Wikileaks Hillary knew Saudis sponsored ISIS took money from them, and helped cover it up

Just a quick comment about the questions raised about Wikileaks. The corrupt, bias and bought media of the United States used to be about telling the truth and being an ally of the people. With their now prejudicial position, Wikileaks (among others) have filled in the void of reporting the truth, facts and real world events to the people.

Wikileaks are heroes of the American people and the enemy of the US government. Which logically translates that the US government and the media are also enemies of the people.

We already knew Hillary was aware of the Saudi's role in sponsoring terrorism from cables released in 2010 so I don't think this will have any effect on her.

WikiLeaks cables portray Saudi Arabia as a cash machine for terrorists
Hillary Clinton memo highlights Gulf states' failure to block funding for groups like al-Qaida, Taliban and Lashkar-e-Taiba



'Saudi Arabia is the world's largest source of funds for Islamist militant groups such as the Afghan Taliban and Lashkar-e-Taiba – but the Saudi government is reluctant to stem the flow of money, according to Hillary Clinton.

"More needs to be done since Saudi Arabia remains a critical financial support base for al-Qaida, the Taliban, LeT and other terrorist groups," says a secret December 2009 paper signed by the US secretary of state. Her memo urged US diplomats to redouble their efforts to stop Gulf money reaching extremists'

So her defense will be that she is accepting donations from the Saudi's because the more money she takes from them the less they will have to support 'extremists'

cables portray Saudi Arabia as a cash machine for terrorists


The Podesta Group is one of many lobby groups used by the Saudi's in the US which gives Hillary plenty of room to wriggle out of any bad publicity or pressure that comes her way. Podesta group is also retained by the Iraq Government, Russian Banks to name a few.

originally posted by: Seagle

So her defense will be that she is accepting donations from the Saudi's because the more money she takes from them the less they will have to support 'extremists'

I hope she makes this argument, because it is disgusting and a loser. This would be another admission that shew knew she the Saudis sponsor ISIS, she will still have to defend why she sold them arms, and have to defnd why the podesta group is running PR for them to help cover it up.

If she would come public and say this, it would be game over.

Also, Obama would then have to explain not only why he is still selling them arms, but helping them with their national defense knowing they sponsor ISIS.

No the strategy from Hillary will be to ignore this story and defect. She knows her media friends won't dare question her on this, an in case in does leak out into the public, her media will just bombard people with stories of how Paul Ryan and Trump are fighting.

The Podesta Group is one of many lobby groups used by the Saudi's in the US which gives Hillary plenty of room to wriggle out of any bad publicity or pressure that comes her way. Podesta group is also retained by the Iraq Government, Russian Banks to name a few.

And has been shown, many of thos lobby groups have connections to Hillary. Of course she will try to wriggle out, but as soon as she starts discussing any of this stuff seriously it is a bad situation for her.

She just wants this to go away.

As far as the rest of your post I agree with you that many of us knew this. But we never had Hillarys words flat out saying she knew the Saudis were arming Isis in the way she does in the email. Most people won't believe it till its straight from the horse mouth.

Look at it this way. Everyone knew that Trump had probably made lewd comments about women. But when the audio was released that showed him saying stuff, it got more peoples attention.

This is very similar. To see Hillarys private conversation with her campaign manager where she is saying she needs to deal with the Saudis arming Isis is damning. Especially when you factor in the timeline that two week later she sent Bill to discuss things, and two weeks after that the Podesta group.

So even if she tries to wriggle out of the Podesta group doing wrong, it looks horrible.

a reply to: Grambler

So it's Iran Contra all over again-but this time it's the democrats.

originally posted by: Thecakeisalie
a reply to: Grambler

So it's Iran Contra all over again-only this time it's the democrats.

Definitely are similarities.

However this I would argue is worse for several reasons.

1. Hillary is helping Isis, which is supposedly Americas biggest enemy.

2. Iran contra involved officials that were already elected, and as was proven by it and the clinton email scandal, its basically impossible to have any recourse on elected officials. However, we can refuse to elect Hillary.

3. The media black out of this is astounding.

4. No one will be prosecuted like Ollie was, which shows even more corruption.

a reply to: Grambler

Listen, I hate HRC but there is no email on Wikileaks on 8/17/2014. Link the actual email to this post or I'm calling BS.

a reply to: ColdChillin

ATS does not allow links to wikileaks.

The email in question is in the body of an email chain dated 9/27/2014. Email ID: 3774.

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: ColdChillin

ATS does not allow links to wikileaks.

The email in question is in the body of an email chain dated 9/27/2014. Email ID: 3774.

Thanks for beating me to it. Now I know that says the email is from 9/27/2014, but keep in mind that the wikileaks are from Podesta.

So we are getting email from his side of things. In this email, its shows an email that he received from Hillary on 8/17/14

Here is a source that links to the email.

dailycaller.com...

Excerpt from a Hillary speech:

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Lauren Peterson < [email protected]> wrote:

...

And once and for all, the Saudis, the Qataris, the Kuwaitis, and >> others must stop their citizens from funding extremist organizations and >> stop supporting radical schools and mosques around the world that have set >> too many young people on a path toward extremism.

/podesta-emails/emailid/5708

Here she is in a speech from December of last year stating that "the Saudis, the Qataris, the Kuwaitis, and others," must stop their citizens from funding extremist organizations. Sp, as another poster mentioned a bit earlier in the thread, we can see the angle that will be used to defend continued funding of the Saudis. And that is it's "citizens," who are funding terror, not the governments themselves.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
Excerpt from a Hillary speech:

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Lauren Peterson < [email protected]> wrote:

...

And once and for all, the Saudis, the Qataris, the Kuwaitis, and >> others must stop their citizens from funding extremist organizations and >> stop supporting radical schools and mosques around the world that have set >> too many young people on a path toward extremism.

/podesta-emails/emailid/5708

Here she is in a speech from December of last year stating that "the Saudis, the Qataris, the Kuwaitis, and others," must stop their citizens from funding extremist organizations. Sp, as another poster mentioned a bit earlier in the thread, we can see the angle that will be used to defend continued funding of the Saudis. And that is it's "citizens," who are funding terror, not the governments themselves.

I think she will just try to ignore it, just like the Hillary supporters on ATS.

Look if she makes this argument, then she is still forced to answer many questions about arms sales, the podesta group, accepting millions of dollars, etc. She does not want to mention the words Saudi Arabia at least until after the election.

And I still think this excuse won't work. Lets look again at what she said the the released Aug 17 2014 email.

“While this military/para-military operation is moving forward, we need to use our diplomatic and more traditional intelligence assets to bring pressure on the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region,” Clinton wrote.

This is the first time she has specifically specified it is the GOVERNMENTS that are supporting ISIS, not private citizens.

a reply to: Grambler

Oh, I'm with you on all of the above. I just thought it interesting that the quote excerpt I used indicated an apparent "distancing" of the aforementioned governments and the ones 'funding extremists.'

It's almost like the Hillary camp isn't even trying any more and expect to coast in to the white house due to all the grease that's been applied to the various mechanisms of power.

Well, as I mentioned I have been mentioning this information on other threads and asking hillary defenders or supporters, or just anyone in general that doesn't think she is that bad what they think of this information.

Mostly its ignored, but I have to say I am starting to see an answer that I wasn't expecting.

You see, Hillary didn't PERSONALLY sell arms to anyone, and she didn't PERSONALLY kill anyone, so its not a big deal.

I kid you not, this is what people are saying.

How can you have a rational discussion with that?

a reply to: Grambler

LOL, really?

Does that mean we can let off anyone who murdered another person with anything other than their bare hands?

The lengths to which some will go in order to not address this is almost astonishing; but then I remember how strong is the cognitive dissonance and normalcy bias amongst her supporters and realize that even if we did have Hillary on video strangling someone, her supporters would be able to excuse it in some form or fashion.

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: Grambler

LOL, really?

Does that mean we can let off anyone who murdered another person with anything other than their bare hands?

The lengths to which some will go in order to not address this is almost astonishing; but then I remember how strong is the cognitive dissonance and normalcy bias amongst her supporters and realize that even if we did have Hillary on video strangling someone, her supporters would be able to excuse it in some form or fashion.

Thats what I said. So I assume we can't blame Bush for invading Iraq right. I mean he personally sat in his comfy house.

Lets blame the soldiers, they are the ones that went.

I agree with you, I can't believe the lengths some will go to defend her.

a reply to: Grambler

In short...EVERYONE knows that SOME of the Suadi royal family (gov) has supported terrorism. Effen Bin Laden was a cousin of the family? Was he not?

The Saudi royal family has become a sprawling mass of thousands of members and some of them are extremists.

I am confused why you think this is revelation...Not just Hillary, but congress, the Bush admin....everyone knows this.

So she suggested more diplomatic pressure on the Saudi Gov. to police their own.

What's the issue again?

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: Grambler

In short...EVERYONE knows that SOME of the Suadi royal family (gov) has supported terrorism. Effen Bin Laden was a cousin of the family? Was he not?

The Saudi royal family has become a sprawling mass of thousands of members and some of them are extremists.

I am confused why you think this is revelation...Not just Hillary, but congress, the Bush admin....everyone knows this.

So she suggested more diplomatic pressure on the Saudi Gov. to police their own.

What's the issue again?

This has been answered several times in this thread.

Three points on this. She did more than just suggest diplomatic pressure, she took millions of dollars from them and sent her people over to run PR for the Saudis and cover it up. And she sold them a bunch of weapons.

1. Even if you are right, do you not agree that this still disqualifies Hillary to be president; selling them arms, accepting money from them, etc.? Doesn't this outweigh anything Trump has done?

2. We now have proof that Hillary knew they were sponsoring ISIS. Before she could deny it, but now we know she knew. This is new.

3. We now know that not only did Hillary sell them arms and take money from them, but we have a timeline that shows her direct connection to covering up for Saudi Arabia.

You will get no argument from me on Bush, he was terrible. Yet some of the same people that called on Bush to be tried for war crimes are defending Hillary doing this, brushing it off because others have done similar things.

Are you really willing to overlook these facts because we have known for a long time that the saudis support terror?

So do you believe HIllary when she talks about wanting to unify people, wanting to solve syria, wanting to combat Isis, wanting to help women and LGBT, and all of the other things she says when she is helping support Isis?

And do you think Trumps lewd comments or tax returns etc. are a bigger deal than this?

a reply to: theantediluvian

no...it's not a great thread. republicans have been colluding with the Saudi's as well...republicans in the government have known about this for a long, long time.....this is a "reveal" as big as "the sky is blue"......let's remember it was the bush administration that flew out the Saudi family members after 9/11, when no other plane was allowed to fly in America, except military, it was bush that had the Saudi royals come to his Texas ranch, he held hands with him like he was king's sauds girlfriend

originally posted by: jimmyx
a reply to: theantediluvian

no...it's not a great thread. republicans have been colluding with the Saudi's as well...republicans in the government have known about this for a long, long time.....this is a "reveal" as big as "the sky is blue"......let's remember it was the bush administration that flew out the Saudi family members after 9/11, when no other plane was allowed to fly in America, except military, it was bush that had the Saudi royals come to his Texas ranch, he held hands with him like he was king's sauds girlfriend

Finally!!!

After about 35 hours, the official party line has been crafted!

This isn't a big deal because we have always known that the Saudis armed terrorists, and the Republicans and Bush have done what Hillary has done too.


HAHAHA!!!!

Unbelievable. So you admit that Hillary is guilty of

1. Knowing that the saudis sponsor Isis.

2. she accepts loads of money from them.

3. She had a top priority of selling the arms when she was sec. of state.

4. She sent her associates to the saudis to help cover up their Isis connection.

And you think that none of this matters because um..... Bush did it!

So I assume you are not voting for her. What reason would you have to?

Womens rights, gay rights, keeping america safe? All moot considering she is knowingly help arm and cover up Isis.

a reply to: jimmyx

this is a "reveal" as big as "the sky is blue"

Tell that to those who lost loved ones in isis terrorist attacks all across the planet. Hillary Clinton KNEW about state sponsored terror and did nothing to stop it. She is complicit in each and every one of those attacks. Worse she took money from state sponsors of terror and armed them. She has been shown to have done enough to be charged with treason.

a reply to: Grambler

Even more telling is the opening line...

“While this military/para-military operation is moving forward..."

The "operation" to regime Syria like Libya, Iraq and all the rest. To meddle in sovereign states affairs, use military force directly and by proxy to destabilize a country, murder its population and change the heads of state to ones more favorable to the west.

She was directly involved in the reduction of Libya too. In fact, is caught on camera laughing when she heard qaddafi was dead.

Quoted Cesar?!

Everyone seems to be ignoring that. Hey, play that laughing video for the live tv audience next debate...

show it even once on Main stream TV. Ask her directly about it in an open press conference.

Aaaah... let her become president.