I'MMA LET YOU FINISH
"How likely is it, that the Bush administration has held back anything that makes the Clinton administration look bad?"
Fairly likely, I'd say. Not to protect Clinton or his advisors, but because it sets a standard that allows them to not reveal embarassing things about their own activities prior to 9/11.
For instance, when Bush issued an executive order that kept classified the documents of the Reagan and Bush I administrations, he also kept the Clinton papers classified.
Whether they did it out of ideals (e.g. "we believe that information is privileged, no matter the administration") or for political points ("see? We kept the Clinton papers classified TOO!") is up for debate.
The Saudis and their friends in the oil business have been the 500-lb. gorilla in the room all along. Somehow everyone else is more important than they are -- Iraq, Iran, Colombia, Korea, you name it.
Yet from the beginning we have known that the 9/11 attack was led, manned, and financed by Saudis and Gulf Arabs, and that al Qaeda had support from people high up on the Saudi totem pole.
But we can't afford to offend an important ally. They've been a reliable ally too, and have only attacked NYC a couple of times. Some comedian should get to work on that one.
We don't actually need the Saudis for anything at all. They depend on us militarily, and most of the oil-industry work is done by foreigners.
The Saudis are being protected by their American friends, who have good reasons to do so.
This was the top story in our paper on Friday. Big headline: What did Bush know pre 9-11?
First paragraph:
Washington - President Bush was warned in a more specific way than previously known about intelligence indicating that al-Qaida terrorists were seeking to attack the United States, a report on the Sept.11 attacks said Thursday.
Actually Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon offer vast amounts of information as to how engaged Clinton was. Read "The Age of Sacred Terror" -- the Authors were Clinton's NSC directors on Counterterrorism, and while the Bush Administration refused to declassify some materials they wanted to use, they do a pretty good job of it, working off the better parts of public reporting, and commenting on it, topic by topic.
They include many examples of Clinton inviting experts, authors of books for 4 hour dinners, both in the White House and on vacation. In the last three years he attended many NSC organized meetings on various aspects of the problem.
Clinton's great fault was to not fire Louis Freeh, who supported the Saudi refusal to cooperate sufficiently in the investigation of the bombing of Khobar Towers and participate fully in investigation of E African embassy bombings. For whatever reason, Freeh was totally in bed with the Saudi's, and the Monica Mess had weakend Clinton's ability to throw him out -- which he should have long done. It is interesting he was one of Condi's first "take down's" in the Bush Administration. Most of the deliquency investigating pre-911 matters can be laid to Freeh's refusals during his FBI tenure. Simon and Benjamin lay out many of the details. I believe it is now in Paperback.
Broken record alert. I simply cannot understand the media's negligence and failure to hold the Busheviki accountable. They are live and work in and around terrorist targets. It is not simply possible, but downright likely that they would die if there were another terrorist attack.
So why don't they cover this story as if their lives depended on it???????
I'm beginning to see an extensive pattern now forming.
Before, during, and after the events of Sept 11th, 2001, this government, and even the previous administrations, covered heavily for the Saudis.
These people were getting away with so much it was incredible that anyone, even conservatives, could tolerate it.
But now the PNAC strategy becomes clear.
Now that we have control over enough oil to keep the country going, they're now free to start putting the pressure on the Saudis without fear of retaliation. In fact, I wouldn't be suprised if this administration isn't daring the Saudis in private to try something.
But recently we've begun seeing accusations being made in public, officials are making snide backroom comments in the frontroom view of reporters, and now this report comes out with *just enough* smack to fan the flames and make people look in their direction.
PNAC's website talked about taking down Saddam to remove a source of rebel pride to the militant muslims, and to eliminate a man they were upset over having outlasted Bush41. They talked about also removing Saddam so they could deploy there and remove their forces from Saudi Arabia which was one of Bin Laden's manifesto tenets why he is attacking Americans.
They admitted openly about taking almost all of the troops out of Arabia almost the day after the war was considered complete(but before Bush's cockrun).
They also know that a great deal of middle east tension is done with Saudi approval. Their offering of financial support to Palestinian suicide bomber's families added to instability and probably incited many to do it just for the money.
By now moving some of the pressure onto Saudi Arabia, but not in as much a manner as they are publicly doing to Iran or Syria, they are getting things done the way they wanted.
I can imagine the reason so many people put up with it for so long is because they knew that once the Iraq was was over all Bush eyes would turn to Saudi, but not in a manner that would be public. They want this coup to go on in the background. Attacking the home of islam would be 100% suicide as no muslims in the world would tolerate it.
It all gets clearer and clearer.
Or perhaps they're all just evil?
MYOB'
.
Excuse me but, if influential members of the Saudi government gave aid and material support to the people who attacked this country, in what sense is Saudi Arabia our ally?
The Bush administration wouldn't implicate the Clinton administration IF they both were tied financially to the same Saudi-affiliated patrons.
The reason Gore sold out and had a Republiclone vice president candidate- Leiberman- and lost the election- is that the Democratic mainline was (and may be still) corrupted by the same corporate energy interests that own the Republicans.
The Saudis have been sucked into this by individuals in their government. I think that like the Christian fundamentalists, the prejudices of Islamic fundamentalists are being manipulated to stoke a war that profit a few wealthy corporations. The Saudis also feel that they have a finite period of time before their own wealth is bled out by the West.
Development of alternate energy sources- like methane production from microrganisms on an industrial scale- won't happen until the oil guys have made as much money as can be made from drilling every last drop... and fighting wars for it, too.
They will bet back to business as usual -- the Kobe Bryant story and the murder of the athlete. And the latest peccadilloes of Hollywood and Rock figures.
MYOB (ult. mo.) - the scenario you just laid out is almost word for word what I've been told by a very conservative friend of mine.
Attacking the home of islam would be 100% suicide as no muslims in the world would tolerate it.
Gee, you think bin Missing and AQ would be upset if we took down the House of Saud? PNAC gets scarier by the minute.
NTodd - they are some of the scariest ever.
bin missing, 
Gee, you think bin Missing and AQ would be upset if we took down the House of Saud?
Who has the potential to cause more trouble "in the background"? The Bushies or the House of Saud?
"Gee, you think bin Missing and AQ would be upset if we took down the House of Saud?"
Not if AQ got the country afterward.
Warren Commission.
I'm surprised the survivors of those killed in the 9-11 attacks are not more involved in raising hell about the incomplete report. They would have the understanding and the sympathy of the country and could really pressure the politicians if they had an assertive spokesperson to loudly express their concerns. Who better to demand the truth?
There is something very troubling to about this passage from the 9/11 report:
"2. Finding: During the spring and summer of 2001, the Intelligence Community experienced a significant increase in information indicating that Bin Ladin and al-Qa’ida intended to strike against U.S. interests in the very near future.
Discussion: The National Security Agency (NSA), for example, reported at least 33 communications indicating a possible, imminent terrorist attack in 2001. Senior U.S. Government officials were advised by the Intelligence Community on June 28 and July
10, 2001, that the attacks were expected, among other things, to “have dramatic consequences on governments or cause major casualties” and that “[a]ttack preparations have been made. Attack will occur with little or no warning.”
TOP SECRET 7
TOP SECRET
Some Community personnel described the increase in threat reporting as
unprecedented, at least in their own experience. The Intelligence Community advised senior policymakers of the likelihood of an attack but, given the non-specific nature of the reporting, could not identify when, where, and how an attack would take place.
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, in his testimony, described his recollection of the threat and the U.S. Government’s response:
We issued between January and September nine warnings, five of them
global, because of the threat information we were receiving from the
intelligence agencies in the summer, when [DCI] George Tenet was
around town literally pounding on desks saying, something is happening,
this is an unprecedented level of threat information. He didn’t know where it was going to happen, but he knew that it was coming."
I'd like to know whose desks was Tenet pounding on?
Paul, well in August, you can be sure it wasn't Dubya's - he was back at the ranch.
The Saudi government is not a monolithic bloc.
It is an agglomeration of royal families (that's what polygamy does for you -- 20,000+ members of the elite) -- in 1975 King Faisal was even killed by a family member.
Saudi Arabia is a top-heavy decrepit ship of state running on borrowed time and borrowed money.
The back-to-basics call of radical islam is very attractive to many people in the country.
Troy - so would Bush's decision to pull out of SA be a sneaky way of encouraging the toppling of the Sauds?
On September 14, 2001 the following appeared on the ABC New website:
"In Washington, CIA Director George Tenet and David Boren, former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, were having breakfast at the St. Regis Hotel three blocks from the White House.
"Out of the corner of my eye, I could see several people converging on our table," Boren said. "One of them said to George Tenet, 'Mr. Director, the World Trade tower has just been attacked by an airplane.' I was struck by the fact he used the word 'attacked.'"
An aide handed a cell phone to Tenet.
"After he … handed the cell phone back to his security person," Boren recalled, "he said to me, 'You know, this has bin Laden's fingerprints all over it.'"
Bush was specifically warned on August 6 while on vacation at the "ranch."
He thanked the agents briefing him and then asked the maid to bring him another pitcher of her "special" lemonade...
I think the meme here is "Bush goes on vacation, people die."
one CIA memo that concluded there was "incontrovertible evidence" that Saudi individuals provided financial assistance to al Qaeda operatives in the United States.
So then we then we went to war with Iraq who had nothing to do with 9/11 and took over their oilfield business so they didn't have too worry about that right.
Also please notice people that the Saudis have been rejecting a lot of Western oil companies of late(particular American businesses) and the link that Calpundit provides today where Former CIA director James Woolsey in The Guardian mentions "special scrutiny of Wahhabi-backed charities" and places "such as one in Saudi Arabia" - and he is good friend of board member to same defense advisor board as Perle who has blackmailed Saudi family members. AND let us not forget that Paul Wolfowitz recently said about it being a mutual agreement that the US leave Saudi Arabia but the US was told to leave, period so we didn't have a choice.
I really don't want to go to war with the Saudia's now that Iraq is such a mess. Bush has worn out his appeal of any good will.
This why I wish Al Gore had won because we SHOULD BE moving away from oil controlled energy dependence and not more into as Bush has directed the US to become.
I hate those 5 Supreme Court Jusitces because they really are responsible for all the people that have DIED because they choose to give a couple of negligent oil kingpin criminals the US presidency.
The kooks were hoping Clinton would fire Freeh. That was gonna be a reason for impeachment.
Also
The current admin. had an order out in mid 2001 the no high ranking admin. officials were to fly comical airplanes.
Tom White Sec. of the Army used that as his excuse for using military planes while he was house hunting.
White testified to that in a hearing. I don't know who held the hearing but it is on record somewhere.
I have looked everywhere I could think of. If anybody has a link please post it.
Ashcroft Flying High
WASHINGTON, July 26, 2001
(CBS) Fishing rod in hand, Attorney General John Ashcroft left on a weekend trip to Missouri Thursday afternoon aboard a chartered government jet, reports CBS News Correspondent Jim Stewart.
In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/
2...ain303601.shtml
comical = commercial
I was putting my hat on while I was type that.
If any can help please post a link to the White testimony.
Coup in the Phillipines.
Is that slipping under the radar?
" This why I wish Al Gore had won because we SHOULD BE moving away from oil controlled energy dependence and not more into as Bush has directed the US to become."
What world do you live on? Not only the automobile manufactures and oil/energy companies want gas powered autos, but the automobile unions.
Did fuel effeciency rise under Clinton? Hell, if there weren't an oil embargo fuel effiency would have never risen.
hadenough - question - how would firing Louis Freeh be grounds for impeachment?
Not arguing, just asking -
THANK GOD FOR MILLION George Soros
This from Body and Soul
Saturday, July 26, 2003
George Soros has been reading Billmon. He will be running full page ads in the New York Times the St. Louis Dispatch, and the Houston Chronicle tomorrow with a list of a dozen Bush administration lies about the war. You can download a copy of the ad -- headlined WHEN THE NATION GOES TO WAR, THE PEOPLE DESERVE THE TRUTH -- here.
UPDATE: Oh, Jeez, I was kidding about Billmon, but check out the fine print.
posted by jeanne | 1:48 PM
Got to the link above to check out the ad that says "WHEN THE NATION GOES TO WAR, THE PEOPLE DESERVE THE TRUTH -- ." Amen Mr. Soros.
Tena,
Freeh was after Clinton. He was digging any dirt he could on Clinton. That was the focus of the FBI for several years, also the secret service. If Clinton fired Freeh it would have been like Clinton firing Ken starr.
hadenough - thanks. I see what you were saying.
Cheryl, Thanks for the link. It's great stuff. It's a shame someone has to pay the NY Times to publish the trush, but at least there's someone's willing to do that.
The New York office of the FBI was all over Bin laden. Freeh did everything he could to stop them from connecting the dots.
Why is Freeh still walking around, free?
There is a link to an hour and a half video that will make you think.
The man who knew
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/fr...ine/shows/knew/
Go check Billmon out folks.
Whiskey Bar
He is hanging out with millioniar now--sort of he is.
I second Sara’s recommendation of The Age of Sacred Terror. Alas, it is not yet out in paperback, I didn’t even see a date for pback release on Amazon. Hopefully soon.
Robert Baer's new book, Sleeping With the Devil, on our relationship with SA, should be interesting.
hadenough, might want to ask a reference librarian for help in finding transcripts concerning White’s testimony to Congress. That’s what reference librarians are for, support them!
Paul, YOU MEAN 9/11 DID NOT HAVE SADAAM'S FINGERPRINTS???
get that out there for the MWs and the sheeple.
Hey 56K,
My guess is the media is getting paid too much to ignore it (I know it's fairly obvious but still...)
Or MAYBE they REALLY are scared that if any of them step out of line and dig up dirt on Bush and 9/11 they'll be in the unemployment line (or maybe something worse...)
OR lastly they are SO insulated from everything (due to the money they're making from being negligent) that they TRULY believe that the terrorists will never come back and harm them again.
Anyway you look it certainly doesn't make the US mainstream media look any better onow does it? Chris
-------------------------------------Broken record alert. I simply cannot understand the media's negligence and failure to hold the Busheviki accountable. They are live and work in and around terrorist targets. It is not simply possible, but downright likely that they would die if there were another terrorist attack.
So why don't they cover this story as if their lives depended on it???????
56k | 07.26.03 - 5:10 pm | #
Anon. in Ohio,
Thanks, I'll try that.
So why don't they cover this story as if their lives depended on it???????
56k | 07.26.03 - 5:10 pm | #
The ironic thing is that their lives probably do depend on it. Most of them live either in the D.C. or N.Y.C. metro areas, and work downtown...
9/11 is history now, and the press does not do history very well. If there is a clear culprit, they will go after him/her-- but the media just aren't going to try to sell news on the current 9/11story that is very complicated. If the Saudi story line holds up, I'm sure that will get some play. But bureaucratric communications, which is much of what the 9/11 report talks about is essentially boring.
What I want to know is why the fighter jets weren't on high alert on 9/11? Thjjere were plenty of warnings about highjackings yet it took over 45 minutes to scramble jets on 9/11. The 9/11 commission couldn't get answers on this, and it is very fishy.
Actaully the Saudis benefited by 9/11-- they got Saddam removed, who was a threat to them, they got US soldiers off their soil. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some deal between Bushco and the Saudis regarding 9/11.
"Maybe we should thank the Democrats for shedding their moderate clothing to reveal their true Swinging-Seventies selves."
http://www.majorityleader.gov/news.asp?
FormMode=Detail&ID=127
Greetings from Glorious Majority Leader!!!!!
in what sense is Saudi Arabia our ally?
Black gold.
Texas tea.
Oil, that is.
As far as the "Sunday gasbags" go, Russert, after rubber-hosing Wolfowitz, had the four chairmen on for an extended interview. Goss is a schmiel, but I find Richard Shelby somewhat refreshing in his dogged determination to get the truth out. So it is encouraging.
pie,
Bob Graham referred to bin Laden on "Real Time with Bill Maher" last night as "Osama bin Forgotten"...
I've lately been mulling over the irony of airplanes being used by Osama bin Laden in an attack against the US as juxtaposed against the history of two members of his family (father, Mohammed and brother, Salem) dying in plane crashes in Texas...
"Amen Mr. Soros." When I see ads like that placed by the Cullmans and Soros in the Times today, I wonder whether the soft money ban was such a good idea, after all. But maybe this is a way to get partially around it.
Characters Remaining:
Commenting by HaloScan
