This weekend we reported that classified documents, the infamous 28 pages, implicated that Saudi Arabian involvement in 9/11 had been soft pedalled to protect the delicate diplomatic relationship between the U.S. and the Arab state.
However, the New York Post has claimed that these allegations go beyond playing down Saudi involvement, and that the U.S. government deliberately covered up the kingdom’s involvement in the atrocious attacks that claimed the lives of nearly 3,000 people.
The Post report that the cover-up goes beyond simply classifying the 28 pages and, in fact, claim that investigations were deliberately stopped while co-conspirators were let off the hook.
Apparently, their reporter Paul Sperry interviewed various officials investigating the attacks, including people from the Joint Terrorism Task Forces in Washington and San Diego, people at the operating base for some of the Saudi hijackers, and detectives at the Fairfax County Police Department who also investigated several 9/11 leads.
He claims that ‘virtually every road led back to the Saudi Embassy in Washington’, and that the Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles were allegedly stopped from pursuing leads with the most common excuse being ‘diplomatic immunity’
These same sources told him that there were pages missing from the 9/11 congressional report, including the final chapter which dealt with ‘foreign support for the September 11 hijackers,’ and included evidence gathered by both the CIA and FBI of official Saudi assistance for at least two of the Saudi hijackers.
Some of this information has reportedly already leaked from the redacted section, including phone calls between one of the hijackers’ Saudi handlers in San Diego and the Saudi Embassy, and the transfer of some $130,000 from the then-Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar’s family bank account to another of the hijackers’ Saudi handlers in San Diego.
They also claim that, while certain groups wanted to investigate Bandar, others actively protected him. While former FBI agent John Guandolo, who worked both 9/11 and related al Qaeda cases, said that Bandar should have been a key suspect in the 9/11 probe.
The Saudi ambassador funded two of the 9/11 hijackers through a third party. He should be treated as a terrorist suspect, as should other members of the Saudi elite class who the U.S. government knows are currently funding the global jihad.
However, Bandar wasn’t investigated and, in fact, he met with President George W. Bush on September 13, in the White House, where the two family friends reportedly shared cigars on the Truman Balcony.
Meanwhile, the FBI evacuated dozens of Saudi officials from multiple cities across the U.S, including at least one Osama bin Laden family member who was on the terror watch list.
The 9/11 Commission member John Lehman was reportedly interested in investigating the hijackers’ connections to Bandar, his wife and the Islamic affairs office at the embassy, but every time he was constantly stonewalled by the White House.
Former FBI Agent Mark Rossini, who was investigating the hijackers, even went so far as to say the White House ‘let them off the hook’.
Regardless of the veracity of these claims, it’s clear that the public need to be filled in on exactly what happened that fateful September morning.
More of a concept than a journalist, Tom Percival was forged in the bowels of Salford University from which he emerged grasping a Masters in journalism.
Since then his rise has been described by himself as ‘meteoric’ rising to the esteemed rank of Social Editor at UNILAD as well as working at the BBC, Manchester Evening News, and ITV.
He credits his success to three core techniques, name repetition, personality mirroring, and never breaking off a handshake.