I wrote this after reading an article published by CBS News online following a report stating 9/11 victims suing Saudi Arabia had acquired evidence linking a Saudi operative with ties to the royal family to two of the hijackers. That evidence included video of the two attending a party he held and drawings a former U.S. Navy pilot says could have been used to tell the terrorists how to keep their hijacked aircraft on target as it approached the Pentagon. I then did a little more reading and discovered 9/11 victims have pursued this angle for some time, without receiving much help from our government.
I’ve included what I believe are the most informative articles here:
www.cbsnews.com/news/911-hijackers-video-saudi-intelligence-official-omar-al-bayoumi/
We’ve been asked to overlook too much since 9/11, so much I see the post-9/11 era as a better era for terrorists than the era that preceded it. A Marine Veteran who worked closely enough with Marine Embassy Guards, Intelligence Officers, and members of the Secret Service familiar with the threat of terrorism to know Saudi Arabian involvement was often understated, I left the United States for Canada for a while afterwards because it appeared they might prevent U.S. officials seeking to place that blame on Iraq from doing so. Now, you may think that unreasonable, but from my perspective America was then being sold out so a country known to support terrorism could benefit from military operations targeting a red herring. I mean, really! Our forces were going to be asked to trust Saudi Arabia wouldn’t continue to finance terrorists so they could prolong the war thus its profitability? That sounded a bit too far fetched for me to accept.
Today we know there was very little separation between the Saudi royal family and the terrorists responsible for the attacks of 9/11. In fact, there’s a direct connection between an intelligence operative on their payroll and two of the hijackers who targeted the Pentagon. Prince Bandar bin Sultan Al Saud, then their acting ambassador in the United States, paid Omar al Bayoumi, a former Saudi intelligence operative with expertise in aviation, while he was in San Diego providing two of the of the terrorists responsible for that attack logistical and technical support. He is caught on film with the two while hosting a party shortly before the attacks. We now know he found housing for them and taught them how to ensure the aircraft they hijacked remained on target as it approached the Pentagon.
This information was known to the FBI, but was withheld from the 9/11 Commission. We now know British police acquired evidence linking Bayoumi to 9/11 hijackers, Hawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar, in a raid on his Birmingham, England residence just two weeks after the attacks and presented it to the FBI. Despite clearly indicating Bayoumi knew of their plans, FBI officials questioned by the 9/11 commission would only say there was a 50/50 chance. Why Bayoumi was so brazen he’d keep this evidence with him rather than destroy it is a mystery, but it may speak to the confidence he had in his ties to the Saudi Royal family. The question is, were any lawmakers made aware of this evidence, here or in England, and if so were they blackmailed into keeping it to themselves.
It is highly unlikely that evidence was reviewed by British police and not by British intelligence. It is even more unlikely knowledge of what was learned in the process didn’t reach Parliament. The same can be said of U.S. intelligence and political leaders. It’s simply impossible they weren’t informed. So why did they withhold this information? The only reasonable explanation is that they were blackmailed into doing so by Saudi Arabia. The alternative is unthinkable because it implies they made Saudi Arabia an ally in response to a terrorist attack they funded and intended to profit from as the United States was forced to respond. Bad enough they’d allow U.S. forces to be deployed there knowing they were dependent on the support of a nation that could prolong that effort and the profits they acquired as a result of it merely by continuing to fund terrorism. I’d rather not believe they had the okay of U.S. lawmakers as they did that. It is, however, entirely possible.
Jamie Beaulieu
Farmington, Maine
Opinion pieces reflect the views of the individual author, and do not reflect the views of the Daily Bulldog, Mt. Blue TV, or Central Maine Media Alliance. Publication of an opinion piece does not equate to endorsement of the content of the piece.
