Inside the Saudi 9/11 coverup

 

From: Marjorie

From: Daniel

Those who've studied 9/11 most deeply understand that, whoever else might have been involved, the named "hijackers" were principally Saudis. Whether they were patsies for the actual engineers of 9/11 is a separate issue, but one that could conceivably be opened up to public scrutiny by this groundbreaking article in the NY Post.

=d=



From: Michael

Knowledgeable sources report that shortly after Edward Snowden released top secret documents confirming the massive surveillance of heads of state in the EU, European intelligence agencies dumped a massive amount of their 9/11 files into the public domain via selected release to independent media in Europe.  
Today, the New York Post, (owned by arch-conservative Australian billionaire, Rupert Murdoch) published an editorial revealing a shift in their editorial policy away from their hitherto unflinching support for the official version of the 9/11 Commission's story.  The appearance of this article in the most popular tabloid in New York is being interpreted by astute observers as a sea change in public attitudes to the tragedy of 9/11.

Inside the Saudi 9/11 coverup

December 15, 2013 | 5:13am

After the 9/11 attacks, the public was told al Qaeda acted alone, with no state sponsors.
But the White House never let it see an entire section of Congress’ investigative report on 9/11 dealing with “specific sources of foreign support” for the 19 hijackers, 15 of whom were Saudi nationals.
It was kept secret and remains so today.
President Bush inexplicably censored 28 full pages of the 800-page report. Text isn’t just blacked-out here and there in this critical-yet-missing middle section. The pages are completely blank, except for dotted lines where an estimated 7,200 words once stood (this story by comparison is about 1,000 words).
A pair of lawmakers who recently read the redacted portion say they are “absolutely shocked” at the level of foreign state involvement in the attacks.
Reps. Walter Jones (R-NC) and Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) can’t reveal the nation identified by it without violating federal law. So they’ve proposed Congress pass a resolution asking President Obama to declassify the entire 2002 report, “Joint Inquiry Into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001.”
Some information already has leaked from the classified section, which is based on both CIA and FBI documents, and it points back to Saudi Arabia, a presumed ally.
The Saudis deny any role in 9/11, but the CIA in one memo reportedly found “incontrovertible evidence” that Saudi government officials — not just wealthy Saudi hardliners, but high-level diplomats and intelligence officers employed by the kingdom — helped the hijackers both financially and logistically. The intelligence files cited in the report directly implicate the Saudi embassy in Washington and consulate in Los Angeles in the attacks, making 9/11 not just an act of terrorism, but an act of war.
The findings, if confirmed, would back up open-source reporting showing the hijackers had, at a minimum, ties to several Saudi officials and agents while they were preparing for their attacks inside the United States. In fact, they got help from Saudi VIPs from coast to coast:
LOS ANGELES: Saudi consulate official Fahad al-Thumairy allegedly arranged for an advance team to receive two of the Saudi hijackers — Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi — as they arrived at LAX in 2000. One of the advance men, Omar al-Bayoumi, a suspected Saudi intelligence agent, left the LA consulate and met the hijackers at a local restaurant. (Bayoumi left the United States two months before the attacks, while Thumairy was deported back to Saudi Arabia after 9/11.)
SAN DIEGO: Bayoumi and another suspected Saudi agent, Osama Bassnan, set up essentially a forward operating base in San Diego for the hijackers after leaving LA. They were provided rooms, rent and phones, as well as private meetings with an American al Qaeda cleric who would later become notorious, Anwar al-Awlaki, at a Saudi-funded mosque he ran in a nearby suburb. They were also feted at a welcoming party. (Bassnan also fled the United States just before the attacks.)
WASHINGTON: Then-Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar and his wife sent checks totaling some $130,000 to Bassnan while he was handling the hijackers. Though the Bandars claim the checks were “welfare” for Bassnan’s supposedly ill wife, the money nonetheless made its way into the hijackers’ hands.
Other al Qaeda funding was traced back to Bandar and his embassy — so much so that by 2004 Riggs Bank of Washington had dropped the Saudis as a client.
The next year, as a number of embassy employees popped up in terror probes, Riyadh recalled Bandar.
“Our investigations contributed to the ambassador’s departure,” an investigator who worked with the Joint Terrorism Task Force in Washington told me, though Bandar says he left for “personal reasons.”
FALLS CHURCH, VA.: In 2001, Awlaki and the San Diego hijackers turned up together again — this time at the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center, a Pentagon-area mosque built with funds from the Saudi Embassy. Awlaki was recruited 3,000 miles away to head the mosque. As its imam, Awlaki helped the hijackers, who showed up at his doorstep as if on cue. He tasked a handler to help them acquire apartments and IDs before they attacked the Pentagon.
Awlaki worked closely with the Saudi Embassy. He lectured at a Saudi Islamic think tank in Merrifield, Va., chaired by Bandar. Saudi travel itinerary documents I’ve obtained show he also served as the ­official imam on Saudi Embassy-sponsored trips to Mecca and tours of Saudi holy sites.
Most suspiciously, though, Awlaki fled the United States on a Saudi jet about a year after 9/11.
As I first reported in my book, “Infiltration,” quoting from classified US documents, the Saudi-sponsored cleric was briefly detained at JFK before being released into the custody of a “Saudi representative.” A federal warrant for Awlaki’s arrest had mysteriously been withdrawn the previous day. A US drone killed Awlaki in Yemen in 2011.
HERNDON, VA.: On the eve of the attacks, top Saudi government official Saleh Hussayen checked into the same Marriott Residence Inn near Dulles Airport as three of the Saudi hijackers who targeted the Pentagon. Hussayen had left a nearby hotel to move into the hijackers’ hotel. Did he meet with them? The FBI never found out. They let him go after he “feigned a seizure,” one agent recalled. (Hussayen’s name doesn’t appear in the separate 9/11 Commission Report, which clears the Saudis.)
SARASOTA, FLA.: 9/11 ringleader Mohamed Atta and other hijackers visited a home owned by Esam Ghazzawi, a Saudi adviser to the nephew of King Fahd. FBI agents investigating the connection in 2002 found that visitor logs for the gated community and photos of license tags matched vehicles driven by the hijackers. Just two weeks before the 9/11 attacks, the Saudi luxury home was abandoned. Three cars, including a new Chrysler PT Cruiser, were left in the driveway. Inside, opulent furniture was untouched.
Democrat Bob Graham, the former Florida senator who chaired the Joint Inquiry, has asked the FBI for the Sarasota case files, but can’t get a single, even heavily redacted, page released. He says it’s a “coverup.”
Is the federal government protecting the Saudis? Case agents tell me they were repeatedly called off pursuing 9/11 leads back to the Saudi Embassy, which had curious sway over White House and FBI responses to the attacks.
Just days after Bush met with the Saudi ambassador in the White House, the FBI evacuated from the United States dozens of Saudi officials, as well as Osama bin Laden family members. Bandar made the request for escorts directly to FBI headquarters on Sept. 13, 2001 — just hours after he met with the president. The two old family friends shared cigars on the Truman Balcony while discussing the attacks.
Bill Doyle, who lost his son in the World Trade Center attacks and heads the Coalition of 9/11 Families, calls the suppression of Saudi evidence a “coverup beyond belief.” Last week, he sent out an e-mail to relatives urging them to phone their representatives in Congress to support the resolution and read for themselves the censored 28 pages.
Astonishing as that sounds, few lawmakers in fact have bothered to read the classified section of arguably the most important investigation in US history.
Granted, it’s not easy to do. It took a monthlong letter-writing campaign by Jones and Lynch to convince the House intelligence panel to give them access to the material.
But it’s critical they take the time to read it and pressure the White House to let all Americans read it. This isn’t water under the bridge. The information is still relevant ­today. Pursuing leads further, getting to the bottom of the foreign support, could help head off another 9/11.
As the frustrated Joint Inquiry authors warned, in an overlooked addendum to their heavily redacted 2002 report, “State-sponsored terrorism substantially increases the likelihood of successful and more ­lethal attacks within the United States.”
Their findings must be released, even if they forever change US-Saudi relations. If an oil-rich foreign power was capable of orchestrating simultaneous bulls-eye hits on our centers of commerce and defense a dozen years ago, it may be able to pull off similarly devastating attacks today.
Members of Congress reluctant to read the full report ought to remember that the 9/11 assault missed its fourth target: them.
Paul Sperry is a Hoover Institution media fellow and author of “Infiltration” and “Muslim Mafia.”

http://nypost.com/2013/12/15/inside-the-saudi-911-coverup/

 

Wendy's picture

In a Bilderburg meeting probably back in 1975....."Darn those pesky Muslims that forbid the collection of interest when lending $$! They are against everything we beleive in - the ruthless persuit of money and power! They are competing with us in the oil and illegal drug trade! We need to do something about them."

Noa's picture

I've never heard these things before and it sounds too incredible to be true.  I was sure it was one of those email rumors, but sure as heck, the NY post reported it...

http://nypost.com/2013/12/15/inside-the-saudi-911-coverup/

Wendy's picture

Thanks Bob,

That's kind of what I wanted to say but it just came out with the focus on the Muslim religion. There was also Pakastan and Turkey involvement too. For years I went around saying "9/11 was an inside job" with my truther friends. After a while the consensus shifted to "9/11 was an inside outside job".

Even right after 9/11, I get the sense that a lot of New Yorkers were mad about Bin Laddin's family being allowed to fly out of the country when still airline travel was shut down for everyone else. I get the sense that the NY Post is playing off that angle.

Anyone who wants to fact check, Paul Thompson's complete 9/11 timeline is still available on-line with a handy search tool. I read it straight through in about 2003 - it reads like a spy novel but plan on loosing a few weeks to reading the whole thing. I imagine by now it's only gotten much bigger than it was back then.

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

 

ChrisBowers's picture

In this article, and the other more recent one about 911, there is much to be said about the hijackers and the alleged funding for their operation.  This, in my opinion, is the tried and true art of misdirection.  To study the tactics involved in this ongoing geopolitical chess game may help to better understand what really happened on September 11th, 2001.

As many of us already know, the Operation Northwoods document concerning brainstorming ideas for possible false flag operations in Cuba during the Bay of Pigs and Cuban Missile Crisis era is a good way to see how these geopolitical planners think.

I don't know what really happened to all those hijackers and passengers, but I strongly suspect that the planes that hit the two towers were empty airliners being directed efficiently and accurately by GPS technology.  This way there is no need to worry about human error messing up the false flag operation. 

And I am absolutely certain that no airliner hit the Pentagon.  The evidence on the ground that day makes this clear.  One small entry hole with windows left and right left intact (windows that would have most definitely been broken by the wings of "the official story" airliner).

And the 800 lb Gorilla in the room, steel structures do not fall down at near free fall speed in a global collapse, straight down in their footprint without some very thoughtful and very impressive engineering skills and planning.  You could fly airliners over and over again into those towers and you would still have a fairly large portion of their inner 47 steel column core sticking out of the ground.

And then there is building 7 (who needs to say anything more about building 7 - so blatantly "in your face" obvious).  The hijacker story is the least of the whole story.  It's like talking only about the kicker in a football game to describe the game.  The most pitiful and pathetic part of all of this is the utter lack of critical thinking en mass, especially in the US.

911 was just a current update beta test (among other things) in this ongoing social engineering project.  At this point, my most realistic hope for this planet and Humanity is that there will always be a remnant that survives and evolves, regardless of all the insanity and destruction.  And that the Planet herself has it within her to outlast the insanity and destruction of an out of control species/virus....

Bob07's picture

...comes up as I read this.  The source (Rupert Murdock) is a red flag in itself.  Why would we suddenly trust a chief Elite mouthpiece?  Not that Saudi Involvement is out of the question -- it's even likely -- but far more significant involvements would be Israel, international banking, and elements of our own government.  Is this meant to keep public attention around 9/11 on someone else who maybe is less in favor than they used to be?  I read somewhere that, as the US dollar weakens more and more as the international currency,  Saudi Arabia is beginning to look to options other than the dollar as payment for their oil.  I wish I could remember the source of that, but the sense is that the Saudis aren't as loved in the US halls of power as they used to be.  Could this release of new information be a kind of punishment?

In any case, why this focus on the 19 hijackers who couldn't possibly have done the job?  Smells of red herring to me.

Noa's picture

Thanks for that powerful, insightful observation, Chris.

And welcome back.  You've been missed.

The Gathering Spot is a PEERS empowerment website
"Dedicated to the greatest good of all who share our beautiful world"