Peter Lance's new book Triple Cross

[Duer 157099]

I just finished reading the exhaustive (no kidding) timeline leading up to 9/11. I need time to digest it all and do further research, and get Lance's book, but has anyone here read it, or seen this timeline (link below)?

http://peterlance.com/Peter%20Lance/Home/Home.html

Timeline here:

http://www.peterlance.com/TRIPLE%20CROSS%20Timeline.pdf

[RedSock]

1. able danger blog

For more on Lance, including articles and some interview transcripts, see the Able Danger Blog:

http://www.abledangerblog.com/

[KJF]

12. How do you get court transcripts?

One of the things that caught my eye was the Sphinx Trading story. I have an idea that Mohamed El Atriss actually forged more than 2 ID cards for the hijackers (but worked as an FBI informer and so got off lightly). What we really need is to identify which of Al Mihdhar's documents is supposed to be forged (the other one they are talking about is Al Omari's international driving licence). I guess it should say that in the transcript of the El Atriss' trial. Have you (or has anybody else) got any idea how to get it?

On edit: punctuation.

[John Q. Citizen]

2. I just read the timeline from your link. Quite the story from the Brooklyn point

of view.

When one considers it in conjunction with Hopsicker's reporting (from the Venice Beach Florida point of view) what we have is the Nexus of Terror, organized crime and intelligence all working together to thwart and punish the good guys, to let the bad guys run around free, and to continue to put the public at risk.

The authors view that all these bad guys are spared from jail just to cover the fact that some LEO or intelligence officer missed the boat, however, is highly debatable.

I think it is much more likely there may be something like drug profits involved that leads to the reluctance of the powers that be to follow up on obvious intelligence gathered. These people are being and have been protected for something bigger than just somebodies career path or to spare some embarrassment.

For instance, putting Mohamed Ali into witness protection, when he didn't even testify, is very strange to say the least.

Thanks for posting, this is further indication to believe 9/11 was indeed helped along by people on the inside.

[mirandapriestly]

4. interesting post, JQ

Now my curiousity is up and I'll have to read it.

[Duer 157099]

5. Yes, my reaction was similar to yours

In some ways I needed to be reminded of just exactly who these guys (al Qaeda et al) were and what they want.

It's certainly a case of "if you lie down with dogs, you get fleas" -- we cultivated many of these "assets" when the Soviets were the common enemy, and with that enemy gone, who did we think the next target would become? Surely *we* are not that naive.

For me, this is the best sort of evidence against legislation such as the Pat Act. We don't need more info, we just need real patriots who will use the info they *do* have, for the good of the country.

I wasn't very pleased with the amount of blame handed to Fitzgerald, and am a bit concerned that he was artificially targeted because he's currently considered "one of the good guys" and so this would make the book more noticable.

Certainly there is MUCH more to this story than we can even imagine at this point.

[mirandapriestly]

3. Ali Mohammed

from an excerpt:
"A deep-penetration al Qaida sleeper, he succeeded as a triple agent, gaining access to the most sensitive intelligence in the U.S. counter-terrorism arsenal"

Peter Dale Scott said that Ali Mohammed was considered the mastermind of 9-11 by U.S. authorities. This reminds me of what David Shayler said about the program that Britain had whereby they let informants come and go as they pleased and one of them turned out to be the alleged mastermind of the London bombing. I wonder if the U.S. has something similar, it certainly sounds like it. OTOH, who knows what to believe and if you can trust any of these people to tell the truth, which is why I haven't looked before that much at the "terrorist" stuff, but I'm getting too interested in it.
I'll look at the timeline, thanks for the link.

[mirandapriestly]

7. oops, I meant he trained bin laden

not masterminded 9-11, I got my masterminds mixed up.

[spillthebeans]

14. You can listen to this debate with Lance

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2805153#2805199



June 16th, 2005
Guests: David Ray Griffin, Alex Jones, Peter Lance, Michael Levine, Morgan Reynolds
http://physics911.ca/Noory:_Coast_to_Coast_round_table

and make up your own mind

[mirandapriestly]

15. ewwww.eom

[spillthebeans]

16. ?

[mirandapriestly]

17. lol, his opinions

are "ewww". how can anyone look at these histories and not suspect something?

[spillthebeans]

18. If you like being lied to....

he somehow got 5 emmys

Have you listened to the interview?

[Duer 157099]

6. This is the most explosive quote from that timeline (imho):

"But the repeated references to the blind Sheikh and a hijack threat are ignored, even though by the first week in September the Taliban government in Afghanistan offers to exchange eight Christian missionaries in exchange for Sheikh Rahman."

One wonders what the world would be like today had we agreed to the exchange.

[mirandapriestly]

8. So Ali is kept at Fort Bragg

even after being identified as a radical Islamic sympathizer by
Egyptian military officers? I just don't get this...
.

[Duer 157099]

9. But wasn't this during the time when

the radical Islamics were fighting the Russians in Afghanistan?

That's why we allied with them and trained them and all that. They were assets against the Commies.

[mirandapriestly]

10. I thought of that

but it's still weird, and if they were plotting the 93 bombing, you'd think our intelligence would be hip to that. I guess there wasn't much suspicion at that time, at least officially, and don't they maintain their relationship with Ali after the 93 bombing?

[Duer 157099]

11. I guess the easy answer lies in the book title itself

The feds believed Ali was a double agent for them, and perhaps he was at one time, or to some degree.

He was actually a triple agent. Or, maybe just a double agent once removed, so betrayal of his handlers is a triple cross whereas betrayal of bin Laden would have only been a double cross.

Yeah, that's it.

[John Q. Citizen]

13. What is also wierd is that they had the blue print for 9/11 but never charged

Yosef with plotting it and never mentioned it again.

[ftr23532]

19. Curt Weldon was praising this book yesterday

CSPAN showed the final session of the House armed services committee, which included Curt Weldon giving a kind of good bye speech while praising all the committee members and staff, etc. He was recounting the committee's various accomplishments over the years while the Republicans were in control, including the Able Danger stuff that http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/16/weldon.able.danger/index.html">Weldon went public with last year. So he ends his speech wave a copy of Triple Cross, talked about Ali Mohamed and Able Danger, and said the something to the effect that it was an incredibly important book. So that was kind of interesting. If someone can find that footage on CSPAN that would be a worthwhile clip to show people on the other side of the aisle.