CNN Airs Eyewitness Testimony that ‘Well-Dressed’ Indian accomplice helped Abdulmutallab board without passport and that man on plane filmed entire flight and bombing attempt

Aaron Dykes
Infowars
December 29, 2009

Evidence is emerging that clearly indicates Abdulmutallab was more than just a Nigerian extremist carrying out his anger through an ill-conceived plot to ignite a powdery explosive substance on-board a flight to the United States. Eyewitness testimony pointing to a man helping the accused terrorist board without a passport, along with an unusual cameraman documenting the attempted attack on board the plane raise more than red flags– they point towards an intelligence operation, run as a drill, meant to conjure up public support for a number of fronts in the continuing ‘War on Terror.’
CNN interviewed key flight witnesses during their Dec. 28 program who raised these very points, making clear that the full story is still emerging and that wider-connections to intelligence handlers is evident.




THE SHARP-DRESSED MAN
Kurt Haskell and his wife, who were witnesses on board Northwest Airlines Flight 253 saw Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab receiving assistance from a well-dressed, wealthy-looking Indian man at the boarding gate in Amsterdam. Haskell told CNN that the accused bomber appeared strikingly ‘poor’ next to the well-dressed man. According to Haskell, that man did the talking for him, explaining to the flight personnel at the gate that Abdulmutallab needed to board without a passport, claiming that he was a Sudanese refugee. Haskell told CNN:

“Laurie and I were sitting near the boarding gate, sitting on the floor, there weren’t any seats to sit in. And I saw two men. They caught my eye because they seemed to be an odd pair. One was what I would describe as a poor-looking black teenager around 16 or 17, and the other man, age 50-ish, wealthy looking Indian man. And I was just wondering why they were together– kinda strange. And I watched them approach what I would call the ticket agent, the final person that checks your boarding pass before you get on the plane. And I could hear the entire conversation. The only person that spoke was the Indian man, and what he said was: ‘This man needs to board the plane, but he doesn’t have a passport.’ And the ticket agent responded, ‘Well, if he doesn’t have a passport, he can’t get on the plane.’ To which the Indian man responded back, ‘He’s from Sudan. We do this all the time.’ And the ticket agent said, ‘Well, then you’ll have to go and talk to my manager.’ And she directed them down a hallway. And that was the last time I saw the Indian man, and the black man I didn’t see again until he tried to blow up our plane hours later.”

The gate attendee referred the odd-couple to the manager. Haskell said that was the last he saw of the wealthy man, but later recognized Abdulmutallab after the incident occurred on the plane. That’s when he says he put two and two together about the unusual connection.
His wife, Laurie, said she found it ‘odd’ that authorities have not yet followed up on their witness account, as they were the only ones known to have witnessed Abdulmutallab with the ‘Indian’ man prior to boarding the flight.
THE CAMERAMAN
If he had help getting on the flight with no passport after having been reported to U.S. authorities by his own father, what is the true explanation for the man seen filming the entire flight? Another witness on board the flight, Richelle Keepman, said she noticed the mysterious cameraman at the beginning of the flight, believing the man might have been simply excited about a first flight, or etc. Later when the ‘bombing’ incident took place, she says the cameraman was the only one standing up, and intently filming the entire incident.
ADDULMUTALLAB AND THE WIDER WAR ON TERROR
Put this together with new focus on Yemen ‘in the fight against Al Qaeda’, including calls from Sen. Lieberman to pre-emptively attack, the media’s immediate hype of the event, and the ready-made Body Scanners and other ‘enhanced’ Airport security, it is clear that this is a contrived incident intentionally unleashed to goad renewed support for ever-expanding terrorism-related warfare in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sudan and now Yemen.

Just like after 9/11, airport travelers are again prepared to accept greater violations of their liberties and privacy for supposed security. Yet patsies and watchlist-subjects alike have repeatedly been allowed to bypass security clearance and been proven to have ties to the intelligence community.
The latest accused ‘terrorist’ Abdulmutallab was very likely the fall-guy in a pattern-drill– handled by wealthy, mismatched associates, allowed to board without required credentials, and videotaped by a cameraman with an unknown connection. Was Abdulmutallab involved with these figures through a drill which ended with an intentionally-failed bombing meant to incite great fear of terrorism?
PREVIOUSLY-STAGED TERROR
This would fit closely with other elements of CIA-concocted “terrorism.” Many of the 9/11 hijackers and other known extremists were revealed to have participated in ‘dry run’ drills, shared addresses with intelligence handlers or lived on military bases, were allowed to pass through the border despite being on one or more watchlists, and were given VISAS/Passports through execptions and/or special clearance.
Similarly, David Headly, named in the Mumbai attack, has been exposed as a CIA-double agent.
FBI/CIA provocateurs and exaggerated accounts of extremists groups have continued to emerge from the phony stories given to the public in the cases of many would-be plots, such as in Toronto, the ‘plot’ to bomb the Sears Tower, the Transatlantic liquid bomb plot, alleged plans to ‘blow up a Jewish temple and shoot down military planes’ in New York and more.
We see a similar pattern here, the emerging evidence strongly suggests. How long will we allow deliberately-provoked terror incidents to frighten us to death, invade our privacy, erode our liberties, restrict our travel and perpetuate an ever-expanding string of wars?
COMMENTARY: BODY-SCANNERS AND THE SECURITY-SWINDLE
Benjamin Franklin long ago warned us that “If we restrict liberty to attain security, we will lose both.” And that those willing to make that bargain deserve neither their liberty nor security.
On the most basic level, government is established only for the common security of its people. Thus, it is no surprise that government tends to test the line between the government and the governed on grounds of “security.” It is no coincidence that Franklin and fellow compatriots like Thomas Paine laid down principled reasons for an individuals’ rights in respect to government.
Today’s advances in technology do not diminish the principled reasons for keeping government’s power in check with the people’s essential, as per Franklin– freedom. The ‘War on Terror’ is a shining example of Franklin’s principle gone awry. You cannot fight against an existential, shadowy “enemy”, on a fishing expedition for evidence, avoiding certainties, and employing such unprincipled tactics as torture, rendition, widespread wire-tapping– going against the very spirit of the law established by the Constitution, while hoping to maintain that opposing spirit in the nation.
The people, for reasons of “security” are stripped and searched– preemptively, without warrant, probable cause or specific things being searched for– in ever-expanding screenings– losing privacy, dignity and basic freedom of travel. But even this is not the point.
All the while, the rare, real perpetrator, identified as a terrorist, never goes through the database checks, security screening or passenger tracking schemes set-up by Homeland Security. The people do. Mothers with breastmilk. Business men with laptops. Shoes, belts, nail clippers, tooth paste, underwear, but not terrorists.
They evidently are whisked through by contacts who may or may not work directly for the FBI, CIA or etc. Databases make exceptions for its most-important targets while people with commonly-confused names are kept from flying or subject to secondary screening. Any ordinary person without proper documentation is subject, at the least, to alternate verification and likely quite a few intense questions. For this would-be bomber, however, it is apparently the matter of a handshake with the manager, and a high-level contact to vouch as sponsor.
It’s a bait and switch. It’s not security, Constitutionally-sound or not. It’s a scheme to tightly-control the travel of ordinary Americans while co-opting that fear through staged-attacks to generate support for various overseas operations. It is textbook problem-reaction-solution.
Though the Body Scanners have already been phased in throughout the U.S., they along with newly hailed restrictions, such as banning blankets, electronics and on-board bathroom use during the final 60 minutes of flight, are heavy-handed measures set up by Homeland Security that have been waiting for the right excuse to introduce them to the public.
But it’s a misapplication of security by an inept arm of government stumbling in the dark. The TSA offers neither security nor freedom– it’s Franklin’s monster.
The heroic, but also practical actions of the passengers in thwarting this attempted-attack is a sane reminder in the fog of the ‘War on Terror’ that people can actually fend for themselves in many situations, particularly in the face of danger. Though real, big scale dangers do exist for which governments clearly play a role, we cannot shriek in the face of danger, handing over to government all that we hold in the balance. There are ways of detecting crimes, preventing attacks and ’saving lives, for the children’ that don’t involve enslaving and indicting the whole of the population.
The game is surely rigged if the criminal it was meant to catch walks right through the proverbial back-door, which was held open for him by the archetypal inside man. The trading of liberty for so-called security does not balance favorably, but transfers power duly held by the people to the government, the more dangerous by the loosened-chains of the Constitution.
Supporting links and further info:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/man-videotaped-underwear-bomber-on-flight-253.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/bomber-had-no-passport-helped-to-board-plane-by-sharp-dressed-man.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/12/28/terror.suspect.father/index.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/terrorist-or-cia-agent-maybe-both.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2006/080606militaryconnections.htm
http://www.prisonplanet.com/new-york-terror-plot-another-government-provocateured-set-up.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/cia-and-mi6-links-to-rauf-and-liquid-bomb-plot.html
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2006/230606searstower.htm

BOMBSHELL: Evidence Clearly Indicates Staged Attack on Detroit Flight

THE WHISTLE BLOWS FOR TRUTH
The whistleblower deep in the basement of one of the ugly, modern tower-blocks of the dismal, windswept University of East Anglia could scarcely have timed it better.
In less than three weeks, the world’s governing class – its classe politique – would meet in Copenhagen, Denmark, to discuss a treaty to inflict an unelected and tyrannical global government on us, with vast and unprecedented powers to control all once-free world markets and to tax and regulate the world’s wealthier nations for its own enrichment: in short, to bring freedom, democracy, and prosperity to an instant end worldwide, at the stroke of a pen, on the pretext of addressing what is now known to be the non-problem of manmade “global warming”.
The unnamed hero of ‘Climategate’, after months of work gathering emails, computer code, and data, quietly sent a 61-megabyte compressed file from one of the university’s servers to an obscure public message-board on the internet, with a short covering note to the effect that the climate was too important to keep the material secret, and that the data from the University would be available for a short time only.
He had caught the world’s politico-scientific establishment green-handed. Yet his first attempts to reveal the highly-profitable fraud and systematic corruption at the very heart of the UN’s climate panel and among the scientists most prominent in influencing it’s prejudiced and absurdly doom-laden reports had failed. He had made the mistake of sending the data-file to the mainstream news media, which had also profited for decades by fostering the “global warming” scare, and by generally denying anyone who disagreed with the official viewpoint any platform.
The whistleblower’s data file revealed, for the first time, the innermost workings of the tiny international clique of climate scientists, centered on the Climate Research Unit at East Anglia, that has been the prime mover in telling the world that it is warming at an unprecedented rate, and that humankind is responsible.
REVEALED: THE ABJECT CORRUPTION OF CLIMATE SCIENCE
The gallant whistleblower now faces a police investigation at the instigation of the University authorities desperate to look after their own and to divert allegations of criminality elsewhere. His crime? He had revealed what many had long suspected:
- A tiny clique of politicized scientists, paid by unscientific politicians with whom they were financially and politically linked, were responsible for gathering and reporting data on temperatures from the palaeoclimate to today’s climate. The “Team”, as they called themselves, were bending and distorting scientific data to fit a nakedly political story-line profitable to themselves and congenial to the governments that, these days, pay the bills for 99% of all scientific research.

• The Climate Research Unit at East Anglia had profited to the tune of at least $20 million in “research” grants from the Team’s activities.
• The Team had tampered with the complex, bureaucratic processes of the UN’s climate panel, the IPCC, so as to exclude inconvenient scientific results from its four Assessment Reports, and to influence the panel’s conclusions for political rather than scientific reasons.
• The Team had conspired in an attempt to redefine what is and is not peer-reviewed science for the sake of excluding results that did not fit what they and the politicians with whom they were closely linked wanted the UN’s climate panel to report.
• They had tampered with their own data so as to conceal inconsistencies and errors.
• They had emailed one another about using a “trick” for the sake of concealing a “decline” in temperatures in the paleoclimate.
• They had expressed dismay at the fact that, contrary to all of their predictions, global temperatures had not risen in any statistically-significant sense for 15 years, and had been falling for nine years. They had admitted that their inability to explain it was “a travesty”. This internal doubt was in contrast to their public statements that the present decade is the warmest ever, and that “global warming” science is settled.
• They had interfered with the process of peer-review itself by leaning on journals to get their friends rather than independent scientists to review their papers.
• They had successfully leaned on friendly journal editors to reject papers reporting results inconsistent with their political viewpoint.
• They had campaigned for the removal of a learned journal’s editor, solely because he did not share their willingness to debase and corrupt science for political purposes.
• They had mounted a venomous public campaign of disinformation and denigration of their scientific opponents via a website that they had expensively created.
• Contrary to all the rules of open, verifiable science, the Team had committed the criminal offense of conspiracy to conceal and then to destroy computer codes and data that had been legitimately requested by an external researcher who had very good reason to doubt that their “research” was either honest or competent.

THE NATURE ‘TRICK’ TO ‘HIDE THE DECLINE’ IN TEMPERATURES
Among the most revealing of the emails released to the world by the whistleblower was one dated November 1999. In that email, Professor “Phil” Jones of the CRU wrote to Michael Mann, Raymond Bradley and Malcolm Hughes, the authors of the infamous “hockey stick” graph that falsely abolished the medieval warm period:
Almost immediately after the news of Climategate broke, Professor Jones told Investigative Magazine’s TGIF Edition that he “had no idea” what he might have meant by the words “hide the decline”. He said:

“They’re talking about the instrumental data which is unaltered – but they’re talking about proxy data going further back in time, a thousand years, and it’s just about how you add on the last few years, because when you get proxy data you sample things like tree rings and ice cores, and they don’t always have the last few years. So one way is to add on the instrumental data for the last few years.”

A few hours later, the science hate-crime website created by the Team cobbled together a jumbled, snivelingly self-serving, and entirely different pretext:

“The paper in question is the Mann, Bradley and Hughes (1998) Nature paper on the original multiproxy temperature reconstruction [the ‘hockey-stick’ graph of pre-instrumental temperatures over the past 1000 years in the Northern Hemisphere], and the ‘trick’ is just to plot the instrumental records along with reconstruction so that the context of the recent warming is clear. Scientists often use the term “trick” to refer to “a good way to deal with a problem”, rather than something that is “secret”, and so there is nothing problematic in this at all. As for the ‘decline’, it is well known that Keith Briffa’s [another prominent member of the Team] maximum latewood tree ring density proxy diverges from the temperature records after 1960 (this is more commonly known as the “divergence problem” … and has been discussed in the literature since Briffa et al. in Nature in 1998 (Nature, 391, 678-682). Those authors have always recommend not using the post-1960 part of their reconstruction, and so, while ‘hiding’ is probably a poor choice of words (since it is ‘hidden’ in plain sight), not using the data in the plot is completely appropriate, as is further research to understand why this happens.”

Enter Steve McIntyre, the one who had first realized that the UN’s climate panel in 2001 had used a corrupt graph that had falsely abolished the medieval warm period with the aim of pretending that today’s global temperatures are unprecedented in at least 1000 years. Later that day his website, www.climateaudit.org, revealed the truth about the conspirators’ “trick”.
In order to smooth a data series over a given time period, one must pad it with artificial data beyond the endpoint of the real series. However, when Mann, Bradley, and Hughes plotted instrumental data against their reconstructions based on the varying widths of tree-rings from ancient trees, their favourite form of proxy or pre-instrumental reconstructed temperature, no smoothing method could conceal the fact that after 1960 the tree-ring data series trended downward, while the instrumental series trended upward. This was the Team’s “divergence”:

“So Mann’s solution [‘Mike’s Nature trick’] was to use the instrumental record for padding [both the proxy and the instrumental data series], which changes the smoothed series to point upwards.”

Accordingly, though the author of the original email had said that the “trick” was to add instrumental measurements for years beyond available proxy data, his conspirators at the science-hate website admitted it was actually a replacement of proxy data owing to a known but unexplained post-1960 “divergence” between the proxy data and the instrumental data. In fact, it was a fabrication.
The next day, in a statement issued by the University of East Anglia’s press office, Professor Jones fumblingly tried to recover the position:

“The word ‘trick’ was used here colloquially as in a clever thing to do. It is ludicrous to suggest that it refers to anything untoward.”

As we shall see, Professor Jones was not telling the truth.
BREAKING THE BROKEN CODE: DISSECTING THE DODGY DATA
The “Documents” folder in the enormous data-file released by the whistleblower contains many segments of computer program code used by Jones and the Team in contriving the Climate Research Unit’s global temperature series. The data-file also contained a 15,000-line commentary by programmers concerned that the code and the data used by the Team were suspect, were fabricated, and were not fit for their purpose.
Looking at the seldom-tidy code, the sheer number of programs which subject the raw data to various degrees of filtering, processing, and tampering is disconcerting. Some of these alterations were blatant and unacceptable, notably those which removed proxy data that correlate poorly with measured regional temperature, or even replaced proxy data altogether with measured data to conceal a discrepancy between what the proxy data actually showed and what the Team wanted it to show.
The Team’s programmers even admitted, in comments within the code, that they were artificially adjusting or “correcting” the proxy data from tree-rings. In Fortran, the high-level computer language long in use at universities for programming, a programmer’s comment is usually preceded by the statement “REM” for “remark”, indicating that the text on the line following the word “REM” should be ignored by the compiler program that translates the Fortran code that humans can understand into executable machine language that the computer can understand.
One of the commonest remarks included in the program fragments disclosed by the whistleblower is as follows:

“These will be artificially adjusted to look closer to the real temperatures.”

There could scarcely be a plainer admission that the data are being regularly, routinely, materially tampered with, for the sake of making it appear that the proxy data are sufficiently reliable to appear close to the instrumental temperatures.
This is no mere debating point. The UN’s climate panel had issued specific warnings against using proxy data (MXD) from tree-rings, because warmer weather is not the only reason why tree-rings become wider in some years than in others. There are at least two other prominent reasons, both of which can – and do – distort the tree-ring data beyond the point where they are useful as indicators of (or proxies for) pre-instrumental temperatures. First, the tree-rings become wider whenever the weather becomes wetter. Secondly, and of still greater concern, the tree-rings widen when there is more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. And there is 40% more CO2 in the atmosphere today than there was in 1750.
Yet, as McIntyre and McKitrick had established originally in 2003, and had published in a leading journal in 2005, the majority of the data on the basis of which Mann, Bradley and Hughes, and later other members of the Team, had attempted to pretend that there had been no medieval warm period were tree-ring series. Take out the suspect tree-ring series, together with just one other rogue series, and all the remaining data series establish beyond reasonable doubt that the Middle Ages were truly, materially, and globally warmer than the present.
Scientists with programming knowledge have already begun to examine the computer code that Professor Jones and his colleagues had attempted to hide for so long. Here is Marc Sheppard’s selection of three examples of the tortuous sequences of deliberate data tampering that are evident within the program code.
Read the complete report from SPPI here:

For the Full Report in PDF Form, please click here.

Lord Monckton’s summary of Climategate and its issues