Claims of Saudi hand in September 11 attacks hang over Obama's speech

[Octafish]

Important points to remember from an Australian, via BuzzFlash:

Claims of Saudi hand in September 11 attacks hang over Obama's speech

Paul McGeough
Sydney Morning Herald (Australia), September 12, 2014

Washington: It was ironic that the launch of Barack Obama's war on terror coincided with the 13th anniversary of the September 11 attacks, doubly so because it meant the president's pitch for Saudi Arabia to join his global coalition coincided with renewed attention on claims that Washington was suppressing evidence of Saudi complicity in the strikes on key US cities.

Initially suppressed by the Bush administration, and still kept under wraps by Obama, 28 pages redacted from a Joint Congressional Inquiry into the attacks are locked in a secure underground store beneath Congress.

The New Yorker magazine quotes Massachusetts Democrat Stephen Lynch on the document offering direct evidence of the complicity "on the part of Saudi individuals and entities in Al-Qaeda's attacks on America". But the same report quotes North Carolina Republican Walter Jones' very different take on a document that he, like Lynch, claims to have read - "it's about the Bush administration and its relationship with the Saudis".

A third member of Congress is quoted on the document providing "very disturbing" evidence of Saudi government support for the September 11 hijackers, most of whom were Saudi. He argues: "the real question is whether it was sanctioned at the royal-family level or beneath that, and whether these leads were followed through?"

Well yes … and no. A subsequent investigation, the so-called 9/11 Commission, looked into the allegations and, commission director Philip Zelikow told The New Yorker his investigators could not substantiate what he described as "wild accusations that needed to be checked out … an agglomeration of preliminary, unvetted reports".

CONTINUED...

http://www.smh.com.au/world/claims-of-saudi-hand-in-september-11-attacks-hang-over-obamas-speech-20140912-10fvvb.html

Who are we -- as in We the People of the United States -- really protecting by making war without end?

[CJCRANE]

1. Philip Zelikow is very interesting.

He is an expert in "public myths" and coined the term "public perception", which is a belief shared by a specific group which is thought to be true but may not be.

[Octafish]

2. Everybody knows Rush Limbaugh. Who ever heard of Phil Zelikow?

They both are professional communicators -- the former famous on the radio, the later recognized in academic and governmental circles.

Unlike consumers of Corporate McPravda, DUers are more likely to know Dr. Zelikow from his service as the Executive Director of the 9-11 Commission. President Obama has appointed him to the President's Intelligence Advisory Board and other official offices.



[font size="2"]Illustration by Joseph Nectvetal of /seconds.org [/font size]

Although less well known than the fascist gasbag, Phil Zelikow is by far the more important voice for our nation and planet's future. The reason: He's been given authority with which to shape history from behind the scenes.

In his book, "The Commission," New York Times reporter Philip Shenon chronicles how, at the very least, Zelikow helped protect the reputation of his former co-author and then-national security advisor Condoleeza Rice. Of course, a case could be made that it was more than a reputation what got protected, gross incompetence and criminal negligence and all.

Then, there's the matter of claiming to not know Karl Rove and not telling anyone to report ever receiving phone calls from Mr. Rove. That's some serious not-knowing, Reaganesque, if truth be told.

My biggest problem with the guy has to do with his interpretation of what President Kennedy really said. Dr. Zelikow and his co-author Ernest R. May wrote "The Kennedy Tapes." The work has added to what scholars know about the workings of the Kennedy White House. Unfortunately,

What JFK Really Said

The author checked the Cuban-missile-crisis transcript in The Kennedy Tapes against the recorded words. He discovered "errors that undermine its reliability for historians, teachers, and general readers

by Sheldon M. Stern
The Atlantic

EXCERPT...

An unforgettable moment in these unique historical records concerns JFK's apprehension that military action in Cuba might touch off the ultimate nightmare of nuclear war, which he grimly describes at a meeting on October 18 as "the final failure." Brian McGrory, of The Boston Globe, who listened to this tape with me in 1994, after it was declassified, used those words in the lead of his article on the newly released tapes. But when I checked the transcript recently, I was unable to find "the final failure." Certain that the editors must be right, since they had technically cleaner tapes, I listened again; there is no question that Kennedy says "the final failure." The editors, however, have transcribed it as "the prime failure."

SNIP...

The participants then discuss evidence that work on the missile sites is continuing. They debate whether to add petroleum, oil, and lubricants (POL) to the list of quarantined materials immediately, or to wait twenty-four hours to see if talks proposed by UN Secretary-General U Thant produce a breakthrough. McGeorge Bundy, Kennedy's national security adviser, suggests that they "leave the timing until we've talked about the U Thant initiative." The inaccuracy in The Kennedy Tapes is especially bizarre in this case, with Bundy saying "leave the timing until we've talked about the attack thing." These last two examples—"the destroyers " and "the attack thing"—could easily leave a reader wondering what in the world these men were talking about. (Three days later, on October 29, U Thant was mentioned again. JFK asserts, "We want U Thant to know that Adlai is our voice." But The Kennedy Tapes transcribes this line as "We want you to know that Adlai is our voice.&quot

October 27 saw the darkest moment in the crisis. An unconfirmed report was received at midday that a U-2 spy plane had been shot down over Cuba by a Soviet SAM missile, and the pilot killed. On the tape of the late-afternoon meeting Kennedy discusses whether to order an air strike on the SAM sites if the incident is repeated (a delay that produced consternation at the Pentagon). He declares that two options are on the table: begin conversations about Khrushchev's proposal to swap Soviet missiles in Cuba for U.S. missiles in Turkey, or reject discussions until the Cuban crisis is settled. Kennedy chooses the first, with the caveat that the Soviets must provide proof that they have ceased work on the missile sites. He repeatedly refers to "conversations" and "discussions" and concludes, "Obviously, they're not going to settle the Cuban question until they get some conversation on Cuba." Incredibly, The Kennedy Tapes substitutes "compensation" for "conversation." It's easy to imagine how Cold War veterans like Rusk, Bundy, and McCone would have reacted to any suggestion of compensation for the Soviets in Cuba.

On October 29, the day after Khrushchev agreed to remove the missiles, the President and his advisers, relieved but not euphoric, conclude that surveillance and the quarantine will continue until the missiles have actually been removed. After a lull in the meeting, during which the conversation turns to college football, the President observes, "I imagine the Air Force must be a little mad," referring to the division of responsibility for aerial photography between the Air Force and the Joint Chiefs' photo-reconnaissance office. The Kennedy Tapes transcribes this as "I imagine the airports must be looking bad," which must leave many readers scratching their heads: the removal of the missiles had nothing to do with Cuban airports. Kennedy then ponders why, in the end, the Soviets decided to back down. He notes, "We had decided Saturday night to begin this air strike on Tuesday." No effort was made to conceal the military buildup in southern Florida, and Kennedy wonders if the impending strikes pushed the Russians to withdraw their missiles. The Kennedy Tapes, however, has JFK saying "We got the signs of life to begin this air strike on Tuesday," making his shrewd speculation unintelligible.

ONE particular error, among scores not cited above, seems to epitomize the problems with these transcripts. On the October 18 tape Dean Rusk argues that before taking military action in Cuba, the United States should consult Khrushchev, in the unlikely event that he would agree to remove the missiles. "But at least it will take that point out of the way," The Kennedy Tapes has Rusk saying, "and it's on the record." But Rusk actually said that this consultation would remove that point "for the historical record." The historical record is indeed the issue here.

CONTINUED...

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2000/05/what-jfk-really-said/306407/

Personally, I understand Dr. Zelikow's a fine fellow. Brilliant, well-read and a great writer and thinker, people who know him say.

Where I have a problem with him is his version of Truth. It is that of the Establishment, or the Powers-That-Be and their instrument for running democracy their way, the national security state.

So, as we approach the 51st anniversary of taking the disastrous course of a national policy geared primarily toward the needs of War Inc, Wall Street and the relatively few who profit from owning and operating them, we are left to wonder what the next 48 years will be like: The Establishment/War Party's or those of JFK and Democrats like him? I know which version I'll hold and which path I'll follow.

Absolutely interesting, CJCRANE. Absolutely. And thank you for standing up to such un-democratic thinkers.

[CJCRANE]

7. Yes, he's a very perceptive fellow.

He penned an article in the late 90s that predicted if the WTC towers were destroyed there would be draconian laws and punitive wars.

He also authored a policy paper on preemtpive war.

He got to see his predictions and ideas play out in the real world.

[johnnyreb]

3. Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-MA), September 9 2014, very cautiously choosing his words

... so as not to violate classification:

(The b*sh-redacted 28 pages) "would definitely be instructive going forward, uh, for us to see the complicity, uh, behind the long-term planning, and uh, very deliberate steps taken to reach that day of 9/11. There was a great deal of planning beforehand, uh there were individuals that uh, I think, I think the 28 pages I have said are stunning in their clarity, in terms of how demonstrative they are in showing the planning beforehand, the financing, and the eventual attacks on that day. So I think it would uh, it would be instructive to members of congress to understand uh, the scope of this, the involvement of individuals, whether or not they were working in league with uh, with governments or not."

(That's right, it's an lpac video of a congressional room press conference. So bite me, why isn't it MSNBCNN?)

[Octafish]

8. Those 28 pages are Zelikow Sideshow.

Zelikow answered to Rove.

http://m.democracynow.org/stories/9196

We can only imagine what aren't written down.

The New Yorker adds detail:

http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/twenty-eight-pages

Thankfully we have reps like Stephen Lynch. Thanks to Johnnyreb and DU I'll get to learn about them.

[DirkGently]

4. Saudi hijackers. Saudi funding. Wars in Iraq & Afghanistan.

Threats to Iran.

It would sound like a wild Conspiracy Theory (tm) if wasn't the plain and simple truth of the way we do business and war with the Middle East.

[Octafish]

9. Ties to the Bushes for 3 Generations.

This is the guy Ike was talking about
when he thought of making it:
“Military-Intelligence-Congressional Complex.”



Check out what U.S. Senator Prescott Sheldon Bush, wrote back in 1959,
cheerleading for Boeing, General Electric, Westinghouse, Remington,
Chevron and the rest of the war profiteers hogging at the trough of the U.S. Treasury:

To Preserve Peace Let’s Show Russians How Strong We Are

By Prescott Bush
U.S. Senator from Connecticut;
member of the Senate Armed Services Committee
The Reader’s Digest July 1959

MAN’S GREATEST danger, it is said, is ignorance. In a very real sense, the Soviet Union’s ignorance of our military strength may be the source of her gravest peril—and ours. Kaiser Wilhelm started World War I because he miscalculated Allied power. Hitler, mistakenly thinking he could blitz the world, launched World War II. Kruschev today lacks firsthand knowledge of our country; he may be given what others think he would like to hear—rather than an objective report on our actual military strength. Although it seems impossible that any sane person could start a war, we would be wise to take no chances.

Why not invite the Soviet high command to the United States for a conducted tour of our military might? We are bringing Russians to see our farms and factories, our scientific laboratories and research centers; we exchange dancers and musicians. Why not have their military leaders over for the most beneficial look of all? Our expressed policy, the aim and purpose of our entire defense system, is to deter the Kremlin from starting a war. What better way to deter than to show?

What we could show is nothing more nor less than the greatest military might ever assembled in the history of the world. If the Soviet high command could see what we have, they should be of our mind—that for them to start war today would be an act of insanity.

We could start in a Pentagon briefing room. There, with maps, globes, films and sound-projection equipment to help illustrate our points, we could give them a good hard look at the distribution of American power. Then we could fly the group to Mountain Home Air Force Base in Montana, where bombers of the Strategic Air Command are on 24-hour alert, many ready to take off within 15 minutes. We could see an awe-inspiring line of B-47’s, any one of which can, in a single mission, deliver explosive power equivalent to that of all the bombs dropped by all sides in World War II. We could invite the commander of the Soviet air force to ride in one of these planes, and see it refueled in the air, thus quietly demonstrating that, while most Soviet bombers would have to fly one-way missions, ours can strike any target in the world and return nonstop.

SNIP...

The demonstration at SAC should effectively dismiss from Soviet minds any speculation about the possibility of their gaining an advantage from all-out war any time soon. But we must face the fact that in a few years the Russians may be able to zero in our SAC bases with ballistic missiles. To drive this temptation out of their minds, we could show them other deterrents.

CONTINUES…

The Reader’s Digest
July 1959 pp. 25-30

Prescott Bush detailed how Kruschev and the head of the Soviet armed forces be our guest on nuclear submarines, demonstrations of sea- and land-launched ICBMs, operations from aircraft carriers and a cruise aboard the inter-continental strategic bomber, the B-52.

The guy was on to something. You know how much they get for a B-2 these days? Two billion? Each?



Almost forgot. Prescott also discussed the strategic importance of Iraq –
the very same right next door to Iran, the very place the CIA and MI6 had, five years earlier,
replaced a democratically elected government with a despot, the Shah. For the oil, I’d wager.

It’s fortunate for them that we want only peace with justice. Our entire record attests to that. We have no history of aggression, profess no desire for world domination, as do the Communists. Only by their continued menace have we been forced to take these measures for defense.

I ASK, “Why don’t we show the Russians many of these defense measures?” What I would not show them is any self-satisfaction on our part about the future, any slowing-up of plans to produce the new weapons which must inevitably take the place of the old ones. I believe we are in a continuing struggle to keep on top in this business of declaring war. I think that the Russians are never to be underrated. [font color="red"]I also believe that the Communists are master bluffers that they seek to put us off by arrogant threats to Berlin and to the peace of the far Pacific, and, while our people are preoccupied with these threats, they may try to take over Iraq as the Chinese Reds have conquered Tibet.
[/font color]

So. At least three generations of the Bush Family Evil Empire have had their eyes on Iraq’s oil. Interesting how Prescott mentioned Tibet's destruction by China. How was he to know his namesake would one day become head of the U.S.-China Chamber of Commerce? The article also shows how Prescott boosted the Cold War, way back in ’59. It’s not so odd to think that three generations of crazy petrodollar-loving warmongers would rise to the top echelons of American leadership.



IMFO, this is exactly what Ike was talking about when he mentioned being on our guard against the “Military-Industrial Complex.” The Bushes and their supporters may think they're American royalty, but all they are is a multi-generational mob of banksters, warmongers and traitors.

[Uncle Joe]

5. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Octafish.

[Octafish]

10. The Twenty-Eight Pages

By Lawrence Wright
The New Yorker, Sept. 9, 2014

EXCERPT...

Those advocating declassification present a powerful and oftentimes emotional argument, but others offer compelling reasons that the document should remain buried under the Capitol. Immediately after the Joint Congressional Inquiry finished its report, in late 2002, the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States—better known as the 9/11 Commission—began its work, under the leadership of Thomas Kean, the former governor of New Jersey, and Lee Hamilton, a former congressman from Indiana. The questions raised by the twenty-eight pages were an important part of the commission’s agenda; indeed, its director, Philip Zelikow, hired staffers who had worked for the Joint Inquiry on that very section to follow up on the material. According to Zelikow, what they found does not substantiate the arguments made by the Joint Inquiry and by the 9/11 families in the lawsuit against the Saudis. He characterized the twenty-eight pages as “an agglomeration of preliminary, unvetted reports” concerning Saudi involvement. “They were wild accusations that needed to be checked out,” he said.

Zelikow and his staff were ultimately unable to prove any official Saudi complicity in the attacks. A former staff member of the 9/11 Commission who is intimately familiar with the material in the twenty-eight pages recommends against their declassification, warning that the release of inflammatory and speculative information could “ramp up passions” and damage U.S.-Saudi relations.

Stephen Lynch agrees that the twenty-eight pages were buried in order to preserve the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia. “Part of the reason it was classified was the fact that it would create a visceral response,” he told me. “There would be a backlash.” But, thirteen years later, is that still a reason to keep the document a secret?

SNIP...

Thomas Kean remembers finally having the opportunity to read those twenty-eight pages after he became chairman of the 9/11 Commission—“so secret that I had to get all of my security clearances and go into the bowels of Congress with someone looking over my shoulder.” He also remembers thinking at the time that most of what he was reading should never have been kept secret. But the focus on the twenty-eight pages obscures the fact that many important documents are still classified—“a ton of stuff,” Kean told me, including, for instance, the 9/11 Commission’s interviews with George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and Bill Clinton. “I don’t know of a single thing in our report that should not be public after ten years,” Kean said.

CONTINUED...

http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/twenty-eight-pages

PS: You are most welcome, Uncle Joe. The long shadow of Bush and Cheney, evinced by their failure to give their word in sworn testimony, is to cover up their Treasons.

[Uncle Joe]

12. Yea, the last thing we would want to do is "offend" Saudi Arabia, they're so sensitive.

On a thread by 99th Monkey

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025536027

Beheadings at ‘record levels’: Saudi Arabia executes dozens in deadly August
AUGUST 26, 2014 1:56PM * News.com

A PERSON has been put to death in Saudi Arabia almost every day this month with the country expected to have added to that figure with the execution of its 23rd inmate yesterday. Hajras al-Qurey will become the latest person to be executed in the last three weeks with human rights groups horrified by what they are calling a surge in executions.

(snip)

[Holly_Hobby]

6. KnR! n/t

[Octafish]

11. Bandar Bush left town suddenly.

Big line of corruption.

Brothers in Arms: Bandar Bush Took a Billion in Bribes to Push UK Weapons Deal

Written by Chris Floyd
Empire Burlesque
Thursday, 07 June 2007

So says the Guardian, which has had a sneak peek at the evidence compiled by Britain's Serious Fraud Office (SFO) in its lengthy investigation of vast corruption in a decades-long arms deal between Saudi Arabia and the Anglo-American arms merchant, BAE, Tony Blair's favorite war profiteer. The SFO's probe was preemptorily quashed by Blair's ever quiescent attorney general, Lord Goldsmith, last December. Now the Guardian has learned that BAE paid a quarterly bribe to Prince Bandar bin Sultan bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud-- long-time ambassador to the United States, and so intimate with America's ruling family that the president nicknamed him "Bandar Bush." BAE was plying Prince Bush with $30 million every quarter -- for ten years. Nice work if you can get it.

The background to this sordid business can be found in a piece I did last year: Last Bad Deal Gone Down: War Profits Trump the Rule of Law. A brief excerpt below sets the scene:

Slush funds, oil sheikhs, prostitutes, Swiss banks, kickbacks, blackmail, bagmen, arms deals, war plans, climbdowns, big lies and Dick Cheney – it's a scandal that has it all: corruption and cowardice at the highest levels, a festering canker at the very heart of world politics, where the War on Terror meets the slaughter in Iraq. Yet chances are you've never heard about it – even though it happened just a few days ago. The fog of war profiteering, it seems, is just as thick as the fog of war.

But here's how the deal went down. On Dec. 14, the UK Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith (Pete Goldsmith as was, before his longtime crony Tony Blair raised him to the peerage), peremptorily shut down a two-year investigation by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) into a massive corruption case involving Britain's biggest military contractor and members of the Saudi royal family. SFO bulldogs had just forced their way into the holy of holies of the great global backroom – Swiss bank accounts – when Pete pulled the plug. Continuing with the investigation, said His Lordship, "would not be in the national interest."

It certainly wasn't in the interest of BAE Systems, the British arms merchant which has become one of the top 10 U.S. military firms as well, through its voracious acquisitions during the profitable War on Terror – including some juicy hook-ups with the Carlyle Group, the former corporate crib of George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush and still current home of the family fixer, James Baker. BAE director Phillip Carroll is also quite at home in the White House inner circle: a former chairman of Shell Oil, he was tapped by George II to be the first "Senior Adviser to the Iraqi Ministry of Oil" in those heady "Mission Accomplished" days of 2003. BAE has allegedly managed to "disappear" approximately $2 billion in shavings from one of the largest and longest-running arms deals in history – the UK-Saudi warplane program known as "al-Yamanah" (Arabic for "the dove&quot . Al-Yamanah has been flying for 18 years now, with periodic augmentations, pumping almost $80 billion into BAE's coffers, with negotiations for $12 billion in additional planes now nearing completion. SFO investigators had followed the missing money from the deal into a network of Swiss bank accounts and the usual Enronian web of offshore front companies.

Bandar Bush was instrumental in setting up the deal in the first place, the Guardian notes, wheeling and dealing with Maggie Thatcher from his Washington redoubt. The prince -- one of the leading figures in perhaps the most repressive and extremist Islamic state on earth -- has continued to be influential with the White House even after stepping down as ambassador in 2005. (He's now head of the repressive state's security organs.) He's also played a key role in L'il Bush's political career -- making a deal to cut oil prices before the 2004 vote and publicly endorsing his "brother" in the election. One cannot but speculate on how much of the dirty BAE money was used to grease the overt and covert ops of the Bush political machine. According to the Guardian, Bandar's BAE bribes were drawn from BAE's slush fund and deposited in Bandar's account in Washington's Riggs Bank -- the notorious money-laundering outfit used for decades by American and foreign elites to wash their filthy lucre. L'il Bush's uncle, Jonathan Bush, was a top executive at Riggs Bank when it was hit with a record $25 million fine in 2004 for skirting money-laundering laws, as David Sirota -- and then the Washington Post -- report.

CONTINUED w/links...

http://baltimorechronicle.com/2007/060707Floyd.shtml

The House of Bush and the House of Saudi share a long and profitable history.

[Ichingcarpenter]

13. exclusive interview ‘US failure to look into Saudi role in 9/11 has helped Isis’

Senator Graham, who chaired the Senate Intelligence Committee, said that successive administrations in Washington had turned a blind eye to Saudi support for Sunni extremists. He added: “I believe that the failure to shine a full light on Saudi actions and particularly its involvement in 9/11 has contributed to the Saudi ability to continue to engage in actions that are damaging to the US – and in particular their support for Isis.”

Senator Graham, a distinguished elder statesmen who was twice Democratic governor of Florida before spending 18 years in the US Senate, believes that ignoring what Saudi Arabia was doing and treating it as a reliable American ally contributed to the US intelligence services’ failure to identify Isis as a rising power until after it captured Mosul on 10 June. He says that “one reason I think that our intelligence has been less than stellar” is that not enough attention was given to Saudi Arabia’s fostering of al-Qaeda-type jihadi movements, of which Isis is the most notorious and successful. So far the CIA and other intelligence services have faced little criticism in the US for their apparent failure to foresee the explosive expansion of Isis, which now controls an area larger than Great Britain in northern Iraq and eastern Syria.

Senator Graham thinks it is wise to engage with Saudi Arabia because, despite Saudi denials, he says it has been “a central figure in financing Isis and extremist groups”. But he is cautious about success from the US point of view because of the Saudi monarchy’s long-term alliance with the Wahhabi clergy and its commitment to spread Wahhabism, the intolerant variant of Islam which denounces Shia as heretics and treats women as chattels under male control. The Senator says that Saudi Arabia not only gives support to Sunni communities worldwide “but the most extreme elements among the Sunni”.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/islamic-state-us-failure-to-look-into-saudi-role-in-911-has-helped-isis-9731563.html



Saudi Arabia’s Escalating Campaign against Shia Muslims



No one should forget the spite expressed by the leader of the congregation at the Grand Mosque (Masjid-ul-Haraam) in Mecca, Adel Al Kalbani, which shocked even his interviewer on BBC Arabic Television in May 2009 when he declared that all Shia Muslims were apostate, unbelievers, and as such should be hunted down and killed. Knowing that Al Kalbani was appointed to his position by the King himself, one can only surmise that the cleric was merely expressing the state’s sentiment and forthcoming policy against all Shia Muslims, whether within or outside the borders of the Kingdom. Al Kalbani suggested that all Saudi Shia should be forced to leave the Kingdom, “as for repatriating the Shia, we can possibly discuss it.” He stressed that no members of the Shia community should be entitled to political representation at the Supreme Council of Ulama, even though they are citizens.But if the government has sought to persecute and mistreat Saudi Shia within its own borders it has also projected that hatred onto the region in order to promote division among communities in the name of control. Driven by political and territorial greed, the House of Saud has served as ground zero for anti-Shiism. The nefarious force behind the region’s sudden burst of ethnic-based violence and prejudices, disseminated by Saudi Arabia has sown the seeds of intolerance in the entire Middle Eastern region.

On April 2013, Saad Al Durihim, a Saudi cleric, posted a series of comments on Twitter in which he advocated that militias in Iraq demonstrate a more “heavy handed” approach when dealing with Shia Muslims and kill any Shias they might encounter – women, men and children in order to instil fear in their hearts. Such statements essentially gave fanatics a carte blanche right to kill an entire community based on their ethnicity and faith, in complete and utter violation of international law.Al Durihim’ hateful cries stand directly in violation of article 6 and 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Article 6: “Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.” Article 18: “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.”Al Durihim continued to categorize Shia Muslims as lesser human beings, social pariahs and undesirables in order to justify and rationalize his calls for genocide. Shia Right Watch, decided to step into this international void of silence and denounce Saudi oppression against Shia Muslims in order to promote unity on the basis of human dignity.

This came in reaction to Saudi cleric Nasser Al Omar’s fatwa against Shia Muslims everywhere. He ruled in his fatwa, “Shia have only two options, they can convert to ‘Islam’ or be killed if they decided to keep their beliefs…First slaughter all their men. Slaughter Shia until there are rivers of their blood. Second inmate their females. If virgin let the BEST ‘Mujahedeen’ enjoy them [sexually]. If not virgin but beautiful reserve for the rest of the “mujahedeen” and the rest of the females can be given to the rest of the men [who are not considered ‘Mujahedeen.’ Last group are Shia children. Capture them and teach them ‘true’ Islam and train them to be soldiers so we can use them in wars.”Finally Al Omar called for all Shia places of worship, and cultural centres to be burned to the ground.

http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2014/05/26/saudi-arabias-escalating-campaign-shia-muslims/

[Octafish]

15. ''Most Americans Don't Have a Clue''

ISIS and Washington’s Ignorance About the Sunni-Shia Divide

by GARY LEUPP
CounterPunch, Sept. 15, 2014

A couple weeks ago Saudi Arabia was warning against U.S. action against ISIL (ISIS, Islamic State) arguing that it would be perceived as a pro-Shiite intervention in a Sunni-Shiite conflict. Saudi Arabia is of course the land where the Prophet Mohammed lived, and the House of Saud sees itself as the guardian of the holy sites of Mecca and Medina. It is a bastion of Sunni orthodoxy; the Sharia is rigidly enforced. There are punitive stonings and beheadings. Women must wear the abaya and are forbidden to drive. Saudi Arabia was one of the very few countries that recognized and supported the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. In short, it has much in common with ISIL. Much of ISIL’s funding comes from private Saudi sources and “charities.”

But Saudi Arabia also has a longstanding close relationship with U.S. imperialism. It guarantees the supply of cheap oil to world markets in return for generous U.S. military aid. The regime seeks peace with Israel, and has proposed a two-state solution to the Israel-Palestine question endorsed by the Arab League. From 1990 to 2003 it hosted U.S. military forces. (This was the factor that caused Osama bin Laden to break with the regime and call for the overthrow of the monarchy.) ISIL’s “Islamic State” despises the Saudi rulers just as bin Laden did. It wants to ultimately conquer the Arabian Peninsula and raise the black flag of the caliphate in Mecca and Medina.

So Riyadh fears ISIL. It has now succumbed to Washington’s pressure and agreed to take part in some sort of alliance to defeat the Islamic State. But it also fears Iran, a bastion of Shiite orthodoxy with a population three times its size. It has no rational fear of an Iranian attack; Iran indeed has not invaded another country in several hundred years. Iran’s military budget at around $6 billion annually is just 11% of Saudi Arabia’s. U.S. intelligence has long since concluded that Iran has no nuclear weapons program. But according to some reports, Riyadh would even look the other way if Israel flew over its airspace to bomb Iranian nuclear sites. What Riyadh dreads is the prospect of a Shiite rebellion within the Saudi kingdom, backed by Iran.

Over 10% of Saudis (perhaps even 18%) are Shiites. They are concentrated in the Eastern Province, especially in the cities of Al-Qatif and Al-Ahsa on or near the Persian Gulf. This province is the center of Saudi oil production. It could one day become an independent state. It should be obvious why Riyadh is concerned about the possibility that U.S. actions might advance Shiite interests at its expense.

Some necessary historical background: In the seventh century the still young Islamic movement split into two camps, Sunni and Shia. The proximate cause was a difference of opinion about the selection of a new caliph, the spiritual and political leader of the Muslim community. The Sunni felt he should be elected; those who came to be called Shiites believed that he must be a member of the Prophet’s family. The quarrel came to a head at the Battle of Karbala (in what is now Iraq) in 680 and the defeat of the Shiite faction, which still nurtures historical resentments towards the victors, and a sense of eternal victimhood.

Always a minority within the Islamic world, the Shiites developed their own beliefs and practices that somewhat diverged from those of the Sunnis (although there is enormous variety within both traditions). In particular, their reverence for saints and construction of shrines to their memory strikes many Sunnis as virtual idolatry. Some indeed refuse to concede that Shiites are truly Muslims.

Patrick Cockburn reports that Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the Saudi ambassador to Washington (1983-2005), once told M16 head Sir Richard Dearlove: “The time is not far off in the Middle East, Richard, when it will literally be ‘God help the Shia.’ More than a billion Sunni have simply had enough of them.”

There are thus deep animosities within Islam, as there have been, historically, within Christianity.

CONTINUED...

http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/09/15/isis-and-washingtons-ignorance-about-the-sunni-shia-divide/

Regarding former Sen. Bob Graham:

Former senator: Government, FBI hiding full 9/11 story

By: Craig Patrick, FOX 13 Political Editor
Updated: Sep 11, 2014 8:01 PM EDT

TAMPA (FOX 13) - Former Florida Governor and U.S. Senator Bob Graham co-chaired the 9/11 investigation in Congress. He claims we still don't know the full story behind the September 11th attacks because our own government is covering it up.

While President Obama just called on Saudi Arabia to help us fight the ISIS terrorists (and while Secretary of State John Kerry is currently rallying support from Arab diplomats in Saudi Arabia), Graham claims the Saudi government is already sponsoring the terrorists.

"They essentially are the creator of ISIS and the primary source of its financial support today," Graham said. "Saudi Arabia feels they can do almost anything and nothing is going to happen (to them) because they're being protected, covered up by the U.S. government."

Graham helped write classified documents that he says reveal Al Qaeda had help launching the September 11th attacks. He claims there is evidence of a terror-support network in the United States, that supported Al Qaeda, and may still be in place for ISIS today.

Presidents Bush and Obama have both refused to release 28 pages of those classified records. Though Graham cannot reveal the specific contents, he accuses the Saudi government of working against us behind the scenes, and he accuses the U.S. government of keeping it a secret (possibly to protect our oil interests or alliance with the Saudi Arabia).

"For 13 years, that information has been denied to the American people," said Graham. "The pot is going to break soon."

He says only a few members of congress have seen the information.

“Without exception, when they have put down the 28 pages, their reaction has been, 'Oh God, I can't believe this has really happened!"

CONTINUED...

http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/story/26511322/2014/09/11/former-senator-government-hiding-full-911-story

Thank you for the heads-up, Ichingcarpenter. For some reason, my television screen in Detroit hasn't brought these important concerns to my attention.

[nationalize the fed]

14. 28 Ways You Can Build the 28 Pages Movement

1. Write to your representative or call them at 202-225-3121. Send a letter in minutes with our ready-to-print letters.

2. Write to the president or call the White House at 202-456-1111 and ask the president to keep his pledge to 9/11 families.

3 and 4. Write to your two senators or call them at 202-224-3121 to ask them to introduce legislation similar to H.Res.428. Here’s what to say.

5. Follow @28Pages on Twitter.

6. Use #declassify when discussing the subject in social media...
7-28: http://28pages.org/2014/08/28/28-ways-you-can-build-the-28-pages-movement/

SAUDI GOVERNMENT CONNECTION TO 9/11 HIJACKERS
From False Flag 9/11 by Philip Marshall- Chapter 16

It takes a close reading of an innocuous-looking statement within the 911 Commission’s report to realize that a huge entourage of the longtime Saudi Intelligence Minister, Prince Turki al Faisal, was in Las Vegas on September 11, 2001. Tucked in the back of the report was an account of three separate chartered airliners carrying dozens of Saudis, departing from Las Vegas on midnight transatlantic flights beginning on September 19th.

We now know that this group, including Prince Turki, with deep connections to Saudi Arabia’s secret police, was in Las Vegas during the time that the 911 Commission could not explain why all the hijackers had made trips to Las Vegas. The roster of Saudi officials in the United States on September 11 includes the Defense Minister, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Minister of Aviation and the head of Dallah Avco Group, in addition to Prince Turki and of course Prince Bandar, Saudi ambassador to the U.S. In addition, the head of two of Saudi Arabia’s holiest mosques stayed at the same hotel as the all-Saudi hijackers of AA77 — at the Marriott Residence Inn in Herndon, Virginia — on the night of September 10th. In the week after the attack, there were a dozen chartered flights with high-ranking Saudi officials that left from Las Vegas, Newark, Boston and Washington, all cities, by the way, with direct links to the hijackings. By September 24, 2001, they had all returned home.

The British Observer reported that the widely feared Prince Turki al Faisal had a long, mutually hostile relationship with Osama bin Laden. Turki, with American connections (he would become Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. after Prince Bandar), was funding bin Laden’s mujahedeen against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s, but the partnership with bin Laden ended soon after. More recently, the entire Saudi royal family had become the prime target of al-Qaeda for their relationship with American oil companies. Of great interest is the Observer’s reporting that pilot/hijacker Mohamed Atta left Hamburg soon after making contact with Prince Turki’s intelligence agents in early 2000. Atta’s destination, after a brief stop in Pakistan, was Huffman Aviation, the small school in Florida where he began basic flight training. He was soon joined by Jarrah and al Shehhi. They told people in Venice that they were bodyguards with the Saudi government and needed to learn to fly airplanes.

The prince’s entourage entailed a perfect opportunity for the Raiders to get the needed Saudi Boeing flight instructors into the country, and exit after the attacks without anyone interviewing them. The chartered departures from Las Vegas were a four-engine DC-8 for Geneva on September 19, 2001 with 69 passengers, including 46 Saudis; a Boeing 727 for England with 18 Saudis on September 20; and on September 23, a jumbo Lockheed L-1011 for Paris. Only 34 passengers were listed on that plane, which has a capacity of nearly 400. On that flight was Prince Turki...
Much MORE: http://thebigbamboozle.tumblr.com/post/40938835223/saudi-government-connection-to-9-11-hijackers

WANT ANSWERS? WHO TRAINED THE 9/11 HIJACKERS TO FLY BOEING JETLINERS

...There are two different worlds in aviation — the general single-engine airplane world with a service ceiling of 10,000 feet and a top speed of around 200 miles per hour, and the commercial swept-wing jetliner world at 40,000 feet and Mach numbers for speed calculations. Little within that first world prepares the pilot for the second, high-altitude world.

So began my search for Middle Eastern operators of Boeing airliners. Because the hijackers were mostly Saudi Arabian, the firm of Dallah Avco, a Saudi operator of multiple private Boeing airliners, soon stood out as a focal point. To my amazement, I immediately discovered that Congressional investigators had already linked Dallah Avco with the actual hijackers. Omar Bayoumi, a Dallah employee and operative within the Saudi Ministry of Aviation, had provided housing and basic support for three hijackers: Nawaf al-Hazmi, Khalid al-Mihdhar and the pilot/hijacker of American 77, Hani Hanjour...

...“Air Blackwater,” previously known as Aviation Worldwide Services, formed in early 2001, just when the 911 hijackers were in the final stages of training. Public statements said they were to provide “military training operations and aviation transport” for the U.S. government.

http://thebigbamboozle.tumblr.com/post/40856537710/want-answers-who-trained-the-9-11-hijackers-to-fly

The man that did the research above was dead less than a month after posting these stories.