Updates on the Vreeland
Case Mike Vreeland Attacked in Canadian Jail
U.S. AND CANADIAN
GOVERNMENT S POSITION CRUMBLING IN THE CASE OF A US INTELLIGENCE
OFFICER WITH FOREKNOWLEDGE OF 9/11 ATTACKS
Greta Knutzen, FTW Staff
[© Copyright 2002, From The Wilderness
Publications, All Rights Reserved. May be copied, or redistributed
for non-profit purposes only. May not be posted on any Internet
web site without express written permission.]
TORONTO, Feb. 29, 2002 -- A man who
claims to be a US intelligence officer accurately predicted
the Sept. 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon,
recently unsealed court documents show.
Delmert Edward Mike Vreeland is currently incarcerated in
a Toronto prison. His claims, however, are corroborated
by evidence that has surfaced during his ongoing court battle
in Canada. Court hearings in late-Feb. have only deepened
the mystery and added to the list of questions, calling
into question the integrity of the US government.
Vreeland has been subject to physical attacks while behind
bars, indicating that the certain death he fears if he is
returned to the US, might become a reality behind the jailhouse
walls in Toronto.
As America wages an increasingly expensive and complex war
against terrorism, Vreeland sits in a Canadian jail with
a story to tell. It is a story about the murder of a Canadian
Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (Foreign
Affairs) worker, and about foreknowledge of the horrific
terrorist attacks on Sept. 11. One would assume it is a
story deserving of the Canadian and US governments attention.
Yet, despite Vreeland s repeated attempts to inform them,
both the American and Canadian governments have oddly and
inexplicably refused to listen. Their argument goes something
like this: Vreeland is not perceived to be trustworthy or
credible. Therefore, nothing he says can be deemed trustworthy
or credible. But, they have never seen fit to ask how he
knew of the attacks in the first place.
Vreeland s story does indeed resemble something that John
Grisham might produce in the throes of a caffeine-induced
frenzy. However, Vreeland s story begins to look less like
the stuff of unadulterated fiction when one takes into account
actions of US and Canadian authorities that seem equally
It is becoming increasingly evident, as the case against
him unfolds, that the documentation pertaining to Vreeland,
supplied by the US Navy and Canadian law enforcement officials,
is itself so contradictory and incomplete as to, frankly,
defy logic. As such, the validity of the charges against
Vreeland and the position adopted by US and Canadian authorities
raise more questions than they answer.
Vreeland, an American citizen who has been in jail since
Dec. 6, claims he is a US Naval lieutenant who has worked
for Naval intelligence since 1986.
The US is seeking to extradite Vreeland on a Michigan warrant.
Crown Solicitors, Canadian government lawyers in Toronto,
are representing the US government in this case and have
dismissed Vreeland s claims of affiliation with US intelligence
as nonsense, on the grounds that he lacks credibility.
Justice Archie Campbell of the Superior Court of Justice,
who briefly presided over the case, is in agreement with
the Crown s assessment and has described Vreeland as nothing
more than a petty fraudsman with a vivid imagination.
Ostensibly, Vreeland s story begins in the fall of 2000.
In a sworn affidavit filed in court documents on Oct. 16,
Vreeland claims that he was sent on assignment to Russia
where he was in contact with Marc Bastien, a computer systems
specialist working for Foreign Affairs at Canada s embassy
Vreeland acquired information vital to the national security
of the US and Canada. Vreeland alleges he left Russia with
the documents, and arrived in Canada on Dec. 2, 2000. According
to his affidavit, he expected to meet Bastien two days later
in Toronto to hand over the documents to a third party.
Bastien did not show up, however, so Vreeland hung onto
the documents. Vreeland asserts that he proceeded to upload
the documents onto a secure website, the location of which
is unknown to anyone to the present day, including his attorneys,
Paul Slansky and Rocco Galati.
Vreeland claims that Bastien had given him two telephone
numbers at CSIS, the Canadian intelligence service, to contact
in the event that anything went wrong. He was subsequently
arrested in Toronto on Dec. 6, 2000, on alleged fraud charges.
At the time of his arrest Vreeland claims that he attempted
to contact CSIS, per Bastien s instructions, but he was
Upon his arrest, Vreeland was placed in solitary confinement.
The reason for this treatment was the difficulty Toronto
police had in confirming his identity. FBI fingerprint records,
requested by the Toronto police, were negative, indicating
that Vreeland had no criminal record.
After he was removed from solitary confinement on Jan. 15,
2001, he learned that six days after his arrest, on Dec.
12, 2000, Bastien was found dead. The official explanation
was that he died of natural causes. Vreeland stated in his
affidavit that he believed Bastien was in fact murdered,
a statement which later proved correct.
In May, the US government issued a formal request
for the extradition of Vreeland on charges of credit card
fraud. It was at this point that he hired Slansky, and later,
Galati, to fight the extradition. Vreeland s first objection
was that the credit card in question was his own. In addition,
his criminal record shows that he was detained in New York
at the time the alleged offence was committed in Michigan.
Both Vreeland and his lawyers believe that the US government
is pursuing extradition on minor and dubious credit card
charges, when in fact the government intends to prosecute
him for treason, a capital offence, in relation to the documents
he retrieved from Russia.
In June, Vreeland informed his counsel that he had information
vital to US and Canadian national security. He did not then,
nor has he since, divulged the substance of this information
to his counsel.
Between June and Sept., Vreeland s counsel made repeated
and exhaustive requests to US and Canadian intelligence
offices that they speak to their client. Their requests
were ignored, except for one meeting with the Royal Canadian
Mounted Police (RCMP) on Aug. 8. The RCMP contacted the
US Navy and was told that Vreeland had been unsatisfactorily
discharged in 1986 after four months of basic training.
The position of the Navy was contradicted by an attachˇ
at the US embassy in Ottawa, who spoke with the RCMP and
confirmed that Vreeland was a lieutenant in the US Navy.
The Navy refused to cooperate with the RCMP, and the attachˇ
s statement has since been retracted. Because of this, the
RCMP did not follow up on the meeting, and Vreeland was
dismissed as a crank.
On Oct. 5, Vreeland s counsel wrote to the Canadian government
s intelligence and law enforcement agencies. The letter
has been filed in court documents. The attorneys confirmed
their head-bashing attempts at convincing the RCMP to deal
with their client in a serious manner, reiterating, all
that was being sought was an opportunity to place him in
protective custody for 4-5 days so that you can satisfy
yourselves as to the veracity of his national security information.
It would seem, particularly in the wake of Sept. 11, that
this was not an outlandish request. Were Vreeland to be
formally debriefed he would be subjected to polygraph and
psychological tests. If he is simply a nut-case with a vivid
imagination and a penchant for forging government documents,
then this would surely become evident fairly quickly and
he would be sent back to his jail cell.
In August, Vreeland wrote down information from the documents
he acquired in Moscow. The information was fed to him in
jail by telephone from a contact he had on the outside who
had access to the secure website.
He wrote down a list of potential targets of violent attacks
that included the Pentagon, the World Trade Center and the
Parliament buildings in Ottawa. Also included in the note
were names, including that of bin Laden. The note contained
the rather ominous phrase, let one happen, stop the rest.
An exact copy of that note, obtained from court records,
is online at http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/
Vreeland requested that his guards seal the note and register
it in his personal effects, which they did. The fact that
the note was written and sealed a month prior to the violent
attacks of Sept. 11 has not been disputed. Another name
on the note was Dr. Haider followed by the question, Whats
his contacts. [sic]
It may well be a coincidence, but, a man called Abu Doha,
using the alias Dr. Haider, was arrested in London in early-2001.
The sworn affidavit of an FBI special agent dated July 2
indicates that Doha was suspected of conspiring to bomb
various US targets, including airports. Doha was allegedly
a leader of an Algerian terrorist cell operating from Afghanistan,
associated with Osama bin Laden s terrorist network, al
Qaeda. Coincidence or not, it certainly begs the question
of how a jailed man with limited access to computers could
know such an obscure detail.
Meanwhile, the efforts on the part of Vreeland s counsel
to defend his credibility resulted in the retrireview of
his Navy personnel record. On Sept. 7, Commander Nieusma,
naval liaison to the US Congress in Washington, D.C. forwarded
Vreeland s attorneys 56 of 1261 pages of Vreeland s Navy
personnel record. Commander Nieusma s assistant, Tim Decent,
later provided Vreeland s extensive Navy medical records.
These documents are available in court records.
So this begs the questions, how can a man, with only four
months of basic navy training, manage to accumulate a 1261-page
personnel record and extensive medical records? Why are
over a thousand pages are missing? Why do the pages that
do exist display clear omissions and evidence of tampering?
So far, plausible answers to these questions have not been
addressed by the Crown, or anyone else for that matter.
On Sept. 11, the US was subjected to violent attacks of
an unprecedented scale. Three days after the attacks, on
Sept. 14, Vreeland instructed his guards to retrieve the
sealed note and open it. They did and promptly contacted
Vreeland s attorneys, who were unaware of the note. One
would reasonably assume, indeed expect, that the events
of Sept. 11 would compel US and Canadian authorities to
talk to Vreeland, but they continue, to this day, to ignore
him, with only a few very tentative exceptions.
Parliamentary Secretary, Lynn Meyers, granted Galati a meeting,
the first of three, in Ottawa on September 20. They met
again on Oct. 10 at Mr. Meyers office in Waterloo in the
presence of Slansky and another unidentified individual.
During this meeting Meyers confirmed that Bastien, Vreeland
s alleged contact in Moscow, had indeed been murdered. Vreeland
was thus vindicated on this point. The coroner s report,
which suggests Bastien was poisoned, was only made public
three months later, on January 21.
On Oct. 15, Galati traveled again to Ottawa to meet Meyers,
this time under the impression he would also meet the Solicitor
General Lawrence MacAulay to voice his concerns about Vreeland
s information. The Department of the Solicitor General oversees
Canadian law enforcement and intelligence communities. But,
when Meyers and Galati met MacAulay, he refused to grant
them even fifteen minutes of his time.
The next day, Vreeland s exasperated counsel filed his sworn
affidavit into public record. On Oct. 22, in an effort to
seek clarity regarding Vreeland s identity and the charges
against him, his counsel filed a disclosure motion. This
motion amounts to a request that the US government be compelled
to produce official records pertaining to Vreeland, specifically
his criminal record and Navy personnel record.
This would seem to be a logical and reasonable request as
not much about any government or law enforcement document
pertaining to Vreeland makes very much sense at all. On
the one hand, the Detroit News reported on April 27, 2000
that Vreeland was sought by authorities concerning a string
of ID theft and fraud charges. But on the other hand, Vreeland
s criminal record is inconsistent and contradictory, as
is his Navy personnel record.
Instead of being a reason to disbelieve Vreeland, the criminal
records alleging fraud are entirely consistent with covert
intelligence operations. Vreeland was allegedly allowed
a per diem of $19,000, and his credit cards would likely
have been underwritten by the US Navy or the CIA. As documented
by the history of the Iran-Contra scandal, any number of
intelligence operatives who had discretionary control of
large sums of money, were routinely controlled by this method.
Among the Iran-Contra era figures who fit a similar pattern
were Al Martin, Steve Carr, Scott Barnes, Scott Weekly,
Jack Terrell, Lt. Col James Bo Gritz, and many more. It
is also significant that Vreeland had apparently never served
much time for the prior charges, suggesting that his claims
of intelligence connections enabled him to be released from
Yet, on Oct. 25 Justice Campbell of the Superior Court of
Justice denied the request of Vreeland s counsel to compel
production of records. Campbell s decision was based on
his belief that the evidentiary record, which is largely
supported by conflicting documentation supplied by US and
Canadian authorities paints Vreeland as a petty fraud with
a vivid imagination.
Galati s response was if Vreeland is the petty criminal
they claim he is, his criminal record should take five minutes
to produce. It would also settle the argument as to Vreeland
s whereabouts at the time the alleged credit card fraud
took place in Michigan. At present, records show him to
be in two places at once, something surely even Vreeland
is not capable of.
Two attachˇs from the US consulate met on Oct. 24 with Vreeland
s counsel at the Barristers Lounge on University Avenue
in Toronto. Galati stated that the Justice Department, representing
the US government, refused to host the meeting on the grounds
that the department did not want to get involved. Neither
the attachˇs nor Vreeland s counsel wanted to meet at either
of their respective offices. During this meeting, Vreeland
s attorneys informed the attachˇs that their client claimed
to have information regarding threats to President Bush
s daughters, Jenna and Barbara, and Prime Minister Blair
s eldest son, Euan. According to Vreeland, the threats were
posed by two terrorist cells -- one based in Montreal and
the other in Europe.
The next day, Oct. 25, Slansky was telephoned and informed
that a US Secret Service agent was on his way from Buffalo
to meet with Vreeland and his lawyers. The agent and Vreeland
spoke alone for 30 minutes. It is interesting that on the
day Vreeland was described as a petty conman by Justice
Campbell, a Secret Service agent took time out of his busy
schedule to interview this conman about threats to the children
of the leaders of the free world.
Several days later, on Oct. 29, the US counselor officer,
David Abell and his assistant Ms. Kasey Flemming, met Vreeland
in the presence of his counsel. Abell is the head of American
Citizen Services at the US consulate in Toronto. The subject
of this meeting was confidential, and no other meeting has
taken place since.
On Jan. 10 Vreeland s counsel took a very big risk. Slansky
telephoned the Pentagon in open court. Slansky first called
directory assistance in Washington. D.C., and was provided
with the main number for the Pentagon. The Pentagon operator
confirmed Lt. D. Vreeland s rank, room and telephone number.
The Canadian lawyers called into question the reliability
of the telephonic demonstration. They argued that Vreeland,
who, as they claim, had no particular education or training,
was able to arrange from jail to manipulate the Pentagon
s computer and simply insert his information by telephone
Galati said two days after this display in court, a clerk
at the Canadian Justice Department was informed that an
NCIS investigator had gone on record to say that US authorities
were at a loss to explain how Vreeland had manipulated the
system. Hacking into or manipulating the Pentagon s computer
system is a federal offence.
The telephone call to the Pentagon revealed one of two possibilities
-- either Vreeland manipulated the computer system, or he
is who he says he is, and it is the government who is manipulating
the system. The presiding judge, Justice MacDonald, formed
the opinion that it is more probable that Vreeland managed
to manipulate the system. He found Vreeland to be an imaginative
and manipulative person who has little regard for the truth.
Although MacDonald acknowledged that the computerized records
provided by US law enforcement officials regarding Vreeland
s criminal convictions are terse, incomplete and confusing,
he rejected the request made by Vreeland s counsel that
their client s asylum claim be permitted to proceed on constitutional
In other words, MacDonald s decision was based on a subjective
assessment of degrees of probability, rather than proven
fact. Galati, who intends to appeal the decision, said that
Macdonald s judgment suspends reality and brings judicial
proceedings into the realm of Alice in Wonderland.
The latest round of court appearances, presided over by
Justice Laforme, began on Feb. 18. Slansky argued that as
the Canadian government s position attacks the credibility
of his client, then it is only fair that he be given the
opportunity to defend his client s credibility.
As Vreeland s counsel has been denied access to their client
s certified criminal record and the missing pages from his
Navy personnel record, they have opted for the next best
thing -- witnesses. Slansky requested that he be permitted
to summon witnesses during the extradition hearing that
could corroborate Vreeland s story. Among the witnesses
they seek to question are individuals familiar with Pentagon
computer security and personnel records, as well as Commander
Nieusma, who forwarded Vreeland s inconsistent Navy personnel
record. The judge s decision on this matter is still pending.
In an unsettling turn of events, Slansky alerted Justice
Laforme that Vreeland was allegedly physically assaulted
and threatened by a prison guard on the evening of Feb.
18, and again the following morning. Vreeland has pressed
charges, and Laforme ordered that the guard in question
was to have no contact with Vreeland pending an investigation
into the allegations.
Vreeland has a history serving as an informant against organized
crime interests in Michigan. This history may offer a possible
explanation for the recent assaults. In future stories FTW
will explore Vreeland s relationship with organized crime
and the long history of the relationship between organized
crime and the CIA.
Whatever the precise nature of Vreeland s identity and criminal
history is, it should be largely irrelevant if he has information
that could help the government with its investigation of
the Sept. 11 attacks. The FBI does not subject informants
or individuals who call with tips to stringent evaluation.
In many cases they do not even require an informant s name.
So why is the personal credibility of a man who has been
right about the murder of a Foreign Affairs worker, and
who had foreknowledge of the September 11 attacks an issue?
Mike Vreeland s story raises the question of why the US
and Canada insist on ignoring such an obvious investigative
lead. If no stone is to be left unturned, why is Vreeland
s Rock of Gibraltar being left alone?