Put on the tin foil hat while we talk about terrorism

[Target_For_Exterm]

:tinfoilhat:

I was reading the threads this morning about the abrupt resignation of Turki al Faisal as Ambasador to the US. Here's some of the tidbits that caught my eye - and I'm sorry I can't link to the specific posts I'm quoting from (I don't know how), but below the quotes I'll link to the thread:

From leveymg:

"He was UBL's case officer. Last time he resigned, 9/11 happened a week later
He inexplically resigned as the head of Saudi external intelligence agency on 9/4/01.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/03/03/01_...
On September 4, The Saudi Gov't announced that Prince Turki's departure was "by his own request" . Prince Turki had been head of Saudi foreign intelligence for 24 years, and had just been reappointed on May 24 to a new 4-year term. By an interesting coincidence, this same day Prince Turki's "resignation" was announced, Robert Mueller was sworn in as FBI Director, and Pakistani ISI Chief Gen. Ahmed arrived in the US for consultations with the CIA, Pentagon and DIA during the following week. This chain of events squares with Senator Graham's observation that the true facts behind the 9/11 "intelligence failure" involve "a couple of foreign intelligence agencies", and these facts may become public in 50 years when the national archive records are finally opened."

From Efilroft Sul:

"More here on Prince Turki
After the Taliban takes control of the area around Kandahar, Afghanistan, in September 1994, prominent Persian Gulf state officials and businessmen, including high-ranking United Arab Emirates and Saudi government ministers, such as Saudi intelligence minister Prince Turki al-Faisal, frequently secretly fly into Kandahar on state and private jets for hunting expeditions.

General Wayne Downing, Bush’s former national director for combating terrorism, says: “They would go out and see Osama, spend some time with him, talk with him, you know, live out in the tents, eat the simple food, engage in falconing, some other pursuits, ride horses.”

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?id=152184... "

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2649199

The abrupt departure, and al-Faisal's involvement with players in previous terrorist acts, make me wonder what's up.

We all know about the BFEE obsession with oil, and their tight relations with the Saudis. It's also been speculated by many that 9/11 was either LIHOP or MIHOP, and the same regarding the anthrax attacks.

Now if you're BFEE, and compromised so that you don't care all that much about the future of the US and are willing to be persuaded to another point of view if the payoff is big enough, then some of this backplay manipulation might make sense.

For example, what if Cheney's summons to Saudi was for delivery of an in-person ultimatum: Support the Sunnis in Iraq or else. Now the Sunnis in Iraq are in the minority, so taking sides of the minority is not an easy thing to do, and it puts the future of US involvement in Iraq at risk. So let's speculate and say Cheney gives the Saudis the finger and comes home - can't disappoint Halliburton by giving up on all that Iraqi oil. Let's say factions in the Saudi government ARE involved in terror, and their plan is to orchestrate another terror attack on the US if they don't get their way.

Well, if you wanted to plan a large scale terror attack on the US in the present security environment, you'd want to compromise Bush so he looks the other way and covers for you, and you'd want someone on the inside in diplomatic circles because immunity gives you a lot of opportunity for smuggling interesting supplies. If the diplomatic player involved also has extensive contacts with known terrorists, then it's a perfect setup for planning the next terror hit.

We all know the BFEE is power mad, so the carrot could be increased power in the US. After all, how did the American people react after 9/11? Didn't they give Bush whatever he wanted and ignore all critics? They happily signed on to the Patriot Act, looked the other way on domestic spying without a warrant, undermined the Constitution, etc. Well, what might Bush be able to do after ANOTHER large scale terror attack? Could he nip the Democratic resurgence in the bud? Could he silence Congressional investigations? Could he expand his already near-dictatorial powers?

If Bush and Cheney KNEW Saudi factions were planning another terror attack on the US, what incentive do they have to actually try to stop it?

[peace13]

1. To your last question...

it's deja vu all over again!