Saudi Arabia; Kings of Evil.

DandyAndy

Wanted to share some super disturbing things I've learned about the absolute monarchy called the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA.) This includes their confirmed involvement in the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 but also includes all the additional shaddy stuff they've done over the past few decades; Jamal Khashoggi murder, the royal coup that removed all "America-friendly" Saudi royalty from office--they're probably dead now, human rights violations and the current and ongoing invasion of the Western world via acquisition by petro-bucks.

firstly, Saudi 9/11. This is a summary of why we know that Saudi Arabia financed 9/11. Most of us suspected it when we learned that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi's. Thanks to the OP for writing such a well researched summary:

*One of the many pregnant women falling to her death on 9/11

In short, yes, there is evidence to suggest that two Saudi intelligence assets, Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama Basnan, did aid and fund two of the alleged 9/11 hijackers, Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi.

I’ll begin where FBI investigators allege these Saudi assets met the hijackers. According to the FBI, after hijackers al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar arrived in Los Angeles on February 1 2000, they were taken to a cafe by Mohamed Johar. According to a witness, he was tasked to take them to this cafe by an imam assigned to the Saudi consulate, Fahad al-Thumairy. At the cafe, they met with Omar al-Bayoumi, who had been waiting for them. al-Bayoumi approached them when they arrived, and they spoke for half an hour.[1] Bayoumi had been in close telephone and in-person contact with al-Thumairy, and immediately prior to visiting the cafe where he met al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar, he was at a meeting at the Saudi Consulate, which was near the cafe.[2] The above facts led the FBI to suspect that the meeting between hijackers al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar and al-Bayoumi had been coordinated by al-Thumairy and possibly others at the Saudi Consulate.

al-Thumairy is a fascinating figure. He was an accredited diplomat at the Saudi Consulate in Los Angeles between 1996 and 2003, but lost his position in part because he was refused re-entry to the US by the State Department, who determined he may be connected with terrorist activity.[3] This determination was based on an FBI investigation which discovered he led a “radical Islamist faction” at the King Fahad Mosque. He also had telephone contacts with the family of two al Qaida militants, and individuals who are alleged to have assisted in a plot to bomb LAX in 1999. More relevant to this story, he received a phone call from an unidentified person in Malaysia shortly before hijackers al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar traveled from Malaysia to Los Angeles. The two hijackers had been in Malaysia attending a meeting with al Qaida operatives in early January 2000. These facts help support the FBI’s contention that al-Thumairy had al Qaida connections, and that he was in a position to arrange this meeting between hijackers al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar, and al-Bayoumi at the cafe in Los Angeles in February 2000.[1]

Moving on to al-Bayoumi, after he met with the hijackers al Hazmi and al Mihdhar at the cafe, he quickly provided them with support. He secured them an apartment next to his, served as a guarantor on their lease, and provided them with more than $1500 for two months of rent. More significantly, he helped arrange classes at flight school for the pair.[5]

Bayoumi was being paid by Saudi aviation services firm Dallah Avco [5], in an arrangement ProPublica characterized as “being paid surreptitiously by the Saudi Defense Ministry.”[1] Before hijackers al-Mihdhar and al-Hazmi arrived in the US he was paid $500 a month, but after they arrived this increased to $3,700.[5] A source told the FBI that Bayoumi was a “ghost employee” of Dallah Avco who was “being paid for doing nothing.”[6] Bayoumi was also receiving large sums of money, totaling in the tens of thousands of dollars, from Haifa bint Faisal, wife of Saudi Ambassador to the US Prince Bandar.[4] On one occasion, Bayoumi received a check from Prince Bandar’s account directly.[7]

Bayoumi left the U.S. in July 2001,[4] but not long after, his friend Osama Basnan moved into his apartment building, which as noted also housed al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar. The FBI felt this “could indicate [Basnan] succeeded Omar al Bayoumi and may be undertaking activities on behalf of the Government of Saudi Arabia.”[8] Basnan seemed to sympathize with the alleged hijackers: After 9/11, Basnan reportedly “celebrated the heroes of September 11” and talked about “what a wonderful, glorious day it had been.”[4]

The FBI’s investigation revealed that Basnan had received more than $74,000 in cashier’s checks from Bandar’s wife between February 1999 and May 2002. On one occasion, Basnan received $15,000 directly from Prince Bandar.[7] 

In April 2002, Basnan met with an unknown “high Saudi prince who has responsibilities for intelligence matters”[4] and who was part of a Saudi royal entourage which had arrived in Texas to conduct meetings with Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld. This prince provided Basnan with “a significant amount of cash.”[9] The above facts strongly suggest that Basnan was an agent of Saudi intelligence.

The above facts can lead one to safely conclude that al-Bayoumi and Basnan aided and funded alleged hijackers al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar. They are also strongly suggestive of the fact that al-Bayoumi and Basnan were assets in some form or another of Saudi intelligence, although the nature of this relationship is unclear.

Sources:

[1] Tim Golden and Sebastian Rotella, “Long-Secret FBI Report Reveals New Connections Between 9/11 Hijackers and Saudi Religious Officials in U.S.,” ProPublica, September 12, 2021.

[2] Kean and Hamilton, “The 9/11 Commission Report,” 515

[3] Kean and Hamilton, “The 9/11 Commission Report,” 515

[4] Michael Isikoff, “The Saudi Money Trail,” Newsweek, December 1, 2001.

[5] John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski, The Watchdogs Didn’t Bark: The CIA, NSA, and the Crimes of the War on Terror (New York: Hot Books, 2018), pp111, 112.

[6] Judicial Watch, “FBI Documents Raise Additional Questions About Saudi and al-Aulaqi Connections to 9/11 Attacks,” February 12, 2014,

[7] Duffy and Nowosielski, The Watchdogs Didn’t Bark, 154.

[8] Duffy and Nowosielski, The Watchdogs Didn’t Bark, 112.

[9] Duffy and Nowosielski, The Watchdogs Didn’t Bark, 150.

DandyAndy

The question “why” is extremely difficult to answer. As ProPublica notes, the CIA was aware that hijackers al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar had entered the United States, but neglected to inform the FBI for more than 16 months. [1] Combine this with the fact that these same hijackers were apparently supported by Saudi intelligence, and it becomes even more difficult to answer.

Richard Clarke, White House Counterterror Czar from 1998 to 2003, suspects that there was a CIA operation which attempted to turn al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar into informants or assets.[10] A joint CIA-GID (Saudi intelligence) operation seems a likely venue for this attempt, especially considering the two agencies established a “joint intelligence committee” in 1997.[11] A recent court filing with the Guantanamo Military Commission, which is trying the surviving 9/11 suspects, seems to support this. A confidential FBI source interviewed by an investigator for the Commission described the meeting between al-Bayoumi and hijackers al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar as “an operation directed by the Central Intelligence Agency.”[12]

There is other evidence to suggest that the CIA was protecting hijackers al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar, possibly as part of one of their operations. In January 2000, when the CIA’s Alec Station, which covered issues related to al Qaida, originally became aware that hijacker al-Mihdhar might soon be visiting the U.S, an FBI agent assigned to the unit drafted a cable to be sent to the FBI warning them. This cable was blocked by the deputy director of the unit, Tom Wilshire, so the FBI was not informed.[13] Wilshire’s actions at this stage may be consistent with the CIA’s attempt to conceal an ongoing operation from the FBI.

However, this is difficult to square with what we know of Wilshire’s later actions. On July 23 2001, he sent a cable to leaders at the CIA’s CounterTerrorism Center (CTC), explaining that “Khalid Midhar [sic] should be [of] very high interest” in relation to a possible upcoming attack.[14] Assuming Wilshire knew enough in January 2000 to know that he needed to protect al-Mihdhar from the FBI in order to protect a CIA-GID operation, why was he then telling CIA CTC leaders that al-Mihdhar was now a potential threat? That naturally leads one to suspect that the operation to recruit al-Mihdhar (assuming it existed) had failed by that point. However, Wilshire never informed his colleagues at the FBI, where he had been detailed since May 2001.[15] If by July 2001 there was no longer any CIA-GID operation to recruit hijackers al-Hazmi and al-Mihdhar, why the continued secrecy? Clarke’s theory may be the best we have, but it seems insufficient. Further declassifications and testimony are needed.

Sources:

[10] Interview with Richard Clarke, conducted by John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski.

[11] Prince Turki al-Faisal, “Allied Against Terrorism,” The Washington Post, September 17, 2001.

[12] Seth Hettena, “Exclusive: FBI Agents Accuse CIA of 9/11 Coverup,” SpyTalk, March22, 2023. (I know typically a SubStack post would not be an approved source, but Hettena is a national security editor at Rolling Stone and a well-known reporter on these issues.)

[13] Kevin Fenton, Disconnecting the Dots: How CIA and FBI officials helped enable 9/11 and evaded government investigations (Walterville, OR: Trine Day, 2011), 43, 44, 45; Kean and Hamilton, “The 9/11 Commission Report,” 502

[14] Fenton, Disconnecting the Dots, Chapter 40.

[15] FBI Office of the Inspector General, A Review of the FBI's Handling of Intelligence Information Prior to the September 11 Attacks, November 2004. [Wilshire is referred to by the pseudonym “John” in this report.]

Mullaghteelin

I thought most of this was in the public domain 20 years ago, so question why it should even be in the conspiracy section.

I recall speculation that GW Bush would find an excuse to invade Iraq and finish what his father started, when he was still only seeking nomination to be the Republican candidate!

It was against this backdrop that the post-911 political media kept dragging Saddam Hussein into the argument while tip-toing around the Saudi connection.

The Saudi connection was downplayed or ignored while Saddam Hussein had as much blame put on him as Bin Laden. The Saudi connection was very much an inconvenient truth.

DandyAndy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120826871#Comment_120826871

Some of it is. Some of it has only been declassified in the past couple years (2021 had a big declassification dump.)

We also had the "20th hijacker" trial which the suspect confirmed high level Saudi royals being involved in the operational stages of spying on American airline security, doing the "test runs" months prior to 9/11, which is a whole new level of evil.

its a conspiracy thread because of what I'll be posting very soon... just want to make sure everyone is up-to-date before proceeding.

The conspiracy is that the Kingdom of Saudi (meaning the "royal" Saudi's we've been paying trillions to to be our friends) are actually enemies--not "friendenmies"--that are actively undermining Western democracies and spreading anti-semitism (along with Vlad Putin and his corrupt regime) using networks of bots. This has been especially noticeable over the last few years. The internet is overrun with bots that seem to be designed to divide intelligent people in the Western world.

Stay tuned. It takes time writing this stuff up for posting. Ain't like I got a publisher PAYING me to do this...

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120826987#Comment_120826987

Decent overview here from r/Askhistorians

"The crucial thing here is that “The Saudis” are not a monolithic entity. Like any country of (in 2001) 22 million people, there were competing government ministries, factions within the government, and numerous groups outside of the government entirely. Not to mention the countless ideologies and ideas that animate individuals.

The official and centrally directed policy of the Saudi Government was generally supportive of US anti-terrorism efforts during the 1990s. The Saudi government stripped Usama Bin Laden (UBL) of his Saudi citizenship and froze his finances/inheritance in the 1990s. But there was a tension which ran through all these efforts, the Saudi decision to allow US troops into the Kingdom in 1990 had been controversial internally and within the wider Arab/Muslim world. The Saudis were very quiet in public about the lingering US troop presence (which endured on a small scale until 2003).

Continued cooperation with American anti-terrorism efforts were likewise controversial. The Saudi government often did not communicate with the US about Saudi efforts to silence anti-American clerics or foil internal terrorist plots. The Saudi’s kept to themselves secret negotiations with the Sudanese to deport UBL. Although Saudi anti-terrorism efforts were in earnest, they were conducted independently. Nor were Americans granted access to detained Al-Qaeda figures such as financier Madani al Tayyib (in 1998).

This central government policy existed at odds with somewhat common sympathy for Al-Qaeda among the Saudi people, the clergy, and doubtless many individuals within government.

The US Government’s 9/11 Commission Report found “no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials individually funded [Al Qaeda].” However, it is likely still true that most of Al Qaeda’s financing originated in Saudi Arabia, where anti-American views and theology were common. Saudi Charitable giving existed on a very large scale and with minimal oversight.

'No Saudi government participation' remained the official US line for two decades, though there was continuous speculation about the role of the Saudi State in the 9/11 attacks. Although Al-Qaeda was based in Afghanistan by 2001, 15 of the 19 individuals who conducted the 9/11 attacks were Saudi Arabian, as was UBL himself.

Most of the subsequent speculation about possible Saudi state involvement is very silly conspiracy theories. But the phrasing “Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials” led many to believe there was evidence linking non-senior Saudi officials to the attacks. This theory has been confirmed by subsequent document releases which show several connections.

The most significant connection is from Saudi Ambassador to Washington Prince Bandar bin Sultan and his wife, who provided $140,000 (ostensibly for medical expenses) to the wife of Osama Basnan, Basnan then passed funds on to Omar al-Bayoumi. Al-Bayoumi was a Saudi intelligence agent living in San Diego who personally provided significant and repeated support to two hijackers, while communicating with an Al-Qaeda logistics manager. This was revealed in documents released in 2022. Prince Bandar was subsequently implicated in unrelated money laundering on a large scale. The FBI concluded there was a "50/50 chance" that al-Bayoumi knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance. An FBI report also stated Al-Bayoumi and a second Saudi state employee (a religious official with the Saudi consulate in LA) may have been directed by Mussaed Ahmed al-Jarrah, a higher ranking Saudi diplomat in Washington to help the two hijackers. But in this instance, like the others, there is no definitive involvement in the attacks, only numerous pieces of circumstantial evidence.

So while I would not say “The Saudis” generally funded and helped the attackers. Some Saudi Arabians funded, helped, and carried out the 9/11 attacks.

A useful analogy for our primarily American readership is the January 6th attack on the US Capitol Building. I think it would be odd to say “the Americans” funded and helped the attack. But some US elected officials, law enforcement officers, and serving members of the US military did participate in the attack.

Sources:

• Kean, Thomas, and Lee Hamilton. The 9/11 commission report: Final report of the national commission on terrorist attacks upon the United States. Vol. 3. Government Printing Office, 2004.
• Ottaway, D. B. "Saudi Arabia Faces the Missing 28 Pages." Wilson Center Viewpoints 102."

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/12ujpzs/did_the_saudis_actually_fund_and_help_the/

Markus Antonius

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120828089#Comment_120828089

A useful analogy for our primarily American readership is the January 6th attack on the US Capitol Building

Good grief

Cheerful S

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120826987#Comment_120826987

This is likely kept a secret because the US government wanted to maintain good relations with Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, and the potential exposure of their involvement in Al Qaeda could have damaged those relations. Additionally, the US government was likely aware that bin Laden was living in the compound near the Pakistan military academy, but they may have chosen not to pursue the matter until later due to the potential diplomatic consequences.

It's important to remember had closer ties back then. In the event that factions within those countries conspired to attack America on 9/11 and went public with it, that would lead to a war with Pakistan. Nuclear weapons are in their possession.

Three weeks before 9/11, Mahmoud Ahmed wired $100,000 to the alleged ringleader Mohammad Atta. It is explosive that the head of Pakistan Intelligence sent Atta that much money before the attack. However, how many people are aware of it? Despite the fact that this information could indicate Pakistan Intelligence's involvement in the attacks, it has been largely ignored by the US media and government officials. It could cause a diplomatic crisis between the US and Pakistan if this information were made public back then.

In terms of the true facts surrounding 9/11, they have largely been kept from the public, and don't even get me started on the collapse of building seven.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120868935#Comment_120868935

We know what happened on 9/11.

It was secret Nazi's and Jews and Saudis and George Bush all working together, I can quote your post on that.

Cheerful S

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120869197#Comment_120869197

The 9/11 event was followed by the US declaring war on Afghanistan and invading Iraq. It also ushered in an era of increased surveillance and security measures. The event led to the War on Terror and many other changes in the world.

I see the 9/11 attack as having two stages: the public face and the secret face. The public face is what is seen by the public, which is usually the version that is reported in the media. The secret face is what actually happened behind the scenes, which may be different from what is reported in the media. This can be difficult to uncover, but it is important to understand the full picture of what happened.

It is possible that certain powerful people or groups were behind the planning and execution of the 9/11 attacks, and that they had a hidden agenda that was not revealed to the public. There have been numerous reports of suspicious activity leading up to the attack, and it is possible that the attack was orchestrated by individuals or groups with a vested interest in the outcome. Additionally, the collapse of seven world does suggest an orchestrated attack by a third party.

In spite of the fact that you may not like to discuss who did it, this was the first tall steel-framed building in history to collapse due to fire. When they botch the official study and lie about the collapse, people have every right to be skeptical. The official story of the collapse of the World Trade Center seven was that it was due to structural failure caused by the fire. However, many experts have pointed out that the collapse was too symmetrical and too fast to be the result of a normal fire.

NIST's conclusion of fire-induced collapse is flawed. It is difficult to accept this conclusion without an explanation for why their modeling missed eight floors of collapse. NIST continues to avoid addressing this question.

This means that the collapse wasn't due to fire, and that it must have been caused by something else. This is a serious oversight by NIST and should be properly explained and answered by the debunkers.

There is no reasonable explanation for the collapse of the building other than the use of explosives. This is further evidenced by the fact that the building fell at free-fall speed, meaning that there was no resistance from the structure itself. This is not consistent with any other known natural form of building collapse.

Some kind of force must have acted on the columns in order to cause them to collapse so quickly. The only logical explanation is that an external force, such as an explosion or something like it, must have been involved in causing the collapse of the building.

Regardless of what you believe, the NIST model doesn't make any sense

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120877659#Comment_120877659

You forgot:

Semi-silent explosives, that no one can hear except if you listen very carefully to one video.

That were in boxes, of red chips, just left around the buildings, with wifi detonators.

Planted there on the orders of Bush, Saudis, actual German Nazi's, Mossad, Larry Silverstein...

Over a couple of weekends, by a few guys walking into the buildings..

And terrorists flew planes into the buildings at the same time. Is your version of what happened. Or one of your versions.

Cheerful S

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120878662#Comment_120878662

Nano thermite chips are engineered to be highly reactive to heat, even in low temperatures. When they are exposed to a fire, they rapidly heat up and release energy, creating additional heat. This extra heat can be used to accelerate the burning process.

Might be able to place all this stuff in a few weekends. How much nanothermite would it take to melt off bolts?

The iron microspheres found in the WTC dust suggest that temperatures of up to 2000 degrees Celsius must have been reached in order to melt the steel. This is far higher than the average temperature of a typical office fire. The nanothermite reaction hypothesis suggests that this high temperature was achieved through a chemical reaction which caused the steel to melt. This is supported by the fact that the building contained relatively little iron. Steel is an alloy, dont get pure Iron from it naturally in molten form.

That explains the silence at the towers.

Building seven

The collapse of a bottom eight floors created a void in the lower floors which allowed the uppers floors to come down through it at freefall. I see no natural way of doing that in building without using some explosives.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120882406#Comment_120882406

But cheerful, this has been explained to you before, and you ran away.

The study you posted that you claimed proved thermite said that the iron mircospheres were formed by melting, not by reduction as would be caused by thermite. It also states that there was no aluminium oxide, which would be the other byproduct of a thermite reaction.

The study proved the thermite theory is false. This was explained to you repeatedly, but you refused to discuss this issue, failed to explain both your lack of explanation or your scientific errors like the notion that the iron microspheres are pure iron. So using your argument from the other thread, your theory is false.

You are also forgetting that thermite isn't an explosive and cannot be used to instantly destroy hundreds of steel support columns. Steel melting would not be instant. So again, thermite theory is debunked by your own claims.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120882406#Comment_120882406

They could have placed it in a few weeks, done it at nights and weekends, rigged everything, radio detonators, silent thermite. Planes hit, they start to thermite burning at those points, it weapons-grade secret tech, burns through structural steel in fractions of a second, completely undetectable.

Wow it's been this easy all along?

DandyAndy

"The most significant connection is from Saudi Ambassador to Washington Prince Bandar bin Sultan and his wife, who provided $140,000 (ostensibly for medical expenses) to the wife of Osama Basnan, Basnan then passed funds on to Omar al-Bayoumi. Al-Bayoumi was a Saudi intelligence agent living in San Diego who personally provided significant and repeated support to two hijackers, while communicating with an Al-Qaeda logistics manager. This was revealed in documents released in 2022. Prince Bandar was subsequently implicated in unrelated money laundering on a large scale. The FBI concluded there was a "50/50 chance" that al-Bayoumi knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance. An FBI report also stated Al-Bayoumi and a second Saudi state employee (a religious official with the Saudi consulate in LA) may have been directed by Mussaed Ahmed al-Jarrah, a higher ranking Saudi diplomat in Washington to help the two hijackers. But in this instance, like the others, there is no definitive involvement in the attacks, only numerous pieces of circumstantial evidence."

This is the important stuff right here. There's definitely more to this incident that we aren't told... yet. Plus, the FBI itself admits that there were other leads to Saudi royals and religious officials that they were unable to follow-up on since they were already being told to back off by administration officials.

Important to note:

Saudi stands for House of Saud--the ABSOLUTE monarch family that rules over the wealth and the population in Arabia. Calling your average Arabian citizen a "Saudi" is equal to saying that human-being is a subject of the House of Saud--property of them. Its disgusting. Its their "sacred" tradition, keep the people under their control.

The current crown prince is a sociopath that murdered hundreds of dissidents and his own competition for the throne back in 2017-2019. It was a coup lead by Mohammed bin Salman against anyone who challenged him, including a permeant American resident named Jamal Khashoggi. Khashoggi wrote for the Washington Post, MBS disliked him because he "criticized" the coup--go read some of Khashoggi's old articles. I wouldn't call them harsh critiques like Martin Luthers writings about the Pope. What's shocking is he actually carefully encourages the "reform" that MBS had been selling--he was quick to label the purge as such--and yet this was enough for MBS to order a heinous murder of the man.

Had anyone here heard of Jamal Khashoggi before his death? Odds are no. His own writings weren't really drawing that much attention to MBS anyways. But MBS lied to Khashoggi, telling him to come to a Saudi embassy in Turkey, then MBS's hired goons broke an ancient--and modern--code of ethics; it is a heinous sin to harm a person one invites into their home under the pretenses of safety. Think back to the story of Job; he invited in the strangers that the citizens of Sodom wanted to rape for being new-comers. Job tells them these people are his guests and are protected as such, then he offers his OWN DAUGHTERS as an alternative. In modern times the expectation is codified in UN conventions that Saudi Arabia agreed to, and yet MBS felt so embolden he committed the crime AND bragged that he bought the information from Jared Kushner whom he said was "in my pocket."

Kushner got $2 billion dollars from the Saudi's and MBS bragged openly about it. Go search, this is all public info.

its disgusting how badly the public got sold-out to these criminals. We've got the Russian Mafia, the Paypal Mafia and the Saudi Mafia all draining American resources and they're getting away with it because they've planted sympathetic spies in our governments; Canada is overrun by them, America isn't much better off, Europe has been bought and paid for and Australia is too far away to really leverage its recent turn to the liberals. Heck, in many of these governments the liberals are bought off as well. Democracy and the people are screwed.

Saudi Arabia owns significant shares of Birkshire Hathaway; Grandpa billionaire Warren Buffet's investment firm. Saudi's own stock in Disney, Uber, Spacex, Tesla, JP Morgan, hollywood studios, they own water rights in Arizona at lower costs than American farmers get--in an area with a limited water supply to draw from! The Saudi's basically control Silicon Valley now; they've been the money behind start-up's for hears now. Saudi Arabia even got caught having a spy working inside Twitter that was stealing journalist information for them!!! Once they got caught doing that they just bought the company flat out--with their sock-puppet South African Elon Musk, of course. Saudi's and Elon partnering up to spy on those that report on their shaddy dealings.

MBS was hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein on election night 2016. What an odd "coincidence." Epstein, a notorious child-sex-offender and trafficker, had connections to Saudi's (themselves notorious child-sex-traffickers) as well as connections to JP Morgan and billionaires like Jeff Bezos, Elon Musk and Peter Thiel--Thiel is famous for hating democracy and publicly stating he'd like to destroy democracy... he also started an internet data analytics spy company with a grant from the CIA after he sold Paypal with Musk. The grossness is overwhelming.

If there is a God it should have went apeshit on this cult of evil decades ago but here we are, most of this stuff is public knowledge but the billionaires laugh and brag about how they'll get away with it.

Anyone stupid enough to believe the 20-oughts theories of "demo-charges" at the WTC is missing the real crimes that are on-going; exactly what this cult of evil wants you to be distracted by. Go watch the National Geographics/Discovery channel documentary that test and debunks those out-dated theories. The billionaires laugh at your ignorance; it's much cheaper and easier to pay some loser Saudi's to fly stolen airliners into the buildings... which is exactly why they did it.

Immigrants like Elon Musk and Peter Thiel and Rupert Murdoch (also linked to Jeffrey Epstein) were plants to help muddy the narrative. They've done well.

*Did anyone notice Jeff Bezos buying up all the single-family housing to rent-trap us commoners forever? Gone are the days of "lease to own" and Bezos is monopolizing humanities shelters now. Meanwhile, he's enjoying a vacation on his pedophile yacht--they buy the sex-slaves from Eastern European countries and fly them to the yacht thats currently loitering around Spain.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120911837#Comment_120911837

The heat released from a nano thermite explosion is so intense that it has been known to cause physical effects, such as melting steel and glass. 

You've never actually been able to show your nanothermite actually exists never mind what it's physical effects are.

And as before, you've been shown the evidence that thermite reactions weren't present. You provided the evidence for that.

The only one who ignores things here is you cheerful.

King Mob

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121441072#Comment_121441072

Yes. Because evidently it did. The explanations for how this occured are pretty reasonable and consistent and I haven't seen any convincing argument for why they are not. The only arguments against them I've heard rely on ignorance or outright dishonesty. And all of the alternatives I've seen are not very good, usually being inconsistent, far fetched and generally ridiculous.

It's pretty telling that you're repeating the meme of "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" as if we haven't heard it before. It's parroted so much it's become a joke.

No one claims that the towers collapsed because the steel melted.

The best and only viable explanation presented, and the one supported by pretty much every expert, is that the buildings collapsed because the fires weakened the steel to the point of failure.

Since you're so versed in the properties of steel at high temperatures, then you should also be familiar with what happens to the strength of steel at 1500-2000 F.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121441072#Comment_121441072

Of course. Steel is vulnerable to fire (which is why structural steel is fire-cladded)

An office fire, over a period of time, can weaken steel by around 50% (and also cause steel to warp which can push joists off their mounts). In the Twin Towers, the fires burnt hotter than that (due to the A1 jet fuel from the airliners).

National Geographic did a test with A36 steel (loaded), the same type used in the Twin Towers, with fire of the same approx temp recorded on 9/11 and the steel sagged (weakened) and then failed within minutes. There was no "melting" involved. It's actually testament to how well the buildings were designed they lasted as long as they did.

Multiple investigations all concluded that indeed fire was the cause, and there's no credible evidence of any alternative.

This is a little off-topic I know, but you asked.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121443877#Comment_121443877

Dohnjoe, asserts

It doesn't come from me. It's the conclusion of investigations into 9/11, widely accepted historical fact and taught everywhere.

You, on the other hand, reject all that and have your own personal conspiracy theory (unique to you) that a cabal of secret Nazis, Jews, Saudi Royals, the US president, investigators, Biden, FBI, CIA, Pakistani ISIS and a whole raft of characters conspired to blew up/melt the towers

Slight difference

Cheerful S

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121444225#Comment_121444225

Multiple investigations concluded that fire was the cause of the Twin Towers collapse. This is the conclusion of 9/11 investigations next post.

Can you name all the investigations into the Twin Tower fire? What is the length of the study, who is involved, and is there an online version of the paper?

Making **** Up all the time.

In regards to Biden, all I posted was an interview. Where he acknowledges that the ISI chief had forwarded money to Mohammed Atta couples of weeks before 9/11. In the subsequent interview, Biden became visibly angry when he was asked why his government did not question the ISI chief further. He went on to make a rant about the concept of diplomatic immunity, arguing that it limits the ability of governments to investigate and prosecute individuals associated with foreign nations.

I linked him to demolitions, which is not true.

Secret Nazis: The infiltration of the OSS by former Nazis is not a new revelation. It has been a subject of much debate and controversy over the years. One of the main reasons for this infiltration was the lack of thorough background checks and screening procedures in the early days of the agency's formation. As a result, individuals with a questionable past were able to join the OSs which later became the CIA, and contribute to its operations. These Nazi individuals were instrumental in employing dirty tricks to achieve their objectives, including torture, false accusations, blackmail, propaganda, and disinformation. During the 1950s and 60s, the CIA conducted a secret program known as Operation MKULTRA. ( thats what the Nazis did. I could debate this more if you want? I am not entirely certain that one can completely eliminate the influence of Nazism once it is ingrained in the agency's mindset.

Saudi Royals.

Love how you just say Saudi Royals, as if I am blaming them all for 9/11. This statement implies that I am automatically assigning blame to all members of the Saudi royal family for the 9/11 attacks. It is incorrect to assume that I am making such a sweeping statement. What I said was that there is clear and overwhelming evidence that Saudi intelligence agents were actively working for powerful figures from Saudi Arabia to facilitate the attacks. This statement is based on concrete evidence from various official investigations and reports.

I linked the Saudi Royal family to demolitions, which is again not true.

US President

Linked Bush to the demolition. Where?

Investigators

I have complaints about NIST work and rightly so.

FBI

The FBI has been accused of hiding information about demolitions. Where did I say that?

CIA

The CIA and their surrogates in the media have attempted to distort and discredit credible sources of information that challenge the official narrative.Richard Clarke, a former White House counterterrorism advisor, has emerged as one of the central figures exposing the CIA's involvement in a cover up. Based on the evidence provided by his own testimony, it is undeniable that the CIA ran a counter-intelligence operation against both the FBI and other law enforcement agencies within its own country to prevent the arrest of the individuals involved in the hijacking of the Pentagon plane on 9/11.The CIA has long been involved in covert operations and has used various means to conceal its activities. One such case is the JFK assassination, where the agency resorted to using the media as a cover to hide its role in the events.

Mossad. The first people arrested on 9/11 were not Muslims, but Mossad agents. These agents were apprehended after it was discovered that they had set up cameras in order to capture the moment the first plane hit the Twin Towers. Despite their arrest and subsequent seventy-day detention, the Israeli involvement in 9/11 remains classified, and it is unlikely that the truth will ever be revealed. FBI conducted raids on numerous moving companies, suspecting their involvement in the infiltration of buildings by the Israel Mossad. Adding to the mystery, the owner of the company, Urban Moving Systems, Dominick Suter, had mysteriously vanished. The FBI was unable to locate him, and efforts were made to track him down to question him regarding the smashed hard drives and the suspicious activities surrounding Urban Moving Systems.

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121455656#Comment_121455656

Those are your own views on 9/11.

So far you haven't provided any credible evidence for any of it. Instead you rely on denial and incredulity, which is a classic technique used by everyone from Alex Jones to that poster on this site who has spent 3 years arguing, via denial, that satellites don't exist.

Still waiting for you to support any of it

Cheerful S

I  believe that there has been a lack of willingness to engage in a constructive conversation. The inability to acknowledge certain facts and consistently dismiss them as insignificant raises concerns regarding the feasibility of further dialogue with you.

Why do I have to keep answering you people when you don't even provide the same level of information in return? I asked weeks ago how the Iron/Steel melted during the Twin Towers fire, and as usual, there was complete silence.

The debunkers have failed to provide any credible evidence to refute the numerous anomalies and inconsistencies surrounding 9/11 in this thread, case closed. Whataboutism is all I see here.

Hannibal_Smith

@Cheerful S @Dohnjoe @King Mob the three of you have had an equal hand in dragging this thread off topic. There is already a thread here discussing in great detail the building collapse. I dont see the point in strangling yet another thread with it. I have moved relevant posts to that thread.

HS