Fort Hood & the KSM trial- Part II: The al Qaeda Spy Who Could Be the Best Witness vs. KSM in NY

Why Didn’t the Feds Get the 9/11 Plot out of Ali Mohamed?

A week after the September 11th attacks, FBI Special Agent Jack Cloonan flew back from Yemen to New York where convicted al Qaeda spy Ali Mohamed had been brought up from custodial witness protection in Florida to the M.C.C. (federal jail) in Lower Manhattan. 

Rushing from the airport and desperate to learn what Ali might have known about the attacks that killed 2,976, Cloonan got to the prison around 11:00 p.m.

“I walked in and I had him pulled out,” Cloonan said in an interview for my Ali Mohamed biography Triple Cross. “I said, ‘How’d they do it?’ and he wrote the whole thing out—the attack, as if he knew every detail of it. He [had] conducted training for Al Qaeda on how to hijack a plane.

“’This is how you get a box cutter on board. You take the knife, you remove the blade and you wrap it in [redacted] and put it in your carry-on luggage.’ They’d read the FAA regulations. They knew four inches wouldn’t go through. ‘This is how you position yourself,’ he said. ‘I taught people how to sit in first class. You sit here and some sit here.’ He wrote the whole thing out.”

Pic1On 9/11 the hijackers who flew AA Flight 77 into the Pentagon were reported to have used box cutters. Three of the muscle hijackers who stormed the cockpit and took that plane were Khalid al-Midhar and the al-Hazmi brothers, Nawaf and Salim. Later it was revealed that Khalid and Salim had obtained their fake ID’s (used to board the plane) at Sphinx Trading, the same tiny Jersey City Mailbox store that had been on Patrick Fitzgerald’s radar since the 1995 “Day of Terror” trial. (see Part I)- (Highlight ‘Part I’: link to part I)

As bin Laden’s trusted security advisor Ali Mohamed almost certainly knew of the planes-as-missiles operation that KSM was executing by 1998. Khalid Sheikh’s nephew, Ramzi Yousef, had conceived the plot in Manila in 1994; the year Ali stayed in bin Laden’s own house in Khartoum as he trained his bodyguards.  By 1997 Mohamed was living part time in Kenya with Wadih El-Hage, bin Laden’s personal secretary.

So why couldn’t Patrick Fitzgerald and the elite agents of the FBI’s Bin Laden squad have squeezed the plot out of him in the year 2000 when Ali copped a plea that spared his life? That’s one of the most important questions that could be answered if the trial of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed goes forward in New York. And if the Feds don’t have the inclination to ask that question, the defense attorneys surely will.

The baseless fears of the KSM trial critics

A media storm erupted from the moment the Justice Department announced that the 9/11 “mastermind” would face a jury in the Southern District of New York. The critics have ranged from Rudi Guiliani to N.Y. Gov. David Paterson and now, even 9/11 Commission chairman Gov. Tom Kean has chimed in.

KSM at Guantanamo

Many predict that the trial will be a “circus,” and a threat to U.S. security. But they seem to forget that the SDNY Feds have locked up two of the most lethal al Qaeda terrorists in the world: Ramzi Yousef and Sheikh Omar Abdel Rahman after separate New York trials that were models of civility.

So far in five SDNY trials, not a single al Qaeda terrorist has escaped justice. The 1994 WTC bombing trial, the 1995 Day of Terror Trial, the 1996 Bojinka trial, the second WTC bombing trial in 1997 and the Embassy bombing trial in 2001 all proceeded to convictions without incident. Except for a few raucous protests outside the New York Supreme Court trial of El Sayyid Nosair, the killer of Rabbi Meier Kahane, none of the trials turned into the “circus” the critics are predicting.

What about the threat to the U.S. homeland some critics say will increase if KSM is allowed to venture out of the confines of Gitmo? Hogwash. Ramzi Yousef and most of the principal al Qaeda convicts are serving life sentences at the Supermax in Florence, Colorado, the most hardened Federal prison in the system. The blind Sheikh, reported near death in 2007, is locked down at the Butner Federal Medical Facility in North Carolina.

Pic2As to critics like John Yoo (architect of the DOJ’s water-boarding rationale) who warned in the Wall Street Journal that KSM’s trial would represent a “bonanza” of intelligence for al Qaeda, I refer him to Ali Mohamed’s stunning track record uncovering the inner secrets of the FBI and Green Berets during his 11 year run as al Qaeda’s spy.

Thanks to Ali Amiriki, (aka “Ali the American”) the FBI informant and U.S. Army sergeant embedded at Fort Bragg, there is little or nothing about the Government’s “sensitive sources and methods,” that might come out at this trial that bin Laden and al-Zawahiri don’t already know.

Mohamed in Fort Bragg video

The likelihood KSM will walk? Zero to none
There’s little doubt that KSM will be convicted. Even if all of the “testimony” he vomited out during his months of water boarding is suppressed, he openly admitted to his role as “the executive director of 9/11” last December in the Gitmo military trial at of Salim Hamdan, bin Laden’s driver.

“Due to my work as...a military official in al Qaeda,” KSM boasted, “my job is to oversee all of the al Qaeda cells aboard.”  And he coughed up even more culpable details in March of 2007 at another Guantanamo hearing. Back then he actually boasted that he “was responsible for the 9/11 operation, from A to Z.”

KSM then went on to list 29 al Qaeda terror operations that he either ran or was a co-conspirator in planning; including both attacks on the WTC: the 1993 bombing and 9/11, the separate 1994 plots to assassinate President Bill Clinton and Pope John Paul II in the Philippines, the notorious “Bojinka” plot (hatched by his nephew Ramzi Yousef) to smuggle improvised explosive devices aboard a dozen U.S. bound airliners exiting Asia in 1995, the 2002 murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl and the Bali nightclub bombing that same year which left 202 dead.

So when he goes on trial in New York, while any statements made under “enhanced” interrogations will no doubt get suppressed, those admissions made freely in open court in Guantanamo will sink him for sure.

What are the unanswered questions about the FBI’s failure to stop 9/11 that the trial of KSM in New York could reveal? And how could Ali Mohamed impact the possible prosecution of  alleged Fort Hood killer Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan?

The most important reason for bringing KSM before a civilian jury in New York is the potential his trial has for connecting the dots on the negligence of U.S. intelligence agencies prior to 9/11. The responsibility for that job was squandered by the 9/11 Commission, half the staff of which were alumni of the very agencies they were charged with auditing.

That’s why nobody in the counter-intel community was held accountable for failing to miss the “planes as missiles plot,” hatched by Ramzi Yousef and his uncle in Manila in 1994 – a plot that the Philippines National Police had warned the N.Y. Feds about as early as 1995. No wonder ex-New Jersey Gov. Tom Kean, the 9/11 Commission Chairman, doesn’t want to go back down that road.

However, in this upcoming legal showdown with KSM in New York, his ego suggests that he’ll take the stand. After all, his nephew Ramzi represented himself during his 1996 Bojinka trial (for which he was convicted). Once he starts talking, Khalid Shaikh could trigger the answers to a number of questions that were side-stepped or ignored by the 9/11 Commission and the Congressional Joint Inquiry:

1) Isn’t it true that Osama bin Laden and al-Zawahiri had established what amounted to an al Qaeda headquarters at the al Farooq mosque in Brooklyn as far back as 1989 and directly bankrolled the first WTC bombing by Yousef?

The 9/11 Commission claimed that the 1993 WTC bombing was the work of “loosely based group of Sunni Islamists.”  Even Patrick Fitzgerald, the man Vanity Fair called “the bin Laden brain” told a documentary crew in 2005 that he wasn’t sure whether al Qaeda was involved in the bombing that killed six and injured 1000 a month into Clinton’s presidency.

But if the trail of culpability for the FBI leads all the way back to their 1989 surveillance of Ali Mohamed’s trained cell at a Long Island shooting range (see Part I) ( Highlight ‘Part I’: link it to Part I) that will make three separate presidential administrations (both Bushes and Clinton’s) responsible for failing to stop the al Qaeda juggernaut.

2) After secretly indicting KSM in January, 1996, why did the Feds wait until January 2008 to unseal the indictment?

Yousef’s $2 million matchbook want poster

In 1995 they’d brought KSM’s nephew Ramzi to ground the old fashioned way: with a $2 million reward plastered on want posters and matchbook covers from Bangkok to Islamabad where he was finally busted after a young South African accomplice ratted him out.

KSM want posters distributed in early 1998

But the Feds didn’t go public with their worldwide hunt for KSM until early 1998 and by then he was in Hamburg, well on his way to executing the “planes operation” he and Ramzi  had set in motion back in Manila in 1994. Why did SDNY prosecutors wait so long to seek the public’s help in capturing Khalid Shaikh?

3) How much assistance did KSM get from Khalid bin Abdullah al-Thani, a member of the ruling family of Qatar who reportedly got Khalid Sheikh a new I.D. and smuggled him off to the Czech republic in 1996 after an FBI sting of Yousef revealed his uncle’s presence in Doha.

According to Paul Thompson who runs a remarkable website, KSM even returned to Qatar two weeks after 9/11 and stayed there “with the knowledge of some Qatari royals.”

Why is the possible participation of the Qataris in the 9/11 plot a crucial question? Because since 2002 the forward headquarters for CENTCOM, the United States Central Command has been located at Camp As Sayliyah in Doha. The entire invasion of Baghdad and the Iraqi campaign was coordinated out of this facility.

KSM could be the one man with insight into just how cozy the al-Thanis are with al Qaeda’s leadership. Talk about an irony, the U.S. invades Iraq on the false pretext that Saddam Hussein was linked to the 9/11 attacks and our principal strategic ally in the region may have been responsible for helping the “mastermind,” KSM slip through the FBI’s fingers five years before the attacks.
The importance of Ali Mohamed to the Hasan case

Bringing this story full circle; apart from the lessons the U.S. Army should have learned about sheltering Islamic radicals during Ali Mohamed’s service at Fort Bragg, it’s quite possible that if he’s convinced to talk, al Qaeda’s master spy could be helpful to the prosecution of Maj. Hasan.

Why? Because of the disturbing evidence that seems to grow each day of Hasan’s relationship with radical imam Anwar al Aulaqi. Months ago the FBI learned that Hasan and al Aulaqi communicated “10 to 20 times,” but no formal investigation was every launched by the Bureau.

Terrorism analyst Thompson has done ground-breaking investigative work on al Aulaqi; proving that he interacted directly with 9/11 hijackers al-Midhar and al Hazmi in San Diego, then helped them along after the imam moved to the Dar al Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church, Virginia in 2000.

Sgt. Ali Mohamed   Maj. Nida Hasan   Anwar al-Aulaqi

 We now know that Maj. Hasan held his mother’s funeral at that mosque in May of 2001. In one of the emails, monitored by the FBI six months before the Fort Hood massacre, Maj. Hasan told al Aulaqi “I can’t wait to join you” in the afterlife.

Two degrees of separation between Maj. Hasan and KSM

In 2004 U.S. News reported that post 9/11, German authorities found the phone number of al Aulaqi’s Dar al Hijrah mosque in the apartment of Ramzi Binalshibh, Khalid Shaikh’s Number Two, who will also go on trial in New York.

While no evidence has surfaced that al Aulaqi ever met KSM, the link between the Fairfax mosque and Ramzi Binalshibh makes for two degrees of separation between the 9/11 “executive director,” Khalid Shaikh and the fanatical U.S. Army psychiatrist who allegedly left 13 dead and 30 wounded at Fort Hood.

There’s also a disturbing parallel between the FBI’s failure to detect Ali Mohamed as a threat to U.S. security and the Bureau’s lapses in monitoring Maj. Hasan.

The Weekly Standard quoted the FBI as admitting that Hasan came to their attention “in December 2008” and that the Joint Terrorism Task Force “reviewed ... communications between...Hasan and (al Aulaqi) and deemed them “consistent with research being conducted by Maj. Hasan...” Contrast that with the London Telegraph’s report: in one outburst at Walter Reed Army Hospital, Hasan declared that non-believers should be beheaded and “have boiling oil poured down their throats;” hardly the view of a serious medical researcher.

As documented in Part I, Ali Mohamed not only exhibited openly hostile jihadist views while serving as an E5 sergeant at the JFK Special Warfare Center at Fort Bragg, the Army even used him to make a training video in which he articulated his radical Islamic beliefs. 20 years ago an actual agent of al Qaeda had burrowed into a highly secure Army facility and after he was discovered and arrested a decade later, the Army didn’t seem to learn its lesson.

A revelation or another cover up?

The continuing Hasan investigation will shed new light on whether the Bureau has sufficiently reformed in the years since the 9/11. The question is, will federal prosecutors have the courage to come clean on years of negligence by the two “Bin Laden offices of origin” and put the man who snookered them on the stand as the chief witness against KSM?

Ali Mohamed remains the greatest enigma in the war on terror. Locked away somewhere in custodial witness protection there are seals upon seals on his case. Having skirted the fate that awaits KSM, can the convicted spy now be persuaded to testify about what he knows of the 9/11 plot and Khalid Shaikh’s role in it?

If he does, he could be to terrorism what Sammy “the bull” Gravano was to organized crime – the most lethal witness ever against the 9/11 “executive director.” A full, unexpurgated vetting of FBI/DOJ blunders at that trial could be the kind of kick in the ass the Bureau needs to finally begin its reform.

There’s little time to lose. The FBI’s failure to identify Ali Mohamed as a threat two decades ago at Fort Bragg and their recent lapses in stopping the wide-eyed shooter at Ford Hood are proof positive that the Bureau has miles to go before Americans can feel protected from the metastasizing threat of radical Islam.

# # # #

PeterLancePeter Lance is a five-time Emmy Award-winning investigative reporter and former correspondent for ABC News. He has covered hundreds of stories worldwide for 20/20, Nightline, and World News Tonight. Peter is the author of 1000 Years for Revenge, Cover Up, and the novel First Degree Burn. For more details visit Peter’s website.

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by contributing directly and or purchasing Boiling Frogs showcased products.

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.


  1. I don’t want to sound totally burned out on this. But I just read Part II and this occured to me.

    What if Ali Mohamed was allowed to testify and told the whole story in open court? How would the public react? Would they do ANYTHING at all to protest this?

    I just checked my email. And in what, 6 days I’ve gotten over 100 Tiger Woods emails. The most powerful celebrity in the world (with the most powerful advisors) is striking back at the MSM frenzy. Which means, what are (and all the others) going to do now? There’s only so many ways to talk about his “alleged” mistresses, the scandal, what I would do if I were him, and so on.

    Obama keeps marketing (for lack of a better phrase) his fight against “terrorism.” It seemed ironic in his speech last night when he talked about “preserving freedom.” Wiretapping. Recruiting informants on univ. campuses. The lucrative contracts many firms are signing to develop Afghanistan. Developing ski lodge resorts is really going to make the average Afghan sleep better at night? I don’t think so.

    The last irony? Even if it turns out that Obama is making lots of money thru defense firm investments, I really think that nobody would do anything. Because to some, nothing will get in the way of their image of The Perfect President.

  2. A question for Peter:

    Could Fitzgerald and these others who failed to do their jobs be tried for that? Or it won’t happen due to statute of limitations. Which means the worst would be an “official reprimand”. Or possibly getting reassigned or maybe fired.

  3. The black box for flight 77 reveals that the cockpit door was never opened. This information was recently released.

    Door not opened = plane not hijacked

    plane not hijacked = story about hijackers (at least for 77 made up out of whole cloth

    If the plane WAS hijacked and hit the pentagon… they the black box data was from another plane (or simulator) which did not hit the pentagon and was substituted – placed there or claimed to be found. This also would be a fabrication. Story was made up out of whole clothe.

    Mr. Lance you are speaking about facts which are not facts, but narratives “officials” are telling you. You are passing off lies and are either being used for this purpose or are doing it with intent. Tough spot to be in.

  4. ( – Newly decoded data provided by an independent researcher and computer programmer from Australia exposes alarming evidence that the reported hijacking aboard American Airlines Flight 77 was impossible to have existed. A data parameter labeled “FLT DECK DOOR”, cross checks with previously decoded data obtained by Pilots For 9/11 Truth from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) through the Freedom Of Information Act.

    On the morning of September 11, 2001, American Airlines Flight 77 departed Dulles International Airport bound for Los Angeles at 8:20 am Eastern Time. According to reports and data, a hijacking took place between 08:50:54 and 08:54:11[1] in which the hijackers allegedly crashed the aircraft into the Pentagon at 09:37:45. Reported by CNN, according to Ted Olson, wife Barbara Olson had called him from the reported flight stating, “…all passengers and flight personnel, including the pilots, were herded to the back of the plane by armed hijackers…”[2]. However, according to Flight Data provided by the NTSB, the Flight Deck Door was never opened in flight. How were the hijackers able to gain access to the cockpit, remove the pilots, and navigate the aircraft to the Pentagon if the Flight Deck Door remained closed?[3]

    Founded in August 2006, Pilots For 9/11 Truth is a growing organization of aviation professionals from around the globe. The organization has analyzed Data provided by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for the Pentagon Attack, the events in Shanksville, PA and the World Trade Center attack. The data does not support the government story. The NTSB/FBI refuse to comment. Pilots For 9/11 Truth do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, there is a growing mountain of conflicting information and data in which government agencies and officials along with Mainstream Media refuse to acknowledge. Pilots For 9/11 Truth Core member list continues to grow.

  5. rayandmaura says:

    Are you trying to tell us that it was an intelligence failure that allowed 9/11 to happen? Are you joking? News flash: It was a intelligence success. 9/11 was allowed to happen. The story your telling shows you are either a traitor to this country, COINTEL or a damn fool. I suggest readers here check out the evidence that points to the official story being false. Just google 9/11 inside job and go from there. Any person telling you the crap this guy is telling you is like I said, a traitor COINTEL or a fool. Giving his stature, I would say traitor. Yea, these cave dwellers hijacked all these planes on the same day and were able to make NORAD stand down, yea right. Those towers just fell at freefall speed because of OBL, yea right. I thought Sibel was a patriot, but having these fairy tale stories on this site tells me differnt. If she was a true patriot, there would be a banner saying 9/11 was an inside job, and she wouldn’t let these clown tell lies to her readers and our children.

  6. BREAKING 9/11 NEWS: FBI Says Barbara Olsen Did Not Call Ted Olsen. Bush Solicitor General LIED !

    Posted by: Clare Swinney

    Nationally syndicated talk show host Charles Goyette uncovered blockbuster information in his drive-time interview with author David Ray Griffin.

    A center piece of the increasingly apparent BULLSH*T story our government and corporate media have fed us for six long years was a complete fabrication!

    We were fed a lie by Ted Olsen who served as Solicitor General for the Bush Administration, when on 9/11 he held a press conference to tell America and the world that his dead wife had called him before her demise from the jet she was on that had just been hijacked.

    Personally, I thought it was odd at the time that a man would decide to hold a press conference minutes after hearing of his own wife’s death, when it happened on 9/11. If my own wife had just died, the last thing I’d want to do would be to talk to anyone, let alone call a press conference. It didn’t “smell” right.

    truth processing

    Now we know why it didn’t smell right. It was a lie. The FBI has reported that no such call between Barbara Olsen and Ted Olsen ever took place on 9/11/2001.

    It was part of the rapidly unraveling scam that is the official story of 9/11.

    In fact, Griffin went on to explain that there is zero evidence that any hijackers had commandeered a plane at all. True Bush believers will say, whao, wait a minute, we all know they did. How do you know? Because Bush told you.

    But, as Griffin rightly points out, in this interview, there is no “EVIDENCE” of their existence.

    Which also reveals that mis-information shill, Popular Mechanics, in their 9/11 interview on the Charles Goyette Show months ago, lied when they told us there was DNA evidence of the so-called Muslim hijackers. LIES, all lies.

  7. @sandero,

    Do you have any other sources for your 9/11 posts here? Please post the links.

  8. Off topic, an interesting picture of a new, still classified stealth jet drone which the blurb calls ‘the Beast of Kandahar’, also making the important observation, “Perhaps the biggest mystery, though, is what the birds were doing in Kandahar. Why use a stealth aircraft against an adversary that doesn’t have radar?”

  9. You can start here:

    but if you use your google and use logic, reason, scientific method, know and check history you can see what is happening. This is not rocket science.

    Intel has been largely involved in operations of manufacturing consent – propaganda and controlling the “conventional” wisdom.

    False flags are the big lies they create.

    Who do they work for? Why are we sending 100,000 men to Afghanistan to eradicate 100 Al Qaeda. Who informs our decision makers, our congress, our executive and forms public opinion? Who is behind all the stories in the media? The army admits to planting and fabricating stories. Who are the military analysts on TV who are scaring you? Who do they work for? Who is benefiting?

    Aside from natural disasters, nothing just happens. You need to look deep into the motives and who up and down the chain benefits.

  10. Sibel,

    I only just looked at your About Us and learned that Peter Lance is one of your investigative reporters. While I don’t doubt that he has uncovered much interesting information. His denial of the facts about the fabrications on 9/11 is very troubling.

    There are many professionals who have examined evidence presented on 9/11 and determined that there is more than enough “mistakes” (and that is a generous word) to warrant a new investigation. I am one of them and have been an architect for over 38 years.

    You apparently discovered corruption within our government and were silenced. I and many others supported you because we believe in truth and transparency.

    I would expect that you would demand the same about 9/11.

    There is all sorts of interesting things which need some light and are hiding in the shadows such as the work of Christopher Bollyn

    It is an undisputed fact that the CIA has plants throughout the media and that they are there to dis inform and create narratives to infuence public opinions. 9/11 was used to get us into two wars. Coincidence? Or was this orchestrated and planned like the event itself?

    Look deeper than the surface. As interesting as the waves are, the depth beneath is what makes up the ocean.

    What are you afraid of? What do you know about physics and structural failures? Why do you avoid looking for the truth?

  11. Kingfisher says:

    “Intel has been largely involved in operations of manufacturing consent – propaganda and controlling the “conventional” wisdom.

    False flags are the big lies they create.”


    And you know this from your career spent designing McMansions in the suburbs?

    You were prattling on about how you should be listened in the other thread because you are an architect and the towers didn’t fall without explosives…prattle…prattle… Now you are prattling off cliches about things you have absolutely no clue about.

    You bring little to the table here. There are plenty of places on the internet to accommodate the discussions you wish to have (and/or validate your worldview); I ask again, why do you need another here?*

    *actually this is a rhetorical question; please just leave.

  12. @sanderO: Okay, since this is related to 9/11 I’ll let people briefly state their views on related topics; including those I disagree with. You did that; done. Please do not turn this forum into plane-no-plane or similar no-end arguments. As for your comment on Peter Lance: He reports based on what he investigates, and documents his findings. I respect his work and I believe in his integrity as a top notch reporter. Believe me someone like Pat Fitzgerald would have had a field day if he’d found any holes in this book/Lance’s reporting; he couldn’t find it. I don’t want to have a back-and-forth endless argument on this…So, let’s move on. Thank you.

  13. JamesLaffrey says:

    Thank you, Peter Lance. I read your Timeline on your website several weeks ago. It was so compelling, I read long into the night until finished.

    In this 2-parter for BoilingFrogs, you say “negligence” a lot. But I think I recall your Timeline and related materials being more forceful, showing that there must have been purposeful, treasonous cover-ups of evidence and willful avoidance of following known evidence to arrests and prosecutions.

    SibelEdmonds’ own experience proves other purposeful, willful, treasonous cover-ups of known evidence in the FBI.

    Two questions:

    1. So, why are you going the safe route here – with mere “negligence”?

    2. In a NYC trial of KSM, I would expect the government to ban evidence, including spoken testimony, that indicts important government officials and agencies. Bush and Obama have set the precedents for it. I think you don’t agree with me. Why?

  14. “So when he goes on trial in New York, while any statements made under “enhanced” interrogations will no doubt get suppressed, those admissions (like ‘the 2002 murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl’)made freely in open court in Guantanamo will sink him for sure.”

    Oh, a “free admission in an open court” …at Guantanamo–a military prison that tortures its inmates. Wasn’t a man called Omar Saeed Sheikh convicted of killing Daniel Pearl in a British trial that didn’t use torture? After reading about the Moussoui trial “confession” and his subsequent retraction ( , I personally am doubtful about trial statements made by these al-quaeda “masterminds.” And additionally, after the Moussoui trial, the judge stated that she “could no longer trust the CIA and other government agencies on how they represent classified evidence in terror cases after Moussaoui case prosecutors admitted that the CIA had assured her that no videotapes or audiotapes existed of interrogations of certain high-profile terrorism detainees, but later, in a letter made public Nov. 13, two such videotapes and one audio tape were made known.” The author seems to take a very hard line on these terrorism suspects. Perhaps my general agreement with SanderO’s take on 9/11 gives me a different outlook.

    I’m not sure what all this about Maj. Hasan is proving? Hasan “communicated” with an Imam who talked with alleged 9/11 hijackers, Hasan “interacted with” (I notice that the author doesn’t use the term “alleged” for these hijackers) them directly, and expressed his eagerness to join an Imam in the afterlife? I don’t see how this and “Two degrees of separation between Maj. Hasan and KSM” adds up to criminal conspiracy between them.

  15. I just read the whole 911 report graphic adaptation – recommended as setting the standard for all future works of contemporary history by stan lee, and this guys story is in it! What a legend. He must have known everything!
    Did our reporter ask if Ali knew how the military grade nanothermite got past securasec and into the cores?

  16. Why dont they try KSM in a Military court and really throw the book at him

  17. A few questions:

    Will anyone cover this trial live? Since it is the MOST important terrorist case right now, shouldn’t it be getting wall-to-wall coverage? Silly question, I know.

    If the jury did find them innocent, I wonder how far the govt. would get in appeals?

    And, on the slim chance that the case wasn’t re-tried, how would Obama, Holder and the DOJ spin this?

  18. Ms Edmonds,

    I am not trying to derail your site into a forum to put forth plane vs no plane discussions. And I am not disputing that Peter Lance is reporting on what he has been investigating. He certainly seems to have found many interesting facts.

    But since this is about the crime of the century, a crime that became the justification for two wars which led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people, costing trillions, it supremely important to make sure we get the actual perpetrators of that crime.

    That begins with the forensic analysis of the crime scene and the as well as the evidence which has been used to “prosecute” the case which took place in the court of public opinion and led to the wars noted above. Our DOJ is about to put KSM et al on trial as the masterminds of that crime.

    I would hope that he gets a fair trial and that all the evidence of the crime is brought to bear which points to his and his associates guilt. On the other hand I would hope that you and Mr. Lance would support the introduction of any and all exculpatory evidence.

    And there appears to me to be some very troubling evidence in this case. Some of it, such as the destruction of the towers reveals that explosives, not fires from plane strikes, brought the towers down and if this is so, then the conspiracy of the 19 hijackers is inadequate.

    I would think that this claim by 1000 architect and engineers and thousands of others needs to be examined at trial and if it proves true, we need to open a new investigation as to what actually happened and who was involved in the planning and execution of that crime.

    Mr. Lance’s work seems to conclude that the CIA, FBI the army and other agencies have no culpability other than training AQ and trying to play the double agent game at worst, being incompetent and missed the monsters that they had created, and dropped the ball on monitoring people who they considered dangerous threats to our national security.

    Yet no one has even been held or charged with incompetence or dereliction of duties and the focus is on convicting and executing these men, who undoubted have been tortured, abused and brainwashed.

    Perhaps Mr. Lance can identity who in the intel business made all these egregious blunders which led to 911 and the events that followed. Even if these men were part of the plot, those who paved the way for it to happen, let it happen or made it happen using these men Mr. Lance needs to complete his investigation because we need the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

  19. If they were found not guilty presumably they could not be charged on the same charges. The government, as in the case of many terrorists will bring new, different charges of equal import with the possibility of the same penalty. So if found not guilty for 9/11 they will try him for the bombing of the USS Cole for example. Appeals are for matters of law and procedure, not fact.

  20. Ms Edmonds,

    I don’t know why you consider Patrick Fitzgerald the gold standard. He is a prosecutor who works with the FBI, relies on them for investigations. How do you suppose one would investigate the FBI?

    If you examine the entire process of the terrorism trials/investigations and who the players were such as Mukasy and Chertoff for example, they show up in key “enforcement/policy” posts in the W administration. I don’t trust them and I don’t trust Patrick Fitzgerald.

    Do you?

  21. where is the proof of planting nano-thermite? people would have seen all the work going on installing this. It would take so many people on so many levels and someone would be talking

  22. Hey, ScribE,

    Where’s the proof that you’re not a dumbass?

    How do you know what people would have seen?

    How do you know how many people it would take?

    Oh, I know, you’re the “former truther”, right? That really brings a lot of respect. I wish I could be like you.

  23. sCAb, My guess is that you and KingFisher haven’t had much to be afraid of in your lives.

    Great job at being born into your lives and making the most of it!

  24. Ok, last comment was pretty petty. I’m sorry to all for that.

    Most of us, out here on the frontier, are just waiting for a bunch of heads to roll. Some of us are hoping it’s not our own heads, I guess.

  25. Although I am far from convinced about the case for high tech explosives such as nano thermites, public information published by reliable scientists (not “truthers”) indicate that these have some unique and flexible characteristics for use as explosives. Depneding on how they are constituted the same chemical perform dramatically different.

    Nano thermite can be made into a substance applied in the same manner as ordinary paint – rolled, brushed or strayed on.

    If this is so and these were some of the explosives used they could have even been applied unwittingly by building maintenance or painting crews doing normal work in the buildings. Who would suspect that applications to steel structure, replacing the asbestos fireproofing which was being removed in a massive project was not in fact nano thermite explosives? If such applications is possible this could easily explain how the buildings core columns were coated with explosives in plain sight.

    Or how about the idea that drop in ceiling tiles which were manufactured with a nano thermite coating on the back (unseen side) were also installed as remodeling or routine maintenance. This too could have and would have taken place in the evening when offices were not in use again installed unwittingly by building contractors without drawing any attention to something untoward being done.

    The towers were under going the largest elevator upgrade project ever undertaken in the world. And so it would be normal for work to be going on in the core area throughout the entire 110 floors.

    All this is speculation and fun to do. But once the notion that the buildings collapsed from office fires started by burning jet fuel is ruled impossible the only culprit IS explosives and the investigation will hopefully provide all the answers.

    The key here is to be able to look dispassionately at the events, extract the facts, apply science and math, chemistry, physics, forensic analyses and let the findings speak for themselves.

    There are no engineers who can model those collapses from office fires. All attempts leave out important details or set absurd assumptions in their equations. This is dishonest, professional misconduct and fraud.

    Look at the facts, do the math, Numbers don’t lie.

  26. Mr. Lance,

    You said the previous terror trials went on without incident. Are you recanting your theory about what potentially took down TWA 800?

    As for being against KSM being tried in civilian court, which I am, based largely off my reading of your trilogy. Do you really think anything good will come out of that show trial? If they needed Ali Mohammed to convict KSM, which they don’t, this would never have been moved out of a Military Tribunal. It is most certainly a show trial, because they’ve already admitted that upon the even of an acquittal, they would not be released.

    Trying Yousef did nothing to prevent his “planes operation” from coming to fruition. What would you have proposed we would have done with KSM after his capture? Bring him straight to civilian trial? Not interrogate him for intelligence to prevent more attacks?

  27. Why are other detainees still being tried in military tribunals? Holder even said KSM and cohorts could have been tried in either, but could not expand coherently on his reasoning for his choice, beyond the target choices. This policy to me does not seem consistent, and Holder could not explain how future enemy combatants who are captured would be handled.

    The Fort Hood massacre was not prevented because of political correctness. How fast would it have taken the ACLU to slap a lawsuit on the government had they taken any action against Hasan? The majority of the media barely acknowledge the radical islam side to the story, and Obama urged us not to rush to judgement, and wanted the investigation postponed!

  28. Mr. Lance,

    I’m also troubled by the letter you posted on your website from “the Jersey girls” and the language they used in their support of the civilian trials for KSM and his cohorts, or more accurately, their letter to denigrate those who are opposed to the civilian trials. “Knee-jerk” certainly does not accurately characterize my reaction to Holder’s decision and I am appalled they would cast such a blanket assertion. I saw Holder’s decision coming more than a year in advance, I even sent an email out to some friends and colleagues a year and three days before Holder officially announced the decision, warning of precisely that. If you have any idea how I could contact any of them, I would love to be able to have a discussion with them to iron out any misunderstands from their as well as my perspective. My reaction is also largely supported by your investigative work, thank you for doing such a great job! I attended the Dec 5th Rally in Foley square, and the so called “frenzy” seemed to be created by fairly informed people, not fear mongers. It is an insult, a very deep insult. I would politely ask the Jersey girls not to denigrate us in their future support of these trials, and stick to whatever logic and justification they can conjure that is behind Holder’s decision (since they are still using military tribunals and he said himself KSM and co. could have been tried in either!).

  29. I suppose it depends on whether you consider KSM a soldier or a civilian criminal. Enemy combatant is is a non state person who is believed to be engaged in non state terrorism. States do terrorism too. Just look at the “shock and awe” as this clearly was an act of state terrorism.

    I consider the events of 9/11 crimes not acts of war. And as such those charged with involvement should be tried in civilian courts with the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and in capital cases I believe the jury must reach a unanimous decision.

    The CIA’s 23 operatives were recently tried (in absentia) and convicted of kidnapping in Italy. I would have thought that if they were innocent of the charges they would have mounted a vigorous defense with the CIA supplying the best lawyers. Their failure to present a defense was telling and the failure of the US to honor its extradition treaties with out ally Italy is even more telling.

    Trials need to be open, thorough and fair. Secret evidence and evidence gathered through torture should not be permissible and if such evidence exists it should be the basis for prosecution of those involved with torture, a clear violation of the Geneva conventions which are part of US law.

    Military tribunals in the case of the Gitmo prisoners are clearly attempts to provide “less justice” and keep lots of evidence from the public. Having said that, I expect a show trial for KSM in the tradition of the USSR or any authoritarian government which uses trials for political agendas.

  30. “As bin Laden’s trusted security advisor Ali Mohamed almost certainly knew of the planes-as-missiles operation that KSM was executing by 1998.”
    The Lone Gunmen certainly knew that routine as well, as evidenced by their awesome pilot episode [ ] on Fox in March of 2001. (Condie apparently missed that screening.)
    “So why couldn’t Patrick Fitzgerald and the elite agents of the FBI’s Bin Laden squad have squeezed the plot out of him?”
    How big a bet says Fitz and them have nothing to hide in this matter?
    “The 1994 WTC bombing trial”
    . . . the bombing that the FBI promised Emad Salem they would substitute fake powder, and then double-crossed him? As is proven by his brilliant and daring bugging of his own conversations with them, famously reported in the NYT ( Tapes Depict Proposal to Thwart Bomb Used in Trade Center Blast ” By RALPH BLUMENTHAL Published: October 28, 1993)

  31. It is irrelevant whether KSM is a citizen or not, we citizens have a Constitutional right to hear his trial’s arguments and evidence. KSM, call ALI MOHAMED TO THE STAND!

    An Islamic radical and Egyptian ex-commando, Ali Mohamed, worked at Fort Bragg in the Pentagon’s Special Forces, was an FBI informant and CIA asset, but yet, Ali Mohamed was also:

    – Osama Bin Laden’s personal security chief
    – Escorted Al Qaeda’s second-in-command, Al-Zawahiri, in the US on ‘fund raising’ trips
    – Trained the World Trade Center 1993 bombing cell
    – Took the targeting photos of the bombed US African Embassies.

    Ali Mohamed has been in US ghost custody since 2000 – meaning, he hasn’t spent a day in prison.

    KSM, if you have worked with him, call ALI MOHAMED TO THE STAND so we citizens can hear!

    But alas, why do you believe KSM’s trial will be in Dick Cheney’s newly created and secretive “military” commission? (Which is separate from our civilian and military Constitutional justice system—a creation of the Bush Administration and Republican Congress through the illegitimate “Military Commissions Act” of 2006. Do NOT confuse it with real Constitutional based military justice!)

    Have you ever heard of the good cop (Obama) / bad cop (Cheney’s) routine?

    Peter, I truly appreciate your work. Thank you for letting us read between the lines. You don’t have to vocalize what is obvious, you have done enough for the truth. Ali is the smoking gun link between the US Empire and its Al Qeada hitman squad. Suppressing the KSM trial means indefinite plausible denial-ability.

  32. criticalthinking says:

    There’s good claims and bogus claims about 9/11 complicity.

    There’s ample evidence that Cheney & Co. knew 9/11 was coming. See the Complete 9/11 Timeline by Paul Thompson at for a large list of mainstream media stories about warnings. The timeline also has the biggest collection of stories about the numerous war game exercises underway during the attacks, including a “plane into building” exercise the CIA was doing at the National Reconnaissance Office near Dulles Airport.

    But there’s also a lot of nonsense claims and speculation that discredits the citizen investigation, either through ego, incompetence or malice.

    Interesting that someone would post to this blog a suggestion that a white supremacist neo-Nazi should be treated as a credible source on 9/11 issues — Mr. Bollyn (referenced above) wrote for the American Free Press, an organization whose “Barnes Review” subsidiary claims that Adolf Hitler deserved the Nobel Peace Prize and promotes Holocaust denial. We don’t need fascists to tell us what Israeli militarism is doing, nor are they credible sources for anything, even if pieces of what they say contain truth.

    John Judge, a long time researcher of deep politics (and assistant to Rep. Cynthia McKinney when she was in Congress) states that “just because someone says the government is lying does not mean they are telling the truth.” This applies especially to the 9/11 truth movement, the sincere adherents understand that it was a covert operation to enable war but get most of the “facts” wrong. There’s virtually no fact checking in the “truth” movement and the defenders of the official story know to focus their attacks on the blatantly ridiculous claims (no planes, thermite, etc) rather than well documented facts that would put the enablers on the defensive (warnings and wargames).

    Every major scandal has this sort of dynamic, where false claims are inserted into the public discussion to discredit the best evidence and distract attention away from the most damning material. It was Karl Rove’s speciality to do this sort of thing. it worked to ridicule the investigations into the removal of President Kennedy from office and it is working to ridicule the 9/11 truth movement, too.

Speak Your Mind