Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Ichingcarpenter

(36,988 posts)
Sun Feb 8, 2015, 05:05 AM Feb 2015

Why Saudi Funding of 9/11 Attacks Still Cloaked in Secrecy -

AThe revelation that Zacarias Moussaoui had “high-level” contacts with Saudi officials brought back attention to the Saudi role in the formation and financing of Al-Qaeda. It also revived the debate on whether the U.S. government should release Part 4 of the September 11 report, which deals with Saudi financing of terrorism.

The report remains classified and the U.S. government has been vigilant to protect the Saudi government in court and in Congress. The Saudi government, in typical fashion, dismissed the account of Moussaoui as the product of a deranged mind––just as it accuses all critics of its policies and repression of being deranged. But the American public can never understand the real circumstances of September 11 and the origins of Al-Qaeda without releasing the report and bringing more attention to the role of Saudi Arabia in funding (and arming, as in the case of Syria) of various militant Jihadi terrorist groups.

This is what we know. After the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, the U.S. government launched a horrific campaign to recruit fanatical Muslims from around the world in order to form an anti-communist militia. It jointly ran the program through the CIA with the Saudi and Pakistani intelligence.

So the U.S. government is not only protecting the Saudi royal family from scrutiny, but also protecting its secret role in the campaign against the Soviet army in Afghanistan. We still don’t know the extent to which American intelligence officials in Pakistan had direct contacts with Osama Bin Laden when he was a chief organizer of the Arab volunteer effort against the Soviet Union (the gang of Jihads was technically a volunteer force, because the Saudi government picked up the tabs for those who came to Pakistan from Saudi Arabia). The Economist revealed after September 11 that American intelligence agents did have contacts with Bin Laden, at least prior to 1994.

The man who was assigned to run the entire affair was none other than Prince Turki Al-Faisal, who ran Saudi foreign intelligence apparatus from 1977 until days—literally days––prior to September 11. We still don’t know why he resigned and under what circumstances.

When Turki Al-Faisal became Saudi ambassador in London, there was an outcry in the United Kingdom about his past role, but his assignment here in the U.S. (also after September 11) did not arise much controversy. (He later resigned but for other reasons dealing with a clash with his predecessor, Prince Bandar Bin Sultan).

Turki also had very good relations with the Taliban movement and is one of the few foreign officials who had direct, and by all accounts cordial, relations with Mullah Omar (let us remember that the three governments which extended recognition to the Taliban regime were all close allies of the United States: Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Pakistan). Turki was a chief financier for the Jihad movement when Bin Laden was closely coordinating with the Saudi government. By their own admissions, all top Saudi princes (including the former King Abdullah) had close dealings with Bin Laden, and Prince Turki still holds the view that Bin Laden was a good and gentle guy but that his Egyptian deputy corrupted him and led him astray.

It is unlikely that the Obama administration would respond to the pleas by the families of September 11 victims. There is so much at stake for his government and for his close ally, Saudi Arabia. It is certain, for example, that Princess Haifa (who is also the sister of Prince Turki and wife of Prince Bandar––such are marriage arrangements in the House of Saudi) sent regular checks to Omar Bayyumi, who had strong connections to at least two of the hijackers. She was never investigated and the matter was typically covered up by the government. Let us just imagine the U.S. government response if this was the wife of the Iranian or Syrian ambassador in the United States.

Saudi Arabia is not only financially tied to the world of Jihadi terrorism, it also provides the ideology that motivates Jihadi recruits. It is not mentioned in the American press that the ideology and practices of ISIS don’t deviate from the ruling ideology of Wahhabiyyah in Saudi Arabia, which has been spread by billions of oil revenues. Until the American public demands the full disclosure about the Saudi role, we won’t understand the real circumstances of September 11 and the forming and funding of Al-Qaeda.

- See more at: http://www.progressive.org/news/2015/02/187990/saudi-funding-911-attacks-still-cloaked-secrecy#sthash.5CtEsDha.EVGay3fV.dpuf

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why Saudi Funding of 9/11 Attacks Still Cloaked in Secrecy - (Original Post) Ichingcarpenter Feb 2015 OP
If our allies support our enemies then the wars are unwinnable. CJCRANE Feb 2015 #1
Operation Iraqi FREEDOM Ichingcarpenter Feb 2015 #2
we're fighting sock puppets and our allies have their hands up their asses yurbud Feb 2015 #5
Ties too close to the Bush family, and George W. Bush in particular blkmusclmachine Feb 2015 #3
One Really Sad Chapter colsohlibgal Feb 2015 #4

CJCRANE

(18,184 posts)
1. If our allies support our enemies then the wars are unwinnable.
Sun Feb 8, 2015, 05:37 AM
Feb 2015

But it certainly makes sense as an excuse to project hard power around the world, take away our freedoms and implement a police state, and make vast amounts of money for the right people.

Ichingcarpenter

(36,988 posts)
2. Operation Iraqi FREEDOM
Sun Feb 8, 2015, 05:59 AM
Feb 2015

Has it really ever been about freedom or has it been about power and influence of interests?

The buzzwords always sound nice for the masses that must support and supply the men to war but in the end war is a racket.

colsohlibgal

(5,275 posts)
4. One Really Sad Chapter
Sun Feb 8, 2015, 12:48 PM
Feb 2015

So may Americans just accept what they are fed, accept whatever the official narrative is, and do it like they are zombies.

That's so wrong. We should question everything. Oswald shot JFK. lone nut, nothing to see here, move along. Released telephone tapes of LBJ showed he knew it was a crock but felt he had to sell it. Of course it was all facilitated by the patsy being killed, before he could talk more, in the freaking police station.

9/11 has so much hinky about it too. Research things, use your head and you'll see it. The commission to look into it was a farce.

On top of that Iraq had nothing to do with it. The rush to that war, where anyone who questioned it was branded unpatriotic, where MSNBC's highest rated host, Phil Donahue, was canned for daring to question this action, was a black eye for the US.

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»Why Saudi Funding of 9/11...