# Saudi Arabia Threatens Economic Fallout If 9/11 Documents Released & They Get Blamed



## WhatInThe (Apr 16, 2016)

Saudi Arabia does not want classified information involving them and 9/11 revealed. There is a bill which would release those 28 pages of redacted information regarding Saudi Arabia.  Apparently the Saudi's have promised or threatened economic fallout/an asset sell off including US Treasuries would be done to prevent the freezing of their assets.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/16/w...mic-fallout-if-congress-passes-9-11-bill.html

Many survivors/families want to sue the Saudis and those they helped, protected or trained. 

Now why would they fear assets being frozen?


----------



## Guitarist (Apr 16, 2016)

I didn't realize the US government allowed foreigners to make decisions for it.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 16, 2016)

I say release the pages, what are we hiding anyway?


----------



## fureverywhere (Apr 16, 2016)

Something that didn't make sense and still doesn't for many folks. The 9/11 hijackers were Egyptian and Saudi...So they invade Afghanistan. makes perfect sense...except you'd think they'd invade Egypt or...eeeep can't even think about invading a country we're sleeping with.


----------



## WhatInThe (Apr 16, 2016)

Guitarist said:


> I didn't realize the US government allowed foreigners to make decisions for it.



Makes you wonder what they hung over GW's head if anything. I'm sure if it was disclosed the Saudi's were big participants/aiders & abetters the US public and many foreign governments would've had no problem with a full scale invasion of Saudi Arabia which actually might have been easier than Iraq especially in 2001. Many Muslim factions might have gotten upset but other than Al Qaeda those groups didn't have the mass or financial support they have today. It's could've should've but if any of those same Saudi's are in power today I'd have no problem restoring Saudi Arabia to the desert it was ment to be.


----------



## Wrigley's (Apr 16, 2016)

Guitarist said:


> I didn't realize the US government allowed foreigners to make decisions for it.



When that country is an ally, it can demand certain considerations. Or, as in this case, make empty threats.


----------



## Wrigley's (Apr 16, 2016)

WhatInThe said:


> Makes you wonder what they hung over GW's head if anything. I'm sure if it was disclosed the Saudi's were big participants/aiders & abetters the US public and many foreign governments would've had no problem with a full scale invasion of Saudi Arabia which actually might have been easier than Iraq especially in 2001. Many Muslim factions might have gotten upset but other than Al Qaeda those groups didn't have the mass or financial support they have today. It's could've should've but if any of those same Saudi's are in power today I'd have no problem restoring Saudi Arabia to the desert it was ment to be.



There's a whole crapload more hanging over Saudi king heads than any US presidential head, WIT. 

But the US made them an ally anyway because, oil and strategic military real estate. We have legal agreements about not invading our allies. It's illegal to invade them.


----------



## tnthomas (Apr 16, 2016)

Guitarist said:


> I didn't realize the US government allowed foreigners to make decisions for it.



Well, only when oil interests (massive $$) are involved...


----------



## Guitarist (Apr 16, 2016)

WhatInThe said:


> Makes you wonder what they hung over GW's head if anything. I'm sure if it was disclosed the Saudi's were big participants/aiders & abetters the US public and many foreign governments would've had no problem with a full scale invasion of Saudi Arabia which actually might have been easier than Iraq especially in 2001. Many Muslim factions might have gotten upset but other than Al Qaeda those groups didn't have the mass or financial support they have today. It's could've should've but if any of those same Saudi's are in power today I'd have no problem restoring Saudi Arabia to the desert it was ment to be.



Seems like at the time there was something in the news (or the rumor mills) that it had to do with Arabs owning "American" businesses in the US, including TX?  I don't know, I'm not a political animal so I don't get half of what I read about politics because it's a foreign world to me.  But I remember thinking about what I read, and relating that to the Arab ownership of Harrod's (and the Dodi al Fayed family) and thinking about how the attacks were on the World TRADE Center not any military bases (well, the Pentagon, yeah).  But whether or not any of that Arab-owned business aspect had anything to do with the Bushes or not, I don't know.


----------



## Debby (Apr 16, 2016)

Guitarist said:


> I didn't realize the US government allowed foreigners to make decisions for it.




I have read that AIPAC (American Israeli Public Afairs Committee) has significant control over American political and other decisions.   http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/201...eliminates-another-critic-paul-craig-roberts/  and paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 of   http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article24176.htm 

And now the Saudi's are calling the shots too.  Some might say that the administration has painted itself into a corner?


----------



## WhatInThe (Apr 17, 2016)

Some of the suspected involvement of the Saudi government in 9/11. Mostly enabling and/or facilitating.

http://nypost.com/2013/12/15/inside-the-saudi-911-coverup/

Ironically as the Saudi threats increase the US is transferring Guantanamo detainees to Saudi Arabia for 'rehabilitation'. So the facility/function that had it's birth/rebirth as a result of 9/11 is sending prisoners to the country that might have planned & enabled the very same plot/crime/act of war.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-rel...-to-saudi-arabia-1460838120?mod=trending_now_

Also many have suspected Saudi Arabia as a breeding ground for extremism.

http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/09/15/saudi-arabia-911-and-the-rise-of-isis/

But will all this wind up the enemy of my enemy. Saudi Arabia and Iran not feeling the love.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/draft-doha-agreement-freeze-output-034824669.html


----------



## WhatInThe (Apr 20, 2016)

Now Obama says if a country like Saudi Arabia could be sued other countries would try to sue the US. Doesn't mean we have to pay nor do the Saudis for that matter.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...saudi-involvement-911-or-else-americas-terror

I say list each Saudi person involved a criminal suspect wanted for questioning for the murder of 3,000. I think Italy still had warrants out for CIA agents. If not the country each individual needs a warrant issued for their arrest and be denied further entry into the US. And individuals still here need to be questioned then expelled. The families just to need to change the names on the lawsuit. Replace one country Saudi Arabia with the nameS of the suspects. If an entire country is involved that should be war and not a lawsuit anyway.


----------



## Debby (Apr 23, 2016)

Something I haven't heard on television news is that apparently the Saudi's snubbed Obama 'royally' when he arrived in that country within days of this new situation.  The royals didn't meet him at the airport this time, sent some underlings instead and half the delegation that was there on the tarmac compared to last time and no socializing before the business meetings but straight to business and then Obama went home.  Hmmmm, cold shoulder thingy happening here


----------



## tnthomas (Apr 23, 2016)

WhatInThe said:


> Some of the suspected involvement of the Saudi government in 9/11. Mostly enabling and/or facilitating.
> 
> http://nypost.com/2013/12/15/inside-the-saudi-911-coverup/
> 
> ...



With Bin Laden plus 15 of the 19 hijackers being *Saudi Arabian ,* I would have thought that more folks would have "connected-the-dots" , over the last 15 years.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 23, 2016)

Debby said:


> Something I haven't heard on television news is that apparently the Saudi's snubbed Obama 'royally' when he arrived in that country within days of this new situation.  The royals didn't meet him at the airport this time, sent some underlings instead and half the delegation that was there on the tarmac compared to last time and no socializing before the business meetings but straight to business and then Obama went home.  Hmmmm, cold shoulder thingy happening here



Definitely the cold shoulder, but I wonder who really cares.  They are stressed now over the 28 pages which should have been made public a long time ago, but it seems tensions have been present long before Obama came into the picture also.  More here. 




> Those differences are not necessarily new.





> “We’ve had out ups and downs over the years,” said former U.S. Ambassador to Saudi Arabia Robert Jordan.
> 
> Forty years ago, Saudi Arabia and other oil producing countries responded to the U.S.’s involvement in the Yom Kippur War with an oil embargo that left wide-reaching economic effects.
> 
> ...


----------



## BobF (Apr 24, 2016)

fureverywhere said:


> Something that didn't make sense and still doesn't for many folks. The 9/11 hijackers were Egyptian and Saudi...So they invade Afghanistan. makes perfect sense...except you'd think they'd invade Egypt or...eeeep can't even think about invading a country we're sleeping with.



Osama bin Laden was running to hide his location.   He had left Iraq and headed into Afghanistan.   The US asked the UN permission to enter Afghanistan to try to find Osama bin Laden and got permission.   So that is why the US entered Afghanistan.   

Years later it was found that Osama was living in Pakistan and a military group was sent there to capture or kill him.   Osama was killed and our military brought his body out of Pakistan.


----------



## WhatInThe (Apr 24, 2016)

tnthomas said:


> With Bin Laden plus 15 of the 19 hijackers being *Saudi Arabian ,* I would have thought that more folks would have "connected-the-dots" , over the last 15 years.



I always wondered that but one who brings that up is one of the conspiracy people even if hard news/facts are there. During clean out and dig for tax records this year I found articles I had clipped on 9/11 over a decade ago saying the same thing-Saudi connections. I think it all goes back to the Bush's oil money & connections along with a fear that an invasion of Saudi Arabia would spike oil prices and cause economic chaos. I think if the Saudis had come clean, turned over the suspected parties there would've been no invasion, just a silent coup.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Apr 24, 2016)

WhatInThe said:


> I think it all goes back to the Bush's oil money & connections along with a fear that an invasion of Saudi Arabia would spike oil prices and cause economic chaos.



And all the Saudis who were escorted out of the US after the 9/11 attack, some actually assisted by Bush, must be another conspiracy.   More here.


----------



## WhatInThe (Apr 24, 2016)

SeaBreeze said:


> And all the Saudis who were escorted out of the US after the 9/11 attack, some actually assisted by Bush, must be another conspiracy.   More here.



But those were just "events", no why or how just by coincidence just "events" that were put in the news that day.


----------



## Debby (Apr 24, 2016)

WhatInThe said:


> But those were just "events", no why or how just by coincidence just "events" that were put in the news that day.




Are you saying you believe those were a coincidence or are you being sarcastic?


----------



## WhatInThe (Apr 26, 2016)

Debby said:


> Are you saying you believe those were a coincidence or are you being sarcastic?





I doubt a coincidence. As often as the mainstream media throws in their two cents on news stories these just get a mention, there is little or no commentary, they are not put in context and lack questions like is this for their safety? What do they have to fear etc.

It's the those small paragraph or two stories tucked away in the last pages of the paper that frequently blow up. I remember seeing stories about "feasibility studies" on an invasion of Iraq "if" need be spring/summer 2002. It is at this point the media, knowing how leaks & purposely planted stories work should have started investigative reporting on the matter/s.


----------



## WhatInThe (May 17, 2016)

Senate approves legislation allowing 9/11 families to sue Saudi Arabia.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/senate-oks-bill-allow-9-11-victims-families-sue-saudi-n575511

White House opposes legislation saying the US could be sued under the same premise/precedent.


----------



## WhatInThe (Jul 15, 2016)

Administration has decided to release the 28 redacted pages from the 9-11 Commission report.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/secret-28-pages-9-11-report-be-released-officials-n609586

If one can't manufacture a cover-up in 15 years one should not be in government/politics or involved in crime.


----------



## Ray (Jul 15, 2016)

_"Something I haven't heard on television news is that apparently the Saudi's snubbed Obama 'royally' when he arrived in that country within days of this new situation".

And so did Castro not long ago. We just happen to be blessed with a "snubable" President.
_


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jul 15, 2016)

About time they released them and stop hiding the facts from the American people on these things.  Took them long enough!


----------



## WhatInThe (Jul 15, 2016)

SeaBreeze said:


> About time they released them and stop hiding the facts from the American people on these things.  Took them long enough!



Writing a classic best seller takes time.


----------



## WhatInThe (Jul 16, 2016)

It shows what many already suspected-ties between Saudi Royalty, intelligence officers/officials and hijackers. They said unable to find a smoking gun or take investigation further.

Just a coincidence, nothing to see , move along. Everyone sends people 15,000-74,000 dollars at a time.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other...-us-relationship-with-saudi-arabia/ar-BBuoSFy


----------



## WhatInThe (Jul 18, 2016)

*Pre 9-11 intelligence questions*

One of the things that has since come to light is that Saudi Arabia impeded investigations and action on Al Qaeda in the 1990s before 9-11.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/16/us/28-pages-saudi-arabia-september-11.html?_r=0

A captured Al Qaeda phone number list included a Colorado number in which some Saudi officials were found to have given aide to some of the hijackers. Also questioned was the role of a pre 9-11 Los Angeles consulate official who had ties to hijackers and/or facilitators/funders. 

One of the most troubling and vague assertions from Colorado is that an FBI informant was living with or associated with two of the hijackers. Did he pass on potential intelligence? Was it acted on? Was action delayed or denied?


----------



## WhatInThe (Jul 23, 2016)

*lie and deny*

The Saudi's are going around trying to rebut and minimize the release of the 29 pages saying they've been "cleared" and there are 'no links' between the Saudi government and the hijackers. Several 9/11 commission members said they have NOT been cleared or exonerated. The Saudis have multiple lobby firms trying to spin the story now.

The suspects deny knowing each other yet phone records indicate daily phone calls with another calling the Saudi consulate at least 12 times. Then they say the only discussed religious matters yet one of them cosigned a lease for the hijackers. They refused lie detector tests, would only be interviewed in Saudi Arabia at their palace 2-3 years after the fact. FBI agents interviewing the Saudis considered them deceptive.

http://nypost.com/2016/07/23/the-claim-that-the-saudis-are-innocent-for-911-is-total-bull/

If they want to hold congressional hearing this is one matter that needs much more attention.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Jul 29, 2016)

They still edited the 28 pages and are still hiding the truth from the American people.  https://28pages.org/2016/07/20/selected-revelations-from-the-declassified-28-pages-on-911/


----------

