Saudi government involvement in 9/11

"After being kept out of the public eye for 13 years, Congress on Friday declassified 28 pages of a controversial report outlining a series of potential connections between the terrorist hijackers who attacked the United States on 9/11 and the government of Saudi Arabia. The document details a number of alleged instances wherein individuals linked to the Al Saud family may have assisted or provided financial support to the al Qaeda operatives who committed the terrorist attacks." - Vanity Fair, July 15th.
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/declassified-report-saudi-ties-september-11

The article goes on to describe interesting evidence of funding links between Saudi royals and the attackers, in particular, Prince Sultan bin Salman bin Abdul Aziz Al-Saud, who is high in the royal circles of Saudi Arabia.

The Real News Project has a fascinating article on the activities of the Ghazzawi family, who had property in Florida near the flying school where the hijackers trained and were in regular contact with them. The Ghazzawis were receiving direct financial support from the Saudi royals. They fled two weeks before the attacks, leaving behind expensive items in their house. The FBI tried to lure them back for an interview but eventually settled for signed statements done in Lebanon. The Ghazzawis appear to have been deeply implicated and possibly were the controllers of the operation - one of them was previously a Saudi secret service agent. They are one of a number of Saudis who were allowed to leave the US unmonitored just before and just after 9/11.
http://whowhatwhy.org/2016/07/15/28-pages-released-saudi-911-ties-missed/

Worth noting against a backdrop of Saudi Salafist-inspired terror in Europe.

The real question before us is when are we going to deal properly with the Saudi problem? Instead, they are welcomed in London, they own extensive property in the UK and Europe and they are a constant corrupting influence on our political circles.

Reply 1

Aj12

The Saudi problem will be dealt with when we no longer need their oil and influence in the region. The west's relationship has been one of the most counter productive in history, they consistently work against western interests and we're stuck putting up with it. I'd love to see a break in relations, but due to economic and geopolitical factors it is not going to happen in a hurry.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 2

queen-bee

Original post by Aj12

correct answer

Reply 3

Fullofsurprises

Original post by Aj12

Much of their oil now goes to Japan and China - the US is considerably less reliant on it than it used to be.

I think the issue has migrated from being one of oil dependence to one of cash dependence - their corrupt influence is deeply embedded in Wall St and the City, the upper political elites, etc.

Apparently so much so that elements within the ruling family can commission mass murder in the West for unknown reasons (revenge for something? Salafist mania?) and get away with it unscathed.

Reply 4

Aj12

Original post by Fullofsurprises

The problem is that economics and oil go beyond direct use. The US is dependent on trading relationships with countries that are dependent on saudi oil too. A spike in oil prices or a drop in supply may not hurt them directly, but the impact on trade partners like the EU and Asia would see a heavy secondary effect on them.

I imagine personal influence plays it's hand but the fact that this report was released despite saudi warnings suggests that only goes so far. However a more concrete break in our relationship will require a paradigm shift in petropolitics globally.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 5

QE2

Original post by Aj12

The vast majority of Saudi oil goes east, mostly to India and China. The US gets 15% of its oil from KSA, the UK only 4%.

It is not about us needing their oil. It is about what they buy from us with their oil money.

Reply 6

the bear

once their oil runs out they will immediately be friendzoned. unless there is a sudden demand for sand...

Reply 7

Aj12

Original post by QE2

As I pointed out we live in a globalised economy, a slow down caused by a restriction of oil supply will impact the US regardless of how much oil it directly imports. Naturally what they buy from us, especially defence exports, plays a hand too. Our relationship with saudi is multifaceted.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 8

Josb

Original post by Aj12

I think that what they buy from us is more important than their oil now.

Reply 9

MagicNMedicine

Original post by Fullofsurprises

The real question before us is when are we going to deal properly with the Saudi problem? Instead, they are welcomed in London, they own extensive property in the UK and Europe and they are a constant corrupting influence on our political circles.

Probably the answer is, when it becomes obvious that the Saudi government is hostile to US interests.

Saddam in Iraq or the Taliban in Afghanistan are examples. They were unpleasant regimes with oil or with strategic importance for oil supply so the US did business with them. Like they do with the Saudis now.

It then got to a point where it was obvious these regimes were actively hostile to US interests and so they received a visit from the bald eagle of freedom.

The same would happen to Saudi Arabia if the Saudi government were obviously acting in ways that were detrimental to US interests.

Now you might ask, well already we have some of this evidence, so why not go and do it now? The answer is probably that Iraq and Afghanistan showed that it's not as simple as a quick job to get rid of the existing regime and install a pro-US puppet regime. Once you commit to regime change its then years ahead of instability and insurgency with US troops being killed, terrorist attacks and disruption to oil supply which would be very severe in the case of Saudi Arabia. So the cost of intervention is quite high, which means they will put up with a bit of crap from the Saudis before it gets to that point, but in the end if the cost justifies it, the bald eagle of freedom will be sent in.

Reply 10

jamiep151

We should fix relations with Russia import their gas and cut the Saudis off. How people continue to moan about Putin and Russia while our head of state bows to the Saudi royal family who lead a country that beheads homosexuals, fund terrorism and export Wahabbi clerics is beyond me.

Reply 11

IYGB

Original post by jamiep151

You are asking very difficult questions

Reply 12

Fullofsurprises

Original post by MagicNMedicine

There was clearly more to the events surrounding the 'get out of America free' card that was handed to these people pre- and post- 9/11 than just being supportive of the Saudi petrocracy. It's very suspicious indeed and points to clandestine involvement with the 9/11 planners by the US to my mind. Why else would the FBI be so willing and so relaxed about dropping all pursuit of a group of Saudis living in the US at the time who were strikingly obviously involved in the planning? Why did the US not pursue criminal allegations against the Saudi royals involved? Is it really so necessary to US interests that they would allow members of the Saudi government to get away with committing mass murder inside US territory with apparent impunity? It seems a stretch.

A more likely scenario is that the Bush family were somehow involved. They were certainly on very friendly terms with a range of Saudis. Perhaps 9/11 was 'let through'? This is the most plausible of the conspiracy theories and unlike the others, there is some very provocative and disturbing evidence to support such a notion.