I think I will watch 60 Minutes.

[Averageman]

http://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2016/04/11/60-minutes-lawmakers-say-redacted-pages-of-911-report-shows-saudi-official-met-hijackers-in-la/
A CBS News “60 Minutes” report quoted officials familiar with the 2003 report as saying 28 pages of redacted information raises questions over whether Saudi officials were involved in assisting Nawaf al-Hazmi and Khalid al-Mihdhar upon their arrival in Los Angeles in Jan. 2000.

In response to the 60 Minutes report, the Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabiaissued a statement which read in part: “The CBS 60 Minutes program was a compilation of myths and erroneous charges that have been thoroughly addressed not just by the Saudi government but also by the 9-11 Commission and the U.S. courts.”

The White House is reviewing whether to declassify the 28 pages,

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-911-classified-report-steve-kroft/

Steve Kroft: Is there information in the 28 pages that, if they were declassified, would surprise people?

Tim Roemer: Sure, you're gonna be surprised by it. And, you're going to be surprised by some of the answers that are sitting there today in the 9/11 Commission report about what happened in San Diego, and what happened in Los Angeles. And what was the Saudi involvement.

[Firefly]

It'll likely be surprisingly unsurprising with the last 15 years of hindsight and current events.

[Eurodriver]

So on 9/11/2001 the USA was attacked by Saudi (Sunni) Nationals financed and trained by a Saudi millionaire with at least implicit support from the Saudi Government and the US government classified as TS 28 pages of documents that more or less explained the connection to Saudi Arabian support...

...and our response was a half ass invasion of Afghanistan so that less than a year later we could begin sending in a quarter million guys to Iraq (a majority Shi'ite Muslim state and noteworthy thorn in the side of the Saudis) based on what we now know as made up intel regarding WMDs.

I'm not a conspiracy theorist by any means, but am I understanding the big picture correctly? (Serious question)

http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Seems+legit_ac5165_3650521.jpg

[Firefly]

Yeah I think in retrospect we all got caught up in some BS mess there and our emotions and thirst for revenge used against us, but well...shit.

Here we are. And we are in a position to actually have worse leadership than we had under Bush and Obama.

So I ask sincerely, now what?

[glocktogo]

Yeah I think in retrospect we all got caught up in some BS mess there and our emotions and thirst for revenge used against us, but well...shit.

Here we are. And we are in a position to actually have worse leadership than we had under Bush and Obama.

So I ask sincerely, now what?

Never trust the warmongers again, no matter how enraged you are. :(

[KalashniKEV]

I talk about this every day...

1) Release the 28 pages.
2) Instant war with Saudi Arabia.
3) Justice for those who have suffered. Righteous violence against True Evil. A river of blood and tears.

[Dist. Expert 26]

I fear that our military is too emasculated to win a definitive victory at this time. We need a couple years of good leadership, both in the White House and Pentagon, to roll back the PC disease and get back into the business of killing people and breaking their stuff.

Right now our only reliable course of action would be an air campaign supported by SOF assets on the ground. A full scale invasion would turn into another quagmire of overly restrictive ROEs, nation building, and fighting the same guys we fought in Iraq. This time they already have the IED thing down pat.

[Benito]

Never gonna happen. Too much money in too many powerful people's pockets. The USA has been bought by Saudi oil-rich Islamists. They are right in the sense that the West is corrupt and weak, beefy of leadership. Doesn't help that our Pres is a Muslim and doesn't even need money to make him want to sabotage us.

[sevenhelmet]

Never trust the warmongers again, no matter how enraged you are. :(

Nor the apologists. Basically, nobody can be trusted.

Oh, and the Saudis own our refineries now too. Cool.

[LowSpeed_HighDrag]

Ya, but, I got a GI Bill, VA Loan, and hemorrhoids out of the deal!

[cbx]

Yeah.....let's get in a shooting war with the Saudis..... That's a great idea.....

There's no way that won't lead to unintended consequences.

The Saudis are totally complicit in this deal. Always have been. It's not a secret.

Thing is, current arab policy dates back to the kissinger days. Kinda hard to go back on 50 years or so worth of work without disrupting the natural flow of pretty much everything.

If it does go down though, I say we don't do the just the tip thing anymore, and we go all in and start adding states. The idea of breaking everything and then leaving all the good shit and loot, and just bringing home worn out equipment, bills, dead soldiers, broken bodies, and broken souls seems retarded to me.

I'm not anti war, but the last one sure broke some good eggs that are family and friend to me.

Sorry to rant.

[Todd.K]

I'm not a conspiracy theorist by any means, but am I understanding the big picture correctly?

I don't think so.

Afghanistan was a legitimate military target after 9/11. We can argue about tactics and nation building in third world countries but the war was justified as the safe haven for AQ.

We know the intel on WMD's in Iraq was weak, now. Back then intel types were trying to make up for missing 9/11 and were told to connect the dots. Sadam wanted his enemies in the region to believe he had WMD's and convinced us of enough dots being real to get dealt with. When I was there in 04 we were spending a ton of time looking for it. If it was "made up" I honestly don't believe we would have been in such a hurry to prove it didn't exist. Again I say there is room for argument but it is probably somewhere between "incompetent" and "exaggeration" rather than "made up".

[HardToHandle]

I don't think so.

Afghanistan was a legitimate military target after 9/11. We can argue about tactics and nation building in third world countries but the war was justified as the safe haven for AQ.

We know the intel on WMD's in Iraq was weak, now. Back then intel types were trying to make up for missing 9/11 and were told to connect the dots. Sadam wanted his enemies in the region to believe he had WMD's and convinced us of enough dots being real to get dealt with. When I was there in 04 we were spending a ton of time looking for it. If it was "made up" I honestly don't believe we would have been in such a hurry to prove it didn't exist. Again I say there is room for argument but it is probably somewhere between "incompetent" and "exaggeration" rather than "made up".

This is the state of play, actually connected to reality.

NeoCons or not, Hillary and her ilk got the same Intel briefings and supported action against Iraq. What every 20/20 hindsighter does not mention is the post-Clinton I crowd (Albright et al) who had waded into the Balkans war against the Serbs loved the Iraq situation. Saddam had provided numerous F-yous to the UN Security Council, even with Russian complicity, and had numerous strongly worded resolutions that no nation seemed to enforcing besides the U.S. and occasionally the Sunni states.

The leftist interventionists saw the failure in Rwanda as the cause belli for targeting of Serbia and subsequent hunt for political leaders to haul to the International Court of Justice. A mixture of NATO restrained military action and diplomacy emasculated the Serbs, stopped more Srebernicas and eventually led to integration in somewhat viable small countries generally formed on ethnic lines. Those interventionists saw the Balkans as a win, which in restrospective it was mostly proved to be. Remember Hillary ducking sniper fire? That dodging of incoming was this war and guess why she was playing that up to potential Democratic voters?

In 2002-03, the US no fly zone was not working to shelter the Kurds and the Shia in the south were oppressed. The leftist interventionists were either advocating for war or sitting on the sidelines silent.

I object to the continual 20/20 criticism that repeats the illegality and deceit of the 2003 Iraq War. Retrospect shows it was a shaky foundation of bad Intel analysis and too much mobilization planning vice political plans for the postwar Iraq. Saddam was POS and in 2003, POSes like Ghaddaffi and Assad were marching to the US tune right quick. The Iraq War was entirely in tune with the times.

[Moose-Knuckle]

Whoa lot of "Truthers" here about of late . . . :jester:


And to think I'm one who gets labeled with the old "tinfoil" song and dance.

The game is rigged folks, blue or red pill?

[KalashniKEV]

Never gonna happen. Too much money in too many powerful people's pockets.

They don't get to decide... in fact, many of them would be exposed, tried, and punished were we to have a period of national Truth and Reconciliation.

You can't implement just one part of the plan. In order to put things back on the right track we must punish those within our own government. It's time for the architects of the war to step up, be held accountable for the Evil they have done, and receive their punishment.


I don't think so.

Afghanistan was a legitimate military target after 9/11.

Al Qaeda was the target, the Taliban government of Afghanistan was offering them sanctuary.

Because we failed to properly target the enemy, we failed and have been defeated.

Why? Because victory was not possible in either war, because no desired endstate was published and the phases to get there were not laid out. I plan my lazy Sunday afternoons better than the big picture war in either theater.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

I talk about this every day...

1) Release the 28 pages.
2) Instant war with Saudi Arabia.
3) Justice for those who have suffered. Righteous violence against True Evil. A river of blood and tears.

I understand the theory, but your solution for a bad war is a bigger, worse war. As if invading the home of Mecca will make all the little crazies go away.

Like I said before, a great Tom Clancy novel. For a military guy, I would expect something a bit more rational and tied to some sort of reality on resources.

You want the neo-cons to stand trial for their half-baked plans, are you going to when your shit-show hits the fan?

Ever think that the Neo-cons wanted to knock off Iraq, convert Iran and then go after the Saudis? Where exactly were we going to invade Saudi from in 2002?

I'm not disagreeing with you KEV, I'm just looking for something rational and actionable.

[WickedWillis]

It really doesn't matter, because the Saudi's have oil. And that's all that really mattered in the first place.

[KalashniKEV]

I'm not disagreeing with you KEV, I'm just looking for something rational and actionable.

Are you truly though?

What I've offered is 100% rational as opposed to the current state of affairs, and I don't really see why you think it wouldn't be actionable.

I can action that shit all day.

And anyway- Do you think previous administrations concerned themselves with those little things before they spun into action?

Is it really your concern that bad things will happen to Evil people?

That's the whole point.

You think they won't allow it? They don't have a choice.

[Dist. Expert 26]

Kev, if Hillary Clinton can't even be charged for clear violation of federal laws, George Bush will never stand trial for the Iraq war. That's just reality. High level politicians are essentially above the law.

I'm all for bombing the Kingdom back into the stone age though.

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Are you truly though?

What I've offered is 100% rational as opposed to the current state of affairs, and I don't really see why you think it wouldn't be actionable.

I can action that shit all day.

And anyway- Do you think previous administrations concerned themselves with those little things before they spun into action?

Is it really your concern that bad things will happen to Evil people?

That's the whole point.

You think they won't allow it? They don't have a choice.

OK, so you aren't saying invading Saudi, but- with the permission (or really acquiescence) of the Saudis- go in and whack the people responsible?

Of course, aren't those the same people that for the most part you are going to go in and whack? Isn't that the point?

And you do this from? A Gulf state? Egypt? Jordan?


And anyway- Do you think previous administrations concerned themselves with those little things before they spun into action?

And you want to hang them from their heels for it.

I'm fine if you want to spout off on some kind of Tarantino-cum-Clancy revenge fantasy.

[KalashniKEV]

Kev, if Hillary Clinton can't even be charged for clear violation of federal laws, George Bush will never stand trial...

No. She can.

So can he.

I'm talking about something completely different than the regular kabuki bullshit.


OK, so you aren't saying invading Saudi, but- with the permission (or really acquiescence) of the Saudis...

Saudis don't fight, they surrender before the fighting starts or they get someone to fight for them.

I'm talking about all cards on the table and a zeroing of accounts... then support for secular Arab Nationalism and getting shit organized correctly.

More of this:

http://waleg.com/images/bashar_alasad_family.jpg

Less of this:

http://snoovies.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/article-2311024-194EB492000005DC-568_306x423.jpg

[Dist. Expert 26]

In a perfect world, sure, but the world we live in is far from it. Hillary will never stand trial, neither will Bush, Obama or anyone else who ever occupied the White House. Unless of course we have a full scale revolution, but that's another discussion entirely.

[Benito]

I actually agree with Kev here 100%.
People seem to just write off that entire region as unchangeable, and resign themselves to having "leaders" who kiss the dirty hairy asses of oil-rich pedophile Princes. Invading Saudi Arabia would make a difference The difference between it and Iraq is that Saudi Arabia is the vast majority of the source of the $$ and ideology(i.e. Islamic schools, universities, institutes, etc., as well as the home of Mecca) and Iraq was not.

We need to start with Saudi Arabia, and leave Assad the hell alone. Ditto for all secular governments that repress Islamists, regardless of whether they are "democratic". Yeah, that means leaving Mubarak in power, and not letting "Arab Spring" type BS push the Islamic Brotherhood into power.

Decades of atrociously bad Western war planning and strategy have left people with this notion that war is futile and can't really change anything. Japan and Germany would attest to how incorrect this is. So would most of human history. The Middle East was not always Islamic. War changed that. We can, and should, change it back.

[SteyrAUG]

No. She can.

So can he.

I'm talking about something completely different than the regular kabuki bullshit.



Saudis don't fight, they surrender before the fighting starts or they get someone to fight for them.

I'm talking about all cards on the table and a zeroing of accounts... then support for secular Arab Nationalism and getting shit organized correctly.

More of this:

Less of this:


It won't turn out like you hope, I wish it actually would, but it won't.

We have a better chance of getting genuine representative government in THIS county and how is that working out so far?

[Moose-Knuckle]

Report: Saudis Vow To Sell U.S. Assets If Congress Decides Gov Was Involved In 9/11


Saudi Arabia has reportedly told the Obama administration and congressional leaders that it will sell billions of dollars in U.S. financial assets if Congress passes a bill to make the Saudi government legally responsible for any role in the 9/11 attacks.

Al-Juberi purportedly informed the lawmakers during a trip to Washington that Saudi Arabia would be forced to sell as much as $750 billion in Treasury securities and other American financial assets on the world market, fearing the legislation could become law and U.S. courts would then freeze the assets.

http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/04/16/report-saudis-vow-sell-us-assets-if-congress-decides-gov-was-involved-911




Saudis warn of economic reprisals if Congress passes 9/11 bill


Saudi Arabia is warning it will sell off billions in American assets if the U.S. Congress passes a bipartisan bill that would allow victims of 9/11 and other terrorist attacks to sue foreign governments.

Saudi foreign minister Adel al-Jubeir issued the warning to U.S. lawmakers last month during a visit to Washington, two senior State Department officials told CNN. A source with knowledge of the Saudis' thinking said investments would be put in jeopardy if this bill passes, so they are trying to protect themselves from risk.

The Obama administration has, in turn, applied heavy pressure on Congress to block the bill.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/16/politics/saudi-arabia-government-9-11-congress-bill/index.html

[SteyrAUG]

Report: Saudis Vow To Sell U.S. Assets If Congress Decides Gov Was Involved In 9/11

http://nation.foxnews.com/2016/04/16/report-saudis-vow-sell-us-assets-if-congress-decides-gov-was-involved-911

Saudis warn of economic reprisals if Congress passes 9/11 bill

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/16/politics/saudi-arabia-government-9-11-congress-bill/index.html

See. And this is just over the threat of lawsuits which would be virtually unenforceable and the Saudi's would never pay. There will be no war, hell doesn't even look like their will be lawsuits of any consequence.

[Irish]

So the Saudis are threatening to blackmail the U.S. and we're sending Gitmo prisoners to Saudi Arabia. (http://www.breitbart.com/jihad/2016/04/17/u-s-frees-9-guantanamo-prisoners-sends-saudi-arabia/) :suicide2:

The U.S. has released nine more prisoners from its base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and sent them to Saudi Arabia for resettlement, officials said Saturday.

The move announced in a Pentagon statement is part of an effort by President Barack Obama’s administration to release detainees considered low-risk while seeking to transfer the remainder to the U.S.

“The United States is grateful to the government of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for its humanitarian gesture and willingness to support ongoing U.S. efforts to close the Guantanamo Bay detention facility,” the Pentagon said.

With this latest release, there are now 80 prisoners at Guantanamo, including 26 cleared men expected to be sent home or to another country by the end of the summer...

[glocktogo]

Saudi Arabia controls U.S. foreign policy FAR more than the U.S. controls theirs. We forget that fact at our peril. This is a long game and we can't afford to play short. :(

[lowprone]

So the far better to deal with the Devil we do know, the the Devil we don't know axiom applies?
Known or unknown a deal with the Devil is a fools folly.
That this laundry is hung in public is telling, indeed!

[Moose-Knuckle]

Obama's chilly reception in Saudi Arabia hints at mutual distrust


The US president was greeted at the airport by the governor of Riyadh, Prince Faisal bin Bandar Al Saud, and the event was not broadcast live on Saudi TV, as is routine with visiting heads of state – quickly generating talk of a snub.

Underlining the coolness, King Salman bin Abdulaziz, accompanied by other senior figures, was shown earlier on state television greeting the leaders of neighbouring states on the tarmac – ahead of Thursday’s summit of the six-member, Saudi-dominated Gulf Cooperation council, which Obama is to address.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/20/barack-obama-saudi-arabia-visit-king-salman-relationship

[glocktogo]

Obama's chilly reception in Saudi Arabia hints at mutual distrust



http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/20/barack-obama-saudi-arabia-visit-king-salman-relationship

Perhaps he didn't bow deeply enough the last time he was there? :rolleyes:

[Singlestack Wonder]

I wonder if obama will protest saudi arabia's beheadings while he is there.....

[SteyrAUG]

I wonder if obama will protest saudi arabia's beheadings while he is there.....

Maybe he can start with the "anti sorcery" squad of the police.

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/08/saudi-arabias-war-on-witchcraft/278701/

[Averageman]

You know, if we cannot eliminate all dealings with these guys, why aren't we just drilling and fracking our own oil out of own country?
I wouldn't have a problem telling these guys, No, we want our refineries back and no we aren't going to pay you for them.

[26 Inf]

You know, if we cannot eliminate all dealings with these guys, why aren't we just drilling and fracking our own oil out of own country?
I wouldn't have a problem telling these guys, No, we want our refineries back and no we aren't going to pay you for them.

It is an aspect of the market. It is still cheaper to buy oil in the middle east for use in America. As the price of oil dropped, the additional costs associated with fracking became less attractive. It is simply the market.

At this point, according to what I've read, it is still cheaper to buy Iraqi oil, ship to the U.S. for refining, and then ship to Europe:

OPEC crude production is expected to jump by nearly 1 million barrels per day this year, thanks in large part to increases in Iraq.

Platts expects more of that resurgent Iraqi oil output to make its way to the U.S.

It's way cheaper to refine oil in the Gulf (of Mexico)

The shift is being driven by the simple fact that it's cheaper for oil producers to have certain blends of oil refined in the Gulf Coast than in Europe.

"The Gulf Coast offers the best economics. It's the place where if you want to make money, you send your crude to," said Battistini.

The U.S. imported 521,000 barrels of Iraqi oil per day during the final week of October. That was up from zero during several weeks in August.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/17/investing/iraq-shipping-more-oil-to-us/

[TAZ]

It is an aspect of the market. It is still cheaper to buy oil in the middle east for use in America. As the price of oil dropped, the additional costs associated with fracking became less attractive. It is simply the market.

At this point, according to what I've read, it is still cheaper to buy Iraqi oil, ship to the U.S. for refining, and then ship to Europe:

OPEC crude production is expected to jump by nearly 1 million barrels per day this year, thanks in large part to increases in Iraq.

Platts expects more of that resurgent Iraqi oil output to make its way to the U.S.

It's way cheaper to refine oil in the Gulf (of Mexico)

The shift is being driven by the simple fact that it's cheaper for oil producers to have certain blends of oil refined in the Gulf Coast than in Europe.

"The Gulf Coast offers the best economics. It's the place where if you want to make money, you send your crude to," said Battistini.

The U.S. imported 521,000 barrels of Iraqi oil per day during the final week of October. That was up from zero during several weeks in August.
http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/17/investing/iraq-shipping-more-oil-to-us/

I think we need some clarification. It's not the market that is dictating the price of crude in the USA. It's a combination of market AND government policy. Pretty sure that the exact same thing can be said for refining in the EU. There is MORE at play here than simple free market forces.

The USA runs its pie hole all day and night about energy independence and ME reliance, but that is all it is. Gum flapping by politicians who just want the sound bites and nothing more.

[Irish]

White House report. (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SEPT_11_ATTACK_SECRET_FILES?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-04-24-09-13-10)

The Obama administration will likely soon release at least part of a 28-page secret chapter from a congressional inquiry into 9/11 that may shed light on possible Saudi connections to the attackers...

Tim Roemer, who was a member of both the joint congressional inquiry as well as the 9/11 Commission and has read the secret chapter three times, described the 28 pages as a "preliminary police report."

"There were clues. There were allegations. There were witness reports. There was evidence about the hijackers, about people they met with - all kinds of different things that the 9/11 Commission was then tasked with reviewing and investigating," the former Democratic congressman from Indiana said Friday...

[SteyrAUG]

http://s2.quickmeme.com/img/40/406851ed75a77cd0f1d701af31aeeb37380058836983fa5ff0e34c9ade416d60.jpg