Document 17 Declassified – 9/11 attackers may have had links to Saudi Arabia [pdf]

https://28pagesdotorg.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/document-17.pdf

by agjmills • 10 years ago

240 146 10 years ago

28pagesdotorg.files.wordpress.com

dukoid• 10 years ago

What a coincidence with the recent visit...

emirb• 10 years ago

not a HN content

coldtea2• 10 years ago

HN is a social bookmarking site.

Anything that gets voted to the first page IS de facto HN content, as voted by HN users, unless it specifically violates some rule.

eterm• 10 years ago

That rule would be the first rule in the guidelines:

Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon. [...] If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic.

From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

ilyanep• 10 years ago

Without commenting on this specific article, if there's one thing I learned from reddit, it's that heavy moderation >>> "the users choose and everything is free".

An example of the latter is pretty much any big subreddit you think of as awful and full of nonsense. Some examples of the former include the most well-respected science and history-related subreddits. I would honestly prefer there to be heavy moderation on HN with someone who has a vision for what "HN content" should be (even allowing for the fact that those people may disagree with me) than a free-for-all.

Random sites on the Internet are not the entire Internet, nor are they the government. I believe in Free Speech when it comes to people with power over me, not so much when it comes to websites that I can choose to leave at any time.

funkyy2• 10 years ago

Oh, so now you decide whats good for HN and whats not? HN is "democracy", users choose whats right.

funkyy2• 10 years ago

I wonder if its part of Panama Leaks counter measures. Make US and SA look bad and make them hostile towards each other to cover up the leaks.

gadders• 10 years ago

Is anyone seriously shocked by this?

geofft2• 10 years ago

Well, we knew almost immediately after the attacks that 15 of the 19 attackers were citizens of Saudi Arabia.

From skimming the document quickly, I don't see anything that implies definite ties to the Saudi government, which would be interesting. They knew people who worked for the Saudi government, but I don't think this document says anything more than that.

phatbyte• 10 years ago

The timing couldn't be better.

opendomain• 10 years ago

Can you clarify? Why was it important that this came out now?

lossolo• 10 years ago

My guess is it's probably because of the US anti terrorist funding law.

ttctciyf• 10 years ago

Maybe because of the Presidential trip to Saudi Arabia?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/20/barack-obama-sa...

geofft2• 10 years ago

I was curious about a source, especially since it seems like it was declassified almost a year ago. The same papers are available from .gov as:

https://www.archives.gov/declassification/iscap/pdf/2012-048...

The index page,

https://www.archives.gov/declassification/iscap/pdf/2012-048...

calls it "Saudi Notes". There's one other set of "Saudi Notes" and some "Saudi News Clips" on that page.

Does anyone know what the declassification process was for these / why they were declassified?

patates3• 10 years ago

This is hard to parse without any commentary. What should I, as an average person, take from this? Should I start to think Saudi Arabia as a terrorist country or is there room for interpretation?

I'm very sure, by intuition, that this is important but probably would have been more valuable with some opinions from people who are knowledgeable on the subject.

coldtea2• 10 years ago

Should I start to think Saudi Arabia as a terrorist country or is there room for interpretation?

Sorry, but SA has been supporting terrorism for decades, all around the middle east and the world. In fact much more so than other openly blamed countries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-sponsored_terrorism#Saud...

Not to mention their horrendous fundamentalist human rights, religious laws record. It's just that they have oil and friends (probably because of the first).

If you're just hearing this for the first time, I'm not sure what you can "take away" from this news. I'm certain though that you need to read deeper in the history and related news.

arethuza2• 10 years ago

I can recommend Bob Baer's book "Sleeping With the Devil: How Washington Sold Our Soul for Saudi Crude":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeping_with_the_Devil

Also the excellent Adam Curtis BBC documentary Bitter Lake - which is probably the best thing I've watched in the last year:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitter_Lake_%28film%29

notahacker2• 10 years ago

Of course, since it's not news that the Saudi government is willing to fund terrorist groups involved in overseas conflicts, the bigger question which the paper doesn't consider is whether it would have been in the Saudi Arabian government's interest to sponsor the September 11th actions.

I think the answer to this is probably no: it massively boosted the prestige of al-Qaeda - a group which is anti House of Saud first and anti US/Israel second - over Sunni terrorist organisations more closely aligned with Saudi interests and the only part of US foreign policy response that was entirely predictable was the invasion of Afghanistan, well outside Saudi Arabia's area of interest.

To be honest, if you're not already aware of it, the most interesting connection to a national government agency mentioned in the paper is probably two of the hijackers living with an FBI informant...

rayiner3• 10 years ago

In addition to coldtea's point: Saudi is in some respects the bizarro version of the US. While we export American Idol and McDonalds, they build schools teaching extremist Islam all over the world. Many formerly more moderate countries have gotten much more theocratic in the last 20 years, and Saudi evangelism funded by oil money has played a huge role.

For example, when I visited Bangladesh in the early 1990's, seeing veiled women in the capital city of Dhaka was unusual. It's very common today.

yodsanklai• 10 years ago

For example, when I visited Bangladesh in the early 1990's, seeing veiled women in the capital city of Dhaka was unusual. It's very common today.

Why do you think SA has something to do with this?

BTW, this is true in some western countries as well (I'm thinking of France where veiled women are everywhere, it wasn't the case in the 80s). I wonder what explains this trend.

Alex3917• 10 years ago

Saudi is in some respects the bizarro version of the US

And that's the subject of another Adam Curtis documentary, The Power of Nightmares.

lovelearning• 10 years ago

Same with Maldives.

bcg12• 10 years ago

First, there is not really such thing as a "terrorist country". Terrorism is a tactic, not an ideology. To be more precise, one might refer to "state sponsored terrorism" or something to that effect. But that is beside the point.

For context around this particular document, there appears to be the following article:

https://28pages.org/2016/04/19/exclusive-a-buried-envelope-b...

user_00013• 10 years ago

Terrorism is what "they" do. We do "morally just wars".

Said every side involved in any conflict sense the dawn of humanity.

ISIS: morally just. The west = terrorists. And they are probably right. Our bombs do terrorise. As do the torture weopans we export to their ruling parties.

and vice versa

Nokinside• 10 years ago

Confessions of a Terrorist http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,480226,...

golergka3• 10 years ago

Al Quaeda was founded by Saudi nationals, but it saw the Saudi government as their enemy just as US — so, while a lot of terrorists are Saudi citizens, they are a common enemy for Saudis and US together. Saudi government itself is balancing between international system and wahhabism, which has a lot of local support: if they would suddenly adopt human rights, democracy and other western policies, they would most likely not stay in power for long. So, US relationship with Saudis makes a lot of sense: US is trying to find common interests and build commercial relationship, hoping that it will help gradually promote western values in Saudi society over time. If there would appear a democratic, westernized faction, US would support it over existing government, but it doesn't seem likely in near future. Alternatively, if US would cut ties with Saudi government because of their human rights records (as a lot of commentors here routinely suggest), it would only push Saudi government and society away from western values further into islamism.

patates3• 10 years ago

if they would suddenly adopt human rights, democracy and other western policies, they would most likely not stay in power for long

I think you may be right (I haven't enough information about Saudi Arabians or their views to tell) but I really want to believe that the real-life politics is much more rational than in a game of Civilization.

simonh2• 10 years ago

Great post. Take the Islamic schools. They are intended to promote Islam and Wahabism. The Saudi government doesn't want to fund extremism as such, it's just that their governance and control over these schools and other Islamic charities they fund is minimal and incompetent. As a result, the money too often gets diverted to causes and pockets the kingdom would never choose to support directly. And yes, some of it gets channelled to terrorist organizations.

So on the one hand it's true that Saudi Arabia and a government funds terrorists and extremists, but that's not at all their intention and as has been pointed out many of these organizations would quite happily slaughter the Saudi royal family.

The again, there are some individuals within the regime and probably at some levels within the royal family itself, that actually do support terrorists and extremists.

It's a real mess.

user_00013• 10 years ago

Don't forget the agreement between the house of Saud and the religious rulers. The religious rulers will not criticise the house of Saud and they will be pretty much left alone.

Add to that mix tribal allegiances, the cross pollination of all groups seeking their own agendas and you have the situation where some very wealthy religious extremists can fund their agendas worldwide including "terrorism".

Too many posts are seeing everything as black and white. The Saudis from the top down planned 9-11 etc.

Just like in the US, there are hidden agendas, secretive groups akin to the CIA all pushing their own agendas whether financial / religious. And just like some in US politics, there are some pushing for the end of days where their chosen deity / son of / prophet of returns and leads them to paradise / the next world.

ioab2• 10 years ago

Most of the population here aren't as in the media stereotyped depiction. Most of them just like ordinary people around the globe, workers, teachers, doctors, students, business owners, etc...

They just doomed by .. well, you know, I can't say.

Take me as an example. I'm a regular guy from there. All my concerns in life right now is to get high grade in my (scikit-learn/keras)-based CS graduation project.

Looking towards silicon valley and scientific institutes in the world to get inspired. Hoping to get more time to learn React and become pro in rails/DotNET and contribute something that worth to the OSS.

iambateman• 10 years ago

Yes. Of course this is true. Governments operate differently than the people of the country. Every single Saudi person I have known has been generous and kind.

Good luck!

rayiner3• 10 years ago

They're not "ordinary people" like Americans or Germans. There is a face people (especially educated people) from these countries like to put on. "Oh, we are just like you." Except the normalization of domestic abuse; inhumane treatment of servants; strict gender roles; condemnation of homosexuals; the deep-seated racism. In the country where my parents come from, 87% of women are the victims of domestic violence: http://www.asianews.it/news-en/In-Bangladesh,-87-per-cent-of....

It's not a "media stereotype." I'm speaking from first-hand experience. I've seen most of the above in my own extended family (which is all educated and upper middle class). It's the dirty laundry and it's deeply ingrained in culture. Obviously, a lot of people do embrace western values. But I've met plenty of educated people from those countries with a western education whose are still trapped by their culture. They might be hackers who code, but they also think women shouldn't work.

uptown• 10 years ago

This document is different from the 28 pages that remain classified. For more info on that, read here:

https://28pages.org/faq/

wozniacki• 10 years ago

Precisely.

Those pages have been kept so securely & hidden away from everyone that even Congressmen & Senators with clearances weren't even allowed to take notes on a scratchpad, when perusing them.

They had to mentally memorize any of the contents therein !

Here's the recent 60 Minutes piece on the White House's potential declassification of the "28 pages" [1] of the 9/11 Commission Report [2].

http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/28-pages

[ Warning : Auto play video ]

  It also comes at a time when the White House and intelligence officials 
  are reviewing whether to declassify one of the country's most sensitive 
  documents -- known as the "28 pages." They have to do with 9/11 and the 
  possible existence of a Saudi support network for the hijackers while 
  they were in the U.S.

  For 13 years, the 28 pages have been locked away in a secret vault. Only 
  a small group of people have ever seen them. Tonight, you will hear from 
  some of the people who have read them and believe, along with the families 
  of 9/11 victims that they should be declassified.

[1] 28 Pages

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-911-classified-report...

[ Warning : Auto play video ]

[2] 9/11 Commission Report

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Commission_Report

AnkhMorporkian2• 10 years ago

(...) weren't even allowed to take notes on a scratchpad, when perusing them.

That's really not that surprising. Notes would need to be derivatively classified, and would require special transportation out of the SCIF that they were taken in. Additionally, I doubt any congresspeople's offices are SCIFs that would be allowed to store such sensitive information.

rmc• 10 years ago

I thought everyone already knew this?

shrugger• 10 years ago

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. Has a very "Scientists report water to be wet" feel to the whole thing.

It's almost like they think that 9/11 is just a part of life now, and the only thing that matters is the paper trail. Realistically, it signals a new societal problem of religious toxicity and an insidious new type of invader that we as Americans (assumption) have not faced before. If we can't trust our neighbors not to blow us up, who CAN we trust?

jsnk• 10 years ago

Everyone as in your average joes and janes on the street? Not even close. People still think Iraq did 9/11.

This document merely suggests the possible link, while there are some document still classified that actually links Saudi Arabia's role as a state sponsoring the attack on 9/11.

US and its coalition went to war with Iraq and Libya over what could be said to be nothing compared to the 9/11 attack. US wanted to start a war with Iran, another giant monolithic power in Middle East over the regime's rhetoric.

Compared to those rationales for going to war, if there are actual proofs of SA's state involvement of 9/11 attack, we will actually have "just war" cause for going to war against SA. Imagine the impact of that. Convincing the masses would be so easy, that won't even be a problem. Convincing senate and congress probably needs more work, but given that there's huge support for war from the public, it would have to be a risk congressmen/women and senate would have to take losing the election next time.

When that happens, you don't need any convincing to make people wonder about WTF was Bush admin., Obama admin. and perhaps entire Republican and Democratic party doing for last 15 years knowing that SA was the real enemy?

spriggan34• 10 years ago

I thought everyone already knew this?

There is a difference between knowing something and a fact that can be proven. With proven facts you families of the deceased can sue KSA. "Common knowledge" doesn't work in a court of law.

samfisher83• 10 years ago

The title is a little misleading. Obviously the hijackers were mostly from Saudi. The document shows how those people were directly connected with government.

However in Saudi a ton of people work for the government so it isn't surprising they had connections to Saudi government.

tremon• 10 years ago

"May have had"?

I thought it was widely known that Osama Bin Laden was heavily financed from there? Also: wahabi?

coredog64• 10 years ago

Heavily financed as in "inherited a shit-ton of money from his rich dad", or something else?

fleitz• 10 years ago

I was always under the understanding that the US provided most of his training and funding. Was SA helping the CIA?

puppetmaster3• 10 years ago

O ba ma: https://www.rt.com/usa/340313-obama-saudi-pages-classified/#...

spriggan34• 10 years ago

This is not just Obama, Hillary, and obviously the Bush families who have had long ties with the Saudi dinasty. This isn't a left vs right issue, most politicians in US are in bed with the Saudis.

happyslobro• 10 years ago

Is it unusual for nations to use terrorists, mercenaries, privateers for missions that they don't want to be directly associated with? IIRC, the Russians and the Americans were doing this in the Middle East in the 20th century, and may still be doing it in Syria now.

Seems to me that the real news is that Saudi and America are able to be allies and enemies at the same time, not that they may have employed people who have the big T label.

dfsegoat• 10 years ago

We should not be surprised. The Kingdom of Saud is rooted in wahhabism - an ultraconservative branch of Islam that also happens to be the primary influence of a little group called Daesh/ISIL.

mtgx• 10 years ago

It's already messed up that one of U.S. "allies" would be behind the 9/11 attacks, and that U.S. went ahead and invaded a whole other country for it anyway, but at least there could be an argument to be made that it wasn't the Saudi government behind it (which seems rather likely that it wasn't).

But protecting who the culpable parties were in the biggest attack on the U.S. since Pearl Harbor, because it "might endanger relationships" with that country (and after already invading Iraq for supposedly the same reason), is beyond messed up. Everyone involved in covering it up should be tried as traitors, as I don't just say that as a hyperbole.

explorer666• 10 years ago

Everyone involved in covering it up should be tried as traitors, as I don't just say that as a hyperbole.

Don't expect them to speak out then.

lintiness5• 10 years ago

we invaded afghanistan because bin laden was residing there and those in charge, the taliban, were protecting him (or the other way around given real political strength). it's fun to imagine the entire us intelligence apparatus as corrupt and criminal, but reality's plenty interesting.

Slamidan• 10 years ago

It's interesting that this is the result of a country practicing a hands off policy, instead of the "cultural imperialism" many complain about. The Saudi's chose to work with the US over the brits because we agreed to firewall our operations to keep their culture/society "pure" as possible.

cordite• 10 years ago

I've heard the comparison that this group is the same kind of caliphate style setup where they wear white instead and stability is granted through oil and money.

However, I don't know how accurate such a statement is. I've also heard SA compared to a bunch of tribes that are continually bribed to behave cohesively.

SEJeff• 10 years ago

It is accurate. Daesh follow wahabism, the Saudi branded form of Islam that is much more extreme as did Osama Bin Laden. The HuffPo isn't my favorite news source, but this is a good article:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-yousaf-butt-/saudi-wahhabis...

turar• 10 years ago

Yep. This is a bit trivialized, but is accurate and to the point: http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user3303...

Jugurtha2• 10 years ago

There's an article entitled "Saudi Arabia, an ISIS That Has Made It".

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/21/opinion/saudi-arabia-an-is...

leaveyou4• 10 years ago

Also, we should not be surprised if the rest of the documents will be declassified when, for various reasons, there will be an acute need of war with Saudi Arabia.

spriggan34• 10 years ago

Also, we should not be surprised if the rest of the documents will be declassified when, for various reasons, there will be an acute need of war with Saudi Arabia.

There will never be a war with KSA. This place is way too sensitive even the US wouldn't dare touch it. It would be an instant war with the Muslim world. The US has other ways to pressure KSA if needed. I don't think anybody in the US would be that foolish and attack the Mecca .

gene-h• 10 years ago

Well if the US does go to war with Saudi Arabia, I hope it's an economic one. Stuff like funding electric cars and clean energy to cut off Saudi Arabia's oil money. But that's probably not going to happen.

dismal2• 10 years ago

There is a fantastic Adam Curtis documentary about Saudi Arabia and Wahhabism called Bitter Lake.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitter_Lake_(film)

Due to various issues, you'll just have to find a way to watch it... (BBC iplayer blocked in us, copyright issues when posted on youtube, etc, etc, etc)

kough• 10 years ago

I feel like the problem with Adam Curtis' work is... well, Adam Curtis. It's very easy to dismiss his entire body of work as "conspiracy theory", because he only writes about these sorts of topics. And it does him and his work a disservice, because of course there is a lot of truth in what he writes and produces. As with anything, there is also a lot of unsubstantiated narrative, but for anyone who's on the fence I would highly recommend watching Bitter Lake. Even if you think Curtis is a crank, the film is beautiful and the score is fantastic (Burial, Four Tet, etc.) and you might find some of the facts interesting.

randomsearch3• 10 years ago

I thought Bitter Lake was an amazing documentary.

Can anyone recommend related or similar work of the same quality?

justsaysmthng• 10 years ago

Here: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2hdcji

Watched it a couple of weeks ago and as always was deeply impressed by Curtis' work.

His style is so unique in that he approaches the subject matter from a totally unexpected angle, connecting seemingly unrelated events and concepts to create a unique and original painting of history.

Highly recommended.

samstave5• 10 years ago

I just watched that - wow. That was really interesting and super depressing.

Afghanistan is hell on earth. I felt so bad for any children I saw in that.

And that guy who was torturing people and lied about being in the military and he was basically doing it for fun! What the fuck!?

graedus• 10 years ago

I knew this was suspected but I thought it was officially denied. Apparently it's acknowledged by the Saudis. This quote from a recent FT article [0] surprised me:

  After the Iraqi city of Mosul fell to a lightning Isis offensive in 2014, even 
  the late Prince Saud al-Faisal, the respected Saudi foreign minister, 
  remonstrated with John Kerry, US secretary of state, that “Daesh [Isis] is our 
  [Sunni] response to your support for the Da’wa” — the Tehran-aligned Shia 
  Islamist ruling party of Iraq.

[0] https://next.ft.com/content/876a971c-0644-11e6-a70d-4e39ac32...

iheartmemcache2• 10 years ago

If you invest a lot of time, whether it's configuring your .vimrc/.emacs.d/init.el or throwing a lot of money at a specific car/tool brand, you're naturally going to have an emotional attachment with that. Read the comments on tool reviews on youtube - contractors have holy wars over their DeWalts vs Milkwakees. Slashdot in the mid 90s was emacs vs vim/GNOME2 vs KDE3 for the better part of a decade. It's not limited to only the Perl greybeards or contractors - it's quite common for tenured professors to be ousted as complete frauds after some other lab tries to replicate the findings only to yield entirely different results. "The results should have yielded this, so .." This is human nature - people are going to inherently defend anything they invested a lot of time in learning/using/doing.

With religion, it's 10x more intense because they can't put down the beaker or drill and go have a beer with their buddies - it's their entire identity. FT/Der Spiegel/The Guardian(usually)/the Newshours(BBC/PBS) all do a good job for the limited amount of time/column-lines they have to cover such a complicated topic such as religious factionism that goes back thousands of years. Then there's the Bismarckian Realpolitik which is certainly a large aspect of it.

There was certainly Saudi money behind it. But when you hear "state-sponsored terrorism" it could mean a lot of things. A governor or 8th son might have funded a non-profit NGO which later turned out to be mostly legitimate but 10% of those funds were diverted to purchase New-old-stock over-stock arms from the former USSR (then the question arises - was it with or without his knowledge?). because the House of Saud itself has politics that are so intricate internally that you'd have to spend years studying that exclusively. Start reading about the First Saudi state of 1744 (under Abdel Wahhab's rule in alliance with ibn Saud) and a few thousand pages later one might have half of a grasp on the internal politics. And that's just historical internal Saudi politics. Bring in religious subsets and hatred spawned from that, ethnic hatred (Persians are about as Arab, as Japanese are Chinese), international interests propping up different regimes and it's all a very complicated game.

Think of how complicated our government operates with just two parties - the capitalists who retain the lobbyists that influence the congressmen who have multiple interests that have to be simultaneously balanced in order to keep their constituents, donors, and party all happy enough so that you retain power. It's all a subtle game of spinning plates and we're working with just with two parties (effectively).

samstave5• 10 years ago

So you know how the Bush family is in bed with the Saudis (bandar bush for example) - after watching bitter lake i am more convinced the Saudis did it, but the neocon Hawks and bush family was complicit.

Jugurtha2• 10 years ago

I've always found the way security/terrorism issues are portrayed in movies or the news, especially in the U.S. to be really "cute".

The manicheism of it all made me believe that either every news anchor really has no clue about how it works, or that they're exceptionally good actors.

I also found that many times, events tend to be seen as discrete things that live in a vacuum rather than rooted to some previous event (isn't it interesting that these documents are resurfacing during a transition period where the U.S. is turning its back to Saudi Arabia and warming it up with Iran? Small pieces of content and info injected here and there).

An interesting piece if you have a few minutes to spare:

https://20committee.com/2014/09/25/what-if-everything-you-kn...

mangeletti• 10 years ago

I'd be curious to see whether any of the redacted sections are available via Illustrator[1].

1. http://hackaday.com/2008/08/01/exposing-poorly-redacted-pdfs...

smpetrey• 10 years ago

Funny story:

My economics professor back in college would give us these take-home quizzes each month with hundreds and hundreds of "short-answer" questions on them to use to study for tests and such.

I noticed there was a inconsistent amount spacing between questions and opened one of the pdf's in illustrator. The fool actually drew white boxes over all of the answers. Needless to say, I walked away from that class with high marks.

That was a lovely class.

dsabanin2• 10 years ago

Looks like they might be getting some democracy soon!

Synaesthesia3• 10 years ago

Doubt it, they've been a dictatorship supported by the US since day one.

dsabanin2• 10 years ago

Well, maybe it's a sign that it's about to change.

Uhhrrr• 10 years ago

He is using "democracy" as an ironic euphemism for "bombs".

arca_vorago• 10 years ago

I'm curious about the repercussions for the British Monarchy and th Bushes due to their unnaturally cozy relationships.

jokoon2• 10 years ago

I'm afraid that this will put SA in a very bad position, bad enough to gain some hate from around the world.

The day this alliance between the US and SA starts to diminish or ends, it's not going to be worrying. Muslims already get so much hate everywhere, if the home of Islam gets bad PR, the middle east will turn up worse than it already is. I hope I'm just being pessimistic here.

riyadparvez2• 10 years ago

SA should get bad PR. SA has been exporting Islamic terrorism for decades with their petro-dollars. SA funds mosques, madrassas with their extreme ideologies which in turn breeds terrorists. I have seen my home country has been being Islamized which is directly funded by SA.

jokoon2• 10 years ago

Unless they manage to stir enough hate to create more and more conflicts. The problem isn't really SA's government, it is the potential for violence to spread.

Once SA gets bad rep, muslims around the world might also get bad PR. So it might be wiser to play along with them than to pave the way for more middle east instability.

I also hate islamism, but I prefer that than WW3.

esquivalience• 10 years ago

Informant Codename: Muppet. Poor guy.

dmix• 10 years ago

Reading the quotes from this page give enough of an indication that there is more than just a connection between the hijackers and Saudi diplomats as was shown in this release, but specifically financing and involvement from well known figures at a seemingly significant level:

https://28pages.org/quotable/

When asked by 60 Minutes if the 28 pages include specific names: “Yes. The average intelligent watcher of 60 Minutes would recognize them instantly.”

freyr• 10 years ago

I thought I was intelligent, but I probably wouldn't recognize a single Saudi diplomat.

samstave5• 10 years ago

Can someone explain exactly why these 28 pages are being held top secret? What implications are there if the wider world knew their content?

And are they classified with a certain timeframe - like "for the next 70 years" or some such?

rrggrr• 10 years ago

In 2012 Citigroup forecast that Saudi Arabia would run out of oil in 2030. If true, there must have been considerable anxiety in the years preceding 9/11 as the Saudi government contemplated ways to offset its impending decline in reserves. Fortunately for the Saudis, 9/11 was the catalyst for the fall of Iraq, a country with the largest unproven oil reserves in the region, and ideally located near Saudi refineries and export infrastructure. In the book Hotel California: The Clandestine War in Iraq, the author repeatedly claims the Bush Administration was divorced from reality... its scary to think the United States was manipulated into deposing Sadaam for the benefit of Saudi Arabia.

samstave5• 10 years ago

I have stated this was the goal for years. They knew that Saudi was peak, and what better way to prevent the next largest reserves from being pumped dry; war. Keep that going until you can go in and steal all the oil after you run out.

Document 17 Declassified – 9/11 attackers may have had links to Saudi Arabia [pdf]

Related Stories