Saudis funded 9-11

Discussion in '9/11' started by Ronstar, Jun 16, 2014.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,464
    Likes Received:
    14,678
    Trophy Points:
    113
    http://nypost.com/2013/12/15/inside-the-saudi-911-coverup/

    A pair of lawmakers who recently read the redacted portion say they are “absolutely shocked” at the level of foreign state involvement in the attacks.

    The Saudis deny any role in 9/11, but the CIA in one memo reportedly found “incontrovertible evidence” that Saudi government officials — not just wealthy Saudi hardliners, but high-level diplomats and intelligence officers employed by the kingdom — helped the hijackers both financially and logistically. The intelligence files cited in the report directly implicate the Saudi embassy in Washington and consulate in Los Angeles in the attacks, making 9/11 not just an act of terrorism, but an act of war.




    when will we hold Saudi Arabia accountable?
     
  2. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,464
    Likes Received:
    14,678
    Trophy Points:
    113
  3. Stndown

    Stndown Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why couldn't the Saudis have the military stood down that day? Point is the stand down was the result of something more 'homegrown' than the Saudis (Bush's card playing buddies) were able to provide.
     
  4. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,464
    Likes Received:
    14,678
    Trophy Points:
    113
    don't derail my thread.

    last warning.

    this thread is about Saudi involvement and funding of 9-11.
     
  5. Stndown

    Stndown Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Saudis were direct associates of the Bush family. How is that derailing it?
     
  6. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,464
    Likes Received:
    14,678
    Trophy Points:
    113
    yes, and this is why Bush refused to release the sealed parts of the 9-11 Commission.

    why won't Obama release these sections? cause Saudi Arabia probably has some severe financial tenticles in the USA.

    plus it would severely embarrass the USA if it turns out our major ally...attacked us.
     
  7. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The Saudis hated OBL and al Qaeda. They didn't fund 9-11..

    Time to release the 28 redacted pages.

    - - - Updated - - -

    The Saudis want to redacted pages released... and they don't think much of Dubya.. As an oilman he was a complete flop.
     
  8. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,464
    Likes Received:
    14,678
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The CIA seems to think that the Saudis DID fund 9-11.
     
  9. Stndown

    Stndown Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0


    I'm glad you see that I wasn't trying to derail your thread. Thanks.
     
  10. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Release them all, total transparency.
     
  11. Stndown

    Stndown Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Bush boys were big pals with the Saudis so, they must think Bush was also involved, correct?
     
  12. Hannibal

    Hannibal New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    10,624
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Have you asked them? Scamper down the hall and let us know, there's a good lad.
     
  13. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,324
    Likes Received:
    861
    Trophy Points:
    113
    That article is disinfo as the proof that the US government planned and carried out the attacks is crushing.
    http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=348380&p=1063729867#post1063729867

    The article was written by sophists who didn't even believe what they were saying themselves.
     
  14. Stndown

    Stndown Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
  15. Ronstar

    Ronstar Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2013
    Messages:
    93,464
    Likes Received:
    14,678
    Trophy Points:
    113
    no its not.
     
  16. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Never.

    P.S. - This has already been posted.
     
  17. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    1) It's not probably - the Saudis do have large economic interests in the U.S. and vice versa is true as well.

    2) Foreign involvement would likely cover more than just Saudi loyalty giving hijackers financial aid. I suspect that it would cover Israeli involvement too, not financially, but the spy ring they had in the U.S. that was keeping an eye on Muslims in New York, among other places. There'd probably be some dirt on the Pakistanis too.
     
  18. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You need some new material scott/cosmored/fatfreddy88/david c,your old stuff isn't relevant anymore
     
  19. Stndown

    Stndown Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The Kean propaganda 'report' is old too so, I guess that's irrelevant now too. Right?
     
  20. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    /the 9/11 report is the definitive work on what happened sept.11,2001

    Not our fault you won't accept the truth,boss.
     
  21. Stndown

    Stndown Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2014
    Messages:
    889
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    'your old stuff isn't relevant anymore'

    That's your line there, right?
     
  22. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Trouble reading now,boss?
     
  23. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Because it isn't the truth. It's a fine report, but it is not 'definitive'.
     
  24. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Definitive enough for me,and it is the truth
     
  25. Jango

    Jango New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Messages:
    2,683
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm not saying that the report isn't truthful, just that it isn't truthful to say that it is 'definitive'.
     

Share This Page