The long-awaited 28 secret pages from the Congressional Joint Inquiry into the 9/11 Commission report were released on Friday, indicating that the alleged hijackers may have been in contact and supported by individuals connected to the Saudi Arabian government.

The declassified documents were published by the US House Intelligence Committee and confirm the suspicions that have brewed since the pages were made classified that Saudi officials played a role in the New York City terror attacks.

“While in the United States, some of the September 11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support or assistance from, individuals who may be connected to the Saudi Government,” the report reads. “There is information, primarily from FBI sources, that at least two of those individuals were alleged by some to be Saudi intelligence officers.”









The report continues:

The Joint Inquiry’s review confirmed that the Intelligence Community also has information, much of which has yet to be independently verified, indicating that individuals associated with the Saudi Government in the United States may have other ties to al-Qa-ida and other terrorist groups. The FBI and CIA have informed the Joint Inquiry that, since the September 11 attacks, they are treating the Saudi issue seriously, but both still have only a limited understanding of the Saudi Government’s ties to terrorist elements.

Kevin Ryan of Dig Within reports:

The 28 pages say a lot about two men—Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama Bassnan. The pages hint at the idea that Al-Bayoumi and Bassnan, who sponsored some of the alleged hijackers in the U.S., were Saudi intelligence agents or assets. Although this is not new, the pages also mention that both of them worked closely with the Saudi Arabian Cultural Mission (SACM). That should bring investigators back to the WTC security company Stratesec, which held its annual meetings in SACM offices.*** The pages also reveal that, “several Saudi Naval officers were in contact with the September 11th hijackers.”

The pages serve to reinforce some information that was readily available about suspicions of Saudi involvement in 9/11 but they do nothing to put to rest the controversy surrounding the implausible official story given to the American public and the collapse of the towers that many experts argue could not have happened solely from the impact of airliners.

Questions still remain as to why WTC building number 7 fell when no plane had hit the building and was only infected with mild office fires.

The 28 Pages do nothing to explain the contradiction between the official explanation of how the towers fell and how they actually fell on the morning of 9/11.

The American public was told by the 9/11 Commission to believe that the buildings collapsed under gravity from structural failure due mainly to fires initiated by the impacts of the airplanes.

But as many experts have pointed out, this is highly unlikely considering the spread of debris that occurred in a massive radius around the towers and the obvious pulverization of the buildings’ make-up.

“Large multi-ton beams were hurled hundreds of yards laterally, gravity works vertically not laterally,” explains Jody Gibbs, a 35-year architect and member of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

The thousands of experts with Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth are quick to point out that the manner in which the WTC buildings fell and the ejections of pieces of the buildings exhibit all the signs of a demolition.







In the video above you can see these experts’ testimonies of how they believe the official story given to the public is bogus.

Take into consideration what then-governor of New York George Pataki had to say at Ground Zero shortly after the towers fell.

“The concrete (of the towers) was pulverized,” Pataki told CNN.

The core structure of the World Trade Center Twin Towers was a steel reinforced, cast concrete, tubular core.

“And I was down here on Tuesday, and it’s like you were on a foreign planet,” the Governor continued. “All of lower Manhattan, not just this site, from river to river there was dust powder 2-3 inches thick. The concrete was just pulverized.”

Does that sound like a result of a gravitational collapse?

If jet fuel cannot melt steel beams, then why was there a presence of molten steel during and after the collapse of the Twin Towers?

Despite the denials by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) that molten steel was found during and after the towers’ destruction, eyewitnesses have said on record hat they did indeed see molten steel when inside the buildings.

Reports also said that molten steel was present at Ground Zero after the buildings had fallen.

Visual evidence of molten steel pouring out the side of the towers also counters NIST’s claim.

As two-decade-long chemical engineer, Robert Kim Ireland, explains that “jet fuel, which is essential kerosene, is not capable of melting steel nor iron.”

Kerosene or jet fuel burns at less than 1600 degree Fahrenheit, while molten steel needs at least 2700 degrees Fahrenheit in order to melt.

Since jet fuel is not capable of melting the steel beams which made up the towers, experts have pointed to the use of thermite to bring down the buildings.

NIST’s blatant lies that no molten steel was present, and the fact jet fuel can not cause the liquid steel which poured out the side of the damaged WTCs, should open every American’s eye to the false “official story” that they were fed.







The Smoking Gun: WTC 7’s Collapse

The collapse of WTC number 7 has long been called the smoking gun that proves the official story of 9/11 to be false.

According to the official explanation of the collapse, the building fell due to office fires. This would be the first time in history that a steel high-rise building collapsed due to fire.

But as this video shows, experts have blown it wide open that it was impossible for the high rise to collapse in the manner it did due to the fire damage that it had sustained.

According to experts with Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, WTC 7 fell into its own footprint at free-fall speed. Meaning that it fell with no resistance.

The official explanation violates the fundamental law of a physics as the structures below the point the building began to fall would have to cease to exist in order to validate the theory.

All of the information above begs the question: Were the buildings rigged to come down in a controlled demolition?

It is obvious that WTC 7 did not fall due to fire and had all the hallmarks of a controlled demolition.

The presence of molten steel and the obvious pulverization of towers 1 and 2 make a clear statement that the planes were not the sole culprit in the destruction of the towers.

The release of the 28 pages might be a step forward in bringing justice to those who were behind what happened on 9/11 but they distract from some very serious questions surrounding the collapse of the buildings.

(Related Reading: Exploring Nuclear 9/11 With An Open And Rational Mind)