Saudi Involvement In 9-11

[conehead433]

There are twenty eight pages missing from the report on intelligence failures leading up to 9-11 in an effort to protect the Saudi Arabia government's involvement in the 9-11 hijackings and the destruction that followed. At least two and possibly more of the hijackers were funded and aided directly by highly ranked officials in the Saudi government. According to Senator Bob Graham these government members of the nation in question were not rogue members, implying that the government of this nation was actively involved in supporting the activities of these individuals. And the current administration is apparently trying to protect this country from the truth being known by not allowing this part of the report to be publicly available. Suppose it has something to with oil.

Graham On Fox

 

[MonstaThrilla]

Our nation's soul was sold to the Saud royal family decades ago, and we've been paying for their oil with American lives ever since. Previous administrations are just as guilty as the current one for protecting the Saudis. It looks to me that no President has the guts to break the relationship.

What needs to be done? A President needs to "challenge" the nation to develop alternative forms of energy within a certain time frame (a decade or so) much like Kennedy challenged the nation to reach the moon before the decade was out. Not the half assed work we've been doing, but a real "American" effort. Then, we could break all ties with the Sauds (and the entire Middle East for that matter) and leave them to rot in their own religious fundamentalism. Of course, we should finish the jobs we started in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Israel/Palestine and hopefully promote moderate to liberal Arab governments, which will show the rest of the region the benefits of the free society and free market...

 

[JellyBaby]

Suppose it has something to with oil.

I believe I read somewhere the Saudis also own a considerable chunk of our stock market as well.

 

[Nitemare]

I would not be surprised if the Saudi royal family bankrolled the entire thing

 

[sMiLeYz]

I think why the funding part of the report was censored because they wanted to save face, for both the Bush families and the Saudi's. They know if they block that part, the less the chances of the media and the public connecting the dots.

Iraq was infact primarily invaded for oil, but that's not the only reason. Iraq posed no threat, but Saddam was a nussiance anyway who was universally reviled. They know the Saudi's hate Americans, but we have to deal with them because they supply our oil. So the administration cut ties with the Saudi's, withdrew US troops earlier last year rather quietly. With Iraq occupied, the neocons can control the flow of the oil without having to depend on the Saudi's.

Absolutely brilliant I say. Cold, calculating, manipulative, but nonetheless brilliant.

Don't be surprised if Saudia Arabia is next US target.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Originally posted by: Nitemare
I would not be surprised if the Saudi royal family bankrolled the entire thing

 

[Tripleshot]

Suadi's are pissed. They're flying to DC now to kick Bush's ass for taking the 28 pages out of the congressional report on 9/11. That 28 pages removed point a finger at Suadi Arabia as being the supporters and sponser of 9/11, monitarily and socially.

Now maybe we'll get some answers.

Saudi to meet with Bush on report

 

[MonstaThrilla]

It is rather ironic that taking out those 28 pages have probably brought more attention to the Saudi involvement then leaving those pages in would have.

 

[Moonbeam]

People with money have friends.

 

[DealMonkey]

Once again, the gov't is essentially telling the U.S. public, "You're all too stupid to understand what's going on here. Just ignore all of this and go back to watching your reality TV and police chases on FoxNews."

 

[Tripleshot]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Once again, the gov't is essentially telling the U.S. public, "You're all too stupid to understand what's going on here. Just ignore all of this and go back to watching your reality TV and police chases on FoxNews."

Yea, they wish.

 

[UltraQuiet]

I was watching the news this evening and Sen. Roberts was saying he didn't understand why the majority of those pages were still classified. He said that in his opinion there was stuff in those pages that would take some of the heat off the intel community and there was also some stuff in there about "missed opportunities" where the intel community wanted to act but were not allowed to. He also hinted that there is some info. in those pages that is critical to both the current admin. and the last one.

Just as a side note, those pages are classified and I think anyone who reveals what is in them should be shot. Our civilian leadership has way too cavalier an attitude towards classified info. IMO.

 

[Zebo]

It's amazing the power the president has.. All he would have had to say... "15/19 hijackers were from SA, Al queda raises the funds and trains thier troops in SA" "We can't comprise source and methods.." "but we must act now against SA"

And we would have hit SA instead of afganistan.. Seems independent verification is'nt needed and plenty of evidence was there for action agaist SA, now it's missing.

Basically i get the impression he can direct a war almost twards any country while completely ignoring another just as guilty.

His choice. His message. We must accept it. The press and pundits run with it. Then we repeat it on these boards.

 

[Martin]

An idea came to me while I was watching the news. These pages seem to be masked by a marker. Now if the people 'erasing' the pages didn't go over the lines with the markers many times, chances you could sitll read what was written with some effort. Someone who has a copy of the report should try to read what those pages say and then leak it to the press.

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
I think why the funding part of the report was censored because they wanted to save face, for both the Bush families and the Saudi's. They know if they block that part, the less the chances of the media and the public connecting the dots.

Iraq was infact primarily invaded for oil, but that's not the only reason. Iraq posed no threat, but Saddam was a nussiance anyway who was universally reviled. They know the Saudi's hate Americans, but we have to deal with them because they supply our oil. So the administration cut ties with the Saudi's, withdrew US troops earlier last year rather quietly. With Iraq occupied, the neocons can control the flow of the oil without having to depend on the Saudi's.

Absolutely brilliant I say. Cold, calculating, manipulative, but nonetheless brilliant.

Don't be surprised if Saudia Arabia is next US target.

Iraq was the fall guy for Saudi Arabia. I doubt we would invade Saudi Arabia since they are all too eagar to please us and work with us. Think of it in the same fashion as the war on drugs and how it is being fought. In my opinion is that like the "war on drugs", this "war on terror" shall and will become a big time money making industry on both sides.

 

[BarneyFife]

The thing that would worry me if I was the King of Saudi Arabia is that this is the only subject EVERYONE agrees upon. Liberals and conservatives agree that Saudi Arabia is an enemy. This never happens on anything else.

 

[DKlein]

Think of it in the same fashion as the war on drugs is being fought. In my opinion is that like the "war on drugs", this "war on terror" shall and will become a big time money making industry on both sides.

Couldn't have said it better, and it already has. How much have we spent already? How much in the future? I've decided that politicians, at least a good number of them (by no means all), act for two things and two things alone: 1) to get re-elected and 2) to serve their own personal interests (special interest groups, friends, own greed) as best they can while still doing #1, and I'm not even too sure #1 plays much more of a factor than that in their thinking.

 

[JellyBaby]

Originally posted by: Zebo
It's amazing the power the president has.. All he would have had to say... "15/19 hijackers were from SA, Al queda raises the funds and trains thier troops in SA" "We can't comprise source and methods.." "but we must act now against SA"

And we would have hit SA instead of afganistan.. Seems independent verification is'nt needed and plenty of evidence was there for action agaist SA, now it's missing.

Basically i get the impression he can direct a war almost twards any country while completely ignoring another just as guilty.

His choice. His message. We must accept it. The press and pundits run with it. Then we repeat it on these boards.

The system was designed to prevent this very thing. That's why the constitution gives the war-making power to Congress. For Iraq the cowards transferred their authority to the executive for purely political reasons, without a care in the world for the rule of law they're oblidged to follow or to the long term consequences of that stupidity.

 

[Alistar7]

Too bad OBL was actually in Afghanistan and not SA..

SmileyZ SA is not our main supplier of oil, we barely get 30% out of the entire ME anymore....

 

[cpumaster]

Who is our main supplier Ali007? Iran? N. Korea? maybe that's why Bush is too afraid to talk with N. Korea, they might cut our oil supply.

Of course the lesson learn by the world from this war and our dealing with N. Korea is that if you really have WMD and openly declare them, then you're safer from attack by us than if you don't or try hard to conceal them....

 

[Phuz]

Originally posted by: Alistar7
SmileyZ SA is not our main supplier of oil, we barely get 30% out of the entire ME anymore....

Don't believe everything you read.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: JellyBaby

Originally posted by: Zebo
It's amazing the power the president has.. All he would have had to say... "15/19 hijackers were from SA, Al queda raises the funds and trains thier troops in SA" "We can't comprise source and methods.." "but we must act now against SA"

And we would have hit SA instead of afganistan.. Seems independent verification is'nt needed and plenty of evidence was there for action agaist SA, now it's missing.

Basically i get the impression he can direct a war almost twards any country while completely ignoring another just as guilty.

His choice. His message. We must accept it. The press and pundits run with it. Then we repeat it on these boards.

The system was designed to prevent this very thing. That's why the constitution gives the war-making power to Congress. For Iraq the cowards transferred their authority to the executive for purely political reasons, without a care in the world for the rule of law they're oblidged to follow or to the long term consequences of that stupidity.

The President didn't need the permission of any Congressman to send troops to Iraq. He can deploy troops as he pleases.

 

[0roo0roo]

Sleeping With the Devil: How Washington Sold Our Soul for Saudi Crude

 

[zantac]

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet


The President didn't need the permission of any Congressman to send troops to Iraq. He can deploy troops as he pleases.

Only if the United States is under attack and there is insufficient time to discuss and pass a resolution to use force. Just because Congress hasnt allways checked the president before sending troops doesnt mean the President can send troops at whim without Congressional oversight.
And Congress can order the President to remove troops if they feel so inclined.
Title 50 of the US Code is a good read

 

[UltraQuiet]

Originally posted by: zantac

Originally posted by: Ultra Quiet


The President didn't need the permission of any Congressman to send troops to Iraq. He can deploy troops as he pleases.

Only if the United States is under attack and there is insufficient time to discuss and pass a resolution to use force. Just because Congress hasnt allways checked the president before sending troops doesnt mean the President can send troops at whim without Congressional oversight.
And Congress can order the President to remove troops if they feel so inclined.
Title 50 of the US Code is a good read

If you are talking about War Powers sorry, it's not gonna float. The War Powers Act was largely a feel good law that was passed after Vietnam to give Congress the illusion they control the .mil. They do not. All Presidents ignore it and no Congress will ever invoke it because everyone knows if it ever goes to the Supreme Copurt it is going to get struck down as being unconstitutional. Only Congress can declare war but the President controls the .mil. Federal and Supreme court decisions have made this clear time and time again.