SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The long-secret 28-29 pages of the 9/11 Commission's report have been released by the U.S. House Intelligence Committee, albeit in a redacted form:
"According to various FBI documents and CIA memorandum, some of the September 11 hijackers, while in the United States, apparently had contacts with individuals who may be connected to the Saudi Government," the report said, giving a catalog of alleged links.
They included reported contacts between Saudis in California and a statement that a man who was reportedly a Saudi Interior Ministry official stayed at the same Virginia hotel as one hijacker in September 2001.
Another section said that Omar al-Bayoumi, said to be a Saudi intelligence officer, met with two hijackers at a public place after they arrived in San Diego. It said, citing FBI files, that his salary rose to $3,700 a month from $465 two months after two of the hijackers arrived in California.
One page described how two of the hijackers asked flight attendants technical questions during a trip in 1999 from Phoenix to Washington to attend a party at the Saudi embassy. One tried twice to enter the cockpit. The plane made an emergency landing and the FBI investigated, but did not prosecute.
Here are the documents, available at Cryptome or House.gov. The Office of the Director of National Intelligence says that the release of the documents is not an indication that the intelligence community agrees with their accuracy. Apparently, many of the leads mentioned have been investigated by the FBI and found to have no basis in fact.
So, SoylentNews readers, did the Saudis do 9/11?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Saturday July 16 2016, @01:59PM
I can't add anything to the conversation about Saudi involvement in 9/11, but I can say I have seen raw footage from cameras around DC. I guy I used to work with ran ABC's data clusters that archived all their raw footage from street cams and the like, presumably for "this is the traffic on the expressway today!" kind of shots. He showed me a sequence from an approach to the Pentagon that showed an object flying low over the street. It was only 2-3 frames. It was moving fast and the camera resolution wasn't really high, so it was too blurry to make out details. But you could get a sense of the size because in one of the frames it was directly over a pickup. It was roughly the same length. I suspected it might be a cruise missile, but it was obvious it was not a jumbo jet.
The guy had made a backup of the footage, which he hid away in some secret place. Hours later the FBI showed up and confiscated everything.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 16 2016, @05:00PM
yeah, i think it's pretty clear that the pentagon was hit by a missile, flight 93 was shot down, and several WTC buildings were demolished by pros after the planes crashed into two of them. Who did it? I don't know enough about gov's black ops demo teams to guess what country's team was used to blow up the WTC buildings(mossad, pakistanis?), but it was surely not some random goat humpers. the highjackers could easily be sourced from wahabi saudi groups and wouldn't have to be in on the big picture. they could just be given their chance to strike a blow for victory against the great satan. the miltary personell responsible for the flight 93 shoot down probably wouldn't take much force to get them to keep quiet. who wants to be that guy anyways. The pentagon could have been managed a few different ways. feed bad info, sabotage instruments, etc. whoever pushed the button probably doesn't want to try and prove their conspiracy theory. Black ops demo teams(could just be a few people, with more time.) probably don't talk much about their work. All of this means coordination means at least some high level US personnel knew something. Probably not the most public of them though. Why have them acting when they could be actually surprised on TV? This kind of power is what keeps politicians in line too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 16 2016, @09:26PM
The guy had made a backup of the footage, which he hid away in some secret place. Hours later the FBI showed up and confiscated everything.
I guess he didn't think to make backups on the Internet and spread it around. How convenient.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Saturday July 16 2016, @10:14PM
He was kind of a grey hat and rather paranoid. When he showed it to me he was skittish.
All i can say is that i did see it, and that the object that hit the pentagon was not a passenger jet. It was smaller. I don't know why someone would hit the pentagon with a cruise missile intentionally. It would have to be a colossal fuckup.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 17 2016, @05:43AM
and we're supposed to believe you just because you're generally a nice person who would never lie about something like this, right?
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Sunday July 17 2016, @10:52AM
I don't care if you believe me or not. It doesn't matter. I'm not selling anything, no book, no film, no conspiracy. I can't think of any reason why a cruise missile would have been fired at all, because you don't fire cruise missiles at hijacked planes, you fire something else. Likewise the US Air Force and Navy would have had no reason to fire a cruise missile at anything that morning. So either it was a colossal fuckup and they didn't want the embarassment, or the hijackers also somehow launched a cruise missile and it freaked Washington out that a non-state actor could do that. That's wild speculation, though, and doesn't really hold water.
So there's no takeaway here beyond the few frames I saw that showed what hit the Pentagon was not a passenger plane. That's it.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 17 2016, @02:44PM