Saudi officials were 'supporting' 9/11 hijackers, commission member says

What is the relevance of this thread? One commissioner said there was an "awful lot" of participation by Saudi individuals? How many is an "awful lot"? And some worked for the Saudi government? Does this imply we should indict every employer when its employees commit an act of crime?

 

The Saudi government no doubt supports Wahabbi/Salafist movements around the Islamic world, no doubt. But let's not forget that one of the major grievances of core Al-Qaeda was the Saudi monarchy in the first place. The Saudi regime plays an awkward balancing act between catering to Islamist clergy that control the vox populi and their country, and the West which backs them militarily and financially. I think US support for Saudi Arabia will only continue to create problems for us and eventually backfire long term. And I'm not doubting that there's some linkage between many Salafist groups and the Kingdom (some of which backfire), but I doubt Saudi officials knew of 9/11 or aided the hijackers. They would have had nothing to gain. The Kingdom's covering up of Saudi individuals involvement is more to try to paint themselves as a loyal US ally than anything else.

 

Saudi Arabia was at best an enabler. Who knows what at worst.

But we made our bed by sleeping with a dangerous ally. It was a short-sighted mistake to see the enemy of our enemy as our friend. (and one with lots of oil).

 

"Since the 1970s Saudi Arabia has provided foreign assistance to many countries and organizations.

Just between 1976 and 1987, Saudi developmental aid amounted to USD49 billion,[1] second only to the United States of America. The ODA/GNP ratio averaged 4.2% over this period, well above the highest amount provided by Development Assistance Committee countries (the DAC average is 0.35%).[2] On a per-capita basis, the country is the biggest worldwide donor "


Only Fahad Althumairy a former worker at the Islamic ministry of relief had been implicated but later he was cleared .

this aid for those who claim it is just to Salafi's ,some of the aid had been directed toward Iran , India ,most of Africa etc .

 

At some point in life, you either stand for something or you don't.

As long as the civilized world conducts trade with Saudi then yaps on about freedom, democracy, rape being a crime etc, they're hypocrites and thirsty for that D.

the Oil D.

b****es best recognize.

 

i partially agree , people should stand for something or set . civilized nations of Norway, Sweden and Canada or maybe Denmark should conducts trade exclusively within this circle , Salmon and cheese is all what people need and not hard to be circulated it from one destination to another .

 

Spoiler

 

I didn't want to make a new thread but I wanted to share this article, which I have been thinking a lot about lately. It's from January 2016. This is a depressing read but it's worth the time.

What a complete mess this whole thing is. History is repeating itself, again.

https://harpers.org/archive/2016/01/a-special-relationship/1/

 

Saudi government employees can be anything, that's not the equivalent of Saudi government supporting Al Q. There is absolutely nothing in it for the Saudi Royal Family to want to hurt American government. They are allies, and the Saudi government's existence and persistence is a function of American government support among other things.

If the relationship between Saudi government and the US government is as Republicans and new democrats are describing, then they would have just let Saddam invade.

The Saudi government did not support the hijacking or know of it IMO, but for sure there are people who funded the plot whose money can come from anywhere.

You have to understand that the wahhabists and the government are entirely different entities, and that relationship or deal between them seems to be getting very tricky since 9/11.

 

Why is the royal family threatening the us financially at the idea of those 28 pages going public? Why was Obama on a plane to fly over and see them asap when this went viral?

 

There can be a MILLION reasons.

I can't say this outright, so I'll explain it another way.

Let's say the Clintons and the Bushes want to start a country called America. The Clintons have all the money and foreign help and the Bushes have the soldiers and guns and domestic might. Together, they will succeed, but without each other, none will be succesful.

They agree that for the rest of time, the Clintons will be officially in charge and the Bush's will provide the ammo and manpower to hold power in exchange for HANDSOME eternal payments and benefits and special positions. The Bushes are f'ing maniacs and the Clintons consider them useful peasants. The Clintons are hungry for exapnsion but the Bushes consider them a tolerable stepping stone for future endeavours.

This goes on for some 100 years and now tensions are high. Both stick to the deal, but each plotting behind the others' back. Naturally, Bushes will be working in the Clinton government and will be receiving a lot of money for it. Outside government as well, the Clintons simply have to keep paying the Bushes otherwise they'll cause havoc, and the Bushes have to keep smiling because they are happy with their chances of changing the situation to their advantage.

The Bushes fund a terrorist plot to attack the BIG BAD friends of the Clintons. The money, obviously like all the other money in the country, came from the Clintons.

Did the Clintons fund the terrorist bombing of their best friends' country?

No. Nor do they want to keep paying those people, but they have no choice. They can not piss those people off. They can not overly scrutinize those people. They can not stop paying them. They can not control what they do with the money.

So, why don't the Clintons want the documents relating to the bombing released? Well, because the money - from an ACCOUNTING perspective - absolutely can be linked back to them. But as you can see, they had zero to do with the attacks. In fact, they were furious at the attacks, and made the Bushes feel that fury. The Bushes want chaos, they want broken allegiances, they want chaos. They have been waiting for a vaccuum to appear for decades, and they are prepared to fill it.

In addition, they hid the terrorist for years because they didn't want ALL these details to get out. You see, this information bundle is not common knowledge and that's part of the reason why their country has not yet descended into total anarchy.

The Saudi Royal Family has no incentive whatsoever to conduct an attack on the country that helped it to exist, persist and continues to arm and defend it. It's ludicrous to think otherwise.

 

He went to explain to them that climate change is a greater threat than Islamic extremism.

 

Typical media smear campaign no truth to the threat

 

Israel controls US foreign policy and Israel and SA have made a "deal" in terms of the MENA region, sharing the same enemy in Iran and, by extension, Syria and Russia.

 

such relation would be beneficial to both on many fields but Saudis had made it clear since 50 years , no relation with israel as long Palestinian's struggle continues ,even pro-israeli in the US gave up on that to change. they are not like the Jordanian or Egyptians governments, as for Iran , those photo reveals what they are .. [iranian military exhibition took pride to display their production recently]

Spoiler

 

Why are we so afraid of them, because they hold a lot of dollars and threaten to crash the market?

I mean if they did that, wouldn't we simply invade and take them out?

DD

 

BOOM!

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/18/u...-arabia-to-legal-jeopardy-over-9-11.html?_r=1

If Obama vetoes this the Republican will win the White House easy.

 

nice , so everyone knows it's a hoax of local political agenda driven bill , I hope Obama won't veto it .would be interesting how it goes

 

so obama is afraid to sign it because they're scared of legislative retaliation. wow, usa IS really weak. since when are we afraid of other 3rd world countries? what could they possibly do legislatively that would scare obama like a little b****?