Saudi Arabia really might have funded 9/11

[JSanderO]

I don't think these hijackers did not have some sort of "support" and it was someone with wealth and power in SA.... who do you think it was? OBL? Maybe.. likely... are there others like OBL in their hate for the west?

 

[Cosmic Yak]

Yak... I am not going to spend the time to do research.

Then I am not going to spend the time on this either. If you're not going to make the effort, I see no reason why I should.

 

[Oystein]

it is easy, trivial, to answer a question like this:

are there others like OBL in their hate for the west?

The true answer is "Yes".

And now? Does this answer get you or us further with any quest that may be related to the thread topic?

No.

I'll leave it to you to figure out how I arrived at the answers of "Yes" and "No", respectively.

 

[Axxman300]

I don't think these hijackers did not have some sort of "support" and it was someone with wealth and power in SA.... who do you think it was? OBL? Maybe.. likely... are there others like OBL in their hate for the west?

The short answer is individual Saudis, some working in key positions in Saudi Intelligence and a couple of Embassies in the US directly assisted the 911-Hijackers. The Saudi Royal family is huge and a few of them are not that bright seeing as Al Qaeda planned to eliminate the Royal family and assume rule over the Kingdom.

The longer answer regarding your speculation is I doubt Saudi would have seen provoking the US into a protracted conflict in the Middle East as a wise idea. If the US withdrew support the Kingdom would fall as fast as Afghanistan.

And you have to remember, there was a split among Al Qaeda leadership once the Planes Operation was revealed because half of them feared the US would retaliate in a massive way, undermining Al Qaeda's long-term goals, and the other half, bin Laden's ha;f, believed the US would just fire off cruise missiles for a while. Bin Laden also believed that if the US did go big with a response he would still win a moral victory, which you can argue he did.did some house cleaning, and certain cousins ended being found dead in the desert.

Then you have the official Saudi response after 9-11 when they

 

[pgimeno]

Then you have the official Saudi response after 9-11 when they
[silence]

Oh no! They found Axxman!

 

[Axxman300]

Oh no! They found Axxman!

 

[Allen773]

I don't think these hijackers did not have some sort of "support" and it was someone with wealth and power in SA.... who do you think it was? OBL? Maybe.. likely... are there others like OBL in their hate for the west?

To build on Axxman’s point, and to paraphrase the lead attorney in the JASTA-based civil suit against Saudi Arabia on behalf of 9/11 victims’ families, Jim Kreindler:

Dozens of Saudi officials and agents, mostly employed by their Islamic Affairs ministry, appear to have been coordinating a logistical support network for at least some of the 9/11 hijackers. The most compelling and well-documented evidence of direct Saudi official contact with the hijackers involves alleged Saudi intelligence officer Omar al-Bayoumi (who met Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Midhar “by chance” on their first day in California and immediately assisted them generously), and Islamic Affairs official and accredited diplomat at the Saudi consulate in Los Angeles Fayd al-Thuimary, who was the imam of the King Fahd Mosque in Culver City, CA — a Saudi-funded mosque that was attended by members of the consulate.

Thumairy was known for his extremist views, to the point where the Saudi government disciplined him and warned him about going too far BEFORE 9/11. Additionally, others who attended the King Fahd mosque are believed by the US government to have known and possibly assisted Hazmi and Midhar. As for Bayoumi, his passport was stamped by the Saudi government with a marker that indicated devout Islamic belief—but also sometimes indicated suspected extremist beliefs.

Moreover, both Thumairy and Bayoumi were, according to the FBI, directed to assist Hazmi and Midhar on their arrival in California by another Saudi official—a diplomat at the Saudi Embassy in Washington named Jarrah (I forget his first name). Jarrah was a deputy overseeing the Islamic Affairs section in the Embassy.

Why the focus on Hazmi and Midhar? Because not only were they the first future 9/11 hijackers to enter the United States, and not only is there the most extensive known evidence for Saudi support in their cases, but because they were by 2000 already veteran al-Qaeda operatives who had fought in Bosnia and Chechnya—both places where many other Saudis had also fought, and where Saudi money funded both humanitarian and yes, armed activities on behalf of Muslims in those countries. A number of Saudi-based and Saudi-funded charities were involved in such support, and at least some employees of said charities have been charged with terrorism-related offenses. The Saudi ministry most involved with overseeing and coordinating Saudi support of overseas Islamic charities? The Ministry of Islamic Affairs.

There are also many other Saudi officials—again, mostly from the Ministry of Islamic Affairs—who are alleged by the JASTA lawsuit to have been involved in facilitating the 9/11 attacks to one extent or another. Islamic Affairs was suspected, at least prior to 9/11, of being heavily penetrated by al-Qaeda and al-Qaeda sympathizers, so it’s no surprise that they have the bulk of the Saudi government officials who are accused of supporting the 9/11 attacks.

Going back to Kreindler’s theory of the case: I listened to an interview with him in which he said, paraphrased from my memory, “I think there was a cell in the Ministry of Islamic Affairs, emanating from Riyadh outward to other countries including the United States, that coordinated the support network for the hijackers. These officials not only supported al-Qaeda out of ideological affinity, but also to help protect the Saudi government itself from al-Qaeda’s goal of overthrowing the House of Saud—in other words, doing their best to direct al-Qaeda operations outward, away from Riyadh.”

 

[Wballz4900]

****** saudis

 

[Allen773]

****** saudis

Do you have something to actually add to this thread? You're welcome to do just that. Something to actually logically engage with, preferably?

 

[RRBacon]

Seems one can have suspicions even proof, but no action, besides 3 strikes and a warning, and they let it go to the keeper, sure next time when it's a missile they'll send a 3 min warning, But denialists have trouble believing there are folk who are much smarter than them, and timing is important

 

[theprestige]

Seems one can have suspicions even proof, but no action, besides 3 strikes and a warning, and they let it go to the keeper, sure next time when it's a missile they'll send a 3 min warning, But denialists have trouble believing there are folk who are much smarter than them, and timing is important

Seems you're boosting your post count with random crap in random threads. Do you have anything substantial to add here, or is it just the same ass-pull noise that already plagues this thread?

 

[beachnut]

Seems one can have suspicions even proof, but no action, besides 3 strikes and a warning, and they let it go to the keeper, sure next time when it's a missile they'll send a 3 min warning, But denialists have trouble believing there are folk who are much smarter than them, and timing is important

Saudi Arabia really might have funded 9/11? Because it's a missile? Did you fall into the yankee451 woo trap with missiles?

 

[bknight]

Saudi Arabia really might have funded 9/11? Because it's a missile? Did you fall into the yankee451 woo trap with missiles?

I wonder where he is, I haven't seen him around for some time.

 

[beachnut]

I wonder where he is, I haven't seen him around for some time.

The missile woo mocker of the victims of 9/11?
Missile woo master, still into woo -
https://911crashtest.org/

This thread might be safe from his missile madness based on ignorance and delusions - maybe

 

[Allen773]

Juan Cole has long been a harsh critic of US foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East, and he has condemned the US government for propping up authoritarian regimes....like that of Saudi Arabia.

With that in mind, here's his take on whether there was Saudi government involvement in 9/11:

People keep saying that 15 of the nineteen hijackers on 9/11 were Saudis. So what? Osama Bin Laden chose them as muscle precisely in order to sour relations between the US and Saudi Arabia, the government of which he was trying to overthrow. Of the some 5,000 al-Qaeda members in Afghanistan in 2001, very few were Saudis. As for the hijackers, the important ones were the pilots, and they included an Egyptian and a Lebanese. So was Hosni Mubarak in Egypt also behind the attacks because one Egyptian national was a leader of them?

This is illogical and guilt by association.

The newly released records cast suspicion on a graduate student who used to hang around the embassy without any obvious role. He met the two hijackers based in San Diego, Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdar. They told the embassy they were students, and one of the purposes of the Saudi embassy in DC is to take care of the tens of thousands of Saudi students in the US. Bayoumi is reported to have had sympathies with the militants.

But some of that evidence was from an ex-wife who said that Bayoumi was always talking about how Muslims had to do something for their community and that they were at jihad. I know the FBI has made a fetish out of the word jihad, but really. This kind of talk was a dime a dozen among some Muslims in the 1990s and did not indicate they wanted to blow anything up. Bayoumi ran up big bills and seems to have enjoyed American consumerism. And his ex-wife, really? The FBI must really be tired of hearing from Muslim-American spouses about how their ex is al-Qaeda and should be thrown in jail with the key lost.

But it isn’t at all clear that Bayoumi even knew al-Hazmi and al-Mihdar were themselves terrorists. The al-Qaeda cells in the US tried to throw surveillance off track by going to strip clubs and drinking in bars, behavior intelligence agencies would not expect in fundamentalist militants. The evidence against Bayoumi is completely circumstantial and proves nothing.

..............

Unlike Bayoumi, who seems to have been one of those hangers-on one finds at embassies of the wealthy oil states in Washington, Fahad al-Thumairy was actually a diplomat at the embassy. He was said to have led a radical faction at his mosque in DC and to have had contacts with al-Hazmi and al-Mihdar and perhaps with members of the Algerian-based Armed Islamic Group, who sought to blow up LAX.

Again, knowing or helping al-Hazmi and al-Mihdar is not a proof of anything. They were under cover posing as Saudi students. Embassy personnel were supposed to be in touch with and to help such people.

But, as the FBI says, that al-Thumairy was on the phone with people from the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) is concerning. Unlike Bayoumi’s contacts with the San Diego-based hijackers, that is harder to explain. The GIA people were Algerians and it isn’t clear why a Saudi diplomat was talking to them.

But if al-Thumairy were a radical, it would show that a minor diplomat at the Saudi embassy had those sympathies, not that the government of Saudi Arabia did.

A Trump appointee to a position in the State Department took part in the Jan. 6 insurrection. That doesn’t mean that Mike Pompeo planned out the invasion of the Capitol.

A lot of Saudi diplomats get their positions by being friends of friends of the royal family. Although there is an Institute of Diplomatic Studies in Riyadh, my guess is that the Saudi diplomats have a lot of random, untrained people among them. Al-Thumairy was likely one of these.

https://www.juancole.com/2021/09/arabia-attacks-conspiracy.html

Definitely some good arguments here against any knowing Saudi government help to the hijackers - as in, knowing what these Saudi "students" were actually up to in America.

 

[pgimeno]

Juan Cole does not have anything to do with Jon Cole, right?

 

[Oystein]

Juan Cole does not have anything to do with Jon Cole, right?

From the link Allen773 provided:

About the Author

Juan Cole is the founder and chief editor of Informed Comment. He is Richard P. Mitchell Professor of History at the University of Michigan He is author of, among many other books, Muhammad: Prophet of Peace amid the Clash of Empires and The Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam. Follow him on Twitter at @jricole or the Informed Comment Facebook Page

 

[Venom]

Juan Cole has long been a harsh critic of US foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East, and he has condemned the US government for propping up authoritarian regimes....like that of Saudi Arabia.

With that in mind, here's his take on whether there was Saudi government involvement in 9/11:



https://www.juancole.com/2021/09/arabia-attacks-conspiracy.html

Definitely some good arguments here against any knowing Saudi government help to the hijackers - as in, knowing what these Saudi "students" were actually up to in America.

Nice article. I've always thought the "SA did it" crowd were overstating their case for a conspiracy among the Saudi higher ups. It seems the locus of the plot is anywhere but Al Qaeda in the CTist mind.

 

[Allen773]

Nice article. I've always thought the "SA did it" crowd were overstating their case for a conspiracy among the Saudi higher ups. It seems the locus of the plot is anywhere but Al Qaeda in the CTist mind.

Well if I remember correctly Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was never actually a member of al-Qaeda, and the al-Qaeda shura vehemently opposed the Planes Operation. Bin Laden overruled them and kept them in the dark, while KSM and a few others (notably Ramzi Binalshibh of the Hamburg cell) cooordinated the operation largely from Pakistan.

Many of the actual operational decisions like selecting flights and the date of the attacks were initiated by the hijackers themselves, led by Mohammed Atta who checked in with KSM and Binalshibh, who then reported to bin Laden. At least, this was what I remember reading in the 9/11 Commission Report.

So it seems that, rather than being an “al-Qaeda operation” per se, it was a KSM operation with Osama bin Laden’s blessing and strategic guidance and al-Qaeda trained operatives (the hijackers) and financial resources.

 

[Axxman300]

Well if I remember correctly Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was never actually a member of al-Qaeda, and the al-Qaeda shura vehemently opposed the Planes Operation. Bin Laden overruled them and kept them in the dark, while KSM and a few others (notably Ramzi Binalshibh of the Hamburg cell) cooordinated the operation largely from Pakistan.

Many of the actual operational decisions like selecting flights and the date of the attacks were initiated by the hijackers themselves, led by Mohammed Atta who checked in with KSM and Binalshibh, who then reported to bin Laden. At least, this was what I remember reading in the 9/11 Commission Report.

So it seems that, rather than being an “al-Qaeda operation” per se, it was a KSM operation with Osama bin Laden’s blessing and strategic guidance and al-Qaeda trained operatives (the hijackers) and financial resources.

No, it was an Al Qaeda operation. KSM and UBL ran it through their chain of command. There was a split among AQ leadership when the plan was initiated because those opposed felt it was too much of a risk, and hindered their long-term goals for the region.

You can't split hairs with this one as Al Qaeda is not an organization, but an amalgamation. Citing internal differences and technicalities doesn't apply to Al Qaeda, which was why it was successful on 9-11 due to a lack of a central core for the CIA/FBI to penetrate, and the fact that only an entity like AQ could pull off that style of attack on that scale. It was the mouse that roared.

Which brings us back to the Saudis, and 9-11 Conspiracies in general. Just as the idea that the WTC was imploded with controlled demo in combination with holograms is a CT, so too is the idea that Al Qaeda must have had some level of state sponsorship. We have billionaires with competing private space programs, but the idea of Bin Laden, a multi-millionaire, paying for flight school, rent, and airline tickets is somehow unbelievable to some people. The Bush Administration felt Iraq had been behind 9-11 on some level, and we know this wasn't true. The same is true with this lawsuit against the Saudi government, and that their intelligence service must have been in on it at some level. And the truth is that there are few straight lines in the Saudi leadership, and government model. Ask anyone at the State Department, or anyone with Aramco, Saudi Arabia is a frustrating place to do normal business.

The fact is, at the end of the day, and after almost 21 years, Al Qaeda remains the sole actor behind the 9-11 attacks.

 

[Axxman300]

The FBI quietly uploaded their 2017 report to the internet on Friday. It's heavily redacted, and it's over 500 pages:

https://vault.fbi.gov/9-11-attacks-...sive-to-executive-order-14040-2-c-part-4/view

Haven't read it yet.

Here's a related story which gives the jist:

https://www.northjersey.com/story/n...bi-links-saudi-arabia-spy-attacks/9442454002/

After the 9/11 attacks, FBI investigators focused attention on Bayoumi and other Saudis in Southern California. But none was ever arrested.

Bayoumi left the United States and returned to Saudi Arabia not long after the 9/11 attacks. While in America, he was described in the FBI report as a “co-optee of the Saudi General Intelligence Presidency” who was paid an undisclosed “monthly stipend” by Prince Bandar. The FBI report, however, does not say whether Bayoumi ever spoke directly with Prince Bandar or communicated by email.

But the report also offers this glimpse on Bayoumi’s role as a spy and his connection to Prince Bandar: “The information AlBayoumi (sic) obtained on persons of interest in the Saudi community in Los Angeles and San Diego and other issues, which met certain GIP intelligence requirements, would be forwarded to Bandar. Bander would then inform GIP of items of interest to the GIP for further investigation/vetting or follow up.”

The 9/11 Commission investigated Bayoumi’s links to Mihdhar and Hazmi before releasing its best-selling report 2004. But neither Saudi officials nor the FBI and the CIA ever spelled out to Commission investigators the extent of Bayoumi’s work as a spy or his connection to Prince Bandar.

Reached this week, the Commission’s chairman, Tom Kean, the former New Jersey governor, said his investigators never learned that Bayoumi was a spy.

“If that’s true I’d be upset by it,” Kean said in a telephone interview, adding, “The FBI said it wasn’t withholding anything and we believed them.”

But Kean also cautioned against jumping to conclusions about the extent of Saudi involvement in the 9/11 plot.

Looks like holes in this side of the story are being filled in. Nothing earth-shaking.

 

[bknight]

The FBI quietly uploaded their 2017 report to the internet on Friday. It's heavily redacted, and it's over 500 pages:

https://vault.fbi.gov/9-11-attacks-...sive-to-executive-order-14040-2-c-part-4/view

Haven't read it yet.

Here's a related story which gives the jist:

https://www.northjersey.com/story/n...bi-links-saudi-arabia-spy-attacks/9442454002/



Looks like holes in this side of the story are being filled in. Nothing earth-shaking.

The FBI nor CIA never learned if Bayoumi was a spy?

 

[Axxman300]

The FBI nor CIA never learned if Bayoumi was a spy?

This is the kind of factual issue that ticks me off about the 9-11 Truthers. They wasted all kinds of time and money of fantasies while ignoring serious problems within the FBI and CIA. Real problems appear to still exist, and nobody is pressing either agency for answers as to why, and what will they do to fix them.

This underlines the reality of the US government, and it makes a secret plot impossible.

 

[ozeco41]

This is the kind of factual issue that ticks me off about the 9-11 Truthers. They wasted all kinds of time and money of fantasies while ignoring serious problems within the FBI and CIA. Real problems appear to still exist, and nobody is pressing either agency for answers as to why, and what will they do to fix them.

This underlines the reality of the US government, and it makes a secret plot impossible.

That is the fundamental strategic error made by the Truth Movement. Maintaining focus on false technical claims long after they had been explained. Whilst the real issues of concern with 9/11 were, always were, still are in the domain of politics and inter-agency behaviour.

Arguably R Gage and AE911 Truth have been the most successful pro-"Government" shills. The last thing that politicians of either major party colour would want is open scrutiny of the political misfeasances. Starting with proximate issue #1 > "Why did the USA not prevent 9/11?" By maintaining focus on false claims for "CD at WTC" Gage et al met the defacto goal of most major party politicians >> viz ensuring that the political issues were not intensely scrutinised WHILST keeping focus on a false set of technical claims which will never go anywhere.

Then, for those even more oriented to strategy >> the extent to which US (and "western allies") hegemony over at least many decades set the climate for 9/11.

Sure - claiming "CD at WTC" served R Gage's de-facto goals of ego massaging and income assurance. But that focus lost any traction in the political arena about 2007-8-9 >> the time when WTC collapses were first explained correctly and in legitimate layperson understandable language.

 

[bknight]

This is the kind of factual issue that ticks me off about the 9-11 Truthers. They wasted all kinds of time and money of fantasies while ignoring serious problems within the FBI and CIA. Real problems appear to still exist, and nobody is pressing either agency for answers as to why, and what will they do to fix them.

This underlines the reality of the US government, and it makes a secret plot impossible.

I was really asking if you omitted the word "if".

 

[Axxman300]

I was really asking if you omitted the word "if".

I can't even with the FBI and CIA right now.

Quick rant:

I hate the way the US government bends over for the Saudis at every level of government. Heaven forbid we offend them or call them on their evil. Saudis funding Wahabi madrasas in Pakistan which birthed the Taliban? Gosh, maybe we'll send them a carefully worded, back-channel letter. Saudis giving money to Islamic terror organizations? Yeah, but they're letting the Israeli air force use remote Saudi airfields to practice mock-attacks on Iran. A Saudi pilot helping two Al Qaeda 9-11 hijackers? Maybe he's a spy, maybe not.

Forget the fact that the FBI has never had a problem throwing around accusations about innocent people, and let's ignore the fact that the CIA ignored it's Iraq AND counter-terrorism desks about the lack of evidence of Saddam's involvement with 9-11 AND WMD production.

The United States is Saudi Arabia's b*tch. And there is no polite way to say this.

While the 9-11 Truthers ran around spouting fantasies about CD, and holograms, and nano-thermite, the press gave the Clinton and Bush Administrations a free pass on their colossal failures as they put the relationship with the Saudis and other oil-rich Middle Eastern states ahead of the security of the American people. 9-11 Truthers have been nothing more than willing chumps to obscure the truth. I don't if it was intentional or not, but we're 21 years past the event, and the US intelligence community, and the civilian oversight is exactly where it was in August, 2001. Except now the problem is Russia, and it's cities we need to worry about now, not just buildings and bridges.

End of rant.,

 

[Allen773]

I can't even with the FBI and CIA right now.

Quick rant:

I hate the way the US government bends over for the Saudis at every level of government. Heaven forbid we offend them or call them on their evil. Saudis funding Wahabi madrasas in Pakistan which birthed the Taliban? Gosh, maybe we'll send them a carefully worded, back-channel letter. Saudis giving money to Islamic terror organizations? Yeah, but they're letting the Israeli air force use remote Saudi airfields to practice mock-attacks on Iran. A Saudi pilot helping two Al Qaeda 9-11 hijackers? Maybe he's a spy, maybe not.

Forget the fact that the FBI has never had a problem throwing around accusations about innocent people, and let's ignore the fact that the CIA ignored it's Iraq AND counter-terrorism desks about the lack of evidence of Saddam's involvement with 9-11 AND WMD production.

The United States is Saudi Arabia's b*tch. And there is no polite way to say this.

While the 9-11 Truthers ran around spouting fantasies about CD, and holograms, and nano-thermite, the press gave the Clinton and Bush Administrations a free pass on their colossal failures as they put the relationship with the Saudis and other oil-rich Middle Eastern states ahead of the security of the American people. 9-11 Truthers have been nothing more than willing chumps to obscure the truth. I don't if it was intentional or not, but we're 21 years past the event, and the US intelligence community, and the civilian oversight is exactly where it was in August, 2001. Except now the problem is Russia, and it's cities we need to worry about now, not just buildings and bridges.

End of rant.,

Righteous rant!

 

[Allen773]

Some “ally”:

The new report lays out what it calls the FBI’s “investigations and supporting documentation” regarding the religious “militant network that was created, funded directed and supported by the KSA [Kingdom of Saudi Arabia] and its affiliated organizations and diplomatic personnel within the U.S.”

That network, as described in the report, was intertwined with the hijackers.

“As Saudi government officials and intelligence officers were directly operating and supporting the entities involved with this network, their involvement with the activities of these organizations/individuals would logically be supposed to have the knowledge or concurrence of the KSA government. This knowledge and/or concurrence by the SAG [Saudi Arabian Government] is related to the 9/11 investigation not only [by] the direct involvement of some personnel but also via the creation of a larger network for such activities.”

https://www.floridabulldog.org/2022...-provided-support-network-for-9-11-hijackers/

 

[ozeco41]

The United States is Saudi Arabia's b*tch. And there is no polite way to say this.

9-11 Truthers have been nothing more than willing chumps to obscure the truth. I don't if it was intentional or not, but we're 21 years past the event,.,

The concerns about 9/11 fell into two "camps" viz (a) The main technical claims which have been given the focus. WTC times 3, Pentagon and Shanksville. AND (b) The "political" issues which have not been given the same emphasis until relatively recent legal claims.

The big concerns lie in the range of political issues. Starting with the reality that the USA stuffed up on a grand scale by not preventing 9/11 ... for whatever complex of reasons. The technical discussion has wasted a lot of energy and time debating four (or five) sub-sets of false claims. Thereby diverting attention from the political issues.

I've been suggesting for some time that AE911 led by R Gage has been defacto a most effective Government Shill. Whether intentional or not. I agree with Axxman's assessment.

The focus primarily on false claims for CD at WTC and, to a lesser extent on Pentagon and Shanksville, has deflected attention. And that suits a range of political goals. Ranging from the low level "We made a big balls up" up to the major strategic issue of "The United States is Saudi Arabia's b*tch." Criticism of political performance is not a popular theme for politicians of either camp. (Unless there is critical mass for the pursuit of the political agenda.)

"Let's keep them talking around in circles about those technical issues" is and possibly has been a very attractive choice for political pragmatists. Gage, AE911 and most of the "Truth Movement" have certainly behaved like: "willing chumps to obscure the truth".

 

[Axxman300]

The irony is our current President will meet, and glad-hand, and generally suck up to the Saudis this week. There will be one or two carefully worded (agreed upon in advance) speeches where human rights may be mentioned. The Saudis will smile politely, and the President will smile politely, and maybe the price of oil will drop $35 per gallon.

And the disgusting thing is that he has to do it for not only economic reasons, but for internal political survival. Mid-term elections loom in November, and a GOP takeover of both houses of Congress is an ugly reality if gas is still over $4 per gallon in November.

*and yes, I understand that the issues behind domestic gasoline prices are extremely complex, and have little to do with the Saudis.*

 

[bknight]

The irony is our current President will meet, and glad-hand, and generally suck up to the Saudis this week. There will be one or two carefully worded (agreed upon in advance) speeches where human rights may be mentioned. The Saudis will smile politely, and the President will smile politely, and maybe the price of oil will drop $35 per gallon.

And the disgusting thing is that he has to do it for not only economic reasons, but for internal political survival. Mid-term elections loom in November, and a GOP takeover of both houses of Congress is an ugly reality if gas is still over $4 per gallon in November.

*and yes, I understand that the issues behind domestic gasoline prices are extremely complex, and have little to do with the Saudis.*

It is all about getting elected and staying elected. The Dems made a similar error in political winds as the Rep did when Hillory went down.

 

[Axxman300]

It is all about getting elected and staying elected. The Dems made a similar error in political winds as the Rep did when Hillory went down.

The ultimate no-win situation. If Biden doesn't suck up, the GOP candidate who replaces him will. Problem is I don't have a better solution. When they write the book on late-20th Century/early 21st Century American foreign policy, historians will marvel at the endless string of corners we painted ourselves into...some cases, knowingly so...

 

[Oystein]

The ultimate no-win situation. If Biden doesn't suck up, the GOP candidate who replaces him will. Problem is I don't have a better solution. When they write the book on late-20th Century/early 21st Century American foreign policy, historians will marvel at the endless string of corners we painted ourselves into...some cases, knowingly so...

The problem with many US politics issues is the two-party system, which in turn is a result of the voting system. It gives power to the largest minority, keeps out every other minority but the second, and ensures that is strategic policy fields, those two will stay as close as can be.

But that call for a major revamp of the Constitution (impossible wiuth the two ruling minorities) is for another forum...

 

[cjnewson88]

The concerns about 9/11 fell into two "camps" viz (a) The main technical claims which have been given the focus. WTC times 3, Pentagon and Shanksville. AND (b) The "political" issues which have not been given the same emphasis until relatively recent legal claims.

The big concerns lie in the range of political issues. Starting with the reality that the USA stuffed up on a grand scale by not preventing 9/11 ... for whatever complex of reasons. The technical discussion has wasted a lot of energy and time debating four (or five) sub-sets of false claims. Thereby diverting attention from the political issues.

I've been suggesting for some time that AE911 led by R Gage has been defacto a most effective Government Shill. Whether intentional or not. I agree with Axxman's assessment.

The focus primarily on false claims for CD at WTC and, to a lesser extent on Pentagon and Shanksville, has deflected attention. And that suits a range of political goals. Ranging from the low level "We made a big balls up" up to the major strategic issue of "The United States is Saudi Arabia's b*tch." Criticism of political performance is not a popular theme for politicians of either camp. (Unless there is critical mass for the pursuit of the political agenda.)

"Let's keep them talking around in circles about those technical issues" is and possibly has been a very attractive choice for political pragmatists. Gage, AE911 and most of the "Truth Movement" have certainly behaved like: "willing chumps to obscure the truth".

Hit the nail on the head. I've said for quite a while now that the best thing to happened to those who had a share in the responsibility of sep 11, was the invention of 9/11 conspiracy theories. Millions of people arguing about controlled demolitions, fake planes, fake crash sites, all muddied the waters to the point that the actual (albeit less sensational and "boring") behind-the-scenes of 9/11 got missed.

The ultimate irony that 9/11 conspiracy theorists actually helped those allegedly involved get away with it.

 

[dudalb]

I don't like the Saudi's very much.
But the problem I have with a number of the ANti Saudi people is they seem to be in love with Iran, which IMHO Is no better the the Saudis.
I would rather we kept both at arms length as much as possible.

 

[theprestige]

I don't like the Saudi's very much.
But the problem I have with a number of the ANti Saudi people is they seem to be in love with Iran, which IMHO Is no better the the Saudis.
I would rather we kept both at arms length as much as possible.

The reason the Saudis get a pass is because they offer something of value in exchange for their shenanigans: marginal stability. I assume they're generating a certain amount of instability, in order to maintain demand for their product. So **** 'em. ****' em right in the ear. Just as soon as Iran offers a better deal.

 

[bknight]

The reason the Saudis get a pass is because they offer something of value in exchange for their shenanigans: marginal stability. I assume they're generating a certain amount of instability, in order to maintain demand for their product. So **** 'em. ****' em right in the ear. Just as soon as Iran offers a better deal.

The only way Iran will ever offer a better deal is when they are allowed to build the bomb. Not likely IMO.

 

[theprestige]

Put me down for, Iran with the bomb would be an even worse deal.

 

[Allen773]

The only way Iran will ever offer a better deal is when they are allowed to build the bomb. Not likely IMO.

It’s almost as if things like lumping them in with an Axis of Evil, assassinating their nuclear scientists via the services of a terrorist cult of exiles that sided with Saddam Hussein in the Iran-Iraq War (the MEK), unilaterally withdrawing from the JCPOA, crippling “maximum pressure” sanctions that seem to hurt everyone but Iranian leaders, and assassinating a top Iranian General aren’t conducive to the prospects of Iran wanting a “better deal.”

To be clear, Iran has been a mendacious regime, both to the Iranian people in terms of human rights and religious persecution and within the region, especially its actions and influence in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Israel-Palestine, along with Yemen in more recent years. But then, so have Saudi Arabia (and the UAE, and Qatar, Turkey, and—especially in Syria—Russia). As have China and yes, Western countries like the US, UK, and France along with Israel have their own shares of the blame. No clean hands here.

The question, therefore, is what exactly are America’s national interests in this region, and to what extent do they actually line up with our existing alignment with certain countries over others. That’s relevant to 9/11, not just in terms of Saudi involvement in the attacks and Wahhabism/Salafi jihadism and sectarian violence and oppression more broadly (especially within the Islamic world), which MUST factor into whether anyone in good faith can call that regime an “ally” of the United States (or Western democracies in general, or human rights and democratic efforts in MENA…KSA is, not surprisingly, especially hostile to such efforts within the region), but also, to what extent US-led policies in the region both before and after 9/11 might—just might—have something to do with why some people don’t like us very much.

 

[zorro99]

The irony is our current President will meet, and glad-hand, and generally suck up to the Saudis this week. There will be one or two carefully worded (agreed upon in advance) speeches where human rights may be mentioned. The Saudis will smile politely, and the President will smile politely, and maybe the price of oil will drop $35 per gallon.

.*

More disgusting is The former president takes Saudi blood money and plays golf with them while spreading 9/11 conspiracy theories.