Summations Only

You have to give the R's credit. They are able to hide an anti-middle class agenda behind hot button issues. I just wish more people would call them out on it, like . . . I don't know . . . middle class Republicans.As a corollary to your experiences, I have a buddy who works in the oil fields in Alaska. He had quite a few co-workers that, once Obama was elected, dug a hole in their back yard, lined it with plastic, filled it with motor oil and all the guns they could do without for 4 years, and then buried the whole thing. They were completely convinced that Obama secret agents were going to go house to house and confiscate fire arms. I don't know if I should call these paranoid delusions or one of the best marketing campaigns in history.

If you aren't a rich white christian, the current republican party isn't for you.A super rich, ultra christian. A christian that wants a theocracy. A millionaire christian. The only people like that are.....DING DING DING! The politicians. Oh, and the CEO's that they coddle.Now, I'm not saying ALL of the current conservative crop are like this. Especially given what Huntsman has said. However, the ones who are the loudest, the ones who will be running shit in the unlikely event they gain control, are the ones that are in question.

New report says my POV has credibility: Bush should have turned left of Palestine as 9/11 response. Humanity is paying the price of America's so called allies and national interests, and no doubt the victims are turning in their graves:

quote:

---

Iran and Saudi Arabia helped Al-Qaeda carry out 9/11 attacks, claims new bookBy Ted Thornhill

​

Last updated at 12:09 PM on 20th August 2011

​

Comments (169) Add to My Stories Share As the 10th anniversary of 9/11 approaches, two authors who’ve analysed thousands of documents relating to the attack conclude that both Iran and Saudi Arabia helped Al-Qaeda carry it out.

​

In the aftermath, both countries publicly stated that they’d fight terrorism and expressed their condolences, but The Eleventh Day, by Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan, produces a compelling argument that they were actually complicit in the attacks.

​

The book also questions whether George W Bush deliberately withheld evidence linking foreign countries with the attack on the Twin Towers.
9/11: A new book asserts that Iran and Saudi Arabia were involved in the attacks, in which nearly 3,000 people lost their lives
The official U.S investigation into the attacks — the 9/11 Commission — found no evidence that Iran was involved, but Summers and Swan beg to differ.

​

They point to a court document called the Havlish memorandum, which was produced during a civil action brought against Iran by Fiona Havlish, the widow of an insurance consultant who worked in the World Trade Center and was killed when the planes struck.

​

More...Michele Bachmann is keeping an eye on the Soviet Union... 20 years after it dissolved
U.S. 'close' to signing deal to keep troops in Afghanistan until at least 2024

​

In seeking compensation from the state it drew on the testimony of several experts, including a French investigative magistrate, former CIA agents, an Israeli intelligence analyst and former 9/11 Commission staff members.

​

Compelling: The Eleventh Day draws together evidence from thousands of documents
It also includes evidence from three Iranian defectors.

​

The memorandum states that Hizbollah, the paramilitary group supported by Iran, knew 9/11 was going to take place.

​

It asserts that one of its key members, Iman Mughniyah, met with Osama Bin Laden and his No2, Ayman Al Zawahiri as long ago as 1993 and also travelled with members of the 9/11 hijackers on flights to and from Iran in 2000.

​

It’s claimed he also went to Beirut with hijacker Ahmed Al Ghamdi and ‘visited Saudi Arabia to coordinate activities there’ and that two of the terrorists, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi, were put up in the Iranian embassy during a visit to Malaysia.

​

The document also states that Al-Qaeda operatives have received airline hijacking training in Iran.

​

Evidence linking Saudi Arabia to 9/11 is even stronger, according to the authors.

​

To begin with, they point out, 95 per cent of Saudi professionals polled about 9/11 stated that they agreed with Bin Laden’s cause.

​

Bin Laden, who was born into a wealthy Saudi family, was publicly denounced by the government and had his citizenship removed, but Summers and Swan quote a former French intelligence officer, Alain Chouet, who says that this was ‘a subterfuge aimed at the gullible, designed to cover a continuing clandestine relationship’.

​

They go on to claim, sourcing a U.S official, that two Saudi princes paid bin Laden ‘protection money’ - in return for Al-Qaeda not carrying out operations in Saudi Arabia, the authorities would turn a blind eye to his operations elsewhere.

​

FBI counter-terrorism chief John O’Neill, speaking before 9/11, summed it up. He’s quoted in the book as saying that ‘all the answers, all the clues that would enable us to dismantle Osama bin Laden's organisation’ were in Saudi Arabia.
Questions: Ten years after 9/11, the full picture about who was behind the attack is still not known
Rejuvenated: Memorial fountains now stand in the footprints of the Twin Towers, while new skyscrapers are being constructed around them
The authors unearthed more evidence in the form of a shady Saudi operative called Omar al-Bayoumi, who was alleged to have met two of the hijackers in Los Angeles.

​

There’s also the fact, they say, that 13 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and that U.S investigators working on the 9/11 inquiry complained of Saudi officials continually blocking requests for information.

​

And why, they ask, was a Saudi religious official staying at the same Marriott hotel as two of the hijackers the night before 9/11?

​

The authors also place a huge question mark over George W Bush’s actions after 9/11. They say that 28 pages of the report of Congress’s Joint Inquiry into 9/11 were withheld from the public ‘on the personal orders of George W Bush’.

​

An explanation for this, they say, came from the inquiry’s staff director, Eleanor Hill.

​

She said: ‘It had to do with sources of foreign support for the hijackers.’

​

This information, they point out, is still being withheld.

​

Read more: 9/11 conspiracy theories: 'Iran and Saudi Arabia helped Al-Qaeda' | Daily Mail Online

---

Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

Quoting the most repugnant hate-mongering shit-sheet published in the UK is not going to give your POV any credibility. Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

OK, so you tell us why Saudi Arabia and Egypt were not in the loop of Bush's target zone post 9/11. I'm listening. Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

Maybe because neither Nation had anything to do with 9-11.Of course neither did Iraq and Afghanistan but that's a given. Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

Ok, so you tell us, why do you think that quoting the most repugnant hate-mongering shit-sheet published in the UK is not going to give your POV any credibility?
(I realise that this will involve you actually addressing what I posted - so I expect you to not answer this question.) No - you aren't.
You never do.
TBH: You aren't even reading. Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

How's about you get the fuck ON TOPIC. Every single topic you enter, you attempt to derail. Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

... I thought it was more appropriate to post this here:http://www.farleftside.com/index.html Huntsman is interesting, but (imho) will never be selected by the majority fanatic fringe, and thus will not be picked.Enjoy.

You mean, maybe there is no Islamic Brotherhood financed by the Saudi regime and Al Qaida is a far removed entity from 9/11? Is that your view? Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

How about getting back to The Awesome Republican Primary Thread? It seems some don't like bad questions. Even when a report which evidenced a claim is posted! Edited by IamJoseph, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

You could start by answering the very direct question i posed to you upthread. That would be a start for you to get on topic. I know it's hard, but you can try.

Too funny.The Muslim Brotherhood is not Al Qaeda and Al Qaeda is not a Nation State.You seem to love posting irrelevant misrepresentations don't you? Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

Never mind the media - I posed about a novel by scholars. Who's not reading?The issue of bad US response per 9/11 has nthing to do with Repubs or Dems - its more an American policy error of its percieved allies and national interests. The post-9/11 history affirms this nicely. Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.

Who isn't reading? You aren't.You directly quoted the media - so let's ignore the media you posted (as you advise) and we are left with....nothing.
By your own suggestion: you posted nothing.Which is a little more than you have read.
Or are you claiming that you have read the novel? Edited by Panda, : No reason given.Edited by AdminPD, : No reason given.