Lori And Kurt Haskell Options

[albertchampion]

tell a very interesting story about the boarding of the nigerian at schiphol airport.

here is a newspaper account

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ss..._says_at_l.html

but kurt haskell got air on npr's atc today. a very interesting interview. of interest to me was learning that for 6 years he was an attorney for the irs. and that during the 2 hours the passengers were sequestered and interviewed by the fbi after landing in detroit, he told them this same story.

i must admit, i stopped flying through schiphol in 2002. but from at least 1998 -2002, it was the most security-conscious airport that i traversed. as i recall, security at schiphol from 1998[if not earlier] was managed by ex-israeli military/intell services personnel. as i recall, one could not move from one concourse to another, even as a transiting passenger, without having to produce a relevant boarding pass and a passport. i found this to be the case at heathrow as well.

so, let us consider the haskell's story. the alleged jihadi shows up at the gate in the company of an elegantly dressed older and taller man. who haskell overhears trying to bully the gate agent to board the nigerian without a passport. the gate agent refuses and sends the pair to her manager.

somehow, the nigerian, with no passport, gets boarded. if haskell's overhearing is accurate[and i think it is], the nigerian is boarded without producing a passport.

several questions are raised, according to the haskells, the tall elegant companion that they observed, overheard, did not board the aircraft. one must ask a question, how was this individual able to enter that concourse? you cannot access a concourse without a boarding pass and a passport. which also invites the question, how did the nigerian enter the concourse without a passport?

in my relations with spookdom, i would submit that the nigerian's companion was a "handler".

haskell identifies this "handler" as appearing to be an "indian"[i.e., from the subcontinent]. i interpret that to mean that the companion was of an olive complection. could have been an israeli. an employee/manager of the israeli-managed schiphol security operations. this would allow him to move, with his nigerian companion, throughout schiphol unquestioned, unstopped.

several weeks ago, i read an article in the nyt, i think, where an ex-cia officer predicted another terrorist event before the end of the year. was this that event?

another false flag operation?

another bit of terrorism orchestrated by israel and the usa?

if the haskells heard it accurately, and i think that they did, then i sure think so.

what will be interesting will be the disposition of the film record from all the security cameras. as i recall, schiphol was the first major international airport to be overwhelmingly cameraed. there should be film tracking every bit of the nigerian's transit through schiphol. through every security check-point. his "no passport" rendezvous with the gate agent. to his entry to the manager's office. to his eventual boarding.

what i heard from kurt haskell this afternoon was how the swarthy, elegantly dressed companion identified the nigerian as sudanese and informed the gate agent that sudanese had been allowed access to flying without papers routinely. makes one wonder if this is how israeli intelligence moves its agents around without any record of their transit. also makes me wonder how often it is that the airline industry succumbs to this fraud.

what i really vouchsafed haskell's story for me was when he was asked if anyone heard what he heard, saw what he saw. his response, "no one else was paying attention".

and that has been my experience when flying. i am always paying attention. i do not go through life as if in a dream state. most do, however.

finishing up, haskell has reported a reality. watch how his report goes down the rabbit hole, lubricated by the mossad operatives that are running the usa. it should never be forgotten that israeli firms were running[as i recall] security at bos, dia, on that day in september, 2001.

was it an israeli false-flag bit of catastrophic homicide that misfired? i think so.

[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.