• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories

Saudi Arabia really might have funded 9/11

Might have been said already, but might the ability to sue foreign gov'ts just be a generic provision being played up to satisfy part of the base? As in even Graham doesn't really believe it but is talking the talk, knowing no meritorious suit will ever come of it?
 
Thermal said:
Might have been said already, but might the ability to sue foreign gov'ts just be a generic provision being played up to satisfy part of the base? As in even Graham doesn't really believe it but is talking the talk, knowing no meritorious suit will ever come of it?
Click to expand...

This. I'd say Congress isn't doing trutherism, they're doing politics. Which often looks very similar to CT, but is done by the establishment, rather than those resiling against the establishment.
 
Oystein said:
Well, the Saudi embassy, lead by Prince Bandar, is implied in several lines of evidence. Prince Bandar is not one of the 15,000 also-theres, he is the long-time ambassador to the USA, and later head of the Saudi intelligence system. He was surely top-50 among the Princes and government officials. Plus, he is often portrayed as a good personal friend of GW Bush - who surely wasn't good friend with 15,000+ members of the royal family.
Click to expand...

The Saudis have a ton of money, and so they use it to buy influence. I am sure that one of the many ways Bandar buys influence is that he funds a lot of Saudi-in-America charities. This ensures that the royal family will have friends in the US Saudi communities.

The guy who got al-Mihdhar his apartment was a Saudi named Omar al-Bayoumi. He was trying to start a mosque in San Diego, and hence had been funded by the Saudis to the tune of about $400K. He got them a unit at the complex he was living at and paid their first month's rent, but he was promptly reimbursed, according to this article which goes into excellent detail on the San Diego connection.

The 28 pages also mention that Bayoumi received $400,000 to start a new mosque in San Diego. According to U-T archives, Bayoumi was the building maintenace manager for Kurdish mosque in El Cajon that was created through a gift from a Saudi citizen, not the Saudi government.

The community told the U-T at the time that it was common for wealthy Saudis to offer such help to other Muslims because of the emphasis on charity in the religion, so the donation was not considered suspicious.

Bayoumi moved to the U.K. before 9/11. He was detained there and interviewed.

Bill Gore, who was the special agent-in-charge for the San Diego FBI field office at the time, said he sent agents to the U.K. to talk with Bayoumi, and he concluded that Bayoumi did not know the true intentions of the hijackers for being in the country.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Brainster said:
The Saudis have a ton of money, and so they use it to buy influence. I am sure that one of the many ways Bandar buys influence is that he funds a lot of Saudi-in-America charities. This ensures that the royal family will have friends in the US Saudi communities.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup: Well said.
 
kellyb said:
Is the consensus that Senator Graham is right?
Click to expand...
September 11, 2016 article, what took so long to find it?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=231395

Bob is selling books, was Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee on 9/11. Did you buy one of his books? Guess if someone was the Chair of the Senate Intelligence, they might blame Bush as a smoke screen since they were Chair of the Senate Intelligence. Best defence...

Bob's book sales declining again back in September 11, 2016. Did he do this in 2013/12 and earlier? Free publicity for books?

When did Bob write his first 9/11 associated book, and was one fiction?

As Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee on 9/11, can he explain his failure to stop 9/11?

Bob has books to sell, "loved" the Bush administration, and was Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee - Bob is right, publicity increases sales, or what.
 
kellyb said:
Do you think congress was engaging in "trutherism" when they passed the law that "was drafted specifically to allow families of the victims of the 9/11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia"?
Click to expand...
This is a good example of go chase the bait fallacy please remain on topic instead of derailing. The topic is about Saudi Arabia funding the attacks not everything in between.
 
Last edited:
kellyb said:
It wasn't a project of the Saudi government, but the funding for the attack certainly seems to have come from the Saudi government, albeit indirectly.
Click to expand...

You keep saying that, but you have yet to establish this as fact.
Given that your own link mentions the rift between the Saudi government and Bin Laden, and given also that it doesn't take much research to confirm this, on what are you basing this claim?
If it were true, it would mean the Saudi government was basically acting against its best interests, and for no obvious benefit.
 
Cosmic Yak said:
You keep saying that, but you have yet to establish this as fact.
Given that your own link mentions the rift between the Saudi government and Bin Laden, and given also that it doesn't take much research to confirm this, on what are you basing this claim?
If it were true, it would mean the Saudi government was basically acting against its best interests, and for no obvious benefit.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how united or coherent the House of Saud's view of their "best interests" is. My understanding is that there are more than a few within and outside the Saudi monarchy, religious establishment, leading business families (like, say, the bin Ladens), and the sprawling Saudi government itself - military, intelligence, and security forces - who, for one reason or another, (whether it was genuine religious fanaticism, Machiavellian power plays and palace intrigue, political resentment of America, Israel, etc. and "foreign influence" and alleged "meddling in Saudi affairs", a myopic and cowardly "insurance policy" against Salafi-Wahhabi Islamist jihadists, including such powerful and influential figures as Osama bin Laden; or some combination of the aforementioned factors), supported to one extent or another the activities of bin Laden, al-Qaeda, and the broader ideological, educational, financial, and indeed, operational waters in which the jihadists swam. Certainly many ordinary Saudis admire the "Cause!"

Remember, Osama bin Laden was the Saudi golden boy in the 80s against the USSR, and supported heavily by Saudi as well as Pakistani intelligence, among many other state and nonstate actors in the Gulf through "charitable" donations. Osama knew where the bodies were buried (literally, in some cases!). He knew many of the dirty secrets of the Saudi royals, Saudi clerics, and indeed, the Saudi business elite - he was an extremely and apparently sincerely devout and fanatically religious scion of the last of these.

The golden boy with the keys to the Kingdom - until he soured on the Kingdom. But even if the House of Saud took away with the keys, they seem to have neglected to change the locks. Hence, the apparent "leave us alone, and we'll discreetly protect you in Afghanistan" policy of the Saudis from the mid-90s up until 9/11 (they were one of three governments, other than Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates, to recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan before 9/11, for God's sake. They cannot possibly have been naive as to what they were doing, or whom they were dealing with). And they did this in a way that gave them some degree of plausible deniability. Key word being "some."

Needless to say, this bit them in the rear end.
 
Last edited:
I heard in passing that apparently the US Senate just passed a Resolution calling upon the government to declassify tens of thousands of pages about Saudi Arabia's connections to 9/11 as far as possible.
 
Oystein said:
I heard in passing that apparently the US Senate just passed a Resolution calling upon the government to declassify tens of thousands of pages about Saudi Arabia's connections to 9/11 as far as possible.
Click to expand...

Mmmmm... potentially interesting but....

It may simply be political grandstanding. You can bet that "declassify...as far as possible" is one of the base principles of the relevant statutes.

Tho it could act as a political hint to the bureaucrats to do what they should have been doing anyway.
 
Last edited:
Allen773 said:
I'm not sure how united or coherent the House of Saud's view of their "best interests" is. My understanding is that there are more than a few within and outside the Saudi monarchy, religious establishment, leading business families (like, say, the bin Ladens), and the sprawling Saudi government itself - military, intelligence, and security forces - who, for one reason or another, (whether it was genuine religious fanaticism, Machiavellian power plays and palace intrigue, political resentment of America, Israel, etc. and "foreign influence" and alleged "meddling in Saudi affairs", a myopic and cowardly "insurance policy" against Salafi-Wahhabi Islamist jihadists, including such powerful and influential figures as Osama bin Laden; or some combination of the aforementioned factors), supported to one extent or another the activities of bin Laden, al-Qaeda, and the broader ideological, educational, financial, and indeed, operational waters in which the jihadists swam. Certainly many ordinary Saudis admire the "Cause!"

Remember, Osama bin Laden was the Saudi golden boy in the 80s against the USSR, and supported heavily by Saudi as well as Pakistani intelligence, among many other state and nonstate actors in the Gulf through "charitable" donations. Osama knew where the bodies were buried (literally, in some cases!). He knew many of the dirty secrets of the Saudi royals, Saudi clerics, and indeed, the Saudi business elite - he was an extremely and apparently sincerely devout and fanatically religious scion of the last of these.

The golden boy with the keys to the Kingdom - until he soured on the Kingdom. But even if the House of Saud took away with the keys, they seem to have neglected to change the locks. Hence, the apparent "leave us alone, and we'll discreetly protect you in Afghanistan" policy of the Saudis from the mid-90s up until 9/11 (they were one of three governments, other than Pakistan and the United Arab Emirates, to recognize the Taliban as the legitimate government of Afghanistan before 9/11, for God's sake. They cannot possibly have been naive as to what they were doing, or whom they were dealing with). And they did this in a way that gave them some degree of plausible deniability. Key word being "some."

Needless to say, this bit them in the rear end.
Click to expand...

I agree with a lot of this, but I think it's slightly missing the point.

That the House of Saud is large and divergent is not in question. However, the thrust of my post was about the Saudi government, funding the attacks as official, though covert, government policy. To alienate America, Saudi Arabia's key ally, would seem to be entirely counterproductive, and to encourage the extremist elements in Saudi society would also be of little benefit to the Saudi government. It would merely serve to destabilise the country and threaten the rule of the House of Saud.
To give an example, Pakistan has been playing a very similar double game. They have been ostensibly involved in the fight against terrorism, tacitly allowing US drone strikes in the tribal areas, and publicly condemning jihadism, whilst at the same time letting those same jihadists shelter in Pakistan, and aiding and abettting the Taliban in Afghanistan, and other extremist networks in both countries. This allows them to obtain millions of dollars in US aid, and at the same time fulfills their aim of grooming Afghanistan as an ally in their war with India.
Saudi Arabia is unlikely to adopt a similar policy, because there is, as far as I can see, no benefit to be had from such a double game.
With regard to Saudi recognition of the Taliban government, it is my understanding that they were trying to extradite Bin Laden from Afghanistan, and were hoping that, along with their support of the Taliban's fundamentalist form of Islam, that they could use closer ties with their regime to facilitate this aim. I'm not sure the Saudis were trying to protect him: he had fallen from grace some time prior to 9/11, and I see no benefit to them to let him stay at large. If they had wanted to protect their dirty secrets, that would have been much easier for them to do if Bin Laden had disappeared into a Saudi prison.
Finally, I'm not sure how much support Al Qaeda had or has from ordinary Saudis. I spent 4 years there, and, while they were quite open about their admiration for Hitler, for example, not one person expressed anything similar about Al Qaeda. In fact, many of the students I taught were learning Englsih for the express purpose of escaping the repressive Saudi society they had been born into, and living in the States. Obviously, there are pockets of extreme jihadism and fundamentalism there, but I never encountered any, and so am really not sure how widespread it is.
 
kellyb said:
It wasn't a project of the Saudi government, but the funding for the attack certainly seems to have come from the Saudi government, albeit indirectly.
Click to expand...
That's saying nothing. The Spanish government indirectly funded my car many years ago, when I was receiving the unemployment pay back in these days. The tricky part here is to prove that the Saudi government had the intention to fund the attacks when they funded those charities.
 
pgimeno said:
That's saying nothing. The Spanish government indirectly funded my car many years ago, when I was receiving the unemployment pay back in these days. The tricky part here is to prove that the Saudi government had the intention to fund the attacks when they funded those charities.
Click to expand...

Or indeed that the Saudi Embassy, personified by Prince Bandar, the Ambassador, had the intention of funding and supporting a terrorist attack when they funded and supported Saudi participants in the terrorist attack. Saudi Arabia is extremely rich, and may have had a general policy of looking after or supporting their countrymen and -women in the USA generously for the flimsiest of reasons, or no reasons at all. Someone would have to convince me that the extent of the alleged support was unusual, or that the reasons stated were unusual.

This is all very worthy of investigation - and possibly HAS been investigated, but classified, at great length. Seeing the result declassified ... I find no immediate reason not to, even if it gives Truthers more tens of thousands of pages to misconstrue and quote out of context.
 
Oystein said:
Or indeed that the Saudi Embassy, personified by Prince Bandar, the Ambassador, had the intention of funding and supporting a terrorist attack when they funded and supported Saudi participants in the terrorist attack. Saudi Arabia is extremely rich, and may have had a general policy of looking after or supporting their countrymen and -women in the USA generously for the flimsiest of reasons, or no reasons at all. Someone would have to convince me that the extent of the alleged support was unusual, or that the reasons stated were unusual.

This is all very worthy of investigation - and possibly HAS been investigated, but classified, at great length. Seeing the result declassified ... I find no immediate reason not to, even if it gives Truthers more tens of thousands of pages to misconstrue and quote out of context.
Click to expand...

It's my experience that no CTists actually read FBI or CIA documents. They'll quote other CTists who think they know what they say (The NIST WTC#7, and Twin Towers reports are perfect examples).

By the way, the Hulu mini-series "The Looming Tower" is excellent. It details the intelligence failure brilliantly, both the CIA and FBI's points of view get a fair hearing, but the story is definitely written from the FBI's New York Office's point of view. Our weird relationship with the Saudis is emphasized at every key plot development. Great work, but a very frustrating show to watch.:thumbsup:
 
Axxman300 said:
It's my experience that no CTists actually read FBI or CIA documents. They'll quote other CTists who think they know what they say (The NIST WTC#7, and Twin Towers reports are perfect examples).

By the way, the Hulu mini-series "The Looming Tower" is excellent. It details the intelligence failure brilliantly, both the CIA and FBI's points of view get a fair hearing, but the story is definitely written from the FBI's New York Office's point of view. Our weird relationship with the Saudis is emphasized at every key plot development. Great work, but a very frustrating show to watch.:thumbsup:
Click to expand...

Haven't seen the TV series, but I highly recommend the book.
 
Was it in the Saudi government's strategic interest to "disappear" a prominent Washington Post columnist under the noses of the Turkish government?

Don't underestimate the stupidity of an inbred royal family, particularly in certain cases - of which there are plenty in the House of Saud, considering its thousands/tens of thousands of princes...
 
Allen773 said:
Was it in the Saudi government's strategic interest to "disappear" a prominent Washington Post columnist under the noses of the Turkish government?

Don't underestimate the stupidity of an inbred royal family, particularly in certain cases - of which there are plenty in the House of Saud, considering its thousands/tens of thousands of princes...
Click to expand...

Perhaps they looked at the significant lack of solid action after the Russians poisoned the Skripals and thought they could do the same.
 
Ahem....I just discovered this document: the (many of the) 9/11 victims’ families lawsuit against Saudi Arabia under JASTA.


Interesting excerpt from pages 138-139.



For years prior to and on September 11, 2001, Saudi Arabia established, owned, operated and controlled a series of state-run "charity" organizations, namely

- the Muslim World League (MWL),
- the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO),
- the Rabita Trust,
- the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY),
- the Benevolence International Foundation (BIF),
- the al Haramain Islamic Foundation (AHIF),
- the Saudi High Commission for Relief of Bosnia and Herzegovina (SHC),
- the Saudi Joint Relief Committee for Kosovo and Albania (SJRC), and
- the Saudi Red Crescent (SRC),

and these organizations are referred to hereinafter as "Saudi Arabia's charity organizations" and, as further described herein, each of these organizations(i) were so closely related to Saudi Arabia that they must be considered as part of Saudi Arabia, and/or (ii) were government agents of and/or(iii) were alter-egos of Saudi Arabia, because Saudi Arabia:

established, controlled, operated and regulated each organization through its King, Council of Ministers, the Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs, the Council of Senior Ulema, Ministry of Islamic Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, other Ministries and bodies and Saudi Arabia's Embassies throughout the world;

maintained significant, repeated and extensive control of the day-to-day operations of each organization;

provided each organization with virtually all of its funding and determined how its funds were distributed;

established guidelines, plans and policies that each organization was required to follow;

appointed Saudi Arabia officials and employees to the lead positions within each organization;

staffed each organization with Saudi Arabia's officials and employees;

hired, fired and directed each organization’s officers and employees;

required each organization to obtain its approval for ordinary business decisions, including purchases, the locations of its operations and offices, banking, budgeting and grant decisions;

used each organization's personnel and property as its own;

ignored the separate legal status, if any, of each organization;

treated each organization as a part of Saudi Arabia;

used each organization to perform its core governmental functions, including foreign affairs and the advancement of Saudi Arabia's state religion of Wahhabism throughout the world;

and operated, controlled and used each organization in such a manner that it would work a fraud or injustice to regard the organization as a legal entity separate from Saudi Arabia.
Click to expand...


https://static1.squarespace.com/static/57fbbfa88419c2de35c1639d/t/58d03556ff7c50abde86720f/1490040171270/Ashton-v-KSA-2017.pdf
 
Paywall. Does anyone have access, and if so, can you quote the most interesting parts?
 
PS: The name of that Saudi official hasn’t been released to the public, just to the lawyers and family members who’ve been suing KSA under JASTA. Very small crowd, very hush-hush. No permission to share the name.

I’m pretty sure that this official worked in the Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs, likely at the Saudi Embassy in Washington, maybe even back home at headquarters but based on what I’ve read in the lawsuits I am leaning strongly toward this official being based at their embassy in DC.

I’ve read elsewhere that after Osama bin Laden and similar voices started publicly cursing the House of Saud and the state-sponsored Wahhabi religious establishment in Riyadh in the 1990s for letting the American infidel soldiers “defile” the Land of the Holy Places (Mecca and Medina) and in Osama’s case, started launching attacks against Western targets in the Kingdom and calling for the outright deposing of the al-Saud, the Saudi government turned their Ministry of Islamic Affairs into a massive global bureaucracy where they placed their most radical and Osama bin Laden-loving religious nutters.

Furthermore, they gave this same ministry effective control over the major Saudi religious charities and similar organizations that operated globally, and placed religious extremists from this and other government ministries and agencies in Saudi embassies and consulates worldwide. The US would be no exception to this policy.

Finally, Osama bin Laden and others who later formed al-Qaeda themselves got into the jihad game as a direct result of extensive patronage by (primarily) Saudi intelligence, Gulf Arabs Islamic charities, and other networks of wealthy donors and supporters throughout the Sunni Muslim world, but particularly KSA and the other Gulf monarchies. And while many of these donors were private, they often had at least indirect ties to members of the royal families and governments of those monarchies. No doubt, there were (and still are) plenty of bin Laden/al-Qaeda/Salafi jihadism sympathizers and supporters throughout these networks, and I can’t imagine the most senior of royals and officials aren’t well aware of that, even if they themselves don’t support those things.
 
Last edited:
The Saudis continue to be a malignant influence in both the US and throughout the world, particular the Islamic world:

The Justice Department has charged two former Twitter employees with spying for Saudi Arabia by accessing the company’s information on dissidents who use the platform, marking the first time federal prosecutors have publicly accused the kingdom of running agents in the United States.

One of those implicated in the scheme, according to court papers, is an associate of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, who the CIA has concluded likely ordered the assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Istanbul last year.
Click to expand...


https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/former-twitter-employees-charged-with-spying-for-saudi-arabia-by-digging-into-the-accounts-of-kingdom-critics/2019/11/06/2e9593da-00a0-11ea-8bab-0fc209e065a8_story.html
 
Allen773 said:
The Saudis continue to be a malignant influence in both the US and throughout the world, particular the Islamic world:




https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/former-twitter-employees-charged-with-spying-for-saudi-arabia-by-digging-into-the-accounts-of-kingdom-critics/2019/11/06/2e9593da-00a0-11ea-8bab-0fc209e065a8_story.html
Click to expand...

Which begs a bigger question: Why would the Saudi government waste time and money on Al Qaeda when their money gives them access to experts with proven track records in black ops? In 2000, 2001 there were plenty of former Spetsnaz, Serbian Special Forces and intelligence, former PIRA bomb makers, and others available. This would be consistent with everything else the Saudis do when they buy whatever they want by going first-class. This would give the Saudi government total control and if they funded it right - total deniability.

Individual Saudis giving money to Al Qaeda is likely, though not as a state-santioned act.
 
Axxman300 said:
Which begs a bigger question: Why would the Saudi government waste time and money on Al Qaeda when their money gives them access to experts with proven track records in black ops? In 2000, 2001 there were plenty of former Spetsnaz, Serbian Special Forces and intelligence, former PIRA bomb makers, and others available. This would be consistent with everything else the Saudis do when they buy whatever they want by going first-class. This would give the Saudi government total control and if they funded it right - total deniability.

Individual Saudis giving money to Al Qaeda is likely, though not as a state-santioned act.
Click to expand...

All good points, but consider a couple of things:

- Osama bin Laden’s “Afghan Arabs” operation was not merely the (reckless) bravery of Osama and his followers and the goodwill of individual Saudi donors to his cause (among others), but - if we can believe quotes from long-time Saudi intelligence director Prince Turki al-Faisal (paraphrased: “before the Soviet war in Aghanistan, our services only wrote checks - we didn’t do operations) and his chief of staff Ahmed Babeeb (sp), a man who had been one of Osama bin Laden’s high school teachers (“I loved Osama”, “the truth is, he was our man in Afghanistan”) (these quotes are from Steve Coll’s excellent Ghost Wars book) - a key part of Saudi intelligence operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan in the 1980s.

- Elsewhere, there have been quotes that much of the Saudi state bureaucracy - including religious and educational ministries, but also the military, security, and yes, intelligence services - has been home to many bin Laden/al-Qaeda sympathizers and supporters.

- And then there are those infamous charities, many of which have or have had significant Saudi state funding and in some cases, outright control by powerful, senior members of the royal family.

Of course, considering all of the corruption, palace intrigue, personal rivalries, factionalism, and the fact that so much money has come out of Saudi Arabia for half a century (and other wealthy Gulf monarchies who similarly spread and sponsor sone hard-line interpretations of Sunni Islam around the world, though perhaps not to the extent that KSA does) I would be willing to bet that even the sharpest accountants in the world wouldn’t be able to make heads or tails of the massive global Saudi financial mess (aside from ARAMCO, the exception that proves the rule). You can bet for sure that none of the Saudis involved know the full story.
 
Last edited:
Well yeah they funded a lot of stuff that is just a tiny step above being slavers but you know. We all know what the bible thinks of slavery lets ask google about the Koran. WIkI really spins it but sounds like that were for the most part fore it. 17 million slaves in the middle east. wow that's some doing. I did recently donate some money to help Syrian refugees. I guess I am a few years behind the curve there though
 
Last edited:
MinnesotaBrant said:
Well yeah they funded a lot of stuff that is just a tiny step above being slavers but you know. We all know what the bible thinks of slavery lets ask google about the Koran. WIkI really spins it but sounds like that were for the most part fore it. 17 million slaves in the middle east. wow that's some doing. I did recently donate some money to help Syrian refugees. I guess I am a few years behind the curve there though
Click to expand...

Not exactly sure what you’re saying here...
 
Allen773 said:
Not exactly sure what you’re saying here...
Click to expand...

What I am saying is that they are someone donated 100m dollars to fund Sesame Street in Syria as well as other educational programs wow. Let me look up the non profit. I might donate to them too. McArthur Foundation I think I am gonna donate to that too. sounds wonderful. I am still looking into it. Refugee.org seems a fine organization too. International Rescue Comittee and Sesame Street Workshop. I think I will probably donate to the comittee one again tomorrow because they don't seem to mail you or email you stuff.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/21/world/middleeast/macarthur-sesame-street-refugees.html
 
Last edited:
Allen773 said:
PS: The name of that Saudi official hasn’t been released to the public, just to the lawyers and family members who’ve been suing KSA under JASTA. Very small crowd, very hush-hush. No permission to share the name.

I’m pretty sure that this official worked in the Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs, likely at the Saudi Embassy in Washington, maybe even back home at headquarters but based on what I’ve read in the lawsuits I am leaning strongly toward this official being based at their embassy in DC.

I’ve read elsewhere that after Osama bin Laden and similar voices started publicly cursing the House of Saud and the state-sponsored Wahhabi religious establishment in Riyadh in the 1990s for letting the American infidel soldiers “defile” the Land of the Holy Places (Mecca and Medina) and in Osama’s case, started launching attacks against Western targets in the Kingdom and calling for the outright deposing of the al-Saud, the Saudi government turned their Ministry of Islamic Affairs into a massive global bureaucracy where they placed their most radical and Osama bin Laden-loving religious nutters.

Furthermore, they gave this same ministry effective control over the major Saudi religious charities and similar organizations that operated globally, and placed religious extremists from this and other government ministries and agencies in Saudi embassies and consulates worldwide. The US would be no exception to this policy.

Finally, Osama bin Laden and others who later formed al-Qaeda themselves got into the jihad game as a direct result of extensive patronage by (primarily) Saudi intelligence, Gulf Arabs Islamic charities, and other networks of wealthy donors and supporters throughout the Sunni Muslim world, but particularly KSA and the other Gulf monarchies. And while many of these donors were private, they often had at least indirect ties to members of the royal families and governments of those monarchies. No doubt, there were (and still are) plenty of bin Laden/al-Qaeda/Salafi jihadism sympathizers and supporters throughout these networks, and I can’t imagine the most senior of royals and officials aren’t well aware of that, even if they themselves don’t support those things.
Click to expand...

Allen773 said:
All good points, but consider a couple of things:

- Osama bin Laden’s “Afghan Arabs” operation was not merely the (reckless) bravery of Osama and his followers and the goodwill of individual Saudi donors to his cause (among others), but - if we can believe quotes from long-time Saudi intelligence director Prince Turki al-Faisal (paraphrased: “before the Soviet war in Aghanistan, our services only wrote checks - we didn’t do operations) and his chief of staff Ahmed Babeeb (sp), a man who had been one of Osama bin Laden’s high school teachers (“I loved Osama”, “the truth is, he was our man in Afghanistan”) (these quotes are from Steve Coll’s excellent Ghost Wars book) - a key part of Saudi intelligence operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan in the 1980s.

- Elsewhere, there have been quotes that much of the Saudi state bureaucracy - including religious and educational ministries, but also the military, security, and yes, intelligence services - has been home to many bin Laden/al-Qaeda sympathizers and supporters.

- And then there are those infamous charities, many of which have or have had significant Saudi state funding and in some cases, outright control by powerful, senior members of the royal family.

Of course, considering all of the corruption, palace intrigue, personal rivalries, factionalism, and the fact that so much money has come out of Saudi Arabia for half a century (and other wealthy Gulf monarchies who similarly spread and sponsor sone hard-line interpretations of Sunni Islam around the world, though perhaps not to the extent that KSA does) I would be willing to bet that even the sharpest accountants in the world wouldn’t be able to make heads or tails of the massive global Saudi financial mess (aside from ARAMCO, the exception that proves the rule). You can bet for sure that none of the Saudis involved know the full story.
Click to expand...

These are a really good (albeit) loose description that ties in a lot of forces at work.

We must beware, though, of using amorphous definitions of "Saudi Arabia".

Sometimes we mean individuals, sometimes we mean the country's policy on something, sometimes we mean the Saud royal family.

Minnesota Brant, I saw a good news story about a week ago about how the percentage of women using the internet in Saudi Arabia is far greater than its male population's.

Imagine how this affects their knowledge of other countries, and how the women in turn affect Saudi attitudes to justice on an individual level.

It made me think about what women do/did when they are only allowed out when a male relative accompanies them... learn things on the internet!
 
Attorney for 9/11 families: intimate knowledge of Saudi government involvement in the attacks was the motive for murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

“Khashoggi was part of the intelligence community and we knew he knew a lot about the Saudi government’s involvement in 9/11. He was connected to the Muslim Brotherhood and to [former Saudi Crown Prince] Muhammad bin Nayef, and that’s the reason our investigator went to speak with him,” said Kreindler. “She said would you come to New York and talk to my boss? He said yes.

“I’m sure that as soon as she left, he called KBS [Khalid bin Salman] and said, ‘Look, the 9/11 lawyers are on to me. They know that I know what you guys did and I didn’t give ‘em anything, but you’re holding my kid in Saudi Arabia and if you harm him I will.’ So my belief is that Khashoggi was killed not because he was a dissident, there are lots of dissidents, but because he was holding this ax over the Saudis’ heads.
Click to expand...

https://www.floridabulldog.org/2019/11/attorney-9-11-secrets-motive-for-murder-of-journalist-jamal-khashoggi/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom