Posted on 12/20/2013 8:16:51 AM PST by bayouranger
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/12/16/what-do-the-saudis-have-on-us-buck-sexton-reveals-the-alarming-answer/
http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/an-act-of-war-cia-leak-gives-incontrovertible-evidence-that-911-was-state-sponsored_12162013
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=226807
Let’s ROLL!
A lot of what was done after 9-11 doesn't make sense to me. But if we're investigating it, what motive is being suggested for the actions the article is highlighting? In other words, if the writer has an alternative explanation for reality, I'd like to know what it is. Or even what he guesses it is.
I don’t have any basis to doubt the validity of this reporting, but to me the obvious question is, what was the motive was for Saudi Arabia to sponsor 9/11? Where was the benefit to them, given how dependent they are generally on the US?
What Do the Saudis have on Us; Buck Sexton Reveals the Alarming Answer
An Act of War: CIA Leak Gives Incontrovertible Evidence that 9/11 was State-sponsored
(trying to help & boning up on html)
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/343665/america-s-fast-pass-saudi-arabia-michelle-malkin
DHS fast tracks Saudi Visas
Democrat Bob Graham, the former Florida senator who chaired the Joint Inquiry...
So these three clowns are driving this conspiracy theory?
It's only a matter of time before Henry Waxman and Al Franken jump on board.
My guess is Bush-Cheney-Wolfowitz and the neo-cons wanted a war with just Iraq because it was ‘doable’, we would be welcomed and oil would pay for it. Besides they were working on the mushroom cloud like Iran it today. Syria also has weapons of destruction. Our policy is find a reason to ‘whack-a-mole’ one country at a time, maybe Saudi thinks that is a good idea.
The Saudi involvement will lead back to the Clintons because there is at least a 4th strike not just 3 and the 4th strike leads back to the Clintons for another terrorist attack during the Clinton years.
About 3 years ago an ABC news producer said he had received some information from Saudi intelligence which had received the info from an unnamed source.
The information turned out to be completely false, but it was intended to help then President Bill Clinton spin the news to his political advantage after a terrorist attack.
After the terrorist attack, instead of just running with the false info and presenting it as fact as was intended, ABC news did the unexpected and turned the info over to the FBI which confirmed it was false.
The terrorist attack was the OKC bombing and the false info could only come from the Clinton WH.
Saudi Arabia has a split personality. The ruling family lives in great wealth and comfort. They financially support the religion (which is the same as supporting a war because Islam is always at war) because they feel they should. The fact that the religion they’re supporting disdains them and their money is irrelevant because it can’t do it to their faces. Being good Muslims they must do this. So, on the one hand they need us to pay them for their oil and on the other they want us all dead or converted to their version of Islam.
I doubt the official government had anything to do with 9/11. But individuals in the government (and every prince is to one extent or another “in” the government) have and continue to support jihad with their money. But it’s guilt money; a paltry sum just to save face and show their equivalent of religious “patriotism.” Very few would commit their all. About a decade ago one of their imams who was preaching jihad had his son arrested and returned home for trying to go to Iraq to martyr himself. Jihad and martyrdom, you see, is for the great unwashed masses. Not the elite.
Is Saudi Arabia our “friend?” As Churchill said, “Nations don’t have friends. Nations have common interests.” Our common interest is in preventing Iran from getting the bomb. If Iran does get the bomb it will be Saudi Arabia that turned to glass, long before Israel. So, from that perspective they were our friend. But, not so any longer under Obama, who has clearly sided with the Iranians.
I remember back in the early days after both the 1993 Trade Centers Bombing and the 2001, that MANY people were asking why we didn’t retaliate by striking Saudi Arabia. Makes you wonder why, and what the Saudis have on us that they couldn’t do it. I never understood why we attacked Iraq. We could’ve sent in a sniper team to take our Saddam. Saved a lot of lives, too! Since WWII, we have lost our way in battle as well as morality. This will not go down well.
“But if Saudi Arabia’s government was involved, then America needs to clean out our government now, beef up our military and go on a road trip to the land of oil and do a smack down of epic proportions.”
And let’s nuke Mecca while we’re at it.
Either it does or doesn't amount to a clear implication of Saudi Arabia.
If it doesn't - move on.
If it does - Bush Jr. and his team need to be wearing orange and awaiting trial for Treason.
Saudi Arabia certainly has competing factions within its royal family government, and some of them seem to have close...ahem, financial...ties to many American politicians. Since declaring war on the whole country would have seriously messed up a lot of GOP campaign coffers, we instead played the old game of "Let's pretend there are moderates in Saudi Arabia who can help us hunt Al Qaeda."
That would make for a very interesting A DAY IN THE LIFE OF PRESIDENT BUSH.
Agreed, there would be no possible reason for the Saudis to attack the country that keeps the money flowing to them. This story reeks of BS.
ping
It is not unreasonable to assume that this hatred of the USA extended to those in the KSA government.
“At minimum, there is no consequence for taking such a stance, and a maximum, it is a badge of honor within more activist circles,” said a former U.S. official who specialized in tracking Gulf-based jihadist movements and who spoke on the condition of anonymity because much of his work for the government was classified. “Among the more religiously conservative groups, you want to be seen as forward-leaning when it comes to helping fellow Sunnis.”
Guess Elana Kagan couldn’t stop this one:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2013/12/911-families-ecstatic-they-can-finally-sue-saudi-arabia.html
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.