A Damned Good Question, Tribute To Iraq War

Jon Gold
3/22/2022
UPDATED: 3/27/2022

I was listening to my interview with Paul Thompson (which by the way is priceless), and we talked about the "flip theory" concerning the two alleged hijackers in San Diego put forward by Richard Clarke. The idea was so they would have operatives inside of "Al-Qaeda." I don't agree with it. What I know is that the CIA was protecting two of the alleged hijackers, and that's reason enough for people to be held accountable, and for truths to be told.

Here's my interview with Paul:

We Were Lied To About 9/11
Paul Thompson Part I
https://archive.org/details/pauljon1

Paul Thompson Part II
https://archive.org/details/pauljon2

Paul Thompson Part III
https://archive.org/details/pauljon3

Paul Thompson Part IV
https://archive.org/details/pauljon4

You can read about Richard Clarke here: https://www.salon.com/2011/10/14/ins...oubts_cia_911/

Here's an old article from MSNBC from 2006 entitled "Did The 9/11 Hijackers Have A U.S. Accomplice?"

http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/sho...9169#post69169

So I was thinking, if Prince Bandar helps to finance "Al-Qaeda" and 9/11, then that technically makes him a member of "Al-Qaeda." I can't think of a better plant to get inside of "Al-Qaeda." He was good friends with George Tenet, then the Director of the CIA. George used to go to his house, swim in his pool, and go on drunken tirades. I'm sure they spoke about A LOT of things.

Late 1990s: CIA Director Tenet Has Direct, Private Channels to Saudi Leaders
https://web.archive.org/web/20190625...0stenetchannel

George Tenet Screamed About Jews In Saudi Prince's Pool: Book
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/georg...d-abo_n_151690

Prince Bandar was GOOD FRIENDS with the Bush Family. So close, he was referred to as "Bandar Bush."

House of Bush, House of Saud: The Secret Relationship Between the World's Two Most Powerful Dynasties
https://www.amazon.com/House-Bush-Sa.../dp/0743253396

On March 15th 2001, George Bush was meeting with Prince Bandar, one of the financiers of "Al-Qaeda" and 9/11, and talked about Iraq. He said "if there is any military action, then it has to be decisive. That can finalize the issue," and that "the Iraqi opposition is useless and not effective." Months before the pretext (9/11) that enabled the Bush Administration to go into Iraq.

March 15, 2001: Bush Tells Saudi Prince that Military Action in Iraq Needs to be ‘Decisive'
https://web.archive.org/web/20201108...eeting20010315

Too Many Americans Thought Saddam Had Something To Do With 9/11
http://www.yourbbsucks.com/forum/sho...9245#post99245

One day Dick Cheney invites Prince Bandar to his West Wing Office. Donald Rumsfeld, and General Myers are present. Myers brought "a top-secret map of the war plan. And it says, 'Top secret. No foreign.' No foreign means no foreigners are supposed to see this." "They describe in detail the war plan for Bandar. And so Bandar, who's skeptical because he knows in the first Gulf War we didn't get Saddam out, so he says to Cheney and Rumsfeld, 'So Saddam this time is gonna be out, period?' And Cheney - who has said nothing - says the following: 'Prince Bandar, once we start, Saddam is toast.'"

Woodward Shares War Secrets
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/woodwar...s-war-secrets/

Because of the fact that the President of the United States was talking about the need for "decisive" military action in Iraq with one of the financiers of "Al-Qaeda" and 9/11, because Prince Bandar also wanted war with Iraq, and because 9/11 was the pretext that enabled the Bush Administration to go into Iraq, that brings up the question of whether or not there was a collaboration between the Bush Administration and Prince Bandar to bring about the 9/11 attacks. It's not a "theory." It's a DAMNED GOOD QUESTION.

After all, 10 days after his inauguration at his very first principals meeting, Bush asked his subordinates to "go find me a way" to get into Iraq. One of the FIRST things the Bush Administration did was tell the different alphabet agencies to "BACK OFF" the Saudis and the Bin Ladens, an action that Senator Bob Graham said if true, would be a "very serious charge." It sure seems to be because the famous John O'Neill complained about it. Not to mention the "Visa Express Program" that was implemented before 9/11 which ONLY applied to Saudi Arabia, and which some of the alleged hijackers took advantage of. Also, according to Richard Clarke, in the months before 9/11, members of the Bush Administration discussed creating a "cassus belli" for war with Iraq. When I asked Richard Clarke on Facebook his opinion on whether or not people in the Bush Administration were capable of such a thing, he said "some of them were." When 9/11 Commissioner John Lehman asked George Bush about Bandar and 9/11, he "dodged the questions," and then went outside and told the world that he "answered every question" they asked. When the 9/11 Commission questioned Bandar, they didn't even bother to ask him about his connections, financial or otherwise, to 9/11.

Jacobin recently came out with this article that talks about even more incriminating information concerning Prince Bandar. In it, they cite Thomas Kean. I am FURIOUS that Kean has the gall to feign anger. As if he didn't know about the 9/11 Commission not asking Prince Bandar the tough questions or Bush dodging questions about Bandar.

Anyway, I don't believe in the "flip theory." On top of that, I've shown that we had access to one of the most important insiders of "Al-Qaeda" so why the need to "flip" those two hijackers at all (I'm saying that with a sly, angry smile across my face)?

Prince Bandar even admitted that Saudi intelligence was "actively following most of the terrorists with precision."

Prince Bandar Says Saudi Intel "Actively Following" Hijackers "With Precision"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-GLTNIYk6I

He says that "U.S. Security Authorities" never "engaged their Saudi Counterparts in a serious and credible manner" and that's why 9/11 happened, but I wonder if he "engaged" members of the Bush Administration. After all, if you wanted a terrorist attack to take place, Prince Bandar WOULD be the guy to go to. Remember he threatened London with terrorist attacks "unless corruption investigations into their arms deals were halted." Former FBI Director Louis Freeh was his lawyer at the time. He also sent in terrorists into Syria to try and take out Assad.

BAE: secret papers reveal threats from Saudi prince
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20.../bae.armstrade

Freeh defends Saudi payments
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2009-apr-07-na-freeh7-story.html

End of an era as Prince Bandar departs Saudi intelligence post
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...lligence-syria

Because this is the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, I posted that "they're (those responsible) being invited on "Ellen" to promote their book, they're getting apologies from Keith Olbermann. Their history is being rewritten so as to put them on a pedestal instead of the Hague where they belong."

Hell yes they do.

Ellen DeGeneres explains friendship with George W. Bush: "We're all different ... that's OK"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ellen-d...ue-2019-10-08/

Olbermann: 'I probably owe George W. Bush an apology'
https://thehill.com/homenews/media/3...ush-an-apology

By the way, isn't it a disgrace that Prince Bandar's daughter is now the Saudi Ambassador to the United States?

https://www.saudiembassy.net/ambassador

Also, FOR SOME REASON, Bandar refuses to testify in the lawsuit brought on by the 9/11 Families against Saudi Arabia.

https://www.floridabulldog.org/2021/...fy-about-9-11/