Alleged CIA Protection of 9/11 Hijackers and Links to Saudi/Qatari Royals, Plus Questionable Cyber‑Crime Partnerships

Khalid Sheikh Mohammed; 3. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, identified in the 9/11 Commission Report as "the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks”; 4. Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, two of the alleged 9/11 hijackers, whose presence in the United States was concealed from the FBI by CIA officers for months before 9/11. It might sound from these citations that the 9/11 Commission marked a new stage in the U.S. treatment of these terrorists, and that the report now exposed those terrorists who in the past had been protected. On the contrary, a principal purpose of my chapter is to show that 1. one purpose of protecting these individuals had been to protect a valued intelligence connection (the "al-Qaeda connection,” if you will); 2. one major intention of the 9/11 Commission Report was to continue protecting this connection; 3. those on the 9/11 Commission staff who were charged with this protection included at least one commission member (Jamie Gorelick), one staff member (Dietrich Snell), and one important witness (Patrick Fitzgerald) who earlier had figured among the terrorists’ protectors. In the course of writing this chapter [Scott continues], | came to another disturbing conclusion | had not anticipated. This is that a central feature of the protection has been to defend the 9/11 Commission’s false picture of al-Qaeda as an example of non-state terrorism, ignoring not just the CIA but also the royal families of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. In reality, as | shall show, royal family protection from Qatar and Saudi Arabia (concealed by the 9/11 Commission) was repeatedly given to key figures like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, the alleged “principal architect of the 9/11 attacks.” The establishment claims that the wars fought by America in Asia since 9/11 have been part of a global “war on terror.” But this “war on terror” has been fought in alliance with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Pakistan - precisely the principal political and financial backers of the al-Qaedist networks the United States has supposedly been fighting. Meanwhile the most authentic opponents in the region of these Sunni al-Qaedists - the governments of Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Iran - have found themselves overthrown (in the case of Iraq and Libya), subverted with U.S. support (in the case of Syria), or sanctioned and threatened as part of an “axis of evil” (in the case of Iran). We should not forget that, just one day after 9/11, “Rumsfeld was talking about broadening the objectives of our response and ‘getting Iraq.” (pp. 44-45, The American Deep State) Clinton's daughter is now poised to work global health initiatives which | would suggest is little more than a cover for on-going terrorism "ops". To return to Steve Colo - in the interview he speaks of a partnership between the Secret Service, the FBI, and South Carolina's SLED (State Law Enforcement Division) to open a Computer Crime Center. Bud Horton (mentioned above) (long-affiliated with IT Security; his title at Accenture was Chief technology officer of it's cyber security practice) happened to have just moved to South Carolina from Loudoun County after being implicated in a continuing child sex scandal (see details below). Further, cyber-crime just so happens to be another of the arenas in which our Intelligence Community coordinates with the Russians: "The US cooperates with the FSB and Russia's interior ministry on counter-terrorism, organized crime, bio-terrorism, and cyber-crime." -- p. 243, Expelled: A Journalist's Descent into the Russian Mafia State, by Luke Harding) Most would interpret this quote to suggest that the nations work together to prevent these various threats. The reality is more the opposite; trust me when | say that the US doesn't work "ops" alone - the 2005 London Bombings is one notable example of a instance in which the US coordinated with also British intelligence in the HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017595