[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I'm sick of the media calling them hijackers! They were rabid Muslim scum out to severely damage American infrastructure our financial center, the Pentagon, and either Congress or the White House. When the hell will our politicians wake up and realize they are NOT our allies! They are Wahabi Muslims who wish to turn the entire world into an Islamic Caliphate. [/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]A former Republican member of the 9/11 commission, breaking dramatically with the commissions leaders, said Wednesday he believes there was clear evidence that Saudi government employees were part of a support network for the 9/11 hijackers and that the Obama administration should move quickly to declassify a long-secret congressional report on Saudi ties to the 2001 terrorist attack.[/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, serif]With much more @ http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/12/911-commission-saudi-arabia-hijackers and I'm certain there are many more similar reports[/FONT]
There were no hijackers. 9/11 was an inside job. The US government planned and carried it out. The proof is crushing. September 11 -- The New Pearl Harbor (FULL) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXA-enq65ng Explosives Technician - Loader - AE911Truth.org https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5IgqJXyLbg ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS FOR 911 TRUTH (full unreleased version) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-V1CiuGMJo Architects & Engineers - Solving the Mystery of WTC 7 - AE911Truth.org https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMEHc14IWf4 Was the 9-11 Attack the 2001 Version of "Operation Northwoods"? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIoK9wvJyyU Operation Northwoods document https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JFku_mDwbsE There are plausible motives. 9/11 False Flag Conspiracy - Finally Solved (Names, Connections, Motives) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAAztWC5sT8 http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/new-american-century/ http://www.globalresearch.ca/search?q=lithium http://www.globalresearch.ca/search?q=iraq+oil&x=13&y=15 http://www.globalresearch.ca/iran-s...in-march-us-dollar-crisis-on-the-horizon/1937 NEW 2015! Solving 9/11 Christopher Bollyn Live in Dallas TX Feb 12, 2015 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EVHstSrC1CQ People who still believe the official story should check this info out. Why Can't They See The Truth? Psychologists Help 9 11 Truth Deniers http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Xzmprkpxac http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/821-why-do-good-people-become-silentor-worseabout-911-.html People who promote the no-plane theory or the mini-nuke theory are government plants trying to discredit the truth movement. Real truthers don't believe in those theories. provocateurs,shills and disinfo agents https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYedTmaHt1A (7:20 time mark)
I definitely believe some Saudi Arabian officials were involved. That being said, it's also obvious that some -American- officials were involved. I know that diplomats generally have "diplomatic immunity", but in something as big as 9/11, I think an exception could have been made. Instead: "The diplomat, Fahad al-Thumairy, who was deported from the US but was never charged with a crime, was suspected of involvement in a support network for two Saudi hijackers who had lived in San Diego the year before the attacks." (Source: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/may/12/911-commission-saudi-arabia-hijackers) Who decided to simply deport him? Why has this flown below the radar until now? Nor was he the only one that was let go. There is, ofcourse, the fact that a plane load of Bin Laden family members were flown out of the U.S. while most planes were still grounded. None of them were even questioned. (Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bin-laden-family-evacuated/ ) Why? And moving on from arabs into israeli territory, why were the 5 'dancing israelies' released: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html Finally, as to the hijackers themselves, many were reported still alive and claiming to have nothing to do with 9/11: http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/hijackers.html
Really? Even the -mainstream- news thinks this is important. Here's an article from Saturday from someone who has already read the 28 pages: http://nypost.com/2016/05/14/ive-read-the-missing-pages-of-the-911-report-you-should-be-able-to-too/ Bernie Sanders has had something to say about the Saudis as well: http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/04/17/bernie-sanders-us-cant-be-blackmailed-saudi-arabia Even Hillary is for allowing Americans to sue the Saudi government: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wor...arabia-threat-u-s-revealing-article-1.2604613
There's something that stinks to high heaven in OCT land (besides the OCT that is). It has been known for years that there's allegations that the Saudis financed the alleged hijackers and that most of them were Saudi nationals. And the redacted 28 pages were also known about for many years. What wasn't known until the last couple of years was that the FBI withheld some 27 boxes of documents from their PENTTBOM "investigation" from Congress and the 9/11 Commission and lied and told both they gave them everything they had. A federal judge has been reviewing about 80,000 pages of those documents for the last couple of years with no timetable as to when that would be completed. The documents allegedly connect the Saudis to 9/11. But the point is why has this all of a sudden flared up in the MSM. I know there's a pending lawsuit by the 9/11 families where the judge dismissed it on the bogus grounds of sovereign immunity. That's completely bogus (and criminal) because it protects potential foreign enemies who may have been involved in war crimes against the US. Protecting the enemy is clearly treason as described by Article III Section 3 of the Constitution. In any case regardless, there's no reason whatsoever to coverup those 28 pages regardless of what they contain. In fact the only reason to coverup anything about 9/11 is to protect the criminals, which is criminal complicity and treason in itself.
Hey Blues63... You chickened out and disappeared on this other thread because you were checkmated. http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=452072&page=15&p=1066163607#post1066163607 Sincere truth-seekers don't get checkmated; they modify their opinions when they see they're mistaken. You're obviously not a sincere truth-seeker. Why are you posting with the attitude that you still have credibility?
And? I still don't understand the fuss over this as it is not a secret. The hijackers were Saudi nationals; UBL was a 'disowned' member of the Saudi royal family, and there is little doubt that he received funding from the 'upper echelons' of the Saudi government. Whether they were aware of funding the 9/11 attack is another story. Much ado about nothing and it's just more political game playing.
No, you refused to make your point(s), so I'm ignoring your taunts. I hope that helps your understanding, for I'm not chasing you down rabbit holes if you can't articulate your point. Remember, you have the burden of proof, not me. I know 9/11 truth doesn't understand the processes of logical discourse, but I refuse to make it my problem when it clearly isn't.
All thru 2003 the Saudis asked for the 28 redacted pages to be released so they could defend themselves from these stupid allegations. Bush told them he couldn't because it would compromised US intelligence assets... and of course leaving us in the dark allowed him to hint over and over again that Saddam was involved so he could invade Iraq. The Saudis had nothing to do with 9-11. They had nothing to gain, but OBL wanted the attack to have a Saudi face to create conflict between us and our oldest ally in the ME.. So you have a lot of nincompoops who are accusing the Saudis and backing the terrorist agenda.
Well then if that's true I guess they changed their minds because now they're threatening economic damage if they're declassified. And you know this because? According to those who read them, they claim there's no reason for those 28 pages to have been and to remain classified. I believe they are in a better position to know than you. According to the OCT, most of the alleged hijackers were Saudis and according to those in a position to know, the Saudis financed the alleged hijackers. So that leaves your claim where exactly? Are you calling the 9/11 families who are attempting to sue the Saudi government for the murder or their loved ones on 9/11 "nincompoops who are accusing the Saudis and backing the terrorist agenda"? That's pretty audaciously disrespectful of you.
From post 39. You're not going to impress any viewers who take the time to look at what's being discussed. http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=452072&page=15&p=1066163607#post1066163607 All you have to do is click on the link and go to the time mark to see the point explained. It would take me ten minutes to copy what the guy says so why should I do that just so you'll acknowledge that a point is being made. You're avoiding the issue because it's one of those points that's too clear for you pro-official version posters to try to obfuscate without looking silly. A lot of viewers are clicking on the link and listening to the truther argument. You're not convincing them that the argument is invalid by demanding that I reiterate what the guy in the video says before you'll recognize that a good argument for an inside job is being made. This is turning out to be a good study in sophistry tactics. I'm waiting for your response.
You're not going to impress any viewers by being evasive. All you have to do is state your point. It would take you ten minutes to state your point? Then do it. Big deal. You're avoiding the issue because you know that the points won't stand up to scrutiny. LOLOL You're not convincing me that the argument is valid by refusing to state your points. This is turning out to be a good study in truther evasive tactics. I'm waiting for your case to be stated. In all this time you could have posted your points, but no, you've ranted and bloviated instead. Here's a thing: start a thread on your subject, and state your case clearly and concisely. I'm waiting for your response.
I have posted links to their requests for over a decade, Ron. On the other hand, there are some who say the pages should be released because they don’t implicate the Saudis. That includes the Saudis themselves: Back in 2003, then–Saudi ambassador Prince Bandar bin Sultan said that “Saudi Arabia has nothing to hide” and the redacted allegations “could not be substantiated.” Democratic California Rep. Adam Schiff said this year that “the issues raised in those pages were investigated by the 9/11 Commission and found to be unsubstantiated” and says he would like to see them released to defuse the controversy surrounding their existence. The 9/11 Commission’s director, Philip Zelikow, doesn’t appear to have taken a public stance on the pages’ release, but he told Lawrence Wright that they amount to “an agglomeration of preliminary, unvetted reports.” The 9/11 Commission’s official report says it ultimately “found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials individually funded [al-Qaida].” http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...classified_pages_of_congress_9_11_report.html Why hasn’t the section about Saudi Arabia been made public? It’s an executive branch decision. President Bush said that the redacted section would reveal “sources and methods that would make it harder for us to win the war on terror.” It's also assumed that the information was withheld in part to avoid embarrassing a country with which the U.S. has a longstanding and controversial military, intelligence, and economic alliance.
Oops! Senate approves Sept. 11 legislation despite Saudi threats The Senate passed legislation Tuesday that would allow families of Sept. 11 victims to sue the government of Saudi Arabia despite a White House veto threat and fierce objections from the U.S. ally. ... Schumer was confident the Senate had the 67 votes to override a presidential veto. http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/se...tion-despite-saudi-threats/ar-BBta6rK?ocid=sf
(*)(*)(*)(*) the Saudi govt., (*)(*)(*)(*) the Saudi royal family. they allowed terrorists to fund raise almost unimpeded.
The SAG declared AQ a terrorist outfit in 1994. I hope they will release the redacted pages.. I think we're all in for a big surprise. meanwhile, U.S. DISTRICT COURT RULES IRAN BEHIND 9/11 ATTACKS December 23, 2011 A federal district court in Manhattan yesterday entered a historic ruling that reveals new facts about Iran's support of al Qaeda in the 9/11 attacks. U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels ruled yesterday that Iran and Hezbollah materially and directly supported al Qaeda in the September 11, 2001 attacks and are legally responsible for damages to hundreds of family members of 9/11 victims who are plaintiffs in the case. http://www.iran911case.com/
the Saudis lent a blind eye to terrorist fundraising in their lands. they hampered terrorism investigations in their lands. at the very least, they helped make 9-11 possible. at worst, high members of the saudi royal family were directly involved.
Isn't it funny how everyone seems to know what is in these pages? So much for them being classified. LOLOL
Yep and some court in NY laid 9-11 on Iran, U.S. DISTRICT COURT RULES IRAN BEHIND 9/11 ATTACKS December 23, 2011 http://www.iran911case.com/ A federal district court in Manhattan yesterday entered a historic ruling that reveals new facts about Iran's support of al Qaeda in the 9/11 attacks. U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels ruled yesterday that Iran and Hezbollah materially and directly supported al Qaeda in the September 11, 2001 attacks and are legally responsible for damages to hundreds of family members of 9/11 victims who are plaintiffs in the case.
I tend to agree with you to a point, however, I don't believe the Saudi government sanctioned the attacks. Having said that, I do believe in the possibility of funding coming from Wahhabi jihadis, and wealthy sympathisers. If there is a possibility, it should be investigated as long as it doesn't turn into a witch hunt.
