What was the Saudi role in 9/11?

[Sabrina]

That's not a gag order. That document basically says that although she no longer works for the FBI she still has to abide by the oath she signed when she did work there. Forum member Sabrina I'm sure could expand on this seeing how she works (or did) in the intelligence sector.
If she was under a gag order or was actually disclosing state secrets she would be in jail by now. Besides wouldn't you think the MSM would pay a little more attention to what shes saying?

Everyone who works for the government signs a standard nondisclosure agreement, whether they have access to classified information or not.

It's been estimated that over 80% of all intelligence deemed useful is also unclassified, hence that qualification of whether it's classified or not. But in relation to Sibel Edmonds; if the information she is allegedly in possession of would pose a distinct threat to national security if it were revealed, she would be prevented BY LAW from disclosing it. The mere fact that she's spouting off about what she supposedly knows, however, tells me that she knows NOTHING. But IF (and I'm stressing that "if" as much as I possibly can) she did know something, and spouted off about it, she would be facing criminal charges up to and possibly including treason, depending on what the information was and how much of a threat it posed to national security.

If you want my opinion, however, she's essentially blowing smoke out of her [rule10]. She's probably upset that she didn't get recognition for something and is trying (in a very juvenile way I might add) to get the recognition she feels she deserves. If she knew something that would expose someone or some group in the government of committing a crime, however, she would not be censured; she would be hailed as a hero. The mere fact that she has not said anything of the sort beyond ambiguous references to something she hasn't even fully defined tells me, once again, that she's blowing smoke out of her [rule10].

Face it; your whistleblower can't even whistle.

 

[DC]

http://www.justacitizen.com/index.htm

she slowly starts blwoing the whistle

 

[Thunder]

she does not believe 9-11 was an inside job. hahahahaha!!!!

 

[DC]

she does not believe 9-11 was an inside job. hahahahaha!!!!

wich i never claimed :/ hahaha?

 

[Sabrina]

If she doesn't believe 9/11 was an inside job, why are you harping about her being a whistleblower (which she isn't, BTW)?

In order to be able to blow the whistle, there has to be an "illegal move", to borrow a sports analogy.

 

[DC]

If she doesn't believe 9/11 was an inside job, why are you harping about her being a whistleblower (which she isn't, BTW)?

In order to be able to blow the whistle, there has to be an "illegal move", to borrow a sports analogy.

prolly whistle blower isnt really correct. she joined after 9/11. but she claims to know important things that are covered up. and that someone tryed to recruit here as double agent or something like that.

something that should be investigated i think. no mather where it leads to, inside job or not.

 

[DGM]

prolly whistle blower isnt really correct. she joined after 9/11. but she claims to know important things that are covered up. and that someone tryed to recruit here as double agent or something like that.

something that should be investigated i think. no mather where it leads to, inside job or not.

She didn't join anything. She was more like "adopted". She loves the attention and after awhile she will be forgotten because she can't suggest to know something she doesn't forever.

 

[DC]

She didn't join anything. She was more like "adopted". She loves the attention and after awhile she will be forgotten because she can't suggest to know something she doesn't forever.

with she joined , i ment the FBI, she started working for them after 9/11 afaik.

so you think she is just making it up? dramaqueen? or even a sharlatan? she lies just to get some attention?

 

[DGM]

with she joined , i ment the FBI, she started working for them after 9/11 afaik.

so you think she is just making it up? dramaqueen? or even a sharlatan? she lies just to get some attention?

Basically, Yes! If she really knows of a criminal act no amount of gag orders would matter. Gag orders and such don't cover "illegal acts". She was in another country and she still didn't reveal a single thing.

 

[DC]

Basically, Yes! If she really knows of a criminal act no amount of gag orders would matter. Gag orders and such don't cover "illegal acts". She was in another country and she still didn't reveal a single thing.

so she failed UCLA ant the media, she even went before court with her bluff?

got any evidence for that? sounds interesting

 

[DGM]

so she failed UCLA ant the media, she even went before court with her bluff?

got any evidence for that? sounds interesting

Yeah I do. What's become of it?

 

[DC]

Yeah I do. What's become of it?

what evidence? show me

 

[DGM]

what evidence? show me

Show you what? How can I show you evidence that she has revealed nothing?

What has been the impact of what she has said to date? The answer to that question should tell you a lot about what she knows. As far as I have seen the answer is nothing (zero).

Off to Scouts so I can mold young minds. That should comfort you. Good night.

 

[DC]

Show you what? How can I show you evidence that she has revealed nothing?

What has been the impact of what she has said to date? The answer to that question should tell you a lot about what she knows. As far as I have seen the answer is nothing (zero).

Off to Scouts so I can mold young minds. That should comfort you. Good night.

oh so you have no evidence, ok.

and could the outcome till now also be a sign of how corrupted the system is already? i know just in paranoid CT nutty nobrainers fantasys.....

 

[DGM]

oh so you have no evidence, ok.

and could the outcome till now also be a sign of how corrupted the system is already? i know just in paranoid CT nutty nobrainers fantasys.....

I'm still not sure what you want evidence of. She's never revealed anything. She's hinted but that's about it.

OK, Convince me, What has she actually revealed? Please don't start with the baseless accusations and speculation I could do that. She claims to be an insider so what specifically has she claimed and how has she supported it?

 

[Sabrina]

To the best of my knowledge, she's CLAIMED that she knows something that indicates information was covered up during the investigations; nothing about what kind of information this might be or why it's important. She's preaching to the twoofers, so the merest hint of a coverup and they're slavering over her.

My opinion, she's an attention [rule10], plain and simple. By keeping up with the vague hints and occasionally releasing dribbles of ultimately meaningless information, she keeps their attention on her. If she truly knew something the government was covering up that was illegal, I highly doubt she'd be holding it back like this. Granted, I'm assuming she has a shred of integrity, which may be a humongous stretch in her case; I don't know. But I know for sure if it were me, I'd be shouting it from the rooftops; in fact, I'd be obligated to by the very regulations I swear by.

 

[thatsmystory]

After 9/11, an unnamed former CIA officer who worked in Saudi Arabia will tell investigative journalist Joe Trento that hijackers Nawaf Alhazmi and Khalid Almihdhar were allowed to operate in the US unchecked (see, e.g., February 4-Mid-May 2000 and Mid-May-December 2000) because they were agents of Saudi Arabia’s intelligence agency. “We had been unable to penetrate al-Qaeda. The Saudis claimed that they had done it successfully. Both Alhazmi and Almihdhar were Saudi agents. We thought they had been screened. It turned out the man responsible for recruiting them had been loyal to Osama bin Laden. The truth is bin Laden himself was a Saudi agent at one time. He successfully penetrated Saudi intelligence and created his own operation inside. The CIA relied on the Saudis vetting their own agents. It was a huge mistake. The reason the FBI was not given any information about either man is because they were Saudi assets operating with CIA knowledge in the United States.” [Stories That Matter, 8/6/2003] In a 2006 book the Trentos will add: “Saudi intelligence had sent agents Khalid Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi to spy on a meeting of top associates of al-Qaeda in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, January 5-8, 2000. ‘The CIA/Saudi hope was that the Saudis would learn details of bin Laden’s future plans. Instead plans were finalized and the Saudis learned nothing,’ says a terrorism expert who asks that his identity be withheld…

I don't remember anyone on the 9/11 Commission mentioning that two of the alleged hijackers were actually Saudi intelligence agents. Trento's source indicates they were Saudi agents at the time they were sent to Malaysia...ten months before the Cole bombing.

If they were double agents that could explain the failure to prevent the Cole attack but for the same agents to be involved in 9/11 is hard to understand.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

I don't remember anyone on the 9/11 Commission mentioning that two of the alleged hijackers were actually Saudi intelligence agents. Trento's source indicates they were Saudi agents at the time they were sent to Malaysia...ten months before the Cole bombing.

If they were double agents that could explain the failure to prevent the Cole attack but for the same agents to be involved in 9/11 is hard to understand.

trentos anonymous source whose word we have to take at face value? no thanks

 

[thatsmystory]

trentos anonymous source whose word we have to take at face value? no thanks

I followed up with him. He stands by his sourcing (multiple sources used to confirm their GID status). Who is more trustworthy...Trento or Zelikow? I would say Trento.

If the US government wants to declassify all evidence related to al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar that would be fine with me.

 

[PhantomWolf]

I followed up with him. He stands by his sourcing (multiple sources used to confirm their GID status). Who is more trustworthy...Trento or Zelikow? I would say Trento.

If the US government wants to declassify all evidence related to al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar that would be fine with me.

Well even if he is standing by his source, the source is still anonymous and thus unverifiable.

Verified sources say that OBL wasn't ever an GID agent, though he did workvery closely with them and receive funding. While they requested him to do certain things while in Pakistan and Afghanistan (including not actually going into Afghanistan) OBL only ever did what they asked if it benefited him or his group. He was never beholdened to them nor activity worked for them. The close relationship with them did likely allow for routes into their ranks however, especially in a country where they already have a relatively extreme form of Islam.