Former Accused Iraqi Agent Reveals Facts about 9/11 WarningMarch 2, 2009 at 15:13:53
By Michael Collins
I first wrote about Susan Lindauer's struggle against the Bush-Cheney
regime in October 2007, "American Cassandra: Susan Lindauer's Story." This
was initially published in "Scoop" Independent Media (complete series) and
carried by a wide variety of concerned Internet news sites and blogs. This
interview follows the full dismissal of charges against her just before
President Obama's inauguration on January 20, 2009. This is the first in
depth interview that Lindauer has offered regarding 911. Below is part one
of the interview.
I asked Ms. Lindauer to make her own statement about why she's willing to
go into detail now about 911 and the governments handling of pre 911
intelligence.
"For five years, I was the poster child for President Bush's retaliation
against Americans who opposed his War Policy in Iraq. In March, 2004 the
Justice Department indicted me for acting as an "unregistered Iraqi Agent"
(not espionage), because I delivered a prescient letter to my second
cousin, Andy Card, former Chief of Staff to President Bush, warning of the
dire consequences of War.
"More dangerously, I had decided to talk. In February, 2004 I approached
the senior staff of Senators Trent Lott and John McCain and asked to
testify in front of the new blue ribbon Presidential Commission on Iraqi
Pre-War Intelligence. Within a month, I was astounded to wake up one
morning to hear FBI agents pounding on the door of my house in Maryland
with an arrest warrant.
"The indictment called me "Symbol Susan." It was a bizarre notation
unsupported by any evidence or action in the indictment. It did however
have one crucial purpose-to communicate a warning that anybody breaking
ranks from the Bush White House should expect to be brutally crushed like I
was.
To speak the truth under President George Bush was the worst crime of all.
It was treason.
'But what exactly was the U.S. government trying to hide?
"The answer is more far reaching than you would expect. In the first
article of this series written and edited with the help of Michael Collins,
we talk about the 9/11 warning that my team delivered to the Office of
Counter-Terrorism at the Justice Department in August, 2001.
"For those who think you've heard the whole story of 9/11, you might be
surprised."
Susan Lindauer, March 1, 2009
Interview of Susan Lindauer by Michael Collins
Michael Collins: What confirmation can you provide that you actually warned
about 9/11 several months before the attack?
Susan Lindauer: On June 17, 2008 the Court granted the Defense our first
and only pre-trial evidentiary hearing in five years, which allowed my
attorney to begin confirming that my relationships with my intelligence
handlers were fully authentic and involved counter-terrorism.
Dr. Parke Godfrey, an associate professor of computer science at York
University in Toronto, testified under oath that starting in the year 2000,
and several times in the spring and summer of 2001, I warned him that we
expected a major attack on the southern part of Manhattan, and that the
attack would encompass the World Trade Center. Dr. Godfrey assured the
Court that he had told the FBI about my 9/11 warning during a sit down
interview in Toronto in September, 2004, which was jointly attended by a
member of the Canadian Royal Mountie Police.
It's worth noting that Dr. Godfrey is a scientist and a precise, deliberate
and methodical thinker, who chooses his words carefully. In style, he's
been compared to Dr. Spock of Star Trek fame. He does Leonard Nimoy proud.
He would make an outstanding witness at any congressional hearing.
Quoting from his testimony in June 2008, he said that I told him, "A
massive attack would occur in the southern part of Manhattan that would
involve airplanes and possibly a nuclear weapon."
He testified that I told him "the attack would complete the cycle of the
first bombing of the World Trade Center. It would finish what was started
in the 1993 (World Trade Center) attack."
Dr. Godfrey testified that I first mentioned the possibility of an attack
in the year 2000, which coincided with the Lockerbie Trial. Then throughout
the spring and summer of 2001, I described the threat much more
specifically as "involving airplanes" and the World Trade Center.
In August 2001, I told him the attack was "imminent."
He testified that I urged him to stay out of New York City.
Collins: What was your background that made it possible for you to issue
this 9/11 warning?
Lindauer: Throughout the 1990s, the U.S. used me as a back-channel to
Libyan and Iraqi officials at the United Nations, seeking to leverage my
anti-sanctions and anti-war activism to establish contacts within nations
under sanctions, in support of anti-terrorism goals. I established contact
with the Libyan Embassy in May, 1995, for the purpose of starting
negotiations for the Lockerbie Trial. In that capacity, I met with Libyan
diplomats approximately 150 times over the next eight years. I established
contacts at the Iraqi Embassy in August, 1996. In addition to providing a
back channel for terrorism intelligence from Baghdad, I conducted
preliminary talks to resume the weapons inspections with Iraq's Ambassador
to the United Nations, Dr. Saeed Hasan, and other senior Iraqi officials.
Our purpose was to guarantee that Iraq would agree to rigorous U.S.
standards for transparency in the inspections process before the matter
went to the U.N. Security Council.
It must be emphasized that all of my work was heavily supervised by
handlers from the U.S. Intelligence Community. And most unusually, from our
first meetings, Iraqi and Libyan diplomats fully understood my motivations
to assist in facilitating an end to sanctions, and that I would function as
a back channel to contacts tied to the United States government. We wanted
diplomats to use me for that purpose. There was no deceit involved.
Collins: Who was your CIA handler?
Lindauer: Dr. Richard Fuisz (FUZE) is the most fascinating individual I
have encountered in my life.
Dr. Fuisz was a major CIA operative in Syria and Lebanon in the 1980s. Dr.
Fuisz coordinated the hostage rescue of Terry Anderson et al out of Beirut,
Lebanon. His team located their make-shift prisons and called in the Delta
Force for a daring raid. He testified before Congress about U.S.
corporations that supplied Iraq with weapons systems before the first Gulf
War. He got outed as CIA by Damascus after stealing the blueprints for
Syria's brand new telecommunications system.
Finally, Dr. Fuisz claims to know the real story of Lockerbie, including
the identities of the terrorist masterminds, whom he insisted were not
Libyan at all. It was he who suggested that somebody needed to approach
Libya about the Lockerbie Trial. An individual who passionately opposed
sanctions and recognized possible terrorist scenarios, he thought, would be
ideal to start up the talks.
That was me. Despite my ordeal, I am extremely proud of our work together.
I remain deeply grateful that Dr. Fuisz invited me to embark on this
extraordinary adventure inside the most interesting Middle Eastern
embassies at the United Nations. I loved every moment of it.
Collins: What first triggered your concern about a possible attack
involving airplanes and the World Trade Center? How did Lockerbie figure
into the 9/11 warning?
Lindauer: The Lockerbie Trial in the year 2000 got us thinking of what the
next terrorist scenario would look like. The bombings of Pan Am 103 in
December, 1988 and UTA (French airlines) in September, 1989 were the last
attacks involving airplanes prior to September 11, 2001. Our team worried
openly that the Trial of the two accused Libyans would inspire a sort of
"tribute attack" to the success of Lockerbie.
The problem is that while most Americans have refused to accept that
Libya's man, Mr. Megraghi was innocent of the crime, it happens to be true.
And terrorists groups know that. They know very well who was responsible
for planting the bomb on Pan Am 103, and they know that those individuals
have never been brought to justice. Indeed, throughout the Trial, when the
U.S. made such a poor showing of forensic evidence against the accused
Libyans, that U.S. failure was gossip throughout the Middle East. As Dr.
Fuisz used to say, terrorist groups thought that for all the mighty
resources of U.S. Intelligence, the U.S. was either too stupid to catch
them. Or we were afraid because the real terrorists are "too big."
Either of those beliefs stood to create a huge and irresistible provocation
to the younger generation of jihadis. It was an easy step to anticipate
that younger terrorists would be inspired to launch a tribute attack to the
"heroes" who came before them. On that basis, we drew up an extreme threat
scenario that the next major attack would most likely involve airplane
hijackings or airplane bombings.
That is exactly what happened by the way. Back in the 1980s, Osama bin
Laden called Ahmed Jibril "a hero" and "the greatest fighter against Israel
who ever lived."
Sure enough, my own extensive sources in the Middle East have repeatedly
told me that Ahmed Jibril was the true mastermind of Lockerbie-And so we
find the 9/11 puzzle fits together exactly.
Collins: When did your concern jump from "hypothetical scenario" to the
belief that an attack was actively being planned?
Lindauer: I remember it all vividly. In April, 2001 I received a summons
to visit Dr. Fuisz at his office in Virginia. We met almost weekly anyway.
On this occasion, he phoned my home and asked me to come right away. He
also inquired how quickly I was making my next trip to New York to see the
Embassies. He wanted to talk to me before I left, and he wanted me to go
soon.
Of course I visited him immediately. Dr. Fuisz demanded that I must warn
diplomats at the Iraqi and Libyan Missions that their nations would suffer
a major military offensive if it was discovered that either had possessed
intelligence about possible airplane attacks, and failed to notify the
United States through my back channel.
I was reluctant to deliver such a harsh message. I have always been an
anti-war activist. That's a major reason for my success in dealing with the
Arabs, because they appreciate the consistency of my opposition to violence
on both sides. So, on my next trip to New York, I soft pedaled Dr. Fuisz's
warning. I requested that diplomats send messages to Baghdad and Tripoli
seeking intelligence on possible airplane attacks. But I made no threats of
violent reprisal against them.
When I got home to Washington, I met with Dr. Fuisz, who demanded to know
how diplomats had responded to his threat. I had to admit that I had
stopped short of actually threatening them. But I assured him that I had
requested their cooperation.
At that point, Dr. Fuisz became enraged. As I recall, in all our years
together, there was never any other time that he lost his temper and yelled
at me. He stormed up and down the room. He demanded that I must return to
New York immediately, and I must tell diplomats "the United States will
bomb them into the Stone Age, worse than they've ever been bombed before,
if they don't help us identify any terrorist conspiracies involving
airplanes. They will lose everything. We will destroy them." He was not
pacified until I promised to deliver that message exactly as he had
communicated it. He expressed great satisfaction when I promised that I
would make sure they understood the warning came from him, not me, backed
by forces above him.
Dr. Fuisz was determined the Arabs should know the threat was deadly
serious.
Right then I knew terrorists were actively plotting an attack. This was
more than checking our trap lines, or putting out inquiries. Something was
moving. Dr. Fuisz was firing back to stop cooperation.
Reinforcing that tension, throughout the summer of 2001, Dr. Fuisz
continued to prod and push hard for any fragment of intelligence from Iraq
or Libya involving airplane hijackings or airplane bombings. He urged me
not to filter intelligence or test its accuracy before informing him.
During numerous meetings, he tried to explain how urgently he needed to
collect even fragments of intelligence, whether it appeared to make sense
to me or not. He begged me to hold nothing back.
That's when I knew that something bigger was going on. Dr. Fuisz was
already onto it. Again and again, our talks turned to airplane hijackings
and/or airplane bombings in a reprise of the 1993 World Trade Center
attack. It sounds uncanny but we all understood exactly what was going to
happen.
In turn, I shared those fears and dangers with other friends and family,
including Dr. Parke Godfrey.
All of us took the danger very seriously. Our team was strong, proactive
and fiercely protective of American security.
Collins: Ultimately, did Libya or Iraq provide any intelligence regarding
the attack?
Lindauer: No, they did not. After the attack, it became clear that neither
country could have been party to the conspiracy. Gadhaffi and bin Laden
hated each other. Back in 1995, Libya was the first country in the world to
warn Interpol about Osama, and urge an international warrant for his
arrest. Saddam's government hated him, too. Baghdad considered Osama's
extreme brand of Sunni fundamentalism to pose a serious destabilizing
threat to Iraq's moderate Sunni elite. Osama was a wrecking ball to Arab
governments. They all despised him.
In fact, we pushed Iraq so hard for intelligence in the months before 9/11
that afterwards Iraqi diplomats aggressively challenged our U.S. claims of
ignorance. A couple of diplomats put it to me bluntly: "Obviously you knew
it was coming, because you kept telling us about it. So why didn't you stop
it? Why didn't you do something before this, instead of blaming us now?
You should be blaming yourselves."
No, even before the 9/11 attack, I deduced that Dr. Fuisz's advance
intelligence was derived from an entirely different source. It just
happened to be one I had not expected.
Collins: All right. Who did you warn about this attack?
Lindauer: By early August, 2001, our team was gravely concerned that an
attack was "imminent."
When Robert Mueller was nominated to be Director of the FBI, we dallied
with going to his confirmation hearings to put a buzz in the ears of
congressional staffers about our fears.
Instead, Dr. Fuisz instructed me to telephone U. S. Attorney General John
Ashcroft's office.
In mid-August, I phoned the staff of his private office at the Justice
Department, which probably consists of about 20 people. Identifying myself
as an asset covering Libya and Iraq, I made a formal request that his
private office issue an emergency alert throughout the department for any
fragment of intelligence pertaining to possible airplane hijackings or
airplane bombings. I explained that we expected a major attack involving
that scenario, and we urgently needed cooperation from all other agencies.
Ashcroft's office told me to contact the Office of Counter-Terrorism at the
Justice Department, and repeat what I had just told them. I did so
immediately.
Collins: What happened after that?
Lindauer: I didn't stop there. Most Americans would be stunned to know
that in mid-August, 2001, our team was so convinced a 9/11 style attack was
imminent that I visited my second cousin, Andy Card at his house in
Arlington, Virginia, so that we could warn him.
I parked on the street and waited in my car, chain smoking for almost two
hours. Occasionally, I could see neighbors peering out of their windows. In
my head, I rehearsed what I would tell the police if they showed up to
investigate this strange car parked outside the house of the Chief of Staff
to the President of the United States.
Unhappily, he did not return home, and I finally left without sharing our
fears.
Driving away, I remember feeling that I was making the greatest mistake of
my life. Throughout all these years, it is one of my few regrets.
Collins: Who appears to have been Dr. Fuisz's other source on 9/11?
Lindauer: Dr. Fuisz never formally revealed his source to me. But within
about 30 minutes after airplanes struck the Twin Towers, he blurted
something to me over the phone.
He told me the Israeli Mossad had advance warning about the attack. As I
recall, he said it before the buildings collapsed.
He asked me if I thought it was "an accident that a man and woman happened
to be waiting on the sidewalk with a video camera, ready to record the
attack." He was highly agitated. He challenged me "how often a bystander
has a camera cued up to record a car accident?"
Then he said, "Those are Israeli agents. It's not an accident. They knew
this attack was coming. And they were waiting for it."
I was outraged and shocked by the images on the television. I shot back
something to the effect of, "You mean, we've been looking for an attack all
this time! And the Israelis knew about it? And they didn't tell us?" In
retrospect, outside the passion of that particular moment, the Israelis may
have told us much more than Richard Fuisz may have known.
Immediately the phone line cut dead between us.
I called him right back. Very calmly, he said, "Susan, we must never talk
about that again."
There are a couple more details regarding this Mossad team with the video
camera. Dr. Fuisz was able to announce their identities before the media
publicized who they are. The attack was so new when he said it, that it
seemed to me that he already knew about them.
I could be wrong. But I don't think so.
Collins: Thank you Ms. Lindauer. Part two of this series Susan Lindauer
will describe the extraordinary efforts by the Justice Department to
deceive U.S. Judge Michael Mukasey in the Southern District of New York of
the authenticity of Ms. Lindauer's 9/11 warning.
h
ttp://www.opednews.com/articles/Former-Accused-Iraqi-Agent-by-Michael-Collins-090302-909.html
