I was quoting the FBI. You can tell them how crazy you think they are. Meanwhile, the 9/11 Commission Report itself indicated attackers were funded by and tight with Saudi elites. You might, based on official report, wonder why our Presidents and counterterror efforts are tight with the one country they said sponsored 9/11 and other terrorism. ;)
The report does claim that. It cites the government agencies whose declassified documents say they armed him in the first place. They lied about that for a long time. They were caught repeatedly lying, esp on torture or surveillance effectiveness, during that administration. Using CIA's own intelligence framework, their source integrity rating would be very, very low even if I trusted 9/11 Commission to faithfully do their part. I mean, think about it, do we really trust CIA and DOD to give us evidence that they're guilty of negligence with direct access to source materials by 9/11 Commission? Or should we reject those parts as tainted? The latter is standard in every criminal investigation in U.S. outside of cases involving "national security."
In any case, the other thing the report said was that Arab-Americans working for CIA posed as Saudi's to trick AQ operatives into cooperating. Turned out, they thought they were saved by their Saudi friends and gave all kinds of unlisted numbers to royalty, etc. The revelation that funding and connected personnel came from the Saudi's means we should've torn up Saudi Arabia looking for them if our goal was stopping/punishing terrorists. Instead, Afghanistan and... Iraq...? While giving arms and military training to the Saudis through private military companies? And sharing terrorist intelligence with them when they just funded 9/11? What... the... hell...?
Now, fast forward to today, the Obama Administration is still protecting the pages showing level of Saudi involvement. The Saudi's still don't want their info or people in a courtroom. You indicate OBL and Afghanistan are all we gotta worry about whereas the 9/11 report on Saudi involvement, that classified doc, and U.S. government working their ass off to protect Saudi's that funded 9/11 seems to suggest very opposite of your or official claims.
That is, if OBL did it at all, he was just a tool for a large, Saudi organization connected to their financial and political elites that murdered 3,000 Americans. That connection is in official report, but downplayed. And U.S. government, for whatever reason, is doing everything they can to cover that up and keep justice from happening. If that's not evidence of supporting terrorism or negligence re 9/11 then I don't know what is.
Note: We've been able to show complicity or U.S. support of terrorism without resorting to anything beyond their own official report and actions. No conspiracy sites, no thermite, nothing. Just their own claims and hard work to protect Saudi crooks.
Usually good. Fun part, though, is that doing ad hominem fairly would find all the times the FBI, DOD, CIA, NSA, and so on mislead the public or courts. Then, their credibility would be at zero just like some conspiracy nuts. Then, moderates like myself would win by default given we're the only ones presenting, but not forging, evidence. So, I tell them to bring the character assessments on but apply them fairly and equally.
Evidence was elsewhere. You know where to find it. You had already dismissed the whole topic with an ad hominem with plenty assumptions and no references whatsoever. If anything, I acted above your standard of discussion. I've replied in another comment with more details focusing on just one angle from government docs and activity only.
