Jul 222016
 

canstockphoto7142417
by Thomas L. Knapp…….

In December of 2002, Congress released its report on the “Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001.” Part of that report, anyway: 28 pages remained classified until July 15, 2016, when they were finally presented to the public with significant redactions.

Why the long wait, and what do the 28 pages reveal?

If we’re to believe the headlines in Saudi media (e.g. Al Arabiya) and mainstream American media (e.g. Time and the Washington Times) the big news is what they don’t reveal: A “smoking gun” connecting the government of Saudi Arabia to the 9/11 attacks.

If we’re to believe the 28 pages themselves, the big news is that they do, in fact, reveal a “smoking gun” connecting the government of Saudi Arabia to the 9/11 attacks.

Here’s the opening sentence from the newly released material: “While in the United States, some of the September 11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support or assistance from, individuals who may be connected with the Saudi government.”

Among those individuals was Omar al-Bayoumi, who sported a “no-show” job at a company affiliated with the Saudi Ministry of Defense (the company reported that he visited their facilities once, thereafter collecting a continuing salary). When 9/11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hamzi and Khalid al-Midhar arrived in the United States, they stayed with al-Bayoumi until he found them an apartment and someone to help them get drivers’ licenses … and locate flight schools.

The two also appear to have received assistance from Osama Bassnan, who lived across the street from them in San Diego. According to the CIA, Bassnan received significant funds from Saudi government sources and members of the Saudi royal family. According to the FBI, Bassnan was a supporter of both Osama bin Laden and New York terror plotter Omar Abdel-Rahman.

Why are we only now finding out all this? Because four words make the whole thing problematic: “The Saudi royal family.” In particular, Prince Bandar bin-Sultan, Saudi ambassador to the US at the time, whose wife appears to have been the conduit through which money was routed to Osama Bassnan — and then, quite possibly, used to service the needs of the 9/11 plotters.

But Saudi Arabia controls much of the world’s oil supply either directly or as the dominant member of OPEC, the Saudi military buys lots of US-manufactured weaponry, and Saudi assets in the US — which the Saudi government threatened to sell off if the US changed its laws to hold them responsible for their role in the attacks — top $750 billion.

In other words, unlike Afghanistan’s Taliban regime, the Saudi regime carries considerable clout with the US government. In fact, Prince Bandar visited president George W. Bush at the White House immediately after the 9/11 attacks.

In response to those attacks, Afghanistan suffered US invasion, the overthrow of its government, and is now in its 15th straight year of war and occupation.

Saudi Arabia enjoyed not just a 13-year reprieve from the exposure of damning evidence, but seemingly better relations with the US government than ever before. Go figure.

~~~~~~~~~~

Thomas L. Knapp (Twitter: @thomaslknapp) is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Thomas L. Knapp
Thomas L. Knapp is director and senior news analyst at the William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism (thegarrisoncenter.org). He lives and works in north central Florida.
 July 22, 2016  Posted by at 12:31 am ~ Opinion ~, Editorial, Issue #176, Thomas L. Knapp  Add comments

  3 Responses to “9/11: 28 Pages Later”

  1. Mr. Knapp, from what I’ve read, the public, including the press, have yet even to see the 28 pages; all that’s been released is what you reported. That, alone, leaves me thinking those 28 pages are nuclear.

    So imagine what those 28 pages due in the minds of a whole lot of Americans who are convinced the U.S. Government was in on 9/11?

    That even President George W. Bush was in on it?

    That it was contrived to give Bush a chance to go to war overseas? At the beckoning of people he actually answered to, starting perhaps with Dick Cheney, who was not all that far up the totem pole himself?

    There’s plenty of 911 conspiracy speculation online.

    I read online that there were important Saudis in America when 911 happened, who were friends of the Bush family, who were allowed to leave and go back to Saudi Arabia.

    That aside, I’m convinced the Saudis are funding radical Islam’s war against humanity, including against Muslims they don’t like.

    I’m surprised, or maybe that’s a joke, the release of those 28 pages has not been a front-burner issue in the US President lead out beauty pageant.

    I wonder if the Hillary or the Donald will ever get around to demanding those 28 pages be released before the November 4 election? Maybe that’s a joke, too.

    I wonder if the majority of Americans even want to know what’s in those 28 pages?

    I wonder if they are afraid to know?

  2. Sloan,

    Sorry to take so long to reply (I send my columns to a lot of newspapers and while The Blue Paper is one of my favorites it sometimes takes me awhile to get around to visit).

    I agree that among those who believe “9/11 was an inside job,” the 28 pages will add a new layer of hypothesizing as to who knew what and when and what their motivations were.

    My own opinion (subject to change on the basis of evidence):

    The 28 pages do substantiate a CONNECTION between the Saudi government and the 9/11 attacks. What they don’t necessarily substantiate is the notion that 9/11 was the result of a plan, decision or policy of that government.

    Osama bin Laden came from an important Saudi family with close connections to the government and to the royal family. His father was a billionaire from construction, much of it government contract construction. Additionally, Osama had followers and supporters on his own merits as e.g. a fighter against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. I don’t think it’s a stretch to assume that he had active supporters inside the Saudi regime. In fact, I’d think it was a stretch to assume he didn’t.

    Additionally, the ocean of oil money available to the Saudi royals and other elites lends itself to the habit of throwing that money around generously to (for example) Saudi students in the US who need it for housing and other expenses.

    So: Let’s say that Bayoumi or Bassnan or both were supporters of al Qaeda, in addition to being employees of the Saudi government, and they wanted to funnel money to the support of the terrorists. It would probably not be that unusual for one of them to hit up Prince Bandar, Saudi ambassador to the US, for money to help a couple of Saudi “students” with their expenses, or for him to let his wife know to cut a check for that purpose.

    Once the attack had happened, the Saudis would almost certainly realize very quickly how that would look. And, not wanting to strain relations with an ally over aid that was unintentional on the part of the royals, I can see why the Bush administration would get them the hell out of the country and then try to keep the matter under wraps for years.

    There probably were consequences. Prior to 9/11, Bandar seemed to be on track to at the very least become permanent consigliere to Saudi kings and possibly even king himself. After 9/11, he was eventually recalled as ambassador and has been in and out of favor ever since, even disappearing from the public eye completely for a couple of years (house arrest, perhaps?). It would not surprise me at all to learn that Bassnan, Bayoumi, or other low-level actors were — quietly — either handed over to CIA black site interrogators, or perhaps interrogated and executed in Saudi Arabia.

    But all of that is just guesswork on my part. I think it is plausible guesswork and I have a LITTLE bit of background to support it (I spent time in Saudi Arabia and interacted briefly — very briefly — with both low-level royals and likely regime spies during the 1991 affair), but I could very well be completely wrong.

    • oh please… the evidence is crystal clear; the building fell down due to controlled demolition. for structures of that size and location, vis a vis other buildings, it would dictate months of planning, preparation, and execution. that alone disallows for any conclusion other than the U.S. government was involved. this had nothing to do with the fictional ‘war on terror’ or they hate us for our freedoms, or any other poppycock other than it was another false flag event to advance the agenda of the elites. honestly, how can you think otherwise with the tremendous, expansive, monumental, prodigious amount of evidence that states just that?

      but oh yes, a guy living in a cave, directing a bunch of drugged out, strip club going, cocaine snorting Muslim/Islamic zealots, armed with deadly box cutters, who could barely get a Cessna off the ground, one of whose passport magically was found in pristine condition in the rubble….., that, that makes sense to you.