Saudi government allegedly funded a ‘dry run’ for 9/11 - Polidicks

[url]http://nypost.com/2017/09/09/saudi-government-allegedly-funded-a-dry-run-for-911/[/url] [QUOTE]Fresh evidence submitted in a major 9/11 lawsuit moving forward against the Saudi Arabian government reveals its embassy in Washington may have funded a “dry run” for the hijackings carried out by two Saudi employees, further reinforcing the claim employees and agents of the kingdom directed and aided the 9/11 hijackers and plotters. Two years before the airliner attacks, the Saudi Embassy paid for two Saudi nationals, living undercover in the US as students, to fly from Phoenix to Washington “in a dry run for the 9/11 attacks,” alleges the amended complaint filed on behalf of the families of some 1,400 victims who died in the terrorist attacks 16 years ago. The court filing provides new details that paint “a pattern of both financial and operational support” for the 9/11 conspiracy from official Saudi sources, lawyers for the plaintiffs say. In fact, the Saudi government may have been involved in underwriting the attacks from the earliest stages — including testing cockpit security. “We’ve long asserted that there were longstanding and close relationships between al Qaeda and the religious components of the Saudi government,” said Sean Carter, the lead attorney for the 9/11 plaintiffs. “This is further evidence of that.” Lawyers representing Saudi Arabia last month filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, which may finally be headed toward trial now that Congress has cleared diplomatic-immunity hurdles. A Manhattan federal judge has asked the 9/11 plaintiffs, represented by lead law firm Cozen O’Connor, to respond to the motion by November.[/QUOTE]

Surely the Bush administration and the security services at the time became aware of this, at least in the blame-game after 9/11. Why oh why did they not do anything about it? ...I know it was oil don't worry.

If it turns out that they were responsible for 9/11, can we please knock them off the map? :v:

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;52666486]If it turns out that they were responsible for 9/11, can we please knock them off the map? :v:[/QUOTE] Probably not, it would be done diplomatically at first. Probably the same reason why North Korea is still around.

[QUOTE=garychencool;52666536]Probably not, it would be done diplomatically at first. Probably the same reason why North Korea is still around.[/QUOTE] Ahhhh, oil. AKA black nukes.

[QUOTE=garychencool;52666536]Probably not, it would be done diplomatically at first. Probably the same reason why North Korea is still around.[/QUOTE] North Korea is around because China backed them during the Korean war. We decided that fighting China wasn't really in our interests. In the interim, North Korea has fortified their position and has made no real attacks. They are a powderkeg, but one generally content to remain undisturbed. This, however, would be an orchestrated attack by another nation that killed thousands of American civilians outside of armed conflict. The last time another nation attacked Americans on US soil, we nuked Japan. The American people wouldn't, and shouldn't, settle for anything less than a formal declaration of war.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;52666486]If it turns out that they were responsible for 9/11, can we please knock them off the map? :v:[/QUOTE] good idea, lets make the most unstable area in the world even worse.

[QUOTE=GunFox;52666653]North Korea is around because China backed them during the Korean war. We decided that fighting China wasn't really in our interests. In the interim, North Korea has fortified their position and has made no real attacks. They are a powderkeg, but one generally content to remain undisturbed. This, however, would be an orchestrated attack by another nation that killed thousands of American civilians outside of armed conflict. The last time another nation attacked Americans on US soil, we nuked Japan. The American people wouldn't, and shouldn't, settle for anything less than a formal declaration of war.[/QUOTE] Was it the Saudi government as an entity that supported them, or was it various extremist individuals within the government? I wouldn't like war to be declared on the US because a handful of senators were involved in a conspiracy the rest of the US government didn't condone.

[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;52666682]Was it the Saudi government as an entity that supported them, or was it various extremist individuals within the government? I wouldn't like war to be declared on the US because a handful of senators were involved in a conspiracy the rest of the US government didn't condone.[/QUOTE] The Saudi Embassy in Washington D.C. according to the article.

[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;52666486]If it turns out that they were responsible for 9/11, can we please knock them off the map? :v:[/QUOTE] I doubt that'll happen. Iran and the Saudis are the two biggest inlfuences in the region. Anything that'll weaken the Saudis will strengthen Iran, which I think the US government would take all steps to avoid.

[QUOTE]These media sources are slightly to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation. See all Right-Center sources. Factual Reporting: MIXED Notes: The New York Post is a daily tabloid type newspaper from New York City. This source can swing very far to the right, but does occasionally provide a balanced account. Not a very credible source overall. (7/16/2016) Source: [url]http://nypost.com/[/url][/QUOTE]

I'm so fucking tired of people saying "bush wasn't that bad" or make stupid cute memes about him painting. Seen it on this forums as well. He was a horrible president, Trump hasnt even come close to what he done and his inactions(Not yet atleast). They lied about WMDs after an attack on the US to gain support for an illegal war that killed many soldiers and civilians. Saudi Arabia should've been leveled back then. Take their oil if the U.S government was that pathetic about the petrodollar. But instead we are Saudi Arabia's [B]bitch[/B] for oil that would run out by the 2070s and have our entire economy depend on the petrodollar. To this day, 9/11 victims and familes never truly gotten justice nor did the victims of an illegal war.

The 28 redacted pages of the 9/11 report were released a while back and pretty much already confirmed that elements within the Saudi government were involved in the attack. Nothing's going to be done, though. We have lucrative weapons and oil deals with them. Business as usual over everything.

[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;52667327]The 28 redacted pages of the 9/11 report were released a while back and pretty much already confirmed that elements within the Saudi government were involved in the attack. Nothing's going to be done, though. We have lucrative weapons and oil deals with them. Business as usual over everything.[/QUOTE] Nothing will be done because the same people who are in bed with the Saudi government benefited from the Iraq war in terms of finance and influence in the region.

If footage leaked of the Saudis having some party and smashing a mockup version of the twin towers while screaming "CANT WAIT FOR THIS ON 9/11." Our spineless politicians would go. "Well...we need more evidence..." Would prefer not to go to war with Saudi Arabia. But if we do, at least there's a fuck ton of benefits of removing them from power and stopping the greatest exporter of radical islam and terrorist funding.

One problem with that. Saudi Arabia is the spiritual capital of Islam. The US attacking it would be akin to ISIS invading and occupying the Vatican. Not only would the US's already tenuous standing in the Middle East be demolished, but half the Middle East would likely form a coalition and declare war on the United States. As for Terrorist attacks on US soil by radical Islamists, it'd increase a hundredfold.

[QUOTE=GunFox;52666653]North Korea is around because China backed them during the Korean war. We decided that fighting China wasn't really in our interests. In the interim, North Korea has fortified their position and has made no real attacks. They are a powderkeg, but one generally content to remain undisturbed. This, however, would be an orchestrated attack by another nation that killed thousands of American civilians outside of armed conflict. The last time another nation attacked Americans on US soil, we nuked Japan. The American people wouldn't, and shouldn't, settle for anything less than a formal declaration of war.[/QUOTE] The thing is why would the Saudi's want to attack us? Why would you fund a terrorist act of an "ally", when the end result would lead to Afghanistan? Iraq aside, as that literally had nothing to do with the planning of 9/11", I fail to see how the Saudi's would profit on the world scale from doing that. Sure it ramped up the war machine which meant more money for them in oil, but that was also not a guarantee since those prices are dictated by a world market. I'm more inclined to believe it was an individual or individuals within the royal family who would direct that sort of thing. That's much more believable since the royal family doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the relations of the government of Saudi Arabia aside from their appointed positions. Sympathetic family members are more likely the culprit in my opinion, and people need to remember the royal family of the Saudi's aren't like those of other countries. There are hundreds of members of the royal family, each with varying degrees of relation to the king. All of whom have massive amounts of wealth, and can pretty much order anything.

[QUOTE=cis.joshb;52666549]Ahhhh, oil. AKA black nukes.[/QUOTE] I think you meant nukes of color.

more reasons to hate saudia for blocking my country

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;52668877]The thing is why would the Saudi's want to attack us? Why would you fund a terrorist act of an "ally", when the end result would lead to Afghanistan? Iraq aside, as that literally had nothing to do with the planning of 9/11", I fail to see how the Saudi's would profit on the world scale from doing that. Sure it ramped up the war machine which meant more money for them in oil, but that was also not a guarantee since those prices are dictated by a world market. I'm more inclined to believe it was an individual or individuals within the royal family who would direct that sort of thing. That's much more believable since the royal family doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the relations of the government of Saudi Arabia aside from their appointed positions. Sympathetic family members are more likely the culprit in my opinion, and people need to remember the royal family of the Saudi's aren't like those of other countries. There are hundreds of members of the royal family, each with varying degrees of relation to the king. All of whom have massive amounts of wealth, and can pretty much order anything.[/QUOTE] While I think your version is probably correct simply due to it being the most simple explanation, I am somewhat concerned by the results. To get the US to stop being isolationist, you generally need to attack us. Then on the flip side, look at what they have gained. They have had a significant involvement in the reconstruction of Afghanistan and it has certainly been at no small profit to them. Iraq was a major enemy, now it is a reasonable ally to them. Whether we like it or not, Iraq was able to happen due to 9/11. They effectively got us to invade and remove an entire hostile leadership. On top of that, you now have Afghanistan and Iraq, both with US interests, on either side of Iran, yet another major opponent of Saudi Arabia. Not that even close to all of this could have been predicted by the Saudis, but even if only part of it was intentional, they actually stood to gain a lot. Given that they have a number of opponents in the region, it could have been that they didn't much care who got taken out, it just mattered that the US came in and then got stuck in the region. It feels awfully strange that the end result has benefited them so directly.

[QUOTE=UncleJimmema;52668877]The thing is why would the Saudi's want to attack us? Why would you fund a terrorist act of an "ally", when the end result would lead to Afghanistan? Iraq aside, as that literally had nothing to do with the planning of 9/11", I fail to see how the Saudi's would profit on the world scale from doing that. Sure it ramped up the war machine which meant more money for them in oil, but that was also not a guarantee since those prices are dictated by a world market. I'm more inclined to believe it was an individual or individuals within the royal family who would direct that sort of thing. That's much more believable since the royal family doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the relations of the government of Saudi Arabia aside from their appointed positions. Sympathetic family members are more likely the culprit in my opinion, and people need to remember the royal family of the Saudi's aren't like those of other countries. There are hundreds of members of the royal family, each with varying degrees of relation to the king. All of whom have massive amounts of wealth, and can pretty much order anything.[/QUOTE] What if their goal is to remain the sole stable nation in the Middle East that also has business dealings with the US? If all of your neighbors are unstable, they can't possibly become a threat to you.

Far right loves to shit on refugees but never have the balls to stand against the worst of the Muslim world and go as far as support them. Pathetic.

[QUOTE=GrizzlyBear;52671345]Far right loves to shit on refugees but never have the balls to stand against the worst of the Muslim world and go as far as support them. Pathetic.[/QUOTE] The refugees don't control any oil. Why give a shit if they don't have oil?

Don't forget corperate owned democrats didnt do much either about this either. Both parties are spineless.

How long before it's not considered crazy to say 9/11 was an inside job?

[QUOTE=Quark:;52673799]How long before it's not considered crazy to say 9/11 was an inside job?[/QUOTE]Around the same time Boris Johnson transmogrifies into a Yorkshire plumber.

[QUOTE=Sgt Doom;52673813]Around the same time Boris Johnson transmogrifies into a Yorkshire plumber.[/QUOTE] If there's evidence that Saudi Arabia was involved in the 9/11 attacks, and evidence that the US government was aware of the attacks beforehand, is that not considered an inside job if they didn't prevent the attacks? Or if they used the attacks to invade Afghanistan and Iraq? At the very least isn't that a gross deception?

[QUOTE=Quark:;52673831]If there's evidence that Saudi Arabia was involved in the 9/11 attacks, and evidence that the US government was aware of the attacks beforehand, is that not considered an inside job if they didn't prevent the attacks? Or if they used the attacks to invade Afghanistan and Iraq? At the very least isn't that a gross deception?[/QUOTE] Depends who in the Saudi government knew about it and who in the US government knew about it.

For the sake of discussion, let's speculate and assume that the royalty of Saudi Arabia as well as much of the formal government knew, as well as the President of the United States. What does that make it?

[QUOTE=Quark:;52674091]For the sake of discussion, let's speculate and assume that the royalty of Saudi Arabia as well as much of the formal government knew, as well as the President of the United States. What does that make it?[/QUOTE] I'd honestly argue that the POTUS didn't know jack shit about it, probably a few higher up officials with the fingers in the pie's ready to go. The whole fucking thing stinks, along with the collapse of the 3 towers.