07/25/2016
911 Blogger

Recently former FBI agent Mark Rossini and former counterterrorism czar Richard Clarke have raised the issue of CIA withholding in relation to al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar. This is an aspect of 9/11 that the 9/11 Commission failed to investigate. Despite this failure the mainstream media still loves to pretend the 9/11 Commission did a super job. This endorsement is probably based in part on the fact that the mainstream media has done a horrible, horrible job of investigating this aspect of 9/11. Basically the media hides their own lack of investigation by pretending the 9/11 Commission did a thorough job. The withholding is not a small detail that has little import. The truth about the withholding will likely change the entire context of the war on terror. It is that important.

Clarke and Rossini have both obscured the conduct of the FBI in the withholding:

Rossini:

Dina did not know at all about the recruitment effort. Dina just knew that the methodology by which the CIA knew about these terrorists was via an “intelligence method”, (which Dina erroneously and innocently thought was protected then by the “wall”).

9/11 Final Thoughts

Clarke:

Finally, 18 months after the two al-Qaeda men arrived in the U.S., the CIA, in a very low key way, passed a report to the FBI about al-Mihdhar and al-Hamzi. It was too late. Their trail had gone cold. They had entered the final phase of preparations for 9/11.

Behind the 28 pages

People who have followed this aspect of 9/11 are aware that the FBI UBLU which received the info acted in a very strange manner. Here are a few reasons the conduct was irregular:

1) Corsi’s claim of wall hindrance contradicts with the statements of NSLU attorney Sherry Sabol.
2) Remember the context at the time. Lots of terrorist chatter. Clarke and CIA officials were sounding the alarm.
3) The Cole investigation was a criminal matter. Al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar were linked to the Cole by way of the Malaysia meeting and the Yemen hub.
4) Why would UBLU personnel not involve high level FBI immediately? Were they worried about a terrorist attack in the US? Were they worried about CYA if their interpretation of the wall was later deemed to be BS? It makes no sense that they wouldn’t involve higher level officials like head of CT Dale Watson.
5)If the wall was really the issue then why on earth was the investigation marked routine? That is outrageous. The routine flag strongly suggests that the wall was an excuse to conceal another reason. Perhaps Alec Station deputy chief Tom Wilshire was still running things even after the sharing and he made sure the investigation was not successful by having the UBLU assign a single rookie intel side agent to perform the search.

If the UBLU also sat on the info then the CIA recruitment story becomes less credible as an explanation. The media have never interviewed any Alec Station or UBLU personnel directly involved in the withholding loop (i.e. Blee, Wilshire, Bikowsky, Corsi, Middleton). Journalists don’t have to go to Saudi Arabia to get answers as to why CIA and FBI personnel obstructed at least two al Qaeda investigations. Sadly for the public the media in the US doesn’t care enough about the public interest to get answers.