Abby Martin Grills Senator Graham on 9/11, CIA Cover Ups, Waterboarding & Much More!

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.

Comments

  1. avatar carnegie45 says:

    Senator Graham still needs to get his story straight on 9/11. Unlike Pearl Harbor, the attacks on the World trade center, pentagon and the shooting down of flight 93, were NOT done by outside enemies but people within the United States of America(or very close friends like Israel’s mossad). The sooner the truth and the whole truth is known the sooner the illegal wars will end. Of course a lot of people making tons of money off these wars will not be happy. But thousands, if not millions, of innocent people will finally go back to normal lives. It’s blind people like senator Graham that keep’s the truth from coming out. He says little truths, but keeps quiet on the big ones.

  2. avatar tonywicher says:

    Graham does not fully understand 9/11, yet his insistence on Saudi involvement and his demand to declassify the 28 pages with evidence that then Saudi ambassador to the U.S. Bandar bin Sultan (aka Bandar Bush) was supporting the 9/11 “hijackers” is very important. The interviewer was very good, when she asked why the U.S. attacked Afghanistan instead of Saudi Arabia. Obviously because the Bush administration was collaborating with the Saudis. Bandar was practically living in the White House at the time. It was Bandar, who made the arrangements, set up the patsies and gave them money to lay trails of false evidence. Saudi Arabia is the primary source of world terrorism, and Bandar, now chief of Saudi intelligence, is the top terrorist controller. If you want to pick a foreign country behind 9/11, it’s Saudi Arabia, not Israel. But behind the Saudis is the real power, Anglo-American imperialism. http://larouchepac.com/bae911

  3. avatar CyrilPenn says:

    Graham was pretty low key about 911 in this interview. Still I appreciate that he did the interview. He’s been calling for a new investigation for years and wrote an important book, “Intelligence Matters: The CIA, the FBI, Saudi Arabia, and the Failure of America’s War on Terror” The book makes a strong case for the complicity of Saudi officials in the events of 9/11, and shows this was covered up by the Bush Administration – an important piece of the puzzle.

  4. Abby did a pretty good job here. She sometimes seems to have a reluctance to ask the obvious follow-up questions and pinpoint people on their own inconsistencies, seemingly out of propriety or something, or just that she’s still relatively new at this and it’s hard to think on your feet in those situations. She let Tony Shaffer get away with a lot of nonsense, for example, in her interview with him.

    But here she did pretty well, apart from sure it would have been nice to increase the discomfort level by asking about the cozy relationship between “Bandar Bush” and the White House, and the apparent CIA protection of some of the same hijackers Graham was talking about (Al Hazmi and Al Midhar), as compellingly presented by Kevin Fenton in Disconnecting the Dots. Michael Springmann would have been a good reference point here too, the head of the visa section at the Jeddah embassy who got fired when he complained about being ordered to give US visas to unqualified applicants who turned out to be terrorists (or patsies anyway).

    She probably wouldn’t have gotten much out of Graham other than a stony silence and an end to the interview, but it can be instructive seeing how people squirm. If he’s willing to go as far as Saudi involvement, it begs a lot of logical follow-up questions. Maybe next time….

  5. avatar tonywicher says:

    It is a good time to keep the focus on Saudi Arabia and Bandar bin Sultan, as the alliance between the U.S.G. and the Al Qaeda terrorists we are supposed to be fighting becomes more and more obvious. Hopefully, the House will soon vote to have a select committee to investigate Benghazi, which will bring out the nature of this alliance even more. We also have the 9/11 families demanding the release of the 28 pages showing that Bandar was supporting the “hijacker” patsies, and now the FBI documents concerning the visits of some of these patsies to the home of a Saudi businessman, Esam Ghazzawi.

    http://www.heraldtribune.com/article/20131002/ARTICLE/131009884/2055/NEWS?p=2&tc=pg

  6. avatar guitarman says:

    Graham certainly didn’t want to answer the question about whether Bush administration officials should be prosecuted for war crimes because of torture. Nice how he skirts that issue.

    So he’s ok with the war in Afghanistan but not in Iraq. Complete BS. The plans to go to war in Afghanistan were drawn up before 9/11.

    Anyway, good interview. Abby Martin is always a joy to watch compared to mainstream media.

  7. john said:

    “She let Tony Shaffer get away with a lot of nonsense, for example, in her interview with him.”

    Amen to that, brother.

  8. he obviously not reading the same Internet out here I am…”no answer” response to zelikow commission questions asked of Bush BandarSaudi connect; that it all a ‘mystery’ with many ‘theories’ won’t go down as great X-examination. taken either way, it was his intention to ‘no answer’ and thats what we got. His stance on ‘suspect’ testimony gained thru torture doesn’t square with signing off Commission report later redacting Abu Zabudah ‘participation’ as number three man in al ciada OCT. The number three man on 911 Commission storyboard ! Gone? How does anyone fill THAT hole in credulity….

    • avatar Whipping Boy says:

      I was sad that the news of his death (Bandar) were greatly exagerated..heh

    • avatar Whipping Boy says:

      One thing though, even the good men who used to be in the Senate and Congress (their numbers always dwindling with the fake democrats and the tea party faction taking over any place where a moderate or progressive republican, yes those existed, Ron Paul was one, even if he was a freemason. Rand Paul like Corbett said….about Rand Paul…that apple sure fell off far from the family apple tree “not even sure it’s an apple, most likely a banana.” lmao, some people consider James dry and tutorialist, which is true but he’s got a sense of humour similar to mine or what the few politically awakened friends I have do when going off on a tangeant like I just did,which I will finish by saying, being a freemason isn’t automatically a bad thing, what level is Ron Paul? As most know freemasons don’t really know what’s up with their organization until they into the 25th level and up.
      Below that it is still a kind of corrupt place where supposed rivals in commerce or even political “in real life” have feasts and binge drink together passing some deals at the same time.

      Ok what i was saying is that obviously Bob Graham isn’t an evil man, but when he was elected, as i’m sure many elected officials who are very, how can I say, very idealist, quickly realize that imposing true change even in a small way means massive battles agains the establishment. I even think Obama was brought in over Clinton because he would cave in to the shadow government a lot easier, while Clinton is american royalty so she might have goals similar to the shadow government, but she would have done like her husband and did things opposite to their goals in some ways (less than Bill who’s actually pragmatic, thats why his presidency was so…movemented with loads of bad things happening to force his hand.

      The real guy who tried for real was Jimmy Carter, true he didn’t start any wars, there’s a hole in the list of wars when he was there, but Z-Big was working, most likely behind his back stirring up the Talibans using God and all (there is video evidence of this), Also, Jimmy Carter was about to cut aid to Israel significantly…anyway, with the way he was smeared and still is to this day by the not-too-bright, you gotta know he did something right.

Speak Your Mind