bin sultan better known as bandar bush and vladimir putin back last july where apparently according to these leaked reports bandar bin sultan directly threatened in and russia with the expanded terror attacks if the attack on syria did not go ahead and as we know of course syrian military intervention by was put off the table earlier this year meaning that potentially this is sourcing back to the saudis it london that tongues were carried out by islamic radicals in your opinion is that the same case handle the ground. well of course the islamic radicals are the ones that tend to carry out these attacks but the ones that are directing funding fostering and training them tend to be elsewhere located elsewhere and of course we have for example the testimony of former f.b.i. whistle blower sabella edmonds talking about operation gladio b. earlier this year she was talking about how this this operation was a nato fund is an ongoing nato funded operation in cooperation with the pentagon to stir up islamic radical terrorism specifically in the north caucasus region and the surrounding area

pressure the saudi government for the rest of prince bandar bin sultan proof of rule nine eleven the tox see according to cia memos from two thousand and two there is incontrovertibly evidence the saudi government not only knew about the hijackers but helped them financially and just to create i first asked rosanna what the reason could be possibly for the u.s. government going after almost every other country except the one it knew was in part responsible. for all that's while before when i was on here with you we talked about m.k. ultra mind control and i said i may not have said it on your show but in a subsequent speech i did say what m.k. ultra mind control does is train people never to blame the guilty and stad to point the finger down more helpless and never oporto they guilty but you know i and people in america are just under that kind of mind control and it originates from congress and from our government you know that they don't want to get caught as their pocket and all the peoples. and this is just more of it i mean these people that what gets me about the ruled by psych

prince bandar was close personal friends with george w. bush senior and he was bone as bandar bush, and they had business dealings in the carlisle group. saudi arabia was an ally. we relied on them for oil, revealing the saudi connection would have been explosive and damaging to both the saudis and the bush administration. >> banda was a popular guy, speaking english beautifully, there are reports that money me may have sent from people that supported the hijackers. senators led by chuck schumer demanded that it be declassified, saying protecting the saudi arabia regime for for given to terrorists would be a mistake. do you think that the issue is that it's circumstantial evidence that's not enough to pin a sponsor of terrorism on the saudi state? >> you know, i have to believe if saudi arabia were not an alply, we would have found more reason to suggest it was a state sponsor terrorist attack. i think there is plenty of evidence, some circumstantial evidence. but it adds up to the least, members of the saudi arabia government were support

he was known as bandar bush. the business deals, and the carlisle group, and saudi arabia was an ally. we relied on them for oil. they revealed the saudi connection at that point would have been explosive and damaging administration. >> he was a popular guy, speaking english, and there are reports that some money he may have sent to people that may have supported the hijackers. a decade ago. 46 senator led by chuck schumer in new york demanded that he be classified at 28 pages. >> do you think that the issue is that it's circumstantial evidence that is not enough to really pin a sponsor of terrorism on the saudi state? >> you know, i have to believe if saudi arabia were not an ally, we would have found more than to suggest it was a state-sponsored terrorist attack. i think there is plenty of evidence. some of it may be circumstantial, but it adds up to the least, members of the saudi government were supporting hijackers and/or supporting the men i told you about from saudi arabia, were living in the united states

and bandar would call up at 3 p.m. and say i need to come over at 4. [laughter] and it used to annoy me a lot. why should they have this kind of access? but actually president bush once said he's not influencing me, i'm influencing him. you know, keep them close. this is how i get a message in an hour directly to the king. this is how i get a reply from the king. and it was, actually -- it worked. it worked. a little bit of discounting because you knew some piece of the message was bandar, not the king. basically, it worked. and i think i fully agree that i think tom donilon was for a while the point pan for the saudis. and finish man for the saudis. and the system had not been fixed so there's somebody whom they and we view as the key intermediary s. and that's very unfortunate, was we do want to influence them. even punching under their weight, they obviously have a lot ofen influence in, for example, syria. they have an active syria policy. they have a very active bahrain policy, and we want to maximize our own influence, and we're probably not doin

perhaps we shouldn't forget is what it pops back in august when it was widely reported that prince bandar the saudi head of intelligence i legit only made an offer to president putin to rein in these kind of attacks to stop these attacks if of course president putin were to agree more with saudi policy in respect of syria of course president putin has not gone along with assad to do mons and what naturally seen death for that there has been no effort by saudi arabia to rein in these kind of attacks but it may be that these attacks would take place anyway because of course this is part of a long ongoing situation of strife in relation to the caucasus region why aren't tight security measures and of course ahead of the olympics they are very tight across the country why aren't they enough to stop attacks like this what else can be done. there are a number of factors to consider here first of all one imagines that in such at the moment and increasingly so the security will be very very tight in terms of intelligence assets and fishers of physical security this means that if they are consider

. >> would you cite as evidence the statements by prince bandar in saudi arabia. >> absolutely. it was perceived as a direct slap to the united states. whether we perceive it that way is another question. so many countries around the world right now are having serious doubts about the u.s. you hear questions, i hear the questions. i hear them from indonesia. i hear them from the emirates. >> the questions are about america's willingness to lead and engage? >> america's commitment to them, commitment internationally. the articulation of a strategy national interest. these are foreign ministers i'm talking about. these are heads of state. even if you and i sit around this table and we actually think, the white house is creating a coherent strategy internationally and it does make sense, the fact that if it is not being perceived by these other countries, we have a problem. i do not believe it is just a communication issue. when bush put caring use in places, the idea was we could just explain ourselves. these countries just don't know what we really need. i cannot buy that. >> nor

resented it and dismissed qatar as ucp starts and even recently there was a tweet by the, by prince bandar of saudi arabia dismissing qatar as a country of 300 people and a tv station. of course the qatari foreign minister tweeted back, we raised our kids to be a lot more polite than others. so a twitter war of sorts ensued does sheikh amin and new crop of katari leaders have the same visceral resentment of the saudi behemoth? i don't know. i don't think wes,av know the ar to that. probably not. and,e but, again, i think we wil see the ultimate result of sheikh's stamp on qatari diplomacy, in a year or two still. so, we don't know yet. yes, sir? >> thank you, dr. kamrava, for a fascinating presentation. i'm a second year student for arab studies and i was wondering i have not had the pleasure of visiting qatar yet. i hope to soon one day. i was wondering if you were to advise another state on political reforms what type of advice do you think the katari system can give them. >> what kind of advice the qatari system would give to anotherld system on political reform? >> for, you know, seems

and as elliot was saying before about bandar and bush, it's best to lead them, guide them, influencethem. but at what point when the saudis are saying this, as elliot was describing, at what point are they right when they're talking about syria, when they're talking about iran? tsa either we need you as the superpower leading, or you're wrong on syria, you're wrong on iran. so how do we distinguish the noise from when they're correct? >> look, i mean, you could argue -- and they would certainly argue -- they're already right in this regard. and i would just respond this terms of, again, back to u.s. strategyingic interests and how, again, having a clear plan of how does this end and where does this go. if you wanted to go to an all-in strategy in a way that, again, i don't think -- it won't happen. i can almost say for certain just based on my own assessment. from the u.s. side. yeah. look, you look at sort of the fallout from what would have been a failed vote in congress, i think, on very limited strikes. so selling this case to the american public will require a fundamental change

you, you say that and would you cite as evidence, for example, you know, the statements by prince bandar in saudi arabia. >> absolutely. not joining the security council, not taking the seat was perceived by the saudis as a direct slap to the united states. whether we perceived it that way is another question. but certainly, so many countries around the world right now are having serious doubts about the u.s. you hear these questions, i hear these questions. i hear them from canada. i hear them from indonesia, i hear them from the emirates. i hear them from turkey. >> rose: and the questions are about america's willingness to lead to engage, and to take risks. >> america's commitment to them. america's commitment internationally. you know, america's articulation of its strategy national interest. these are foreign ministers i'm talking about, these are heads of state. these are significant folks so even if you and i sit around this table and think you know what, the white house is creating a coherent strategy internationally and it does make sense, the fact is that if it's not being effe