Saudi Newspaper: 9/11 Carried Out By "America and Jews"
Remember how right after 9/11 rumors spread around the world that it was Israel that did it and the "proof" was that no Jews were killed? My response to that was always to point out that the friend of mine who died the moment that plane hit the first tower was Jewish and a cantor at his synagogue, so shut the fuck up.
Now remember our good ally Saudi Arabia? Well, a Saudi daily newspaper, Al-Watan, apparently has an interview with the father of Mohammed Ata (who happened to be piloting the very plane that killed my Jewish friend in the WTC). This is what the Saudis are hearing about 9/11: (From Guysen.Israël.News)
"The United States and the Jews are the authors of the September 11 attacks." Mohamed a-Saïd Ata, the father of one of the terrorists who perpetrated these attacks in the US, said that "the Americans supported by the Jews, designed the attacks of September 11 in order to cover up even greater disasters that are starting to be revealed". He made these comments to the Saudi daily Al-Watan. (Guysen.Israël.News)
So, was Mohammed Ata an American or a Jew when he flew that plane into the World Trade Center?
Remember that Saudi Arabia is the birthplace of Osama bin Laden and most of the 9/11 hijackers. Saudi Arabia is the center of fundamentalist Islam (the Wahhabi sect). Saudi Arabia supports fundamentalist schools that train terrorists. Saudi Arabian money funds Hamas and al-Qaeda.
And Saudi Arabia and its leaders are great friends of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
9/11 | Terrorism | Wahabi | Saudi Arabia
Welll...
Submitted by mole333 on 19 October 2006 - 5:59am.
Checked the paper, it was in Arabic. Date was pretty much when I posted it or day before. Let me know if you find differently. But Arab newspapers are rife with anti-Semitic cartoons and "rumors," not to mention the crap about "no Jews being killed in the WTC."
The bin Laden family are Saudi. No question about that. They are Saudi big wigs.
I do not mean to pin the attacks on the majority of the Saudi people. Let me be clear that I feel people are people and should be judged on actions not nationality and ethnicity. BUT, Saudi Arabia really is the source of a great deal of anti-Semitic and anti-Americanism, and really is the origin of many terrorists, including Osama. Denying this feeds the problem the same way many Americans deny our own role in the problem (e.g. Republican support for some of the same groups that later became the Taliban and al-Qaeda, the negative impact of our illegal invasion of Iraq, etc.)
The Saudi Royal family are linked with the Wahabi sect and supports the Madrasses that are major sources of anti-American propaganda. Oil money is one of the main sources of al-Qaeda money, though often filtered through many layers of offshore accounts. That kind of financial trickery is something Democrats and intelligence officials have been advocating cutting off for years, but Republicans and oil companies (who use the same loopholes) block those efforts.
Blaming Israel and Jews is a common Arab tactic to divert attention from their own problems. Much as Republicans used Janet Jackson's breast on TV to divert attention from their own problems. Arab newspapers blamed JEws for the pope's perceived anti-Islam comments. Arab newspapers blamed the Jews for Danish cartoons. These were foolish accusations.
Saudi Arabia is a major part of the problem. It is complicated for the Saudis because of the alliance between the Royal family and the Wahabis. The Royal family needs that support so they have to walk a thin line between the radicals within their own nation and their alliance with America. I think they have never been as good an ally as they say and have betrayed us. That does not mean I blame the average Saudi any more than I blame the average American for the invasion of Iraq. We all bear some blame in what our nations do, but also, as I said, people are people and most people I have met are decent folk.
At one end Ata and other
Submitted by jamic on 18 October 2006 - 8:37pm.
At one end Ata and other hijakers are supposed to be from Saudi Arabia and at the other end Saudi Arabia and its leaders are allies of victims! Ye, this fuck up must be ended>>
But the Americans have some other RUMOURS as well:
The first hijacked plane crashed through the 94th to the 98th floors of the World Trade Center's 110-story North Tower; the second jet slammed into the 78th to the 84th floors of the 110-story South Tower. The impact and ensuing fires disrupted elevator service in both buildings. Plus, the lobbies of both buildings were visibly damaged before the towers collapsed. "There is NO WAY the impact of the jet caused such widespread damage 80 stories below," claims a posting on the San Diego Independent Media Center Web site (sandiego.indymedia.org). "It is OBVIOUS and irrefutable that OTHER EXPLOSIVES (... such as concussion bombs) HAD ALREADY BEEN DETONATED in the lower levels of tower one at the same time as the plane crash."
"Residents and workers at businesses outside Shanksville, Somerset County, reported discovering clothing, books, papers and what appeared to be human remains," states a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette article dated Sept. 13, 2001. "Others reported what appeared to be crash debris floating in Indian Lake, nearly 6 miles from the immediate crash scene." Commenting on reports that Indian Lake residents collected debris, Think AndAsk.com speculates: "On Sept. 10, 2001, a strong cold front pushed through the area, and behind it--winds blew northerly. Since Flight 93 crashed west-southwest of Indian Lake, it was impossible for debris to fly perpendicular to wind direction. ... The FBI lied." And the significance of widespread debris? Theorists claim the plane was breaking up before it crashed. TheForbiddenKnowledge.com states bluntly: "Without a doubt, Flight 93 was shot down
"We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."
As each tower collapsed, clearly visible puffs of dust and debris were ejected from the sides of the buildings. An advertisement in The New York Times for the book Painful Questions: An Analysis Of The September 11th Attack made this claim: "The concrete clouds shooting out of the buildings are not possible from a mere collapse. They do occur from explosions." Numerous conspiracy theorists cite Van Romero, an explosives expert and vice president of the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, who was quoted on 9/11 by the Albuquerque Journal as saying "there were some explosive devices inside the buildings that caused the towers to collapse." The article continues, "Romero said the collapse of the structures resembled those of controlled implosions used to demolish old structures."
"It has been standard operating procedures for decades to immediately intercept off-course planes that do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers," says the Web site oilempire.us. "When the Air Force 'scrambles' a fighter plane to intercept, they usually reach the plane in question in minutes."
Photographs and video footage shot just before United Airlines Flight 175 hit the South Tower of the World Trade Center (WTC) show an object underneath the fuselage at the base of the right wing. The film "911 In Plane Site" and the Web site LetsRoll911.org claim that no such object is found on a stock Boeing 767. They speculate that this "military pod" is a missile, a bomb or a piece of equipment on an air-refueling tanker. LetsRoll911.org points to this as evidence that the attacks were an "inside job" sanctioned by "President George Bush, who planned and engineered 9/11."
AND THERE ARE NUMEROUS OTHER SIGNALLING 9/11 AN INSIDER JOB. killing american to safeguard jews agenda of new world order.
in fact American hijacked since 9/11. The absence of Nuclear weapons in iraq further strengthening these claim
In February 2004, retired Army Col. Donn de Grand-Pre said on "The Alex Jones Show," a radio talk show broadcast on 42 stations: "It [Flight 93] was taken out by the North Dakota Air Guard. I know the pilot who fired those two missiles to take down 93." LetsRoll911.org, citing de Grand-Pre, identifies the pilot: "Major Rick Gibney fired two Sidewinder missiles at the aircraft and destroyed it in midflight at precisely 0958."
No fighter jets were scrambled from any of the 28 Air Force bases within close range of the four hijacked flights. "On 11 September Andrews had two squadrons of fighter jets with the job of protecting the skies over Washington D.C.," says the Web site emperors-clothes.com. "They failed to do their job." "There is only one explanation for this," writes Mark R. Elsis of StandDown.net. "Our Air Force was ordered to Stand Down on 9/11."
On Sept. 11, FOX News broadcast a live phone interview with FOX employee Marc Birnbach. 911inplanesite.com states that "Bernback" saw the plane "crash into the South Tower." "It definitely did not look like a commercial plane," Birnbach said on air. "I didn't see any windows on the sides."
Coupled with photographs and videos of Flight 175 that lack the resolution to show windows, Birnbach's statement has fueled one of the most widely referenced 9/11 conspiracy theories--specifically, that the South Tower was struck by a military cargo plane or a fuel tanker
Rumors
Submitted by mole333 on 19 October 2006 - 10:09am.
These rumors have the same lack of creedence as those that "no Jews were killed" or "Palestinians were dancing in the streets" and a whole slew of other BS.
There are voluminous records indicating what happened. There were plans captured from al-Qaeda planning the attacks. There is footage of bin Laden and others discussing and celebrating the attacks.
Most of what you cite has long ago been disproven. Funny how passenger lists exist for that non-existent commercial flight. People were killed on those airplanes and there are family members who know that...and cell phone calls. You are basically insulting those families who lost people on that plane.
The comments on cement debris not being consistent with a collapse is patently BS. That is EXACTLY what you would expect from a collapse and NOT what you would expect from controlled detonation which would not be at the exterior of the building, but rather at the interior columns that actually hold the building up.
Passenger lists, air traffic controller records, cell phone calls, eye witness accounts, analysis of the debris, etc. etc. disprove much if not all of what you are saying.
These kinds of absurd theories detract from the very real issue of Bush ignoring warnings and essentially dropping the ball on stopping al-Qaeda's funding and capturing bin Laden. Bush has been incompetent to an extreme degree and should be held accountable for THAT.
You made a definite attempt
Submitted by jamic on 19 October 2006 - 3:37pm.
You made a definite attempt in shifting from the subject matter: 9/11 carried by American and jews. Shifting Emphasize on Saudi Arabia.
Any way, here you go: Trying to make saudis at the heart of Problems. This is opposite to what Saudis doing(according to you) putting Jews at the center of Evils. So equation is equalised; you are nullifying the Saudis bad customs.
You have done: pinning attack on majority ; but still reluctant to accept it. Actions are based on atttitudes, believes and other sources. so these believes/ sources of action are equally important.
Saudi arabia + laden=Terrorists. No, we need some establised difination of TERRORISM. Only then you could have reasons to pass this like comments. This is so important(defining terrorism) because the same Saudis, Ladens, Taleban, Fighters .... were heavenly funded in war against Communism and the same now termed as Terrorists. Same is the casse with Sadam against Iran, Shah Iran, some agencies eg ISI against USSR. SO need to have your defination of Terrorism. Otherwise, Its simply the US and its allies to declare any one as Terrors or peaceful!!
Here you have another concerns with Saudis for there funding to Madrassas. But we can see US fundings to Israel of every kind: dollars, weapons, political and social support as well only for bombings on picnicers and children shelter houses. In fact, Us had taken every means to stop Saudis funding but multiplying its own funding to jews.
Here again you reserved the right to term the facts into foolish accusations: especially the Danish cartoons.
Hard to respond
Submitted by mole333 on 20 October 2006 - 6:09am.
You have such and odd mix of accusations and claims that it is hard to know how to respond.
Definition of terrorism? I think the one that has been in existence for decades (I am blanking on the name of the person who wrote it) suffices for me: actions, whether by a government or a guerilla group, whose primary goal is to kill civilians, is an act of terrorism. I condemn all such acts and have written on this blog about such actions committed by Western nations (read my piece on Columbus day).
There is ample evidence that Saudi Arabia has funded terrorist organizations. It isn't a wild accusation. The dominant sect of Islam in Saudi Arabia is one that advocates jihad and puts its money, training and actions where its mouth is. We took advantage of this when that terrorism was directed at the Soviet Union...and, I predicted back then, the arms and training we provided back then would be turned against us eventually. The same people, movements and organizations that spread Islam with the gun in Chechnya, Afghanistan and Somalia (with fully Wahabi/Saudi encouragement) are the same groups that now target Americans, Brits, etc. By contrast, the accusation that Israel and the US did an inside job in the US is absurd and based on the thinnest of evidence. They are not equivalent.
US support for Israel is a legitimate debate, one where we probably disagree. But it has nothing to do with whether the "Jews" (NOT synonymous with Israel) and the US did an inside job on 9/11. Furthermore, any definition of terrorism you can come up with that declares Israel a terrorist state would also have to declare Palestine a terrorist state. But this is a completely different issue.
Are you sure?
Are you sure about that? give me the date of the newspaper and let me verify, also, alwatan is an independent newspaper.
oh yeah, I am sorry for your loss, but just because 15 people who did it happen to be saudi doesn't mean that the other 15million are the same...
oh and I believe Yemen was osama's origin..
Saudi Arabis is not funding al-qaeda, if I haven't heard any news, we suffered attacks by al-qaeda, suicide bombings and such, SA is NOT supporting them.