In 9/11 Document, View of a Saudi Effort to Thwart U.S. Action on Al Qaeda

[deminks]

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/16/us/28-pages-saudi-arabia-september-11.html?_r=0

WASHINGTON — The long-classified document detailing possible connections between the government of Saudi Arabia and the Sept. 11 terrorist plot released on Friday is a wide-ranging catalog of meetings and suspicious coincidences.

It details contacts between Saudi officials and some of the Sept. 11 hijackers, checks from Saudi royals to operatives in contact with the hijackers and the discovery of a telephone number in a Qaeda militant’s phone book that was traced to a corporation managing an Aspen, Colo., home of Prince Bandar bin Sultan, then the Saudi ambassador to Washington.

The document, 28 pages of a congressional inquiry into the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, is also an unflattering portrayal of the kingdom’s efforts to thwart American attempts to combat Al Qaeda in the years before the attacks.

(snip)

The 28 pages discuss the role that Mr. Thumairy is said to have played, as well as a number of possible connections between Qaeda operatives and Saudi officials. One section of the report details how a phone number in a telephone book found with Abu Zubaydah, who was captured in Pakistan in March 2002 by the C.I.A., was traced to a corporation in Aspen, Colo., that manages the affairs of the Colorado residence of Prince Bandar.

(snip)

It closes with a snippet of testimony from October 2002, when a senator asked Robert Mueller III, the F.B.I director, during a closed-door session, whether the work of the congressional inquiry had unearthed information of which he had been unaware.

“Yes,” he said.

(end snip)

The key here may not only be the money trail, but may also be the efforts to thwart the investigation. The FBI was 'in the dark'. And remember, The Saudis were flown out of the country when planes were grounded. Bandar was so close to BFEE that he was called Bandar Bush.

[NightWatcher]

1. Can we arrest Evil Dick and The Shrub yet?

In the best case scenario for them, bush was used and possibly complicit.

In the worst he was a co-conspirator to a foreign govt that attacked.

[Dustlawyer]

2. Could not be released until Jeb's chance to ever become POTUS was over.

Bandy Bush would be a really bad link since W was so fond of him.

[Politicub]

3. Has anyone actually read the thing?

I haven't -- planning to -- but reporters are using a lot of language like possibly, maybe and perhaps.

[Botany]

4. Tell me agin why we invaded Iraq?

Between this and the Chilcot report* people should be in jail for high crimes.

* http://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2016/jul/06/chilcot-report-live-inquiry-war-iraq


Key findings include: Blair deliberately exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam Hussein; the UK chose invasion before it had exhausted peaceful options; British intelligence produced “flawed information”; the US ignored UK advice on postwar planning; the British military was poorly prepared for war, Blair ignored warnings, kept his cabinet in the dark and had no plans for occupation.

The report revealed secret letters between Blair and George W Bush, including one in which the then prime minister pledged to the US president: “I will be with you, whatever.” Six days after invasion, he added: “This is the moment when you can define international politics for the next generation: the true post-cold war world order.”

Blair responded by saying: “I express more sorrow, regret and apology than you can ever know or believe.” But the former prime minister insisted he made the right decision. “I believe it is better we took that decision. I acknowledge the mistakes and accept responsibility for them,” he said. “As this report makes clear, there were no lies, there was no deceit.”

Bush defiantly insisted the decision to invade was the correct one. “Despite the intelligence failures and other mistakes he has acknowledged previously,” a spokesperson said, “President Bush continues to believe the whole world is better off without Saddam Hussein in power.”