A) Veterans Today is a neo-Nazi conspiracy theory publications with close ties to the Iranian government. B) Who are these two congress people? What is the original source for these claims? Upon further reading of your article none of the claims made in the article bare any semblance to what the congress people called for IE to release the redacted report on 9-11 in full, they are not claiming nor have they ever claimed that anyone but Al-Qaeda was responsible for the 9-11 attacks, your laughable article takes that call for releasing the report and jumps from that to a bunch of debunked troofer talking points. C) Where is the evidence that Bandar who considers himself a Hamiltonian and supports greater Saudi relations with Israel making him a die hard liberal within the Arab world was involved in any way with the Islamic radicals who brought down the twin towers, struck the Pentagon, and brought down flight 93? D) What exactly is Bandars relationship with Bandar? E) This article belongs squarely in the conspiracy theory subforum.
Reps. Walter Jones (R-NC) and Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) More detail here http://nypost.com/2013/12/15/inside-the-saudi-911-coverup/
I rarely support President Bush, but he made the right decision to censor these documents. There wasn't a state sponsor of the 9/11 hijackers but no one can see it, even now. That's why this censorship was the correct choice.
I find it strange that this is appearing just as our relationships with Saudi Arabia is souring over their support of Al Queda in Syria. It should have soured after 911. We had a perfect excuse to grab the oil wells, instead we went and attacked Afghanistan and Iraq. Did Prince Bandar fool us? Maybe, or maybe it wasn't feasible at that time because of the oil flow.
just some background information...... The Russian-Saudi Showdown at Sochi Saudi Arabia threatens Russia with Olympic Terror Saudis offer Russia secret oil deal if it drops Syria
Do you think Prince Bonder is capable to do anything he wants to? This is US, the super power in the world. Bonder was only a tool used by the Feds (DOD and DOJ) to commint the 911 attack. All of them came from friendly allies of US. Why? Because in case of an investigation, an ally will testify for what the Feds said. While other countries won't lie for this fraud case.
Saudi won't follow US as it used to be. That's why they released this news to intimidate. If you dare to criticize, we'll charge you for "committing 911 attack". It is not an attempt to reveal the 911 truth. It is just another dirty political trick of intimidation. And they play you fools, poor steeples.
Considering that most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis, and that Bush's regime quickly jumped on 9/11 as an opportunity to take the US to war in two countries that had nothing to do with the attacks, should this really come as any surprise?
Why should we have waited to go after al Qaeda and the Taliban? And we didn't need 9/11 for an opportunity to remove Saddam, the US had already made the decision, in 1998, he could not be allowed to remain in power before 9/11 took place.
Erm, no, 9/11 was an act of terrorism. It was not an act committed by any one state or government. Neither did we go to any declared war against any one nation in response to it. Bush declared war on terrorism, which makes about as much sense as the war on drugs and will ultimately prove just as fruitful.
Maybe that's why the 9/11 Commission Report, meant to be "comprehensive", decided, after indications of financing from Saudi Arabia, that determining who financed the attack was no big deal! Really? I would think that's pretty important!
We are STILL waiting!!! AQ, according to the USA, have their strongest presence in the whole world in Syria, where they are left completely unmolested to carry out their genocide against Kurds, Christians, other Muslims et. al. and they have even established their own safe-haven there, with loads of weapons, flying the flag and the lot. Meanwhile, Obama bombards mystery targets he can't identify for us, in Yemen, and elsewhere, claiming they are AQ. So it's hard to hear about an earnest desire to "go after" AQ. As for the Taliban, similar can be said.. In fact, read about the "reconciliation" plans with John Kerry and Obama that would have Taliban members able to hold political office in Kabul!
Did you elect a representative? If you did, you gave him/her the authority to act on your behalf. If you didn't like the decision made, then I hope you voted for someone else. That's how it works in this Republic. - - - Updated - - - When you have the proof get back to us.
The first attack on the world trade center was not declared an act of war by Clinton. The FBI was called on to arrest the Shik who lead the bombing of the WTC in 1998. It was Bush Jr. who declared an act of war was committed by the terrorist group Al Qaeda who trained in Afghanistan, which is why we took the fight there.
Do you recall what happened in the seventies when the Arab nations imposed an oil embargo on the West for supporting Israel, and a barrel of oil jumped from three dollars a barrel to twelve dollars? We fell into a deep recession and only came out of it years later because of Reagan's new economic policies. The intent of 911 was to destroy the West by having us fall into a deep depression. This was not something Pres. Bush was going to hand to Bin Laden by going to war with Saudi Arabia. Bush had inherited a recession from Clinton, and even with the economic damage of 911, he was able to pull us out of it, so let's give credit where credit is due.
No. In case you hadn't noticed, ours is a screwed up winner-take-all, two-party-dominated, corrupted republic. And then there's the unilaterality of the presidental office we've seen of late besides. I'm tired of every disgusting policy decision made by our so-called leaders being blamed on everyone else simply because we're supposed to have the power to elect whom we want representing us.
Read what? What did you read that convinced you, and how did it manage to rule out every single country?
Do I have to connect the dots and draw the lines for you? Read the link of the opening post. In the post-9/11 hysteria the Bush administration took actions to secure the safety of certain groups and people who would be open to revenge attack, wrongfully, by a population too mad and shell shocked to understand the reality of the situation, and identify who was or was not an enemy. Was there Saudi Arabian state sponsorship of immigration into the USA? Yes. Was it state sponsorship of terrorism on the part of Saudi Arabia? No. The 9/11 hijackers were just the latest in a long line of people who came into the USA using some kind of buddy system, or underground railroad... I don't know what to call it, but just the Saudi diplomats were in on the process of getting many immigrants clothes, food, houses, money and social connections... All so they could start a new life here in America. This was a humanitarian gesture, and they had no idea there would be terrorism from all of this. In the pre-9/11 world terrorism in the USA wasn't even a concept. How little any of us knew and understood the reality of the situation.
So what, you're calling for a revolution? Because short of that things are not going to change as long voters choose the party over the candidates. Unfortunately even that may not be the solution as it seems many who do go to Washington with an agenda to support those who elected them eventually get beaten down and forced to follow the Washington pack. Ted Cruz might be the only one who has so far resisted the thugs in Washington.
