WikiLeaks: FBI hunts the 9/11 gang that got away

Pretty Much Settles it for me beyond a doubt... United Airlines Flight 93's target was the White House...


By Steven Swinford, Robert Winnett and Nick Allen in Los Angeles 8:55PM GMT 01 Feb 2011

68 Comments

Secret documents reveal that the three Qatari men conducted surveillance on the targets, provided “support” to the plotters and had tickets for a flight to Washington on the eve of the atrocities.

The suspected terrorists flew from London to New York on a British Airways flight three weeks before the attacks.

They allegedly carried out surveillance at the World Trade Centre, the White House and in Virginia, the US state where the Pentagon and CIA headquarters are located.

Ten days later they flew to Los Angeles, where they stationed themselves in a hotel near the airport which the FBI has now established was paid for by a “convicted terrorist”, who also paid for their airline tickets.

Hotel staff have told investigators they saw pilot uniforms in their room along with computer print outs detailing pilot names, flight numbers and times and packages addressed to Syria, Afghanistan, Jerusalem and Jordan.

On September 10 they were booked on an American Airlines flight from Los Angeles to Washington, but failed to board. The following day the same Boeing 757 aircraft was hijacked by five terrorists and crashed into the Pentagon.

But, instead of boarding the American flight, the Qatari suspects – named as Meshal Alhajri, Fahad Abdulla and Ali Alfehaid - flew back to London on a British Airways flight before returning to Qatar. Their current location is unknown.

Investigators are also hunting a fourth man, Mohamed Al Mansoori, who they say supported the alleged terrorist cell while they were in the US.

The man, who is from the United Arab Emirates, previously lived in Long Beach, Los Angeles. His current location is also unknown, and US officials recommended that he is put on an international terror watch list because he “may pose a threat to aviation in the US and abroad”.

The details of the secret 9/11 team have emerged in a secret American government document obtained by the Wikileaks website and passed to The Daily Telegraph. It was sent between the American Embassy in Doha and the Department for Homeland Security in Washington.

The document, sent on 11th February 2010, states: “Mr Al Mansoori is currently under investigation by the FBI for his possible involvement in the 11 September 2001 attacks. He is suspected of aiding people who entered the US before the attacks to conduct surveillance of possible targets and providing other support to the hijackers.”

Details of the unknown 9/11 alleged plotters has never previously been disclosed. An official inquiry into the 9/11 attacks, which killed nearly 3,000 people, indicated that the hijackers may have received assistance in Los Angeles but investigators did not publicly provide more details.

The 9/11 Commission report, published in July 2004, states that at least two of the hijackers previously visited Los Angeles but, at the time, investigators appeared to have little information on their movements. The report states they had a "brief stay in Los Angeles about which we know little".

Only one person – Zacarias Moussaoui - has been tried and convicted over involvement in the 9/11 attacks as all the terrorists died in the crashed planes. Moussaoui, accused of being the twentieth hijacker, was sentenced to life in prison.

The secret American document contains detailed information about the movements of the three alleged Qatari plotters.

They took BA flight 185 from London to New York on 15th August, 2001, and the memo alleges that they subsequently conducted “surveillance” on potential targets ahead of the 9/11 attacks. It states: “They visited the World Trade Centre, the Statue of Liberty, the White House and various areas in Virginia.”

They then flew on an American Airlines flight from Washington to Los Angeles, arriving on 24th August and checking into a single room at a hotel near the airport. They paid for the room with cash and during the last few days of their stay requested that their room should not be cleaned.

The cable states: “Hotel cleaning staff grew suspicious of the men because they noticed pilot type uniforms, several laptops and several cardboard boxes addressed to Syria, Jerusalem, Afghanistan and Jordan in the room on previous cleaning visits.

“The men had a smashed cellular phone in the room and a cellular phone attached by wire to a computer. The room also contained pin feed computer paper print outs with headers listing pilot names, airlines, flight numbers, and flight times.”

While in the US, they were aided by Mohamed Ali Mohamed Al Mansoori. The secret document also states that the three Qatari men spent a week travelling with Mr Al Mansoori to “different destinations in California”.

The Qatari men were scheduled to board American Airlines Flight 144 on September 10th from Los Angeles to Washington but did not turn up.

They instead boarded a British Airways flight to London, before flying back to Doha on another BA flight.

The following day the same American Airlines aircraft, flying on route AA77, was hijacked as it returned from Washington and crashed into the Pentagon, killing 184 people.

It is not known whether the FBI believe that the men were simply assisting the hijackers or were a fifth cell who pulled out at the final moment. Alternatively, they may have been planning an attack on the West Coast of America or even London which was abandoned or went wrong.

Mr Al Mansoori has never been publicly named in connection with the 9/11 attacks. The three Qatari men were included on an FBI list of more than 300 people who were wanted for questioning in connection with the 9/11 attacks, which was leaked in 2002.

At the time, the FBI stressed it was not a list of suspects, but merely parties they thought might have information useful to the investigation.

The US embassy cable obtained by the Daily Telegraph was written by Mirembe Nantongo, the deputy chief of mission in Doha. It was marked “priority” and sent to the office of Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI and the CIA.

Mr Al Mansoori’s visa was revoked after the information about him came to light, but “his name was not watchlisted in the class system”, suggesting he may have managed to leave America.

A spokesman for the FBI declined to comment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyson_Chandler

they stopped the one from hitting the white house of course ;-)

---

A gross oversight =/= proof of conspiracy

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyson_Chandler

they stopped the one from hitting the white house of course ;-)

---

What are you trying to say?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyson_Chandler

there are people on record who saw flight 93 get shot down.

---

Link?

Quote:

---

don't believe all the hogwash about courageous good samaritans fighting back and landing the plane in a field. they shot down the one headed to the white house of course, if that makes sense to anyone.

---

1. That's not what the term "good Samaritan" means.

2. No one said they landed they plane in a field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyson_Chandler

there are people on record who saw flight 93 get shot down..don't believe all the hogwash about courageous good samaritans fighting back and landing the plane in a field. they shot down the one headed to the white house of course, if that makes sense to anyone.

---

What people on what record?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyson_Chandler

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com...flight-93.html

you're not going to find it on mainstream corporate media like cnn but if you talk to the right people you'll definitely hear a much different story,...

---

I don't doubt that one bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyson_Chandler

"...like this guy's. obviously no one is saying that because some guy says so it happened, but i've heard stories of eyewitness supports and enough mounting evidence to wonder.

---

So, this isn't an eyewitness report but, you've heard about eyewitness reports. Got it.

Tell me this. What about the family members who had telephone conversations with their loved ones in the moments leading up to them crashing into the cockpit?

Are they making that up?

The cockpit voice recorder? A fake?

The crash footprint that supports the official account?

Just asking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyson_Chandler

there are people on record who saw flight 93 get shot down..don't believe all the hogwash about courageous good samaritans fighting back and landing the plane in a field. they shot down the one headed to the white house of course, if that makes sense to anyone.

---

Are you one of those people that think all the in-flight phone calls were faked?

What a dick!

Quote:

---

“Hotel cleaning staff grew suspicious of the men because they noticed pilot type uniforms

---

Why would hijackers need pilot type uniforms?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

I don't doubt that one bit.


So, this isn't an eyewitness report but, you've heard about eyewitness reports. Got it.

Tell me this. What about the family members who had telephone conversations with their loved ones in the moments leading up to them crashing into the cockpit?

Are they making that up?

The cockpit voice recorder? A fake?

The crash footprint that supports the official account?

Just asking.

---

I like how you prove your hypocrisy in the same post. If you're willing to believe that CNN falsifies information, then why would it be a stretch for the recordings to be fake?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proxy

I like how you prove your hypocrisy in the same post. If you're willing to believe that CNN falsifies information, then why would it be a stretch for the recordings to be fake?

---

It's called a preponderance of the evidence. Look it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

It's called a preponderance of the evidence. Look it up.

---

You take the FOXnews side of things. Is Rumsfeld slipping up here mean anything to you? It doesn't seem like a reasonable error by the Secretary of Defense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJGSorqIZdk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proxy

You take the FOXnews side of things. Is Rumsfeld slipping up here mean anything to you? It doesn't seem like a reasonable error by the Secretary of Defense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJGSorqIZdk

---

I don't watch much FoxNews. And, no, Rumsfeld's gaffe is counter to the evidence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nbadan

Why would hijackers need pilot type uniforms?

---

Pilots have to wear uniforms so if the hijackers wanted to pilot the plane they would have had to have pilot type uniforms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Proxy

You take the FOXnews side of things. Is Rumsfeld slipping up here mean anything to you? It doesn't seem like a reasonable error by the Secretary of Defense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJGSorqIZdk

---

And, one more thing; both President Bush and Vice President Cheney said the order had been given to shoot down the plane and, that would have occurred had they caught up with it before the passengers brought it down on their own so, I'm not real sure what you're trying to prove here.

Had the plane actually been shot down by the government; given the statements made by the President and Vice President, there's no question in my mind they would have owned up to it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SnakeBoy

Pilots have to wear uniforms so if the hijackers wanted to pilot the plane they would have had to have pilot type uniforms.

---

So are you saying that Airline pilot security is compromised? None of the hijacking suspects I know had actual pilot's licenses to fly planes.. in fact, most were found to be very weak pilots by the people who they trained with...in fact, the chances of hitting both towers without having to fly back around are incredible in themselves....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nbadan

So are you saying that Airline pilot security is compromised? None of the hijacking suspects I know had actual pilot's licenses to fly planes.. in fact, most were found to be very weak pilots by the people who they trained with...in fact, the chances of hitting both towers without having to fly back around are incredible in themselves....

---

What are the chances?

Give us a number based on your vast knowledge of flight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

What are the chances?

Give us a number based on your vast knowledge of flight.

---

Incredibly high.....if you've ever flown in flight simulator, piloting a multi-engine jet is very difficult in itself, but hitting a target on the ground without having to fly around at least once?

Of course, this will go down by government-run, 9/11 Commission-lovers like yourself as just another random coincidink!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nbadan

Incredibly high.....if you've ever flown in flight simulator, piloting a multi-engine jet is very difficult in itself, but hitting a target on the ground without having to fly around at least once?

---

To my knowledge, no one has claimed these guys were as incompetent as you, Nbadan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yonivore

To my knowledge, no one has claimed these guys were as incompetent as you, Nbadan.

---

.....of course, FAUX News never said it, therefore, it never happened...

What an idiot...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nbadan

.....of course, FAUX News never said it, therefore, it never happened...

What an idiot...

---

From what I remember, the flight instructors that went on record as having had any dealings with any of the terrorists said they sucked at take offs and landings and seemed acutely interested in in-flight control of the airplane.

And, on a clear day (such as September 11, 2001 in New York City), it's not hard to fly a plane into a landmark that can be seen from miles away. Flying through an object that rises over a 1,000 feet above the ground is different than trying to hit a spot on the ground. You only have to be at the right altitude and lined up vertically.

Quote:

---

And, on a clear day (such as September 11, 2001 in New York City), it's not hard to fly a plane into a landmark that can be seen from miles away. Flying through an object that rises over a 1,000 feet above the ground is different than trying to hit a spot on the ground. You only have to be at the right altitude and lined up vertically.

---

I was referring to the Pentagon, but even the twin towers would be very difficult to hit...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nbadan

I was referring to the Pentagon, but even the twin towers would be very difficult to hit...

---

What's hard about skipping your plane across the yard like a flat rock?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nbadan

I was referring to the Pentagon, but even the twin towers would be very difficult to hit...

---

Planes almost always hit something the shape of one the twin towers every time they fly... It's called a runway..

Quote:

---

From what I remember, the flight instructors that went on record as having had any dealings with any of the terrorists said they sucked at take offs and landings and seemed acutely interested in in-flight control of the airplane.

---

How is it that a guy who believes that Obama is a socialist with a secret Army of Acorn soldiers ready to implement a govt Chavez-style private industry take-over in the U.s. is so gullable?

Quote:

---

How the FBI and 9/11 Commission Suppressed Key Evidence about Hani Hanjour, alleged hijack pilot of AAL 77

In August 2004 when the 9/11 Commission completed its official investigation of the September 11, 2001 attack, the commission transfered custody of its voluminous records to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA).<1> There, the records remained under lock and key for four and a half years, until last January when NARA released a fraction of the total for public viewing. Each day, more of the released files are scanned and posted on the Internet, making them readily accessible. Although most of the newly-released documents are of little interest, the files I will discuss in this article contain important new information.

SNIP

It turns out that just three days after Hani Hanjour failed a flight evaluation in a Cessna 172 at Freeway airport he showed up at Congressional Air Charters, located down the road at Gaithersburg airport, also in the Washington suburbs. Once again Hanjour attempted to rent a plane, and again he was asked to go up with an instructor for a flight evaluation to confirm his flight skills. The plane was the same: a Cessna 172. Yet, on this occasion Hanjour passed with flying colors and, later, this other instructor gave testimony to the commission that turned out to be crucial. The final report mentions the instructor’s name only once in a brief endnote buried at the back of the report. The note states:

Hanjour successfully conducted a challenging certification flight supervised by an instructor at Congressional Air Charter of Gaithersburg, Maryland, landing at a small airport with a difficult approach. The instructor thought Hanjour may have had training from a military pilot because he used a terrain recognition system for navigation. Eddie Shalev interview. (Apr. 9, 2004)<24>

SNIP

So, who is Eddie Shalev? His identity remained unknown for more than seven years, but was finally revealed in one of the files released in January 2009 by the National Archives. The document, labelled a “Memorandum for the Record,” is a summary of the April 2004 interview with Eddie Shalev conducted by commission staffer Quinn John Tamm.<32> The document confirms that Shalev went on record: “Mr Shalev stated that based on his observations Hanjour was a ‘good’ pilot.” It is noteworthy that Tamm also spoke with Freeway instructors Sheri Baxter and Ben Conner, as revealed by yet another recently-released document.<33> Although I was unable to reach Tamm or Baxter for comment, I did talk with Conner, who confirmed the conversation.<34> Conner says he fully expected to testify before the commission. Perhaps not surprisingly, the call never came.

But the shocker is the revelation that Eddie Shalev is an Israeli and served in the Israeli army. The file states that “Mr. Shalev served in the Israeli Defense Forces in a paratroop regiment. He was a jumpmaster on a Boeing C-130. Mr. Shalev moved to the Gaithersburg area in April 2001 and was sponsored for employment by Congressional Air Charters...(which) has subsequently gone out of business.”

---

Link

So dan thinks the jooooooooooooooos are behind the 9/11 attacks?

Of course not.

He'll never say he actually believes anything he posts about 9/11.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyson_Chandler

there are people on record who saw flight 93 get shot down..don't believe all the hogwash about courageous good samaritans fighting back and landing the plane in a field. they shot down the one headed to the white house of course, if that makes sense to anyone.

---

I am telling the 100% truth when I say this

the mornnig of 9/11, I was watching the news, and right after that flight was down, CNN reported that it had been shot down by fighter jets.

then afterwards, it was changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MiamiHeat

I am telling the 100% truth when I say this

the mornnig of 9/11, I was watching the news, and right after that flight was down, CNN reported that it had been shot down by fighter jets.

then afterwards, it was changed.

---

So what do you think made them change the story?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChumpDumper

So what do you think made them change the story?

---

The US Government has power over the media in times of "national security" and may impose a blackout on certain news stories. It goes back to the days before even John F Kennedy.... if the news outlet does not comply, they can be sued and get into a lot of trouble. It was supposed to be used only for war time, etc..

The Bush White House abused this a lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MiamiHeat

The US Government has power over the media in times of "national security" and may impose a blackout on certain news stories. It goes back to the days before even John F Kennedy.... if the news outlet does not comply, they can be sued and get into a lot of trouble. It was supposed to be used only for war time, etc..

The Bush White House abused this a lot.

---

Please show me the emergency media blackout statute of which you speak.

Thanks in advance.

im not playing that game with you chumpy. look for it yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MiamiHeat

im not playing that game with you chumpy. look for it yourself.

---

It's ok.

It doesn't exist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nbadan

Incredibly high.....if you've ever flown in flight simulator, piloting a multi-engine jet is very difficult in itself, but hitting a target on the ground without having to fly around at least once?

---

Thanks Dan.

:lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nbadan

Incredibly high.....if you've ever flown in flight simulator, piloting a multi-engine jet is very difficult in itself, but hitting a target on the ground without having to fly around at least once?

---

It did fly around once before the final approach after flying within about four miles of the Pentagon, then roughly lined up with the Columbia Pike that effectively makes a beeline toward the building.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...light_path.jpg

So really they had four miles of runway.

Still say it's impossible?

How do you have that information when the black boxes were said to not be found?

I am not talking about the bogus "lets roll" recordings either. Also are you that gullible to accept anything you read or hear from the FAA or flight control?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mouse

How do you have that information when the black boxes were said to not be found?

---

The voice recorder for flight 77 was found but not usable.

The flight data recorder was found and was used to plot the above path.

It would help your efforts to debate 9/11 if you know what you were talking about in the first place.

so you think it's easier to fly around and spot landmarks for your trajectory rather than fly straight up the river to your target? O....K....

They had to lose altitude. It's possible they had to choose how to plot the course once they lost that altitude.

Does that make any sense to you? Did I dumb it down enough?