It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi: 'Split' Motive for 9/11?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 06:26 PM
Global Research, September 03, 2013
The Saudi Split – a Motive for 9/11?

A little known conflict between the United States and Saudi Arabia in summer 2001 sheds new light on 9/11. What role did the tensions back then play? And why did the attacks occur actually in early September?

Until today it is largely unknown that the Saudi government planned a radical course change in summer 2001. Via official diplomatic channels the U.S. government was informed that the Saudis intended to stop coordinating their policy with the United States. The attacks of 9/11 destroyed these plans to separate and gain more independence only weeks later.

15 of the 19 September 11 hijackers were citizens of the U.S. ally Saudi Arabia.

Majority of Americans seem to have bought the story that though the vast majority of 'terrorists' were Saudi - and none were either Iraqi nor Afghan - most of them were training in of all places, Iraq and Afghanistan.


posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 06:32 PM
reply to post by gardener

From your source.

a poll two years after the attacks, and six months after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, 70 percent of Americans believed Iraq was responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

Nobody I know thought Iraq was responsible for the 9/11.

Is there a source for this Poll?

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 06:39 PM
Thanks for your reply and enquiry Slayer:

Poll: 70% believe Saddam, 9-11 link
WASHINGTON (AP) — Nearly seven in 10 Americans believe it is likely that ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, says a poll out almost two years after the terrorists' strike against this country.

Not sure who has the more correct time after 9/11 after the poll or polls were taken; nevertheless, the statistics reported are the same.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 06:44 PM
Hmmm... That seems to be almost the opposite of what I recall. I would've thought 70% of Americans did not believe Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. I seem to recall hearing on the news and reading back then that Hussein didn't even like most terrorist groups, as he felt they were a threat to him and his power. I also read that Hussein did not welcome these groups training in his country.

News to me...

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 06:47 PM
Google also reports that 1 poll taken a year after 9.11, shows 70% Americans feel Saddam/Iraq involved in 9/11

Worst yet:

New York Times/CBS News survey finds that six years after the terror attacks of 9/11, "33 percent of all Americans, including 40 percent of Republicans and 27 percent of Democrats, say Saddam Hussein was personally involved." In reality, of course, Saddam and Iraq had absolutely no connection to the terror attacks. 1/3 of Americans believe the Big Lie propaganda tactics employed by the pro-war lobby.

Keep drinkin that tap water, folks! =D

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 06:49 PM
reply to post by gardener

I appreciate the link.

I think I recall this.

Bush rejects Saddam 9/11 link

Bush delivers his State of the Union address in January 2003

US President George Bush has said there is no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in the 11 September attacks.

The comments - among his most explicit so far on the issue - come after a recent opinion poll found that nearly 70% of Americans believed the Iraqi leader was personally involved in the attacks.

Mr Bush did however repeat his belief that the former Iraqi president had ties to al-Qaeda - the group widely regarded as responsible for the attacks on New York and Washington

He may have been just back peddling..

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 07:06 PM
Whenever I think of the numbers of Saudis involved in 9/11, my mind inevitably strays to the USS Liberty Incident. I can't define the similarity, but my brain says there's something connected in their methodology.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 07:07 PM
reply to post by SLAYER69

Ok, I guess that sounds about right, Slayer69. I can see that, after clearing a few cobwebs outta the attic.

I’m probably all wrong, but what I always thought went kinda like this - I never bought the Iraqi connection to 9/11. I figured it was used to rationalize a pre-emptive strike against Hussein. I thought George Dubya was pissed because Hussein had orchestrated a failed assasination attempt against his father, and it was vendetta time. So, all this 9/11 connection and wmd stuff was just propoganda to rally the troops.

Like I said, I might be all wrong, but that’s how I always figured it...

edit on 2/10/2014 by netbound because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 07:15 PM
reply to post by Snarl

Don't look too closely.

LBJ's Fingerprints are all over that one.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 07:16 PM
reply to post by gardener

This pretty much varifies everything I've come to understand about the petro-dollar and our on-going ionvolvement in Middle-Eastern countries. It really was the last nail in the coffin for me. I always believed 9/11 was a farce orchestrated by our own government. I had doubts though, even now, I cannot make my conclusion and say that it is 100% accurate. However, in my mind, there is no longer any doubt. No question. This was planned to secure the petro-dollar as have been most if not all of our conflicts in or around that area since. The Petro-Dollar Wars are what history might call this someday....and America will soon be known in history as what it truely is becoming....The new Nazi's of WWIII. Tis a sad day that I actaully feel this way so strongly I actually have the gall to say it in such a way.

I love/loved America, but it has changed so much in so many negative ways, and nothing I can do seems to be able to change anything about that. This blows.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 07:21 PM

Whenever I think of the numbers of Saudis involved in 9/11, my mind inevitably strays to the USS Liberty Incident. I can't define the similarity, but my brain says there's something connected in their methodology.

And there were those Dancing Israelis.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 07:41 PM


Whenever I think of the numbers of Saudis involved in 9/11, my mind inevitably strays to the USS Liberty Incident. I can't define the similarity, but my brain says there's something connected in their methodology.

And there were those Dancing Israelis.

Yeah ... one cannot overlook the dynamics in the ME.

I was in the wrong place, at the wrong time, during the Iran/Iraq war. Wound up eventually in a Saudi hospital for rehab (more like R&R). I was something of a hero for them, but I could never figure out who they were pulling for. I concluded that they just like war ... as long as it's not on their turf.

Saudis are great folks ... but you better not let your guard down concerning their politics. I'd rather deal with the Chinese, if you know what I mean.

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 07:56 PM
Hasn't the mystery, as to who pulled off 9-11, been solved? It certainly wasn't a group of "hijackers" turned super pilots. That's for sure.
edit on 10-2-2014 by WonderBoi because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 05:47 AM
The link between Iraq and Al-Qa'ida is negligible however it is true that some Americans believed their to be a link, I can recall watching the news shortly after the invasion listening to American troops saying they were in Iraq to get some revenge for what happened in New York. Now did 70% of Americans at the time believe Iraq was behind 9/11, I highly doubt it, you can never really trust these types of poles they might only be a sample of 500 people who all read the Washington Post and where being duped by the Bush administration propaganda at the time.

While Iraq had virtually nothing to do with 9/11 that did not stop the administration at the time trying to find or even manufacture a link, even on the day of 9/11 it has been reported that Rumsfeld wanted a link to Iraq found. Then in the following days and months the FBI where sent a request to find a link, to which they reported back that there wasn't one, the Bush administration then sent another request for any evidence Iraq was connected to Al-Qa'ida. Eventually the FBI sent back messages essentially saying that it was the job of the FBI to investigate what happened not manufacture evidence so the government could have a justification for war (or words to that effect).

Its probably also interesting for members who want to know more about this to read up about a informant named CurveBall and a Al-Qa'ida operative held captive in Egypt called Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi who was the source for much of the "Iraq Al-Qa'ida" claims.

posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 08:53 AM
the reason why 15 of the 19 identified 911 participants were Saudi is because the Saudi Kingdom funds all types of radical Islamics in their country (sort of like the diversified spectrum of Democrats in that American political party)

most of the pilots or copilots of the 4 commandeered commercial passenger jets were trained & schooled in the USA... so does that fact point to a operation of American instigation...

the 15 0f 19 meme is a 'muddy-the-waters'. misdirection ploy by a mindset intent on deflecting blame or just trying to create a false trail

look at the 19 physical perps. only 7 were the pilots or copilots who were the original plotters
the other persons (12 in number) were the last second thugs who were chosen to be the strong-arms in the hijacking phase of the operation... those dozen thugs were teamed into 3 person units for the 4 aircrafts targeted in the operation. they were selected because they were willing to be martyrs & were not given instructions until approximately less than 24 hours before the operation began

so in this breakdown of the " 15 of 19 hijackers were Saudi"... we find that 12 latecomers were quickly recruited from the Saudi Mosques where radical talent was always ready to volunteer... they were likely sent to the USA a week or so before the mission got under way, to make peace with themselves in the likely event of martyrdom (see even they were completely in-the-dark they were to hijack 'Planes-as-missiles"

---(only the 7 pilots/copilots knew their destiny, (and only three of them were Saudi citizens) this was the core-cell group which existed since the failed Bo-Jinka plot)
notice that one of the 911 crafts was shy one single pilot which would have made the full team of commandos hijackers together with the core cell a total of 12+8=20 members instead of 19)

the official story is laced with holes so that conjectures can be inserted as a means of distraction & detraction

the final 12 thugs for 911 could have come from any radical-fundamentalist sect of Muslims, the Wahibbist Mosques in Arabia were just a handy resource,,, the 3 pilots of the active 7 (and ideal cell of 8 pilots) brings the headcount of Saudi locals in 911 to 15 members BUT it does not mean that the Monarchy went out and initiated the plot or directly funded the radical Muslims that was more of insiders pulling strings to ingratiate themselves with fringe radicals in Islam rather than being privy to the real plot...


posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 10:08 AM
reply to post by gardener

You may find that a lot of incidents have either Saudi or Israeli involvement....imho

But its the truth!!

posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 12:27 PM

those dozen thugs were teamed into 3 person units for the 4 aircrafts targeted in the operation. they were selected because they were willing to be martyrs & were not given instructions until approximately less than 24 hours before the operation began

That is a mystery and will always be one. We know from the confessions of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and Ramzi bin al-Shibh the the term 'some time' was referred to as the time the 15 co-conspirators were told of the depths of the plan. I tend to think it was sooner rather than later as all the odd airplane trips all the conspirators made were undoubtedly clued in to what they were studying-the habits of the pilots and the crew.
al Shibh received Atta's riddle sometime between September 6th and ninth depending upon your time zone- after all the tickets had been purchased and the 15 were safely hunkered down in close proximity to their mission.

Atta's delivered the copies of the 'mission statement' (for lack of a better term) the evening of the ninth so preparations for the entrance into paradise via the self sacrifice of the mártyr could be made. It was quite a list of-things too do-and if Atta was the author we will also never know. At that point they were all in such deep cover that any electronic commutation would have been risky-although they took many risk they could have avoided and seemed to have the luck of the devil. Here September 8-9th is another incident of Atta being in two different places at the same time-although not backed up by a paper trail as the other incidents were.
There are so many loose ends-and or clues in the mission statements that each left-either in their rooms-or in Atta's case his automobile. The biggest loose end being just who wrote it-and where were the copies made-and finally why go to so much trouble and risk a 3 year plot on something as trivial as this is.

My guess has always been perhaps some in the group were faltering or having second thoughts but again we will never know.

Of the Saudi citizens that carried out the plot 9 were expatriated and faced arrest if they ever tried to enter the Kingdom. Somehow their travels to Afghanistan were erased from their passports and here is another instance of switching identities-Atta and Khallad this time.

And-again you can't compare the Kingdom in judgement as you would the United States.

posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 01:27 PM
reply to post by spooky24

thanks for your viewpoints.... but - as you allude --- we only have questionable sources as revealing the 'True Facts'

the holes and possible fabrications might well be planted 'evidence' to protect career officials from demotions or just to obscure the real narrative just enough to not be condemned to criminal liability/negilence

the noted time-frames you (adamantly) use are from tortured sources.
KSM got water-boarded some 180+ times as i recall (for instance)
edit on th28139214709011312014 by St Udio because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 06:02 AM

the noted time-frames you (adamantly) use are from tortured sources. KSM got water-boarded some 180+ times as i recall (for instance)

Both men freely confessed to their involvement and both signed their confessions after they were validated by a tribunal judge. They both (especially KSM) were damn proud of what they had done and only regretted the lack of vision, and the accompanying failure to have any kind of long range plans, as the reason they were stopped. While they never mentioned Bin Laden this was who they were talking about. His total lack of a strategic outlook and his inability to understand western culture doomed the movement they has built for more than a decade. In less that 60 days after 9/11 the entire sphere of al-qedia was demolished.

Both confessions can be read on the internet-they are fascinating documents.

posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 11:22 AM
reply to post by netbound

You must have been looking at quality media sources. I remember watching cable news (CNN, MSNBC, Fox News) in the months between 9/11 and the beginning of the Iraq war, and it seemed to me at the time that there must have been a conscious decision to allow misconceptions to stand.

Coverage of the attacks, Al Qaeda, Iraq, WMD, Saddam Hussein ... they all overlapped, leaving the implication that they were all connected. US political leaders were doing the same thing (Wikipedia link) - no one was explicitly saying that Iraq was responsible for 9/11, but I think they realized that if people made that connection, it could only help as they prepared for war with Iraq.

Here's VP Cheney talking about it in September 2003 on Meet the Press (link):

MR. RUSSERT: The Washington Post asked the American people about Saddam Hussein, and this is what they said: 69 percent said he was involved in the September 11 attacks. Are you surprised by that?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: No. I think it’s not surprising that people make that connection.

MR. RUSSERT: But is there a connection?

VICE PRES. CHENEY: We don’t know.

You and I talked about this two years ago. I can remember you asking me this question just a few days after the original attack. At the time I said no, we didn’t have any evidence of that. Subsequent to that, we’ve learned a couple of things. We learned more and more that there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda that stretched back through most of the decade of the ’90s, that it involved training, for example, on BW and CW, that al-Qaeda sent personnel to Baghdad to get trained on the systems that are involved. The Iraqis providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the al-Qaeda organization.

We know, for example, in connection with the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93 that one of the bombers was Iraqi, returned to Iraq after the attack of ’93. And we’ve learned subsequent to that, since we went into Baghdad and got into the intelligence files, that this individual probably also received financing from the Iraqi government as well as safe haven.
Now, is there a connection between the Iraqi government and the original World Trade Center bombing in ’93? We know, as I say, that one of the perpetrators of that act did, in fact, receive support from the Iraqi government after the fact.

With respect to 9/11, of course, we’ve had the story that’s been public out there. The Czechs alleged that Mohamed Atta, the lead attacker, met in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official five months before the attack, but we’ve never been able to develop anymore of that yet either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don’t know.

I definitely don't remember anyone in the media or government acknowledging the fact that most of the hijackers were Saudi. That was just completely ignored, as everyone focused instead on Afghanistan and Iraq.

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in