The "28 pages" thread

[Axxman300]

The thing that is lost here is that the Saudis cleaned house after 9-11. They shut down at least one of the charities, and a few people ended up dying far out in the desert after being "questioned".

Another important issue is that none of these allegations were followed up on, at least not by the Commission, and I question why unsubstantiated allegations would be included at all beyond transparency.

Now that they're all out in daylight, they can be investigated by interested parties to see what shakes out.

 

[JSanderO]

Regardless of the 28 pages... knowing what I do about the KSA it's hard to understand why a western democracy would have diplomatic relations with country such as this. Their human rights practices are deplorable. The only reason I can see is they have oil and with their wealth buy western stuff like cars and oil rigs and jets and military weapons systems. And all of those reason seem like a weird reason to deal with a monarchy which tortures and treats women as they do. I would call them a rogue nation.

 

[Oystein]

The thing that is lost here is that the Saudis cleaned house after 9-11. They shut down at least one of the charities, and a few people ended up dying far out in the desert after being "questioned".
...

How do you know all this?

Sources, evidence...

 

[Axxman300]

How do you know all this?

Sources, evidence...

I'll have to go dig all this stuff out.

 

[Oystein]

I'll have to go dig all this stuff out.

That would be great!
I remember having heard this a very long time ago, but more as a matter of hearsay, rumor, speculation; no trustworthy or verifiable sources. Could just as well have been disinfo.

I would actually be quite surprised if such evidence really existed - not because it ain't true, but because both the KSA and the US services would want to keep a veeery low profile on this. Covert action is rarely done transparently, and any action within SA tends to be veiled.

 

[jimd3100]

jimd, what is your take on Richard Clarke's theory that perhaps "al-Bayoumi was a Saudi spy who was investigating al-Qaeda at the request of the CIA"?

http://abcnews.go.com/International/28-pages-questions-alleged-saudi-spy-cia/story?id=40697425

I'm aware of his theory. I might comment on it if I get time, but actually there is something in the 28 pages that struck me immediately when I read it and that has been touched on here, whether or not anyone realizes it.....

The thing that is lost here is that the Saudis cleaned house after 9-11. They shut down at least one of the charities, and a few people ended up dying far out in the desert after being "questioned".

I don't think so. I noticed something in the released 28 pages immediately that was odd..and relating to this.

How do you know all this?

Sources, evidence...

The "cleaning house part/dying in the desert"... is from Gerald Posner and his book released Sept 1 2003

Could just as well have been disinfo.

It looks to me like the release of the 28 pages proves that is the case.

Zubaydah was captured in March 2002. The FBI did get several items including a phone book according to investigators.
The Joint Inquiry that the 28 pages are from was finished in Dec 2002. But was withheld from the public until July 2003, so The Bush Administration could go to war in Iraq in March of 2003, and censure the 28 pages, or as some prefer.....so the CIA could go over the report and decide what to redact to "keep America safe" In any case, the unclassified version was released in July 2003.

At the end of August 2003, Gerald Posner was releasing his new book, Why America Slept.

Time talked with him just before his book release.....

Sunday, Aug. 31, 2003
CIA men flew Zubaydah to an Afghan complex fitted out as a fake Saudi jail chamber, where "two Arab-Americans, now with Special Forces," pretending to be Saudi inquisitors, used drugs and threats to scare him into more confessions.

Yet when Zubaydah was confronted by the false Saudis, writes Posner, "his reaction was not fear, but utter relief." Happy to see them, he reeled off telephone numbers for a senior member of the royal family who would, said Zubaydah, "tell you what to do."The man at the other end would be Prince Ahmed bin Salman bin Abdul Aziz, a Westernized nephew of King Fahd and a publisher better known as a racehorse owner. His horse War Emblem won the Kentucky Derby in 2002). To the amazement of the U.S., the numbers proved valid. When the fake inquisitors accused Zubaydah of lying, he responded with a 10-minute monologue laying out the Saudi-Pakistani-Osama triangle, according to the book.

Zubaydah, writes Posner, said the Saudi connection ran through Prince Turki al-Faisal bin Abdul Aziz, the kingdoms longtime intelligence chief. Zubaydah said bin Laden "personally" told him of a 1991 meeting at which Turki agreed to let bin Laden leave Saudi Arabia and to provide him with secret funds as long as al-Qaeda refrained from promoting jihad in the kingdom. The Pakistani contact, high - ranking air force officer Mushaf Ali Mir, entered the equation, Zubaydah said, at a 1996 meeting in Pakistan also attended by Zubaydah. Bin Laden struck a deal with Mir, then in the military but tied closely to Islamists in Pakistans Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), to get protection, arms and supplies for al-Qaeda. Zubaydah told interrogators bin Laden said the arrangement was "blessed by the Saudis," according to Posner.

In Posners stark judgment, the Saudis "effectively had (bin Laden) on their payroll since the start of the decade." Abu Zubaydah told the interrogators that the Saudis regularly sent the funds through three royal-prince intermediaries he named, according to the book.

The last eight paragraphs of the book set up a final startling development, McGeary writes. Those three Saudi princes all perished within days of one another. On July 22, 2002, Prince Ahmed was felled by a heart attack at age 43. One day later Prince Sultan bin Faisal bin Turki al-Saud, 41, was killed in what was called a high-speed car accident. The last member of the trio, Prince Fahd bin Turki bin Saud al-Kabir, officially "died of thirst" while traveling east of Riyadh one week later. And seven months after that, Mushaf Ali Mir, by then Pakistans Air Marshal, perished in a plane crash in clear weather over the unruly North-West Frontier Province, along with his wife and closest confidants, Posner writes.

Without charging any skulduggery (Posner told TIME they "may in fact be coincidences"), the author notes that these deaths occurred after CIA officials passed along Zubaydahs accusations to Riyadh and Islamabad.
http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,480240,00.html

This part seems particularly relevant now.....

And many will wonder if these matters were addressed in the 28 pages censored from Washingtons official report on 9/11.
http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,480240,00.html

Here is what was in the 28 pages......

According to FBI documents, several of the phone numbers found in the phone book of Abu Zubaida, a senior al-Qa’ida operative captured in Pakistan in March 2002, could be linked at least, at least indirectly, to telephone numbers in the United States. One of those U.S. numbers is subscribed to by the ASPCOL Corp., which is located in Aspen, Colorado, and manages the affairs of the Colorado residents of the Saudi Ambassador Bandar. The FBI noticed that ASPCOL has an unlisted telephone number. A November 18, 2002 FBI response to the Joint Inquiry states that "CIA traces have revealed no direct links between numbers found in Zubaida’s phone book and numbers in the United States."

– According to an FBI document, the telephone number of a bodyguard at the Saudi Embassy in Washington DC, who some have alleged may be a [redacted] was also found in Abu Zubaida’s possessions;

Phone Numbers Linking Abu Zubaida to a Company in the United States and a Saudi Diplomat in Washington

On March 28, 2002 U.S. and coalition forces retrieved the telephone book of Abu Zubaida, whom the U.S. Government has identified as a senior al-Qa’ida operational coordinator. According to an FBI documents, "a review of toll records has linked several of the numbers found in Zubaida's phonebook with U.S. phone numbers." One of the numbers is unlisted and subscribed to by the ASPCOL Corp. in Aspen, Colorado. On July 15, 2002, FBI Headquarters sent a lead to the Denver Field Office requiring that it investigate this connection. On September 19, 2002 agents of the Denver Field Office responded, stating that they had completed their initial investigation.

According to the FBI’s Denver Office, ASPCOL is the umbrella corporation that manages the affairs of the Colorado residence of Prince Bandar, the Saudi ambassador to the United States. The facility is protected by Scimitar Security. Agents of the Denver Field Office noted that neither ASPCOL nor Scimitar Security is listed in the phone book or is easily locatable. In addition, the Colorado Secretary of State’s office has no record of ASPCOL. The Denver office did not attempt to make any local inquiries about ASPCOL, as they believed that any inquiries regarding ASPCOL would be quickly known by Prince Bandar’s employees. Due to the sensitivity of this matter, they decided to hold their investigation of ASPCOL in abeyance until they received additional guidance from FBI Headquarters.

According to the FBI, the phone number of an individual named [redacted] of McLean, Virginia was found within the effects of Abu Zubaida. [redacted] is reportedly a bodyguard at the Saudi Embassy in Washington, DC. The FBI now suspects that he may be a [redacted]. In a September 17, 2002 document, the FBI notes that the Bureau is opening an investigation on [redacted] due to the size and value of his residence and his suspicious activity in approaching U.S. Intelligence Community personnel. It also appears that [redacted] has been in contact with [redacted], which is located at [redacted], in McLean, Virginia. The FBI has identified this address as the address of Prince Bandar. According to the FBI, [redacted] is officially a driver for the Saudi Embassy. [Redacted] number was also linked to ASPCOL, Prince Bandar’s umbrella company located in Colorado.

Finally, [redacted], the subject of Phoenix and Portland FBI counterterrorism investigations, also has close ties to a member of the Saudi royal family. [redacted] no longer resides in the United States, but is still the subject of an FBI investigation.

In May 2001, the U.S. Government became aware that an individual in Saudi Arabia was in contact with Abu Zubaida and was most likely aware of an upcoming al-Qa’ida operation. The U.S. Government pressured the Saudi Government to locate him. The Saudis informed the U.S. Government that they required additional information to do so. The U.S. Government agency that had originally learned of this individual’s knowledge refused to provide the Saudis with additional information because it would reveal sources and methods. The National Security Council also tried to pressure the Saudis, but the Saudis would not cooperate without the additional information.
http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/declasspart4.pdf

One of the numbers is unlisted and subscribed to by the ASPCOL Corp. in Aspen, Colorado. On July 15, 2002, FBI Headquarters sent a lead to the Denver Field Office requiring that it investigate this connection.

One week later....
On July 22, 2002, Prince Ahmed was felled by a heart attack at age 43. One day later Prince Sultan bin Faisal bin Turki al-Saud, 41, was killed in what was called a high-speed car accident. The last member of the trio, Prince Fahd bin Turki bin Saud al-Kabir, officially "died of thirst" while traveling east of Riyadh one week later.

I haven't seen evidence of these people Posner names as having terrorist connections. Basnan and Thumariry would be the prime candidates for "heart attacks" if they were going to "clean house" in this way.

I think Posner got played, and was fed disinfo. Obviously it was Bandar who was the Saudi Prince Zubaida had phone info on.

Who fed Posner this information?

Posner told TIME he got the details of Zubaydahs interrogation and revelations from a U.S. official outside the CIA at a "very senior Executive Branch level" whose name we would probably know if he told it to us, McGeary writes. He did not. The second source, Posner said, was from the CIA, and he gave what Posner viewed as general confirmation of the story but did not repeat the details.
http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,480240,00.html

Someone working at the White House and - somewhat.. confirmed by someone at CIA.

BTW The 9-11 Commission didn't appreciate the way the CIA responded when asked about this.....

December 13, 2007
MEMORANDUM
To: Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton
From: Philip Zelikow

Late in its investigation, reacting to press allegations that Abu Zubaydah had referred to a Saudi prince in his interrogations, the Commission asked “what information does the CIA have” about whether such assertions were made in Zubaydah’s interrogations. (CIA Question for the Record No. 3, dated May 20, 2004). We knew the CIA believed this was untrue but we asked the question formally to get any relevant information for the record. We cannot find a record of a CIA response.

CIA recorded hundreds of hours of interrogations of Abu Zubaydah and Abd al Rashim al Nashiri and perhaps others, during 2002 and perhaps at other times. These recordings are reported to have been destroyed in November 2005
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/national/20071222-INTEL-MEMO.pdf

Zubaydah today:

As far as we can tell, he is the only prisoner in U.S. history whose interrogation was the subject of debate and direct authorization within the White House, and the first to disappear into a secret CIA "black site."

He was the first prisoner in the "war on terror" to experience the full gamut of ancient techniques adapted by the communists in Korea and, 50 years later, approved by the Justice Department in Washington. He was the first prisoner to have his interrogations captured on videotape -- a practice the CIA ended in late 2002. Two years later, the agency destroyed 90 videotapes of Abu Zubaydah's interrogations, which resulted in a criminal investigation of government officials connected with the program.

In fact, the CIA brass at Langley, Va., ordered his interrogators to keep at it long after the latter warned that he had been wrung dry.

Partly as a result of injuries he suffered while he was fighting the communists in Afghanistan, partly as a result of how those injuries were exacerbated by the CIA and partly as a result of his extended isolation, Abu Zubaydah's mental grasp is slipping away.

Today, he suffers blinding headaches and has permanent brain damage. He has an excruciating sensitivity to sounds, hearing what others do not. The slightest noise drives him nearly insane. In the last two years alone, he has experienced about 200 seizures.

But physical pain is a passing thing. The enduring torment is the taunting reminder that darkness encroaches. Already, he cannot picture his mother's face or recall his father's name. Gradually, his past, like his future, eludes him.
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/apr/30/opinion/oe-margulies30

Those guys in gitmo aren't being tortured to get info to stop the next attack. It's to destroy their minds so anything they have to say is the mumblings of a madman. At least that is how it appears to me.

 

[Oystein]

Thanks a lot for this summary from several sources, jimd, strong stuff!

I understand that your elaborate formatting is done with good readability and usefull emphases in mind, but recommend that you treat quoted content more carefully: Include ellipses when some text is being left out, and mark more clearly which quote is from which source.

 

[paloalto]

Reply

jimd, what is your take on Richard Clarke's theory that perhaps "al-Bayoumi was a Saudi spy who was investigating al-Qaeda at the request of the CIA"?

http://abcnews.go.com/International/28-pages-questions-alleged-saudi-spy-cia/story?id=40697425

This article states that Clarke believed the following:

“We Deserve to Know

Finally, 18 months after the two al-Qaeda men arrived in the U.S., the CIA, in a very low key way, passed a report to the FBI about al-Mihdhar and al-Hamzi. It was too late. Their trail had gone cold. They had entered the final phase of preparations for 9/11.

Nothing in the joint congressional investigation, the 9/11 Commission’s work or the CIA Inspector General’s investigation explains why the CIA hid its knowledge about these two al-Qaeda operatives.

Also, nothing in those reports provides any reason to disbelieve the possibility that the CIA, the CTC and the agency’s top management hid a false flag operation that went wrong.

If the CIA broke the rules about getting FBI approval and, in cooperation with the Saudi intelligence service, ran a false flag operation in the U.S. against al-Qaeda terrorists, that would explain why CIA managers repeatedly made decisions and issued clear instructions not to tell anyone outside the CIA the rather startling and unprecedented news that al-Qaeda operatives were in our country.”

But this article is absolutely absurd, asinine in the extreme and shows a profound ignorance by Richard Clarke of actually what had occurred that had allowed the attacks on 9/11 to take place.

FBI Agent Margaret Gillespie, who was working in the Bin Laden unit at the CIA, Alec Station, sent an email to Tom Wilshire on August 21, 2001, immediately after she was told by the INS that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US. Wilshire, a CIA officer, in fact the very officer that had blocked the information on Mihdhar from going to the FBI on January 5, 2000, was working as Deputy Chief of the ITOS unit the one FBI HQ’s unit that was in charge of all FBI investigation of al Qaeda terrorists in the world.
This is over three weeks prior to the attacks on 9/11 and plenty of time to have allowed the FBI criminal investigators to find these known al Qaeda terrorists before they took part in any attack inside of the US. At this point in fact both the CIA and FBI HQ knew these terrorists were inside of the US in order to carry out just such a huge al Qaeda terrorist attack.

On August 22, 2001 a meeting was held in Wilshire’s FBI office, where Wilshire had Gillespie take the information that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US back to the CIA bin Laden unit, and had FBI Agent Dina Corsi write up an EC to start a intelligence investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi. This information when right to Richard Blee, and then to Cofer Black who as very close to Blee, and then to Tenet who was close to Black. All three of these CIA managers had just been at the White House on July 10, 2001, telling Rice, Hadley and Clarke that a huge al Qaeda attack was about to take place, aimed right at the US that would kill many Americans.

So three weeks prior to the attacks on 9/11 both the CIA and FBI HQs knew that Mihdhar and Hazmi were inside of the US, knew that these terrorists were going to take part in a massive terrorist attack that would kill thousands of Americans, but yet kept this information completely secret from the FBI criminal investigators in the New York office on the Cole bombing, even when both agencies knew that Mihdhar and Hazmi had actually take part in the planning of the Cole bombing, both agencies in fact even had had photographic proof of this.

Wilshire had been ordered by the CIA twice, on July 13, 201 and again on July 23, 2001, to hide the information that Mihdhar and Hazmi had taken part in the planning of the Cole bombing, when the CIA knew a huge al Qaeda terrorist attack was just about to take place inside of the US, knew it would kill thousands of Americans, and even knew by ordering Wilshire to hide this information from the Cole bombing investigators it would keep them from having the “probable cause” they needed in order to start a criminal investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi. The CIA and Wilshire clearly knew that if the FBI could not start a criminal investigation for Mihdhar and Hazmi, these agents on the Cole bombing would be prevented from stopping this huge attack, and hence thousands of Americans would be murdered as a result of their actions to criminally obstruct this FBI investigation.

Would both the FBI and CIA allow these terrorists to carry out a huge al Qaeda attack murdering many Americans because they thought that the CIA wanted to recruit these terrorists as spies. This is way beyond stupid. How Clarke could still be so ignorant of the facts after 15 years is a real wonder. How anyone else on this forum could be so ignorant of these facts is also a wonder, after I have posted this very same information many, many, times on this very forum. Sometimes to just cannot educate stupid!

 

[skyeagle409]

Would both the FBI and CIA allow these terrorists to carry out a huge al Qaeda attack murdering many Americans because they thought that the CIA wanted to recruit these terrorists as spies. This is way beyond stupid. How Clarke could still be so ignorant of the facts after 15 years is a real wonder. How anyone else on this forum could be so ignorant of these facts is also a wonder, after I have posted this very same information many, many, times on this very forum. Sometimes to just cannot educate stupid!

Ignoring warnings was typical of the way the U.S. government did business.

For an example, terrorist warnings were ignored prior to the attack on the USS Cole and the rest became history after its bombing.

Technical warnings were ignored prior to the loss of the space shuttle Challenger that related to the functionality of the booster seals at low temperatures. Despite the low temperature that day, Challenger was launched and lost.

Technical warnings were ignored for years prior to the loss of the space shuttle Columbia that related to the failure of form insulation during launch, yet space shuttle launches were allowed to continue.

Terrorist warnings were received from around the world that indicated Osama bin Laden would conduct a massive terrorist attack upon the United States with hijacked airliners. I might add that terrorist warnings were issued from the Philippines as early as 1995 in regard to the Bojinka Plot, which also targeted the headquarters of the CIA. One of the terrorist in that plot was Ramzi Yousef, the terrorist who bombed WTC 1 in 1993, and nephew of the 9/11 mastermind, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed. Warning after warning that were ignored by the government, which eventually resulted in the death and injury to thousands of innocent people.

In addition to the failures of the CIA and the FBI, Bush, Rice and the FAA must share the blame as well.

 

[jimd3100]

A few years ago(nearly 5)..in a land not far away...

I've seen others post their theories on this thread. So let me share one. Here is my theory. My theory is that elements of the Saudi Government were involved. My theory is that our President kept that from the American people because it ruins his goal of getting America to attack Iraq (Which the Saudis also want) My theory is that Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11 and those 28 pages show that. But the President protected Saudi's in order to go after Iraq. And some of those Saudis are personal friends.

The release of those 28 pages will either expose me as a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist or not.

I'm not saying Al qaeda didn't attack the U.S. on 9-11. I'm saying they did, and I went back into the armed Forces after 9-11 so I could personally have the pleasure of blowing their brains out myself. But I don't like being propagandized, manipulated, and lied to, or "incompetent" politicians re-writing history . I say it's about time to release those 28 pages. And see how my theory holds up.

The Saudi Ambassador reminds me to update my outrageous conspiracy theories...

New Saudi Ambassador: Replace "9-11 NEVER FORGET" with "LET'S MOVE ON"


Op-Ed Saudi ambassador: There is no smoking gun in the 28 pages, let's move on

My government knew the accusations were false, and in order to clear our name, we have been urging the U.S. government to declassify the pages....
Now we know for sure that the conspiracy theorists were wrong: There is no smoking gun in the 28 pages. All they contain is a list of questions and possible leads for exploration in later investigations.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-al-saud-28-pages-20160725-snap-story.html

The 28 pages is a smoking gun with empty shells lying around, but since I've been labeled a "conspiracy theorist" I better get up to date....here's one for Your Royal Heinous.....


From 28 pages:

According to FBI documents, several of the phone numbers found in the phone book of Abu Zubaida, a senior al-Qa’ida operative captured in Pakistan in March 2002, could be linked at least indirectly, to telephone numbers in the United States. One of those U.S. numbers is subscribed to by the ASPCOL Corp., which is located in Aspen, Colorado, and manages the affairs of the Colorado residents of the Saudi Ambassador Bandar. The FBI noticed that ASPCOL has an unlisted telephone number. A November 18, 2002 FBI response to the Joint Inquiry states that "CIA traces have revealed no direct links between numbers found in Zubaida’s phone book and numbers in the United States."
http://undicisettembre.blogspot.de/2016/07/quick-transcript-of-28-pages-of-joint.html

The phone numbers Zubaida had were not United States phone numbers, but instead..."could be linked at least indirectly, to telephone numbers in the United States." So, Zubaida is in contact with a number that also is in contact with a U.S. number. The number Zubaida is in contact with is in Saudi Arabia most likely.

The Joint Inquiry is pretty disgusted with the FBI (Leadership) through out their report and the FBI seems to not want to get involved,........"A November 18, 2002 FBI response to the Joint Inquiry states that "CIA traces have revealed no direct links between numbers found in Zubaida’s phone book and numbers in the United States."
http://undicisettembre.blogspot.de/2016/07/quick-transcript-of-28-pages-of-joint.html

Yes, they know. "The FBI response to the Joint Inquiry", was to defer to the CIA telling them what they already knew.
That's it?
The FBI stops here because they will be going to a Lawyer of Prince Bandar to ask him about this and he probably will not have anything to say. It's Bandar's Lawyer. ASPCOL Corp.., is managed by Bandar's lawyer.

Aspcol Corporation
418 East Cooper Avenue # 202
Aspen, CO 81611 - View Map
Phone: (970) 925-1214
Own This Business?
Aspcol Corporation
A privately held company in Aspen, CO.

More Details for Aspcol Corporation

Categorized under Operators of Nonresidential Buildings. Our records show it was established in 1991 and incorporated in Colorado. Current estimates show this company has an annual revenue of 110000 and employs a staff of approximately 1.

William Jordan
Manager
http://www.manta.com/c/mmsrw93/aspcol-corporation

William Jordan, an Aspen attorney who handled Bandar’s local affairs, could not be reached for comment on Friday.
http://www.aspendailynews.com/section/home/171823

from the 28 pages:

In May 2001, the U.S. Government became aware that an individual in Saudi Arabia was in contact with Abu Zubaida and was most likely aware of an upcoming al-Qa’ida operation. The U.S. Government pressured the Saudi Government to locate him. The Saudis informed the U.S. Government that they required additional information to do so. The U.S. Government agency that had originally learned of this individual’s knowledge refused to provide the Saudis with additional information because it would reveal sources and methods. The National Security Council also tried to pressure the Saudis, but the Saudis would not cooperate without the additional information.
http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/declasspart4.pdf

Why the indirect numbers are important. "In May 2001, the U.S. Government became aware that an individual in Saudi Arabia was in contact with Abu Zubaida and was most likely aware of an upcoming al-Qa’ida operation." Looks like The CIA or more likely NSA maybe both were already aware of this contact.

The U.S. Government pressured the Saudi Government to locate him. The Saudis informed the U.S. Government that they required additional information to do so. The U.S. Government agency that had originally learned of this individual’s knowledge refused to provide the Saudis with additional information because it would reveal sources and methods. The National Security Council also tried to pressure the Saudis, but the Saudis would not cooperate without the additional information.
http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/declasspart4.pdf

Who did they try and pressure?...."the Saudis". Really? All of them? Who was it that "would not cooperate without the additional information?" .."the Saudis"...Really not a single one would cooperate? Or maybe "the Saudis' mean Prince Bandar The American Ambassador?

"....because it would reveal sources and methods." If you can't trust your friend Prince Bandar with your intelligence gathering means, then why should he help you? Or as Bandar would put it......

Speaking to the Arabic satellite network Al-Arabiya on Thursday, Bandar -- now Abdullah's national security adviser -- said Saudi intelligence was "actively following" most of the September 11, 2001, plotters "with precision."

"If U.S. security authorities had engaged their Saudi counterparts in a serious and credible manner, in my opinion, we would have avoided what happened," he said.

...The September 11 attacks killed nearly 3,000 people in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania. All but four of the suicide hijackers who carried out the plot were Saudi nationals, and after the attacks, the kingdom was widely criticized for having tolerated Islamic militancy.

The Saudis have called the criticism unfair, pointing out that al Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden's original grievance was against the country's ruling family, which invited U.S. troops into the kingdom after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/11/01/saudiarabia.terrorism/index.html?eref=onion

See? They have nothing to do with OBL, the guy they give millions to and have the Taliban look out for him, the Taliban who receives nearly all their funding from Pakistan who gets it from Saudi Arabia. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The only two countries with diplomatic ties to the Taliban.

"LET'S MOVE ON" - Saudi Ambassador
I don't think so

 

[jimd3100]

The Saudi Ambassador reminds me to update my outrageous conspiracy theories...

New Saudi Ambassador: Replace "9-11 NEVER FORGET" with "LET'S MOVE ON"

I don't think so

"Now we know for sure that the conspiracy theorists were wrong: There is no smoking gun in the 28 pages. All they contain is a list of questions and possible leads for exploration in later investigations."-Saudi Ambassador
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-al-saud-28-pages-20160725-snap-story.html

From the OP-Ed-
The U.S.-Saudi relationship is one of the most important in the world. Together we fight terrorism, share intelligence, battle ISIS and work to bring stability to the Gulf region.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-al-saud-28-pages-20160725-snap-story.html

What a load of BS - BTW while the Saudi Ambassador is free to promote his BS propaganda I was blocked from commenting. They wouldn't let me post what the 9-11 commission said in regards to their interviews with Basnan, Thumairy, Bayoumi and Bandar. Enjoy your free speech Ambassador. BTW - how does Your Royal Heinous, like my conspiracy theory so far?

From 28 pages:

According to FBI documents, several of the phone numbers found in the phone book of Abu Zubaida, a senior al-Qa’ida operative captured in Pakistan in March 2002, could be linked at least indirectly, to telephone numbers in the United States. One of those U.S. numbers is subscribed to by the ASPCOL Corp., which is located in Aspen, Colorado, and manages the affairs of the Colorado residents of the Saudi Ambassador Bandar.

http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/declasspart4.pdf

The phone numbers Zubaida had were not United States phone numbers, but instead..."could be linked at least indirectly, to telephone numbers in the United States." So, Zubaida is in contact with a number that also is in contact with a U.S. number. The number Zubaida is in contact with is in Saudi Arabia most likely.

There wasn't much of an investigation on this-this is obvious.

The FBI stops here because they will be going to a Lawyer of Prince Bandar to ask him about this and he probably will not have anything to say. It's Bandar's Lawyer. ASPCOL Corp.., is managed by Bandar's lawyer.

Why the indirect numbers are important. "In May 2001, the U.S. Government became aware that an individual in Saudi Arabia was in contact with Abu Zubaida and was most likely aware of an upcoming al-Qa’ida operation." Looks like The CIA or more likely NSA maybe both were already aware of this contact.

The CIA is keeping intelligence from the FBI, and according to this, Bandar...I mean, "the Saudis", are keeping intelligence from the CIA. The FBI and CIA work for the White House, The President in the White House is best friends with "the Saudis"..I mean Prince Bandar. Are they all keeping intelligence from him? That seems unlikely.

28 pages:

The U.S. Government pressured the Saudi Government to locate him. The Saudis informed the U.S. Government that they required additional information to do so. The U.S. Government agency that had originally learned of this individual’s knowledge refused to provide the Saudis with additional information because it would reveal sources and methods.http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/declasspart4.pdf

If the President in the White House is already being informed by his buddy Bandar, then Bandar ..i.e. "the Saudis", can get away with the following....

Saudis would not cooperate without the additional information.
http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/declasspart4.pdf

My Conspiracy theory...

Who did they try and pressure?...."the Saudis".....Who was it that "would not cooperate without the additional information?" .."the Saudis"..... Or maybe "the Saudis' mean Prince Bandar The American Ambassador?

9-11 Commission debunks this? No, it confirms it (in the footnotes-where the real story is) I confess....actually I stole my conspiracy theory from the investigations....

Meanwhile as Bandar's money is going to the hijackers,...accidentally of course...........

9-11 commission Chapter 4 footnote 66:

As late as July 3, 2001, the DCI was pressing Bandar, conveying the urgent need for information. CIA cable, DCI meeting with Bandar, July 3, 2001
http://www.faqs.org/docs/911/911Report-499.html

28 pages:

Saudis would not cooperate without the additional information.
http://intelligence.house.gov/sites/intelligence.house.gov/files/documents/declasspart4.pdf

Even though it's the very next footnote, it's back to "the Saudis" when it comes to Bandar not cooperating.....

9-11 commission:

9-11 commission Chapter 4 footnote 67:
The Saudis, however, were reluctant to provide details of incomplete investigations and highly sensitive to any information related to Saudi nationals, particularly those in the Kingdom
http://www.9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

Footnotes of the 9-11 commission CONFIRM numerous things in the 28 pages.

So who was it in Saudi Arabia that Zubaida was in phone contact with? According to several sources, the messages relayed on Sept 10 2001 saying "Tomorrow is zero hour" and "The match begins tomorrow" were communications from pay phones in Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. Zubaida on the Afghanistan end and ? on the Saudi Arabian end. So now that it's been 15 years have we ever found out who in Saudi Arabia seemed to be "in the know" on the 9-11 attacks? Zubaida, was waterboarded 83 times, but that was during the course of 1 month. That's an average of almost 3 times per day every day for a month. So, I'd say yes. The U.S. Government knows. But wont say because the Saudis are such great friends of ours. We wouldn't want to embarrass them. Bandar wasn't investigated. That's why he isn't on the list at all.....

Perhaps a list of names can help simplify and focus.

This is not my work. It is the work of Michael Jacobson and Dana Leseman who worked on both the Joint Inquiry and 9-11 Commission report.

A Brief Overview of Possible Saudi Government Connections to the September 11th attacks

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

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

Bandar is mentioned 18 times in the 28 pages. Is there someone mentioned in the 28 pages that wasn't on that list? Besides Bandar?

Does Tenet know he was thrown under the bus by his terrorist friend?

Bandar:

"If U.S. security authorities had engaged their Saudi counterparts in a serious and credible manner, in my opinion, we would have avoided what happened," he said.

If anyone should have been shown a waterboard-it's that guy. But I'm supposed to believe while he was busy with Bush planning the Iraq invasion, he was being investigated for killing 3000 people on 9-11. That's why Bush said he classified the entire 28 pages....

Published: July 30, 2003
Mr. Bush said the chapter should remain secret. ''I absolutely have no qualms at all, because there's an ongoing investigation into the 9/11 attacks, and we don't want to compromise that investigation,'' he said. ''If people are being investigated, it doesn't make sense for us to let them know who they are.''
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/30/u...sify-saudi-section-report.html?pagewanted=all

Conspiracy theorists-Always reliable to help with the cover up

Published July 29, 2003
Experts agree that if there's nothing to hide, why not declassify the report and, if Saudi Arabia is mentioned, give that government a chance to clear its name.

"By leaving these pages blacked out, you give rise to all sorts of conspiracy theories and conjecture and it's really counterproductive," said Chris Preble, director of foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute. "It seems to me, there has to be a very compelling reason for keeping things secret from the public."

"The [Saudis] need to reply and not just say 'these are fabricated reports,'" said Steven Stalinsky, executive director of the Middle East Media Research Institute.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2003/07/29/saudi-arabia-friend-or-foe.html

Corruption has made the United States Of America a pathetic joke...

U.S. Government Blames 9/11 on Iran, Fines Iran $10.5B; Iran Refuses to Pay
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016...1-iran-fines-iran-10-5b-iran-refuses-pay.html

 

[beachnut]

... U.S. Government Blames 9/11 on Iran, Fines Iran $10.5B; Iran Refuses to Pay
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/...fuses-pay.html
...

lol, your sources are ... lol, because they are BS. How is the stand down going.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/ not a valid source until you close the loop. Did you press on to "pressTV"? lol, this can get worse, but it will.

Can you revises the US Government Blames? After a quick look, it looks like a Judge did it... not the US evil Government. Note: we own Iran a war... they attacked the USA, all those years ago.

 

[No Other]

Can you revises the US Government Blames? After a quick look, it looks like a Judge did it... not the US evil Government. Note: we own Iran a war... they attacked the USA, all those years ago.

Do you realize that our CIA carried out Operation Ajax? ... and now you say we owe them a war? Read some history and be informed.

 

[jimd3100]

Can you revises the US Government Blames? After a quick look, it looks like a Judge did it... not the US evil Government.

Yes, a Federal Judge nominated by the President and confirmed by Congress.

Note: we own Iran a war... they attacked the USA, all those years ago.

Your friends in Saudi Arabia are wanting to know what is taking so long?

Do you realize that our CIA carried out Operation Ajax? ... and now you say we owe them a war? Read some history and be informed.

He still needs to learn his military chain of command and three branches of Government, so that will be awhile.....

 

[beachnut]

Yes, a Federal Judge nominated by the President and confirmed by Congress.


Your friends in Saudi Arabia are wanting to know what is taking so long?



He still needs to learn his military chain of command and three branches of Government, so that will be awhile.....

Wow, your source are BS. Wow, you do know how to make up BS. Who cares if some court does what you got from the CT washingtonblog BS site?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...d-to-pay-10-5-billion-to-sept-11-kin-insurers

You use a BS website? lol, http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016...1-iran-fines-iran-10-5b-iran-refuses-pay.html

Your paranoid friends? Washington blog... lol, how is the shoot down means stand down BS going?
You mean the Vice is not the president's deputy, who will replace him if needed? lol

What did the Saudis do to you? Where is Tim McVeigh from?

You had me at WashingtonBlog... and "shoot down means stand down". When did you drop CD and the inside job? 2008, or earlier?

Is Graham still selling books, now that the 28 pages are released he has no McGuffin to bolster sells. What now?

 

[Major_Tom]

jimd3110, the information you provide within this thread is very useful for other independent researchers. Unfortunately as written it is 'trapped' within this subforum and it is hard to extract it in a concise, readable form.

Do you have this information posted somewhere else on the internet? I know it is available at the sources to which you link, but those sources are scattered. You seem to bring it together and it would be nice to have that type of presentation somewhere outside of this forum.


Any possibility of that?

 

[beachnut]

Do you realize that our CIA carried out Operation Ajax? ... and now you say we owe them a war? Read some history and be informed.

Wow, history; who knew. I did, already knew; got something better?
What about the 28 pages? What has changed.

My comment was due to taking the hostages from our Embassy. 1953 crap is okay to remember, but why hold hostages?

 

[No Other]

Wow, history; who knew. I did, already knew; got something better?
What about the 28 pages? What has changed.

I don't have a dog in this race.

My comment was due to taking the hostages from our Embassy. 1953 crap is okay to remember, but why hold hostages?

I never like it when my fellow Countrymen are held hostage...

Capturing hostages was probably the only thing they could do. Again, I am not in favor of our Countrymen being taken hostage but unless Iran were to invade the USA, this was the event to capture the entire World's attention.

 

[jimd3100]

Wow, your source are BS. Washington blog... lol, how is the shoot down means stand down BS going?

As time goes on more and more people will realize who is dishonest between the two of us.

Google results for "Shoot down means stand down" .....

https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&...+stand+down"&safe=off&hl=en&start=10&filter=0

there is no evidence that a stand down order was issued. -jimd3100

"Only two people have the authority to issue shoot down orders. The President and Secretary of defense. Neither of them find out about any other hijackings, and neither give shoot down orders. What they do is desert their posts and leave the VP in charge. This is not just a disgrace, it is in fact- the stand down. The VP is not in the military chain of command and has no authority to issue shoot down orders. Not only that the Generals in charge know it due to the exercises that drilled that fact into their heads" -jimd3100

http://911blogger.com/news/2011-11-15/911-stand-down

how is the shoot down means stand down BS going? -Beachnutcase

It's not a secret

"Military officials ignored Cheney’s 9/11 shoot-down order"
"Most striking of all is the revelation that an order by Vice President Dick Cheney was ignored by the military, which saw his order to shoot down aircraft as outside the chain of command."
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/09/08/military-officials-ignored-cheneys-911-shoot-down-order/

Perhaps you're confusing Andy, Barney, and Goober, with Bush, Cheney, and Tenet?

You mean the Vice is not the president's deputy, who will replace him if needed? lol

He replaces the President when he's dead, not when the President is here....

The onboard electronics are hardened to protect against an electromagnetic pulse, and Air Force One is equipped with advanced secure communications equipment, allowing the aircraft to function as a mobile command center in the event of an attack on the United States.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/1600/air-force-one

Rumsfeld knows all this which is why he says the following to try and re-write history....

(U) Rumsfeld to DoD Historian:
Historian: What about authorization to shoot down United #93? Did that
come from the Vice President?
Rumsfeld : Technically, it couldn't, because the Vice President is not in the chain of command. The President and he were talking and the President and I were talking, and the Vice President and I were talking.
Clearly he was involved in the process.
Historian: It was reported that the decision came from the Vice President
Rumsfeld: He might have recommended that.
Historian: But the rules of engagement came out of your office.
Rumsfeld: Sure.
https://www.archives.gov/declassification/iscap/pdf/2012-047-doc2.pdf

If you were in the military you have to know the VP is outside the military chain of command. But you spread disinformation.

What did the Saudis do to you?

They Used their terrorist group to attack my country, and spread their BS Wahhabi Islamic beliefs polluting this world.

Where is Tim McVeigh from?

The power and danger of McVeigh being equal to Saudi Arabia and it's funding of Radical Islam around the world proves your intellect on the subject.

jimd3110, the information you provide within this thread is very useful for other independent researchers. Unfortunately as written it is 'trapped' within this subforum and it is hard to extract it in a concise, readable form.

Do you have this information posted somewhere else on the internet? I know it is available at the sources to which you link, but those sources are scattered. You seem to bring it together and it would be nice to have that type of presentation somewhere outside of this forum.


Any possibility of that?

I don't know if it makes a difference but most of it is in this thread on another forum......

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=254040.0

So now I have to make a preemptive comment for the predicable "ha-this proves you are a conspiracy theorist and nut-that's prison planet forum ha ha"

Yea I post on this forum as well - so what? I'm not writing a book, making movies, creating websites, or staging events. And frankly not into "conspiracy theories". I can't help if 9-11 was a conspiracy. I started posting there to get them to drop the BS of the pentagon. A plane flew into it-it was big-and had people on it-I knew I'd get banned(which I did) and I knew I'd get back on(which I did because I knew Watson was the Admin)I've done more than my share of "debunking" and trying to keep 9-11 truth from going nutty. As a Mod there I drew the line with CIT and their slander of the cab driver. That BS was NOT going to be allowed as long as I had a say. Otherwise people post whatever they post whether I agree with it or not.

Wow, your source are BS. Washington blog... lol, how is the shoot down means stand down BS going?

I know how to use sources, as evidenced below...

In 2013 I knew titling a thread
"What is in the classified 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry"
meant that when they were eventually released it would expose me as either knowing how to use sources or not. Well, they've been released (with redactions)

 

[beachnut]

... I know how to use sources, as evidenced below...

It is your source. Such a great one. Washington Blog.

... U.S. Government Blames 9/11 on Iran, Fines Iran $10.5B; Iran Refuses to Pay
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/...fuses-pay.html
...

Similar sources were used for your CD claims and stand-down claims, or similar logic.

And there is the silly stand-down BS.

Those exercises that were similar to the 9/11 attack made all those involved aware of who is authorized to give these types of orders. Thereby virtually insuring the defacto stand down. - jimd3100

When did you drop the CD fantasy?

28 pages are here, now what.

Poor Bob Graham has lost his McGuffin with the 28 pages released; what will Senator Graham do to sell his books now?