Mr. Bush his Saudis

[KevinWestern]

Why did George W. Bush (as Commander in Chief) ignore the fact that there was a large amount of evidence linking the Saudi Government (or elements within) to the 9/11 attacks (news story), and divert our attention (instead) towards a country that had nothing to do with the event?

It doesn't make much sense to me, but perhaps somone could explain it.

Thanks

 

[Kosh]

Why did George W. Bush (as Commander in Chief) ignore the fact that there was a large amount of evidence linking the Saudi Government (or elements within) to the 9/11 attacks (news story), and divert our attention (instead) towards a country that had nothing to do with the event?

It doesn't make much sense to me, but perhaps a Bush supporter/historian/expert could explain it.

Thanks

No matter who tries to explain anything to a far left Obama drone nothing will come of it, your far left programming just wont allow to see anything other than the what your masters command you to see.

 

[KevinWestern]

Why did George W. Bush (as Commander in Chief) ignore the fact that there was a large amount of evidence linking the Saudi Government (or elements within) to the 9/11 attacks (news story), and divert our attention (instead) towards a country that had nothing to do with the event?

It doesn't make much sense to me, but perhaps a Bush supporter/historian/expert could explain it.

Thanks

No matter who tries to explain anything to a far left Obama drone nothing will come of it, your far left programming just wont allow to see anything other than the what your masters command you to see.

Here's a question for you, [MENTION=42632]Kosh[/MENTION]. As an "Obama drone", why on earth would I start a thread (a month ago) that lists 12 reasons why he is such a horrible President? Bit of a conundrum there. Here's the thread (in case you missed it):

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/324163-does-anyone-left-or-right-still-like-obama.html

And second question (in light of your epic fail), do you sort of feel like an idiot now?





.

 

[Kosh]

Why did George W. Bush (as Commander in Chief) ignore the fact that there was a large amount of evidence linking the Saudi Government (or elements within) to the 9/11 attacks (news story), and divert our attention (instead) towards a country that had nothing to do with the event?

It doesn't make much sense to me, but perhaps a Bush supporter/historian/expert could explain it.

Thanks

No matter who tries to explain anything to a far left Obama drone nothing will come of it, your far left programming just wont allow to see anything other than the what your masters command you to see.

Here's a question for you, [MENTION=42632]Kosh[/MENTION]. As an "Obama drone", why on earth would I start a thread (a month ago) that lists 12 reasons why he is such a horrible President? Bit of a conundrum there. Here's the thread (in case you missed it):

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/324163-does-anyone-left-or-right-still-like-obama.html

And second question (in light of your epic fail), do you sort of feel like an idiot now?

Actually you did not claim anywhere on that thread that Obama was a horrible president. However when one uses the far left talking points and wants explanations it shows the true colors of the one posting them.

If want this to be a discussion and see who all the Bush defenders are you are probably going to be waiting a very long time.

Which also shows how far left you are.

The true conservatives blasted Bush on many things and not just that he was spending like a drunken sailor.

However if you want to edit your far left propaganda post I will acknowledge that you did so.

 

[KevinWestern]

No matter who tries to explain anything to a far left Obama drone nothing will come of it, your far left programming just wont allow to see anything other than the what your masters command you to see.

Here's a question for you, [MENTION=42632]Kosh[/MENTION]. As an "Obama drone", why on earth would I start a thread (a month ago) that lists 12 reasons why he is such a horrible President? Bit of a conundrum there. Here's the thread (in case you missed it):

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/324163-does-anyone-left-or-right-still-like-obama.html

And second question (in light of your epic fail), do you sort of feel like an idiot now?

Actually you did not claim anywhere on that thread that Obama was a horrible president. However when one uses the far left talking points and wants explanations it shows the true colors of the one posting them.

If want this to be a discussion and see who all the Bush defenders are you are probably going to be waiting a very long time.

Which also shows how far left you are.

The true conservatives blasted Bush on many things and not just that he was spending like a drunken sailor.

However if you want to edit your far left propaganda post I will acknowledge that you did so.

It was well implied that I thought he was a horrible President.

My thread simply asked a question, one that not only addresses Bush's judgement but our Government as a whole, which now is represented by Obama.

Why is this "propaganda"? I'm addressing a very serious question that many people on the right and left have shown concern over.

 

[The Rabbi]

Why did George W. Bush (as Commander in Chief) ignore the fact that there was a large amount of evidence linking the Saudi Government (or elements within) to the 9/11 attacks (news story), and divert our attention (instead) towards a country that had nothing to do with the event?

It doesn't make much sense to me, but perhaps a Bush supporter/historian/expert could explain it.

Thanks

Troll thread alert.

 

[Kosh]

Here's a question for you, [MENTION=42632]Kosh[/MENTION]. As an "Obama drone", why on earth would I start a thread (a month ago) that lists 12 reasons why he is such a horrible President? Bit of a conundrum there. Here's the thread (in case you missed it):

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/324163-does-anyone-left-or-right-still-like-obama.html

And second question (in light of your epic fail), do you sort of feel like an idiot now?

Actually you did not claim anywhere on that thread that Obama was a horrible president. However when one uses the far left talking points and wants explanations it shows the true colors of the one posting them.

If want this to be a discussion and see who all the Bush defenders are you are probably going to be waiting a very long time.

Which also shows how far left you are.

The true conservatives blasted Bush on many things and not just that he was spending like a drunken sailor.

However if you want to edit your far left propaganda post I will acknowledge that you did so.

It was well implied that I thought he was a horrible President.

My thread simply asked a question, one that not only addresses Bush's judgement but our Government as a whole, which now is represented by Obama.

Why is this "propaganda"? I'm addressing a very serious question that many people on the right and left have shown concern over.

If you don't understand why it is propaganda then you are definitely a far left Obama drone. You used far left talking points in your OP, you got caught just own up to it.

 

[KevinWestern]

If you don't understand why it is propaganda then you are definitely a far left Obama drone. You used far left talking points in your OP, you got caught just own up to it.

Are you saying the Saudis were not involved in the attacks? Not sure what your point is.

 

[KevinWestern]

Why did George W. Bush (as Commander in Chief) ignore the fact that there was a large amount of evidence linking the Saudi Government (or elements within) to the 9/11 attacks (news story), and divert our attention (instead) towards a country that had nothing to do with the event?

It doesn't make much sense to me, but perhaps a Bush supporter/historian/expert could explain it.

Thanks

Troll thread alert.

Why? Not a valid question?

 

[Kosh]

If you don't understand why it is propaganda then you are definitely a far left Obama drone. You used far left talking points in your OP, you got caught just own up to it.

Are you saying the Saudis were not involved in the attacks? Not sure what your point is.

Are you saying that we should have gone to Saudi Arabia instead of Afghanistan?

 

[Edgetho]

If you don't understand why it is propaganda then you are definitely a far left Obama drone. You used far left talking points in your OP, you got caught just own up to it.

Are you saying the Saudis were not involved in the attacks? Not sure what your point is.

Are you saying that we should have gone to Saudi Arabia instead of Afghanistan?

First he needs to identify who he means by "the Saudis"

Were some Saudis involved? Duh.... In case it's escaped everyone's attention, Mecca is in Saudi Arabia and so is the heart of the Islamic movement.

So of course there were some Saudis involved.

Does he mean "the Saudis" as in the Saudi Arabian government? THAT is the question.

If he's accusing the Saudi GOVERNMENT of collusion or conspiracy then I think he needs a lot more evidence than some missing papers from a Congressional Investigation.

And since when has ANYTHING Congress ever investigated been a secret for longer than an hour?

I also don't like a thread with a presupposed answer to a question.

Although I generally agree with Kevin, this one is way too conspiratorial for me.

 

[The Rabbi]

Why did George W. Bush (as Commander in Chief) ignore the fact that there was a large amount of evidence linking the Saudi Government (or elements within) to the 9/11 attacks (news story), and divert our attention (instead) towards a country that had nothing to do with the event?

It doesn't make much sense to me, but perhaps a Bush supporter/historian/expert could explain it.

Thanks

Troll thread alert.

Why? Not a valid question?

Except Bush has been out of office for 5 years, the incident happened 12 years ago, no new information has come to light to make it newsworthy, and it is merely a chance for you to beat up on Bush and proclaim your narco-libertarian crede.

 

[Redfish]

The dem/libs will never get over the fact that Bush beat their clowns twice. Its amazing.

 

[KevinWestern]

If you don't understand why it is propaganda then you are definitely a far left Obama drone. You used far left talking points in your OP, you got caught just own up to it.

Are you saying the Saudis were not involved in the attacks? Not sure what your point is.

Are you saying that we should have gone to Saudi Arabia instead of Afghanistan?

I'm not saying anything, I'm just asking why the President at the time wouldn't take action against that country in some way.

 

[KevinWestern]

Are you saying the Saudis were not involved in the attacks? Not sure what your point is.

Are you saying that we should have gone to Saudi Arabia instead of Afghanistan?

First he needs to identify who he means by "the Saudis"

Were some Saudis involved? Duh.... In case it's escaped everyone's attention, Mecca is in Saudi Arabia and so is the heart of the Islamic movement.

So of course there were some Saudis involved.

Does he mean "the Saudis" as in the Saudi Arabian government? THAT is the question.

If he's accusing the Saudi GOVERNMENT of collusion or conspiracy then I think he needs a lot more evidence than some missing papers from a Congressional Investigation.

And since when has ANYTHING Congress ever investigated been a secret for longer than an hour?

I also don't like a thread with a presupposed answer to a question.

Although I generally agree with Kevin, this one is way too conspiratorial for me.

Hi Edge,

The newstory I linked to connects a few (what appears to be prominent) government officials to the 9/11 attacks:

"LOS ANGELES: Saudi consulate official Fahad al-Thumairy allegedly arranged for an advance team to receive two of the Saudi hijackers — Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi — as they arrived at LAX in 2000."

"HERNDON, VA.: On the eve of the attacks, top Saudi government official Saleh Hussayen checked into the same Marriott Residence Inn near Dulles Airport as three of the Saudi hijackers who targeted the Pentagon. Hussayen had left a nearby hotel to move into the hijackers’ hotel."

"SARASOTA, FLA.: 9/11 ringleader Mohamed Atta and other hijackers visited a home owned by Esam Ghazzawi, a Saudi adviser to the nephew of King Fahd."

"WASHINGTON: Then-Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar and his wife sent checks totaling some $130,000 to Bassnan while he was handling the hijackers. "

Again, just bringing up the subject because I personally found it to be interesting. I'm not blaming Bush here for all of the world's problems, lol, just throwing the topic out there.

Didn't realize I would get such a backlash. People seem overly protective of the Bush Administration.

 

[KevinWestern]

Except Bush has been out of office for 5 years, the incident happened 12 years ago, no new information has come to light to make it newsworthy, and it is merely a chance for you to beat up on Bush and proclaim your narco-libertarian crede.

I'm just bringing a topic to light that hasn't received a lot of coverage lately. You seem to make a hefty buttload of assumptions about who people are while not offering any original thoughts or opinions on the OP. If you don't want to discuss the OP, then why not just go?

 

[KevinWestern]

If you don't understand why it is propaganda then you are definitely a far left Obama drone. You used far left talking points in your OP, you got caught just own up to it.

Are you saying the Saudis were not involved in the attacks? Not sure what your point is.

Are you saying that we should have gone to Saudi Arabia instead of Afghanistan?

Not necessarily an invasion, just some sort of action. I realize the situation is extremely complex and there are implications to the whole thing.

However, when we have a number of Saudi nationals with ties to the Saudi gov't crashing planes into buildings and we do not much to address this I think there might be a problem. Don't you?

 

[Redfish]

Are you saying the Saudis were not involved in the attacks? Not sure what your point is.

Are you saying that we should have gone to Saudi Arabia instead of Afghanistan?

Not necessarily an invasion, just some sort of action. I realize the situation is extremely complex and there are implications to the whole thing.

However, when we have a number of Saudi nationals with ties to the Saudi gov't crashing planes into buildings and we do not much to address this I think there might be a problem. Don't you?

did any of the bombers have ties to the Saudi government? were any of them agents of the saudi government?

 

[depotoo]

Are you saying the Saudis were not involved in the attacks? Not sure what your point is.

Are you saying that we should have gone to Saudi Arabia instead of Afghanistan?

I'm not saying anything, I'm just asking why the President at the time wouldn't take action against that country in some way.

is there direct evidence the Saudi government itself was involved?

Or was it simply some Saud's that were involved?

Under your assumption, since an American citizen was also involved with al queda, then the US govt. should have gone to war with itself.

 

[Edgetho]

Are you saying that we should have gone to Saudi Arabia instead of Afghanistan?

First he needs to identify who he means by "the Saudis"

Were some Saudis involved? Duh.... In case it's escaped everyone's attention, Mecca is in Saudi Arabia and so is the heart of the Islamic movement.

So of course there were some Saudis involved.

Does he mean "the Saudis" as in the Saudi Arabian government? THAT is the question.

If he's accusing the Saudi GOVERNMENT of collusion or conspiracy then I think he needs a lot more evidence than some missing papers from a Congressional Investigation.

And since when has ANYTHING Congress ever investigated been a secret for longer than an hour?

I also don't like a thread with a presupposed answer to a question.

Although I generally agree with Kevin, this one is way too conspiratorial for me.

Hi Edge,

The newstory I linked to connects a few (what appears to be prominent) government officials to the 9/11 attacks:

"LOS ANGELES: Saudi consulate official Fahad al-Thumairy allegedly arranged for an advance team to receive two of the Saudi hijackers — Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi — as they arrived at LAX in 2000."

"HERNDON, VA.: On the eve of the attacks, top Saudi government official Saleh Hussayen checked into the same Marriott Residence Inn near Dulles Airport as three of the Saudi hijackers who targeted the Pentagon. Hussayen had left a nearby hotel to move into the hijackers’ hotel."

"SARASOTA, FLA.: 9/11 ringleader Mohamed Atta and other hijackers visited a home owned by Esam Ghazzawi, a Saudi adviser to the nephew of King Fahd."

"WASHINGTON: Then-Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar and his wife sent checks totaling some $130,000 to Bassnan while he was handling the hijackers. "

Again, just bringing up the subject because I personally found it to be interesting. I'm not blaming Bush here for all of the world's problems, lol, just throwing the topic out there.

Didn't realize I would get such a backlash. People seem overly protective of the Bush Administration.

We're not 'protective' of Bush, we're sick to death of dimocraps never taking responsibility for anything.

It's important to note in your conspiracy that Osama bin Floatin' was persona non grata in Saudi Arabia. Big time and in a Big way. Had he showed up there, King Abdullah would have had him boiled in oil, drawn, quartered hanged and shot. And then killed.

He was tossed by the King. The story is more complicated than I want to get into, but Osama bin Floatin' offered his services to the King after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. The King, not being stupid, saw what bin Foatin' was up to and tossed him.

Lucky he didn't have his whole family killed.

There were almost certainly bin Floatin' sympathizers inside the Saudi Government willing to help bin Floatin'. He was the one who offered to fight Saddam (he would have gotten pulverized) by bringing his Mujahideen from Asscrackistan.

The King saw that obvious treachery as well. Get 20 or 30 thousand Mujahideen in the Country and take over.

The King preferred American Troops. We had no desire to take over his Country.

There were (and still are) factions that would love to depose the King and the entire Royal Family..... Or most of it.

Complicated.