Kevin Barrett going to Morocco to make a fool of himself

[ref]

http://www.911blogger.com/node/8162


Dr. Barrett will be traveling to Morocco May 6th to apprehend accused 9/11 hijacker Waleed al-Shehri, who, after allegedly stabbing a stewardess on a flight that crashed into the World Trade Center, returned to Casablanca and has reportedly been working as a pilot there ever since.

Barrett voiced his outrage that such a brutal, ruthless terrorist has been allowed to commit mass murder and suicide—and walk away scot free. “Waleed al-Shehri, I’m coming to get you!” Barrett vowed. “I don’t know how you got out of that plane alive, but that was the last miraculous escape you’ll ever make. You’re coming back to the US in handcuffs with me to face charges of mass murder and terrorism.”According to Dr. Barrett, strong evidence indicates that the accused hijackers Waleed al-Shehri and Wail al-Shehri are indeed the sons of the Ahmed al-Shehri (alternative Roman alphabet spellings include Alshehri, al-Shri, etc.) who is a senior Saudi diplomat in Bombay, India. One of Ahmed’s sons is Waleed al-Shehri who has been protesting his innocence from Casablanca. This Waleed says he, like the alleged 9/11 suicide hijacker, has a brother named Wail, attended Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embry-Riddle_Aeronautical_University) in Daytona Beach, Florida—and that the picture of the alleged suicide hijacker offered by the 9/11 Commission is indeed a picture of him.These facts, Dr. Barrett says, makes mincemeat of the report that the actual suicide hijackers were a different pair of brothers named Waleed and Wail al-Shehri. “Excuse me, but I think this guy knows his own photo,” Dr. Barrett said. “And what are the odds that there were two guys with identical photos who not only had the same name, but also had brothers named Wail, and who trained at the same flight school at the same time? And what are the odds that, if this were true, the situation would not even be mentioned, much less investigated, by the 9/11 Commission? Anyone who believes the BS about a second pair of brothers might as well blame 9/11 on Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.”Does he still believe he has the right country?

[Foolmewunz]

Barret's out of his mind, frankly. He now offers direct links to things that prove he's a liar.

In that 911Blogger story he states:

What a load of hrse-sht! The Der Spiegal writer, too cowardly to sign his name, is either too stupid to know, or too dishonest to admit, what any first-year Arabic student understands:....



Yet he provides a link to the article in 2003, which was the cover story, and thus like a lot of Time or Newsweek articles worked on by many people, and which on the last screen LISTS THE REPORTERS.

DOMINIK CZIESCHE, JÜRGEN DAHLKAMP, ULRICH FICHTNER, ULRICH JAEGER, GUNTHER LATSCH, GISELA LESKE, MAX F. RUPPERT

Translated by Christopher Sultan

Link to article: http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,265160,00.html

:spjimlad: :spjimlad: :spjimlad:

[Childlike Empress]

He now offers direct links to things that prove he's a liar.


Evidence that it's a lie and not a mistake? His argument stands, why do you ommit it?

If Bülow had inquired with the airline, he would have discovered that the name of the pilot who lives in Casablanca is Walid al-Shri and not, like that of the assassin, Walid al-Shari. This minor detail makes a big difference, namely the difference between a dead terrorist and a living innocent man. But to conspiracy theorists, discovering the truth is like solving a crossword puzzle for children: What's a four-letter word for a domesticated animal? Hrse.

What a load of hrse-sht! The Der Spiegal writer, too cowardly to sign his name, is either too stupid to know, or too dishonest to admit, what any first-year Arabic student understands: The same Arabic name can be transliterated in various ways. Al-Shahri, al-Shehri, al-Shari, etc. are one and the same name in Arabic, and this name is transliterated as al-Shri in Morocco, where pronunciation and transliteration tends to be heavily elided.


Bolding mine. I remember the DER SPIEGEL hit piece very well. It was written on the peak of (active) 911 skepticism in Germany. We had a lot of fun with articles like this and "debunkers" on message boards back in the days. I remember a priceless radio debate one year earlier between one of the authors, Ulrich Fichtner, and Mathias Bröckers (in case someone is interested - i have the mp3).

2003 also was the year when DER SPIEGEL eventually discredited itself completely and since then is refered to as "the former news magazine" by informed observers. That's a pity, the magazine was the bastion of investigative journalism in Germany for decades, but after Rudolf Augstein died and Stefan Aust took over, it slowly but surely degenerated into a mouthpiece for the new imperialism and "war on terror" idiocy.

[Brainster]

What slays me are the paranoid responses in the comments over there:

Kevin, this is a great idea... but don't tell everyone your plans in detail!

They guys we're up against are serious and evil people. Be careful...

Come on people. We have to be more careful.
Don't we all come here to Blogger first thing each morning?
So do "they".
No upcoming actions of this sort should be announced in advance.

You guys need to realize that we are endangering both of these people's lives. This is not something to brag about, yet. What if something happens to them?! They will then make it seem like an accident. Come on! Please. Am I rational here?

If you're this concerned--and you could be right--, then click the "contact us" under our logo and email any of the mods. They might not see your post in a timely fashion.

This sort of reveals the flaw in Barrett's plan to be the funnyman of 9-11 Denial.

[Gravy]

Barrett should read 9/11 myths. :D

http://www.911myths.com/html/waleed_al-shehri_still_alive.html

[The Silver Shadow]

I didn't know that Kevin Barrett wanted to re-enact the story of Don Quixote :D

[Foolmewunz]

Evidence that it's a lie and not a mistake? His argument stands, why do you ommit it?




Bolding mine. I remember the DER SPIEGEL hit piece very well. It was written on the peak of (active) 911 skepticism in Germany. We had a lot of fun with articles like this and "debunkers" on message boards back in the days. I remember a priceless radio debate one year earlier between one of the authors, Ulrich Fichtner, and Mathias Bröckers (in case someone is interested - i have the mp3).

2003 also was the year when DER SPIEGEL eventually discredited itself completely and since then is refered to as "the former news magazine" by informed observers. That's a pity, the magazine was the bastion of investigative journalism in Germany for decades, but after Rudolf Augstein died and Stefan Aust took over, it slowly but surely degenerated into a mouthpiece for the new imperialism and "war on terror" idiocy.

I didn't cite the whole piece because THERE IS A LINK TO IT and unlike some frequent flyers around here, I assume the members and visitors to this spot can read. I cited the part that proved him a liar. I said, "he's a liar". I provided a link (which he provided) to the article, and I snipped the names of all the contributors to the piece.

So let's give Barrett the benefit of the doubt? What doubt? He said that the author was an anonymous coward, and he said it two days ago. Yet the current link shows there was no anonymity. The current link THAT HE PROVIDED.

This is a pretty basic equation. You call someone something, you prove it. I did so. Barrett did not. Q.E.D.

[Foolmewunz]

This has been asked before, but does he have a visa? "I'd like to come visit your country to come find a dead guy who's not really dead, but who's a stooge for the CIA and aided them in trying to take over the world."
Where do you put that on the application?

[Quad4_72]

Wow that is some insane stuff.

[Brainster]

http://static.stripgenerator.com/generated/brainster/strip/2007/04/28/barretts-trip_embed.png (http://brainster.stripgenerator.com/2007/04/28/barretts-trip.html)

[Civilized Worm]

I can't wait to see how this pans out.

[defaultdotxbe]

http://static.stripgenerator.com/generated/defaultdotxbe/strip/2007/04/28/untitled.png

[Childlike Empress]

This is a pretty basic equation. You call someone something, you prove it. I did so. Barrett did not. Q.E.D.


No you didn't. Why should he provide a link to the article when he consciously lied? That makes no sense. He made a mistake on an irrelevant detail (and i agree that that doesn't show him in a good light and was easily avoidable), but his argument stands.

I too am curious to see how this develops.

[JamesB]

No you didn't. Why should he provide a link to the article when he consciously lied? That makes no sense. He made a mistake on an irrelevant detail (and i agree that that doesn't show him in a good light and was easily avoidable), but his argument stands.

I too am curious to see how this develops.


Well you have a certain point, it is hard to tell when a truther "consciously lied" and when they are just being a blithering idiot. To quote the great Jim Fetzer:

Since I believe every word I say, I can't possibly be lying. If you are going
to slander people, you ought to get your concepts straight.

Barrett is still leading a joke of an investgation. He is completely avoiding the fact that the FBI photo of Waleed, does not look anything like the Waleed he is trying to find in Morocco. The hijacker Waleed was not a pilot, he was the muscle, the pilot on AA11 was Mohammed Atta.

[T.A.M.]

there is a difference in lieing and telling untruths that you believe in.

TAM:)

[pomeroo]

No you didn't. Why should he provide a link to the article when he consciously lied? That makes no sense. He made a mistake on an irrelevant detail (and i agree that that doesn't show him in a good light and was easily avoidable), but his argument stands.


I too am curious to see how this develops.



While we're waiting, perhaps you can clear up a small conceptual issue that's been troubling me.

The Impossibly Vast Conspiracy invented hijackers to hide the monstrous, motiveless crime they perpetrated. Barrett is searching for a real, flesh-and-blood human. Explain.

Let me make this a bit more clear. There were no actual hijackers. We won't wonder why the IVC sort of, kind of, "forgot" to make any of their imaginary hijackers Iraqis or Afghanis: We'll simply assume that it slipped their minds. Anyway, the IVC selects an Arab name for each hijacker and attaches it to a photo of a random Arab.

1) Do you suppose they would permit the random Arab connected to the fictitious name to remain alive?

2) Why would they do this?

3) If Barrett discovers an Arab with same name as the fictitious hijacker who doesn't resemble the photo, what exactly has he proved?

4) If all the hijackers were killed in the plane crashes, anyone Barrett discovers wasn't, by definition, one of those hijackers. Again, what exactly has he proved?

5) Barrett claims that there were no hijackers, so he is trying to find a surviving hijacker. Huh? What did the person he's looking for survive?

6) Barrett's best-case scenario, the most he can hope for--and it is wildly implausible, is this: he locates a man with the same name as one of the alleged hijackers and the guy resembles the photo of that hijacker. The Impossibly Vast Conspiracy admits it may have made an error in this ONE instance, but the identities of the other eighteen are rock-solid. What next?

7) Before you start searching for other "living" hijackers, return to questions 1 and 2.

8) Do you see a problem here?

[Hawk one]

Well you have a certain point, it is hard to tell when a truther "consciously lied" and when they are just being a blithering idiot.It's especially hard to tell when the alternatives are

a) He didn't read the article he's cited, thus believed the untruth he just told.

and

b) He did read the article, but put up the obvious lie and figured he wouldn't get caught on it.

I mean, what is more stupid? Not reading the article you're supposed to have read, or to lie about it and hope nobody notices?

[ref]

Knowing their lack of investigative capabilities, I still have to wonder, if he has the right country? I'm sure he hasn't been in contact with the person he is looking for.

The last reports of his whereabouts are from 2003 I think? And what was he doing in Casablanca in the first place? He was undergoing flight training for Saudi and Moroccan airlines that wanted to set up a link between the two countries. And after all, he is a Saudi man.

Now, I don't know if they have made further contacts to investigate his current whereabouts, but based on that information alone, I wouldn't be too confident in finding that person from Morocco anymore.

[Brainache]

Troother Road Movie?

[hurdygurdy]

Troother Road Movie?

Not Without My Bong Pipe.

With the recents bombings in Casablanca, he couldn't had chosen a worse time for his trip. Lots of policemen everywhere.

[Foolmewunz]

This just in..... beep-dee-deep.... Breaking news.

Kevin Barrett is full of s***. I remembered somewhere a vague connection that I just followed up on. (Google is our friend!)

He's married to a Moroccan. It's their frakkin' vacation? He's studied in Morocco. It's a sabattical?

Any number of things. The least likely of which to be that he's turned bounty hunter!

[ref]

This just in..... beep-dee-deep.... Breaking news.

Kevin Barrett is full of s***. I remembered somewhere a vague connection that I just followed up on. (Google is our friend!)

He's married to a Moroccan. It's their frakkin' vacation? He's studied in Morocco. It's a sabattical?

Any number of things. The least likely of which to be that he's turned bounty hunter!

So he is doing his yearly trip to Morocco. His vacation or whatever with his wife. He wants some hype, so he adds a little extra with a story of an alive hijacker, making it seem like the purpose of the trip is finding him. In reality, he does his yearly trip to Morocco, comes back tanned, no attempts of finding anybody. Explanation, he tried but couldn't find anyone. Reality, he was on a vacation like many times before.

Sound plausible?

[Foolmewunz]

So he is doing his yearly trip to Morocco. His vacation or whatever with his wife. He wants some hype, so he adds a little extra with a story of an alive hijacker, making it seem like the purpose of the trip is finding him. In reality, he does his yearly trip to Morocco, comes back tanned, no attempts of finding anybody. Explanation, he tried but couldn't find anyone. Reality, he was on a vacation like many times before.

Sound plausible?

You people can't believe anything that's not in the NIST! Leave it to you JREF types to put such a ridiculous spin on things. Why would a guy who has a Moroccan wife and who's studied in Morocco and who teaches Islamic studies go to Morocco if not to find the truth hidden by the NWO conspiracy? You guys make me sick!

[gumboot]

I love how useless Conspiracy Theorists are... it's like stealing candy from a baby... but the baby has no arms or legs and is blind.

-Gumboot

[A-Train]

1) Do you suppose they would permit the random Arab connected to the fictitious name to remain alive?

2) Why would they do this?

3) If Barrett discovers an Arab with same name as the fictitious hijacker who doesn't resemble the photo, what exactly has he proved?

4) If all the hijackers were killed in the plane crashes, anyone Barrett discovers wasn't, by definition, one of those hijackers. Again, what exactly has he proved?

5) Barrett claims that there were no hijackers, so he is trying to find a surviving hijacker. Huh? What did the person he's looking for survive?

6) Barrett's best-case scenario, the most he can hope for--and it is wildly implausible, is this: he locates a man with the same name as one of the alleged hijackers and the guy resembles the photo of that hijacker. The Impossibly Vast Conspiracy admits it may have made an error in this ONE instance, but the identities of the other eighteen are rock-solid. What next?

7) Before you start searching for other "living" hijackers, return to questions 1 and 2.

8) Do you see a problem here?


If you read the entire post on 911blogger, it will be obvious to you that Barrett is only being humorous about the whole thing. He doesn't really intend to seek out Waleed al-Shehri, he is only using the opportunity to make a point about the fraudulence of the government's allegations of who the hijackers really were.

By now, no one disputes that there is a Waleed al-Shehri who is or was in Morocco whom the government initially implicated as being one of the hijackers. Defenders of the official story, however, now claim that this was only a case of mistake identity, and that there was another set of al-Shehri brothers who were the real hijackers.

Barrett ridicules this assertion.

"These facts, Dr. Barrett says, makes mincemeat of the report that the actual suicide hijackers were a different pair of brothers named Waleed and Wail al-Shehri. “Excuse me, but I think this guy knows his own photo,” Dr. Barrett said. “And what are the odds that there were two guys with identical photos who not only had the same name, but also had brothers named Wail, and who trained at the same flight school at the same time? And what are the odds that, if this were true, the situation would not even be mentioned, much less investigated, by the 9/11 Commission? Anyone who believes the BS about a second pair of brothers might as well blame 9/11 on Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.”


That's you, pomeroo, and ref, and Binglybert, that he's referring to with the part about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.


To the rest of us, the facts show that someone stole the identities of the two still-alive al-Shehhri brothers, and then assumed those identities while boarding AAL11 and carrying out the hijackings.

To us, the too-convenient story of another set of al-Shehhri brothers showing up needs more scrutiny. So Barrett is only applying the requisite skepticism that should have been applied by the media and the 9/11 Commission in the first place.



"Barrett went further, calling the reports blaming a second Waleed and Wail al-Shehri “among the lamest disinformation efforts ever produced by any intelligence agency, anywhere.” A brief, extremely general story (http://web.archive.org/web/20020929001039/www.arabnews.com/Article.asp?ID=9424&ArY=2001&ArM=9&ArD=17) about the allegedly guilty second pair of brothers surfaced in the Saudi media following September 11th. “It reads like an intelligence agency press release,” Barrett said. “No biographical details, no extensive interviews, nada. Just a couple of paragraphs replete with generalities.”

[~enigma~]

If you read the entire post on 911blogger, it will be obvious to you that Barrett is only being humorous about the whole thing. He doesn't really intend to seek out Waleed al-Shehri, he is only using the opportunity to make a point about the fraudulence of the government's allegations of who the hijackers really were.

By now, no one disputes that there is a Waleed al-Shehri who is or was in Morocco whom the government initially implicated as being one of the hijackers. Defenders of the official story, however, now claim that this was only a case of mistake identity, and that there was another set of al-Shehri brothers who were the real hijackers.

Barrett ridicules this assertion.




That's you, pomeroo, and ref, and Binglybert, that he's referring to with the part about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.


To the rest of us, the facts show that someone stole the identities of the two still-alive al-Shehhri brothers, and then assumed those identities while boarding AAL11 and carrying out the hijackings.

To us, the too-convenient story of another set of al-Shehhri brothers showing up needs more scrutiny. So Barrett is only applying the requisite skepticism that should have been applied by the media and the 9/11 Commission in the first place.
Ah...so Barrett is lying...thanks for clearing that up A-Train

[The Silver Shadow]

If you read the entire post on 911blogger, it will be obvious to you that Barrett is only being humorous about the whole thing. He doesn't really intend to seek out Waleed al-Shehri, he is only using the opportunity to make a point about the fraudulence of the government's allegations of who the hijackers really were.
Waleed is a common first name. al-Shehri is a common last name. I know a guy named Waleed here, he has a different last name but he is from Morocco as well. Imagine a bank robber named John Smith was on the loose, if there was a guy living in New Jersey named John Smith, where incidentally, the bank robber is from, does that mean it is necessarily THE John Smith who was the bank robber? The same can be applied to Waleed al-Shehri.

[beachnut]

If you read the entire post on 911blogger, it will be obvious to you that Barrett is only being humorous about the whole thing. He doesn't really intend to seek out Waleed al-Shehri, he is only using the opportunity to make a point about the fraudulence of the government's allegations of who the hijackers really were.

Yes I agree, Barrett is just full of talk, listen to video of him talking, not a single piece of evidence. Like most truthers, they talk and never take action. They believe but never have facts. They, all the truthers, have yet to produce a fact or any facts on 9/11 to support their ideas on 9/11.

It is a perfect record. And Barrett will fail to mess up this perfect record of no facts on 9/11. Is Barrett at the bottom of the food chain for 9/11 experts with no facts? Not sure how you can rate the bottom since all of the experts have zero facts, but after suffering the slings and arrows of his rhetoric and thin propaganda, he could be the rotten, fact less foundation of 9/11 "truth" movement. Listen to his many video cuts, no facts yet.

[Civilized Worm]

Not Without My Bong Pipe.

With the recents bombings in Casablanca, he couldn't had chosen a worse time for his trip. Lots of policemen everywhere.


Maybe that's what he's going to investigate? After all Barrett doesn't believe in any islamic terrorism. And apparently we're the ones who "believes the BS".

[JamesB]

Barrett has mentioned this on numerous occassions, including his radio program last night. He is serious about that. Of course when he meets the guy and finds out that he looks nothing like the hijacker, I am sure we will all hear, "I was just kidding".

[Slayhamlet]

Ah, "Truthers" harrassing innocent people. What else is new?

[pomeroo]

If you read the entire post on 911blogger, it will be obvious to you that Barrett is only being humorous about the whole thing. He doesn't really intend to seek out Waleed al-Shehri, he is only using the opportunity to make a point about the fraudulence of the government's allegations of who the hijackers really were.

By now, no one disputes that there is a Waleed al-Shehri who is or was in Morocco whom the government initially implicated as being one of the hijackers. Defenders of the official story, however, now claim that this was only a case of mistake identity, and that there was another set of al-Shehri brothers who were the real hijackers.

Barrett ridicules this assertion.




That's you, pomeroo, and ref, and Binglybert, that he's referring to with the part about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.


To the rest of us, the facts show that someone stole the identities of the two still-alive al-Shehhri brothers, and then assumed those identities while boarding AAL11 and carrying out the hijackings.

To us, the too-convenient story of another set of al-Shehhri brothers showing up needs more scrutiny. So Barrett is only applying the requisite skepticism that should have been applied by the media and the 9/11 Commission in the first place.




Oh, sorry! Your answer is...incorrect. Let's find out how much you wagered.

http://911myths.com/html/what_s_new_.html

[Foolmewunz]

Oh, sorry! Your answer is...incorrect. Let's find out how much you wagered.

http://911myths.com/html/what_s_new_.html

Thanks, Ron. Shudda gone looking for Mike's stuff. I didn't realize he'd be on this so early, as he usually takes his time (and waits 'til it reaches urban legend nonsense levels).

So, I take back my "KB's full of s*** " comment. Well, he's full of it, but just not on this issue, perhaps.

I should add a caveat.... I still think there's a very real possibility that this was a scheduled visit, either for personal or academic reasons, and he decided to embroider the crap out of it.

A-Train - thanks for the launch into fantasy. You had me going there for a minute. The story is so absurd that I could see it being a spoof. I mean Kevin's got that rollicking sense of humor so well evidenced in his writings.

[ref]

Is Barrett at the bottom of the food chain for 9/11 experts with no facts? Not sure how you can rate the bottom since all of the experts have zero facts

That one cracked me up :D

[Gord_in_Toronto]

OK. I decided to investigate this myself since Kevin Barrett lives right down the street from me here in Toronto. I dropped by after work today and asked him if he was planning to go to Morocco and he said no. So it's not true. ;)

[ref]

Okay. Where is the alive hijacker, Barrett? It has been more than a week since you left to Morocco to arrest him. Where is he? Where is your report of this trip? I see nothing at mujca.com. Could it be that this trip was always going to be a failure? Are we going to see a report?

[Par]

To us, the too-convenient story of another set of al-Shehhri brothers showing up needs more scrutiny. So Barrett is only applying the requisite skepticism that should have been applied by the media and the 9/11 Commission in the first place.



That which is convenient is unlikely.
X is evidence that explains away a potential anomaly in the official account of 9/11.
Therefore X is convenient.
Therefore X is unlikely.


Now there’s a bug-bear of mine. I see conspiracy theorists employing that sort of dubious reasoning – well – more than I’d like. The thing to take away from this is that the (distinctly subjective) concept of convenience is not a factor that has any entanglement with those of probability, truth and reality. The rather existential and indifferent physical universe is not a conscious entity and thus not in the business of actively manifesting events that pose an inconvenience; so, something being (for some) convenient has no bearing on the probability of whether it is true or real. Given that it cannot provide us with any useful epistemological data, how convenient something is or is not is really quite irrelevant.

[JamesB]

Okay. Where is the alive hijacker, Barrett? It has been more than a week since you left to Morocco to arrest him. Where is he? Where is your report of this trip? I see nothing at mujca.com. Could it be that this trip was always going to be a failure? Are we going to see a report?

He said he was going to be gone 3 weeks. I guess they don't have Internet in Morocco.

[bje]

Okay. Where is the alive hijacker, Barrett? It has been more than a week since you left to Morocco to arrest him. Where is he? Where is your report of this trip? I see nothing at mujca.com. Could it be that this trip was always going to be a failure? Are we going to see a report?


Hmmm.... Could this be about Barrett (http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,21723034-2862,00.html)?

[ref]

He said he was going to be gone 3 weeks. I guess they don't have Internet in Morocco.

I just had to find the stats.

http://www.internetworldstats.com/africa.htm#ma

http://www.internetworldstats.com/images/spa33.gifMA - 30,534,870 population - Country Area: 458,730 sq km
http://www.internetworldstats.com/images/spa33.gif4,600,000 Internet users as of Sept/06, 15.1% of the population, per ITU.

[Brainache]

I sincerely hope Mr Barret is filming his little Morrocan adventure in order to make a documentary. I think it would actually be the first amusing Truther movie. As I said in a different thread: I think he should call it "How I met your martyr".

Can't you just imagine him walking the streets of Casablanca, sweat soaked and delerious asking passers-by if they know where to find Wally Al Sheri?
Be embarassed as he tries to haggle over the price of an interview.
Laugh as he is escorted from various official buildings.
Cry as he loses his traveller's checks to a gang of thieves.
Gag in disgust as his gastro intestinal processes fail explosively.
Cheer in pure schadenfreude as his mission ultimately leads to dismal disappointment.

I'd pay money to watch that doco.

[Slayhamlet]

I sincerely hope Mr Barret is filming his little Morrocan adventure in order to make a documentary. I think it would actually be the first amusing Truther movie. As I said in a different thread: I think he should call it "How I met your martyr".

Can't you just imagine him walking the streets of Casablanca, sweat soaked and delerious asking passers-by if they know where to find Wally Al Sheri?
Be embarassed as he tries to haggle over the price of an interview.
Laugh as he is escorted from various official buildings.
Cry as he loses his traveller's checks to a gang of thieves.
Gag in disgust as his gastro intestinal processes fail explosively.
Cheer in pure schadenfreude as his mission ultimately leads to dismal disappointment.

I'd pay money to watch that doco.

I lol'ed.

[Foolmewunz]

I just had to find the stats.

http://www.internetworldstats.com/africa.htm#ma

http://www.internetworldstats.com/images/spa33.gifMA - 30,534,870 population - Country Area: 458,730 sq km
http://www.internetworldstats.com/images/spa33.gif4,600,000 Internet users as of Sept/06, 15.1% of the population, per ITU.



Maybe he's got his quarry cornered and has called in the Citizen Investigation Team to bundle him up?

[gumboot]

I lol'ed.

So did I, except it was more of a throaty choking sound...

-Gumboot

[Brainache]

Thanks Slayhamlet and Gumboot. I couldn't help myself. I still say it would make a great doco.

[ref]

Well, how convenient. This has now been posted at mujca.com. And you guessed it, he has found nothing :D

http://www.mujca.com/waleedalshehri.htm

I have spoken to a couple of fairly high-level people in the commercial aviation community in Casablanca, and so far nobody will confirm or deny that a Saudi pilot named Waleed al-Shehri ever lived or worked here. When I ask how I might obtain a list of pilots based in Casablanca, they tell me that no such list is obtainable. When I ask whether there is any way to confirm or deny the employment status of pilots working for Royal Air Maroc or Saudi Arabian Airlines, representatives of the respective companies tell me no, there is not. They all have that “don’t want to get involved in dangerous political stuff” demeanor.

If I ran up against a brick wall in my inquiries to the airlines, the response from the official and semi-official embassy milieu has been equally frustrating. The Information Officer at the US Embassy in Rabat, a pleasant fellow named David, told me today that he and all the other current Embassy personnel know nothing about the al-Shehri story, because none of them were in Morocco in 2001, because diplomatic service employees always rotate around the world every few years.

I decided my best bet might be with those conspiracy-theory loving Moroccan newspapers, vowed to track down last week’s news story on al-Shehri, and composed an epistle which I emailed to about forty journalists and news outlets

I am requesting information about Waleed al-Shehri, and announcing that I would be happy to be interviewed for any prospective story on the American 9/11 truth movement.

I am still waiting to hear back from those 40 Moroccan journalists, as well as several other prospective sources. For now, here I am in the beautiful cyber-café Lima Moon, not far from the historic Portugese cisterns and the sunny, surfable beaches of lovely Al-Jadida, Morocco, sipping delicious syrupy-sweet mint tea, listening to the music of the surrounding conversations in Moroccan dialect over the rumble of traffic that drowns out the distant surf, and dreaming of interviews with elusive still-living suicide hijackers. Business hours are over, so I am no longer working my portable phone; instead, I am back in cyberspace, checking out more prospective sources and filing this report to the 9/11 truth movement.

[jhunter1163]

God. Next's he's going to tell us about his riding on the Marrakesh Express.

[uk_dave]

Ahhh those "historic Portugese cisterns" I remember them well.

Beautiful ball valves, as I recall.......

[Disbelief]

Well, how convenient. This has now been posted at mujca.com. And you guessed it, he has found nothing :D



But, he is doing exactly what he set out to do. He can say he is doing all this stuff (which he may or may not be trying) and then say he hit a brick wall because the government won't let anyone talk. Of course, it just means the conspiracy got even bigger, but he and his lapdogs won't care.

[ref]

But, he is doing exactly what he set out to do. He can say he is doing all this stuff (which he may or may not be trying) and then say he hit a brick wall because the government won't let anyone talk. Of course, it just means the conspiracy got even bigger, but he and his lapdogs won't care.

He will certainly find a way to explain himself out of that misery. The CT's won't care how stupid an explanation that is.

BTW, he still repeats some old school CT lies.

From that article:

The alleged cell phone calls from 30,000 to 40,000 feet cruising altitudes were impossible, and must have been fabricated by real-time voice-mimicking technology.There is no evidence that any hijackers were on any of the alleged suicide flights—not a single Arab name is on any of the published flight manifests.
The two (instead of five) airport security videos purportedly showing hijackers boarding planes are blatant forgeries.
The alleged autopsy data from the flights does not identify any of the alleged hijackers despite the official story’s claim that it does.

He is like a CT relic from the centuries before, a bit like Griffin. They still claim some unbelievably old stuff.

[bje]

But, he is doing exactly what he set out to do. He can say he is doing all this stuff (which he may or may not be trying) and then say he hit a brick wall because the government won't let anyone talk. Of course, it just means the conspiracy got even bigger, but he and his lapdogs won't care.


Barrett sure did a lot of ground work before he left, eh?

[chipmunk stew]

Barrett sure did a lot of ground work before he left, eh?
Seriously. He obviously spent far more time "dreaming of interviews with elusive still-living suicide hijackers" than actually planning his trip.

[ref]

Seriously. He obviously spent far more time "dreaming of interviews with elusive still-living suicide hijackers" than actually planning his trip.

If he really wanted to find someone, he would have contacted the embassy and the airlines BEFOREHAND. What's the use of travelling to other continents and only then find out, there is nothing you can do. This all speaks for the conclusion, that he was going to make a trip to Morocco with his Moroccoan wife or colleagues or whom ever anyway, and this hijacker-thing was just a sidestory to add some excitement and fame.

[Disbelief]

If he really wanted to find someone, he would have contacted the embassy and the airlines BEFOREHAND. What's the use of travelling to other continents and only then find out, there is nothing you can do. This all speaks for the conclusion, that he was going to make a trip to Morocco with his Moroccoan wife or colleagues or whom ever anyway, and this hijacker-thing was just a sidestory to add some excitement and fame.

He was too busy writing about what happened to his search in Morocco BEFOREHAND to be bothered to really do it. This way, he can really enjoy his vacation and only have to do a little cut-and-paste to look like he is being thwarted.

[ref]

He was too busy writing about what happened to his search in Morocco BEFOREHAND to be bothered to really do it. This way, he can really enjoy his vacation and only have to do a little cut-and-paste to look like he is being thwarted.

Hmm. I'm going on a vacation abroad this summer. I might create an exciting story of some debunking activity I'm going to do :cool: But in reality I'll just enjoy the sights and add a couple of slightly altered paragraphs from 911myths to my story. Don't tell anyone.

[chipmunk stew]

http://static.stripgenerator.com/generated/anonymous/strip/2007/05/16/teh-troof-jihadist-on-holiday.png

[NoZed Avenger]

Barrett sure did a lot of ground work before he left, eh?

Has he done anything *there* that he couldn't have done via telephone or email from *here*?


Who is more foolish, the fool or the ones that finance his 3 week vacation in Morocco?

[chipmunk stew]

So it's been over a week since Kevin posted this:
http://www.mujca.com/waleedalshehri.htm

Anyone heard any further updates?

[ref]

So it's been over a week since Kevin posted this:
http://www.mujca.com/waleedalshehri.htm

Anyone heard any further updates?

Yup, this just in. Barrett has done nothing, of course. Just one story on a Moroccoan newspaper about the "quest" of Barrett.

http://www.mujca.com/Page06a10%20-%20copie.pdf

Translated by Barrett:

An American Academic in Morocco Searching for One of the Alleged 9/11 Kamikazis

Maroc-Hebdo n.743, May 4th-10th 2007

For many Americans, 9/11 is far from being a closed case. More and more voices are raising questions about (who were) the true authors of the attacks. Among them is Kevin Barrett, coordinator of the interfaith
movement for the truth about 9/11, the Muslim-Jewish-Christian Alliance for 9/11 Truth (mujca.com). M. Barrett will be in Morocco from May 6th onward.

The purpose of his trip is an attempt to find the Saudi Arabian Waleed al-Shehri, who has been presented, along with his brother Wail, as one of five hijackers who took over Flight 11 out of Boston. One problem: shortly afterward the Saudi newspaper as-Sharq al-Awsat reported that the same Waleed al-Shehri was contacting the American and Saudi embassies proclaiming his innocence. At the time, the American authorities said it was a case of mistaken identity. That hypothesis doesn't stand up, since alongside the photo and birthdate, which are indeed those of the Waleed al-Shehri who lives in Morocco, there is also the birthdate and photo of his brother. In short, it is a muddle that casts a monstrous shadow over the events of 9/11, a shadow that Kevin Barrett will try to cast light upon. Will the truth emerge from Morocco?

[ref]

Oh, and he had this message attached to the translation:

Note that this article uses the present tense--Waleed LIVES in Morocco. I have made contact with journalists here who are working on the Waleed story, so whether or not I find him during my one remaining week here, the wheels are turning.

So, he went to Morocco to find a person. And only after he enters the country and reads a newspaper article using a present tense, he is pretty sure that the man he is looking for still actually lives in the same country. Maaaaan. This is so stupid it almost makes me angry. But then again, it doesn't :D

[chipmunk stew]

Oh, and he had this message attached to the translation:

So, he went to Morocco to find a person. And only after he enters the country and reads a newspaper article using a present tense, he is pretty sure that the man he is looking for still actually lives in the same country. Maaaaan. This is so stupid it almost makes me angry. But then again, it doesn't :D
Geeeeez. What makes it even stupider is that they're probably going by information that he gave them!

From his 14 May letter to Moroccan journalists http://www.mujca.com/waleedalshehri.htm:



[text from letter]

<snip>

Ce monsieur a été faussement blâmé pour les attentats d'onze septembre 2001. Le FBI américain nous a dit qu'il était parmi les terroristes qui ont détourné et detruit le vol n. 11. Mais selon le BBC et d'autres sources M. al-Shehri est allé a l'ambassade américain a Rabat quelques jours après les attentats 11 septembre 2001. Il a dit que la photo et la biographie du soi-disant "terroriste" Waleed al-Shehri, frère de Wail al-Shehri, était bel et bien lui-même. Mais il a insisté, apparemment avec raison, qu'il était innocent, et que quelqu'un lui avait volé ses papiers d'identité l'année auparavant. On dit qu'il travaillait a Casablanca pour Royal Air Maroc.

Deux années après, en été 2004, la Commission 9/11 nous a donné la même photo et biographie en disant que c'était bien lui le Waleed al-Shehri qui était sur le vol n.11 qui a frappé la tour nord du World Trade Center. En plus, 9 ou 10 des autres 18 "9/11 hijackers" paraient rester encore vivant, la plupart d'entre eux en Arabie Saoudite. Donc la question des vraies identités des terroristes accusés reste parmi les plus grands problemes de l’histoire officielle de 9/11/2001. (Il y a des centaines de mensonges et de contradictions dans l’histoire officielle, comme Dr. David Griffin (http://unlivrealire.blogspot.com/2006/12/le-11-septembre-fait-natre-toute-une.html) a constaté dans ses plusieurs livres consacré au sujet.)

<snip>

[end text from letter]

I am requesting information about Waleed al-Shehri, and announcing that I would be happy to be interviewed for any prospective story on the American 9/11 truth movement.

I am still waiting to hear back from those 40 Moroccan journalists, as well as several other prospective sources.

[ref]

Geeeeez. What makes it even stupider is that they're probably going by information that he gave them!


Exactly.

[ref]

Well, the date of the newspaper article is earlier than the alleged Barrett letter to the newspapers. But that doesn't make this whole affair any more sane :p

[chipmunk stew]

Well, the date of the newspaper article is earlier than the alleged Barrett letter to the newspapers. But that doesn't make this whole affair any more sane :p
No, I know, but I don't suppose this publication just happened to have been closely following the exploits of Barrett and MUJCA prior to his holiday of errors. The point is, the letter contains essentially the exact same misinformation as the article--so who's the most likely source for their story?

edit: This is a promotion tour. He's going to stir up a lot more interest in his crappy book in a country like Morocco than in the US.

[ref]

No, I know, but I don't suppose this publication just happened to have been closely following the exploits of Barrett and MUJCA prior to his holiday of errors. The point is, the letter contains essentially the exact same misinformation as the article--so who's the most likely source for their story?

edit: This is a promotion tour. He's going to stir up a lot more interest in his crappy book in a country like Morocco than in the US.

Yes, I get the point :) Most likely they received the info directly from him.

[PhantomWolf]

I lol'ed.

I laughed, I cried, I demanded my money back.

[ref]

Kevin Barrett is back home. Did he bring any hijackers with him? No. Has he written any further reports at mujca.com? No. Did he disappoint? No, because this was exactly what was expected of this journey :rolleyes:

He will be talking about his trip on WTPRN 9:00 pm - 11:00 pm CST, I won't listen :cool:

http://www.wtprn.com/listen.shtml

[Pardalis]

I hope he at least got a sun burn, a major sun burn.

[ref]

Here is Barrett's final report. He goes on lengthy rants about missing luggage, Atta's luggage and such nonsense. But he also remembers to mention his failure.

http://www.mujca.com/nobaggage.htm

The truth is, that my first and only effort as a professional Fugitive Recovery Agent ended in abject failure. It’s a good thing I didn’t quit my day job as author, academic and 9/11 truth provocateur.

...

The truth is, if I was not particularly disturbed, much less surprised, by my failure to find Waleed, I was even less disturbed about the lost luggage on our return trip.



What about his efforts in Morocco then?



I looked for Waleed at Royal Air Maroc, the Moroccan national airline colloquially known as RAM, where he was reported to have worked. The people I talked to there had never heard of him. They said that since Waleed was Saudi Arabian, it was unlikely that he had ever-worked as a full-time pilot for RAM. Almost all RAM employees are Moroccan, I was told. If there were Saudis working for RAM, they would stick out like sore thumbs. (I later learned that RAM started denying that they ever heard of Waleed as soon as the story broke back in September 2001.)


I called Saudi Arabian Airlines, just in case the RAM attribution had been in error. I was passed from office to office and finally spoke to an administrative higher-up. He sounded defensive, like he knew something he didn’t want to share.


I tried the French embassy. No luck.


I tried the US embassy. David, the press liaison, denied knowing anything about Waleed, but did alert me to the existence of a recent article about him in a Moroccan magazine—an article that turned out to be about my own hunt for Waleed, and which promisingly referred to him living in Morocc—in the present tense.


I looked for “Détectives Privées” in the Casablanca Yellow Pages—to no avail. I was later informed that there were no private detectives in Morocco. Apparently the police and security services there don’t allow competition.


I tried debt collection agencies, and discovered that they are only authorized to track down debtors, not alleged suicide hijackers.

I composed a letter to Moroccan journalists and emailed it to more than forty journalists and news outlets. My grand strategy had always been to flush out the truth about Waleed (and the larger truth about 9/11) the way hunters flush out their prey, by banging on pots and pans and making a lot of public noise.



What a waste.

[Brainache]

My grand strategy had always been to flush out the truth about Waleed (and the larger truth about 9/11) the way hunters flush out their prey, by banging on pots and pans and making a lot of public noise.


I can't tell you how disappointed I am that Mr Barret didn't make a doco of this trip.

The image of him with a few of the locals banging on pots as they push through a Morrocan market looking to flush out a grounded hijacker is just too good. In my head he is wearing jodhpurs and calling all the locals "Sambo".

[Hyperviolet]

Well, he was always going to fail.
At least he is trying to uncover the so called mystery. As apose to just sitting behind the computer screen shouting "They're alive!"

[MikeW]

Given that Barrett believes he's so knowledgeable about this that he can abuse the rest of us, it surprises me that he hasn't read the interview with Waleed A Alshehri, where it explains exactly what he was doing in Morocco:

The Saudi pilot Waleed As-Shahri (or in the FBI release Waleed M. Alshehri) is under suspicion of involvement in September 11. He informed the ASAA that he is alive and well and was in the Moroccan city of Casablanca when the attack on the World Trade Center occurred. He found out that he was a suspect in the September 11 attack through the media. As-Shahri has been living in Morocco for the last nine months. He is undergoing flight training for Saudi and Moroccan airlines that want to set up a link between the two countries.
http://web.archive.org/web/20040707010907/http://www.ncmonline.com/content/ncm/2001/oct/1005identities.html

He was on a training course, not living there permanently.

[ref]

Given that Barrett believes he's so knowledgeable about this that he can abuse the rest of us, it surprises me that he hasn't read the interview with Waleed A Alshehri, where it explains exactly what he was doing in Morocco:



He was on a training course, not living there permanently.

That's exactly been my point from the beginning. Does he really think he has the right country was the first thing that came to mind. Because that was indeed only a training course he was attending.