28 Pages REVEAL 9/11 U.S. COVER-UP of ACT OF WAR by Saudi Government

Home  »  Conspiracies  »  28 Pages REVEAL 9/11 U.S. COVER-UP of ACT OF WAR by Saudi Government
Print This Post Print This Post
Jul 27, 2016 No Comments ›› admin

By Ben Barrack

Prince Bandar: Saudi Arabia's highest 9/11 Conspirator.

Prince Bandar: Saudi Arabia’s highest 9/11 Conspirator.

The release of the 28 pages from a 9/11 Congressional committee after nearly 14 years has finally happened. It’s clear after reading them, why George W. Bush censored them. Saudi Arabia committed an act of war against the U.S. on September 11, 2001 and the Bush administration covered it up.

The key figure in the 28 pages is Saudi Arabian Ambassador to the U.S. at the time, Prince Bandar (Ambassador from 1983-2005). The pages make crystal clear that Bandar – through his wife and other entities – had connections to Saudi agents and organizations that provided direct assistance to 9/11 hijackers. The line from Bandar to the hijackers ran through no fewer than three people. Chief among them were a Saudi government agent named Omar al-Bayoumi, a colleague of al-Bayoumi named Osama Bassnan, and Saudi diplomat and Imam Fahad al-Thumairy.

Further complicating things is the fact that Bandar’s relationship with U.S. presidents had been close and extended back decades. The pages also reveal a connection to close Hillary Clinton adviser Huma Abedin – a Muslim who was raised in Saudi Arabia and whose mother is a leader with the Muslim Sisterhood – through a wealthy Saudi and co-worker of Abedin named Abdullah Omar Naseef. The man Naseef put in charge of the Rabita Trust which Naseef founded is named in the 28 pages.

Saudi Diplomat Fahad al-Thumairy (L) and Saudi Gov't Agent Omar al-Bayoumi (R); aided two 9/11 hijackers.

Saudi Diplomat Fahad al-Thumairy (L) and Saudi Gov’t Agent Omar al-Bayoumi (R); aided two 9/11 hijackers.

As to why the pages are so explosive and damaging to the last six U.S. presidential administrations (some more than others), let’s examine the findings. It is important to note that – as I’ve maintained consistently – one should look at these discoveries and decisions to cover them up through the lens of Iran-Contra. In 1983, the U.S. allied with the Muslim Brotherhood (parent of al-Qaeda), Pakistan, Hezbollah Afghanistan, and the Saudis to defeat the Soviet Union. The front line of this fight was on the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Prince Bandar and George H.W. Bush on a fishing trip.

Prince Bandar and George H.W. Bush on a fishing trip.

In an undated photo (circa 1989), Bandar can be seen fishing on a boat with George H.W. Bush. Written on the photo is a note from the 41st President expressing well wishes to the Saudi Ambassador while referring to him as a “friend”.

In 1987, then President H.W. Bush’s son George W. sat on the board of Harken Energy with a Muslim named Talat Othman, who represented Saudi businessman named Sheik Abdullah Bakhsh, who was closely linked to the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI), which was a central player in the Iran-Contra scandal. In June of 1990, Bush sold more than $800,000 in Harken stock just before the stock tanked. By August, Othman was making regular visits to the White House.

Reagan National Security Adviser Robert "Bud" McFarlane (far left), White House Chief of Staff Donald Regan (center) and Bandar (far right) on September 1, 1985.

Reagan National Security Adviser Robert “Bud” McFarlane (far left), White House Chief of Staff Donald Regan (center) and Bandar (far right) on September 1, 1985.

There was clearly a relationship between the Saudi government and U.S. Presidents in the wake of the defeat of the Soviet Union. Those relationships were fostered and strengthened as a result of that defeat.

A case can certainly be made that the decision to align with these forces to defeat the Soviets was necessary and right. However, the decision to partner with them – especially through their Muslim apparatchiks on U.S. soil – in the years since has proven to be a grave, grave mistake. It has led to corruption on a massive scale, to include the second Bush administration covering up the truth about Saudi involvement in 9/11.

The suppression of these 28 pages serves as evidence.

Osama Bassnan

Osama Bassnan

Let’s begin on page 417 of the 2002 Joint Inquiry’s report that includes information about a Saudi named Osama Bassnan. Last month, notes from interviews of Saudis, taken by members of the 9/11 Commission, were released. Bassnan was one of the individuals interviewed. Upon reading those notes, it can be seen why the Bush administration would want to suppress what was written about Bassnan in the 28 pages that preceded the 9/11 Commission Report.

Perhaps the most damning excerpt from the page below reads:

“He (Bassnan) and his wife have received financial support from the Saudi Ambassador to the United States and his wife.”

At the time, Prince Bandar bin Sultan Al Saud was that Ambassador and his wife is Haifa bint Faisal. Any attempt to identify Bassnan as a 9/11 co-conspirator would have led to Prince Bandar, who had spent decades ingratiating himself to U.S. Presidents. Note the multiple ways that Bassnan is connected to the Saudi government:


In October of 2003, nearly one year after that page was written and one year before the 9/11 Commission published its findings, Senior Counsel & Team Leader for the 9/11 Commission Dietrich (Dieter) Snell interviewed Bassnan. Upon reading the notes of that exchange, it’s clear there was never any intention to implicate Bassnan; he was too close to the Saudi government generally and Bandar specifically. Despite being caught in lies and conflicting statements that if pursued, would have led to much thicker smoke from a fire at the center of the Saudi government, Bassnan was dismissed for having a lack of credibility.

There is a difference between a witness lacking in credibility and a co-conspirator lacking it. The former is usually dismissed. The latter should be met with dealmaking and the equivalent of plea bargains. Why on earth would Bassnan be let off the hook unless it was to protect the Saudi government? Why not at least offer him asylum in the U.S. in exchange for his testimony? It’s clear that the Bush administration had two tracks it could have pursued. It could have gone where the ugly facts led or it could have chosen the path of least resistance.

It clearly chose the latter, for whatever reason.

Check out these notes from Snell’s interview with Bassnan in October in 2003:

Excerpt of MFR of Interview between Snell and Osama Basnan on 10/21/03.

Excerpt of MFR of Interview between Snell and Osama Basnan on 10/21/03.

What you see about Bassnan written on page 417 of the Joint Inquiry’s report is far more than what was written about him in the 9/11 Commission’s report, despite more information about Bassnan and his complicity in 9/11 being available by then – or should have been. Despite the Joint Inquiry’s findings and Bassnan’s seeming self-incrimination during interviews, he was only mentioned twice in the 9/11 Commission Report – both times in footnotes only.

Isikoff: al-Bayoumi greeted 9/11 hijackers at airport.

Isikoff: al-Bayoumi greeted 9/11 hijackers at airport.

In the 28 pages, Omar al-Bayoumi – one of Bassnan’s associates – is named as well. Al-Bayoumi has been identified as having met and provided assistance to two 9/11 hijackers upon their arrival in the U.S. Those hijackers were Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi. According to an article in Newsweek by Michael Isikoff shortly after the 9/11 attacks, al-Bayoumi actually met the hijackers at the airport and continued to provide necessary assistance:

When the two Qaeda operatives arrived at Los Angeles International Airport around New Year’s 2000, they were warmly welcomed. Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar would help hijack American Airlines Flight 77 and crash it into the Pentagon a year and a half later, but that January in Los Angeles, they were just a couple of young Saudi men who barely spoke English and needed a place to stay. At the airport, they were swept up by a gregarious fellow Saudi, Omar al-Bayoumi, who had been living in the United States for several years. Al-Bayoumi drove the two men to San Diego, threw a welcoming party and arranged for the visitors to get an apartment next to his. He guaranteed the lease, and plunked down $1,550 in cash to cover the first two months’ rent. His hospitality did not end there.

A little later in the article, al-Bayoumi is connected to Prince Bandar:

He (al-Bayoumi) apparently did work for Dallah Avco, an aviation-services company with extensive contracts with the Saudi Ministry of Defense and Aviation, headed by Prince Sultan, the father of the Saudi ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar.

Emails to Isikoff asking if he still stands by this explosive assertion, which runs counter to the narrative about how al-Bayoumi and the hijackers met, have not been returned.

The joint inquiry (the 28 pages) also determined a triangular relationship existed between Bandar, al-Bayoumi, Bassnan and the wives of the three men:


The close connections between Bassnan and al-Bayoumi are deemed “very close” by the Joint Inquiry and also involve at least two of the 9/11 hijackers – Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar:


Here are some specifics about the financial dealings between Bandar’s wife and Bassnan’s wife, as well as evidence that Bassnan actually cashed at least one check from Bandar’s account. This information clearly put Bassnan, al-Bayoumi and Prince Bandar in the same circles:


It is important to underscore that a foundation existed that allowed significant amounts of money to change hands between Bandar, Bassnan, al-Bayoumi and the wives of these men. The reason is that Bassnan was a true believer when it came to his namesake, Osama bin Laden. Bassnan even once held a party for the “Blind Sheik”, who was convicted for his role in the 1993 WTC bombing:


Another very telling excerpt from the 28 pages – especially when juxtaposed with a portion of the 9/11 Commission’s interview notes – reveals the flawed mindset of the Bush administration. Though heavily redacted, the paragraph is very illustrative:


It’s difficult to discern the message there but one thing is clear. Saudi Arabia’s status as a U.S. “ally” was a central component. The text above was in a report presented to Bush in December of 2002, which Bush subsequently censored. Less than one year later, 9/11 Commission staffers traveled to Saudi Arabia, interviewed people like Bassnan, and wrote notes that reflected a willingness to act as Saudi apologists on behalf of Bush. Remember, this was written ten months AFTER the 28 pages were presented to Bush:


After 28 pages clearly communicated complicity between the likes of Prince Bandar and the hijackers through middlemen, the 9/11 Commission team, led by Executive Director Philip Zelikow – a longtime colleague of Condoleezza Rice with whom he co-authored a book – was helping to generate a false premise that the Saudis had been set up by al-Qaeda. In reality, the Saudis were at the top of the al-Qaeda food chain. At the time, Rice was Bush’s National Security Advisor.

Condoleezza Rice (L) and Philip Zelikow (R)

Condoleezza Rice (L) and Philip Zelikow (R)

Eliminating stupidity as an option, there is only one reason why the Bush administration would protect the Saudis after the Saudis committed an act of war on the U.S. That reason is that the Bush administration in particular and the Washington establishment in general had dirtied itself up significantly in dealings with the Saudis since Iran-Contra, when the two countries were major allies against the Soviets.

Consider that just two days after the 9/11 attacks, Bandar was at the White House communicating the need for Bush to allow Saudis already in the U.S. to fly out of the country. Imagine Japan’s Ambassador to the U.S. after Pearl Harbor paying a visit to the White House. While such a visit may have theoretically been permitted, it would not have been a friendly meeting. Conversely, Bandar, Bush, and Vice President Dick Cheney reclined on the White House porch with crossed legs and smoked cigars as Rice looked on.

Clockwise from far left: Cheney, Bandar, Rice, and George W. Bush on 9/13/01.

Clockwise from far left: Cheney, Bandar, Rice, and George W. Bush on 9/13/01.

Nearly three years later, Zelikow’s 9/11 Commission would publish a report that ignored the 28 pages and Saudi involvement in 9/11.

The Joint Inquiry found al-Bayoumi’s connections to the Saudi Government extensive. Al-Bayoumi held jobs with the Saudi government and had several contacts with dignitaries from other Arab countries. It is worth repeating that Bush CENSORED this document when it was completed in December of 2002, just months before an invasion of Iraq that would have been far more difficult to justify had the American people been allowed to see these pages 14 years ago:


On the very next page, two San Diego FBI agents were quoted as saying al-Bayoumi was both a Saudi intelligence agent and involved in the 9/11 attacks. Yet, instead of following these leads publicly or taking the case of Saudi involvement to the American people, Bush buried the evidence:


To re-cap, Bassnan and al-Bayoumi had clear connections to Prince Bandar, specifically through the mens’ wives. As it turns out, Bassnan was a rabid supporter of Osama bin Laden and once hosted a party for the Blind Sheikh:


Bandar connected to Abu Zubaida

Abu Zubaydah

Abu Zubaydah

Bandar wasn’t just connected to men who supported bin Laden and the mastermind of the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. He also appears to have had a connection to one Abu Zubaida, who was part of al-Qaeda’s top brass at the time of his capture in March of 2002.

Have a look at these excerpts from pages 418-19, which connect a company that managed Bandar’s affairs in Colorado and senior al-Qaeda leader Abu Zubaida, who was one of the few terrorists who was waterboarded:



Just two pages later and after more connections between Bandar and Zubaida are explored, we learn that the phone number of a man who provided “services” to Bandar’s assistants, was found at an Osama bin Laden safe house in Pakistan:


Despite these shocking discoveries, Prince Bandar was only mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report five times, all in footnotes that reference meetings with senior Bush administration officials or interviews he granted.


Bandar’s reign as Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. began in 1983, just as the Soviet / Afghanistan angle to Iran-Contra was heating up, and ended more than 20 years later during the second term of George W. Bush. Over that span, Bandar didn’t just rub elbows with every U.S. president; he befriended them.

As the Saudi Ambassador, he was most certainly in the middle of the intelligence operations between the U.S. and Pakistan. This is where the Muslim mindset is at its most effective. It doesn’t just align with its enemies to defeat greater enemies. It has a longterm strategy of charming those enemies and winning them over.

There is little doubt that in August of 1990, Bandar was well aware that Othman was representing Sheik Abdullah Bakhsh and that Saudi money was helping the Bushes. It’s important to note that at that time, Iran-Contra was still not over. Investigations into that scandal stretched to at least 1991.

Bandar with President H.W. Bush at the White House on March 1, 1991.

Bandar with President H.W. Bush at the White House on March 1, 1991.

More recently – in the 2016 presidential campaign – Bush 41 son and Bush 43 brother Jeb Bush was asked about releasing the 28 pages several times and feigned total ignorance:

This clip is particularly interesting. Watch mainstream media reporter Andrea Mitchell come to Jeb’s rescue when a reporter confronts him about releasing the 28 pages. Mitchell is clearly ready to jump in. Why would this be? I thought the mainstream media hated the Bush family. Why wouldn’t it help attack Jeb over this?

Bandar remained friendly with the Clinton White House. Here he is with Bill Clinton in the White House:

Clinton (L) and Bandar (C) in White House on October 26, 1995

Clinton (L) and Bandar (C) in White House on October 26, 1995

Then, less than one year after the 9/11 attacks, Clinton traveled to Morocco where he embraced Bandar:

Bill Clinton embraces Prince Bandar on July 12, 2002, less than one year after 9/11 attacks.

Bill Clinton embraces Prince Bandar on July 12, 2002, less than one year after 9/11 attacks.

Barely six weeks later, President Bush welcomed Bandar to his Crawford, TX ranch in late August:

Bush and Bandar at Crawford Ranch on August 27, 2002.

Bush and Bandar at Crawford Ranch on August 27, 2002.

The Democrat Party’s nominee for President in 2016 Hillary Clinton also appears to have some explaining to do. An excerpt from the 28 pages includes a partial transcript of an exchange between the Joint Inquiry and the General Counsel of the U.S. Treasury that took place in 2002. It’s clear that the Saudis were unwilling to do much to help the U.S. go after a man named “Julaydin”. This is believed to be a reference to al-Qaeda founder Wael Hamza Julaidan, an al-Qaeda founder and Executive Director of the Rabita Trust, founded in 1988 by wealthy Saudi Abdullah Omar Naseef (mentioned above):


At the time, Abedin – a very close Hillary confidante – was listed as a co-worker of Naseef at the Institute on Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA), a Muslim organization founded and funded by the Saudis, headed by Huma’s mother, a Muslim Sisterhood leader.



The 28 pages showing Saudi Government involvement in the 9/11 attacks and the Bush administration’s cover-up of that involvement were finally released earlier this month, on July 15th. Those pages are very, very damning but they were released at precisely the same time that an event halfway around the world was unfolding; that event dominated the news cycle.

Erdogan Cell phone interview during coup.

Erdogan Cell phone interview during coup.

A coup attempt in Turkey sucked up all the media oxygen; it also failed very quickly. Many viewed it as staged by a leader steeped in the ways of Hitler’s Mein Kampf. At one point, Erdogan conducted what appeared to be a desperate interview on a cell phone from a hotel room with a curtain backdrop. If indeed the coup was staged, this was clearly an attempt to communicate weakness on the part of Erdogan.

There were two primary beneficiaries of the failed coup besides Erdogan – who is now said to be stronger. Those beneficiaries are the Saudis and the Washington, DC political establishment.

The fortuitous timing of the 28 pages was further aided by the fact that it happened on the eve of the Republican National Convention.

Tagged with: , ,

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

%d bloggers like this: