifle with a telescopic sight not properly aligned.
What Kurt Haskell and other other passengers of Flight 253 experienced was the duplicity of government. They say and do one thing in public and say do just the opposite in private. And innocent people sometimes get hurt or killed. The coverup ensues. The Benghazi scandal is an example of that duplicity.
Only with the independent Internet media and certain talk radio shows was this fraudulent event exposed for what it was. A false flag in the supposed war on terror. And the end result? A renewal of the Patriot Act, the introduction of full body scanners at the airports, and a general lessoning of liberty and the absurd groping of genitals and breasts at airport security lines.
All as a result of a fake terror event.
Kurt Haskell’s account of witnessing the Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab boarding without a passport.
Silly ABC News report.
Kurt Haskell’s blog and his account of the man in the suit.
Wikipedia entry on PETN.
Mohamed Osman Mohamud Arrested In Portland Car Bomb Plot