For every question, there's an answer -- and you'll find it here!


Printer-friendly copy
Top The PC Q&A Forum Off-Topic Lounge topic #69669
View in threaded mode

Subject: " 9-11 hijackers tied to Saudi government" 1 | 2 | 3 | Previous topic | Next topic
ShellySun Sep-05-04 06:25 PM
Charter member
58338 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
" 9-11 hijackers tied to Saudi government"


  

          

9-11 hijackers tied to Saudi government, Graham says in new book

By Frank Davies

Knight Ridder Newspapers


WASHINGTON - (KRT) - Two of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers had a support network in the United States that included agents of the Saudi government, and the Bush administration and FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship, Sen. Bob Graham wrote in a book to be released Tuesday.

The discovery of the financial backing of the two hijackers "would draw a direct line between the terrorists and the government of Saudi Arabia, and trigger an attempted coverup by the Bush administration," the Florida Democrat wrote.

And in Graham's book, "Intelligence Matters," obtained by The Miami Herald on Saturday, he makes clear that some details of that financial support from Saudi Arabia were in the 27 pages of the congressional inquiry's final report that were blocked from release by the administration, despite the pleas of leaders of both parties on the House and Senate intelligence committees.

Graham also revealed that Gen. Tommy Franks told him on Feb. 19, 2002, just four months after the invasion of Afghanistan, that many important resources - including the Predator drone aircraft crucial to the search for Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida leaders - were being shifted to prepare for a war against Iraq.

Graham recalled this conversation at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa with Franks, then head of Central Command, who was "looking troubled":

"Senator, we are not engaged in a war in Afghanistan."

"Excuse me?" I asked.

"Military and intelligence personnel are being redeployed to prepare for an action in Iraq," he continued.

Graham concluded: "Gen. Franks' mission - which, as a good soldier, he was loyally carrying out - was being downgraded from a war to a manhunt."

Graham, who was chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee from June 2001 through the buildup to the Iraq war, voted against the war resolution in October 2002 because he saw Iraq as a diversion that would hinder the fight against al-Qaida terrorism.

He oversaw the Sept. 11 investigation on Capitol Hill with Rep. Porter Goss, nominated last month to be the next CIA director. According to Graham, the FBI and the White House blocked efforts to investigate the extent of official Saudi connections to two hijackers.

Graham wrote that the staff of the congressional inquiry concluded that two Saudis in the San Diego area, Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama Bassan, who gave significant financial support to two hijackers, were working for the Saudi government.

Al-Bayoumi received a monthly allowance from a contractor for Saudi Civil Aviation that jumped from $465 to $3,700 in March 2000, after he helped Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhdar - two of the Sept. 11 hijackers - find apartments and make contacts in San Diego, just before they began pilot training.

When the staff tried to conduct interviews in that investigation, and with an FBI informant, Abdussattar Shaikh, who also helped the eventual hijackers, they were blocked by the FBI and the administration, Graham wrote.

The administration and CIA also insisted that the details about the Saudi support network that benefited two hijackers be left out of the final congressional report, Graham complained.

Bush had concluded that "a nation-state that had aided the terrorists should not be held publicly to account," Graham wrote. "It was as if the president's loyalty lay more with Saudi Arabia than with America's safety."

Saudi officials have vociferously denied any ties to the hijackers or al-Qaida plots to attack the United States.

Graham ran unsuccessfully for the Democratic presidential nomination and then decided not to seek reelection to the Senate this year. He has said he hopes his book will illuminate FBI and CIA failures in the war on terrorism and he also offers recommendations on ways to reform the intelligence community.

On Iraq, Graham said the administration and CIA consistently overplayed its estimates of Saddam Hussein's threat in its public statements and declassified reports, while its secret reports contained warnings that the intelligence on weapons of mass destruction was not conclusive.

In October 2002, Tenet told Graham that "there were 550 sites where weapons of mass destruction were either produced or stored" in Iraq.

"It was, in short, a vivid and terrifying case for war. The problem was it did not accurately represent the classified estimate we had received just days earlier," Graham wrote. "It was two different messages, directed at two different audiences. I was outraged."

In his book, Graham is especially critical of the FBI for its inability to track al-Qaida operatives in the United States and blasts the CIA for "politicizing intelligence."

He reserves his harshest criticism for Bush.

Graham found the president had "an unforgivable level of intellectual - and even common sense - indifference" toward analyzing the comparative threats posed by Iraq and al-Qaida and other terrorist groups.

When the weapons were not found, one year after the invasion of Iraq, Bush attended a black-tie dinner in Washington, Graham recalled. Bush gave a humorous speech with slides, showing him looking under White House furniture and joking, "Nope, no WMDs there."

Graham wrote: "It was one of the most offensive things I have witnessed. Having recently attended the funeral of an American soldier killed in Iraq, who left behind a young wife and two preschool-age children, I found nothing funny about a deceitful justification for war."

Shelly

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

Replies to this topic: Pages 1 | 2 | 3
bkoenig1Sun Sep-05-04 11:49 PM
Charter member
1674 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#1. "RE: 9-11 hijackers tied to Saudi government"
In response to Shelly (Reply # 0)


          

Here we go again.

We can believe everything Graham wrote(sour grapes?) but let's not believe anything the Swift boat veterans write.

Bill K.



  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

bobboMon Sep-06-04 11:15 AM
Charter member
7376 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#2. "RE: 9-11 hijackers tied to Saudi government"
In response to bkoenig1 (Reply # 1)


  

          

It's obvious what you choose to believe, Bill.





  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

AlMon Sep-06-04 02:50 PM
Charter member
11790 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#3. "RE: 9-11 hijackers tied to Saudi government"
In response to bobbo (Reply # 2)


  

          

Let's assume what Graham writes is correct, and the Saudi Arabian Government is our enemy.

First of all, what do you propose we do?

Military action?

OK, let's look at that.

Prior to the invasion of Iraq, the United States had no viable place from which to base an invasion of Saudi Arabia (take a look at a map and explain to me how you logistically support an invasion against Saudi Arabia through the bottlenecks offered by Kuwait and Qatar).

So, if you are interested in either military action or the threat of military action against Saudi Arabia having any real weight, you need to invade Iraq first.

Oh, yeah...we did that.

Now, let's look at how realistic the idea of overt military action against Saudi Arabia is. Saudi Arabia has both Mecca and Medina within its borders. Invasion of Saudi Arabia is liable to bring the entire Muslim world actively into conflict with the United States.

Instead of Indonesia being helpful in the fight against terrorism, they will be a combatant on the other side. Instead of Malaysia being helpful in the fight against terrorism, they will be a combatant on the other side. Instead of Thailand being an ally in the war on terror, they will likely choose to be neutral (out of necessity). Instead of Pakistan being an ally in the war on terror, they will be an enemy. The same will be true of a number of former Soviet states, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Iran, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Qatar, Dubai, Somalia, Sudan, etc.

The war is not on Islam. No reason to make it on Islam.



  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

OldRayMon Sep-06-04 03:11 PM
Charter member
1367 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#4. "RE: 9-11 hijackers tied to Saudi government"
In response to bobbo (Reply # 2)


          

I'm with Bill . About-to-be-former Senator Graham is both an idiot and a Democrat. (Hmm, I wonder if those are mutually inclusive terms!!)

Ray

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

bobboMon Sep-06-04 03:31 PM
Charter member
7376 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#5. "RE: 9-11 hijackers tied to Saudi government"
In response to Al (Reply # 3)


  

          

Um,... Nobody said anything about war on Saudi Arabia or Islam. The article infers that the Saudis are not exactly our friends (The discovery of the financial backing of the two hijackers "would draw a direct line between the terrorists and the government of Saudi Arabia"). Recognizing that, we should exercise care when dealing with them.





  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

Paul DMon Sep-06-04 06:13 PM
Charter member
10207 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#6. "RE: 9-11 hijackers tied to Saudi government"
In response to Al (Reply # 3)
Mon Sep-06-04 06:17 PM by Paul D

  

          

Instead of Indonesia being helpful in the fight against terrorism, they will be a combatant on the other side.

And what leads you to believe that Indonesia is being helpful in the fight against terrorism? Do some reading on the carefully orchestrated legal sham that is going to allow all the Bali bombers to walk free.

Hells Bells, the Indonesian government are terrorists themselves, why would they want to fight terrorists. Their aid and support of thugs in East Timor is being repeated in Papua. And condoned by the Australian and US governments.




Paul D

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

AlMon Sep-06-04 10:35 PM
Charter member
11790 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#7. "RE: 9-11 hijackers tied to Saudi government"
In response to Paul D (Reply # 6)


  

          

Paul,

The Bali Bombers will walk. And then will disappear from the face of the Earth. They were put on trial to satisfy westerners. They are released to satisfy the Indonesian people. And they will disappear to satisfy the concerns of the Indonesian government and military who don't want bombers of any sort wandering around not controlled by them.

It isn't the west. It works differently. It still works. And Indonesia is being helpful. They were directly involved in the information that led to the arrests in Thailand of Al-Queda personnel.



  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

AlMon Sep-06-04 10:35 PM
Charter member
11790 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#8. "RE: 9-11 hijackers tied to Saudi government"
In response to bobbo (Reply # 5)
Mon Sep-06-04 10:38 PM by Al

  

          

Gee, Bobbo, so the article says the obvious? So why post it?

What is the famous quote? "Governments don't have friends, they have interests"?



  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

Paul DMon Sep-06-04 10:38 PM
Charter member
10207 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#9. "RE: 9-11 hijackers tied to Saudi government"
In response to Al (Reply # 7)


  

          

Hopefully you're right, and you certainly know the people better than me. But quite frankly from a purely Australian viewpoint Indonesia scares the cr@ppers out of me - far more than any Middle Eastern country. I wouldn't trust the Indonesian government as far as I could throw it.



Paul D

  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

AlMon Sep-06-04 10:44 PM
Charter member
11790 posts
Click to send email to this author Click to send private message to this authorClick to view this author's profileClick to add this author to your buddy list
#10. "RE: 9-11 hijackers tied to Saudi government"
In response to Paul D (Reply # 9)


  

          

I'm not suggesting we trust them, just suggesting we not actively give them a reason to be an enemy. They are far more dangerous than the majority of the idiots in the Middle East.



  

Alert Printer-friendly copy | | Top

Top The PC Q&A Forum Off-Topic Lounge topic #69669 1 | 2 | 3 | Previous topic | Next topic
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.27
Copyright 1997-2003 DCScripts.com
Home
Links
About PCQandA
Link To Us
Support PCQandA
Privacy Policy
In Memoriam
Acceptable Use Policy

Have a question or problem regarding this forum? Check here for the answer.