Will Shifting Loyalties in the Middle East (and Fracking) Bring Truth about 9/11?

More at The Real News

As the IBT reported yesterday, Congressman Walter Jones recently managed to get intelligence gatekeeper Mike Rogers to share the 28 redacted pages of the Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry into 9/11 that show Saudi involvement in the plot.

It took Jones six weeks and several letters to the House Intelligence Committee before the classified pages from the 9/11 report were made available to him. Jones was so stunned by what he saw that he approached Rep. Lynch, asking him to look at the 28 pages as well. He knew that Lynch would be astonished by the contents of the documents and perhaps would join in a bipartisan effort to declassify the papers.

He has now joined with Stephen Lynch in an effort to allow all of us to read about Saudi involvement in 9/11.

“I was absolutely shocked by what I read,” Jones told International Business Times. “What was so surprising was that those whom we thought we could trust really disappointed me. I cannot go into it any more than that. I had to sign an oath that what I read had to remain confidential. But the information I read disappointed me greatly.”

The public may soon also get to see these secret documents. Last week, Jones and Lynch introduced a resolution that urges President Obama to declassify the 28 pages, which were originally classified by President George W. Bush.

And it’s not just the original findings about Saudi financial support for the terrorists. As IBT also notes, more recent reporting from Florida reveals possible ties between Saudi princes and the hijackers. Senator Bob Graham continues his efforts to get people to look more closely at the Saudi role (the entire Real News Network interview with him is a worthy review). And there is reason to believe NSA intercepts that were reviewed neither by the JICI nor the 9/11 Commission implicate Saudis in the attack.

All that — as well as details on how the Saudis refused to cut off funding for terrorism until at least 2009 — has been suppressed for 12 years because our relationship with the Saudis was deemed more important than our need to publicly understand the roots of the worst terrorist attack on US soil.

While it’s very early yet — Congress, many members of which who are funded indirectly by Saudis — are doing everything they can to ensure the Saudis remain ascendant in the Middle East. But if an Iran deal succeeds, and if we continue to wean ourselves from Saudi oil by replacing our ill-considered reliance on them with ill-considered efforts that ruin our own groundwater via fracking, then it may become politically possible to admit that individual Saudis had much more responsibility for 9/11 than, say, Saddam.

But there may be good reason to admit to that now. After all, Bandar flunkie (and the aide of a man who formally suppressed this information) just issued this warning.

An atmosphere this poisonous is dangerous, to say the least. The incentive for the Saudis to engage in all kinds of self-help that Washington would find less than beneficial, even destructive, is significant and rising. Driven into a corner, feeling largely abandoned by their traditional superpower patron, no one should doubt that the Saudis will do what they believe is necessary to ensure their survival. It would be a mistake to underestimate their capacity to deliver some very unpleasant surprises: from the groups they feel compelled to support in their escalating proxy war with Iran, to the price of oil, to their sponsorship (and bankrolling) of a much expanded regional role for Russia and China at America’s expense.

While the suppressed evidence shows more evidence that individual princes supported 9/11 than that the Saudi state did, plenty of still powerful princes have proven their ability to foster terrorism when need be. Particularly as Syria remains a rising source of volatility in the Middle East, it would be well for us to understand how deeply support for 9/11 extended 12 years ago.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on Reddit0Share on Facebook0Google+0Email to someone

19 Responses to Will Shifting Loyalties in the Middle East (and Fracking) Bring Truth about 9/11?

Emptywheel Twitterverse
emptywheel And the flight attendant encouraging everyone to take whatever seat they want? It's like chaos paradise on this flight.
4mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @taylormattd The article's error is IMO about as serious as your own.
7mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @taylormattd It didn't include a screen cap? Oh wait. It did.
12mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @taylormattd You agree she was SoS "in 2013"?
14mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @tpabob46 Pretty much what she did; "uniformed military, platinum, gold, 1, 2, 3, 4 are free to board."
15mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @taylormattd Yup. And your tweets, which claimed she wasn't SoS in 2013, was just as inaccurate.
18mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel Gate agent rebelling against zone boarding for 50-seat airplane is my hero if the day.
20mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel RT @DKThomp: Hillary would b the least popular Democratic nom in modern history *and* have the best approval gap over an opponent https://t…
29mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @taylormattd Sentence you did not screen cap is clearly wrong. But month (which comes from Fox) is key to that.
29mreplyretweetfavorite
JimWhiteGNV I've informed my family they have a choice of what to get me for Father's Day. (1) Chris Archer Stormtrooper bobblehead. or (2) A Boxster
32mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @dispositive Welcome back! easy solution: shop at the Farmers and Coop.
39mreplyretweetfavorite
emptywheel @taylormattd Nat (the correct spelling is "Marcy"): read your tweets. And then either retract or clarify them.
39mreplyretweetfavorite
December 2013
S M T W T F S
« Nov   Jan »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031