 |
| 9/11 - 2977 dead, ~6000 injured, 2620 cancer cases; plus effect on families |
Before the Administrations (Bush and Obama) started making
calculations about how hard it would be to maintain the U.S.-Saudi relationship,
wasn’t the proper default to side with your fellow Americans?
After 15 years of hiding some facts, shading the truth,
and siding with Saudi Arabia in regards to their official involvement in 9/11,
America’s Executive branch is getting pressured by the public (e.g.
60 Minutesrecent exposé,
28Pages.org) and faced with a bipartisan Congressional Bill that should
largely be unnecessary.
JASTA – the Justice
Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act – which would specifically allow 9/11 victims and families
to proceed with civil lawsuits against the Saudis and overcome sovereign immunity defenses, is on the verge of passage
and the Administration has threatened a veto.
- Fifteen of 19 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia; most did not speak English
- 28 pages of the 838-page 9/11 Congressional Report regarding Saudi involvement were redacted and classified in 2003 by the Bush Administration
- 9/11 Commission Report buries the Saudi connection in a carefully worded statement
January 2005:
Saudis
cleared from 9/11 lawsuits *
(BBC News) A US
federal court has dismissed proceedings under which the Saudi government was
accused of providing logistical support to al-Qaeda.
New
York District Court Judge Richard Casey ruled that the Saudi government, its
defence minister and ambassador in London have immunity from litigation.
 |
| Special Relationship: 'I love you like one of my own sons,...or perhaps one of my 30 wives' |
May 2009:
Justice Dept. Backs Saudi Royal
Family on 9/11 Lawsuit **
WASHINGTON —
The Obama administration is supporting efforts by the Saudi royal family to
defeat a long-running lawsuit seeking to hold it liable for the Sept. 11, 2001,
attacks.
The Justice
Department, in a brief filed Friday before the Supreme Court, said it did not believe the Saudis could be sued in
American court over accusations brought by families of the Sept. 11 victims
that the royal family had helped finance Al Qaeda. The department said it saw
no need for the court to review lower court rulings that found in the Saudis’
favor in throwing out the lawsuit.
…
The
government’s position comes less than a week before President Obama is scheduled to meet in Saudi Arabia with King
Abdullah as part of a trip to the Middle
East and Europe intended to reach out to the Muslim world.
 |
| President Obama and King Abdullah with gift of gold necklace for protecting the King's jewels |
September 2015:
Affidavits filed in these cases from former Navy Secretary John Lehman, and former Senators Bob Kerry and Bob Graham indicate that there was some serious support from Saudi government sources to the terrorists. The first two were members of the 9/11 Commission and the latter co-chaired a separate House-Senate investigation.
A sampling:
In an affidavit filed this past February, Graham
was more explicit.
"I am convinced that there was direct line
between at least some of the terrorists who carried out the September 11th
Attacks and the government of Saudi Arabia, and that a Saudi government agent
living in the United States, Omar al Bayoumi, provided direct assistance to
September 11th hijackers Nawaf al Hazmi and Khalid al Mihdhar," Graham
wrote. "Based on the evidence discovered by the Joint Inquiry, I further
believe that al Bayoumi was acting at the direction of elements of the Saudi
government and that an official from the Islamic and Cultural Affairs of the
Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles, Fahad al Thumairy, likely played some role in
the support network for the September 11th Attacks."
In 2014, a federal appeals court and the Supreme Court affirmed the right of victims to bring their case within a narrow existing terrorism statute. Despite having affidavits from three former congressmen and a living
9/11 intended-hijacker who said al Qaeda had help from three Saudi
princes, the Judge said the case did not reach the high bar of evidence
needed to include the Saudi government.
April 2016:
Obama slams bill opening up Saudi Arabia for 9/11
lawsuits ***
WASHINGTON (UPI) — President Barack Obama will
likely veto a bill that would revoke Saudi Arabia’s sovereign immunity that
protects it from facing lawsuits related to the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.
…
“The
whole notion of sovereign immunity is at stake and it is one that has more
significant consequences for the United States than any other country,” [Press
Secretary] Earnest told reporters
…
He
also said that he is not sure if Obama will bring up the topic during his visit
to Saudi Arabia where he will meet with King Salman later this month.
 |
| President Obama and the new big fish, Saudi King Salman |
Nothing like carefully parsed denials, first from the 9/11 Commission
and lately the Administration:
 |
| 'Whoa, whoa, whoa...what are you implying there?' |
"Saudi Arabia has long been considered
the primary source of funding [of al Qaeda]. But we have found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or
senior Saudi officials individually funded the organization," [Administration
Press Secretary Josh] Earnest quoted from the 9/11 Commission report during a
briefing last week. [italics mine]
- So, was it only junior Saudi officials in charge
of the funding?
-
Did senior officials merely provide guidance,
direction, identification and other documents, or perhaps a place to stay, but not money?
-
Do they mean the Saudi Arabian government did not pass a tax or write a
government check so it was not institutionally involved?
-
Could the Saudi royalty declare a Fatwa against the U.S. and
still pass this rather specific finding of “innocence”?
 |
| 'Now I'm going on break' |
Remember the
28 Pages?
- When originally redacted, vehement objections were lodged by (soon-to-be House Speaker) Representative Pelosi, (eventual Secretary of State) Senator Hillary Clinton, and (future VP) Senator Biden
- Apparently once these people were in a position to do something about this...crickets: The same 28 pages from the 9/11 Congressional Report are STILL classified after 13 years
- When pressed this week, the Administration recycled the Commission
Report legalese statement (without further explanation) and supported
Saudi immunity
As I said above, pressure is finally mounting to release the information that was found out in the original Congressional investigation. There is certainly more information from other sources at the time and connections made since then (from at least one prisoner at Gitmo, for instance). Freedom of Information Act discoveries have a way of tarnishing presidential legacies over time, so it is likely we'll see at least the 28 pages fairly soon.
Based on all the smoking guns we know about, and a
few only our government does, if Saudi complicity in
al Qaeda’s terrorism is proven, it only seems just that this truth be brought to
light (and all the victims' families can get necklaces too). It could also be that the
Wahhabi-supporting Saudi royalty and government is shown to be as innocent and blissfully
unaware as they claim, but let’s get all the information on the table before
declaring that to be the case.
Meanwhile, the Saudi's have declared that their response to the passage of JASTA would be to pull out their $750B in assets in anticipation of the courts freezing them. Either they don't sound particularly confident of their innocence, or it's a great effort at extortion - neither is a compelling reason not to go forward (unless you are Peter Beinart of
The Atlantic, who believes the extortion is serious and outweighs any justice
++).
This could mean more expensive oil for America as a whole (eh...), a few
U.S. savings bonds traded to the many other nations anxious to have them, and the threat of more Middle East instability (
as if that were
even possible).
But at least we wouldn’t once
again be bedding down with terrorists and despots only to be found out later
as rusty old hypocrites.
 |
| Oh wait, that ship may have already sailed... |
