Saudis, White House, 9/11 - what's up?

[13788]

Longhornjok: Here's an interesting piece of information that's only now coming to light. Apparently, 140 Saudis, including 2 dozen members of Osama bin Laden's own family, were allowed to fly out of the U.S. right after 9/11, even as the FAA grounded all other private aircraft, and had only just started allowing a few commercial flights to resume. The really shocking part is that none of those leaving were questioned at all by the FBI prior to their departure, even though 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi citizens. The White House so far has refused to comment on the story.

washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20030902-094941-3712r.htm

(the full story is in this month's VANITY FAIR, with George Clooney on the cover)

 

[13788]

aj2181: Sounds like just another example of our fine President doing his job

 

[Pecker]

I would take anything written about the present administration by Vanity Fair with a huge grain of salt.

It is among the most anti-Bush publications in America today and is not past outright lying to prove their point (quotes out of context, 'anonymous administration sources').

VF - another example of preaching to the choir.

Pecker

(Out of my mind. Back in 5 minutes.)

 

[13788]

Longhornjok: Well, this source isn't anonymous. It's Richard Clarke, former Bush White House counter-terrorism expert. The link is also to the Washington Times (not the Post), which is generally thought of as GOP-friendly, or neutral at worst. I'm happy to hear the Adminstration's pov on the story, but they have yet to share it.

 

[13788]

hawl: The Washington Times is usually thought of as aggressively Republican, "Reagan's favorite paper" etc., by those who don't think of it as just plain aggressively weird and suspicious.  Like most Americans, I don't know that much about it, but it probably deserves its own thread. It is owned by the Rev. Moon (who has done jail time for tax fraud) and his Unification Church (yes, the "Moonies") who apparently have drawn recent flak for cozy financial relations with North Korea (the Rev.'s citizenship is South Korean, however). The Bush posse has managed to antagonize the military, the CIA, fiscal conservatives, non-interventionists, etc. so where criticism of them pops up is getting increasingly unpredictable. Remember, a majority of Americans opposed his presidential bid in the first place. He and his minions have always just been a loud, well-organized activist minority, like their friends the fundamentalist (Christian, that is, not Muslim!) right. www.consortiumnews.com/archive/moon.html

 

[Ralexx]

Just deleted. Never mind...

 

[jonb]

[quote author=Pecker link=board=99;num=1063770595;start=0#2 date=09/16/03 at 21:12:39]I would take anything written about the present administration by Vanity Fair with a huge grain of salt.

It is among the most anti-Bush publications in America today and is not past outright lying to prove their point (quotes out of context, 'anonymous administration sources').

VF - another example of preaching to the choir.

Pecker

(Out of my mind.  Back in 5 minutes.)

[/quote]
I heard about it on September 13, 2001 on none other than C-SPAN. It's no big secret. What irks me is, what about the poorer Muslims? What about the rest of us with brown skin, who got more than a few anti-Islamic remarks directed at us, despite having never been in a mosque in our lives?

You want to know the media's bias? The media's bias is to scare you. Hence the big Y2K hubbub of the late 90s (which was only a DOS/Windows problem to begin with). Hence the Africanized bees (crypto-racism) set to invade the Southwest that never did. Hence the anthrax resulting in four deaths, less than the common cold in that same time. Hence the blades in Halloween candy that never existed. Hence ritual satanic abuse, which survivors never remember. Hence snake, shark, and wolf scares. Hence escalators mangling shoppers. Hence subliminal messages. (All I have to say is that youre baseically on your own. Are you afraid that the technology might belong to us?)

 

[13788]

Longhornjok: Well, if it was announced on C-SPAN 2 years ago, it seems odd that the White House is refusing to comment on it. It's also odd that it's appearing in newspapers around the country now, but maybe that's because of the VF piece.

I don't have anything against Muslims, jonb, and I agree that it's awful that some people have been singled out for harassment simply because of their ethnic/religious affiliation. All of those who departed may have no knowledge whatsoever about the attacks or the hijackers or groups funding them, but if my grandmother has to take her shoes off before boarding a plane because we will "leave no stone unturned" in our war against terrorism, it seems not only absurd to me, but potentially a dereliction of duty, that family members of the guy who plotted the whole thing weren't questioned by our government before we helped them flee the country. If my grandmother is suspect, then so is everyone else.

 

[13788]

SpeedoGuy: I heard about it soon after 9/11/2001 as well but I didn't see it in the popular media. Rather, it came to me as rumour at the office To be honest, at the time I wrote it off as as a silly and unbelievable story....the same type of  rumour that had thousands of Jewish office workers not showing up work in the WTC towers that day.

If this story is really true then the Bush administration owes the nation an explanation.

Along these lines...

I remember a op/ed piece in a local newspaper from an official in the national flight attendants' union. Her point was that it was ridiculous to search grandmothers' shoes at security checkpoints in the passenger terminal while scores of aircraft mechanics, supply workers and baggage handlers regularly access the flight line and loading areas uninspected. Any truth to this?

SG

 

[D_Martin van Burden]

Just thought I'd plug this humorous book I found online concerning the Bush administration and, to say the least, some half-truths told over the years.

It's called [link=http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2003/09/14/RV259924.DTL]"Bushwhacked."[/link] The link's to a review (and to an Amazon purchase page, if so inclined).

 

[13788]

hawl: Longhornjok, if you're interested in stories like this, albeit linked together by an ex-cop with a wild worldview, check out Michael C. Ruppert's From The Wilderness site. It's full of links to information like this presented by reasonably "mainstream" news sources. I find the site very entertaining if nothing else, and I usually get bored pretty quickly with Middle Eastern politics, conspiracy theories, etc....
www.copvcia.com

 

[13788]

Longhornjok: rrrrrrr, ok if you promise I won't have to read about crop circles, post the link and I'll check it out.

 

[13788]

hawl: O.K. I put the link in my previous post, and having just succeeded in posting a link for the first time :'( I went and put some links in some of my older posts. The floodgates have been opened? Anyway, don't get your hopes up too much, but similar stories tend to get put in the sections on the left side of the main page, like in "The World Since September 11th". It's the most accessible or readable site of its type (whatever that is!) that I have seen, but don't let it drive you crazy. It asks interesting questions and gets the mind thinking in unusual ways, even if you don't agree with Ruppert's conclusions.

 

[jonb]

[quote author=Longhornjok link=board=99;num=1063770595;start=0#7 date=09/17/03 at 17:12:36]Well, if it was announced on C-SPAN 2 years ago, it seems odd that the White House is refusing to comment on it. It's also odd that it's appearing in newspapers around the country now, but maybe that's because of the VF piece.[/quote]
It wasn't pro-Shrub, so most of the media just ignored it. Americans, neurotic as ever, wanted blood.

I don't have anything against Muslims, jonb, and I agree that it's awful that some people have been singled out for harassment simply because of their ethnic/religious affiliation.

What irked me is, if they're worried so much about the bin Ladens, what about those who don't have a big oil company and are still at risk for harrassment? An issue of class, to say the least.

All of those who departed may have no knowledge whatsoever about the attacks or the hijackers or groups funding them, but if my grandmother has to take her shoes off before boarding a plane because we will "leave no stone unturned" in our war against terrorism, it seems not only absurd to me, but potentially a dereliction of duty, that family members of the guy who plotted the whole thing weren't questioned by our government before we helped them flee the country. If my grandmother is suspect, then so is everyone else.

I agree. Quite frankly, anyone could be a terrorist. Letting bin Laden's family leave was the stupidest thing Bush did, even if it wasn't like his normal, totally Engrish orders.

 

[13788]

longtimelurker: Correct me if I'm wrong (and I may well be! )

But I seem to recall that Bin Laden's family are all quite moderate and have disowned their more temperamental 'destroy all infidels' family member.

 

[13788]

hawl: Here's a breaking story on "what's up" from this seedy branch office of the LPSG News - www.msnbc.com/news/984616.asp and www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/10/24/attack/main579854.shtml. ???

 

[jay_too]

At least they did not fly home on Air Force One...or did they? [Is this how rumors get started?]

Thirty years or so from now, what really happened in the White House since 9-11 and why will make interesting reading as the memoirs and histories are written. Maybe there will even be a John Dean-type [see FindLaw.com] who will reconsider the impact on American democracy of the lies that were passed as truth by the Bush administration.

Of course, if the info on the links supplied by rrrrrr is correct we will realize that decisions made by the Bush people are the result of a heightened sense of reality - make that spaced out.

jay

 

[13788]

Tender: [quote author=Raal Lexx link=board=99;num=1063770595;start=0#5 date=09/17/03 at 07:31:44]Just deleted. Never mind...[/quote]


LOL!!
i feel the SaAaAme way!!

************************

To jonb---
Are you afraid that the technology might belong to us?)

no, im afraid that we will belong to the technology...

 

[13788]

Inwood: I believe it was also reported in the New York Times shortly after September 11th. The story I read also had some comments from at least one of the bin Ladens who lived in the New York area quoted something to the effect that (THIS ISN'T A DIRECT QUOTE. THIS IS FROM MY MEMORY OF THE ARTICLE I READ) "he didn't want to leave. He enjoyed his life here in America, but it was for safety reasons for his family that they left" or something to that effect. Just thought I'd throw in that piece of info.

They should have been questioned but money talks. And for my money the Saudi government was quite sure it was Saudi citizens who hijacked the planes or they wouldn't have wanted the bin Ladens out of here.

 

[13788]

balls: [quote author=jonb link=board=99;num=1063770595;start=0#13 date=09/19/03 at 15:25:40]
What irked me is, if they're worried so much about the bin Ladens, what about those who don't have a big oil company and are still at risk for harrassment? An issue of class, to say the least.[/quote]
Yup, the movers and the shakers and the big time money makers.