Who Was Behind 9/11- Poll

Remember when the U.S. went off the gold standard in the early 70s, and tied the dollar to oil by striking a deal with the king of Saudi Arabia whereby the Saudis would sell their oil only in U.S. dollars in return for the U.S. protecting their oil fields from potential enemies? Anyway, by 1975, all of the members of OPEC, which included Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela, agreed to sell their oil in U.S. dollars only. As a result, every oil-importing nation in the world was forced to accumulate U.S. dollars in order to buy oil. This created a great demand for dollars, which meant that every oil-importing nation sought to sell their products to the U.S. to acquire the necessary dollars to purchase needed oil. This situation amounted to an oil tax applied to the world by the U.S.

Contrary to what the mainstream media in the U.S. is telling uninformed people concerning the reasons for the invasions of Middle East countries, the real reason has to do with these countries’ decision to either sell their oil in other currencies, or to switch their foreign currency transactions from dollars to euros. It is no coincidence that when Libya decided to dump the dollar, the U.S. responded with an invasion. Syria made a similar decision, and suddenly Assad was a butcher who had to go. Iraq announced their decision to drop the dollar, and was invaded shortly thereafter under the pretext that they were concealing weapons of mass destruction. In 2007, Iran announced that they would nationalize their oil, accepting all currencies. As a result, the U.S. accused them of developing nuclear weapons and wanting to wipe Israel off the map, and then began applying sanctions. They never made such a threat, and sixteen intelligence agencies within the U.S. concluded that they had not been pursuing nuclear weapons capability. At about the same time, Venezuela decided to dump the dollar, and the U.S. declared Hugo Chevez a bad guy who had to go.

Only an idiot cannot see the pattern here. The U.S. used 9/11 as a pretext to invade Iraq for the crime of dumping the dollar, and to set an example for those who might decide to do the same, and as a means to establish a presence in the Middle East for the purpose of protecting its dollars-for-oil setup.

 

all of this is 100% consistent with what i too have come to understand, and with the facts which stand and can be explored as a matter of public record. it does not directly answer the question of who was responsible for the event in question, but it would certainly be one hell of a coincidence were it no more then to be one.

while i have no more particular love for islam then i have for christianity, which are both in my eyes cults, i remain appalled by the ignorance that scapegoats islam, or even suggests the involvement of its influence.

 

How many horses can you beat to death rehashing this subject time after time after time?

 

When oil-producers decide to accept currencies other than the U.S. dollar, the effect on the U.S. economy and way of life will be catastrophic. Iraq did just that. Of course, the U.S. couldn't just invade Iraq to reinstate the dollars-for-oil arrangement; not without a good excuse. So, after 9/11, we were told that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and connections to Al Qaeda, from which we were to infer that Iraq would supply Al Qaeda with those weapons of mass destruction to do even greater harm to the U.S. The weapons of mass destruction claim turned out to be a lie.

Therefore, it is not difficult for me to determine who was behind 9/11. Who stood to gain from 9/11? Or, more to the point, who stood to keep from losing?

 

Aliens

 

When oil-producers decide to accept currencies other than the U.S. dollar, the effect on the U.S. economy and way of life will be catastrophic. Iraq did just that. Of course, the U.S. couldn't just invade Iraq to reinstate the dollars-for-oil arrangement; not without a good excuse. So, after 9/11, we were told that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and connections to Al Qaeda, from which we were to infer that Iraq would supply Al Qaeda with those weapons of mass destruction to do even greater harm to the U.S. The weapons of mass destruction claim turned out to be a lie.

Therefore, it is not difficult for me to determine who was behind 9/11. Who stood to gain from 9/11? Or, more to the point, who stood to keep from losing?
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

You think aliens stood to gain fom 9/11?

 

do you mean those media lizards that profit profit profit from repetitive money oil bush chaney money oil 911 money oil usa arab money oil isis money oil isreal money 911 oil usa wmd saddam oil afghanistan raq tora bora airstrike usa oil money money oil bush chaney money oil 911 money oil usa arab money oil isis money oil isreal money 911 oil usa wmd saddam oil iraq tora bora airstrike usa oil afghanistan money money oil bush chaney money oil 911 money oil usa arab money oil isis money oil isreal money 911 oil usa wmd saddam oil iraq tora bora airstrike usa oil money money oil bush chaney money oil 911 money oil usa arab money oil isis money oil isreal money 911 oil usa wmd saddam oil iraq tora bora airstrike usa oil money news stories..

 

9/10 was behind 9/11.

Mystery solved.

 

Very astute of you!

 

That might be what I meant, and it might not be what I meant because I don't know what you meant. Do you know what I mean . . . or meant? Here, I'll reiterate:

Remember when the U.S. went off the gold standard in the early 70s, and tied the dollar to oil by striking a deal with the king of Saudi Arabia whereby the Saudis would sell their oil only in U.S. dollars in return for the U.S. protecting their oil fields from potential enemies? Anyway, by 1975, all of the members of OPEC, which included Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela, agreed to sell their oil in U.S. dollars only. As a result, every oil-importing nation in the world was forced to accumulate U.S. dollars in order to buy oil. This created a great demand for dollars, which meant that every oil-importing nation sought to sell their products to the U.S. to acquire the necessary dollars to purchase needed oil. This situation amounted to an oil tax applied to the world by the U.S.

Contrary to what the mainstream media in the U.S. is telling uninformed people concerning the reasons for the invasions of Middle East countries, the real reason has to do with these countries’ decision to either sell their oil in other currencies, or to switch their foreign currency transactions from dollars to euros. It is no coincidence that when Libya decided to dump the dollar, the U.S. responded with an invasion. Syria made a similar decision, and suddenly Assad was a butcher who had to go. Iraq announced their decision to drop the dollar, and was invaded shortly thereafter under the pretext that they were concealing weapons of mass destruction. In 2007, Iran announced that they would nationalize their oil, accepting all currencies. As a result, the U.S. accused them of developing nuclear weapons and wanting to wipe Israel off the map, and then began applying sanctions. They never made such a threat, and sixteen intelligence agencies within the U.S. concluded that they had not been pursuing nuclear weapons capability. At about the same time, Venezuela decided to dump the dollar, and the U.S. declared Hugo Chevez a bad guy who had to go.

Only an idiot cannot see the pattern here. The U.S. used 9/11 as a pretext to invade Iraq for the crime of dumping the dollar, and to set an example for those who might decide to do the same, and as a means to establish a presence in the Middle East for the purpose of protecting its dollars-for-oil setup.
___________________________________________________________________

And then I kinda paraphrased all that by saying this:

When oil-producers decide to accept currencies other than the U.S. dollar, the effect on the U.S. economy and way of life will be catastrophic. Iraq did just that. Of course, the U.S. couldn't just invade Iraq to reinstate the dollars-for-oil arrangement; not without a good excuse. So, after 9/11, we were told that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and connections to Al Qaeda, from which we were to infer that Iraq would supply Al Qaeda with those weapons of mass destruction to do even greater harm to the U.S. The weapons of mass destruction claim turned out to be a lie.

Therefore, it is not difficult for me to determine who was behind 9/11. Who stood to gain from 9/11? Or, more to the point, who stood to keep from losing
_____________________________________________________________________

Do you see how this works now?

 

the occasion is the anniversary of it having happened. that so many others mention it so many other places, creates an occasion to point out the sorts of realities official histories deliberately sweep under rugs.
such is not a gratuitous horse beating when hundreds are still being murdered on its basis as an excuse.

 

Yeah yeah yeah..............