Posted on 04/19/2015 5:23:00 PM PDT by Arthur McGowan
9/11 COVER-UP? The latest claim isn’t from conspiracy theorists--it’s from a former top US Senator. He says documents prove Saudi Arabia helped pull off the attacks, and that the FBI hid the truth. Shep has details:
You’ve never before seen a story on the telly that was later retracted because it was untrue?
Al Qaeda’s:
Leadership
Personnel
Funding
Ideology
Was virtually all 100% Saudi on 9/11. Al Qaeda at that moment was indistinguishable from a plausibly deniable arm of the Saudi Government.
Sure, they kept arms-length. But that would be the POINT of plausible deniability.
That the blowback singed the Kingdom meant the Deniable part became critical.
The Saudis fund Wahabbism, the intellectual font of Al Qaeda.
Saudi princes certainly directly funded Al Qaeda. Does that mean the Government Proper funded Al Qaeda? No, but it makes the idea that they were ignorant of it implausible.
Al Qaeda was led by Saudis. Al Qaeda was staffed by Saudis. Where does all that personnel come from if not from the culture encouraged by the Saudi Government to this day in Mosques around the world that teach Wahabbism?
So I expect that Al Qaeda was a semi-independent operator. But the extreme closeness of the Saudi power structure to the whole existence of Al Qaeda is so strong that the regime’s stench is all over 9/11.
How long do you think the King would last if he cut off all funds to the followers of Wahabbism?
If he did it he would be toppled and a Kallifate would emerge with Wahabbism as it’s driving force.
Think Iran on steroids.
As I said before, the King disburses funds to his family. Some of those funds wind up in places the king probably wishes they wouldn’t. Unfortunately, the Islamic sect wants it there.
One of these days big changes will come to Saudi Arabia. When it does, those who have championed change there for decades are going to get a big surprise.
There were a lot of folks who thought Iran was going to be a lot better if only there was change away from that evil Shah guy.
Look what happened there.
Those Islamic people are actually tame by Wahabbi standards. They despise the U. S.
When there is no king to hold them back, look out.
“How long do you think the King would last if he cut off all funds to the followers of Wahabbism?”
And there you have the issue. The PEOPLE of Saudi deserve a good thorough nuking. If the King can’t help but accidentally fund and support 9/11 and THAT’S YOUR ARGUMENT, then the whole place needs to go up in flames.
We’re not going to nuke the place.
Please tell me who was funding Osama Bin Laden. Do you know? Which of the princes or entities in Saudi Arabia did?
I’m not saying that to be unfair to you, I just don’t know who funded him, or if he was there on his own dime, and running his efforts as a private citizen without anyone’s help.
You know, that is possible. He managed to recruit some of the students attending our colleges in Florida as I understand it. Was government involvement or even one of the prince’s involvement necessary for that?
You suggest nuking the nation because of the vile efforts there. What do we know about those vile efforts other than some extrapolations of circumstances we can’t really be sure of?
I understand your frustration, but I am not of a mindset to nuke the nation and ensure the wrath of the world upon our heads for doing it.
If we use nukes in the region, what’s to stop Russia from using nukes in the region?
Surely you must see the risk in that.
Not trying to give you a hard time on this. I just think there’s only so much you can do.
I see this as a Osama Ben Laden operation. I do not see it as a government operation. I’m not even sure if Saudi princes were involved. How can we know that?
If someone has a name and enough information to come to a reasoned conclusion, then the next president should demand action be taken against the criminals.
International charges could be filed. If Cruz know of this, he’d do his best to get justice.
It cannot happen at freefall speed. I did not say the floors did not come down, obviously they did. We have the video! But I can understand why folks need to phrase things incorrectly so they can be comfy refuting their own mistake.
You spittled out, "Bud, you can spout anything you like, but at the end of the day what you say makes no sense at all." Well, bud, I didn't post what you have attacked, so where does that leave a foolish post like yours?
Bomb the Bastards!! 3000 Americans annihilated. Crying children,wives and parents of the murdered. Why are we seizing that oil? I hate the Sunni bastards.
If the buildings didn’t come down the way they did due to a natural occurrence, then something else had to be the causal factor.
I’m sorry your stuck with the impression you have created, but I didn’t create that impression. You did.
If that makes you angry, then you need to think about what you say that makes people only able to come away with one conclusion based on what you have said is impossible.
Have nice day
It seemed to me the only way you thought all those floors would come down the way they did would be with explosive charges.
You stated that they couldn’t come down that way naturally.
If you have a third theory, I’d be glad to hear it.
Perhaps you’ve got one and that could make my extrapolation seem irrational to you. If so, I would like to know.
After you twice (at least) try to ascribe to me completely fabricated assertions you’ve imagined, do you really think I would waste any more time discussing anything with you? Have nice day and be gone, doughty.
Okay, then sit there in your own stew oblivious to why people think your assumptions are strange.
If I was unfair to you, I apologize. I think my last post afforded you an opportunity to explain to me why you thought I was being unfair. You passed up the chance.
You may think your reason is good enough. You didn’t win anyone to your point of view by offering it up.
Take care. I have no animosity for you.
Unfair? Bwahahaha, you write complete fiction and ascribe it as my postings then whine that I think you’re being unfair? How compeltely vaccuous. It is impossible to discuss a topic when one side is fabricating data points that they attribute to the other. Do you even know what ‘freefall speed’ means? I have not made one post stating how this event was carried out. I am absolutely convinced by the video data and the lies being fed to the public that the event was not what the government told the sheeple. And they have been quite successful in duping a large percentage of the po;ulace based upon how utterly clueless you remain.
Judy’s book is so important that I bought two copies of the heardback so I could lend it out to freinds and family.
If the fire didn’t burn hot enough to compromise the girders, what’s your explanation for the building failing?
If the building couldn’t fall as it did, what’s your explanation for how it fell that way?
You lay out a situation where only one explanation is reasoned, and then get upset when someone addresses that ‘one explanation’.
Either you believe what you say, or you don’t. Which is it?
You’ll get no thanks here...
Her research and the resulting presentation and book made me realize that the evil perpetrated on 9/11 was compounded by the misinformation campaign which followed. It’s truly almost incredible isn’t it, that we have been so programmed to believe that which we have been told to see, and do not see that which we did actually see with our own eyes...
But once you see the steel turning to dust in mid air (and not fall as we are told it is falling) there’s no turning back. There is nothing on the ground where the rubble should be, just huge holes in the ground.
If only your detractors would open their eyes. Instead of looking for the perpetrators, their interest would be well served by asking, HOW! What was the method, what was the energy source that caused the bulk of the structure to ‘dustify’ and literally blow away...
Might even ultimately explain why military activity was diverted from Afghanistan and directed at Iraq, where some of the terrorist crew of the aircraft received their training.
to the point of did he need Kuwait's wealth --
To the point of power grab -- yes, it was a power grab to get more money both directly from Kuwait and indirectly by threatening the Gulf states
To the point of land grab -- I find no corroboration for your statement that "he wanted the entire Arabian peninsula" -- but that was a possibility. However, he wouldn't have even thought of taking Saudi Arabia because of Mecca and Medina -- he would have the Egyptians fighting him and probably the Turks as well. Maybe the Gulf region, yes.
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.