Relatives of 9\/11 victims are asking members of Congress to press FBI Director Kash Patel at a House hearing on Wednesday to release files related to any potential Saudi government ties to the attackers, family members say.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A recent ruling by a federal judge in New York has given families new hope that their decades-long effort to get more information regarding any possible Saudi government link to the attack.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
U.S. District Judge George Daniels ruled on August 28th that the families\u2019 claims were strong enough for their landmark civil case to go to trial. The judge also rejected a Saudi government request to dismiss the case.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cI would love to hear someone acknowledge we had this monumental decision from the judge,\u201d said Terry Strada, national chair of 9\/11 Families United, a group that has advocated for years for more information from the U.S. government regarding potential Saudi ties to the 9\/11 attacks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Strada, whose husband Tom was killed in the North Tower of the World Trade Center and raised their three children, hailed the ruling.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cBecause of this lawsuit we now know there was critical evidence in the hands of the FBI within days of the attacks,\u201d Strada told NBC News. \u201cIt was never properly analyzed or shared with the 9\/11 commission.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Strada said she plans to attend the House Judiciary Committee hearing on Wednesday where Patel will testify. She urged committee members to ask the FBI director to commit to reviewing a 2018 subpoena request by the families\u2019 attorneys, a Biden executive order and releasing \u201call of the documents the FBI to this date has yet to provide.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Mark Hansen, a lawyer at Kellogg, Hansen, Todd, Figel & Frederick, the firm representing Saudi Arabia, did not respond to a request for comment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The families say they hope to hold Saudi Arabia accountable for what they view as growing evidence of Saudi involvement in the run-up to the attacks that killed over 3,000 people 24 years ago.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In his ruling, Judge Daniels cited evidence the families has unearthed so far from the FBI, as well as what they see as critical evidence seized by the Metropolitan Police in the United Kingdom shortly after the attacks.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Two Saudi nationals<\/strong><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The ruling centered on the two Saudi nationals, Omar Al-Bayoumi and Fahad Al-Thumairy, whom federal investigators had linked to two 9\/11 hijackers Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar. Al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar had no ties to the U.S. and spoke little English.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Saudi officials have previously said Bayoumi lived in California and was an accountant. He was the focus of years of investigation by the FBI\u2019s San Diego field office because of his association with al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi prior to the attack, FBI documents have shown.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Judge Daniels wrote in his ruling that the families and their attorneys, \u201chave furnished sufficient evidence to raise questions as to the true nature of Bayoumi and Thumairy\u2019s employment with [Saudi government], which is at the heart of the parties\u2019 dispute.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Thumairy was employed by Saudi Arabia as the Imam of the King Fahad Mosque in Los Angeles, FBI and court records show. \u201cWhen viewed as a whole, the total evidence creates a reasonable inference that their employment was more than what their official job titles suggest,\u201d the judge wrote.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Judge Daniels said that Bayoumi provided \u201cmaterial assistance\u201d that helped Al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi and settle in the United States in 2000 and was acquainted with propagandist and recruiter Anwar Al-Awlaki.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cHis general activity was inconsistent with his official employment title, and his educational pursuits in the U.S.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Judge Daniels also noted that when the hijackers settled into San Diego \u201cthere was a significant increase in Bayoumi\u2019s salary paid” by the Saudi government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n He also said that the Saudi government and Bayoumi “failed to provide a plausible explanation as to why this much increase occurred at this particular time period.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Daniels also found that lawyers representing Saudi Arabia, \u201cfailed to rebut the logical inference that the pay raise could be related to the assistance Bayoumi provided to the hijackers at the time.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The judge also noted frequent phone calls between Thumairy, Bayoumi, and an Imam in San Diego. Regarding Bayoumi and Thumairy, Daniels wrote, \u201ctheir employment with [the Saudi government] likely had some connection with assisting the hijackers.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n