Executive Intelligence Review

May 18, 2016 (EIRNS)--The {9/11 Families} and the {September 11 Advocates} issued a joint statement yesterday denoucing President Obama's decision that he would "kill" or veto
JASTA (Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act), which would allow the 9/11 families to sue foreign states which funded and sponsored the 9/11 terrorists.

JASTA passed the U.S. Senate by acclamation May 17. The White House then announced Obama's intentions, and Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan stated that he had not made up his mind about the bill, preferring to send it to Committee, where most bills die. Rep. Peter King (R-NY) is leading the drive for it. The {9/11 Families} and the {September 11 Advocates} responded with their own statement yesterday:

"Regarding the passage of JASTA today in the U.S. Senate, we would like to sincerely thank Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) and Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) for their dedication and support. Their wisdom and leadership has demonstrated an understanding of the need to hold those responsible for funding terrorism accountable. Without accountability, there can be no justice. We look forward to members of the House joining with the Senate in demonstrating that same level of wisdom and leadership. In this time of angry partisan fighting, it is gratifying to see Senators from both parties joining together to fight terrorism in accordance with our legal principles. Ultimately, we hope to see this important legislation on the desk of President Obama for his swift signature.

"In light of that goal and in direct response to the Obama Administration's statement today that they still, "strongly continue to oppose this legislation," and that they may, `seek additional changes to the measure or try to get it killed in the House,' we would like to respectfully request that the Administration refrain from using such violent language when opposing legislation specifically designed and intended to help victims of terrorism.

"For us, whose loved ones were killed, there is simply no room for the word `killed' in this dialogue. Obama and his speechwriters and spokespeople ought to know that. Moreover, we would also like to encourage President Obama to recalibrate his priorities by placing American citizens and victims of terrorism ahead of nations like the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia who fund terrorists that want to kill Americans. We are tired of witnessing President Obama block our path to justice. We do not appreciate such behavior being exhibited by a President who has the audacity to pride himself on holding such lofty principles of constitutionality, openness, transparency and accountability -- not to mention being a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize.

"Furthermore, over the weekend, at Rutgers University, President Obama stated the following: `In politics and in life, ignorance is not a virtue. It's not cool to not know what you're talking about. That's not keeping it real or telling it like it is.' In the spirit of keeping things real, we would like to draw Mr. Obama's attention to his own deliberate decision not to read the 28 pages of the {Joint Inquiry of Congress' Final Report into the 9/11 attacks}. Perhaps if Mr. Obama had bothered to read the 28 pages, he would more rightfully comprehend and appreciate the need for JASTA. Ignorance is NOT bliss.... "

Kristen Breitweiser

Patty Casazza

Monica Gabrielle

Mindy Kleinberg

Lorie Van Auken

Senator Bob Graham: 9/11 Support Goes to Top of Saudi Government

May 18, 2016 (EIRNS)--Former U.S. Senator Bob Graham (D-FL), co-chair of the Joint Inquiry of Congress into 9/11, said today, "Support for 9/11 goes to the top of the Saudi government," in response to Yahoo.news interviwer Stephanie Sy's question about how high up the support for 9/11--Saudi terrorism--goes in Saudi Arabia.

Graham's optimism came through in the video interview, conducted after the U.S. Senate's unanimous passage of the JASTA (Justice Against State Sponsors of Terroriism Act) bill yesterday, which, if it becomes law if it becomes law, will allow U.S. citizens to sue the Saudis for damages. "JASTA," said Graham, "is part of an overall effort. It will not only open the courts to the victims of terrorism, but potentially expose information related to Saudi Arabia and 9/11."

The release of the classified "28 pages" of the Joint Inquiry is "a roadway to more information," Graham replied to the questions of what will release of the 28 pages do.

Graham reported that he met with Director of National Intelligence James Clapper last night, and Clapper indicated that he would finish his review of the pages, and then send his report to a panel of agencies, such as the State Department, and then the President, noting that it has been withheld for a long time, and that withholding of this information for so long has had consequences -- for the families, and for the U.S., because "the Saudis know what they did, and they know we know," and interpret [our non-action] as impunity to continue to fund terrorists.

Asked if he believed the Saudis were giving financial support to terrorists, Graham said yes. Asked which ones, Graham said, "You name them," and agreed as they came up -- Al Qaeda, ISIS, at least local affiliates, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula. Support runs from rogue elements to the highest levels. It includes public and private elements; government, foundations, individuals. And when accusations are made, said Graham, the Saudi government claims "sovereign immunity." Our assumption is the suppport is on the part of the government.

Graham referred to the Saudi support network for the 19 hijackers, who had little education, little English, and required the support of others. Graham referred to 9/11 Commission member John Lehman's statement that he knew of six high Saudi officials inovlved.
Graham said the information in the 28 pages would lead to many other documents, which would provide multiple confirmatons of the evidence. Graham said, "It is not a coverup. It is, as I have said, aggressive deception."

The Saudi threat to sell off its U.S. Treasury holdings is not credible, because it would hurt them, Graham said. If they were to do it, it would show how serious they think the threat is.

Finally, to the concern that other nations could sue the U.S. if injured by Americans, Graham replied that the JASTA bill was very carefully formulated, and no such suit could succeed.

https://www.yahoo.com/katiecouric/bob-graham-on-declassifying-portions-of-the-911-163328582.html

THE HILL

Preliminary decision on secret 9/11 pages expected this week

By Julian Hattem - 05/18/16 05:32 PM EDT

The nation's top intelligence official will tell the White House this week whether or not he supports declassifying 28 secret pages from a congressional inquiry into the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, he told lawmakers on Tuesday evening.

Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.), one of two sitting House lawmakers and a former senator to attend the 50-minute meeting, appeared hopeful that Director of National Intelligence James Clapper would move to declassify the 28 pages, which are believed to detail suspected links between the government of Saudi Arabia and the al Qaeda hijackers.

"He is going to, at the end of the week, send his recommendation to the White House," Jones told The Hill in an interview in the Capitol on Wednesday.

"I felt like he feels that the families and the American people have a right [to see the pages]," Jones added. "But he didn't say it. I have to be true about that."

Also attending the Tuesday evening meeting was Rep. Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) and former Sen. Bob Graham (D-Fla.), both of whom have pressed repeatedly for the pages to be made public.

In recent weeks, they have expressed cautious optimism that their years of effort might be paying off.

"I think all three of us, when we got back in the car, we felt very encouraged that he is a very fair man, fair-minded man of integrity, who I think fully understands what were trying to do," Jones said of Clapper on Wednesday.

The 28 classified pages from a 2002 joint congressional inquiry into 9/11, which Graham co-authored, are alleged to point to links between senior officials within the Saudi government and al Qaeda. Saudi leaders have denied any link to the terrorist group and have said that the pages should be released to quiet any rumors that have circulated.

Both the George W. Bush and Obama administrations have been under pressure for years to release the pages, but the effort has gained momentum in recent weeks amid a new apparent rift between the U.S. and Saudi Arabia.

Earlier this week, the Senate easily passed a bill that would give victims of 9/11 an avenue to sue Saudi Arabia for any involvement in the terror attack. The White House has opposed the legislation, but its chances in the House could get a boost if the secret pages are released at some point this summer.

After Clapper makes his decision on the matter, it is then expected to go before an interagency group, which will consider his recommendations alongside others. All told, it could still be weeks or months until the pages are released.

The Obama administration has said that it will make a decision about the 28 pages one way or the other in June.

According to Graham, the decision might then be kicked back to Congress.

"The surprise we heard was that after the president makes the decision about whether or not to release them, and if so in what form, they'll send it back to Congress," Graham told the Florida Bulldog.

"I don't know where Clapper got this idea, and I hope it's not just another stalling tactic."

CIA Director John Brennan has been one of the few vocal critics of releasing the pages.

The classified pages contain "uncorroborated, unvetted information," the CIA head has claimed. He has also noted that the 9/11 Commission report, which was r

If the White House does decide to declassify the 28 pages, it still might redact large portions of text, effectively leaving some of the pages secret.

Doing so could calm some critics, but certainly not all of them.

"The American people need to feel good about the 28 pages," Jones said on Wednesday. "You cannot redact this and that without raising questions of why did you do that."

-###-

Executive Intelligence Review