CIA threatens "Press for Truth" producers over release of new documentary

[newton3376]

What's a Government Truther?

There is none.

There are only "Truthers" and people who are actually intelligent and sane.

That's really it.

 

[jimd3100]

I've heard mention of the Capitol building and the White House as potential fourth targets but not the CIA building. Where did you get that from?

It was one of the targets originally- this was an old plot. Paloalto has named sources for it there are lots of sources for it here are some more.

During the joint inquiry hearings....

"1995 evidence that came from the Philippine national police raid, turning up materials in the Manila apartment talking about crashing an airplane into CIA Headquarters. There is years and years of history with respect to the proposition that terrorists are willing to use airplanes as the tool to carry out their agenda."

page 182/871
http://intelligence.senate.gov/pdfs/1071086v2.pdf

Joint inquiry final report.....

KSM came to the attention of the Intelligence Community as a terrorist in early 1995 when he was linked to Ramzi Yousef’s “Bojinka Plot” in the Philippines. One portion of that plot involved the idea of crashing an airplane into CIA Headquarters. Through additional intelligence and investigative efforts in 1995, KSM was also connected to the first World Trade Center bombing.

http://news.lp.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/911rpt/part1.pdf

Even before these hearings an article appeared in the Washington post by a former Wall Street Journal reporter named Matthew Brzezinski who is the nephew of former NSA Zbigniew Brzezinski. He interviewed the officials involved (the link says prisonplanet but if you go to link you'll see the Washington Post article-this is a cache of the article)

Philippine intelligence put the screws to Murad. In Camp Crame, a military installation on the outskirts of Manila, he was subjected for 67 days to what Philippine intelligence reports delicately refer to as TI, or tactical interrogation. By the time he was handed over to the Americans, interrogators had extracted everything they thought they needed to know.

All those years in flight school, he confessed, had been in preparation for a suicide mission. He was to buy, rent, or steal -- that part of the plan had not yet been worked out -- a small plane, preferably a Cessna, fill it with explosives and crash it into CIA headquarters.

There were secondary targets the terrorist cell wanted hit:Congress, the White House, the Pentagon and possibly some skyscrapers. The only problem, Murad complained, was that they needed more trained pilots to carry out the plot.

Gen. Avelino "Sonny" Razon, one of the lead investigators in the Bojinka case, was so shocked at what he saw on September 11 that he jumped on a plane in Cebu, where he was now police chief, and flew to Manila to convene a hasty press conference. "We told the Americans about the plans to turn planes into flying bombs as far back as 1995," he complained to reporters. "Why didn't they pay attention?"

http://www.prisonplanet.com/bust_and_boom.html

Here is the FBI interview of Murad obtained through FOIA -

http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/1995-05-11-FBI-FD302-Abdul-Hakim-Murad.pdf

Due to "National Security" they can't tell us what the Philippine officials already did.

President Bush said at a news conference Tuesday, "Nobody in our government, at least, and I don't think the prior government, could envision flying airplanes into buildings on such a massive scale."

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-04-18-norad_x.htm

Can't tell us due to "National Security"? Or Embarrassment?

 

[carlitos]

When 9/11 actually happened, I was reading a Tom Clancy novel from the 1990's that had a terrorist crashing an airplane into a joint session of Congress. So to say no one envisioned it would be a lie. "On such a massive scale" is of course subjective.

 

[jimd3100]

Even before these hearings an article appeared in the Washington post by a former Wall Street Journal reporter named Matthew Brzezinski who is the nephew of former NSA Zbigniew Brzezinski.

Shortly after his article Brzezinski made a prediction:

Matthew Brzezinski: Eventually there will be an accounting for the intelligence failure. Right now though the CIA and FBI are the frontline troops in the war against terror so it would be counterproductive to further demoralize them. But, when all this is over, I think heads will roll in both agencies.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/liveonline/02/magazine/magazine_brzezinski010202.htm

That didn't happen did it?

At the time he was hemming and hawing over the book deal, Tenet received the Presidential Medal of Freedom, Tyler notes, but Tenet insists that's simply a coincidence.

Tenet wasn't "clear on what conversations he'd had with members of the Bush family during the 18-month interval between actions," the article notes.

Former Saudi ambassador Prince Bandar also hyped speculation of a Bush intervention in the publication delay.

"I knew President Bush called him," Bandar, a close friend of Tenet, told Tyler. "The question is: Was it 41 or 43?"

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Did_Medal_of_Freedom_buy_Tenets_0626.html

Brzezinski also said:

Matthew Brzezinski: Saudi Arabia lies at the very heart of this tragedy. They have financed and exported holy war for years in order to deflect domestic frustration with corruption and repression in the royal family. In ultimately facilitating those that target the US, the Saudis have truly bitten the hand that feeds them, and I think we should seriously re-think our policy toward that nation, which has gotten away with far too much for too long because of its oil

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/liveonline/02/magazine/magazine_brzezinski010202.htm

How did that work out?

Sen. Graham: Bush covered up Saudi involvement in 9/11

http://www.salon.com/2004/09/08/graham_8/

 

[carlitos]

Will jimd3100 be providing a hypothesis that better explains the events of 9/11 vs. the common narrative?

 

[Sabrina]

Will jimd3100 be providing a hypothesis that better explains the events of 9/11 vs. the common narrative?

My guess would be... no.

(I realize this was rhetorical; I'm just emphasizing the point. )

 

[Oystein]

Will jimd3100 be providing a hypothesis that better explains the events of 9/11 vs. the common narrative?

I am guessing that jimd3100 largely subscribes to the common theory (AQ dunnit; no demolition, no military stand-down, no US insider MIHOP, no Jews, perhaps not even US insider LIHOP), but adds a layer of institutional support for AQ from elements in Saudi Arabia, screw-up within US agencies (the "Let It Happen Out Of Incompetence" that many of us can easily live with) and a major case of CYA, perhaps criminal, after 9/11 with regard to these layers.

Few here would disagree that surprisingly few people had their careers negatively affected after the attacks, even though huge and expensive government organisation were supposed to prevent such attacks and obviously failed.

 

[Myriad]

I am guessing that jimd3100 largely subscribes to the common theory (AQ dunnit; no demolition, no military stand-down, no US insider MIHOP, no Jews, perhaps not even US insider LIHOP), but adds a layer of institutional support for AQ from elements in Saudi Arabia, screw-up within US agencies (the "Let It Happen Out Of Incompetence" that many of us can easily live with) and a major case of CYA, perhaps criminal, after 9/11 with regard to these layers.

Few here would disagree that surprisingly few people had their careers negatively affected after the attacks, even though huge and expensive government organisation were supposed to prevent such attacks and obviously failed.

Nope, I don't disagree with that at all. And if there had been a public call for further investigation and follow-up of those issues, something might have been done. But, that could not happen, and it's too late now.

Why couldn't that happen? Preventing it was the one major success of the Truth Movement. For years, any public discussion of, for instance, the gradually unfolding history of the administration's failure to heed warnings about terrorists, was spammed by responses that insisted the writer and any correspondents willing to discuss the issue at face value were all dumb gullible sheeple fooled by Fox News into believing there were terrorists at all.

At any given time, there are a large number of important issues. People have choices about which to concern themselves with. A large segment already felt that blame should not be a priority post-9/11. Convincing them otherwise, or building any sort of grass-roots consensus for addressing questions of due diligence and ass-covering, amid Truthers' persistent pollution of discourse, was not possible.

It's understandable that reasonable people would be upset about the end results of that. However, anyone complaining about it now, who also contributed to (or still contributes to) 9/11 conspiracy theories involving "inside job," "false flag," "brainwashed sheeple," "controlled demolition," "remember Building 7," "stand downs," and similar nonsense, has precisely the same standing as people who crap in the urinals in a train station bathroom, and then complain to management about the smell.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[Oystein]

Nope, I don't disagree with that at all. And if there had been a public call for further investigation and follow-up of those issues, something might have been done. But, that could not happen, and it's too late now.

Why couldn't that happen? Preventing it was the one major success of the Truth Movement. For years, any public discussion of, for instance, the gradually unfolding history of the administration's failure to heed warnings about terrorists, was spammed by responses that insisted the writer and any correspondents willing to discuss the issue at face value were all dumb gullible sheeple fooled by Fox News into believing there were terrorists at all.

At any given time, there are a large number of important issues. People have choices about which to concern themselves with. A large segment already felt that blame should not be a priority post-9/11. Convincing them otherwise, or building any sort of grass-roots consensus for addressing questions of due diligence and ass-covering, amid Truthers' persistent pollution of discourse, was not possible.

It's understandable that reasonable people would be upset about the end results of that. However, anyone complaining about it now, who also contributed to (or still contributes to) 9/11 conspiracy theories involving "inside job," "false flag," "brainwashed sheeple," "controlled demolition," "remember Building 7," "stand downs," and similar nonsense, has precisely the same standing as people who crap in the urinals in a train station bathroom, and then complain to management about the smell.

Respectfully,
Myriad

I think you give them too much credit there.

Otherwise, spot-on, and I have seen jimd3100 bemoan the very same things at other forums: at truthaction.org they have been complaning a lot lately that the CDer, no-planers etc. are standing in the way of a serious new investigation and towards political accountability.

jimd3100 and his buddies are really mostly on "our" side; many posters unfortunately have their blinders on and don't realize this. (Also, jimd3100 and some buddies have done all they can to burn the first flimsy bridges between the camps)

 

[Myriad]

I think you give them too much credit there.

I agree the point is arguable. Given the politics of the relevant period, the odds were probably against accountability. If they were so far against that there was virtually no chance, then the Truthers didn't make any difference. But I can imagine some plausible alternative scenarios that might, without the Truth Movement, have been more than distant long-shots. For example, the victims' families were organized, interested in accountability, and had press contacts and public sympathy. The Truth Movement luring some of them into full-on conspiracy craziness, forcing the rest to retreat on accountability activism, all but silenced them.

Otherwise, spot-on, and I have seen jimd3100 bemoan the very same things at other forums: at truthaction.org they have been complaning a lot lately that the CDer, no-planers etc. are standing in the way of a serious new investigation and towards political accountability.

It's been a while since I've followed any truth forums very closely. When last I did (a few years ago), the closest phenomenon to what you're describing were voices expressing concerns that some Truther arguments were unconvincing and should not be used. At that point, though, they stopped short of admitting they were false; only that they were tactically ineffective. Thus it wasn't clear whether they were actually calling for more truth in Truth, or merely advocating an even more deceptive approach to recruiting. I confess to suspecting the latter.

What you're describing, though, sounds like an unambiguously positive development. I believe it's too late to make any difference for 9/11 issues, but those are people I could find common cause with for future matters. (There's a U.S. Presidential election coming up, for one thing, and vigilance is never out of place.)

jimd3100 and his buddies are really mostly on "our" side; many posters unfortunately have their blinders on and don't realize this. (Also, jimd3100 and some buddies have done all they can to burn the first flimsy bridges between the camps)

There's an elaborate metaphor in here somewhere, involving steel bridges and whether or not fire can harm them. But I can't quite make it work. So I'll just affirm some hard-won wisdom: not everyone who agrees with you is your friend; and not everyone who disagrees with you is your enemy. Take a close look, especially, at those who seem to relish whipping up enmity above all else. You don't have to look far from this thread to find them.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[RedIbis]

Why couldn't that happen? Preventing it was the one major success of the Truth Movement. For years, any public discussion of, for instance, the gradually unfolding history of the administration's failure to heed warnings about terrorists, was spammed by responses that insisted the writer and any correspondents willing to discuss the issue at face value were all dumb gullible sheeple fooled by Fox News into believing there were terrorists at all.

Good lord, are you still pushing this cowardly crap? It's the Twoofies fault that incompetence and negligence were not prosecuted? I would argue that it's actually Twoofies who have brought to light the rampant and widespread negligence and incompetence since no one else seemed to want to pay much attention to it, and if anyone was sincerely interested in rooting out that incompetence, some stupid Twoofies on the intrawebs wouldn't have stopped them.

 

[NoahFence]

Aw... did our chew toy get one too many newspapers on the nose? I'll so much miss being called a Government Truther.

anywho....

Twoofies who have brought to light the rampant and widespread negligence and incompetence since no one else seemed to want to pay much attention to it,

I think what you refer to as "rampant and widespread negligence" the rational people in the world call either "simple mistake" or "not worth mentioning".

Not once has any truther, yourself included, managed to change any conclusions of these rampant mistakes and blatant negligence. You point them out as if you're reaching for your "gotcha" moment, but just before your hand can grab a hold of it, you pull it back, realizing that you "gotcha" nothing but word salad.

 

[RedIbis]

I think what you refer to as "rampant and widespread negligence" the rational people in the world call either "simple mistake" or "not worth mentioning".

For cowards, maybe.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I would argue that it's actually Twoofies who have brought to light the rampant and widespread negligence and incompetence since no one else seemed to want to pay much attention to it [...]

Hah. Historical revisionism at it's average...

 

[NoahFence]

For cowards, maybe.

Please elaborate.

 

[Myriad]

Good lord, are you still pushing this cowardly crap? It's the Twoofies fault that incompetence and negligence were not prosecuted? I would argue that it's actually Twoofies who have brought to light the rampant and widespread negligence and incompetence since no one else seemed to want to pay much attention to it, and if anyone was sincerely interested in rooting out that incompetence, some stupid Twoofies on the intrawebs wouldn't have stopped them.

You would argue that, but it would be wrong, and obviously so. What real information has come to light has been revealed by real journalists and historians. The closest Truthers came to bringing their findings to light is reading the books and articles they published years ago, and posting snippets on the Internet, embellished with unsupported speculation they like to call "connecting the dots" but in the real political world is "making distracting noise."

Finding incompetence and rooting it out takes actual effort and political will. Truthers eschew the former, and (whether or not it's their intention) actively work against the latter. Then they whine about its lack. They (even now) help cause the problem, then complain about it.

Want to know who crapped the bed you're lying in? I've put the answer on your mirror. Take a look.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[JihadJane]

Yup, twoofers also swept torture under the carpet and caused the financial crash of 2008.

 

[NoahFence]

Yup, twoofers also swept torture under the carpet and caused the financial crash of 2008.

No kidding?

Wow. No wonder they don't have any time to do any actual work on the 9/11 front. Thanks for the info!

 

[carlitos]

I haven't done a scientific search, but anecdotally, the words "twoofer" and its variants seem to come more frequently from the truthy ones themselves, in sort of a strawman auto-ad-hominem thingie.

 

[jimd3100]

I think it's pretty despicable to immediately intervene in the Investigation of who was involved in murdering 3000 people on 9-11, in order to protect those involved and convince a terrified public that those not involved were - in order to use 9-11 as an opportunity to have a war with a country that was not involved in the plot in any way......It looks like treason to me. The real question - was it pre planned?

Hijackers Lived With FBI Informant

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500164_162-521223.html

Obviously he needs to be questioned. This is not incompetence- it's deliberate obstruction......

The Administration has to date objected to the Inquiry’s efforts to interview the informant in order to attempt to resolve those inconsistencies. The Administration also would not agree to allow the FBI to serve a Committee subpoena and deposition notice on the informant. Instead, written interrogatories from the Joint Inquiry were, at the suggestion of the FBI, provided to the informant. Through an attorney, the informant has declined to respond to those interrogatories and has indicated that, if subpoenaed, the informant would request a grant of immunity prior to testifying.

page 51/858
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf

It wasn't just Hazmi and Mihdar the informant had contact with....

During the time they were in San Diego, these two hijackers had numerous contacts with a long-time FBI counterterrorism informant. A third hijacker, Hani Hanjour, may have had more limited contact with this individual in December 2000.

page 210/858
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf

This leads me to believe there were certain elements in the U.S. Government that did not want a competent investigation into the 9-11 attacks....

An FBI written response to the Joint Inquiry acknowledges questions about the informant’s credibility, but the Administration and the FBI have objected to the Joint Inquiry’s request to interview the informant and have refused to serve a Committee subpoena and notice of deposition on the informant.

page 210/858
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf

I don't think it's unreasonable for me to be "disappointed" my tax dollars were used to reward this informant...

In July 2003, the asset was given a $100,000 payment and closed as an asset.

footnote 197 page 38/141
http://www.fas.org/irp/agency/doj/oig/fbi-911/chap5.pdf

Saudi Arabia had connections to these terrorist turds. Not Iraq.

The first hijackers to come to America were known Al Qaeda operatives. They were known about and under surveillance by both American and Saudi Intelligence services. Once they came to America the CIA didn't pay their rent, enroll them in flight schools, and get them Ids. But Saudi Agents did.

From FBI Pentbom Investigation:

2. Al-Bayoumi has been determined to have co-signed for hijackers Nawaf Al-Hazmi and Khalid Al-Mihdhar when they rented an apartment at the Parkwood Apartments complex and to have sometimes paid rent for them.

On September 11, 2001, Nawaf AI-Hazmi and Khalid AlMihdhar hijacked American Airlines Flight #77 and crashed the plane into the Pentagon. Passenger manifests from American Airlines confirmed Al-Hazmi and Al-Mihdhar were passengers on American Airlines #77.

http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2001-10-03-FBI-penttbomb-bayoumi.pdf

Osama Basnan is the Saudi Agent who's identity is being protected here and is suspected as Bayoumi's replacement when he left the U.S. in June of 2001......

The possibility of ________ being affiliated with the Saudi Arabian Government or the Saudi Arabian Intelligence Service is supported by________ listing his employment in 1992 as the __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________.
Parkwood Apartment complex in July 2001 could indicate he succeeded Omar AI-Bayoumi and may be undertaking activities on behalf of the Government of Saudi Arabia.

On October 17, 1992, ______________ hosted a party at his house in Washington, D.C. for Sheik Omar Rahman, convicted mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Towers bombing.

http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2001-10-03-FBI-penttbomb-bayoumi.pdf

From Joint Inquiry:

Bassnan had hosted a party for the “Blind Sheikh” in Washington, D.C. in 1992. However, the FBI did not open an investigation.

page 229/858
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf

The Imam referred to here is Anwar Aluqi - a buddy of Bayoumi.....

Several persons informed the FBI after September 11 that this imam had closed-door meetings in San Diego with al-Mihdhar, al-Hazmi, and another individual, whom al- Bayoumi had asked to help the hijackers.

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf

Omar al-Bayoumi is a nice guy who helped the first hijackers who came to America-the ones the CIA knew about but didn't tell anyone......

Shortly after their arrival in the United States, future hijackers Khalid Al-Mihdhar and Nawaf Al-Hazmi moved to San Diego at the suggestion of Omar al-Bayoumi, who had previously been the focus of an FBI counterterrorism _________inquiry. In San Diego, they stayed at al-Bayoumi’s apartment for several days until he was able to find them an apartment. He then co-signed their lease, paid their security deposit and first month’s rent, arranged a party to welcome them to the San Diego community, and tasked another individual to help them become acclimated to the United States. _____________________________________ The second individual served as their translator, helped them obtain bank accounts and drivers’ licenses, and assisted them in locating flight schools.

page 59/858
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf

Omar al-Bayoumi is a Saudi Government agent with ties to terrorist elements....

Since September 11, the FBI has learned that al-Bayoumi has connections to terrorist elements.

Despite the fact that he was a student, al-Bayoumi had access to seemingly unlimited funding from Saudi Arabia. For example, an FBI source identified al-Bayoumi as the person who delivered $400,000 from Saudi Arabia for the Kurdish mosque in San Diego. One of the FBI’s best sources in San Diego informed the FBI that he thought that al-Bayoumi must be an intelligence officer for Saudi Arabia or another foreign power.

According to an individual interviewed by the FBI, al-Bayoumi’s salary from his employer, the Saudi Civil Aviation authority, was approved by Hamid al-Rashid. Hamid is the father of Saud al-Rashid, whose photo was found in a raid of an al-Qa’ida safehouse in Karachi and who has admitted to being in Afghanistan between May 2000 and May 2001.

page 225/858
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf

An amazing coincidence!

Saud al-Rashid was, according to KSM, supposed to be one of the hijackers, until he went back home to Saudi Arabia to get a U.S. visa and didn't return......

9-11 commission footnotes:

8. Saud al Rashid. Describing him as headstrong and immature, KSM says he disappeared after being sent to Saudi Arabia for a U.S.visa, either because he had second thoughts or because his family interceded and confiscated his passport

. page 543/585
http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/report/911Report.pdf

There is never a word in the FBI Investigations or the Joint Inquiry Investigation of Iraqi involvement in any way in the 9-11 plot. There are lots of words of Saudi Arabia involvement.

It wasn't just Hazmi and Mihdar that the CIA knew about.......

C.I.A. WAS GIVEN DATA ON HIJACKER LONG BEFORE 9/11
In March 1999, German intelligence officials gave the Central Intelligence Agency the first name and telephone number of Marwan al-Shehhi, and asked the Americans to track him.

After the Germans passed the information on to the C.I.A., they did not hear from the Americans about the matter until after Sept. 11, a senior German intelligence official said.

The Germans considered the information on Mr. Shehhi particularly valuable, and the commission is keenly interested in why it apparently did not lead to greater scrutiny of him.

The information concerning Mr. Shehhi, the man who took over the controls of United Airlines Flight 175, which flew into the south tower of the World Trade Center, came months earlier than well-documented tips about other hijackers, including two who were discovered to have attended a meeting of militants in Malaysia in January 2000.

The independent commission investigating the attacks has received information on the 1999 Shehhi tip, and is actively investigating the issue, said Philip Zelikow, executive director of the commission.

Asked whether American intelligence officials gave sufficient attention to the information about Mr. Shehhi, Mr. Zelikow said, ''We haven't reached any conclusions.''

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/24/u...ker-long-before-9-11.html?pagewanted=2&src=pm

Here is a searchable pdf of the 9-11 commission report......

http://www.911commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

You wont find what "conclusions" they reached, or even any of that mentioned at all. But the report will admit that in 1999 Shehhi had a couple of room mates - the so called ring leader of the hijackers, M Atta, and one of the paymasters - Binalshibh.

I think the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee who investigated the 9-11 attacks is worth listening to.....

“I am convinced that there was direct line between at least some of the terrorists who carried out the September 11th attacks and the government of Saudi Arabia, and that a Saudi government agent living in the United States, Omar al Bayoumi, provided direct assistance to September 11th hijackers Nawaf al Hazmi and Khalid al Mihdhar. Based on the evidence discovered by the Joint Inquiry, I further believe that al Bayoumi was acting at the direction of elements of the Saudi government and that an official from the Islamic and Cultural Affairs section of the Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles, Fahad al Thumairy, likely played some role in the support network for the 9/11 Attacks.” – Former U.S. Senator Bob Graham

http://blog.motleyrice.com/former-s...-of-saudi-arabia-supported-the-911-hijackers/

I don't think it's unreasonable for me to call this a cover up.......

Congressional Record: October 28, 2003 (Senate)
Page S13349-S13372
(3) The Administration's decision to classify this
information prevents the American people from having access
to information about the involvement of certain foreign
governments in the terrorist attacks of September 2001.

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2003_cr/s102803.html

Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee:

Sen. Graham: Bush covered up Saudi involvement in 9/11

http://www.salon.com/2004/09/08/graham_8/

The reason for the classification was not to protect "sources and methods". How do I know that? Because the authors of the report said so. The reason is obviously because the "certain foreign governments in the terrorist attacks of September 2001" did not include Iraq, which is contrary to who the U.S. Administration in charge at the time wanted to attack.

I'm sure Saudi Ambassador Bandar Bush who's wife was "accidentally" funneling money to Bayoumi and Basnan was OK with this effort...

"A Saudi national, Bassnan was living in San Diego last year and has been linked to Omar al Bayoumi, a Saudi student who befriended two men who wound up helping crash Flight 77 into the Pentagon. The sources also say that the ambassador, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, gave $15,000 to Bassnan."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1003790,00.html

FBI report on Pentbom investigation:

Connections of San Diego PENTTBOMB Subjects to the Govemment of Saudi Arabia
"4. Associations: Closely associated with_________Ambassador Prince Bandar)."

http://intelfiles.egoplex.com/2002-10-09-FBI-Saudi-Links-May-Be-Conflated.pdf

I am surprised Bandars' name was not redacted there.

When the State Department had taken away his security detail after Clinton came into office, Bandar had protested vociferously, arguing he needed it because Saddam had taken out a contract to have him killed. Also, Saddam had tried to assassinate his favorite U.S. president, George H.W. Bush, while he was visiting Kuwait after leaving office in April 1993. So the prince couldn't wait for the U.S. bombs to fall."

page 137
http://books.google.com/books/about/The_King_s_Messenger.html?id=UdIZhiQxGxEC

I'm pretty sure Saudi Arabia was OK with the U.S. Government making Iraq the scapegoat for 9-11....

Plans For Iraq Attack Began On 9/11

CBS News has learned that barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77 plowed into the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was telling his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq — even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks.

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500249_162-520830.html

I don't think it's unreasonable for me to be "disappointed" that the leaders of the U.S. Government are "misleading" it's citizens.....

Ten days after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, President Bush was advised that U.S. intelligence found no credible connection linking the attacks to the regime of Saddam Hussein, or evidence suggesting linkage between Saddam and the al-Qaida terrorist network, according to a published report.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/1016447...-link-refuted-days-after-attack/#.T81vssWuV8E

Al Qaeda had links to Saudi Arabia- not Iraq....

Cheney: Iraq, al-Qaeda linked pre-war
WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President Dick Cheney repeated his assertions of al-Qaeda links to Saddam Hussein's Iraq on Thursday as the Defense Department released a report citing more evidence that the prewar government did not cooperate with the terrorist group.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-04-06-cheney_N.htm

President Bush Outlines Iraqi Threat
Remarks by the President on Iraq

"Iraq possesses ballistic missiles with a likely range of hundreds of miles -- far enough to strike Saudi Arabia...

We know that Iraq and the al Qaeda terrorist network share a common enemy -- the United States of America. We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq.

Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." - Pres Bush

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

Like the fingerprints Saudi Arabia left all over the place that was covered up?

I have no doubt that "mistakes were made". But I don't think it's unreasonable for me to conclude this goes beyond "incompetence"