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 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:…


One thought on “Saudi Arabia May Be Tied to 9/11, 2 Ex-Senators Say

  1. .”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.

Comments are closed.