Lori And Kurt Haskell Options

[GroundPounder]

it's never been about catching the 'bad' guys. and besides, the proles don't mind, literally.

[albertchampion]

all i can relate is that no one in an official capacity wants to deal with kurt haskell's story. or the reality of what was required to put this little nigerian on nw253.

chastising joe brancatelli for his coverage of this and other "terrorist" events, somewhat intemperately i must confess, i "fired" myself. and even after the fact, after i proffered an apology, my "self-inflicted" wound was not to be healed.

virtually no one in a "so-called" guru capacity wants to deal with usa/nato state-sanctioned terrorism.

the official story must be sustained. by all means.

and anyone attempting to contradict that official story, is marginalized. erased from the blackboard.

[KP50]

Back to the underwear bomber and the Haskells are very much still around and very much shouting loudly about the dodginess of the whole case.

Go to

http://haskellfamily.blogspot.com/

and watch the video, it shows Fox News reports on the status hearing for the alleged bomber and a longer interview with Haskell.

[KP50]

Kurt Haskell still keeping an eye on the "Undie-Bomber"

http://haskellfamily.blogspot.com/2011/07/...ing-7-7-11.html

Thursday, July 07, 2011
Underwear Bomber Hearing 7-7-11
by Kurt Haskell

I haven't posted anything regarding the underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab (Umar) in awhile. It is not due to a lack of interest on my part. There simply hasn't been much new going on with the story. That changed today. I expect this story to heat up once again as the October 4th trial date approaches.

As always, if anyone needs a background regarding this case and my throery on it, feel free to read this blog from Christmas Day 2009 forward. Please remember that this is my wife's blog and many posts regarding our lives are commingled between underwear bomber postings. This is not exclusively an underwear bomber blog.

I received notice of this hearing last week. It was set for 11:00 A.M. today. Unfortunately for me, I had a trial on one of my cases set for 9:00 A.M. today. I didn't have enough notice to move my trial. I was hoping my trial would settle or get adjourned to this afternoon. Judge Keith was an hour late today for my 9:00 A.M. trial and had several other cases to complete first. By 10:00 A.M., I didn't think there was any chance I would make it to Umar's hearing. At 10:30 A.M. Judge Keith called the two attorneys into his chambers to discuss the case to see if there was a settlement. There wasn't, so I asked him for a one hour adjournment and he granted it (from 10:45 to 11:45). I asked my client to watch my briefcase and I ran 4 blocks to the federal courthouse. Lori was already there. The hearing lasted 45 minutes of which I got to watch approximately 30 minutes of. See below:

This hearing was scheduled for two reasons: 1) The prosecution asked to "define" the role of stand-by attorney Chambers to determine what he can and can't do and 2) Stand-by attorney Chambers request to delay the October 4 trial date due to the prosecution giving him new evidence only one month ago.

The prosecution argued its motion first and asked for ridiculous requests such as Chambers not being able to sit by or talk to Umar while court was in progress. Judge Edmunds appeared to think most of the requests were ridiculous. A couple of the requests she indicated that she would decide after taking the issue under advisement (Judge talk for thinking it over) and would give her decision at another hearing in approximately two weeks. She took these issues under advisement as between Umar and Chambers: 1) Who will do jury selection, 2) Who will do the opening statement, 3) Who will do the closing statement, and 4) Who will question the witnesses. Interestingly enough, Umar told Judge Edmunds that he and Chambers will each question some of the witnesses. Judge Edmunds told Umar that would probably not be acceptable. I wonder if Judge Edmunds forces Umar to question all of his witnesses, if that will scare him into using Chambers as his regular attorney? I can only hope. Judge Edmunds once again tried to get Umar to use an attorney. Umar once again refused and indicated that he has been making progress on his studying to become his own attorney.

The more interesting part of the hearing today centered around Chambers request to adjourn the October 4, 2011, trial date. As part of his argument, Chambers indicated that the prosecution dumped the "Most significant evidence" of the entire case on his office in June after holding it for 18 months. Chambers then went on to describe such evidence as follows:

1) A copy of Umar's passport (Apparently it took 18 months to create it)

2) A disk containing a chemical analysis of the composition of the bomb

3) Airport security video and audio

4) Four disks of DNA analysis

5)A Witness statement from a Dutch, non-law enforcement citizen, government profiler, who talked to Umar during "the time in question"

For those of you following my theory on this case, you can see the obvious tie ins between the evidence that was withheld for 1 1/2 years and what it likely shows. I am, however, very puzzled as to item 5. I am not sure what the shows, who it is, when it was, or how it's relevant. Chambers then requested all other hidden evidence to which the prosectuion indicated it would turn over to Judge Edmunds for her review within two weeks. AS IF IT WAS O.K. TO HIDE MORE EVIDENCE!!!!! Apparently, the further hidden evidence is classified as SECRET (top secret?) and requires judicial review even before it's released to the defense. If I was representing Umar, I would be beyond livid over this conduct by the prosecution. What kind of evidence in this case could be so highly classified? I wonder if it has something to do with providing a "terrorist" an intentionally defective bomb and escorting him around security without a passport?

The hearing ended with Judge Edmunds denying Chambers request to delay the trial. Jury selection will start October 4, 2011.

*Note that some of the above information was provided by Lori as I had to return to my trial before this hearing concluded.

[GroundPounder]

kp50, thanks for the update.

[SanderO]

This case sounds like it was a classic sting operation and used by intel to gin up fear about the ever present danger of terrorism. It appears that they will take two tacks to make their case... one is to with hold the actual evidence of the sting.. which would implicate Intel for the event... and the other is fabricate evidence which would implicate the defendant.

If the judge is playing ball with the prosecution (the State) all motions to discover the fabricated evidence will be denied for National Security Reasons... ie you don't reveal in open court the unlawful activities of Intel (the State)... and all motions related to witholding of evidence and requesting a later trial date will also be denied for the same reason.

The court seems to be averse to a defendant asking questions in court AND having a lawyer. I don't know if this is in the law... or not. But a person can appear on their own behalf - Pro Se... of course. This might lead to an appeal for "ineffective council"... so better to have an (from the prosecution's POV) a lousy lawyer to botch the case but which can't be called ineffective counsel and the basis for a retrial or appeal.

My sense is the prosecution and the State are trial to completely control the outcome which is that a terrorist managed to almost blow up the plane. Send the SOB to Gitmo forever.

[albertchampion]

this is an interesting thread.

i have continued to keep up with the haskell's. there is no doubt in my mind, from their initial reports, that they encountered a false flag operation. as i recall, i posted here that there was no way that the UB could have transited schipol without a passport. so he had to have had a minder/handler moving him through the checkpoints.

one of the interesting things about the UB is that his father had a long commercial relationship with the IDF.

as you probably know, all reporting on this story was spiked.

there is no doubt in my mind that the incident was facilitated so as to condition the us air traveling public to accept the chertoff xray machinery.

[KP50]

Saw something on a news ticker this morning about the "Underwear Bomber" pleading guilty. Good time to reawaken this thread - check what is happening on

http://haskellfamily.blogspot.com/

Incommunicado all the NZ day so I'll do some more digging tonight.

[GroundPounder]

thanks for the bump and update kp50.

haskell's observations on the 6th are interesting...

[KP50]

http://www.freep.com/article/20111013/NEWS06/110130494

After his underwear bomb fizzled on an overseas flight to Detroit on Dec. 25, 2009, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab couldn't wait to tell everyone he was on a mission from al-Qaida.

In a surprise move on Wednesday, the second day of his federal terrorism trial in Detroit, he told a judge.

"In late 2009, in fulfillment of a religious obligation, I decided to participate in jihad against the United States," the 25-year-old Nigerian student-turned-extremist told U.S. District Judge Nancy Edmunds upon pleading guilty to eight charges that will send him to prison for life.

"Participation in jihad against the United States is considered among the most virtuous of deeds in Islam," Abdulmutallab said in fluent English.

Abdulmutallab, who pleaded guilty against the advice of his lawyer, said he wanted to blow up the plane carrying nearly 300 people in retaliation for U.S. support of Israel and the killing of "innocent Muslims" in Israel, Yemen, Iraq, Somalia and Afghanistan.

He said he was guilty under U.S. law, but not Muslim law. He warned that a "great calamity" will befall the U.S. if it continues on its course.

"If you laugh at us now," he warned, "we will laugh at you later."

Seems like a tidy way to end the whole story, Haskell doesn't get to give his evidence, all the dodgy evidence is swept away. Very strange but not very surprising.

[KP50]

Sentencing has taken place in this case - Kurt Haskell got to read out his victim statement in court, worth a read - go to

http://haskellfamily.blogspot.co.nz/

and look at the recent posts. If only all the people being forced into those scanning machines at airports would only read the truth of the case underpinning the whole thing.

[onesliceshort]

“Ms. Haskell, do you have anything to add besides what Mr. Haskell just stated about his government conspiracy theories?”

Unreal man. Any wonder witnesses don't want to come forward?

In other words, if anybody witnesses anything contrary to the official line, you'll be deemed a "conspiracy theorist" in the negative sense. A "nutcase". That was a calculated move by the "judge".

And the whore media doesn't want to know.

[KP50]

Unreal man. Any wonder witnesses don't want to come forward?

In other words, if anybody witnesses anything contrary to the official line, you'll be deemed a "conspiracy theorist" in the negative sense. A "nutcase". That was a calculated move by the "judge".

And the whore media doesn't want to know.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/sD_tws0qIKE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The noose is tightening for sure. The range of accepted views within the media is getting smaller and smaller - it has been done slowly enough that only the aware notice - while the majority still believe that the media is open and encompasses all views. The changing of the world is accelerating, the narrative of Syria is being conducted quickly (as it was in Libya), the invasion is bound to happen, the reason will be found somewhere along the way.

It is widely reported that the protesters in Syria are armed, have been armed for quite a while, and are being supported by foreign powers. I don't want mainstream news but can somebody who does please point me to a news channel that does anything but highlight the nasty Syrian Government exterminating peaceful civilian protesters.

Did any news channel ever report on the bombing raids in Libya and how a "No-Fly Zone" became a "Bomb a Country back 50 Years Zone"? Where is the outcry? The British news was all over Reagan's single raid on Libya back in the mid-80s, yet a whole country can be destroyed and it is a "humanitarian, liberating mission".

Gone slightly away from the issue of the Haskells but it is all from the same basket - suppression of views contrary to the accepted narrative. Be afraid folks.