which country is it? gov't is hiding findings again...

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Josh_B, Dec 30, 2002.

  1. Josh_B


    >>> On 11 December 2002, the Senate and House Intelligence Committees released portions of their joint report on intelligence failures regarding the September 11 terrorist attacks. The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, on PBS, reported on the release that day. After asking her guests a bunch of predictable questions, and receiving predictable answers, guest host Gwen Ifill asked Senator Bob Graham, Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, a good question and got an amazing answer.<<<

    GWEN IFILL: Senator Graham, are there elements in this report, which are classified that Americans should know about but can't?

    SEN. BOB GRAHAM: Yes, going back to your question about what was the greatest surprise. I agree with what Senator Shelby said the degree to which agencies were not communicating was certainly a surprise but also I was surprised at the evidence that there were foreign governments involved in facilitating the activities of at least some of the terrorists in the United States.

    I am stunned that we have not done a better job of pursuing that to determine if other terrorists received similar support and, even more important, if the infrastructure of a foreign government assisting terrorists still exists for the current generation of terrorists who are here planning the next plots.

    To me that is an extremely significant issue and most of that information is classified, I think overly-classified. I believe the American people should know the extent of the challenge that we face in terms of foreign government involvement. That would motivate the government to take action.

    GWEN IFILL: Are you suggesting that you are convinced that there was a state sponsor behind 9/11?

    SEN. BOB GRAHAM: I think there is very compelling evidence that at least some of the terrorists were assisted not just in financing -- although that was part of it -- by a sovereign foreign government and that we have been derelict in our duty to track that down, make the further case, or find the evidence that would indicate that that is not true and we can look for other reasons why the terrorists were able to function so effectively in the United States.

    GWEN IFILL: Do you think that will ever become public, which countries you're talking about?

    SEN. BOB GRAHAM: It will become public at some point when it's turned over to the archives, but that's 20 or 30 years from now. And, we need to have this information now because it's relevant to the threat that the people of the United States are facing today.



  2. Josh_B


    If you select other, and have few mins, do state what country you think it might be? maybe some of our "friends" ?

    Saudi Arabia is an obvious one, 15 out of the 19 hijackers were Saudis, and a great number of money trails were traced to Saudi princes and their wives. All that of course was downplayed by our media so far.

    Iraq, well still have to give the benefit of the doubt since war with them seems inevitable so far and we have been trying everything we can to get a link to 9/11..If anything even close to the above was linked to Iraq, Baghdad would have been down town Houston central long time ago.

    Afghanistan is already leveled, we flattened out some al-queda camps there killed few high ranking members Osama still at large most likely, and got the pipelines, so that is a done deal for now.

    Pakistan, well they were immediately declared our "friends" after 9/11 we needed their airspace to make the Afghanistan attacks easier. BUT they have a good size pro-Taliban, anti-US, movement. Their recent democratic elections had the Taliban party gain 56 seats about 20% of their parliament. And they have great links to North Korea. weapons exchange etc.

    North Korea, many problems are surfacing there per recent news..

  3. Josh_B


    and a pretty elaborate financial scheme on top of it..

    So throw Liberia in there along with Libya and another Pakistan connection...

    ...ANTWERP, Belgium -- An aggressive year-long European investigation into al Qaeda financing has found evidence that two West African governments hosted the senior terrorist operatives who oversaw a $20 million diamond-buying spree that effectively cornered the market on the region's precious stones.

    Investigators from several countries concluded that President Charles Taylor of Liberia received a $1 million payment for arranging to harbor the operatives, who were in the region for at least two months after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on New York and the Pentagon. The terrorists moved between a protected area in Liberia and the presidential compound in neighboring Burkina Faso, investigators say.

    Long accused of sanctioning illicit diamond and weapons trading, Taylor and President Blaise Campaore of Burkina Faso deny the charge, which is included in a summary of the joint intelligence findings

    In Osailly's case, Belgian investigators say they uncovered bank records showing that the diamond company enjoyed a sudden surge in business and turned over almost $1 billion in the year before Sept. 11. Investigators also have found telephone records of calls to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq and Iran.

    Diamond merchants in the region said that during that period, they were perplexed because they could no longer buy stones. New buyers were paying from 15 percent to 30 percent more than the going rate.

    Documents obtained by The Post show that on Jan. 2, 2001, an Israeli arms dealer in Panama named Simon Yelnik sent an e-mail to a Russian arms merchant in Guatemala discussing an order that "our friends in Africa need." Attached was a list of assault rifles, ammunition and rocket-propelled grenades as well as 20 SA-8 missiles and 200 rockets for BM-21 multiple rocket launchers.

    The weapons provider was to be the Nicaraguan army, the documents show.

    "What we know is that al Qaeda was very active in the diamond trade, but we also know there is a great deal we don't know," said one senior intelligence official. "What else is there out there we haven't discovered? What are they still doing that brings them profit? Those are the questions I worry about now."


    The plot thickens

  4. Josh_B


  5. Nice posts (as usual), Josh...

    I voted for the Saudis, fwiw...

    Now, if we were bombing the Saudis or Pakistanis, I may even strongly support that... but Iraq is just not a justifiable target...

    In my view, the legitimate hitlist must be based on well documented cases of international terrorism or financial sponsoring of international terrorism... I would support us taking out the Saudi regime and Pakistani regime... but, somehow, I just don't get why we are fixated on Iraq... unless of course its for oil...

    So you see I ain't a pacifist... but I am a strong believer in getting the right people for the right reasons... and yet we continue to label the Saudis and the Pakistanis as our allies... this totally sucks...
  6. We can only keep our fingers crossed that, eventually, the US policymakers do the right thing :cool:
  7. Josh_B


    Saudi envoy in UK linked to 9/11

    Riyadh's former intelligence chief has been accused in US court documents of helping to fund al-Qaeda, report Paul Harris and Martin Bright ...

    ..They accuse him of funding and supporting Osama bin Laden. The Observer can also reveal that Turki has now admitted for the first time that Saudi interrogators have tortured six British citizens arrested in Saudi Arabia and accused of carrying out a bombing campaign..

    ...The revelation has angered relatives of the men and campaigners, who have accused the British Government of sacrificing their freedom in the interests of good diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia. Last week the relatives met Foreign Secretary Jack Straw, who told them that Britain would continue its 'softly, softly' approach. However, that news angered many. 'His stance is the same. He said softly, softly is working. But it has been two years. How much longer?' said one relative at the meeting...

    full article: http://www.observer.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,905698,00.html

    Eventually we may find out what country sponsored/financed the 9/11. Are Saudis the main suspects?

    If yes, shouldn't we be attacking them first?

  8. There are many who believe that elements of the Saudi government - for the most part meaning some members of the ruling family - have supported Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups actively, in the former case building on ties that originated around the time of the Soviet war in Afghanistan, and were originally formed with US blessing. Pakistan's situation is somewhat similar.

    If anti-American and terrorist-supporting forces in those governments can be isolated and purged, if those who hold the highest positions can be motivated to work with us rather than against us, and if their countries can be moved overall on course that's favorable to our interests, why would it make sense to make war on them?