| Hijackers' Friend Objects
to 9/11 Report
By Dan Eggen
Mohdar Abdullah knows what the Sept. 11 commission says
about him. That he was "perfectly suited to assist the hijackers
in pursuing their mission." That he "expressed hatred for the
U.S. government."
Perhaps most damning, the panel's best-selling report alleges that Abdullah
may have bragged to inmates that he knew about the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks
in advance and that he told the FBI, "The U.S. brought this on themselves."
Abdullah, now 25 and back in his homeland of Yemen after his deportation
from the United States in May, called the report "propaganda"
and said he is the victim of U.S. investigators looking for someone to
blame. He said he had no inkling in the summer of 2001 that two friends,
Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi, were about to take part in the deadliest
terrorist assault on U.S. soil.
"If I could have done anything to prevent this heinous attack from
happening, I would have done it," Abdullah said in a telephone interview
with The Washington Post arranged by his attorney last week. "I was
going to school, I was working, I was building my own future over there.
I considered it my own land, and that's how I behaved towards it. . .
. I was quite happy living in America until this happened."
The comments stand in stark contrast to the 567-page commission report,
which portrays Abdullah as perhaps the most suspicious acquaintance to
befriend two of the hijackers during their time in Southern California.
While the commission largely absolves other hijacker associates of wrongdoing,
it casts Abdullah as a central figure in the hijackers' San Diego stay
and strongly suggests that he may have been an al Qaeda operative placed
there to help the plot.
"Abdullah . . . is fluent in both Arabic and English, and was perfectly
suited to assist the hijackers in pursuing their mission," according
to the report. It adds later that "Abdullah has emerged as a key
associate of" Alhazmi and Almihdhar in San Diego.
Abdullah's story highlights one of the enduring debates of the Sept. 11
attacks: how the terrorists managed to train for the assaults, conduct
surveillance and accomplish their mission -- all, apparently, without
assistance in the plot from anyone in the United States. The FBI, after
an exhaustive check of possible accomplices, including Abdullah, supports
that scenario. Others, including the commission and a House-Senate inquiry
panel, have challenged the FBI's conclusion.
Abdullah said he offered his hijacker friends no assistance with the plot
and does not know anyone who did.
Abdullah, whose English is sprinkled with American colloquialisms after
six years of living in the United States, said he "was very surprised"
the commission "even brought me up."
"I was in custody for nearly three years and no one came up to me
and said, 'Hey, we think you were involved,' " he said. "This
has got me very upset. It is very unfair, and it's ruining my life."
Abdullah's San Diego attorney, Randall B. Hamud, said his client remains
a virtual captive in Yemen's capital, Sanaa, where he is under constant
surveillance by the government.
Abdullah was arrested as a material witness in late September 2001. He
spent 32 months in U.S. jails and prisons as the FBI and the Justice Department
investigated his ties to Almihdhar, Alhazmi and a network of immigrant
friends, all of whom congregated around the Rabat mosque in a suburb of
San Diego.
Commission investigators complained that they were never able to interview
Abdullah before he was deported. Abdullah refused to cooperate, and the
Justice Department declined to grant him immunity from prosecution to
compel his cooperation. The panel also is critical of the government's
decision to allow Abdullah's deportation, arguing that unanswered questions
about his case require further examination.
Abdullah's first alleged contact with Alhazmi and Almihdhar came in February
2000. According to the commission, he may have driven them from Los Angeles
to San Diego. Abdullah denies it. The two would-be hijackers sought out
another person they had met recently in Los Angeles, Omar Bayoumi, at
the Islamic Center of San Diego.
The hijackers later found their way to the Rabat mosque, a humble building
nestled amid palm trees and ranch homes in La Mesa, 10 miles from the
well-established and, by reputation, more moderate Islamic Center of San
Diego. On a recent Friday, as families crowded the Islamic Center, the
Rabat mosque appeared almost abandoned, its gates locked and mailbox overflowing.
(A radical Yemeni imam at the Rabat mosque in 2000, Anwar Aulaqi, would
later lead the Dar al Hijra mosque in Falls Church, which Alhazmi attended.)
Until the commission report, Bayoumi had been the primary focus of speculation
about potential Sept. 11 accomplices in San Diego and was identified as
an alleged al Qaeda associate and Saudi spy by a congressional inquiry
in 2003. The Sept. 11 commission, by contrast, found "no credible
evidence that he believed in violent extremism" and concluded that
Bayoumi was an "unlikely candidate" to be involved in an al
Qaeda plot.
Abdullah, the report strongly suggests, is a more likely accomplice.
According to the commission report, which cites FBI interviews and other
investigative material, Abdullah admitted that he knew Alhazmi and Almihdhar
were extremists and that Almihdhar had been involved with the Islamic
Army of Aden, a group linked to al Qaeda. The report also says Abdullah
"clearly was sympathetic to those extremist views."
When he was detained as a material witness after the 2001 attacks, the
commission says, FBI agents found a notebook in his possession that had
been written by someone else but described "planes falling from the
sky, mass killing and hijacking." The report also says Abdullah showed
hatred toward the U.S. government and made the statement about the attacks
being brought upon the United States.
In the interview, Abdullah strenuously disputed those characterizations.
He said that he had no idea Alhazmi and Almihdhar "had associations
with any group or had evil plans towards the United States," and
that he is "committed to my religion but not to the point of extremism
at all."
The commission is particularly alarmed by reports earlier this year from
two inmates housed with Abdullah in the California prison system, who
alleged that Abdullah told them in the fall of 2003 "that he had
known" Alhazmi and Almihdhar "were planning a terrorist attack."
The two inmates' stories are not consistent, however.
In one version, Abdullah bragged that he had been told that the two hijackers
were part of an attack before they arrived in the United States. In the
other, Abdullah allegedly said that he was told of the plot after Alhazmi
and Almihdhar arrived in San Diego and that the hijackers "invited
him to join them on the plane." The second inmate also said that
Abdullah claimed to have found out about the attacks three weeks in advance.
The panel noted evidence that Alhazmi, who had left San Diego, may have
called Abdullah about that time; that Abdullah stopped making calls from
his cell phone after Aug. 25, 2001; and that friends reported "he
started acting strangely." The report also recounts an unconfirmed
witness account that Abdullah and others "behaved suspiciously"
on Sept. 10, 2001, at a Texaco station where they worked, giving each
other "high-fives" after one said, "It is finally going
to happen."
One senior commission official called the findings "troubling"
and said Abdullah's case "deserves a much deeper investigation."
The Justice Department and the FBI take a different view, arguing that
Abdullah's case has been exhaustively investigated and that the claims
of the two jailhouse informants, in particular, do not check out.
"The investigation to date has determined that there is no evidence
to corroborate information that Mohdar Abdullah had prior knowledge of
the 9/11 attacks," the FBI said in a statement. "The FBI continues
an active investigation of Mohdar Abdullah and any connection to the 9/11
attacks."
One senior FBI official said there are numerous inconsistencies in the
inmates' claims and that investigators are not even certain both prisoners
had close contact with Abdullah. The FBI's Sept. 11 investigative team
did not oppose allowing Abdullah to return to Yemen, the official said.
"There's nobody who feels we've lost someone here," the official
said.
Abdullah made no claims about prior knowledge of the attacks, he and his
attorney said. They contend that the two inmates are attempting to use
Abdullah's notoriety as a "Sept. 11 detainee" to their advantage.
"It's scurrilous for the committee to include in its report the spurious
fantasies of jailhouse snitches trying to cut themselves a better deal
with prosecutors," Abdullah lawyer Hamud said. If federal officials
had any evidence linking Abdullah to the Sept. 11 plot, Hamud said, "you
can be assured they would have prosecuted him."
Abdullah said he gave Alhazmi and Almihdhar tips on how to obtain driver's
licenses and other advice because it is "an obligation" for
Muslims to help one another and because neither spoke English or knew
the country well. As far as his behavior in August 2001, Abdullah said
he does not remember acting strangely, "but I was under a lot of
stress because of monetary issues and stuff like that." He denied
taking part in any celebration at the gas station.
Abdullah had just transferred from Grossmont College in El Cajon, where
he studied business administration, to San Diego State University, where
he had planned to study information systems when he was arrested. Now
he is living with his parents and attempting to find a job.
Abdullah said he was brought back to Sanaa under armed guard and held
in a Yemeni jail for about a month after his deportation.
"I still can't understand how this all happened to me," Abdullah
said. "I had a life that was well established, and somehow they ruined
it."
Staff writer Rene Sanchez in San Diego contributed to this report.
The Washington Post
|