あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]Carlosc1dbz 1014ポイント1015ポイント  (368子コメント)

What does Obama have to say about this? What if this information was released by Snowden? Would it get more or less media coverage?

[–]Tonkdaddy14 673ポイント674ポイント  (200子コメント)

He is actively fighting a proposal in Congress to have the full information declassified. He is worried about the fallout and threats the Saudi's have made

[–]EveryNightIWatch 876ポイント877ポイント  (183子コメント)

threats the Saudi's have made

Exactly. These fucking dogs threaten us constantly. The latest threat is that if we sue them they'll divest from the US. Obama's visit to KSA was a shitshow.

I think that should have provoked an aggressive response. I'm flabbergasted about all this fucking bullshit they get away with on a global scale, including funding US enemies.

This whole awful relationship between KSA and the US is based upon a 1970's agreement from the Bush family supported by Nixon/Kissinger. I think if Clinton gets into office than that agreement continues, if Sanders or Trump gets into office then this shit will finally end.

[–]rebuilt11 363ポイント364ポイント  (66子コメント)

sounds like they might need some freedom

[–]KennesawMtnLandis 38ポイント39ポイント  (45子コメント)

Right? I don't understand this. Supposedly we continually go to war in the name of oil, why don't we take over Saudi Arabia? They have actually warranted an invasion.

[–]yeamang[🍰] 71ポイント72ポイント  (17子コメント)

We invade Mecca, you will see radacalized muslims rise to such a scale that we won't be able to stop an all out world war.

[–]EveryNightIWatch 28ポイント29ポイント  (11子コメント)

Agreed. It would be Muslims in every part of the world rising up against the US if we actually invade Saudi Arabia.

But we don't need to invade them, their economy is fragile enough, and we've assassinated their leader before. This could be a CIA action.

Long before that though, if we just make strict demands on these people like "Stop funding terrorism, stop stoking religious fundamentalism" they might be agreeable if they know our demands are back by hostility.

[–]DankJemo 9ポイント10ポイント  (3子コメント)

It's all hinging on oil, which is losing it's value really quickly. All we have to be is be patient. Between the fragile economy and the mistreatment of people from lower social classes, it's a time-bomb. All we have to do is just sit back, continually move towards energy independence and things will be sorted out without the u.s. needing to be involved in anything.

[–]GGAllinsMicroPenis 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

But I thought the U.S. was interested in liberating oppressed people?

[–]DankJemo 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well that is what the propaganda says.

[–]QuasarSandwich 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Taking out the leadership would be a devastatingly bad move. While they are obviously scum, the House of Saud are actually way preferable to the lunatics who would succeed them: Saudi Arabia is struggling to contain the fundamentalists, many of whom (like Bin Laden) see the royals as traitors to Islam for allying the country with the Great Satan USA. There is a significant danger that Saudi will erupt into open rebellion (it's been simmering for years) and if the current despotic leadership is overturned it will almost certainly be replaced by a far worse regime either directly linked with, or similar to, ISIS.

The geopolitical consequences are not hard to imagine - and let's throw into the mix the rather disconcerting fact that the Saudis almost certainly have nuclear weapons (or at least access to them) via Pakistan, whose nuclear program they funded in exchange for just that.

Let's not go assassinating those guys just yet, even if they are complete cunts...

[–]New_Car_Wrecked 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

It depends.

If all we did was help it change custodial hands, it might not be so bad. The question is, who ought to have that power.

Happy Cakeday btw.

[–]Ibarfd 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

The problem is only getting bigger. Amputate the toe or the leg?

[–]Contradiction11 18ポイント19ポイント  (4子コメント)

I say "we" like rich people are thinking the same as us, American or not. This whole thing plays out above our heads financially, and things that don't seem to make sense make perfect sense in their land of complete control and money as power.

[–]Gates9 27ポイント28ポイント  (3子コメント)

"It's a big club, and you and I ain't in it."

[–]MechaBobDylan 6ポイント7ポイント  (4子コメント)

One really huge reason is Mecca. Bin Laden justified his actions by the presence of the US military is KSA. What do you think would happen if we actually invaded?

[–]KennesawMtnLandis 3ポイント4ポイント  (3子コメント)

Well for starters, those groups wouldn't have much money to act since we've toppled KSA.

I see what you are saying. 9/11 wasn't our fault but there was a reason bin Laden and others hate us.

[–]SuperSulf 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

those groups wouldn't have much money to act since we've toppled KSA.

Plenty of people in other OPEC countries in the area are still filthy rich.

[–]betteroffwith28 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

to be honest , how much money the 9/11 perpetrators needed? seriously, we probably are talking at most, just one or couple of millions, and I'm being very generous. pay a few flight sims classes , lodge , gym and expenses? they fucking used boxcutters. The very difficult part of that plan is finding people willing to die, but for that culture that's not even difficult at all.

[–]djangounfazed 20ポイント21ポイント  (12子コメント)

Because, simply, the risks outweigh the benefits.

If america, China and Russia had a better political relationship, the house of Saudi would be quaking in its ill gained boots. It would have felt the combined international long dick of these and probably several other countries that have had their citizens fucked over by wahabist fanaticism. Instead their toes are kept wet by continued foreign dependence on oil. In fact, say what you want, but Obama has reduced American dependence on Saudi oil by so much that he's probably saved a net number of American lives (i wish I could substantiate that in a meaningful way), but I digress. China wants out of the middle east. Russia definitely wants out.

I personally don't think that the reason Obama was snubbed was because he called them terrorist sympathisers, I mean they know that anyway. It's because he hit them where it hurts. In their wallets. It's a clever game, and its allowed this government more than any in the past to stand up to those sheiks and call them out on their bullshit.

Either way, they can't do more than grandstanding. Obama knew he had to make that play since he successfully assassinated bin laden, it was basically a giant middle finger to the house of Saud.

[–]EveryNightIWatch 9ポイント10ポイント  (7子コメント)

Obama has reduced American dependence on Saudi oil by so much that he's probably saved a net number of American lives (i wish I could substantiate that in a meaningful way), but I digress.

I completely agree with you. There's no way to substantiate this, but history will reflect that during Obama's administration, the US ramped up oil efforts in Canada and fraking here in the US to the point where we are very close to self-sufficiency. This undoubtedly will lead us to a point where we can ignore problems in the middle east. Simultaneously, he's ignored KSA's plights and phone calls.

However, Obama has taken a blind eye to the problems of Venezuela, one of our largest oil importers...or maybe we're causing the problems there.

Meanwhile Bush was holding King Salman's hand in Texas.

[–]techhead57 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

Hey I've been looking for a way to learn more about the history/politics in this area. Is there a book you could recommend?

[–]gthermonuclearw 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

If you want to start at the beginning, you could read "The Prize" by Daniel Yergin. That's basically the history of the oil industry through 1990.

[–]SpaceMonkeysInSpace 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

I just bought that book based on your comment, been meaning to read more non-fiction and always been interested in big oil and such. Thanks!

[–]betteroffwith28 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Meanwhile Bush was holding King Salman's hand in Texas.

Man, did that infuriated me when I saw that not long after 9/11. and I was so surprised nobody said anything, other than just maybe raising an eyebrow

[–]santekon 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Because they host a bunch of terrible terrible people within their borders and people are scared that an unstable saudi arabia is actually even worse than the current situation. Lots of oil money to be had + islam + no secular control whatsoever = bad time.

[–]mgahan 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

just tell us who to liberate

[–]Signal2NoiseRatio 8ポイント9ポイント  (2子コメント)

The VA Office is primed and ready to handle all the PTSD and record breaking suicides. The US Flag manufacturing firms in China and the graphic designers for NFL games have stock True Patriot™ image feeds ready. The Air Force has once again blocked access to data on those coffin returns and fueled up a few Galaxies at the ready for good old boy corpses to be hailed heroes for friendly fire.

[–]EveryNightIWatch 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

The CIA is standing by with a blank check for rebel groups to take up arms against us. The DEA has got global interconnected drug ring ready to ramp up a new trading partner. Homeland Security has a new propaganda "threat" to keep dissent minimized and people afraid of their neighbors.

Let's roll!

[–]Signal2NoiseRatio 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Ironically , let's roll may now refer directly to the superseding of cocaine cash cow for nation state and terror cells, MDMA, seeing how those with more than 55 IQ points stray from the mainstay opiate and biological based traditional stims. If only the Islamic factions would partake instead of their chosen quasi meth, Captagon, which turns them into neck splicing zombies instead of take a moment see the Love hippies.

[–]djangounfazed 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

The problem is that the international consequences of invading Saudi Arabia are too far reaching. Iraq and Afghanistan had almost no international relevance in the world stage when they were invaded. If China and Russia have their pull supply threatened, then you can bet your bottom dollar on escalation.

But I'm basing this on old news. I don't know their energy situation. Certainly energy dependence on the middle east is an indignity that the major superpowers have zero interest in continuing.

[–]rstw 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

And the cycle continues

[–]Tour_Lord 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh, the ruling class has a lot of freedom there, just wait till it trickles down

[–]madzanta 41ポイント42ポイント  (16子コメント)

Oil is traded in USD. This is the main reason. If they switch to another currency the impact will be big.

[–]tomorrowsanewday45 17ポイント18ポイント  (10子コメント)

Remember what happened to the last guy who attempted to put oil on the gold standard?

[–]clintonthegeek 14ポイント15ポイント  (0子コメント)

Iraq says that from now on, it wants payments for its oil in euros, despite the fact that the battered European currency unit, which used to be worth quite a bit more than $1, has dropped to about 82[cents]. Iraq says it will no longer accept dollars for oil because it does not want to deal "in the currency of the enemy."

--November 2000

http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,998512,00.html

[–]Unincorporate 29ポイント30ポイント  (7子コメント)

I still can't believe how frankly our world leaders talk about destabalizing regions and causing conflicts that literally cost thousands of innocent Libyans their lives.

More people need to spread these emails: this email was FOIA'd from Hillary's private server. Where it gets nutty is that they actually retroactively reclassified this.

Here's the original foia.state.gov link, now dead.

Seriously, read the PDF. It's only two pages, and it will blow your mind how the untouchables live.

Again, just to reiterate, these are real quotes, originally served from foia.state.gov

Sarkozy's plans are driven by the following issues:

a. A desire to gain a greater share of Libya oil production.

b. Increase French influence in North Africa

c. Improve his intemai political situation in France

d. Provide the French military with an opportunity to reassert its position in the world

e. Address the concern of his advisors over Qaddafi's long term plans to supplant France as the dominant power in Francophone Africa

Just... you know... casually talking about starting a war so that France's military can look good or so they can skim more money off the top of Libyan oil... Not to mention the whole "OMFG HE'S GOING TO SELL HIS OIL IN HIS OWN GOLD BACKED CURRENCY" that exists in the first page.

The West literally came in and started a civil war that cost thousands of lives, and left 143 TONS of gold unaccounted for... Where did it go?!

And here's the kicker!

The person on the US side of this conversation is most likely our next president!!!

This is the kind of thing that I've heard conspiracy theorists talk about for years, and I laughed and laughed about it because it's so ridiculous. I refused to believe our politicians could be so blatantly playing realpolitik -- holding completely untenable positions behind the scenes. I felt like I was just an outsider to the inner workings of politics, and that politics just made good people make tough decisions that I couldn't understand from the outside.

But then you see this. And it's just like... "shit." How can you continue to have faith in our political system when our elected officials play God for the sake of GDP bottom lines? While typing that email, they entirely knew the consequences of overthrowing Gadaffi. The lost Libyan lives were implicit in that entire conversation. They aren't morons.

It's tough to swallow.

edit: 7 upvotes to 4 upvotes in about as many minutes. I guess the $1MM Hillary PAC's Internet-Defence-Force is here!

[–]tomorrowsanewday45 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

Careful now, that's crazy talk /s.

Seriously though, when you understand that the powers to be are not going to let their societies just crumble, such as changing the currency on oil sales, they're going to do everything in their power, clean or dirty, to prevent that from happening.

[–]Unincorporate 4ポイント5ポイント  (1子コメント)

That may be America's stance,

But France wrote that email, and they didn't come at it from a protectionist stance. They wanted more oil money, better political situations, and more global influence.

That's not protectionism. That's offensive.

[–]redreinard 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

I don't think you're wrong, but consider this.

1000s of people die every day for all kinds of reasons. Smoking, driving, overeating, preventable diseases, hunger, violence, suicide, accidents of all manner and kinds.

Now almost of all of them are terrible, have lasting results for the people and communities involved.

But if you're working at the global political level, yeah, you can't get bogged down and shut down every time there's a chance people may die. People will die. Whether you change something or not. There is no "save everyone now" option.

Now peoples lives should obvioulsy be a major concern, but remember these points in those documents appear to be summary aggregations of thoughts, meetings, etc. necessarily devoid of much emotion because their point is purley to communicate data as concise as possible. That is how effective governing has to work sometimes. It doesn't necessarily mean the authors don't care for protecting as many people as possible as much as possible.

Decisions at high levels still need to made, and made quickly, with the best available information concisely provided. And they're made by people who are just as fallible as we all are. And it's essential for some of these exchanges not to happen in public because we the public suck at interpreting things in a reasonable way, and the media has every incentive to skew and sensationalize.

The whole thing is a complex problem, with no easy soliutions. I feel it's important to step back and remember that, especially when a few examples get zoomed in on that much.

[–]Unincorporate 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

But if you're working at the global political level, yeah, you can't get bogged down and shut down every time there's a chance people may die. People will die. Whether you change something or not. There is no "save everyone now" option.

In philosophy (and political science), there's a concept of negative and positive actions/liberties/rights. In simple terms, these fields draw bold moral/legal lines between things that would happen anyway, and things that wouldn't happen without your action. People in these fields tend to believe that inaction causing pain/suffering is comparatively less immoral than an action that directly causes pain/suffering.

To illustrate, can you explain why your reasoning doesn't apply to a petty thief/criminal? There is suffering in the world anyway, so does that mean it is okay for him to rob/steal/kill? Of course not.

You're drawing a false dichotomy. They do not have to choose between "saving everyone" or inaction.

That is how effective governing has to work sometimes. It doesn't necessarily mean the authors don't care for protecting as many people as possible as much as possible.

I disagree. What it shows is that they believe economic and military power of Western countries more than justifies the cost of human lives in another country. You can define effective governing however you'd like. I don't think that encouraging and supplying deadly force to ensure macroeconomic stability is a part of that in any way.

The whole thing is a complex problem, with no easy soliutions. I feel it's important to step back and remember that, especially when a few examples get zoomed in on that much.

You're arguing against democracy -- and I don't disagree that democracy has it's failings, but what you're basically saying is that certain realities are too scary and complex for the public to swallow. You're saying democracy is just wholly incapable of handing that kind of situation. And if our democratic republic has really dissolved into that, it represents a total failing of our government. If a populus is not up to the task of democracy, then the government is to fail. But you can't let the fear of it failing push you into an oligarchy. That's just as much of a failed state, and someone like Hobbes would argue that it's only a matter of time before things fall apart in an even more dramatic fashion.

[–]BakedPastaParty 3ポイント4ポイント  (8子コメント)

yeah, but you dont really think there will be a clean way to cut ties do you?

[–]EveryNightIWatch 9ポイント10ポイント  (1子コメント)

Let them divest and US corporations or global entities (probably China) will happily buy up anything Saudis own in this country.

I'm ready for any economic turbulence they bring to the US, simply because KSA being removed from the global stage would make the whole world a better place. Look at all of the horrible shit going on the middle east: they fund all of that. Syria, ISIS, instability with Iran, resistance in Palestine.

[–]BakedPastaParty 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Dont act like the United States (as well as some other major powers) don't indirectly have a hand in funding whats going on over there as well. I mean the US destabilized the entire region, and continues to fund one group or another, one AFTER another, as time goes on and politics change, etc., trying to keep order among the destabilization. All the while these resources in the forms of weapons, funds, technology, vehicles, these things are all haphazardly changing hands from one group to the next after it hits their land. First shit gets given to "group we want to win", then shit gets captured, then shit gets stolen from them, then shit gets "stolen" (sold to an opposing force on the low by a small group within them), then "our" group always needs more, and it either keeps going or the administration is called out for not doing anything about the Middle East.

I understand why you say cut out Saudi Arabia, and while there is some fairness in it, I still don't think one can point the finger solely at them and say they're the only bad guys. Each country has their own share of accountability in different areas, and it does, certainly, add up (some countries much more than others). This is the basis of Obama's argument AGAINST suing the Saudi government if he declassifies the 28 pages, though; the divestment and economic turbulence caused by it are the least of his worries compared to the cascading avalanche of shit shows that will be the following trials America is put on for all the drone strikes, cruise missiles, bunker busters, no-knock raids, and the COUNTLESS foreign actions they've committed that you or I could not ever count (I won't even begin to fathom the lawsuits that would emerge from Blackwater Xe Academi operations). It's a logical argument, but so is declassifying the records. I don't have an opinion either way, I'm just saying, I could see both sides.

TL;DR Essentially, declassifying those pages will do so much more harm than good on an international political scale. Saudi Arabia and the KSA are definitely NOT the only bad guys and/or cause(s) of the shit that's happening in the Middle East. We don't need to look any further than the United States of America and their efforts(read: success) in destabilizing the region, and their simultaneous effort (read: failure) to install any form of stabilization and instead succeeded in alienating generations of people and forced them to take up arms and actively fight against the US.

Also, you and I both live on this same planet Earth, it will NEVER happen the way you suggest (which I do agree we should do). it wont happen because it... just... won't....as lame as that is....it's too turbulent a move for the US to initialize, there is so much dependent on maintaining the status quo that is much larger than the US/Saudi relations and trade agreements, and I just don't ever see it happening in this universe :/

[–]CMDR_Shazbot 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

As much as I want Sanders in, I'm worried about all the oligarchy style families with ties to folks who organize terror acts, when they're no longer in power and pulling their sketchy strings and backroom deals, what happens with that vacuum?

[–]EveryNightIWatch 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

what happens with that vacuum?

There's pretty clear lines of succession in Saudi Arabia right now. We just need to remove enough of them until we get a peace-supporting prince into power. Military coups are also pretty popular in the middle east. We could destabilize the economy for 6 months to make the existing powers unpopular, and then usher in a new puppet leader.

This is basically the playbook we ran in the middle east until the 1970's. We even assassinated their leader in like 1974. After that assassination things fell in line quickly.

We continue this in South America still.

folks who organize terror acts,

If you look at Afghanistan, we took a horrible man and thrust him into power as President, gave his shaddy ass brother a huge army to go to war against us. We started the war in Iraq, pushed heavily to divide ethnic and sectarian lines, then allowed neighbors to kill neighbors until we had a full blown civil war. In Syria we stoked anti-Assad sentiment via US-owned social media, we secretly supported resistance movements that formed the FSA, provided just enough arms for the FSA to put up a resistance fight. All of South America can't find ways to deal with their inflation, even after years, because international organizations (back by western interests) won't cooperate with them.

Instability is not an accident. In crisis situations people actually organize themselves peacefully pretty quickly; outside actors and influences have created the instability we see in other regions. It's worth noting that this instability is often to the US's benefit.

[–]tinkafuckingbell 7ポイント8ポイント  (4子コメント)

You really think Trump would "end this shit"? What exactly would he end? We need the oil. They need to sell the oil. That is not going anywhere any time soon.

But I would seriously encourage anyone with the slightest interest in events in the Middle East to go read up on the history there. It all starts in the 19th century and gets progressively worse from then on. Yes, there are people in Saudi who are fanaticaly anti-America and are supporting terrorism (or a holy war depending on where you are coming from). But if you think Saudi is the only place with these problems you are very very wrong. It involves Russia, Pakistan, Afganistan, Britain, America, France, Saudi Arabia... and others. So what, exactly, will Mr Trump do? He will not do a damn thing because right now that is the best course of action. Anything else will just make matters worse. Like every other time anyone has tried to get involved in the middle east. The Russians have tried and failed, The Americans have tried and failed. The British have tried and failed.

And while we are at it. You really think the Saudis funded Americas enemies? Well here's a little insight for you. The Americans funded their enemies.

[–]EveryNightIWatch 10ポイント11ポイント  (0子コメント)

We need the oil.

We actually don't.

Of all US imports of oil the entire Persian Gulf makes 16% of the total. We need Canada's oil.

They need to sell the oil.

And they're having an increasingly difficult time doing that. Just the other week China signed an agreement with Russia to get the bulk of their oil through Russian corporations rather than Saudi. In addition, OPEC is falling apart, and what remains is not controlled by Saudi interests - just the other week KSA demanded a global OPEC halt on oil production to increase prices, this was rejected by other nations.

Saudi Arabia has seen this writing on the wall for a decade. They've tried their best to diversify their economy, and the US and Europe rule virtually all other industries. If we don't play ball with them, then their economy is in shambles. If we force further drops in the global oil price, their economy is in shambles.

The Americans funded their enemies.

Yeah, I'm very familiar. We love paying for both sides of a war. But, that doesn't mean we need an additional adversary in the world spreading noxious anti-western rhetoric throughout their region. The middle east could be a place of peace and prosperity - for a while the US didn't want that, and neither did Saudi Arabia. Well, the US is going through big changes, but Saudi Arabia gets worse. The war in Syria is destabilizing Europe because of KSA's actions.

[–]Stereotype_Apostate 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Saudi oil is nowhere near as big a deal as it used to be. If you want to know why we've kept ties with them, look at our exports. Saudi Arabia is one of the largest customers of our arms manufacturing industry. We sell way more weapons to them than they sell oil to us.

[–]HugoWagner 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

We really don't need the oil as much as people think we do. SA isn't even our largest importer and we don't even drill at maximum capacity on our own oil resources. Sure it would cause economic shocks but not large scale collapse and it would probably be better to not be economically tied to such a belligerent country in the long run

[–]wmegenney 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Obama should grow some balls and remember hes the mother fucking commander in chief of the worlds greatest military.

I think that should have provoked an aggressive response. I'm flabbergasted about all this fucking bullshit they get away with on a global scale, including funding US enemies.

Me too, me too.

[–]liam3 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

they are very rude arent they

[–]bd1238907 1ポイント2ポイント  (5子コメント)

This whole awful relationship between KSA and the US is based upon a 1970's agreement from the Bush family supported by Nixon/Kissinger.

We need to go deeper. To the Quincy Agreement, to be precise. It's 1945 and Roosevelt meets with King Abdul Aziz aboard the USS Quincy:

From 14 February, President Roosevelt and King Abdul Aziz of Saudi Arabia met aboard the Quincy. During the meeting, President Roosevelt tried to persuade Saud to give support for Jewish immigration to Palestine and hoped that Ibn Saud might be able to offer constructive advice on the Palestine issue. There, Roosevelt and Saud concluded a secret agreement in which the U.S. would provide Saudi Arabia military security – military assistance, training and a military base at Dhahran in Saudi Arabia – in exchange for secure access to supplies of oil.[2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Quincy_%28CA-71%29#The_Quincy_Agreement

[–]EveryNightIWatch 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

The problem is that this all fell apart in the 1960's.

In the 1970's is when we secured the agreements we use today.

[–]bd1238907 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

The problem is that this all fell apart in the 1960's.

This isn't true. The relationship had its ups and downs, but it never "fell apart".

[–]EveryNightIWatch 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

If Quincy was about oil, I think it indisputably fell apart when KSA announced an oil embargo against the US.

In the book House of Bush, House of Saud it's argued that King Faisal basically cut relations with the US due to Israeli support. I suspect that Faisal was assassinated because he wasn't totally on board with the Bush/Nixon plan.

[–]bd1238907 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The embargo lasted five months, it was never more than a little hiccup.

On Tuesday, President Obama will travel to Riyadh to pay his respects to the late King Abdullah and meet the new Saudi king, Salman bin Abdul Aziz. Obama's decision to cut short his trip to India is a good signal of how important the trip is: Thanks to geopolitics and oil, the United States and Saudi Arabia have had an important, if sometimes strained, alliance for decades.

By coincidence, next month also marks the 70th anniversary of the beginnings of that relationship. It began when President Franklin D. Roosevelt was returning from the Yalta Conference in 1945, where world leaders had met to discuss the future of a postwar Europe. On his way home, Roosevelt decided to meet with some of the Middle East and Africa's most important leaders: King Farouk of Egypt, Haile Selassie of Ethiopia and the first Saudi king, Abdul Aziz ibn Saud (the father of both King Abdullah and Salman, plus every other Saudi king).

Roosevelt and King Abdul Aziz met on board the USS Quincy in the Suez Canal on Feb. 14 and talked for several days. It was the first time that Abdul Aziz, a charismatic yet isolationist military leader who had united Saudi Arabia, had left the country: He is said to have brought eight sheep with him on board to be slaughtered for dinners.

William A. Eddy, an American expert on Arab culture who had been acting as the U.S. minister to Saudi Arabia, was present at the meeting. He later published an account, titled "F.D.R. meets Ibn Saud," that gave a rare first-person glimpse of the meetings. It showed the two world leaders building up a remarkable rapport:

The King and the President got along famously together. Among many passages of pleasant conversation I shall choose the King’s statement to the President that the two of them really were twins: (1) they were both of the same age (which was not quite correct); (2) they were both heads of states with grave responsibilities to defend, protect and feed their people; (3) they were both at heart farmers, the President having made quite a hit with the King by emphasizing his rural responsibilities as the squire of Hyde Park and his interest in agriculture; (4) they both bore in their bodies grave physical infirmities–the President obliged to move in a chair and the King walking with difficulty and unable to climb stairs because of wounds in his legs.

According to Eddy, the last point was especially important: Roosevelt ordered one of his two wheelchairs to be given as a gift to Abdul Aziz, who later kept it on display.

The two men went on to talk about a variety of political issues, in particular the plan to find European Jews a new home in Palestine (Abdul Aziz was vehemently opposed). They eventually came to an agreement that centered around U.S. support and military training for Saudi Arabia, then a fledgling country surrounded by stronger nations, in return for oil and political support in the region. "I would take no action, in my capacity as Chief of the Executive Branch of this Government, which might prove hostile to the Arab people," Roosevelt later wrote to the Saudi king in a follow up letter.

Unfortunately, the great friendship between Roosevelt and Abdul Aziz didn't last – the U.S. president died less than two months later. His successor, Harry Truman, didn't always see eye-to-eye with Abdul Aziz (in particular, his views on Israel were far less conciliatory), who himself died in 1953. However, the core themes of the Saudi-U.S. relationship established at that meeting – security and oil – have endured through five Saudi kings and 12 U.S. presidents.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/01/27/the-first-time-a-u-s-president-met-a-saudi-king/

Yes, there were ups and downs, but the Quincy Agreement marked the true beginning of this "special" relationship. Apparently special enough for the Saudis to facilitate the most gruesome domestic attack on the United States ever conducted.

[–]ChicagoCowboy 1ポイント2ポイント  (6子コメント)

My worry is that Trump won't just end the relationship, but fucking go scorched earth and attack/invade them. KSA then ramps up funding for our enemies, terror attacks increase, them divesting in the US has broad economical effects for the globe, we go another trillion in debt...that shit terrifies me man

[–]EveryNightIWatch 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

attack/invade them

Those are two very different things. We have a spectrum of ways to destabilize a country. We could assassinate their leader, as we did in the 1970's.

We could also just announce international sanctions at the UN on Saudi oil. OPEC would fall in line with that.

We could interfere in their financial markets and cause incredible destabilization of their currency or markets.

Trump

Trump has been outspoken about what a disaster Iraq was. I doubt he's seriously looking for another boots-on-the-ground war.

[–]Arbone 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

"I will start a great war — and nobody starts wars better than me, believe me —and I’ll start it very inexpensively. I will start a great, great war with Saudi Arabia, and I will make Iran pay for that war. Mark my words."

[–]dmadSTL 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Threaten us? Who the fuck do they think they are?

[–]Shaqiriiii 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Now you know how the Middle East feels when US keeps fucking them over and still get away with it. I don't like the Saudis but I'm glad someone is pressuring US. If they can dish it out then they should be able to take it too.

[–]CysGingerShitlord 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Hillary Clinton accepts money from countries that stone women.

[–]thefloorisbaklava 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oil and gas are cheap as fuck right now. Time to cut our ties with those guys.

[–]Tranger 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

This seems odd to me, I was under the impression Saudi Arabia and the US were powerful economic partners... I guess not.

[–]GoOrioles24 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The relationship started from 1945 agreement at Bitter Lake.

[–]swolemedic 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Why would it end with trump? Clinton i get where youre coming from but your level of optimism for trump in regards to Saudi arabia surprises me

[–]lumloon 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Didn't FDR cozy up to the Sauds as early as the 40s?

[–]EveryNightIWatch 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah, even long before that in the 1920's we had strong diplomatic relations. The area was really controlled by the British up until the 1950s.

[–]temp19999 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Don't forget about Israel. Those pieces of shit do the exact same thing through AIPAC...

 

It's pathetic how our politicians bend over to these stone age Middle Eastern jackasses.

[–]klartraume 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Sanders or Trump

What makes you say that?

Sanders has proven ill equipped to answer any foreign policy questions thus far.

Trump is all bluster and business. Why would he risk business with the KSA when he can just bluster?

[–]ChicagoOandB 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It has been this way for 7 years. USA has no respect anymore.

[–]DavidCristLives 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

You want to fight Saudi Arabia on a personal level? Cut back on your gasoline consumption. If we could all get on board, it would hurt them where it counts -- their wallet. Not to mention the boon for the environment if people drove less. PLus, you'd probably be walking more, or riding your bike, which would be beneficial for your health and you'd save money. So, really it's a win, win, win, win win.

[–]KRSFive 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Can't wait for Trump to get in office so we'll have a president with an actual spine again. Bring some dignity back to the presidency.

[–]a_James_Woods 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

It's like Obama said himself, if SA gets sued for their nefarious international bullshit, it will set a precedent in which the US will be sued to oblivion for similar actions all across the globe.

[–]EveryNightIWatch 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

Yeah, but we control those courts. Pakistani's tried suing the US for drone strikes, and we dismissed them outright. Last I counted, there was over a dozen different attempts.

But yeah, in Obama's eyes this is probably a bad international precedent because we don't want it being used two ways, just one way.

[–]a_James_Woods 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's along the same lines of logic to why Clinton probably won't be prosecuted by civil standards. If she gets in trouble it opens up a can of worms, because she's probably just the one who got caught while this sort of information peddling (That's my assumption as to what she was doing) may be very common among our handlers.

[–]obvious-throwaway-- 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Invading another country that borders Russia, I'm sure they won't mind.

[–]luckeybarry 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

powerful and inept be them bushes

[–]rnflhastheworstmods 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

You're flabbergasted?

Obama is a giant pussy. What did you expect?

He will never stand up for America on a global scale.

[–]EveryNightIWatch 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think you're seriously discounting the amount of strides he's made in the middle east.

Israel and Saudi Arabia hate him.

That's an amazing goddamn accomplishment. This hasn't happened in American politics since Carter.

[–]Iohet 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is the downside of integrated economies. The upside is no world wars and no nuclear war. This is the tradeoff of diplomacy.

[–]Johnny_Rockit 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

It goes back to the end of WW2, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quincy_Agreement

The Bush family has a very close relationship with the Saudis but it doesn't start with them.

[–]EveryNightIWatch 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Another person argues the same below. I contend that this agreement completely fell apart during the US oil embargo.

the U.S. would provide Saudi Arabia military security – military assistance, training and a military base at Dhahran in Saudi Arabia – in exchange for secure access to supplies of oil.

They cut off our oil supply and we assassinated their King. Other guys argues this was just a "low point, not the end", but I think if we looked at military aid provided to KSA over the 20th century, it would be absolutely clear that a big change happened in 1975 that continued for 40 years.

[–]0diggles 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Trump would not end it. It's too much money.

[–]betteroffwith28 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Please, let's get out of our oil dependency and you'll see how the tables turn. I'm thinking on buying a nissan Leaf and try to move this quickly

[–]Mouth_Full_Of_Dry 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Please divest yourselves, KSA. Then lets put in an Administration that is willing to fuck them back real hard for the American blood on their hands... Regime change from above for these heathens in 2,000 pound increments.

[–]ThouHastLostAn8th 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

He is actively fighting a proposal in Congress to have the full information declassified.

That's not true at all. He's been pushing toward declassifying the 28 pages of the report, and it looks very likely to happen. The legislation he's been fighting in Congress isn't about declassifying the report, it's about changing long-standing law to allow citizens to sue Saudi Arabia in US courts. He opposes that not because of Saudi threats but because he sees weakening sovereign immunity as massively against US interests worldwide.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/04/19/_9_11_victim_bill_is_controversial_over_sovereign_immunity.html

Under typical principles of fairness, [Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act] is a just and necessary bill. Under basic norms of international law, however, it is a disaster. A primary justification for foreign sovereign immunity is comity: America doesn’t judge foreign countries’ internal decisions; in return, other countries don’t judge America’s. JASTA would jettison this principle for a different proposition: America doesn’t judge foreign countries’ internal decisions, unless they’re really, really bad. Yes, the bill specifically targets terrorist aid and enablement, but Obama and the State Department are nervous that other countries could retaliate by passing even broader waivers of sovereign immunity, allowing lawsuits against American service members, diplomats, and government officials in their own courts. (And it may go without saying that some of these courts—like, say, Saudi Arabia’s—do not comply with American standards of due process.)

Reasonable people can disagree about which principle is more important: just compensation for terrorist victims, or reciprocal sovereign immunity for foreign nations.

[–]mr_luc 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

This needs to be the top-voted response. Because of facts, and context!

Declassifying that report is NOT what that bill is about. Even a little bit.

[–]marsjazztrio 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's not what he's worried about...

Why do you think things are classified?

[–]NSFWies 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I think that's because this is also how we use diplomats. So we can't really tell at other countries becuase were doing it too.

[–]howdareyou 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

pisses me off too. but i guess i kind of get it. it's diplomacy isn't it? i'm sure obama doesn't like it either but he has to play the game.

[–]SilentWalrus92 605ポイント606ポイント  (132子コメント)

Obama is fighting against holding the Saudi's accountable

[–]DocGonzo13 372ポイント373ポイント  (104子コメント)

His logic for doing that is so that no one else holds America accountable. Him and fellow noble peace prize recipient Henry Kissinger were just patting each other on the back a while ago. I'm sure he'll bring up killing bin Laden if mentioned to him.

[–]puttanum 111ポイント112ポイント  (20子コメント)

That's just about suing them.

Keeping this under wraps is likely more about what it would do to America's image if it could be proven that knowledge of who was likely behind the attacks was hidden and instead bombing the countries of their choosing.

[–]SwordfishVPenfish 41ポイント42ポイント  (3子コメント)

It would be a shame if that made it into the courts instead of merely the history books.

[–]areyoudrumpfagain 63ポイント64ポイント  (10子コメント)

Yeah, actually owning up to our mistakes and transgressions and showing improvements to avoid making them again is really going to hurt America's image compared to burying or ignoring the truth and bombing who ever we want.

[–]kniteli 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

Yeah, actually owning up to our mistakes

The problem is it wasn't a mistake. It was purposeful deception.

[–]a_James_Woods 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

ssshhhh silly precariat.

[–]areyoudrumpfagain 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

Hahaha, that's a great word! "Precariat". Thanks for introducing me to it.

[–]a_James_Woods 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

No problem brother! It's an important word to know, that's how Greenspan and friends refer to us these days.

[–]Venereus 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

It has worked so far. If it ain't broken...

[–]areyoudrumpfagain 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm sure that's what the Roman Empire kept telling themselves...

[–]crabbin 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

Well it's public knowledge that the only plane cleared to fly during the total shutdown of US airspace on 9/11 was the Bin Laden family plane getting the hell out of the states. That would have to be authorized by the White House... so the cat's out of the bag on that one I'm afraid.

[–]whitemaleprivileges 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is already proven to us Americans. We are air superiority and we kill with a joystick. "War is a racket" and "military industrial complex" ring a bell? We don't call Hillary a war lord for nothing... That is literally what she did as Sec. of State. Sold bombs to the Saudis and buried their connection to Benghazi. I believe that illegal federal data collection a la NSA began in the Clinton administration, only to be pushed out in the open for Bush, and solidified by Obama. Basically we've been dealing with the same or similar enough administration since before Clinton though. As you can see, we have good reason to shake up that trend with a Bernie or a Donald.

[–]honeycakes 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

After reading Christopher Hitchens book on Kissinger I was so disgusted and outraged that he is still a free man.

[–]eduardog3000 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

And the current Democratic frontrunner considers him a close friend.

[–]ratexe 30ポイント31ポイント  (70子コメント)

America was well aware of an impending attack, even warned by other countries. Also WT7, also footage of plane that hit the Pentagon, also passport of highjacker found near ground zero that supposedly fell from plane, also many other things that don't fucking add up.

Nobody questions shit though..

[–]Peace_Out_GirlScout 33ポイント34ポイント  (2子コメント)

Jet fuel does not melt passports

[–]w3revolved 18ポイント19ポイント  (4子コメント)

TONS of people question shit- they've been mocked and ridiculed for the last 15 years for questioning the official narrative though.

[–]AtomicFlx 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

Just like before Snowden everyone who dared question the NSA was a nut job.

[–]i_ate_a_cookie 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

It's well known that something fishy happened. You are not a bad person if you think that way. Sorry people make you feel that way. I don't know where that sentiment comes from.

[–]justforthissubred 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

You are only considered a nutbag if you question Obama's birth place or why his college records are sealed.

[–]BannaHamHock 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

COINTELPRO (Counter-Intelligence Program, or as I like to call it Counter-Intelligence Propaganda) and Poisoning the Well are very real tactics, employed by agencies within our government. They document it. We should start believing what they say they've done, and start coming to terms with the concept that they still do it.

edit: capitalization

[–]ProWresBlog2 44ポイント45ポイント  (12子コメント)

There were so many "conincidences" and "strange occurances" that day that I don't know how anyone could buy the official story. From Hani Hanjour Super Pilot, to the passports, fatty Bin Laden, to the call to let the tower go down, to the bomb sounds inside, to the guy that mysteriously died that either was there or was looking into the incident, to the Omission Report, the issues with the black boxes, to the evidence and the debris from the tower being hauled away before any inspection could be done, to the missing money that happened right before this and was "forgotten about", to the insurance on the tower, the terrorists being flagged when given passports and the lady working that day saying they shouldn't be given them, the fact that CIA agents knew and were following the terrorists, the fact that the parts of the Pentagon that were attacked happened to be the ones under construction, the clips of video from the Pentagon missing of the crash, the weird phone calls from the plane and so many other things.

Just too much weird stuff happened that day and I wouldn't believe any explanation of it unless it was someone admitting it in guilt.

Here's a nice list of the various weird things that happened with the attack: http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/analysis/anomalies.html

[–]PM_ME_STEAM_C0DES_ 20ポイント21ポイント  (1子コメント)

I don't think that 9/11 was an inside job, but I don't buy the official story.

[–]Matt0715 9ポイント10ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is pretty much my view on the event as well. I Definitely believe that the attack could have been prevented had some meddling not occurred from some of the State's allies (The Saudis), and had more desire to prevent it existed in the administration, who I think we're looking for an excuse to pass unfavourable laws or launch unfavourable wars. However the people saying "Bush and Cheney orchestrated it for oil $$$$!!!" are grasping in my opinion. I don't think anyone that high up had the guts needed to plan and launch an attack on their own nation, and the coverup would have to have been the biggest ever devised. I think the attack was allowed to happen and was convenient for the government at the time. Only time will unravel the true story though.

[–]jars_of_feet 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah i don't know the full story behind "bomb sounds", but no way you could identify any sounds coming from a collapsing building as exclusively bomb sounds.

[–]BannaHamHock 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

One of my favorites has always been how they found one of the hijacker's passports perfectly intact on the city streets below the buildings.

Are we supposed to believe that the plane blew up upon entering the building, and the passport ejected out of the hijacker's luggage or pocket at the exact perfect trajectory, so as to float unharmed down to the street, so that someone could (by pure luck) happen upon it? Give me a fucking break

e: what's more amazing to me is that I'm being upvoted in this thread. It was not long ago that I'd be downvoted to hell and back for saying these exact things. Sign of the times, I guess. It's encouraging to see people start to ask some questions.

[–]The_Voice_of_Dog 11ポイント12ポイント  (1子コメント)

Just the fact that 2 hijackers lived in an FBI safehouse in San Diego CA for years, during that time receiving money from Bin Laden's organization and speaking numerous times to them via FBI-tapped phones, speaks to the priorities of the authorities.

The us government knew these guys were in flight training, knew they were getting money from bin laden, knew they were going to fly planes into the WTC and DC, and even knew when. So what did they do?

Transferred or dismissed multiple FBI agents for pursuing the obvious terrorist plot based in San Diego.

Scheduled the 3 largest NORAD training exercises in history for September 11th, 2001, involving dozens of simulated hijacked civilian aircraft, false radar signatures, and every single military aircraft on the east coast of the USA except for 8 fighter jets.

The 8 remaining jets were repeatedly delayed, rerouted, and denied access to NYC or DC until after the planes hit their targets.

Turned security for the WTC complex over the Marvin Bush (oldest of GW's siblings) and his Kuwait-based security company. They proceed to do unannounced massive renovations to the central support columns and basements of towers 1, 2, and 7. This is actually mentioned in NYC newspapers prior to 9/11/2001, as WTC workers complained of the inconvenience.

And so on.

This list could go on for miles. The people ruling the us government took great pains to make sure that the hijackers succeeded on 9/11. They then used the events to bludgeon the citizens of America into a closed state with no liberties, and secure their overseas investments. They were nice enough to leave us blueprints, of which the most accessible is the Project For a New American Century's "Rebuilding America's Defenses" circa 1996. I'm sure you can find the PDF.

The people who rule America used 9/11 to terrorize the American people into supporting them without thinking. This same fear/horror is cultivated and tended by the rulers, in order to make millions sacrifice for the gains of the few. It's an open secret that 9/11 was a governmental attack on the people, but everyone is afraid to raise their head first.

If there's ever a perceived moment of weakness, we'll tear those motherfuckers limb from limb. But until then, nobody wants to be first, and catch that bullet to the face.

[–]shadovvvvalker 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I've always been labelled a conspiracy theorist for this but here goes.

9/11 was an outside job. BUT, the actual chain of events and explanations that lead to how it was possible reveal a massive level of gross incompetence.

I believe the planes where a shock value touch to what was a planned demolition. That whatever hit the pentagon has scary implications that make an airliner a less scary option. That at every instance of investigation an incompetent government attempted to cover up the truth with a more palatable less terrifying explanation. That the laws passed in its wake were in the end just words on a page to make it look like things were being done. That Iraq and Afghanistan were scapegoats that provided an enemy and action. That every action taken after 9/11 was not in pre planned malice but incompetent plate spinning.

As horrid as the patriot act is. It's not all that effective. You could pass much more powerful and elegant legislation in the wake of 9/11. We know how ineffective a large portion of our surveillance systems are. There just things. Reading every email that crosses national borders SOUNDS like it does something but it actually doesn't.

The us government has proven itself woefully incompetent and as such any idea of an orchestrated inside job is simply madness. But the official explanation doesn't work, and lots of government actions surrounding it point to manipulation of information.

Tldr 9/11: angry people orchestrated a coordinated attack on the largest scale ever seen in the us by exploiting a number of loopholes and security flaws with significant backing from international powers. Idiots tried to hide the fact that they were idiots and scrambled to look like anything other than idiots until the heat blew over.

[–]WhereTheRedBernGrows 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Lucky Larry is really damning also!

[–]plasticspoonn 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I have heard about witnessing hearing bomb sounds, the rest of what your saying is new to me, got any more info? If I just Google 9/11 strange occurrences I'll be reading for days I'm sure.

[–]iamstraightama 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Wait, can you expand on all of this? Super interesting to read about!

[–]ProWresBlog2 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd start here: http://911research.wtc7.net/index.html (Click on the background tab then start going through it)

and check out some of the various documentaries. There's just too much stuff to cover and even I haven't looked at it in a year or so.

This is a nice list of some of the various strange things that happened with the attacks: http://911research.wtc7.net/sept11/analysis/anomalies.html

[–]Hewman_Robot 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

also add:

They videotaped how golden retriever puppies were gassed with antrax, put it on primetime television, and said it was Al-Qaida.

This crushed everything I believed about our western world.

Also with the two cases of relativley high profile people who commited suicide. One on his regular walk through the park. The other, the one who found out that the antrax came from an US lab "couldn't take the pressure anymore".

And just look at whats going on the world right now, and how often we find dubious claims, and very convenient evil enemies, with a personality of an hollywood flick villian. Nothing changed.

[–]trex707 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Maxim magazine of all people literally predicted the 9/11 attacks to a fucking T in the issue a month or two before it happened.

[–]WhereTheRedBernGrows 4ポイント5ポイント  (12子コメント)

What about lucky Larry Silverstein and his buddies that secured the lease to the WTC 6 WEEKS priot to the attack and then made billions in insurance payouts. Oh ya and him and his two kids just happened to not be at work on the day of the attack.

[–]anarki2004 8ポイント9ポイント  (23子コメント)

I do wish somebody had a sound explanation for why building 7 collapsed.

[–]Remember- 37ポイント38ポイント  (2子コメント)

There is.

WTC7 fell due to structural damage caused by falling debris from the twin towers as well as a long burning fire weakening the structural integrity. It should be noted unlike most buildings the WTC building 7 was structurally supported by only 3 trusses holding up the majority of the floors. This caused Firefighters to refuse to enter the building to put out the flames due to a fear of possible collapse and 7 hours after ignition the constant fire finally weakened one of the 3 trusses causing a collapse.

[–]the_norwegian_blue 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

You are wasting your time.

They will only accept the "explanation" of: the jews did it, or some similar shit.

[–]Darth_Tyler_ 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

There's a post above you where someone literally says they won't accept any explanation unless it's made in guilt. So they won't accept anything that doesn't fit their narrative.

[–]energy_engineer 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

Structure was damaged and a fire broke out. Fire suppression systems were inadequate at the time which allowed the fire to cook the base of the building for ~6 hours.

[–]honeycakes 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

*Inadequate because the water lines were broken due to the other buildings collapsing.

[–]do_0b 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

see, a big hunk of falling building hit one of the corners of 7 as it was falling in such a way that all the atoms involved in holding building 7 together were knocked out of alignment and once that happens...

[–]bufftart 1ポイント2ポイント  (5子コメント)

"Passport of high jacker found near ground zero that supposedly fell from plane" do you hear how crazy this sounds.... (you must have failed the educational system if you think that's possibel)

[–]SuperKook 5ポイント6ポイント  (3子コメント)

I think his point was that it doesn't make sense.

Maybe you understood that and I'm just double wooshing

[–]ratexe 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yeah I remember hearing that shit on the news. The media managed to say that with a straight face...over and over again. Showing pictures of the passport. You'd think that would've caused an outcry..nope.

[–]RombieZombie25 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

What is WT7 and what happened to it? I can't really look much into it right now.

[–]-Mantis 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

It was a building in the same area and it collapsed. It collapsed because the flames softened it and then debris hit it, causing lots of structural damage.

[–]HappyZavulon 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

also passport of highjacker found near ground zero that supposedly fell from plane

Wait, is that part of the official story?

That's just dumb.

[–]holocauster-ride 1ポイント2ポイント  (5子コメント)

Didn't he also want to push the TPP etc which would allow foreign corporations to sue the American government?

[–]ostrich_semen 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

That already exists, it's called the WTO.

[–]holocauster-ride 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

So explain the logic about not wanting to hold the Saudi's accountable for bombing NYC.

[–]ostrich_semen 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Which comment are you referring to? I was just clarifying that foreign companies have been able to sue the US in international trade courts for about two decades now. We've even lost a couple. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrimp-Turtle_Case

[–]DocGonzo13 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

The more I hear about it, it seems like it will US companies suing others, so still hypocrisy and a lot worse.

[–]yankeed00dledandy 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Genuine question: what do you mean by that first sentence? Aka I'm confused on what we might be held accountable for?

Also if you have any articles that demonstrate this I would be very interested to read them.

[–]DocGonzo13 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm on mobile and at work but the article was making the news when Obama decided to stop any lawsuit against Saudia Arabia, it's his logic not mine. If you don't want to search o Google search on reddit

[–]twwp 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Unfortunately he is probably right. He knows full well what is at stake - and it's not really about "making sure America doesn't get sued". Saudis and other so-called allies have America by the balls.

[–]Chard121 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

And what does being held accountable mean? A new war over 15 year old history that kills way more people than the original crime?

[–]GrrrrrArrrrgh 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

And what does being held accountable mean?

Cut all ties and freeze all assets; they would collapse in weeks. "Accountability" doesn't have to mean war.

[–]newbearman 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It would probably do wonders for trumps campaign.

[–]TripleEEE1682 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I do not understand the leverage they have in their relationship to us. I heard that they were very disrespectful to Obama when he visited. I don't understand why we keep taking it.

[–]zlide 93ポイント94ポイント  (19子コメント)

It's getting about zero coverage in American news media, the only American news network that I can find with a high profile story about this is CNN...I'm very confident that this won't be on any nightly or network news.

[–]lord_mayor_of_reddit 17ポイント18ポイント  (0子コメント)

60 Minutes did a story on the "28 Pages" just last month. And the New York Post and even the right wing National Review have run stories about it, too. Coverage is just starting.

[–]Pomme_Plastique 6ポイント7ポイント  (2子コメント)

Every time I flip to American news I get nothing. No news stories, just Trump said this and Hillary said this. Absolutely zero news. I feel like I'm in a dictatorship watching European based news to get American information.

[–]CaptainConsolation 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I would check out NPR. They had a giest on today discussing "the 28 pages" business.

[–]daveywaveylol2 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Oh just wait, they'll cover the story, once they clean out all the American/Saudi connections. What we'll be left with is a story in which a bunch of "bad people" did "bad" things in a foreign country. The obvious choice will be to invade and make things right. This is called propaganda. War profiteers do this to rob American tax payers. Both parties support these war profiteers, as well as your favorite sports associations and media groups. It's lucrative for most companies/organizations to support our military programs. This will likely never end.

[–]bullintheheather 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Wait, I'm sorry, you maybe made a typo? CNN?

[–]Yodas_Butthole 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

When I brought this up to a coworker of mine she reminded me that all media organizations are businesses with their own interests. They aren't obligated to do anything other than make money. The quicker this idea catches on the better off we will all be.

And for the record Fox News reported this in April. It just didn't get much attention.

[–]StankyNugz 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Honestly not many people under the age of 40 take the media seriously anymore. So when a legitimate news story comes out, it's no wonder nobody is paying attention.

[–]notfromchicago 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

There was a segment on it today on The Diane Rheem Show.

[–]agent0731 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

can blast it all over social media.

[–]AtomicFlx 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

If the news ran with this story then how would we get our Jenner and Kardashian news? I mean priorities people... Who cares about getting fucked and killed by Arabs, and wasting trillions of dollars of our children's future into useless wars when Kim tripped on a pebble and scuffed her Jimmy Choo?

[–]SFRookie 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Fuck sakes. The fact that they are even permitted to be on TV at all makes me furious. What a waste of shit.

[–]PleaseAgreeWithMe 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

news media, the only American news network that I can find with a high profile story about this is CNN...I'm very confident that this won't be on any nightly or network news.

Gay and trans rights are more important right now. Thats why.

[–]ngenda79 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's because its not credible, if the story had any real facts behind it (only speculations) then it would likely hit the news.

[–]Shkyboyz 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

He's actively fighting against having it declassified. When this first surfaced, and the Saudi's threatened to ruin the US economy in response of the 28 pages of the 9/11 report being declassified, Obama immediately flew to Riyadh to kiss the saudi's asses. The kept him waiting half an hour at the airport, and when he met the king, he bowed so low he could have kissed his balls. Disgrace.

[–]Deadwing2005 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

More importantly, what does mean for Hillary? I'm sure CNN is all over it.

[–]DeafDumbBlindBoy 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Obama has arguably played a role in covering up this information, which would make him and his administration culpable in the attempted cover up of two major war crimes: the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

If this is true? It doesn't matter what he has to say until he's under oath in front of the ICC, and he would be best served invoking his 5th Amendment rights.

[–]ostrich_semen 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Honestly? I wouldn't be surprised if this was a controlled leak intended to be a subtle ultimatum to Salman after he fucked with Obama last month.

[–]crossingtheabyss 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

He says if those papers are released and litigation is ensued against the Saudi government by 9/11 victims' families, it would take away the US's international immunity to such litigation as well. There is a wide range of potential suits against the US.

[–]GonnaFapToThis 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Forget Obama, what does Ja Rule have to say about this?