The 9-11 Report was criticized by many as crafted by the Commission to avoid any real criticism of individuals in prior administrations. Carefully selected by the two parties, the Commission was composed of highly reliable and connected individuals that avoided assigning responsibility despite the obvious intelligence indicating a pending attack. There was one section of the Report however that was notably sealed and kept from the public. Twenty-eight mysterious pages that the Bush and Obama Administrations did not want the public to see. It was reportedly a section containing incriminating informative linking Saudi Arabia even more closely to the 9-11 terrorists. The government refused to let the public know the degree to which one of our closest allies bore responsibility for the worst attack on U.S. soil in our history. Now, thirteen years later, Commission members are finally pushing for the release of the 28 pages against the resistance of the Obama Administration, which has one of the worst records in modern history in barring public access to information.
Officials familiar with the 2003 report say that the 28 pages of redacted information raises questions over whether Saudi officials were involved in assisting Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar upon their arrival in Los Angeles in Jan. 2000. Given the highly political and highly edited language of the report, any direct finding of responsibility would be viewed as a notable departure and reflect substantial evidence of complicity.
There has long been questions about how two Saudi nationals so quickly secured housing and flight lessons upon their arrival despite their poor language skills and experience with the United States. Moreover, both al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar met at the King Fahad mosque in Culver City with Fahad al-Thumairy, “a diplomat at the Saudi consulate known to hold extremist views.” Notably, this Saudi diplomat was such an extremist that, despite the desire of Saudi Arabia to have him represent their country, he was denied reentry to the U.S. in 2003 for suspected terrorist ties.
Thumairy appeared to be a “a ghost employee with a no-show job at a Saudi aviation contractor outside Los Angeles while drawing a paycheck from the Saudi government”, according to media reports. Then there is Thumairy’s to Omar al-Bayoumi, a Saudi who became the hijackers’ biggest benefactor. Bayou was viewed as a Saudi agent before the attacks and had contact with the terrorists. Both Bayoumi and Thumairy, two extremists with connections to the hijackers, met at a Saudi consulate office on the morning of Feb. 1, 2000 and then had lunch “at a Middle Eastern restaurant on Venice Boulevard.”
The Saudis have long denied such support as “myths.” What is really shocking however is not the Saudi denials (given the Kingdom’s denial of free speech and criticism of the government), but the refusal of the Bush and Obama Administrations to allow the public to know the truth for over a decade despite this country’s loss and suffering as a result of the attacks.
Hi Elizabeth,
Thanks for your kind words and the link. The article points out that most people believe this is an empty threat yet still: “The administration, which argues that the legislation would put Americans at legal risk overseas, has been lobbying so intently against the bill that some lawmakers and families of Sept. 11 victims are infuriated. In their view, the Obama administration has consistently sided with the kingdom and has thwarted their efforts to learn what they believe to be the truth about the role some Saudi officials played in the terrorist plot.’
All those lives lost on 9/11 mean nothing compared to our “friendship” with a nation which just beheaded 47 people last month! Yes, the USG stands against terrorism around the globe! What a mockery of justice.
What this would put US citizens at risk is of is facing legal consequences of violations of law, such as the laws against torture.
Call and make your voice heard:
https://28pages.org/2016/04/13/28-pages-action-alert-demand-hearings-on-secret-911-pages/
All the more reason to release the 28 pages:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-warns-ofeconomic-fallout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html?_r=0
Jill,
Always good to see you, here.
Hogs. Pigs. Swine. Or shut up you are paranoid schizophrenic. First i dare any of you to actually read the code. That is right any of us can access medical records for research. Thank bill clinton for that via his agreement with the ec. The ec don’t really need an eu army if it has your medical and can target you directly. But whatever the osi would rather me tell a shrink then them…..that my coworker had a mideast wife and told me about 911 yrs before. That he should have been drummed out but the command er was an egyption and let him stay. And same boss sent assets as a show of force twice and twice forgot to send guns. But no bother the facts….that might matter. I’m crazy. Look it up. Kma.
Ralph…i will add my coworker told me about 911 on a 911 years out. I did send this up the chain. Meanwhile took is “just kidding” literally”. Many years i thought it an intelligence failure…..he got briefs i didn’t……but no more. Not after hayden’s book. It wasn’t an inteligence failure it was willful ignora n ce. I heard about it years in advance….but no one wants my evidence even tho the guy who told me had a md east wife, got let off the hook for smoking dope and our wing commander was an egyptian. Sows.
Clinton had been in office for all of two months when the WTC bombing happened. So to blame him for anything is absurd, especially when there had been no warnings. After that he did pay attention to Bin Laden and his group. The GOP were the ones who blasted Clinton for bombing Bin Laden as an attempt to get out of impeachment. He was told that if he attacked Bin Laden on one occasion that the strike would kill a leader from Dubai, so they scrubbed the mission.
I rather admire Obama since he said before his election that even if Bin Laden was found in Pakistan, he would attack without warning or permission from that country. Both Clinton and McCain took exception to that during the debates. Obama won, and Bin Laden DIED! THAT SAYS IT ALL.
randyjet – you say nothing about the USS Cole. You are quite the little Clinton apologist, aren’t you.
PhillyT:
I personally think the president should nominate a justice whenever the seat comes up empty, and that Congress should vote on it.
Both sides do everything in their power to prevent the other side from nominating during the end of their term.
If the SCOTUS would stop legislating from the bench, then we wouldn’t have this hysteria and shenanigans.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/14/flashback-in-2007-schumer-called-for-blocking-all-bush-supreme-court-nominations/#ixzz40GznvTfT
So what? Bush got warning after warning and just took more vacation days (than any president except maybe Reagan). The more time goes by, the more people come forward to add more evidence about how many people and how many times he was warned. He did nothing. It’s on him.
Clinton had chance after chance and couldn’t pull the trigger. The first Twin Towers and the Cole is on him.
Karen,
There is not one thing in the Constitution that says a president shall not name supreme court nominees in his/her last year in office. No president has been denied hearing based on being a lame duck. Nominees have been voted down, bit never refused. And if you’re thinking of mentioning Joe Biden or the non-existent Biden rule, the FACT is that Biden allowed every nominee ever to have hearings and get a vote, even the ever despicable Clarence Thomas.
President Clinton was afraid of going after Bin Laden because he was worried about being accused of “wagging the dog” to distract people from his affair with Ms. Lewinsky. As well all know now, the three main accusers of his, Livingston, Hastert and Gingrich were all either having affairs of their own at the very same time or working very hard to keep their child rape victims quiet.
9/11 lands on Bush and Cheney. The end.
phillyT – for the type of planning it took, 9/11 started under Clinton.
I blame W Bush for his lack of concern about such an attack. The main man in the NSC, Clark, had been hammering Bush for more serious treatment of the Al Qeada threat, and he did NOTHING, even though Clinton had warned him about the threat. He then compounded his incompetence by grounding me and all airline and private flights, but then gave special permission to the Saudis to fly around the US to pick up members of the Bin Laden family and other Saudi royal family members. This while I and others were grounded! He then refused the FBI request to interview those members to add insult to injury. Then if that was not enough, Bush declared on TV that he didn’t much care about Bin Laden any more! If any Democrat had said such a thing, right wing radio and the GOP would have cried for impeachment of a Democratic Pres.
Any American should be damned glad for Obama since he gave the order to GET BIN LADEN and DID IT! For that one accomplishment he should get the thanks of all patriots, but the GOP bots will never do it and will only prove their dedication to their party rather than our country.
randyjet – Clinton had plenty of time to take care of the problem himself and was afraid to pull the trigger. He was able to blow up an aspirin factory, though. Clinton just kicked the can down the road to the next President, just like he did a lot of other problems.