Lorie Van Auken: The (JICI) In Regards To Foreign Involvement In The 9/11 Attacks
By Lorie Van Auken (with a little help from Jon Gold)
5/6/2007
Recently, I took it upon myself to send 9/11 Family Member, Lorie Van Auken, an email:
Dear Mrs. Van Auken...
Quite honestly, I can't think of anyone better to ask this question to than you. What can you tell me about Pakistan's involvement in 9/11? Since I'm talking to you, a family member, someone that was a member of the Steering Committee, I don't think I mean that question as it sounds. Can you tell me about any experiences you had with Commissioner's about it? Or anyone for that matter. Robert Mueller for instance. I know all of the written word, but I never had the opportunities someone like you did if that makes any sense.
Also, with your permission, I would like to post your response.
Thank you very much.
Sincerest Regards,
Jon Gold
Most of us in the 9/11 Truth Movement know the "facts", but people like Mrs. Van Auken "experienced" them. She was one of the "Jersey Girls", a member of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee. She attended every 9/11 Commission Hearing, and was instrumental in supplying them the questions they were SUPPOSED to answer.
According to 9/11 Commission Chairman, Thomas Kean, "They monitor us, they follow our progress, they've supplied us with some of the best questions we've asked. I doubt very much if we would be in existence without them."
One of the reasons I couldn't think of anyone "better to ask this question to" than Mrs. Van Auken was because of this paragraph from a Washington Times article (sorry, the source link is dead):
"On May 15, 2003, a group of 9/11 victims' relatives met with the commission co-chairman Thomas Kean and other senior staff and submitted a list of questions, which included a mention of Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed. A June 17, 2004, the New York Times reported that Lorie Van Auken, whose husband died in the World Trade Center, was "irate" that the June 16 commission narrative of the 9/11 attacks did not even mention the allegation about Ahmed's role in the $100,000 transfer to Mohammed Atta. Clearly, the ISI link is no mere conspiracy theory."
I am extremely grateful to Mrs. Van Auken, for being able to post the following reply from her:
Hi Jon,
Your question regarding Pakistan is quite complicated, and so my answer will be somewhat long and complex. I really couldn't answer this quickly and without thinking about what needed to be included to make it a thorough response.
Before I begin to answer, I want to make sure that it is understood that the JICI (the Joint Inquiry Into The Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001) was the first investigation that was conducted by Congress into the "intelligence failures" of 9/11. The 9/11 Commission was mandated to pick up where the JICI investigation left off.
1. The question of Pakistan's possible involvement in the attacks of 9/11 has come up many times over the course of the past five and a half years. The petition that Mindy Kleinberg, Patty Casazza, Monica Gabrielle and I have posted online includes the line that "we again call for the declassification and release of the redacted 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry Into The Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 (JICI)... "
One key reason that we have asked for those 28 pages to be declassified is that on page 395 of the JICI report is the finding: [through its investigation, the Joint Inquiry developed information suggesting specific sources of foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers while they were in the United States. The Joint Inquiry's review confirmed that the Intelligence Community also has information, much of which has yet to be independently verified, concerning these potential sources of support... ]
What do they mean by "support"? Are they referring to "financial support"? And what countries participated that alleged "supporting"?
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/congress/july-dec02/intelligence_12-11.html
December 11, 2003, on PBS's NewsHour Senator Graham (who chaired the Joint Intelligence Committee) said "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."
Is Pakistan mentioned in those pages? Is Saudi Arabia mentioned? Are there any other foreign governments mentioned? If so, what was their involvement?
Did Pakistan financially support any of what occurred on 9/11, and is that information included within the 28 redacted pages?
Since those pages are blank in the JICI report we still do not know what information has been hidden from us for all of this time.
We do know that soon after the 9/11 report was published, Saudi foreign minister Prince Saud al-Faisal flew to Washington and challenged President Bush to release the redacted portion.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/07/30/world/main565782.shtml
"After the report was released last Thursday, Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan issued a statement saying that "28 blanked-out pages are being used by some to malign our country and our people."
"Saudi Arabia has nothing to hide. We can deal with questions in public, but we cannot respond to blank pages," he said.
Citing those comments, Senator Graham said Bandar "has joined in asking that the pages be declassified."
2. On the FSC's questioning of the 9/11 Commissioners and Pakistan's possible role:
http://911independentcommission.org/questions.html
The Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Commission (of which I was a member), includes the following questions which pertain to Pakistan, in our section of questions for the 9/11 Commissioners to answer regarding Al Qaeda and State Sponsored Terrorism dated July 2003, we wrote the following:
22) On the issue of state sponsored terrorism:
It is commonly known that if you "follow the money" oftentimes a case can be solved. The 9/11 Commission did not follow this money trail which led from Lt. General Mahmood Ahmed to Saeed Sheikh and finally to lead 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta. Why not?
End Part I
By Lorie Van Auken (with a little help from Jon Gold)
5/6/2007
Recently, I took it upon myself to send 9/11 Family Member, Lorie Van Auken, an email:
Dear Mrs. Van Auken...
Quite honestly, I can't think of anyone better to ask this question to than you. What can you tell me about Pakistan's involvement in 9/11? Since I'm talking to you, a family member, someone that was a member of the Steering Committee, I don't think I mean that question as it sounds. Can you tell me about any experiences you had with Commissioner's about it? Or anyone for that matter. Robert Mueller for instance. I know all of the written word, but I never had the opportunities someone like you did if that makes any sense.
Also, with your permission, I would like to post your response.
Thank you very much.
Sincerest Regards,
Jon Gold
Most of us in the 9/11 Truth Movement know the "facts", but people like Mrs. Van Auken "experienced" them. She was one of the "Jersey Girls", a member of the 9/11 Family Steering Committee. She attended every 9/11 Commission Hearing, and was instrumental in supplying them the questions they were SUPPOSED to answer.
According to 9/11 Commission Chairman, Thomas Kean, "They monitor us, they follow our progress, they've supplied us with some of the best questions we've asked. I doubt very much if we would be in existence without them."
One of the reasons I couldn't think of anyone "better to ask this question to" than Mrs. Van Auken was because of this paragraph from a Washington Times article (sorry, the source link is dead):
"On May 15, 2003, a group of 9/11 victims' relatives met with the commission co-chairman Thomas Kean and other senior staff and submitted a list of questions, which included a mention of Lt. Gen. Mahmoud Ahmed. A June 17, 2004, the New York Times reported that Lorie Van Auken, whose husband died in the World Trade Center, was "irate" that the June 16 commission narrative of the 9/11 attacks did not even mention the allegation about Ahmed's role in the $100,000 transfer to Mohammed Atta. Clearly, the ISI link is no mere conspiracy theory."
I am extremely grateful to Mrs. Van Auken, for being able to post the following reply from her:
Hi Jon,
Your question regarding Pakistan is quite complicated, and so my answer will be somewhat long and complex. I really couldn't answer this quickly and without thinking about what needed to be included to make it a thorough response.
Before I begin to answer, I want to make sure that it is understood that the JICI (the Joint Inquiry Into The Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001) was the first investigation that was conducted by Congress into the "intelligence failures" of 9/11. The 9/11 Commission was mandated to pick up where the JICI investigation left off.
1. The question of Pakistan's possible involvement in the attacks of 9/11 has come up many times over the course of the past five and a half years. The petition that Mindy Kleinberg, Patty Casazza, Monica Gabrielle and I have posted online includes the line that "we again call for the declassification and release of the redacted 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry Into The Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001 (JICI)... "
One key reason that we have asked for those 28 pages to be declassified is that on page 395 of the JICI report is the finding: [through its investigation, the Joint Inquiry developed information suggesting specific sources of foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers while they were in the United States. The Joint Inquiry's review confirmed that the Intelligence Community also has information, much of which has yet to be independently verified, concerning these potential sources of support... ]
What do they mean by "support"? Are they referring to "financial support"? And what countries participated that alleged "supporting"?
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/congress/july-dec02/intelligence_12-11.html
December 11, 2003, on PBS's NewsHour Senator Graham (who chaired the Joint Intelligence Committee) said "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."
Is Pakistan mentioned in those pages? Is Saudi Arabia mentioned? Are there any other foreign governments mentioned? If so, what was their involvement?
Did Pakistan financially support any of what occurred on 9/11, and is that information included within the 28 redacted pages?
Since those pages are blank in the JICI report we still do not know what information has been hidden from us for all of this time.
We do know that soon after the 9/11 report was published, Saudi foreign minister Prince Saud al-Faisal flew to Washington and challenged President Bush to release the redacted portion.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/07/30/world/main565782.shtml
"After the report was released last Thursday, Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan issued a statement saying that "28 blanked-out pages are being used by some to malign our country and our people."
"Saudi Arabia has nothing to hide. We can deal with questions in public, but we cannot respond to blank pages," he said.
Citing those comments, Senator Graham said Bandar "has joined in asking that the pages be declassified."
2. On the FSC's questioning of the 9/11 Commissioners and Pakistan's possible role:
http://911independentcommission.org/questions.html
The Family Steering Committee for the 9/11 Commission (of which I was a member), includes the following questions which pertain to Pakistan, in our section of questions for the 9/11 Commissioners to answer regarding Al Qaeda and State Sponsored Terrorism dated July 2003, we wrote the following:
22) On the issue of state sponsored terrorism:
- Why did Mahmood Ahmed, Director of Pakistan's secret service, the (ISI) order Saeed Sheikh to wire $100,000 to hijacker Mohamed Atta?
- What was Mahmood Ahmed's relationship with Al Qaeda?
- Where did the money come from?
- Did officials in Pakistan know in advance about the terrorist attack?
- On September 11th , Mahmood Ahmed had a breakfast meeting in Washington, D.C., with House and Senate Intelligence Committee chairmen, Rep. Porter Goss and Senator Bob Graham. What were they discussing?
It is commonly known that if you "follow the money" oftentimes a case can be solved. The 9/11 Commission did not follow this money trail which led from Lt. General Mahmood Ahmed to Saeed Sheikh and finally to lead 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta. Why not?
End Part I