Supporting links are available here:
Abby interviews former Senator Bob Graham on Saudi Arabia's connection to 9/11, and several other subjects. *The actual date was 10/2/2013.
But “We Can’t Afford to Irritate the Saudis” By Actually Looking Into Who Backed 9/11 … “Especially with Oil Prices Going Up Now”
Contrary to the official narrative, 9/11 was state-sponsored terror. The only question is which state sponsored it.
A 9/11 Commissioner and Co-Chair of the Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 say in sworn declarations that the Saudi government is linked to the 9/11 attacks.
This week, the Miami Herald provided more evidence of a Saudi link:
A Saudi family who “fled” their Sarasota area home weeks before 9/11 had “many connections” to “individuals associated with the terrorist attacks on 9/11/2001,” according to newly released FBI records.
ABSTRACT: Some sceptics believe Osama was not behind 9/11 and may have been framed. This article argues that Osama was in on the game since the beginning, and that the Bin Laden family might be members of the Global Elite. For the first time ever, this article also pieces together a theory that has been gaining traction in Pakistan since the assassination of Benazir Bhutto. That Osama was killed around December 2001 by a “rogue” MI-6 operative named Omar Saeed Shaikh, in an act of vigilantism . Sadly, Saeed did not get to claim the $25 million bounty on Osama’s head. Instead he got framed for the mysterious murder of reporter Daniel Pearl, who was preparing to tell the world about Saeed’s wondrous feat.
The passage of time since September 11, 2001, has not diminished the distrust many of us feel surrounding the official story of how 9/11 happened and, more specifically, who financed and supported it. After eleven years, the time has come for the families of the victims, the survivors and all Americans to get the whole story behind 9/11.
Yet the story of who may have facilitated the 19 hijackers and the infrastructure that supported the attacks -- a crucial element of the narrative -- has not been told. The pieces we do have underscore how much more remains unknown.
Did the hijackers execute the plot alone, or did they have the support of forces other than the known leaders of al-Qaeda -- a network even -- that provided funds, assistance, and cover?
It is not merely a question of the need to complete the historical record. It is a matter of national security today.
The amount of U.S. currency circulating outside banks rose sharply in July/August 2001. The growth ran into the billions of dollars, and was concentrated in $100 bills. These large-scale currency movements matter for anyone who cares about learning the truth about 9/11.
Under money laundering and other laws, assets can be frozen and seized in the banking system. Knowing this, parties concerned that their assets might be frozen or otherwise at risk after 9/11 would have had an incentive to liquidate securities and banking accounts beforehand, and withdraw their money in difficult-to-trace ways. This could have happened in U.S. banking and securities accounts, as well as accounts denominated in U.S. dollars outside the United States. Finding the parties responsible for large-scale withdrawals of currency before 9/11 could help identify people aware of, if not responsible for, those events.
Monday, 5. March 2012
9/11 Questions Bubble Up in the Media
On Friday February 24, Boiling Frogs posted an article titled “Media Sleepwalks, While History is in the Making.” Three articles had come out the week before, one in the London Daily Telegraph and two in the Florida-based Broward Bulldog, raising important new questions about the crimes of September 11, 2001 and the quality of the government’s investigation. In particular, these articles discussed new information and questions coming from former Senator Robert Graham, questions relating to secret documents that Graham described as running at odds with past government assertions in the 9/11 investigation. These three articles also raised new questions about the role of the government of Saudi Arabia.
The Feb 24 Boiling Frogs post discussed those three articles, and noted that there hadn’t been a single article in the mainstream media on the issues they raised, even though a week had gone by. The post then asked if a valid prediction market could be established for the date when the media would wake up.
Political prediction markets have a very interesting history. One of the difficulties in having a successful market, a market that people trust, is related to a similar issue in futures markets. Futures contracts need to be specified carefully and clearly, and remain free of ambiguous legal interpretation.
Recently Deceased Crown Prince Sultan and his son Bandar “Bush” Epitomize Highly Questionable Saudi 9/11 Connections
News of the Saudi Crown Prince passing in the U.S. and his new successor to the post warrant a refresher on the attempts to name them in 9/11 lawsuits years ago.
ONE BIG FAMILY
Sultan bin Abdul Aziz Al Saud, the Crown Prince to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, died just a weeks ago in a New York hospital due to ill health. The world’s largest oil-exporting nation has quickly found an heir to the Crown Prince, a position directly under the most powerful of the King. The new Crown Prince has been named as Nayef bin Abdul Aziz, brother of the deceased Crown Prince Sultan. Both were half-brothers to the current King of Saudi Arabia, King Abdullah, and both are a part of the powerful Sudairi Seven.
By Michael Collins
(Washington, DC) A faction of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard called the Quds Force (QF) is center stage in the War on Terror for the second time in five years. In 2007, President George W. Bush hauled out the group of middle and upper level Iranian government officials as a rationale for military action against Iran. The decisive shutdown of the Bush effort marks a critical turning point in recent history and will be discussed later in the article.
QF II began last Tuesday when FBI Director Robert Mueller and Attorney General Eric Holder unified the terror storyline between the rabid neoconservatives of the Bush era and the low key loyalists to the national security state in the Obama administration.
By Cahal Milmo, Chief Reporter
Monday, 19 September 2011
A Lloyd's insurance syndicate has begun a landmark legal case against Saudi Arabia, accusing the kingdom of indirectly funding al-Qa'ida and demanding the repayment of £136m it paid out to victims of the 9/11 attacks.
The Brighton-based Lloyd's 3500 syndicate, which paid $215m compensation to companies and individuals involved, alleges that the oil-rich Middle Eastern superpower bears primary responsibility for the atrocity because al-Qa'ida was supported by banks and charities acting as "agents and alter egos" for the Saudi state.
The detailed case, which names a number of prominent Saudi charities and banks as well as a leading member of the al-Saud royal family, will cause embarrassment to the Saudi government, which has long denied claims that Osama bin Laden's organisation received official financial and practical support from his native country.
Posted on 09.12.11
By Eric W. Dolan
Former Democratic Senator Bob Graham on Monday called on the U.S. government to reopen its investigation into 9/11 after a report found that links between Saudi Arabia and the hijackers were never disclosed by the FBI to the 2002 joint Congressional intelligence committee investigating the attacks.
“In the final report of the congressional inquiry, there was a chapter related primarily to the Saudi role in 9/11 that was totally censored, every word of the chapter has been withheld from the public,” Graham said on MSNBC’s The Dylan Ratigan Show.
“Some of the other questions we ought to be asking are if we know that the Saudis who lived in San Diego and now apparently in Sarasota received substantial assistance, what about the Saudis who lived in Phoenix, Arizona? Or Arlington, Virginia? … What was happening in those places?”
“I believe these are questions for which there are definitive answers, but the American people and largely their elected representatives have been denied that information.”
Watch video, courtesy of MSNBC, below:
Sunday, August 28, 2011
This guest blog is from Kevin Ryan, co-editor of the Journal of 9/11 Studies. Kevin's personal blog can be found at Dig Within.
Recent developments among supporters of the US government’s version of events indicate that they plan to begin blaming Saudi Arabia for the attacks of September 11, 2001. 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. 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.