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).There's also a "30-ish Indian Man In Orange" whose carry-on bag was nosed by the sniffer dogs and who was taken into custody, handcuffed following interrogation, and who wasn't mentioned in the Big Old Media. The Witness is indicating that The Authorities are lying about what happened, making stuff up, apparently.
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."
Apparently some folks, ie. The Authorities, fear the inconvenient truth, for apparently it may very well expose themselves, and perhaps by extension, their current political masters, in some damaging way...
One thing's without a doubt, and that is that something's fishy-smelling. And, for once, it ain't Janeane "The Teabaggers're All Raaaaacists!" Garofalo. Boy, do The Authorities ever reek. Ditto the Big Old Media, who appear to be pretty much uninterested in the inconvenient truth.
If this was Russia, China, Iran, Cuba, that sort of regime, the Witness would most likely... "disappear".
I hope the current regime in America wouldn't dare...
ht: Drudge Report