https://www.aol.com/article/news/2020/0 ... /24285901/

This information has been held back and is now being held back by the trump administration because of possible Saudi Arabia's involvement in the attacks of 911. This info is the name of an Embassy Official from Saudi Arabia and provides a link which the families of the victims of the attacks have been seeking for years.

This has been a long saga, painful for the families’ groups and legal efforts. The 43, 44, and 45 administrations have all willfully prevented information from coming to light to preserve status quo with the sandbox royals. It’s absolutely ridiculous.

Aaron747 wrote:

This has been a long saga, painful for the families’ groups and legal efforts. The 43, 44, and 45 administrations have all willfully prevented information from coming to light to preserve status quo with the sandbox royals. It’s absolutely ridiculous.

I agree, it is time for the truth to come out if this information is true. All those people and their families deserve some justice.

There has long been plausible rumors in the media of connections with some Saudi Royals serving in their diplomatic corps in the USA providing funding and advice for those who carried out 9/11 that this disclosure makes very likely true. I have long believed that some of the very extended royal family and diplomats in the USA wanted (and still want) to take over the country from the current clan of the leadership for the power and money it has and supported Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda movement to do so.

Let us not forget the several assassinations by factions of Saudi royals over the decades so adding to the plausibility of supporting the 9/11 connections to try to overthrow them. Supporting an attack on the USA was believe would hope to turn the USA government from the controlling family. The USA has long supported the current Royal line, despite their obscene human rights records, to keep stability in the oil markets, the Persian Gulf region, control of the trading monetary unit of oil as the US Dollar, as well as control of the sacred sites of Islam in the Kingdom. For the surviving victims and families of those who died on 9/11, they have long wanted a deep pocket for many billions in compensation in lawsuits and in revenge for the attacks. Indeed, the Saudi Government should pay for their crimes, but it will never happen.

I'm hoping that the silver lining from covid is that we will create a better world order that does not allow petro chemical dictatorship states to have political influence and makes consumers demand we buy goods from governments that have been transparent and honest with their population and the global community. Its my hope that we will readjust our relationships with the Saudi Arabias, Chinas, Irans, Russias and other governments that have been so dishonest and selfish in this global disease.

holy smoke, no wonder nobody trusts our government.

The links between the House Of Saud and US administrations, is explored, along with much else, in Adam Curtis's film 'Bitter Lake'.
(Curtis has a very individual style, a search should find that film, he does use images and music in sometimes stark and even amusing ways, however he is not a conspiracy theorist, though he attracts them since they are none too bright).

From a meeting on a US warship in the twilight of FDR's time to today...

[quote="Aaron747"]This has been a long saga, painful for the families’ groups and legal efforts. The 43, 44, and 45 administrations have all willfully prevented information from coming to light to preserve status quo with the sandbox royals. It’s absolutely ridiculous.[/quote

do you really think they release this info in error. I am thinking they did it on purpose.

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

This has been a long saga, painful for the families’ groups and legal efforts. The 43, 44, and 45 administrations have all willfully prevented information from coming to light to preserve status quo with the sandbox royals. It’s absolutely ridiculous.

do you really think they release this info in error. I am thinking they did it on purpose.

They do really try to distract people from Trump's failings, even if it means throwing the Saudis under the bus.

49.745 Americans killed by incompetence.. and counting:
https://trumpdeathclock.com/

Best regards
Thomas

IMHO, in 2001 some in the US government knew what was coming and they used it for their own benefit. Create chaos and a war to support the military industry.

marcelh wrote:

IMHO, in 2001 some in the US government knew what was coming and they used it for their own benefit. Create chaos and a war to support the military industry.

To whom are you referring? Potential accuracy really depends on the intended persons.

tommy1808 wrote:

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

This has been a long saga, painful for the families’ groups and legal efforts. The 43, 44, and 45 administrations have all willfully prevented information from coming to light to preserve status quo with the sandbox royals. It’s absolutely ridiculous.

do you really think they release this info in error. I am thinking they did it on purpose.

They do really try to distract people from Trump's failings, even if it means throwing the Saudis under the bus.

49.745 Americans killed by incompetence.. and counting:
https://trumpdeathclock.com/

Best regards
Thomas

Hilarious, not to mention off topic. The petro dynasties of the Middle East are nothing but tools of the real criminals, the global banking and financial cartels. Those cartels, the 1% global elite, manipulate the world like a giant chessboard. The petro kingdoms, the UN, the EU,the US and all global "institutions" are merely arms of the same octopus. Little more than chess pieces to be played against one another by the same master.

Events such as 9/11, ISIS, al-kaida, Covid, etc are simply arenas where they play out their games of manipulation and control.

Flaps wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

do you really think they release this info in error. I am thinking they did it on purpose.

They do really try to distract people from Trump's failings, even if it means throwing the Saudis under the bus.

49.745 Americans killed by incompetence.. and counting:
https://trumpdeathclock.com/

Best regards
Thomas

Hilarious, not to mention off topic. The petro dynasties of the Middle East are nothing but tools of the real criminals, the global banking and financial cartels. Those cartels, the 1% global elite, manipulate the world like a giant chessboard. The petro kingdoms, the UN, the EU,the US and all global "institutions" are merely arms of the same octopus. Little more than chess pieces to be played against one another by the same master.

Events such as 9/11, ISIS, al-kaida, Covid, etc are simply arenas where they play out their games of manipulation and control.

I'd like to see that backed up by some good sources.

Best regards
Thomas

Aaron747 wrote:

marcelh wrote:

IMHO, in 2001 some in the US government knew what was coming and they used it for their own benefit. Create chaos and a war to support the military industry.

To whom are you referring? Potential accuracy really depends on the intended persons.

He refers to "Project for the new American century".
It's a think tank founded in 1997.
"Of the twenty-five people who signed PNAC's founding statement of principles, ten went on to serve in the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_f ... s_Defenses

In 2000 the report "Rebuilding America's Defences" was published. It's a report about discussions over papers written by defense specialist. Nobody "signed off" the report. Nevertheless the report was published by the think tank.

Have a look at the right page:
https://archive.org/details/RebuildingA ... 1/mode/2up

Unfortunately Osama was killed not captured.
I would be curious to know what he has to say about the Saudi embassy connection.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

do you really think they release this info in error. I am thinking they did it on purpose.

They do really try to distract people from Trump's failings, even if it means throwing the Saudis under the bus.

49.745 Americans killed by incompetence.. and counting:
https://trumpdeathclock.com/

Best regards
Thomas

Hilarious! When are you posting the Macron Death Clock, the Johnson Death Clock, the Sánchez Death Clock and the Conte Death Clock? France, UK , Spain and Italy all have per capita death rates far higher than the US rate.

.... and just a few weeks ago it was "they have far more infected than we have". In case you haven´t noticed, you are well on a trajectory to surpassing them, even with only soft reopening considered.

Outside of maybe Italy and very probably UK they don´t need one, as government incompetence didn´t play a role, and even there the governments pretty much all tools at their disposal, none of the governments you listed called it a hoax, none of them ever made clear they don´t care how many die... as long they don´t make the statistics. And they are being generous, attribution only 60% to him doing noting is pretty much a best case estimate that was doubled. You can consider t

Just like UFO videos this is just another distraction from the real, Trump made crisis ..... 9/11 terrorists using Saudi Money did jack about SA, so this won´t either. Plaus Saudi Arabia obviously has the right to kill US residents without any consequences, so what do you expect?

So, you want to make Ridyadh and Mecca disappear over 2997 dead with a fluky connection, but 50.740 dead are seemingly just peachy, as long he confirms judges you like and makes liberals cry, even when the connection is obvious.

Can you please point us to your criticism of Saudia Arabia and Trumps non-reaction to that when they hacked a WP reporter into pieces? Or does that travesty of a pseudo country only get your attention when you need distraction?

best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

do you really think they release this info in error. I am thinking they did it on purpose.

They do really try to distract people from Trump's failings, even if it means throwing the Saudis under the bus.

Bush was a republican. So I can't see how Trump should gain from the release.

Sokes wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

do you really think they release this info in error. I am thinking they did it on purpose.

They do really try to distract people from Trump's failings, even if it means throwing the Saudis under the bus.

Bush was a republican. So I can't see how Trump should gain from the release.

Trump does not care.

casinterest wrote:

Trump does not care.

... about anything or anyone. But himself.

Sokes wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

DLFREEBIRD wrote:

do you really think they release this info in error. I am thinking they did it on purpose.

They do really try to distract people from Trump's failings, even if it means throwing the Saudis under the bus.

Bush was a republican. So I can't see how Trump should gain from the release.

He gains simply by the media paying attention to the 9/11 release, instead of paying attention to the bad Corona response.

petertenthije wrote:

Sokes wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

They do really try to distract people from Trump's failings, even if it means throwing the Saudis under the bus.

Bush was a republican. So I can't see how Trump should gain from the release.

He gains simply by the media paying attention to the 9/11 release, instead of paying attention to the bad Corona response.

And its Obama´s fault! Just like everything else is.....

I am so curious what fake investigations into Democrats Barr´s Department of "Justice" will cook up, just in time for the election, but too close to be laughed out of the courts before it......

Maybe we should start a betting pool.

best regards
Thomas

2001 is a long time ago. I assume the Obama administration also knew about it.
So one can say they are guilty. But for how long is Trump in power? He is also guilty.
That's the beauty about democracy. Politicians are just as dirty, but there are institutions with lots of employees. Knowledge goes through the hands of quite a few. And here was one guy who
a) said to himself that he better obliges unless he wants to make himself guilty. After all, nothing is hidden that shall not be revealed.
b) didn't like it and said to himself that this is a nice chance to blow the whistle.

I strongly disagree that this info was released for political reasons. I guess people will go into denial mode. I predict nobody from the political class will demand action against Saudi Arabia. The political class will try to change the subject or do whatever else is required to not have a discussion about it. Maybe Bill wants to meet Monica again? At least people had something really important to speak about.

alfa164 wrote:

casinterest wrote:

Trump does not care.

... about anything or anyone. But himself.

And Ivanka

Sokes wrote:

2001 is a long time ago. I assume the Obama administration also knew about it.
So one can say they are guilty. But for how long is Trump in power? He is also guilty.
That's the beauty about democracy. Politicians are just as dirty, but there are institutions with lots of employees. Knowledge goes through the hands of quite a few. And here was one guy who
a) said to himself that he better obliges unless he wants to make himself guilty. After all, nothing is hidden that shall not be revealed.
b) didn't like it and said to himself that this is a nice chance to blow the whistle.

I strongly disagree that this info was released for political reasons. I guess people will go into denial mode. I predict nobody from the political class will demand action against Saudi Arabia. The political class will try to change the subject or do whatever else is required to not have a discussion about it. Maybe Bill wants to meet Monica again? At least people had something really important to speak about.

Each of the last three administrations have known - it is one of the worst-kept ‘secrets’ in DC. And twenty years is not very long at all for the victims’ families - especially as there is no semblance of justice yet, just crazy conspiracy videos and empty ‘never forget’ memes.

We knew from the very beginning that some Saudi royals were involved. The Saudi crown is still like the medieval ones - getting to the top is to some extent a bloody game. We have always known we were officially supporting the winners, and had a blind eye toward the losers (some of whom were placated for being losers by being sent to the US). The secret was, we were suppose to all pretend it wasn't so.

I mean, what makes Americans so privileged that they think their lives are more valuable than anyone else's and all those lives lost in America's endless wars? 911 was a rude awakening, the average American life isn't that valuable. AND their families got payouts from the federal government. The Saudi relationship is worth more to American imperialism than those people that died on 911. Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger.

Pellegrine wrote:

I mean, what makes Americans so privileged that they think their lives are more valuable than anyone else's and all those lives lost in America's endless wars? 911 was a rude awakening, the average American life isn't that valuable. AND their families got payouts from the federal government. The Saudi relationship is worth more to American imperialism than those people that died on 911. Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger.

You speak the truth sir!

Economic Times (India) 18.5.20, based on IANS = IndoAsiaNewsService news agency:
"Afghanistan's former spy chief has warned that the Pakistan backed Haqqani network (HQN) is helping banned Islamist terror group al-Qaeda to plan another 9/11 style terror attack against the West
In a series of tweets posted on Sunday, the former director of Afghanistan's National Directorate of Security Rahmatullah Nabil revealed that al-Qaeda continues to be backed by the HQN based in Pakistan.
..."

Same news from another news agency:
https://www.aninews.in/news/world/asia/ ... 517182507/

I first thought this news is about spreading doubts. But googling about "Rahmatullah Nabil" I realized there are important domestic developments in Afghanistan these last days.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/05/ ... 40165.html

I just wonder why an Afghan spy/ politician wants to pick a fight with a neighbor over it.

If Trump really wants to make peace with Afghanistan it may actually help if news about the Saudi connection of 9/11 is revealed. "Sorry, but we attacked the wrong country." At any rate Project for the new American century's aim of strengthening America's military power was achieved. And what better country to choose than Afghanistan? These are very tough guys with a very big youth bulge. They would have probably slaughtered each other anyway.

"The level of fertility in Afghanistan has been very high. Most probable estimates (UN
Population Division, 2013) suggest that the total fertility rate (TFR) was 7.7 children per
woman in 1975 –1980, increasing gradually to 7.9 by 1990–1995 and then starting a slow
decline, reaching a level of about 6.3 in 2005. Today the TFR is most probably in the range
of 5.1 to 6.0 (UNFPA Country Office for Afghanistan, 2012). Fertility in Afghanistan has been
characterized by an early age at first birth, short birth intervals and continuing childbearing
until advanced ages. "
p.21, https://afghanistan.unfpa.org/sites/def ... dend_0.pdf

Sounds like my mother in law. She lost one of her seven children due to diarrhoea. In a sense she was "lucky". She has a friend who lost more than half her children. If the US "occupation" brought some change in fertility rate and urbanization, it may or may not have been worth the killings.
Should the US leave Afghanistan?

Is this news about Rahmatullah Nabil's tweets also in Western media or is it reported from a more known news agency?
It may simply be an inner Afghan drama. I wouldn't attach too much importance to the news. But I believe it's worth considering it.

Aaron747 wrote:

Pellegrine wrote:

I mean, what makes Americans so privileged that they think their lives are more valuable than anyone else's and all those lives lost in America's endless wars? 911 was a rude awakening, the average American life isn't that valuable. AND their families got payouts from the federal government. The Saudi relationship is worth more to American imperialism than those people that died on 911. Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger.

You speak the truth sir!

I wish it weren't like that, and I wish I could put blinders back on sometimes, but it is the way it is.

Pellegrine wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

Pellegrine wrote:

I mean, what makes Americans so privileged that they think their lives are more valuable than anyone else's and all those lives lost in America's endless wars? 911 was a rude awakening, the average American life isn't that valuable. AND their families got payouts from the federal government. The Saudi relationship is worth more to American imperialism than those people that died on 911. Don't shoot me, I'm just the messenger.

You speak the truth sir!

I wish it weren't like that, and I wish I could put blinders back on sometimes, but it is the way it is.

Do you suggest Saudi attacked the US without the knowledge of the US government?
Assuming it is so. Why would they wait for Clinton to leave office and Bush to enter office? Because Clinton was considered too tough after Somalia?

Sokes wrote:

Do you suggest Saudi attacked the US without the knowledge of the US government?
Assuming it is so. Why would they wait for Clinton to leave office and Bush to enter office? Because Clinton was considered too tough after Somalia?

The coverup is always juicier than the crime. Always. Imagine the scale of this crime, then imagine at what scale the coverup has to be.

Anyone can add it up themselves if they know about American history post-WWII and the Saudi Royal Family. The core of the Saudi Royal Family aren't a bunch of international terrorists (they just terrorize their own people) and they value the relationship with America. I postulate that if "the third man" was al-Jarrah then there has to be a "fourth man". That "fourth man" is a member of the Saudi Royal Family who quite possibly went rogue. Also remember that bin Laden came from a very wealthy, very well connected family in the Kingdom. Knowing the leadership style of KSA, the "third man" and "fourth man" quite possibly might be dead at this point. If they aren't, they certainly will never leave the Kingdom, and are never going to be interviewed. The connections are what intelligence services are hiding...and for good reason. We still need Saudi to pump cheap oil. So, it is better to forget this "little incident" and move on...establish a counter-terrorism operation in Saudi which is what happened...and just move on. Sorry to the survivors who get no closure from the government.

Pellegrine wrote:

Imagine the scale of this crime, then imagine at what scale the coverup has to be.

It's not so difficult to imagine. Nero burned the capital of the world. You want something to imagine: Imagine on 9/11 New York would have burned down.

Pellegrine wrote:

I postulate that if "the third man" was al-Jarrah then there has to be a "fourth man". That "fourth man" is a member of the Saudi Royal Family who quite possibly went rogue.

How can you say that there has to be a fourth man?

Pellegrine wrote:

Also remember that bin Laden came from a very wealthy, very well connected family in the Kingdom.

Which was moreover ordered "killed, not captured" in his hideout one km away from Pakistan's military academy.

Pellegrine wrote:

We still need Saudi to pump cheap oil. So, it is better to forget this "little incident" and move on

That's one possible explanation.
Alternatively some hot heads in the Bush administration may have asked the Saudis for a favor. Did you read the one page of the report of "The Project For the New American Century"? I gave the link in a post above.

Bush attacked Iraq which had nothing to do with it, nor had weapons of mass destruction. As it looks now, 9/11 was organized by the Saudis. So why attack Afghanistan? Maybe it's a financial interest, maybe some people wanted some action to fight their boredom.
I struggle to believe that the US wouldn't make a regime change in Saudi Arabia if the embassy had to organize 9/11 by themselves without US involvement.

Sokes wrote:

Pellegrine wrote:

Imagine the scale of this crime, then imagine at what scale the coverup has to be.

It's not so difficult to imagine. Nero burned the capital of the world. You want something to imagine: Imagine on 9/11 New York would have burned down.

Pellegrine wrote:

I postulate that if "the third man" was al-Jarrah then there has to be a "fourth man". That "fourth man" is a member of the Saudi Royal Family who quite possibly went rogue.

How can you say that there has to be a fourth man?

Pellegrine wrote:

Also remember that bin Laden came from a very wealthy, very well connected family in the Kingdom.

Which was moreover ordered "killed, not captured" in his hideout one km away from Pakistan's military academy.

Pellegrine wrote:

We still need Saudi to pump cheap oil. So, it is better to forget this "little incident" and move on

That's one possible explanation.
Alternatively some hot heads in the Bush administration may have asked the Saudis for a favor. Did you read the one page of the report of "The Project For the New American Century"? I gave the link in a post above.

Bush attacked Iraq which had nothing to do with it, nor had weapons of mass destruction. As it looks now, 9/11 was organized by the Saudis. So why attack Afghanistan? Maybe it's a financial interest, maybe some people wanted some action to fight their boredom.
I struggle to believe that the US wouldn't make a regime change in Saudi Arabia if the embassy had to organize 9/11 by themselves without US involvement.

They would not so easily risk regime change with petrodollar stability at stake.

Aaron747 wrote:

They would not so easily risk regime change with petrodollar stability at stake.

Good point. Regime change in Iran didn't work out so nicely.

Bin Laden's background, his hideout one km from Pakistan's military academy, the desire not to capture him alive, the military offensive of Northern Alliance within hours of the 9/11 attacks, the war against Iraq, Project for the new American century's report with "catalyzing event such as a new Pearl Harbor" and now involvement of the Saudi Embassy, long known by US authorities.
This is all fishy, and I haven't even touched conspiracy theories. I believe the Bush administration wanted war and needed a reason for it.
I admit none of above's incidents give any conclusive proof. It may or may not all be a coincidence.

I must say that I believe that in terrorism there is nearly always a state actor who pulls the strings.
I further believe the actual terrorists are useful fools. They believe they can blackmail a people through fear. That's a wrong assumption. On the opposite people rally behind their leaders. That's how a politician can get his enemy to do his job. A terrorist may be financed by the very politician the terrorist believes he attacks.

Sokes wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

They would not so easily risk regime change with petrodollar stability at stake.

Good point. Regime change in Iran didn't work out so nicely.

Bin Laden's background, his hideout one km from Pakistan's military academy, the desire not to capture him alive, the military offensive of Northern Alliance within hours of the 9/11 attacks, the war against Iraq, Project for the new American century's report with "catalyzing event such as a new Pearl Harbor" and now involvement of the Saudi Embassy, long known by US authorities.
This is all fishy, and I haven't even touched conspiracy theories. I believe the Bush administration wanted war and needed a reason for it.
I admit none of above's incidents give any conclusive proof. It may or may not all be a coincidence.

I must say that I believe that in terrorism there is nearly always a state actor who pulls the strings.
I further believe the actual terrorists are useful fools. They believe they can blackmail a people through fear. That's a wrong assumption. On the opposite people rally behind their leaders. That's how a politician can get his enemy to do his job. A terrorist may be financed by the very politician the terrorist believes he attacks.

It wan'st just the Bush Administration that were in favor of the Iraq killings. Numerous Democrats also voted in favor. Including their last 2 presidential candidates!

Sokes wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

They would not so easily risk regime change with petrodollar stability at stake.

Good point. Regime change in Iran didn't work out so nicely.

The first regime change in Iran seemed to have worked out just fine for the instigators. The 2nd time became a problem when the Ayatollah decided not to play along after they (along DE/FR/UK) installed him, and refused to be the same sort of puppet as the Shah was.

Best regards
Thomas

LCDFlight wrote:

Sokes wrote:

Aaron747 wrote:

They would not so easily risk regime change with petrodollar stability at stake.

Good point. Regime change in Iran didn't work out so nicely.

Bin Laden's background, his hideout one km from Pakistan's military academy, the desire not to capture him alive, the military offensive of Northern Alliance within hours of the 9/11 attacks, the war against Iraq, Project for the new American century's report with "catalyzing event such as a new Pearl Harbor" and now involvement of the Saudi Embassy, long known by US authorities.
This is all fishy, and I haven't even touched conspiracy theories. I believe the Bush administration wanted war and needed a reason for it.
I admit none of above's incidents give any conclusive proof. It may or may not all be a coincidence.

I must say that I believe that in terrorism there is nearly always a state actor who pulls the strings.
I further believe the actual terrorists are useful fools. They believe they can blackmail a people through fear. That's a wrong assumption. On the opposite people rally behind their leaders. That's how a politician can get his enemy to do his job. A terrorist may be financed by the very politician the terrorist believes he attacks.

It wan'st just the Bush Administration that were in favor of the Iraq killings. Numerous Democrats also voted in favor. Including their last 2 presidential candidates!

I am not sure how far members of Congress are to blame in general though, given that they voted based on faked and/or oversold intel provided by the Government. Had Iraq in deed possessed WMD, or an active program to get them, a vote to stop Saddam would be much more understandable.

I am not sure that many members, regardless of party, would have voted for war had they known that everything in Iraq was hunky-dory WMD wise.

So "just the Bush administration", as in just their members, maybe correct, as only they knew the justification was made up. But it was a neat gamble to get the old Iraq back, the one that conveniently very much opposed Iran.

Best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

The first regime change in Iran seemed to have worked out just fine for the instigators. The 2nd time became a problem when the Ayatollah decided not to play along after they (along DE/FR/UK) installed him, and refused to be the same sort of puppet as the Shah was.

Best regards
Thomas

I don't understand what you mean. I guess you refer to this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Car ... h_Khomeini
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_S ... acy_theory

I don't know if I should believe it. As I believe that psychopaths with morals and convictions according to convenience have the best chance to come out on top, I can believe it. But it may as well be fake to humiliate Iran's religious authorities.
Iran Contra fits the second theory. Sounds like with Pakistan the last decades.

My impression is that Iran is one of the more progressive Islamic societies. Maybe that's exactly the problem for the mullahs. In a friendly coexistence with the West liberal tendencies may win the upper hand. A common enemy however helps to unite the people. There was no good reason for the US embassy drama. In the absence of a good explanation I shall stick to my assumption.
For the West also a policy of divide and rule may be best to keep the oil rich region in check.

I'm confused. I can only assume. Today's friend is tomorrows enemy in that area. And some enmities may be fake, as both sides profit. What to believe?

Sokes wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

The first regime change in Iran seemed to have worked out just fine for the instigators. The 2nd time became a problem when the Ayatollah decided not to play along after they (along DE/FR/UK) installed him, and refused to be the same sort of puppet as the Shah was.

Best regards
Thomas

I don't understand what you mean. I guess you refer to this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Car ... h_Khomeini

+ the Guadeloupe Conference.

Best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

+ the Guadeloupe Conference.

Best regards
Thomas

I see.
I must have unconsciously assumed that there has always been a conflict with Islam when Islam some decades ago was seen as a useful tool to defeat socialism.
Thanks for the history lesson.

Sieg oder Sozialismus!
Erdaepfel oder Kartoffeln.

Sokes wrote:

Pellegrine wrote:

Imagine the scale of this crime, then imagine at what scale the coverup has to be.

It's not so difficult to imagine. Nero burned the capital of the world. You want something to imagine: Imagine on 9/11 New York would have burned down.

Pellegrine wrote:

I postulate that if "the third man" was al-Jarrah then there has to be a "fourth man". That "fourth man" is a member of the Saudi Royal Family who quite possibly went rogue.

How can you say that there has to be a fourth man?

Pellegrine wrote:

Also remember that bin Laden came from a very wealthy, very well connected family in the Kingdom.

Which was moreover ordered "killed, not captured" in his hideout one km away from Pakistan's military academy.

Pellegrine wrote:

We still need Saudi to pump cheap oil. So, it is better to forget this "little incident" and move on

That's one possible explanation.
Alternatively some hot heads in the Bush administration may have asked the Saudis for a favor. Did you read the one page of the report of "The Project For the New American Century"? I gave the link in a post above.

Bush attacked Iraq which had nothing to do with it, nor had weapons of mass destruction. As it looks now, 9/11 was organized by the Saudis. So why attack Afghanistan? Maybe it's a financial interest, maybe some people wanted some action to fight their boredom.
I struggle to believe that the US wouldn't make a regime change in Saudi Arabia if the embassy had to organize 9/11 by themselves without US involvement.

You are reaching too far. Prince Bandar was a good friend of the US. He and Bush had a great relationship. The Saudi Embassy of DC did not organize this. That is why there is something else hidden...possibly a lesser prince who went rogue. As for Iraq. Saudi leadership hated Saddam and feared him. They would've 100% supported regime change in Iraq and they did.

Think of the Saudi Embassy as being an intermediary bank in an international wire transfer. The transfer being the crime and (possibly) the money flow. Within the embassy itself it looks like all except 1 or 2 were not in on anything. Prince Bandar was not in on this.

Pellegrine wrote:

Think of the Saudi Embassy as being an intermediary bank in an international wire transfer. The transfer being the crime and (possibly) the money flow. Within the embassy itself it looks like all except 1 or 2 were not in on anything. Prince Bandar was not in on this.

How is his relationship with MBS?

Best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

Pellegrine wrote:

Think of the Saudi Embassy as being an intermediary bank in an international wire transfer. The transfer being the crime and (possibly) the money flow. Within the embassy itself it looks like all except 1 or 2 were not in on anything. Prince Bandar was not in on this.

How is his relationship with MBS?

Best regards
Thomas

MBS sent him off to pasture with all the other old influential royals.

Pellegrine wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

Pellegrine wrote:

Think of the Saudi Embassy as being an intermediary bank in an international wire transfer. The transfer being the crime and (possibly) the money flow. Within the embassy itself it looks like all except 1 or 2 were not in on anything. Prince Bandar was not in on this.

How is his relationship with MBS?

Best regards
Thomas

MBS sent him off to pasture with all the other old influential royals.

are they tame, or a potential cause of trouble?

Best regards
Thomas

tommy1808 wrote:

Pellegrine wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

How is his relationship with MBS?

Best regards
Thomas

MBS sent him off to pasture with all the other old influential royals.

are they tame, or a potential cause of trouble?

Best regards
Thomas

Possibly trouble for MBS, not the US. These are guys who worked with Clinton and Dubbya, Obama too. Honestly if I were one of them, al-Waleed included, I would flee KSA with as much money as possible and live in Europe/US.

Pellegrine wrote:

tommy1808 wrote:

Pellegrine wrote:

MBS sent him off to pasture with all the other old influential royals.

are they tame, or a potential cause of trouble?

Best regards
Thomas

Possibly trouble for MBS, not the US. These are guys who worked with Clinton and Dubbya, Obama too. Honestly if I were one of them, al-Waleed included, I would flee KSA with as much money as possible and live in Europe/US.

I bet it would only take a phone call to the oval office to have the right kind of tit bit released to have a reason to clean up potential trouble. Added PR bonus "SA is committed to punishing those that support terrorism" -> better chances for Vision 30.

Best regards
Thomas