9/11 victims’ families outraged over alleged Saudi official involvement

(NewsNation) — Terry Strada, who lost her husband during 9/11, is among victims’ family members are outraged over alleged Saudi government involvement in 9/11 planning.

“We now know that the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was deeply involved,” Strada claimed Friday on “CUOMO,” referencing a newly released video of alleged 9/11 evidence.

9/11 Justice founder Brett Eagleson, a victim’s son, says the video is “damning” evidence in a civil suit against Saudi Arabia, filed by family members of people killed in the terrorist attack.

The video released Friday shows an alleged Saudi intelligence official casing the U.S. Capitol around the same time al-Qaida was planning the 2001 attacks.

Investigators working with 9/11 Families United sent NewsNation the video after a judge released it by court order. It has been referenced in a civil lawsuit against Saudi Arabia from victims’ families, a legal pursuit that aims to hold the kingdom liable for its alleged role in 9/11.

The Saudi government maintains that the video is nothing more than a tourist video of Washington, D.C. Former CIA and FBI official Phil Mudd also weighed in on “CUOMO” and said the video is significant but not evidence. 

Eagleson believes this video is a clear indication of Saudi government involvement.

“The evidence is overwhelming. They can no longer hide. Let’s end this debate. Let’s end this cat and mouse game,” Eagleson said on NewsNation’s “Elizabeth Vargas Reports” Friday. “There’s words of semantics. The Saudis did it. We have the evidence; how much more do we need?”

Eagleson said the video shows the man creating a “runway” to the U.S. Capitol in between the Smithsonian National Museum and the Washington Monument.

“It is just bone-chilling stuff,” he said.

A newly obtained letter from the Department of Justice and FBI to the judge presiding over the case asks for the video to remain sealed.

“In the FBI’s view, it is not appropriate to seek a blanket Privacy Act order unsealing a large collection of documents before the FBI has had the opportunity to review them. The materials cited in the PECs’ filings, including their 564-page averment, and the documents marked at depositions are voluminous, and they implicate a wide range of privacy interests and information of varying levels of potential relevance to the matters at issue in the pending motions,” the letter states.

“Moreover, while the majority of the redactions identified through the FBI’s review to date have been subject to the Privacy Act, the FBI has a broader law enforcement interest in avoiding wholesale public disclosure of the personally identifying information of U.S. persons who were witnesses or of investigative interest in FBI investigations.”

Victims’ family members, like Eagleson, are pushing for the FBI to make public all requested evidence. More than two decades is enough to decide what must stay classified, they claim.

“Every member of Congress tonight should be standing in solidarity with us,” Eagleson said. “It was the members of our community who died.”