COVER-UP pt II? Flight 253 Eye Witness, FBI Lying, has changed accounts 4 times…

Haskell Family: FBI has changed accounts 4 times; our story is the same since day one

COMMENT:As a customs official now confirms the 2nd man detained, confirming the Haskell’s account, the Detroit News points out that the FBI story has changed 4 times, while the Haskell’s has remained unchanged since day one:

“I just want them to look into our claims,” Lori Haskell said. “Our story has been the same since Day One because we are telling the truth. This is the FBI’s fourth story.”

Latest Story–By Kurt Haskell
-The Man In Orange and the Merry Go Round of Ron Smith/U.S. Customs-

Haskell Family Blog
January 1, 2010

As many of you know, my wife Lori and I were passengers and innocent victims of Northwest Flight 253 (Flight 253).

We have repeated our story many times to various reporters, television and radio stations, both across the country and abroad. Our story has never changed. What I would like to emphasize in this article is that not only did we almost lose our lives in the air, but we also almost lost our lives after our plane landed. Let me explain.

When Flight 253 landed, the passengers were forced to stay on the plane on the runway for 20 minutes. We were forced to do this despite not knowing whether there was a further bomb on our plane held by another passenger, in a carry on bag, or in the cargo hold. This action taken by law enforcement further endangered the lives of every passenger on flight 253.

After we were removed from the plane all of the passengers of flight 253 were taken to an empty baggage claim area of an airport terminal. We all had our carry on bags with us and we stood together for nearly one hour until bomb sniffing dogs arrived. Three dogs arrived, one lab, and two German shepherds. The dogs were split up and one German shepherd sat next to a bag of “the man in orange” who stood 20 feet from me the entire time until he was detained (see my post yesterday for more detail). This man in orange was immediately taken into a room for questioning. He was not handcuffed at this time. After approximately one hour, the man in orange was taken out of that room, handcuffed, and led away. At this exact time, a law enforcement person came up to the group of flight 253 passengers and said the following (approximate quote) “You are all being moved to another area because this are is not safe. You all just saw what happened and I’m sure you are smart enough to read between the lines and figure out what is going on.” We were then escorted out of this baggage claim room and taken to a long narrow hallway. While we were being held in this area, an FBI agent announced the following to us 253 passengers “We have those (Plural) we believe are responsible for this in custody we will now be doing interviews with each of you and then you are free to go.” He went on to state two further references to more than one person, which I cannot specifically quote. I have repeated this exact story hundreds of times since flight 253.

The “official” story regarding the man in orange has now changed numerous times.

Version 1: This was the official story from 12-25-09 to 12-30-09. This version was that only Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab was involved or detained.

Version 2: After some of my fellow passengers supported my claim in media accounts, this version 2 was released and became the official story on December 30, 2009.. This version was that, yes, another man was taken into custody, but he was being held indefinitely on “immigration charges”.

Version 3: This version came out late in the day on December 30, 2009. This version provided that yes another man was taken into custody, but he was from another flight. This story was the most ridiculous version to date and made myself write the current article on Mlive.com.

http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2009/12/flight_253_passenger_kurt_hask.html

Let me explain.

Ever since the passengers of flight 253 got off of the plane, we were “quarantined”. By this I mean that nobody was allowed on our floor of the terminal or anywhere near any of us passengers. As a matter of fact, we never saw anyone except law enforcement personnel the entire time we were held by customs (6 hours). To say that the man that was being held was from another flight, and is the same one I saw 20 feet away from me the entire time, defies logic. We were in such tight security that we were not able to drink, eat, use our phones, or go to the bathroom by ourselves (without a law enforcement officer). However, this version tries to make the American public believe that passengers from other flights were by us commingling the entire time. This did not happen. To think that law enforcement would let anyone else near the passengers and crime scene of the biggest terrorist attack in 8 years is simply beyond comprehension. Further, every plane that landed for quite some time after we did, held its passengers on board for a long time. The man in orange was taken away one hour into our detention period (during which, I do not believe any other flights allowed their passengers to get off of). Most certainly however, no other passengers were on the baggage claim floor that we were. When I wrote the above Mlive article I predicted that I would soon see version 4 of the “official story”. I was overwhelmed to find not only a fourth version, but a fifth version.

Version 4: Shortly after 6PM eastern time on December 31, 2009, Ron Smith of U.S. Customs sent an email to various reporters across the country. I received my copy from a reporter that I have been corresponding with. Here is a copy of the email:

All,

Good Evening,

Thank you for your patience and accuracy in reporting the events of December 25 at Detroit Metropolitan Airport. Everything we have talked about has been accurate concerning these events

That being said I have just received a piece of information that I did not previously have and hope it will clear up this matter.

As I have explained, there were no other passengers from flight 253 arrested or detained. The eyewitness accounts coincided with a separate issue concerning a passenger from a separate flight arriving at the airport. That passenger was escorted from the arriving plane to the CBP area. He was handcuffed at that time and could have been observed by the passengers from flight 253.

This still remains true; however, I now know that a passenger from flight 253 did have a canine alert to his carry on baggage in the baggage area of the CBP facility. He was placed in handcuffs and escorted to an interview room where he was interviewed and searched. There was nothing found during that search. Following the negative search results he received an explanation of why he was searched. He thanked the officers for doing their job and departed the facility along with the other passengers from flight 253.

I can not provide any other information about the individual because again, he was not arrested or detained and we have to protect his privacy.

This information is consistent with the eyewitness accounts.

I accept full responsibility for this information not being made available to you. I did not access the correct report that contained this information. I take pride in providing my media contacts complete, accurate information and I did not accomplish that this time. Please accept my apologies for any difficulties this may create.

I am sending this as an email because I will be traveling this evening and will not be available by phone until first thing in the morning.

Ronald G Smith

Chief CBP Officer

Public Affairs Liaison

US Customs and Border Protection

Office of Field Operations

Mr. Ron Smith now claims the following:

1. “He just received some information he didn’t previously have”. Seriously.
2. “The eyewitness accounts coincided with a separate issue concerning a passenger from a separate flight arriving at the airport”. Please see above where I explain that we were “quarantined” which makes this statement impossible.
3. “He now knows (as if he didn’t before), that a passenger from flight 253 did have a canine alert to his carry on baggage in the baggage area of the CBP facility. . . There was nothing found during the search”.
First of all, does it seem plausible that Mr. Ron Smith didn’t have and know all of this information before? Also, please see my account of events above, where I explain that the man in orange was taken away not in handcuffs, but was HANDCUFFED AFTER HE WAS QUESTIONED/SEARCHED FOR AN HOUR! Remember, we were then moved to a new “safe” area at this time and damning comments were made by a law enforcement officer(see above).
4. “This information is consistent with eyewitness accounts”. Not mine Mr. Smith.
5. “He accepts full responsibility because he did not access the correct report that contained this information.” Mr. Smith, are you sloppy and incompetent or something else? This is the most important story in 8 years and a spokesperson for U.S. Customs just cannot come out in public and make an incorrect statement of this magnitude.
6. “Please accept my apologies . . . ” Where is my apology Mr. Smith? Oh wait, I don’t get one because the purpose of this bogus story was to discredit me…………….

Version 5: I was pretty shocked to see version 5 come out this morning in The Detroit News. It seems that Mr. Smith works really hard at this. Of course it would be much easier to just put out one correct story.

http://www.detnews.com/article/20100101/NATION/1010354/1020/rss09

This is my second favorite version besides version 3. Now Mr. Smith claims the following:

1. “My account is a composite of two events at the airport around the time passengers got off flight 253. Both events were unrelated to the suspected terrorist incident.” One of these events involved a passenger from flight 249. Come on Mr. Smith, we both know that our flight was completely “quarantined”. Please see above for a further explanation.

2. “A sniffer dog reacted to agriculture or food products inside the bag of a third man who was off yet another flight”. OK, passengers from other flights DID NOT COMINGLE WITH OUR FLIGHT!

Funnier yet, Mr. Smith is proposing that a dog sniffing for food from another flight was the same as the dog sniffing for a bomb in the carry on bag carried by the orange dressed man on flight 253, who stood 20 feet away from me the entire time until he was taken away. Oh boy is that ever a stretch.

3. “Officials did attempt to segregate flight 253 passengers but the entire baggage area was not cleared”.

Think about this one for a minute. You have the biggest crime scene in 8 years. You don’t know if there are further bombs. Federal law enforcement is involved. You don’t know if there are accomplices. You need to find evidence Yet Mr. Smith proposes that law enforcement was unable to segregate the passengers of Flight 253 and let others trample through our “quarantine area”. Mr. Smith you should become a comedian.

Please answer a few questions for me Mr. Smith before I accept the apology you have yet to give to the passengers of flight 253:

1. Why were the passengers of flight 253 detained on a plane for 20 minutes not knowing if there was another bomb on the plane, in the cargo hold, or on another passenger after the “terrorist” had admitted that he had an explosive device in his pocket to a flight attendant, tried to detonate it, and set our plane on fire? Was it gross incompetence or something else?

2. Why were the passengers of flight 253 taken WITH their carry on bags and held with them for one hour before bomb sniffing dogs arrived in the baggage claim area of the terminal, all the while not knowing if any of the bags contained a bomb? Was it gross incompetence or something else? Did law enforcement intentionally risk the ENITRE AIRPORT TERMINAL TO AN EXPLOSIVE DEVICE or was it something else?

3. Why did you indicate to a well respected reporter that our carry on bags were searched ON THE PLANE, when in fact they were never searched (except for sniffer dogs), until she told you that my wife and I adamantly disputed your claim? Then you suddenly changed the official position to, yes, the carry on bags were not searched? (This was relayed to me in confidence)

Mr. Smith, I think if you honestly answer the few questions above, we will have our answer as to why the “official” position regarding the man in orange has changed 5 times. I suspect that all of the above is tied in together. Draw your own conclusion.

By the way, I look forward to version six of the official story.

I am not going away.

CtPatriot… This is very brave man … we need to spread word of this COVER-UP… something is not right here , are we planning to invade Yemen now?

For Haskell VIDEO interviews

COVER-UP??? Flight 253 Eyewitness: Authorities Are Lying About Terror Attack

Flight 253 passenger Kurt Haskell: ‘I was visited by the FBI’

METRO DETROIT LOCAL NEWS & TALK

By Aaron Foley | MLive.com
December 31, 2009,

Following up on a visit from FBI officials about an eyewitness account first described to MLive.com, Michigan attorney Kurt Haskell described the visit in comment sections across MLive on Wednesday.

Haskell and his wife, Lori, were aboard Flight 253 when Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab allegedly tried to destroy the plane. They say another man tried to help Abdulmutallab board the plane in Amsterdam.

Haskell had two detailed posts in two different stories. Here is Part One, originally posted here (Nothing below in the indent has been changed. Only links have been added.):

Today is the second worst day of my life after 12-25-09. Today is the day that I realized that my own country is lying to me and all of my fellow Americans. Let me explain.

Ever since I got off of Flight 253 I have been repeating what I saw in US Customs. Specifically, 1 hour after we left the plane, bomb sniffing dogs arrived. Up to this point, all of the passengers on Flight 253 stood in a small area in an evacuated luggage claim area of an airport terminal. During this time period, all of the passengers had their carry on bags with them. When the bomb sniffing dogs arrived, 1 dog found something in a carry on bag of a 30 ish Indian man. This is not the so called “Sharp Dressed” man. I will refer to this man as “The man in orange”. The man in orange, who stood some 20ft away from me the entire time until he was taken away, was immediately taken away to be searched and interrogated in a nearby room. At this time he was not handcuffed. When he emerged from the room, he was then handcuffed and taken away. At this time an FBI agent came up to the rest of the passengers and said the following (approximate quote) “You all are being moved to another area because this area is not safe. I am sure many of you saw what just happened (Referring to the man in orange) and are smart enough to read between the lines and figure it out.” We were then marched out of the baggage claim area and into a long hallway. This entire time period and until we left customs, no person that wasn’t a law enforcement personnel or a passenger on our flight was allowed anywhere on our floor of the terminal (or possibly the entire terminal) The FBI was so concerned during this time, that we were not allowed to use the bathroom unless we went alone with an FBI agent, we were not allowed to eat or drink, or text or call anyone. I have been repeating this same story over the last 5 days. The FBI has, since we landed, insisted that only one man was arrested for the airliner attack (contradicting my account). However, several of my fellow passengers have come over the past few days, backed up my claim, and put pressure on FBI/Customs to tell the truth. Early today, I heard from two different reporters that a federal agency (FBI or Customs) was now admitting that another man has been held (and will be held indefinitely) since our flight landed for “immigration reasons.” Notice that this man was “being held” and not “arrested”, which was a cute semantic ploy by the FBI to stretch the truth and not lie.

Just a question, could that mean that the man in orange had no passport?

However, a few hours later, Customs changed its story again. This time, Mr. Ron Smith of Customs, says the man that was detained “had been taken into custody, but today tells the news the person was a passenger on a different flight.” Mr. Ron Smith, you are playing the American public for a fool. Lets take a look at how plausible this story is (After you’ve already changed it twice). For the story to be true, you have to believe, that:

1. FBI/Customs let passengers from another flight co-mingle with the passengers of flight 253 while the most important investigation in 8 years was pending. I have already stated that not one person who wasn’t a passenger or law enforcement personnal was in our area the entire time we were detained by Customs.
2. FBI/Customs while detaining the flight 253 passengers in perhaps the most important investigation since the last terrorist attack, and despite not letting any flight 253 passenger drink, eat, make a call, or use the bathroom, let those of other flights trample through the area and possibly contaminate evidence.
3. You have to believe the above (1 and 2) despite the fact that no flights during this time allowed passengers to exit off of the planes at all and were detained on the runway during at least the first hour of our detention period.
4. You have to believe that the man that stood 20 feet from me since we entered customs came from a mysterious plane that never landed, let its passengers off the plane and let this man sneak into our passenger group despite having extremely tight security at this time (i.e. no drinking even).
5. FBI/Customs was hauling mysterious passengers from other flights through the area we were being held to possibly comtaminate evidence and allow discussions with suspects on Flight 253 or to possibly allow the exchange of bombs, weapons or other devices between the mysterious passengers from other flights and those on flight 253.

Seriously Mr. Ron Smith, how stupid do you think the American public is?

Mr. Ron Smith’s third version of the story is an absolute inplausible joke. I encourage you, Mr. Ron Smith, to debate me anytime, anywhere, and anyplace in public to let the American people see who is credible and who is not.

I ask, isn’t this the more plausible story:

1. Customs/FBI realized that they screwed up and don’t want to admit that they left flight 253 passengers on a flight with a live bomb on the runway for 20 minutes.
2. Customs/FBI realized that they screwed up and don’t want to admit that they left flight 253 passengers in customs for 1 hour with a live bomb in a carry on bag.
3. Customs/FBI realize that the man in orange points to a greater involvement then the lone wolf theory that they have been promoting.

Mr. Ron Smith I encourage you to come out of your cubicle and come up with a more plausible version number 4 of your story.

Haskell continued his comment in a different post on MLive.

For the last five days I have been reporting my story of the so called “sharp dressed man.” For those of you who haven’t read my account, it involves a sharp dressed “Indian man” attempting to talk a ticket agent into letting a supposed “Sudanese refugee” (The terrorist) onto flight 253 without a passport. I have never had any idea how it played out except to note that the so called “Sudanese reefugee” later boarded my flight and attempted to blow it up and kill me. At no time did my story involve, or even find important whether the terrorist actually had a passport. The importance of my story was and always will be, the attempt with an accomplice (apparently succesful) of a terrorist with all sorts of prior terrorist warning signs to skirt the normal passport boarding procedures in Amsterdam. By the way, Amsterdam security did come out the other day and admit that the terrorist did not have to “Go through normal passport checking procedures”.

Amsterdam security, please define to the American public “Normal passport boarding procedures”.

You see the FBI would have the American public believe that what was important was whether the terrorist in fact had a passport.

Seriously think about this people. You have a suicide bomber who had recently been to Yemen to but a bomb, whose father had reported him as a terrorist, who supposedly was on some kind of U.S. terror watchlist, and most likely knew the U.S. was aware of these red flags. Yet, he didn’t go through “Normal passport checking procedures.” What does that mean? Maybe that he flashed a passport to some sort of sympathetic security manager in a backroom to avoid a closer look at the terrorist’s “red flags”? What is important is that the terrorist avoided using normal passport checking procedures (apparently successfully) in order to avoid a closer look into his red flags. Who cares if he had a passport. The important thing is that he didn’t want to show it and somehow avoided a closer inspection and “normal passport checking procedures.” Each passport comes with a bar code on it that can be scanned to provide a wealth of information about the individual. I would bet that the passport checking procedures for the terrorist did not include a bar code scan of his passport (which could have revealed damning information about the terrorist).

Please note that there is a very easy way to verify the veracity of my prior “sharp dressed man” account. Dutch police have admitted that they have reviewed the video of the “sharp dressed man” that I referenced. Note that it has not been released anywhere, You see, if my eye witness account is false, it could easily be proven by releasing the video. However, the proof of my eyewitness account would also be verified if I am telling the truth and I am. There is a reason we have only heard of the video and not seen it. dutch authorities, “RELEASE THE VIDEO!” This is the most important video in 8 years and may be all of two minutes long. Show the entire video and “DO NOT EDIT IT”! The American public deserves its own chance to attempt to identify the “sharp dressed man”. I have no doubt that if the video indicated that my account was wrong, that the video would have already swept over the entire world wide web.

Instead of the video, we get a statment that the video has been viewed and that the terrorist had a passport. Each of these statements made by the FBI is a self serving play on semantics and each misses the importance of my prior “sharp dressed man” account. The importance being that the man “Tried to board the plane with an accomplice and without a passort”. The other significance is that only the airport security video can verify my eyewitness account and that it is not being released.

Who has the agenda here and who doesn’t? Think about that for a minute.

CtPatriot… This sends chills up my spine….Tell everyone you can about this, something is very wrong here…