Posted on 11/16/2014 7:35:06 PM PST by qaz123
A jihadist serving life in prison on terror charges brought in the wake of 9/11 has claimed the Saudi Arabian royal family helped finance the plot. Zacarias Moussaoui, 46, says an unnamed Saudi Prince paid for flying lessons for him and the 19 terrorists who hijacked planes in the September 11 attacks in the run-up to the atrocities.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2837261/Saudi-prince-paid-9-11-pilots-learn-fly-Incredible-claims-20th-hijacker-serving-life-prison-terrorism-asks-testify-court.html#ixzz3JIFO3rer
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
So you’re saying there isn’t any radical Muslims amongst the Saudi royalty?
Pilot and Flight Instructor say NO WAY!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SamPf2ZhHu0
Seung Hui Cho was South Korean. He was not an American citizen. 9/11 was no more an attack by Saudi Arabia than Seung Hui Cho's massacre was an attack by South Korea.
NILA SAGADEVAN: 9/11-The Impossibility of Flying Heavy Aircraft Without Training
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/08/13/nila-sagadevan-911-the-impossibility-of-flying-heavy-aircraft-without-training/
So the fact that 15 of the 19 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia has nothing do with it???? Yeah and Japan had NOTHING to do with Pearl Harbor.
ROTFLMAO!
BTW, the 9-11 attacks were wildly celebrated within Saudi Arabia. People were high-fiving each other. The KSA should have received about a dozen nukes on after 9-11. Instead we get George Bush Junior tongue kissing the old pervert Saudi King, followed by Obama bowing to him.
[ Our “Friends” the Saudis.
ISIS can have it for all I care.]
PS: Shorty after that, Israel can turn it into a glass parking lot.
The UK viewed Germany as an enemy, and the US did indeed help defeat Germany in the UK's behalf. Yet the only money flow was from the US to the UK. The Saudi royals did not need to pay us any money to take Saddam out - we needed to do it to prevent him from attempting to re-assemble the unitary Arab empires of the medieval era. Yet they paid us. Our problem isn't with the leadership of allied Muslim countries - it's with their people, a great many of whom would love to see us converted to Islam or killed to the last man, woman and child.
Like I said, it is not necessarily us paying them in oil money and arming them the problem, it is our own disarming political correctness.
These people have the narcissist mentality of annointing themselves through their religion.
And those members of the Saudi royals were killed. I don't doubt that that the Saudi populace celebrated 9/11. These are the Saudi subjects bin Laden was counting on to overthrow the royals and put him in charge. Bin Laden was a king-in-waiting waiting for his main chance and throwing various things at the wall (including the Cole bombing and 9/11) to help things along.
We had better hope the Saudi royal family holds up. The alternative, a Saudi Arabia (renamed something else to remove its association with the al Saud family) ruled by al Qaeda with universal popular support is unthinkable. It would be ISIS with the world's largest oil reserves.
“The Saudi populace are Islamists closer to Bin Laden’s beliefs (that global conquest is the immediate duty of every Muslim) than those of the royals ...”
That understanding is why the Saudi Royals created Wahhabism - to export as much of that inbred viloence as possible. Now, via ISIS, it is comming back to bite them - worse, there are likely numerous Saudi Royals who support ISIS ...
Makes no sense. They might share ISIS's beliefs vis-a-vis the proper role of Islam in the world, but that's like saying Democrats and Republicans both believe in the Constitution. The question isn't what beliefs they share, but who gets to be in charge. Even the junior branches of the al-Saud clan aren't gonna risk being associated with the charismatic leaders of ISIS. Because an ISIS victory means the extermination of the al-Saud clan.
Note that the liquidation of defeated ruling families if ISIS wins is purely pragmatic. ISIS’s leadership needs to reward their fighting men with money, land and earthly goods, and the easiest way to do this while offending the fewest number of natives is to seize the property of the richest in the land and kill them all. This is why only the dumbest members of the al-Saud clan will cooperate with ISIS.
Nothing in Islam make sense ...
I'd disagree. Allied Muslim leaders slam us in public while cooperating with us in private. They know which way is up. The problem they have is populations that despise us for being infidels. That's why they have to badmouth us in public - to inoculate themselves from the charge of being American stooges.
The Shah got a little too close to the US and was toppled as a result. The Pakistani government is cooperating with the US on drone strikes. We couldn't mount them if the government objected. Drones are sitting ducks for the most basic gun-armed jet fighters, let alone SAM's. And we can't really get the human intelligence needed for targeting purposes if the Pakistani government chooses to stand in our way.
Bottom line is that bin Laden mounted a false flag attack (suggesting that the Saudi royals organized it) to get the US to topple the al Saud family and attack Saudi Arabia. That way, bin Laden could have a shot at getting 1b Muslims to rally around him in a jihad against the US.
Islam, not the politics, the socalled religion makes no sense.
Is it not true that not everyone that lives in the KSA has a fleet of Bentley’s and Ferraris. The KSA has their share of poor as well. After all, who cleans out the trash and takes your police report.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.