Truth; it depends who is telling it.
December 12, 2013 3:37 PM   Subscribe

Congressmen Call For Declassification Of 9/11 Files Discussing Hijacker Links To Saudi Government.
Last week, Reps. Walter B. Jones, R-N.C., and Stephen Lynch, D-Mass introduced a resolution that urges President Obama to declassify the 28 redacted pages of the Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry (JICI) of 9/11 issued in late 2002, which have been thought to hold some answers about the Saudi connection to the attack and were originally classified by President George W. Bush.
Official declassified documents about the September 11 attacks. (Previous 1; 2 ).
posted by adamvasco (42 comments total) 11 users marked this as a favorite
 
huh? I thought all of the hijackers were Saudis.
posted by Ironmouth at 3:41 PM on December 12, 2013 [3 favorites]


The question is whether they were funded by the Saudi government. Finding out that the destruction of the World Trade Center was paid for by a foreign government changes a few things, I'd think.
posted by mhoye at 3:43 PM on December 12, 2013 [6 favorites]


Considering OBL's wealth, why would it have even been necessary for the Saudi government to fund 9/11?
posted by Sticherbeast at 3:55 PM on December 12, 2013


"Government" in the KSA is a bit more of a fluid concept than it is in the USA, however.
posted by planetesimal at 3:56 PM on December 12, 2013 [3 favorites]


Yeah, I'm not seeing that either. It's not like 9/11 was a particularly expensive operation, I'd think. A few hundred thousand dollars, maybe a million, and you're all set.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 3:57 PM on December 12, 2013 [2 favorites]


Isn't the Saudi government the source of OBL wealth though? Did his family stop supporting him after his earlier attacks? Anything non-violent that sours Saudi relations with the U.S. probably makes the world a better place.
posted by jeffburdges at 4:02 PM on December 12, 2013


Yeah, I was going to mention, my understanding is OBL's wealth was the Bin Laden's wealth (until he reportedly got "cut off" not long after taking credit for 9/11), in which case, yes, it's kind of academic because the Bin Laden's and the Saud's are like BFF'S and have deeply intertwined financial relationships.
posted by saulgoodman at 4:20 PM on December 12, 2013


If the Saudi government - or even one rogue part of it - had any part in 9/11, it would be pretty had to justify the close ties between the US and Saudi Arabia, and damaging or ending those dies upsets decades of US foreign policy in the Middle East.
posted by absalom at 4:21 PM on December 12, 2013


The US is still officially allied with the jokers in Pakistan, whose government funded the Taliban's comeback after the invasion of Afghanistan. With friends like those...
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 4:24 PM on December 12, 2013


But we couldn't risk harming relations with the Saudis in 2002, we needed their air bases to launch attacks into Iraq so we could destroy Saddam's WMD and punish him for his involvement in 9/11 GAHHAHHHHHHHAHAH [sounds of head smashing against keyboard]
posted by RobotVoodooPower at 4:24 PM on December 12, 2013 [16 favorites]


If the Saudi government...

It's important to remember that Saudi Arabia is, literally, the part of Arabia which belongs to the Saudi family. The Saudis are the government, everyone else is just a subject. It is as crazy and evil as North Korea, only they control the price of oil so everyone makes nice.

As usual, the conspiracy is out in the open: the US has a deep strategic alliance with one of the most oppressive, backwards, Islamic fanatic anti-western governments on the planet.

It's on the list of things no one is allowed to say about the Middle East along with the fact that the Israelis have nuclear weapons.
posted by ennui.bz at 4:37 PM on December 12, 2013 [38 favorites]


Senator Bob Graham was well on to this in 2004 and published his book in 2008.
A recent interview with Truth-Out.
posted by adamvasco at 4:48 PM on December 12, 2013


Yeah, I was going to mention, my understanding is OBL's wealth was the Bin Laden's wealth (until he reportedly got "cut off" not long after taking credit for 9/11), in which case, yes, it's kind of academic because the Bin Laden's and the Saud's are like BFF'S and have deeply intertwined financial relationships.

Mohammed bin Awad bin Laden
Poor and uneducated, Mohammed bin Laden emigrated to Tihamah before World War I, initially working as a porter in Jeddah. In 1930, he started his own construction business and after coming to the attention of Abdul Aziz Ibn Saud, first monarch of Saudi Arabia, he eventually achieved such success that his family became known as "the wealthiest non-royal family in the kingdom."

Mohammed bin Laden's enormous financial success was ascribed to a shrewd business sense, fealty to Saudi Arabia's rulers, reliability and a willingness to offer the lowest bid on construction contracts.

As the "royal builder," Mohammed bin Laden forged close relationships with the royal family, particularly Prince Faisal of Saudi Arabia. In 1964, Prince Faisal deposed his half-brother, King Saud, and began rebuilding the kingdom after the wasteful excesses of the Saud era. Despite rising oil wealth, the kingdom was fiscally insolvent. King Faisal accepted Mohammed bin Laden's offer of financial assistance to support the national economy and as a reward, King Faisal issued a royal decree awarding all future construction projects to bin Laden's construction company. As a result, bin Laden's company eventually amassed assets in excess of US$5 billion.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:55 PM on December 12, 2013 [1 favorite]


Considering OBL's wealth, why would it have even been necessary for the Saudi government to fund 9/11?

There's an unwritten rule in Hollywood that you never put up your own money to get a picture made. It's how Kevin Costner can make Waterworld and The Postman within the span of two years and still be obscenely wealthy today.
posted by Atom Eyes at 5:06 PM on December 12, 2013 [2 favorites]


How much power does the legislative branch have to force a declassification? The Lynch-Jones resolution only "urges" the executive branch to declassify the 28 pages. Is there anything (other than political will) preventing them from introducing legislation that would force declassification?

The Senate Intelligence committee apparently has the power to unilaterally disclose classified information if it would serve the public interest. I don't know about the House.
posted by compartment at 5:14 PM on December 12, 2013


"How much power does the legislative branch have to force a declassification?"

I'm not sure what's stopping them from simply reading them into the congressional record, Mike Gravel-style.
posted by mullingitover at 5:39 PM on December 12, 2013 [2 favorites]


Considering OBL's wealth, why would it have even been necessary for the Saudi government to fund 9/11?

Brains, training, experience, logistics and organizational skills might be worth more than money. Keep in mind that one terrorist who quite literally had difficulty setting his own underpants on fire.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 5:40 PM on December 12, 2013


Shortly after the attacks, Cheney said "the American way of life is non-negotiable," dismissing any discussion of calling upon the American population taking part in the war effort by changing their consumption patterns.

As I suspected then, and as we know now, the price for holding the American way of life as non-negotiable was letting the Saudis get a free pass for their support of the 9/11 attacks.
posted by ocschwar at 5:58 PM on December 12, 2013 [4 favorites]


Yes obviously, an office within the Saudi government playing any significant role in 9/11, and maybe Bush covering it up, would be the best case scenario, absalom. Egypt's SSIS has engaged in false flag terrorist attacks against Egypt. Ain't too surprising if the Saudi's backed 9/11 too.
posted by jeffburdges at 6:00 PM on December 12, 2013




If I remember correctly, the House of Saud has hundreds of princes, and the suspicion was that some of them continued to support Al Qaeda against the wishes of the government. If so, the ruling Saudis would have wanted that information swept under the rug, and Bush was happy to oblige them. That was the theory, anyway.
posted by homunculus at 6:26 PM on December 12, 2013 [1 favorite]


"It is as crazy and evil as North Korea."
-- No one is as crazy and evil as North Korea. Yes, the KSA abuses cheap foreign labor (all the oil nations over there seem to do this) and treat women abysmally, but I'm doubting they have work-camps or starve millions.
posted by whatgorilla at 8:48 PM on December 12, 2013 [3 favorites]


The question is whether they were funded by the Saudi government. Finding out that the destruction of the World Trade Center was paid for by a foreign government changes a few things, I'd think.

Everyone in Saudi Arabia is funded by the government. It hands out cash to Saudi citizens.
posted by Ironmouth at 8:55 PM on December 12, 2013


Mohammed bin Laden's enormous financial success was ascribed to a shrewd business sense, fealty to Saudi Arabia's rulers, reliability and a willingness to offer the lowest bid on construction contracts.

the qualifications for business success from the dawn of time, actually.
posted by Ironmouth at 8:57 PM on December 12, 2013 [2 favorites]


Having moved to Saudi Arabia in November 2001 and lived there for over a year, I've longed believed it is possible that someone in the royal family/government was stealthily supporting OBL without the rulers' knowledge. There are more organized parts of the world.
posted by ambient2 at 9:35 PM on December 12, 2013


My understanding is that lots of expatriate Saudis get government stipends because of connections or deals back home or "just because". It's quite possible that their pilot training was ultimately paid for by the government of Saudi Arabia, for instance. The Saudi government might be embarrassed if it turned out that the terrorists had been receiving funds from them, even if there were no other connection.
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:52 PM on December 12, 2013 [1 favorite]


my understanding is OBL's wealth was the Bin Laden's wealth (until he reportedly got "cut off" not long after taking credit for 9/11)

It was actually in 1994, when he was exiled from Saudi Arabia (though already in residence in Sudan) and officially repudiated by his family -- but for criticism of King Fahd, not for e.g. the WTC bombing. (Also, he denied complicity for 9/11, for what that's worth.) Still, it's a big family and who knows what he had already squirreled away -- certainly he wasn't living opulently in Abbottabad.

Personally, I doubt there will be anything that boils down to direct support from the KSA for 9/11 with foreknowledge. The fact is that the Kingdom depends on US business and Pentagon expertise to maintain its hegemony; they know which side of the bread has the butter. Still, it's a big, crazy royal family with factions and fringes and it wouldn't at all be surprising that a few of the princes were radicalized in that direction, if only out of spite or resentment against the American backbone propping up the regime.

It's kind of nuts that being fingered for funding 9/11 would make the hated Sauds heroes to much of the ressentiment-infused Muslim fundamentalist and Islamist movements. But since the family and the country survived the political apostasy of OBL it doesn't make a lot of sense that they would be that fearful of a comparative bit player/financier turning up.

One thing that might be possible is a quid pro quo protection of ongoing KSA intelligence operations against its own dissidents.

Anyway, my fundamental point is that these redactions at some level violate Realism and are therefore rather strange, so maybe there is something strange there akin to the swirl of indeterminate connections surrounding Oswald.
posted by dhartung at 10:51 PM on December 12, 2013 [3 favorites]


The Secret Saudi Flight on 9-13 Could be the Key to the Bush-Saudi-Al Qaeda Connection
I have often wondered if the whole deal wasn't to protect the reputation of the presidency; and that if pulled hard enough this thread would unravel the full depth of the Bush / Cheney corruption which spread through all levels of the government and the military industrial complex.
posted by adamvasco at 3:31 AM on December 13, 2013 [2 favorites]


Bush-Cheney administration/corruption.
posted by adamvasco at 3:35 AM on December 13, 2013


I'm still looking for answers regarding the how and why behind 911. I have a copy of "Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States" but have not read much of it and I note that the tone of the passages I read seemed to seek to pin blame on Iraq and Iran and avoid criticizing Saudi Arabia. Philip D. Zelikow, the Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, wrote his college thesis on "Creating Public Myths" and was third author of an article in the December 1998 edition of Foreign Affairs entitled "Catastrophic Terrorism: Tackling the New Danger".
I listen to Webster Tarpley to provide context as well as possible truth. I question the shipment of debris from the WTC to China as it should have been treated as evidence and also been available for analysis to determine how to build future skyscrapers better. I wonder about stories that molten steel poured out of the WTC buildings and wonder how those buildings could have gotten so hot if it was molten steel that poured out.
posted by millardsarpy at 4:52 AM on December 13, 2013


I question the shipment of debris from the WTC to China as it should have been treated as evidence and also been available for analysis to determine how to build future skyscrapers better

The analysis was done. And skyscrapers built since then have applied lessons from 9/11. The "underwear building" in Beijing survived a spectacular fire because it was designed post-9/11.
posted by ocschwar at 8:45 AM on December 13, 2013




Philly law firm seeks to reinstate Saudi Arabia as a 9/11 defendant

Wow. That's not even some fly-by-night ambulance chasing firm. Cozen O'Connor are one of the biggest, most successful law firms in the country and they have a lot of political weight to throw around.
posted by snottydick at 9:33 AM on December 13, 2013 [1 favorite]


Pretty sure that "secret flight" was debunked:

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/flights.asp
posted by Ironmouth at 10:52 PM on December 13, 2013




The St. Petersburg Times begs to differ.

Who are you going to believe? A dinosaur from the old media guard staffed by award-winning investigative journalists or a blog run by a couple of accomplished folklorists who love their cats? I don't think Snopes has quite as much on the line as the St. Pete times, personally. Snopes is good, but it's not an authority.
posted by saulgoodman at 2:31 PM on December 16, 2013


And that's the dilema really isn't it.
Snopes is the new go to true or false; but in spite of the majority thought process it is not infallable especially when it quotes the official government line which is more than risable here.
St. Petersburg Times isn't exactly a national or international newspaper, good as it's journalists are.
Mainsteam as usual ignores or is told to ignore something that could be a game changer by the simple fact of a government body stating ''nothing to see here move along''.
What is it that causes Congressmen to state
"What was so surprising was that those whom we thought we could trust really disappointed me. I cannot go into it any more than that. I had to sign an oath that what I read had to remain confidential. But the information I read disappointed me greatly."
I think the discussion about OBL above is a derail.
The suspicion is that the Saudis were financing suspected terrorists who lived in San Diego and that the US government authorities not only knew about this but condoned it thus ignoring the welfare of their own citizens possibly because of the huge contracts that were being awarded to the US arms industry to the benefit of Industry and Politicians alike - the Military Industrial complex; which hasn't ceased growing.
posted by adamvasco at 4:52 PM on December 16, 2013 [1 favorite]


Inside the Saudi 9/11 coverup
posted by jeffburdges at 5:16 AM on December 18, 2013




See also Judical Watch.
posted by adamvasco at 9:09 AM on December 18, 2013 [1 favorite]


An interesting conversation was sparked by the Iranian propaganda piece ‘Mossad, Bush planned, executed 9/11’ aimed at 9/11 truthers.

We know the CIA, NSA, etc. would ignore or create terrorists, or carry out false flag operations themselves, to increase their power because :
  • The DoD has planned false flag operations against Americans multiple times.
  • The anthrax attacks were an actual false flag operation by what amounts to an American "paramilitary" person or small group seemingly interested in expanding government power.
  • All the "terrorists" caught by the FBI were goaded, trained, etc. by the FBI.
  • All the backdoors installed by the NSA could even be considered an actual false flag operation against Americans too.
I'd almost prefer the reframing : If given a time machine capable of travel as far back as 2001, would Cheney, Bush, Clapper, Brennan, Hayden, Alexander, etc. use it to prevent 9/11? Our best guess is no in all their cases.

And more fundamentally all humans wielding similar powers, or even doing the same job, think relatively similarly because cognition is largely environmental. In "The Problem is Civil Obedience", Howard Zinn observed that all politicians have more in common with one another than with the people they rule. Similarly, western security actually have more in common with Egypt's SSIS, who actually carried out false flag terrorist bombings against Egyptians than with ordinary Americans.

All crime should ultimately be treated epidemiologically. Amongst the poor that requires education, welfare, etc. Amongst the security services, false flag operations can only really be prevented by eliminating the sorts of security service jobs that produce the individuals who plan and execute them. At minimum, we should weaken the CIA, NSA, etc. by separating their powers amongst more agencies. There should be no jobs at the CIA, NSA, etc. that even remotely exercise the same sort of power exercised by the Egyptian SSIS. (related example)
posted by jeffburdges at 4:42 PM on January 5, 2014


I thought the following story was funny, in a sad way. Remember Iraq, what Cheney called the "geographic base of the terrorists who had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11"? Well, now it's partially true: Al-Qaeda-linked force captures Fallujah amid rise in violence in Iraq.
posted by Joe in Australia at 10:02 PM on January 5, 2014 [2 favorites]


« Older A TARDIS materializes at 221B   |   Speech Aid for People Losing the Ability to Speak Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments