• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The "28 pages" thread

"Jersey Girl" 9/11 widow Kristen Breitweiser: The Long-Hidden Saudi-9/11 Trail
Wow, consortiumnews, wowzer... is that the only place the opinion piece could be published? not exactly

What a lot of BS... how do we prevent a secret attack using hijacking as a ruse Kristen Breitweiser? The best part... the 28 pages make your NoC a failed fantasy. Which card will be played for the failed 9/11 truth nuts now?

Wow, Saudis did 9/11? 15 of them. Who else knew, is that in the 28 pages? Who can support CIT and play the 28/29 page BS card?
 
Last edited:
Yep, the Truth Movement sure did a good job helping to hide the Saudi 9/11 trail. By blaming everyone except the Saudis and the terrorists the Saudis supported (the Mossad, the NWO, the U.S. military, Wall Street insiders, the Mafia, the FDNY, the CIA, a "rogue faction" in the U.S. Government, PNAC, the Bush administration, Silverstein, Jews in general, NIST, etc. etc.) they made it nearly impossible to even discuss the issue, let alone be taken seriously by anyone. Even though the broad outlines (just not all the details in the released pages) were already well known.

Oh, Bravo! Well played, Sir!
 
I presented a list of all the names that would be in the 28 pages and why 10 months ago...

Perhaps a list of names can help simplify and focus.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/272443421/2012-048-doc-017

Prince Bandar should probably be at the top of the list.

Response:

Seems odd that world wide law enforcement would not be on this. Their soil has also been attacked......

Has anyone thought to contact Interpol on this (or the host of other countries big dogs)?

I think the U.S. Government might have a little more influence than some anonymous poster on an obscure internet forum.
That's where this declassified document came from.

You simply want Bandar to be on a list, and right on top of that list, even though your sources don't directly implicate him!
Bandar and his wife are mentioned as supporting someone on the list, ostensibly for a charitable purpose. Now we need a little more than your appeal to incredulity ("Do you believe that "Bandar Bush" a future head of Saudi Intelligence and his wife, the sister of the head of Saudi Intelligence at that time didn't know they were sending money to what the FBI called "an ardent supporter" of Bin Laden?") to convince anyone that Bandar should be on the list at all.

Here are the 28 pages, and it would appear that the Joint Inquiry Investigators also put him at the top of their list since he's mentioned 18 times. Do you think they also "simply want Bandar to be on a list,"?

Do the 28 pages expose who paid for the knives? 5 dollars?
I think they might be more interested in a bigger picture, maybe the old saying "follow the money" would apply. In the case of 9-11 though, the 9-11 commission points out......

To date, the U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks. Ultimately the question is of little practical significance.
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report.pdf

One would think KSM might have some idea of where he got his money, but that's the one thing he will not reveal....or so I'm told...

To date, the U.S. government has not been able to determine the origin of the money used for the 9/11 attacks.
Compelling evidence traces the bulk of the funds directly back to KSM, but from where KSM obtained the money remains unknown at this time.
page 12/20
http://www.9-11commission.gov/staff_statements/staff_statement_16.pdf

In other words...
KSM after being waterboarded 183 times and raped with large "feeding hose"....

"HAAAHAAAHAAA and I'll never tell! And you'll never know. HAHAHHAAHA But I'll talk about anything else."
"Oh...and death to America!"
- KSM

A week before the 9-11 commission report (that "exonerated" the Saudi's)was this.....

JULY 15, 2004
MONEY LAUNDERING AND FOREIGN CORRUPTION:
ENFORCEMENT AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE PATRIOT ACT

Sen. Norm Coleman: Why are these findings important? Partly because some of the other accounts at Riggs were owned by Saudi officials, and checks drawn on certain accounts may have benefited two of the September 11, 2001 hijackers. Under the leadership of Chairman Collins, the full Committee on Governmental Affairs is currently investigating the history of these accounts to see
whether any of the money was used to finance terrorist activities. I commend her diligence in looking into this issue and look forward to the results of her investigation.

https://bulk.resource.org/gpo.gov/hearings/108s/95501.txt

Why this? The 9-11 commission already debunked all this.....right?

These hearings seemed to have suddenly stopped. When the 9-11 commission was released a week later. The following is probably just a coincidence...

Disclosures show that the latest addition to the Saudi government payroll includes former US Senator Norm Coleman, a Republican from Minnesota

The contract to work with Coleman was registered in July through Hogan Lovells, a law firm where Coleman has worked since 2011, after being defeated in his re-election campaign in 2008.

In addition to Hogan Lovells, the Saudi government counts several other firms, including Squire Patton Boggs and Qorvis-MSLGROUP, as part of its lobbying operation.

Saudi kingdom’s relationship with “Qorvis dates back to 2001, when then-Saudi Ambassador Bandar bin Sultan inked a $3.2 million deal for an image makeover after ‘favorability toward Saudi Arabia…declined significantly’ among ‘Washington insiders’ in the wake of the terror attacks.”

https://www.thenation.com/article/s...-new-member-gop-super-pac-chair-norm-coleman/

but I digress because..."follow the money", is of little practical significance.

Thanks for confirming that you know of no actionable evidence that would justify placing Bandar on that list which jimd3100 excerpted, and right on top of it.

Now that the 28 pages(w/some redactions) have been released, maybe you'll realize that some people might have studied the issue more than you.

Bandar and his wife are mentioned as supporting someone on the list, ostensibly for a charitable purpose.

Yea, well that someone is named Osama Bassnan. If you'd like to know more about him, it's here.


I believe this very thing is discussed in those 28 pages. Bassnan was known for years to be a terrorist. He was already known (by the FBI) to have hosted parties in Washington D.C. for Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, commonly known in the United States as "The Blind Sheikh". The money Bandar was giving Bassnan(it wasn't just the wives) kept coming after the health issues no longer applied and was then turned over to Bayoumi and then found it's way to the hijackers. This is what the informants FBI handler testified to at a classified hearing of the Joint Inquiry......

"Several members were "appalled" at what informed sources described as the "explosive" testimony of Special Agent Steven Butler, who recently retired from the FBI after his final posting in the bureau's San Diego field office."

"Government officials told U.S. News that Butler disclosed that he had been monitoring a flow of Saudi Arabian money that wound up in the hands of two of the 9/11 hijackers. The two men had rented a room from a man Butler had used as a confidential informant, the sources say. According to officials familiar with his account, Butler said that he had alerted his superiors about the money flows but the warning went nowhere."

"Butler is claiming ... that people [in the FBI] didn't follow up," says a congressional source. Adds another: "He saw a pattern, a trail, and he told his supervisors, but it ended there."

https://web.archive.org/web/2002120...ews.com/usnews/news/features/saudi_021129.htm

Bassnan -named 42 times in the 28 pages...

FBI located copies of 31 cashiers checks totaling $74,000, during the period February 22, 1999 to May 30, 2002. These checks were payable to Bassnan’s wife and were drawn on the Riggs Bank account of Prince Bandar's wife. The FBI has determined that there has been a standing order on Princess Haifa’s account since January 1999 to send $2000 a month to Bassnan’s wife. Bassnan’s wife was allegedly receiving the funding for "nursing services," but, according to the [redacted] document, there is no evidence that Bassnan’s wife provided nursing services. [redacted]

On at least one occasion, Bassnan received a check directly from Prince Bandar’s account. According to the FBI, on May 14, 1998, Bassnan cashed a check from Bandar in the amount of $15,000.


FBI information indicates that Bassnan is an extremist and supporter of Usama bin Ladin, and has been connected to the Eritrean Islamic Jihad and the Blind Shaykh;
http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/declasspart4.pdf

Bayoumi, Thumairy, Bassnan, Al-rashid, are just a few....Bandar needs to be held accountable and answer for his actions as well....

"Connections of San Diego PENTTBOMB Subjects to the Government of Saudi Arabia"
https://web.archive.org/web/2013062...02-10-09-FBI-Saudi-Links-May-Be-Conflated.pdf

Bassnan is a busy little Jihadi who the 9-11 commission mentioned 0 times in their report and once in their footnotes.

And during this time not only were they funneling money from Bandar to Bayoumi who then used it to help the hijackers, they were also trying to get 20th hijacker Ramzi Binalshibh into the U.S.............

9-11 Commission interview of FBI Agent investigating Basnan....

"When asked whether there were any other 9/11 leads he found interesting, ________stated that one interesting fact is that Osama Basnan's_________________________was in phone and e-mail contact with Ramzi Binalshibh in September 2000.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/20300246/Mfr-Nara-t1a-FBI-FBI-Special-Agent-63-11-17-03-00458

Or as the 9-11 commission reported this in a footnote in the back of the book.....

“Even after the last application was rejected, Binalshibh sought ways to get a visa, such as by marrying a U.S. citizen. He corresponded by email with a woman in California, but Atta told him to discontinue this effort.”- footnote 52 page 536/585
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report.pdf

They are the ones not mentioning names and leaving out the phone correspondence.

9-11 Commission meeting with Saudi Officials:

Philip Zelikow began with an overview of the Commission's work and asked questions on the Kingdom's willingness and capacity to fight terrorism, both before and after September 11 2001.

Nizar expressed disbelief about the allegations regarding Princess Haifa, noting that it was preposterous that she was involved in terrorism. Zelikow expressed understanding of this position and explained that the interest was primarily due to the unclear role of Osama Bassnan - if the Commission could learn more about his role, everything could be put in a clearer perspective."

http://www.scribd.com/doc/20556754/MFR-NARA-NA-Saudi-Arabia-Madani-Nizar-10-15-03-01186

9-11 Commission Interview of Osama Basnan:

"The interview failed to yield any new information of note. Instead, in the writer's opinion, it established beyond cavil the witness' utter lack of credibility on virtually every material subject."
http://media.nara.gov/9-11/MFR/t-0148-911MFR-01193.pdf

Someone seemingly upset that I would dare slander their Saudi friends....

Maybe you might want to wait for the 28 pages before making up what you think is in the 28 pages,

Here is your big chance to expose me as a lying fool. I've wrote lots about the 28 pages. Point out something I claimed would be in the pages and wasn't.

28 pages we have no idea what is really in them, as politicians BS about them. Wowzer, you offer BS, on stuff politicians BS about, and make claims that are empty, based on what you think people might of known, but you don't know what they knew.

Perhaps projecting your ignorance on the subject onto me is not the best way to respond.

Nothing, thus you have run out of opinions on the 28 pages, one could hope, until they are released, or not.

From the 28 pages..
A CIA report also indicates that Bassnan traveled to Houston in 2002 and met with an individual who was [redacted]. The report states that during that trip a member of the Saudi Royal Family provided Bassnan with a significant amount of cash. FBI information indicates that Bassnan is an extremist and supporter of Usama bin Ladin, and has been connected to the Eritrean Islamic Jihad and the Blind Shaykh;
http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/declasspart4.pdf

What does all the BS you spam have to do with 28 pages?
post 131
Quite a bit

The checks from Princess Haifa stopped when Basnan was arrested for visa fraud last August.
Osama Basnan showed up in Houston last April when Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah came to town with a vast entourage en route to President George W. Bush's ranch. According to informed sources, Basnan met with a high Saudi prince who has responsibilities for intelligence matters and is known to bring suitcases full of cash into the United States

http://www.newsweek.com/saudi-money-trail-140813

You seem to have trouble staying on topic. Balsamo does the same thing constantly telling people he's a pilot so they should listen to him. I don't care if you and Balsamo flew jets or kites.

Hey Sherlock, tell us why this guy....

That supports the leader of a group that is out to overthrow the Saudi Government, instead of having his head cut off, is being protected? Or why the only two governments to recognize the Taliban as a legitimate Government...you know the Taliban, that gave refuge and protection to the group dedicated to the overthrow of the Saudi Government? Are Saudi Arabia and Pakistan? Even after 9-11....

The United Arab Emirates cut ties with the Taliban, the Islamic militia that claims to be the ruling regime of Afghanistan. Now, only two nations, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, recognize the Taliban as the legitimate Afghan government.

The move gave a significant boost to the U.S. diplomatic efforts to put pressure on the Taliban to hand over Osama bin Laden, whom President Bush has named the "prime suspect" in the deadly Sept. 11 hijacking attacks on America.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92457

U.S. Government’s hope of eventually obtaining Saudi cooperation was unrealistic because Saudi assistance to the U.S. Government on this matter is contrary to Saudi national interests -- page 142/858
http://fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf

Because Al Qaeda was created by Saudi Intelligence. Bin Laden was a Saudi Intelligence Asset and a Pakistani Intelligence Asset. His handler in Pakistan is not exactly a secret...

Brigadier Ijaz Shah is a retired Pakistan Army officer and the former Director-General of Intelligence Bureau of Pakistan, and a long-term close associate of Pervez Musharraf, and a former Pakistan Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) operator.
Shah was the ISI handling officer of the British-born international terrorist Ahmed Omar Saeed Sheikh, convicted for the murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl and part of the terrorist group Harkat-ul-Mujahideen as well as the handling officer for Osama Bin Laden and Mulla Mohammed Omar.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ijaz_Shah

Do you think the Families of the 9-11 victims should issue a public apology to your terrorist friends?

have you considered submitting your resume to take this guys place and help out your terrorists friends, sounds like it would be a fun job for you....

Fahad Abdullah Saleh Bakala: According to an FBI document, Bakala was close friends with two of the September 11th hijackers. The document also notes that Bakala has worked as a pilot for the Saudi Royal Family, flying Usama Bin Ladin between Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia during UBL's exile.
https://www.scribd.com/doc/272443421/2012-048-doc-017
Fahad Abdullah Saleh Bakala mentioned 2 times in 28 pages

You keep presenting BS about 28 pages which no one can say what is in them.

They may be declassified tomorrow, and then we can comment.

Do you know what is in the pages? No.

I know more than you. I'm in the mood for a stupid conspiracy theory....oh...here's one.....

Yes, Bob has a book, spewing BS about what he can't talk about; aka, publicity for his Book. Follow the money. lol - guess bobby needs a new car.

We can buy his book for $0.01... bargain. No wonder he was stumping for his book, playing the 28 pages card.

LOL....follow that money...nice conspiracy theory...looks like CIT has some competition...

Your conspiracy theory that others that read the pages decide to help him with his book selling and BS the public is not impressive, but dumber than a CITs Flyover at the pentagon theory.

Give us more theories with no evidence!

Those involved were executed by the Saudi Government, heads rolled.

Statement backed up with no facts or evidence.

Name who was involved in the 9/11 plot that was executed by the Saudi Government.

When do you think they will find out about Bassnan?

"After September 11, the FBI developed information clearly indicating that Bassnan is an extremist and a Bin Ladin supporter." -page 177
http://fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf

When do you think they will find out that Thumairy was kicked out of the U.S. for ties to terrorists including Khallad Bin Attash, the mastermind of the U.S. Cole bombing that killed 17 Sailors? And also helped the first hijackers into America?

Is "The Wall" still preventing them from knowing? LOL

Thumairy named 5 times in the 28 pages
http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/declasspart4.pdf

How would we know. They execute people; just some BS.
Do you think they did? Maybe that is in the 28 pages; maybe not.
Executed Saudis named 0 times in the 28 pages.


Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11, even if Bush or anyone tried to make a connection, it failed.

maybe the 28 pages are how the Saudis killed people in Saudi Arabia the next day for being associated with the 19 terrorists, or the 15 Saudis of the 19.

Executed Saudis named 0 times in the 28 pages.
And Bush making a connection did not fail.....

President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat
October 7, 2002
We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade.

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html

from 28 pages that were classified:
Two former San Diego agents addressed the issue of whether al-Bayoumi was an intelligence officer at the October 9, 2002 closed hearing. The former case agent who handled Muppet testified:

[Al-Bayoumi] acted like a Saudi intelligence officer, in my opinion. And if he was involved with the hijackers, which it looks like he was, if he signed leases, if he provided some sort of financing or payment of some sort, then I would say that there is a clear possibility that there might be a connection between Saudi intelligence and UBL.

http://undicisettembre.blogspot.de/2016/07/quick-transcript-of-28-pages-of-joint.html

The invasion began on 20 March 2003

Bush Defends Assertions of Iraq-Al Qaeda Relationship
Friday, June 18, 2004
"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda: because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," Bush said

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50679-2004Jun17.html


When you provide evidence of who is funding terrorists, go on 60 minutes and expose them; be famous? When will you provide evidence?
Did you know Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11?

Yes, I knew that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. So did the President.

The very next post in this thread...

LOL!

This 60 minutes news report AFAIK is the first time Fahad Thumairy has been mentioned on a television news story. He's one name in the 28 pages.

Treason at it's worst - The most despicable cover up in U.S. History

Why it's called a cover up.........

"I consider myself to be pretty well informed, and I didn't know any of this stuff before I started reporting the story," says Kroft. "I just knew there had been some questions about what was happening in San Diego, but I didn't know all of the things in the public record. It seems like it's important information that people should know about."
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-overtime-how-to-report-on-a-top-secret-document/

While the 60 minutes report named Thumairy, they didn't outright say the main reason he is in the 28 pages......because he was the American contact for the first hijackers arriving........

If the 28 pages are ever released, The Saudi response will be the same as the CIA's on their "failures", and the Presidents for "protecting" the "good name" of our Saudi "friends". They will disregard and ignore it, because there will be no accountability demanded except from a few unwashed peasants and terror victims.

They're no friend of the 3000 people killed in the 9-11 attacks either. Or those against Islamic Terrorism.

"The 9-11 commission exonerated the Saudis" is treasonous Lie.
 
Last edited:
Wow, Saudis did 9/11? 15 of them. Who else knew, is that in the 28 pages? Who can support CIT and play the 28/29 page BS card?

That's not the story here. The real story is that at least some of the 9/11 hijackers appear to have been assisted by agents of the Saudi Arabian government - and even some members of the royal family itself. That has huge ramifications for American-Saudi relations.

The question, then, is why did the Bush White House cover up this critically important information regarding the investigation into 9/11? Perhaps it had to do with the fact that the Bush family is quite close to Saudi royals and businessmen on a professional and personal level? Or maybe it was that revealing the Saudi government as being directly involved in sponsoring terrorism against the US would jeopardize American foreign policy to an unprecedented extent? Whatever the rationale for classifying this information, I believe that the American public deserve to have some honesty and transparency from our government. Frankly, it's the least they can do after all of this insanity.
 
Probably mentioned in thus thread already, but the ONLY "conspiracy" that the 28 pages could reveal is less conspiratorial and more along the line of pointing out incompetence in security organizations and political interference in security agencies.

It most certainly does nothing for bombs/DEW/fake planes/no planes or having Silverstein, the FDNY or NIST in-on-it, or any of the vast, complicated and overly complex machinations that the 911TM pushes. It dies not aid AE911T, or Chris Sarns, or Tony Szamboti, nor the CIT or PFT. At least not unless they wish to dump everything they have stated about 911 to date.
 
Who are you quoting here? Who is telling this treasonous lie?

BY CNN WIRE
CIA chief: Missing report pages exonerate Saudi Arabia in 9/11 attacks

CIA chief John Brennan says that he believes 28 redacted pages of a congressional inquiry into 9/11 will soon be made public, and that they will prove that the government of Saudi Arabia had no involvement in the September 11 attacks.

http://wtkr.com/2016/06/14/cia-chief-missing-report-pages-exonerate-saudi-arabia-in-911-attacks/


A former Republican member of the 9/11 commission, breaking dramatically with the commission’s leaders, said Wednesday he believes there was clear evidence that Saudi government employees were part of a support network for the 9/11 hijackers
The comments by John F Lehman, an investment banker in New York who was Navy secretary in the Reagan administration, signal the first serious public split among the 10 commissioners since they issued a 2004 final report that was largely read as an exoneration of Saudi Arabia, which was home to 15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/12/911-commission-saudi-arabia-hijackers

1/7/15
Lee Hamilton, who served as vice chairman of the 9/11Commission:

“I do not favor the declassification” of the the congressional probe’s pages, he said in a telephone interview. He added that he had "never read" that section of the other probe and “I don’t know what’s in it….No one ever came to me and said you ought to read these pages.” (He later amended that to say, “I can’t say I’ve never read them; I have no recollection of having read them.”) He evinced no interest in reading them now. “I haven't asked. I don’t think I would,” he said.

http://www.newsweek.com/saudi-arabi...ack-obama-prince-bandar-bin-sultan-bob-297170

A year later....

9/11 Commission Chairs Issue Statement on 28 Pages
Friday, April 22, 2016

Washington, D.C. – The following is a statement by former Gov. Tom Kean and former Rep. Lee Hamilton, who served as chairman and vice chairman of the 9/11 Commission:

9/11 Commission members, senior staff management, and relevant staff were given access to the 28 pages. Those pages were never in the possession of the Commission, nor did the Commission have the authority to declassify them.

We deemed vigorously pursuing the congressional panel’s leads so important that we hired the person who drafted the 28 pages to work on our staff, along with the person who had assisted him.

http://bipartisanpolicy.org/press-release/911-commission-chairs-issue-statement-on-28-pages/

along with the person who had assisted him....that would be Dana Lesemann...they forgot to mention this....

Dana Lesemann was fired by Zelikow, when she obtained access to the 28 pages on her own (she had the proper security clearances and it was based on her work anyway) and she was replaced by Raj De.

We deemed vigorously pursuing the congressional panel’s leads so important that we hired the person who drafted the 28 pages to work on our staff, along with the person who had assisted him.
http://bipartisanpolicy.org/press-release/911-commission-chairs-issue-statement-on-28-pages/

The person they are referring to is Michael Jacobson

From Philip Shenon's book The Commission.....

Jacobson and De felt they had explosive material on the Saudis: the actions by Omar al-Bayoumi, the Saudi "ghost employee" who played host to the two hijackers in San Diego, and Fahad al-Thumairy, the shadowy Saudi diplomat in Los Angeles. Jacobson and De had documentation of the unusual cash transfers from the wife of the Saudi ambassador in Washington to the family of another mysterious Saudi who was tied to al-Bayoumi. - page 398
https://www.amazon.com/Commission-U...580759?ie=UTF8&qid=&ref_=tmm_hrd_swatch_0&sr=

Just before publication of the 9-11 Commission report....

Snell and Zelikow were in the office, rewriting the report. Snell had presented an alternative draft of the chapter and removed virtually all of the most serious allegations against the Saudis. -page 398
https://www.amazon.com/Commission-U...580759?ie=UTF8&qid=&ref_=tmm_hrd_swatch_0&sr=

Jan 7 2015
On the 28 pages:
“I don’t know what’s in it….No one ever came to me and said you ought to read these pages.” - Lee Hamilton Jan 2015
http://www.newsweek.com/saudi-arabi...ack-obama-prince-bandar-bin-sultan-bob-297170
 
Last edited:
jimd3100:

It would make it easier if you just post the link you copy your posts from. .

:rolleyes:

ETA: You did do this. Now actually show what your personal opinion is.

It get's old with you expecting everyone to connect the dot. When can we expect you to actually do this for yourself?
 
Last edited:
That's not the story here. The real story is that at least some of the 9/11 hijackers appear to have been assisted by agents of the Saudi Arabian government - and even some members of the royal family itself. That has huge ramifications for American-Saudi relations.

The question, then, is why did the Bush White House cover up this critically important information regarding the investigation into 9/11? Perhaps it had to do with the fact that the Bush family is quite close to Saudi royals and businessmen on a professional and personal level? Or maybe it was that revealing the Saudi government as being directly involved in sponsoring terrorism against the US would jeopardize American foreign policy to an unprecedented extent? Whatever the rationale for classifying this information, I believe that the American public deserve to have some honesty and transparency from our government. Frankly, it's the least they can do after all of this insanity.

Finally, a "debunker" asking a real question - congratulations!

So, why did the Bush White House cover up the perps of 9/11? Was it because it included prominent members of the PNAC cabal that had wished for a "New Pearl Harbour" incident like 9/11 to gain support for its plan to bomb the **** out most of the Middle-East except for Saudi-Arabia? Or was it because the official Al-Qaida story would not work if people knew that the bad guys were still being paid for by the Saudis just like in the good old days when AQ was called mujahideen? The mujahideen were of course initially a Saudi/US project but the official story depends on people believing that they broke away from their handlers at some point and became rogue! And was it because then people might ask if some element within the US spy apparatus was also STILL involved just like in the good old days? Was it because people might then wonder if that dirty war-hungry insider element of the US government conspired with its old Saudi partner to manufacture a false-flag attack to make its dream come true?

Are you really and truly interested in finding out the truth and the whole truth? Support a new independent international investigation with all the powers needed to get to people at these levels.
 
Finally, a "debunker" asking a real question - congratulations!

So, why did the Bush White House cover up the perps of 9/11?

I'll answer your question as soon as you address the concerns about the Basile study. You are the spokes person, right?

What happened to the study and money?
 
Finally, a "debunker" asking a real question - congratulations!

You and your pals can learn a lot from us...but then you fall back on crap.

So, why did the Bush White House cover up the perps of 9/11? Was it because it included prominent members of the PNAC cabal that had wished for a "New Pearl Harbour" incident like 9/11 to gain support for its plan to bomb the **** out most of the Middle-East except for Saudi-Arabia?

PNAC didn't wish for a new Pearl Harbor. This lie has been debunked and buried years ago. The "Pearl Harbor" reference in the document is in a chapter about Aircraft Carriers and the Navy's risk of maintaining a strategy based on them. Since 2001, the US Navy has decommissioned a number of carriers and now has 11 (10 active, 1 in reserve).

You'd know this if you bothered to read.


Or was it because the official Al-Qaida story would not work if people knew that the bad guys were still being paid for by the Saudis just like in the good old days when AQ was called mujahideen?

The Mujahideen were mostly Afghan tribals. Al Qaeda was always Al Qaeda, and the one time that the CIA reached out to bin Laden during the Soviet occupation he told them to get lost. Bin Laden wanted nothing to do with the United States and certainly nothing to do with the CIA.


The mujahideen were of course initially a Saudi/US project but the official story depends on people believing that they broke away from their handlers at some point and became rogue!

No. The Muj came first. The CIA worked to arm them using Saudi money and Israeli captured Russian weapons from Syria and Egypt. It was largely a CIA operation. There was no breaking away because the CIA kept a low profile, and never had anything resembling control over the Muj.

And was it because then people might ask if some element within the US spy apparatus was also STILL involved just like in the good old days?

Just paranoid people/

Was it because people might then wonder if that dirty war-hungry insider element of the US government conspired with its old Saudi partner to manufacture a false-flag attack to make its dream come true?

How has anything since 9-11-2001 resembled a dream coming true...outside of Al Qaeda, who got exactly the war they wanted.
 
Finally, a "debunker" asking a real question - congratulations!

So, why did the Bush White House cover up the perps of 9/11? Was it because it included prominent members of the PNAC cabal that had wished for a "New Pearl Harbour" incident like 9/11 to gain support for its plan to bomb the **** out most of the Middle-East except for Saudi-Arabia?

No! What's with the so-called 'Pearl Harbor? The war in Afghanistan and Iraq had broke the U.S. military financially on a number of things.

There was a time where I couldn't order safety gloves for my employees working on an Air Force contract because the Air Force didn't have the money. I had to wait for the next fiscal year to order anything. There were Air Force squadrons that were so broke that airmen couldn't replace their worn uniforms. In Afghanistan, some units had to cut back on breakfast items.

Regarding Afghanistan, the U.S. issued a warning to the Taliban to turn over Osama bin Laden or face the consequences. The Taliban failed to heed the warning and the rest is history. Had the Taliban turned over OBL as demanded, the U.S. would not have bombed Afghanistan.


...Or was it because the official Al-Qaida story would not work if people knew that the bad guys were still being paid for by the Saudis...


Let's take a real look as to how al-Qaeda financed itself.


Al Qaeda’s Means and Methods to Raise, Move, and Use Money

Contrary to popular myth, Usama Bin Ladin does not support al Qaeda through a personal fortune or a network of businesses. Rather, al Qaeda financial facilitators raise money from witting and unwitting donors, mosques and sympathetic imams, and nongovernment organizations such as charities.

Charities
Al Qaeda’s charities’ strategy before 9/11 had two prongs. In some instances, al Qaeda penetrated specific foreign branch offices of large, internationally recognized charities. In many cases, lax oversight and the charities’ own ineffective financial controls, particularly over transactions in remote regions of the world, made it easy for al Qaeda operatives to divert money from charitable uses.

These large international Gulf charities donated money to end recipients, usually smaller in-country charities, whose employees may have siphoned off money for al Qaeda. In the second class of cases, entire charities from the top down may have known of and even participated in the funneling of money
to al Qaeda. In those cases, al Qaeda operatives had control over the entire organization, including access to bank accounts.

Much has been made of the role of charities, particularly Saudi charities, in terrorist financing. A little context is necessary here. Charitable giving, known as zakat, is one of the five pillars of Islamic faith. It is broader and more pervasive than Western ideas of charity, in that it also functions as a form of income tax, educational assistance, foreign aid, and political influence.

The Western notion of the separation of civic and religious duty does not exist in Islamic cultures. The Saudi government has declared that the Koran and the Sunna (tradition) of Muhammad are the country’s constitution, and the clergy within Saudi Arabia wield enormous influence over the cultural and social life of the country.

Funding charitable works is ingrained into Saudi Arabia’s culture, and Saudi zakat has long provided much-needed humanitarian relief in the Islamic world. In addition, a major goal of Saudi charities is to spread Wahhabi beliefs and culture throughout the world.

Thus Saudi efforts have funded mosques and schools in other parts of the world, including Pakistan, Central Asia, Europe, and even the United States. In some poor areas these schools alone provide education; and even in affluent countries, Saudi-funded Wahhabi schools are often the only Islamic schools available.

Other than support provided by the Taliban in Afghanistan, there is no persuasive evidence of systematic government financial sponsorship of al Qaeda by any country either before or after 9/11.

While there have been numerous allegations about Saudi government complicity in al Qaeda, the Commission staff has found no persuasive evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or as individual senior officials
knowingly support or supported al Qaeda.

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/staff_statements/911_TerrFin_Ch2.pdf


In other words, there's no evidence that the government of Saudi Arabia had knowingly supported or financed the 9/11 attack, which is why Saudi Arabia had for years, called for the release of those 28-pages.


..just like in the good old days when AQ was called mujahideen? The mujahideen were of course initially a Saudi/US project but the official story depends on people believing that they broke away from their handlers at some point and became rogue!


First of all, the U.S. never supported Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. This is where Truthers often get confused because they are totally unaware that the U.S. supported only the Afghan Mujahideen, not the Afghan Arabs, which was a group of foreigners that Osama bin Laden belonged to. In fact, Osama bin Laden had confirmed that at no time did they receive financial support from the United States and reconfirmed by Pakistan as well.


... And was it because then people might ask if some element within the US spy apparatus was also STILL involved just like in the good old days? Was it because people might then wonder if that dirty war-hungry insider element of the US government conspired with its old Saudi partner to manufacture a false-flag attack to make its dream come true?


First of all, there was no false flag regarding 9/11. Secondly, there was no way the U.S. could have kept such an attack a secret. How long did it take to reveal the Watergate scandal? Furthermore, 9/11 had nothing to do with the war in Iraq.
 
Last edited:
That's not the story here. The real story is that at least some of the 9/11 hijackers appear to have been assisted by agents of the Saudi Arabian government - and even some members of the royal family itself. That has huge ramifications for American-Saudi relations.

The question, then, is why did the Bush White House cover up this critically important information regarding the investigation into 9/11? Perhaps it had to do with the fact that the Bush family is quite close to Saudi royals and businessmen on a professional and personal level? Or maybe it was that revealing the Saudi government as being directly involved in sponsoring terrorism against the US would jeopardize American foreign policy to an unprecedented extent? Whatever the rationale for classifying this information, I believe that the American public deserve to have some honesty and transparency from our government. Frankly, it's the least they can do after all of this insanity.

So there is proof people helped and knew what the 19 terrorists were doing on 911? I missed the proof people knowingly gave money to terrorists to do the acts on 9/11; is that in the 28 pages?

What critically important information is there in the 28 pages?

Did people knowingly assist the terrorists to do the act on 9/11? Where is the proof? Who did it?
Did some of the terrorists get money from Saudis? Did they know what the terrorists were going to do?

If you commit a crime at college, and your parent funded you... oops, your parents assisted you.

Ziggi blames PNAC, jimd3100 has the shoot down means stand-down logic and seems to know what was in the 28 pages before they were released (sour-grapes after failure to have the BS 9/11 truth claims come true).

Poor Bob who was selling books can't use the 28 pages to get press coverage to sell more books.

Ziggi and PNAC, now that takes a lot of paranoia.

...
Are you really and truly interested in finding out the truth and the whole truth? Support a new independent international investigation with all the powers needed to get to people at these levels.
lol, this is cool, you are talking about the 28 pages, which means your thermite is a fantasy, and 19 terrorists did all of 9/11. You are debunking your failed claims. Do you realize you just debunked your silly 9/11 truth claims? wow, PNAC?

How is the failed thermite going?
 
Last edited:
I presented a list of all the names that would be in the 28 pages and why 10 months ago...

Response:
...
Here are the 28 pages, and it would appear that the Joint Inquiry Investigators also put him at the top of their list since he's mentioned 18 times. Do you think they also "simply want Bandar to be on a list,"?
...

Back then, I asked for evidence that would justify putting Bandar on a list of people to be more closely investigated.
It seems you failed, back then, to provide such evidence - there was some hearsay.

I admit now that Bandar has been "named" in those 28 pages 18 times, and those mentions MAY give rise to sufficient reason to investigate him more closely than the Joint Inquiry did. I don't know. I haven't had time to read the 28 pages yet. I am sure you have - do any of the 18 mentions inform us about whether or not Bandar committed actual crimes? For example, is there any information shedding light on whether or not his involvement with any of 9/11 plotters was not innocent, that he knew these guys were planning a crime?

Merely being "mentioned" in a report does not make you a criminal or even a suspect.



jimd, I think I have defended your work elsewhere and expressed my sincere interest in having this information classified and used. If Bandar, and any of the orhers on your list, are guilty of some crime - or politically responsible for terrorism -, it must come to see the light of day, and you have my back.
However, this is a Skeptics' forum, and we have this tedious habit of asking for evidence.

I will read the 28 pages eventually. I am pretty sure that it will leave me with more open questions than I had before, because I am not really familiar with all the context.

I think you are closer to the actual "truth" about 9/11 than any of the other "Truthers", and surely closer than many "debunkers". But don't pass a mere count of "mentions" off as evidence just to make me look dumb!
 

Back
Top Bottom