Saudi Arabia May Be Tied to 9/11, 2 Ex-Senators Say

Saudi Arabia May Be Tied to 9/11, 2 Ex-Senators Say

By Eric Lichtblau, February 29, 2012 

WASHINGTON — For more than a decade, questions have lingered about the possible role of the Saudi government in the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, even as the royal kingdom has made itself a crucial counterterrorism partner in the eyes of American diplomats.

Now, in sworn statements that seem likely to reignite the debate, two former senators who were privy to top secret information on the Saudis’ activities say they believe that the Saudi government might have played a direct role in the terrorist attacks.

“I am convinced that there was a direct line between at least some of the terrorists who carried out the September 11th attacks and the government of Saudi Arabia,” former Senator Bob Graham, Democrat of Florida, said in an affidavit filed as part of a lawsuit brought against the Saudi government and dozens of institutions in the country by families of Sept. 11 victims and others. Mr. Graham led a joint 2002 Congressional inquiry into the attacks.

His former Senate colleague, Bob Kerrey of Nebraska, a Democrat who served on the separate 9/11 Commission, said in a sworn affidavit of his own in the case that “significant questions remain unanswered” about the role of Saudi institutions. “Evidence relating to the plausible involvement of possible Saudi government agents in the September 11th attacks has never been fully pursued,” Mr. Kerrey said.

Their affidavits, which were filed on Friday and have not previously been disclosed, are part of a multibillion-dollar lawsuit that has wound its way through federal courts since 2002. An appellate court, reversing an earlier decision, said in November that foreign nations were not immune to lawsuits under certain terrorism claims, clearing the way for parts of the Saudi case to be reheard in United States District Court in Manhattan.

Lawyers for the Saudis, who have already moved to have the affidavits thrown out of court, declined to comment on the assertions by Mr. Graham and Mr. Kerrey. “The case is in active litigation, and I can’t say anything,” said Michael K. Kellogg, a Washington lawyer for the Saudis.

Officials at the Saudi Embassy in Washington, who have emphatically denied any connection to the attacks in the past, did not respond Wednesday to requests for comment.

Read more:


Graham: FBI’s public statements are in conflict with 9/11 probe

Graham: FBI’s public statements are in conflict with still secret records of Sarasota 9/11 probe
By Dan Christensen and Anthony Summers, February 20, 2012 at 6:00 am

Former Florida Senator Bob Graham has seen two classified FBI documents that he says raise new questions about the Bureau’s once secret investigation of a possible Saudi support operation for the 9/11 hijackers in Sarasota.

Graham would not disclose the content of the documents, which are marked “Secret,” but said the information they contain is at odds with the FBI’s public statements that there was no connection between the hijackers and Saudis then living in Sarasota.

“There are significant inconsistencies between the public statements of the FBI in September and what I read in the classified documents,” Graham said.

“One document adds to the evidence that the investigation was not the robust inquiry claimed by the FBI,” Graham said. “An important investigative lead was not pursued and unsubstantiated statements were accepted as truth.”

Whether the 9/11 hijackers acted alone, or whether they had support within the U.S., remains an unanswered question – one that began to be asked as soon as it became known that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi citizens. It was underlined when Congress’s bipartisan Joint Inquiry, which Democrat Graham co-chaired, released its public report in July 2003. The final 28 pages, regarding possible foreign support for the terrorists, were censored in their entirety—on President George W. Bush’s instructions.

Graham said the two classified FBI documents that he saw, dated 2002 and 2003, were prepared by an agent who had participated in the Sarasota investigation. He said the agent suggested that another federal agency be asked to join the investigation, but that the idea was “rejected.”

Graham attempted in recent weeks to contact the agent, only to find the man had been instructed by FBI headquarters not to talk.

read more:

911 Commissioner Bob Kerrey claims 911 was a 30 year conspiracy

i never get tired of this one.

This puzzle needs to be completed soon.

Hope this piece works for more people to bring that about ....

Going back to the Russian

Going back to the Russian Afghan war, Bob Kerrey is right. It is, in a way, at least a 30 year conspiracy.

Isn't the withholding of information

tantamount to obstruction of justice or accessory after the fact?

The broad scale invocation of national security classification in regard to 9/11 in large part appears to be nothing but a criminal scam designed to avoid accountability.

To review the current court case:

MSNBC's Chris Matthews weighs in...

MSNBC interview with author Eric Lichtblau of the New York Times and CIA officer Bob Baer

*mentions 9/11 "Truthers" at the 3:05 mark.

Glenn Greenwald weighs in on the New York Times article:

a remarkable clip

In this incredible 13-minute ABC News clip we have so much prescient reporting on screen it makes you wonder why ABC didn't win a News Emmy in 2001 (or maybe they did).

The first reporter interviewing Graham suggests al Qaeda involvement. The on-screen text predicts that Building 7 may collapse due to fire. Then Aaron Brown interviews structural engineer Jim Destefano, a guy who has already figured out that “the vertical columns clearly failed from the high temperatures and the damage from the impact”. Whoa! Case closed!
His supreme confidence reminds me of Harley Guy.  I’d like to know more about this engineer:
Why do I think he’s not among the AE911Truth’s 1600+ signers?

It is so very important that we have preserved these clips and that people like Orangutan. keep posting them.

This quote from the article says it all

But Mr. Kerrey and Mr. Graham said that the findings should not be seen as an exoneration and that many important questions about the Saudis’ role had never been fully examined, partly because their panels simply did not have the time or resources given their wider scope.

If that isn't an indictment of the political/media establishment I don't know what is. Should the public not be upset that all the massive post 9/11 policy changes were likely based on faulty conclusions? Note the way Chris Matthews calls out truthers but has no shame about his shitty 9/11 coverage through the years. Why haven't the victims' families gotten answers? Mainly because media with access to government officials has refused to use that access to ask real questions.

Once again a host and his guests completely fail to link the Saudi aspect with the bizarre conduct of US intelligence. The Saudi conduct did not take place in a vacuum. Instead of interviewing Baer why doesn't Matthews interview Rich Blee or Rod Middleton? If he really wanted answers he would interview people who were actually in the loop. Instead Matthews demonstrates that he doesn't want any real answers, rather he is content to blather on without adding anything we haven't known for years.


Noise said...."Once again a host and his guests completely fail to link the Saudi aspect with the bizarre conduct of US intelligence."

The hijackers were grouped in cells. Where did they get this type opf training? From Ali Mohammad ....

FBI 302, dated 9/9/98 of interviews of Mohammad al-Owali:

"Subject further advised that he believes that this type of "cell" training was, at one time, taught in the Bin Ladin camps by an Egyptian male, who was trained by either the American military or intelligence agency. Subject does not know this Egyptian's name but added that he is no longer a part of Bin Ladin's training camps because he had been labeled untrustworthy. Subject believes this person lives in the United States." page 5/18

Just one of the services provided by him here's another...

"Ali Mohammed trained bin Laden's bodyguards." page 220

The CIA had one of the hijackers phone number since 1998. It's in court documents....

FBI 302, dated 9/9/98 of interviews of Mohammad al-Owali:

"Subject made a series of phone calls to his friend in yemen, Ahmed al-hazza at phone number 967 1 200 578." page 14/18

Ahmed al-hazza)who also goes by the name al-hada) was the father in law of Khailid al-Mihdar who was the first hijacker to come to America and was living there. That number was Al Qeada'a switchboard number and the NSA and CIA were recording all the calls made on it since 1998.

"Interrogated by a team of FBI agents, al-Owhali gave up the key relay number(011-967-1-200-578) - the telephone number of Ahmed al-Hada."

"NSA immediately began intercepting al-Hada's telephone calls......The importance of the intercepted al-Hada telephone calls remains today a highly classified secret within the intelligence community, which continues to insist that al-Hada be referred to only as a "suspected terrorist facility in the Middle East" in declassified reports regarding the 9/11 intelligence disaster."

"A conversation on the Hada phone at the end of 1999 mentioned a forthcoming meeting of Al Qaeda operatives in
Malaysia. The C.I.A. learned the name of one participant, Khaled al-Mihdhar, and the first name of another: Nawaf.
Both men were Saudi citizens. The C.I.A. did not pass this intelligence to the F.B.I. However, the C.I.A. did share the
information with Saudi authorities, who told the agency that Mihdhar and a man named Nawaf al-Hazmi were members
of Al Qaeda. Based on this intelligence, Based on this intelligence, the C.I.A. broke into a hotel room in Dubai where Mihdhar
was staying, en route to Malaysia. The operatives photocopied Mihdhar’s passport and faxed it to Alec Station."

Are you starting to see how the CIA and the Saudi's were working together? The sad part is the FBI is the one that turned over to the CIA in 1998
the phone number so much intelligence was gathered from, and then the CIA shut out the lower ranking FBI agents on info from that number.

When these future hijackers came to America and were introduced to an FBI informant(who was probably an informant for another intelligence agency) by Saudi Intelligence agents - Bob Grahams Joint Inquiry obviously wanted to speak with that informant. The President stopped that from happening. Bush was protecting the Saudi's and the CIA from the start...

From Senate and Congress Joint Inquiry into attacks of 9/11:

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

Who said 9/11 was a tragedy? It made that guy $100,000 richer.

"In July 2003, the asset was given a $100,000 payment and closed as an asset." {footnote number 197}

Bush then censored 28 pages of this report to protect Saudi Arabia, because both the U.S. Government and Saudi Arabia (along with Israel) want Iraq taken out.

Here is a little taste of what those pages most likely contain....

"Congress, the FBI, and the CIA are now trying to learn whether any of the money Bayoumi spent on behalf of Almihdhar and Alhazmi came from the Saudi Embassy in Washington."

"A Saudi national, Bassnan was living in San Diego last year and has been linked to Omar al Bayoumi, a Saudi student who befriended two men who wound up helping crash Flight 77 into the Pentagon. The sources also say that the ambassador, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, gave $15,000 to Bassnan.",9171,1003790,00.html

"After September 11, the FBI developed information clearly indicating that Bassnan is an extremist and a Bin Ladin supporter. [censured] [censured]"
page 229/858

"On Sept. 13, 2001, George W. Bush invited Bandar to the White House -- not to press for more liberty and less hate-financing in Saudi Arabia, which is consistently ranked in the lowest 5% of all countries in global-measured freedoms -- but to hug him and smoke cigars (according to a hair-raising profile of Bandar in the March 24 New Yorker)."

Bush protected Saudi Arabia in order to take out Iraq. He's already guilty. That is treason. Just how guilty is he? I'm not going to go around saying "Muslims had nothing to do with 9-11". Because I'm not interested in helping with this cover up.


Solicitor General Elena Kagan said in the brief to the Supreme Court that her office agreed with the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit “that the princes are immune from petitioners’ claims,” although she pointed to somewhat different legal rationales in reaching that conclusion.

Ms. Kagan noted that the Supreme Court had historically looked to the executive branch to take the lead on such international matters because of “the potentially significant foreign relations consequences of subjecting another sovereign state to suit.”

The government said in its brief that the victims’ families never alleged that the Saudi government or members of the royal family “personally committed” the acts of terrorism against the United States “or directed others to do so.” And it said the claims that were made — that the Saudis helped to finance the plots — fell “outside the scope” of the legal parameters for suing foreign governments or leaders.

As Obama's solicitor general, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan urged the Court to dismiss the suit that our 9/11 families have been pressing against the Saudi government and several Saudi princes for their extensive funding of al Qaeda. The families sued under the domestic tort exception to sovereign immunity, which according to Kagan's Supreme Court brief (at p. 14):

requires not merely that the foreign state’s extraterritorial conduct have some causal connection to tortious injury in the United States, but that “the tortious act or omission of that foreign state or of any official or employee” be committed within the United States. 28 U.S.C. 1605(a)(5).

The "tortious act or omission" is the wrongful act (the tort) that leads to the injury. Thus she is claiming that for Saudi funding of al Qaeda to be actionable, the funding itself has to have been transacted within the United States. Compare this with the actual wording of 28 U.S.C. 1605(a)(5):

(a) A foreign state shall not be immune from the jurisdiction of courts of the United States or of the States in any case – ... (5) ... in which money damages are sought against a foreign state for personal injury or death, or damage to or loss of property, occurring in the United States and caused by the tortious act or omission of that foreign state or of any official or employee of that foreign state while acting within the scope of his office or employment..."

Elena Kagan On Her Part In The 9/11 Cover-Up

This is what passes for informed discussion about 9/11

A so called big story they discuss for about five minutes before moving on to the GOP primaries. The failure to properly investigate 9/11 indicates a sickening level of establishment corruption and contempt for the public. Are we really supposed to buy the BS about "not wanting to know." What a bunch of garbage. That isn't an acceptable explanation especially after 9/11 has been exploited for years to justify all sorts of corrupt policies.

Again we have a panel that pretends Saudi involvement took place in some sort of vacuum. As if nobody on the panel has any awareness of Ali Soufan's allegations. The contempt for their audience is bizarre.

Senators Bob Graham and Bob

Senators Bob Graham and Bob Kerrey File Affirmations in Support of 9/11 Litigation Against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
By Cozen O'Connor, Mar 1, 2012; Modified: 1:00pm on Mar 1, 2012

PHILADELPHIA, March 1, 2012 — /PRNewswire/ -- Cozen O'Connor announced today that former Senators Bob Graham and Bob Kerrey, leaders of national inquiries into the September 11th attacks, provided affidavits in support of a pending application filed by Cozen O'Connor on behalf of victims of the September 11th Attacks and their families, to reinstate the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and a Saudi government charity as defendants in the In Re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001 litigation.

In the affidavits, which were filed of record by Cozen O'Connor attorneys on Friday, February 24, 2012, both Senators express their view that further inquiry is warranted into the evidence of possible Saudi culpability for the 9/11 attacks. The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York will hear argument on March 15 concerning the 9/11 plaintiffs' bid to draw Saudi Arabia back into the litigation.

Read more here:

A Statement by the 9/11

A Statement by the 9/11 Families United to Bankrupt Terrorism
By 9/11 Families United to Bankrupt Terrorism
Posted: 10:50am on Mar 1, 2012; Modified: 10:55am on Mar 1, 2012


MT. PLEASANT, S.C., March 1, 2012 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- The 9/11 Families United to Bankrupt Terrorism today applauded former Senators Bob Graham (FL) and Bob Kerrey (NE), who provided declarations on the families' behalf that were filed in Federal Court for the Southern District of New York strongly disagreeing with papers filed by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the Saudi High Commission claiming that they had been "exonerated" of any connection to the 9/11 terrorist attacks. The Senators, who both held leadership roles in the investigations by the U.S. government into the 9/11 attacks, urged the Court to reinstate the Kingdom and the Saudi High Commission into federal litigation (In re Terrorist Attacks) and encouraged the Court to allow a thorough investigation of any connection between the two and al Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks.

"The families and survivors of the atrocities of 9/11 have not given up hope for justice. We are determined to expose the truth," said Beverly Burnett of Bloomington, Minn., mother of Thomas E. Burnett, Jr., one of the heroes of United Flight 93. "The financiers and enablers of those who murdered our loved ones are still alive, well and capable of supporting terrorism. The trail back to them still points to Saudi Arabia."

Read more here:

Red Herring That Serves Official Myth

"Saudi Arabia May Be Tied to 9/11, 2 Ex-Senators Say"

“I am convinced that there was a direct line between at least some of the terrorists who carried out the September 11th attacks and the government of Saudi Arabia,” former Senator Bob Graham"


Right up there with the Muslims did it.

Dangerous facts undermining cherished no hijacker delusion


How about that?

What you're doing is a combination of an appeal to consequences (if facts disprove my pet theory, they are bad) and begging the question (9/11 hijackers are a myth, therefore evidence proving their existence is bad and false)

Okaaay ...

The U.S. blew up the WTC but the Muslims crashed the planes?

Divide and conquer?


Okaaay ...

Again ... blazing response time SJ.

Are you stalking the comment section?

You asked

I replied.

I had just written another reply on the other thread.

Your response time is not too bad yourself!

9/11 was not a Muslim crime...

Says so right here.

"If people who happened to be Muslim participated in the crime of 9/11, that doesn’t mean you blame everyone who is a Muslim. Just as you don’t blame everyone who is a Christian after a Christian decides to blow up an abortion clinic. You blame the individuals responsible, and not everyone from their religion, nationality, or ideology.

9/11 is being treated as a “Muslim crime” by some, and as a result, Thousands of Muslims that had nothing to do with the attacks have been slaughtered. Treating 9/11 as a crime, without the religious, national, and ideological undertones, prevents more people from being blamed and slaughtered for a crime they didn’t commit. It’s as simple as that."

I don't understand why that's such a hard concept for people to understand. Instead, people try to take the hijackers out of the equation completely (which based on ALL of the available information seems to be factually incorrect), even though when they are in the picture, there is way more incriminating information than with them out of it. Pretty soon, people will be calling those who look at 9/11 with the hijackers in the equation "racists." Oh wait, people are already doing that. Never mind.

By the way, this article by Dr. Scott was released today about Saudi Arabia. Man, look at all of that incriminating information that some would like us not to focus on.


Well said Jon, and Muslims continue to bear the brunt of public suspicion, FBI entrapment, and open discrimination such as what was on display in the awful "ground zero mosque" debate. Let's hope this puts an end to the "Muslims did/didn't" do 9/11.

Peace everyone.


Another perspective

While I definitely agree that blaming all Muslims is a terrible consequence of the OCT, I think there is value in understanding the role of brainwashing, indoctrination, and militarization a la US supported madrassas. It's important to understand that we have been using brainwashed young men with religious delusions as a proxy fighting force in global resource wars.

To say that religion is only a superficial circumstance ignores a key mechanism in the Global War Of Terror.

I would also have a look at where the brainwashing is occurring with these people who drive around with pictures of dead fetuses on their cars or wearing them on t-shirts, since you mentioned the abortion clinic terrorism.

Have you ever driven through the Bible Belt?


I agree that exposing how religion is used for war is important. With regards to 9/11, it is important to hold the individuals responsible. Like you would any crime. If a neighbor of yours is doing something illegal, and they are arrested for it, does that mean everyone on the block gets arrested? No. The myth of 9/11 is dangerous to everyone on the planet. The truth about 9/11 is dangerous only to a few. Treat 9/11 as a crime, and not as an act of war.

Aidan I don't agree

Look at Chris Matthew's reaction in the video below. This is an important story to spread for it will certainly help open people to deep aspects of the 9/11 cover-up.

Saudis to remain out of 9/11 damages case -judge

Saudis to remain out of 9/11 damages case -judge

NEW YORK, March 15 (Reuters) - The U.S. judge overseeing a case seeking damages from foreign governments over the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks refused on Thursday to reinstate claims against Saudi Arabia.

In other news..

"West Wins Fresh Saudi oil Supply Pledge"
3/14/2012 - Reuters

Washington has urged ally Saudi Arabia to cover potential shortages when new U.S. and European Union sanctions are expected to reduce Iranian oil exports from July.

On Wednesday, veteran Saudi Oil Minister Ali al-Naimi told the International Energy Forum, a major gathering of producer and consumer nations, that the world's largest oil exporter stood ready to fill any supply gap.

The statement appeared to differ from previous comments by Naimi, who has repeatedly said the kingdom was prepared to raise production only if it saw increased demand from customers.

3 Days in a Row @ MSNBC

March 12 @ msnbc: Saudi who left Fla. before 9/11 considered bin Laden a 'hero,' informant told FBI in '04

March 13 @ msnbc: Classified documents contradict FBI on post-9/11 probe of Saudis, ex-senator says

March 14 @ msnbc: New questions about FBI probe of Saudis' post-9/11 exodus


Kevin Ryan oversimplifies:

Such support for the official conspiracy theory also promotes the ongoing Muslim genocide.

in this article:
Muslims did not attack the U.S. on 9/11

Kevin has previously said this accurate statemement:

There is, in fact, much evidence suggesting complicity by some elements within the Saudi government. But that fact only further implicates western powers due to the close relationship between the Saudi royal family, which runs the Saudi government, and deep state controlling interests that have partnered with and manipulated the Saudi royal family for many decades

Followed by the next sentence that is complete theory:

Blaming Saudi Arabia would, however, make a lot of sense if seizing resources, including the world’s greatest oil reserves, was what the war on terror has always been about.

That was stated in this older article:
Playing the “Get into Saudi Arabia free card”

Kevin Ryan also stated this in that article:

Two weeks ago I spoke to NPR producer, Alex Kingsbury, who asked if I felt the release of the 28-pages of redacted material from the Joint Congressional Inquiry might help to solve the mysteries still surrounding 9/11. Those redacted pages, and much of the 9/11 Commission report that followed, have always seemed to be a kind of "Get into Saudi Arabia free" card for the powers that be. Kingsbury was interested in knowing whether the redacted pages, which are thought to contain significant references to Saudi Arabia, were of interest to me personally. Of course they would be, I said, but we should remember that the government of Saudi Arabia is far from representative of its people.

I point this out because Kevin is leading people who follow blindly astray into conspiracy-theory-land with his loose words and recent conduct at NOI.

His actions show an uneagerness to break information into the mainstream media, by staying right on the fringes.

However, those people following Kevin blindly likely don't remember him correctly stating that there is indeed "complicity within some elements of the Saudi government," and that fact only "further implicates western powers."

Remember that as we all move forward, please. 9/11 was a collaboration between many parties, and not everyone involved necessarily knew everything that was going to happen.

(No subject)