1
   

9/11 - The Presidential Cover-up Continues!

 
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2003 03:27 pm
http://i.cnn.net/cnn/ALLPOLITICS/analysis/toons/2003/07/13/luckovich/luckovich.jpg


George Tenet will be replacing one of the elephants. Guess which one.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2003 03:37 pm
Now I see Dubya on TV mumbling his way through asserting how he doesn't care for revisionist history. Yes, if it's not in his and his political follower's favor, he doesn't like it. If it is, he embraces it.
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Sun 13 Jul, 2003 04:46 pm
There is only Republican history. Anything else is apostasy. Facts are only important if they bear out Republican Truth. Lying for the sake of Republican Truth is not a lie. People just don't understand this. Well, that's their problem.
0 Replies
 
wolf
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Aug, 2003 06:33 pm
C. Rice advised SF mayor not to fly prior 9/11
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Aug, 2003 09:19 pm
Wolf -- That stuff (and Ashcroft's warnings in July) has been around for a while and the real issue is why Questions Haven't Been Asked (or have they) in Congress? Not to mention mainstream press?
0 Replies
 
wolf
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Aug, 2003 09:24 pm
I think more out of embarassment than out of complicity. This is all so shameful, so low.
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 Aug, 2003 10:08 pm
I don't read the Washington Post regularly (the Times is my paper) but it's getting lots of kudos these days for pursuing the administration... after a year or two of standing back with everyone else. Perhaps it will begin to ask the remaining questions about who knew what when.
0 Replies
 
wolf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 Aug, 2003 02:22 pm
Yes, fear is shifting towards defiance. The Guardian has helped in this tremendously and continues to be on the cutting edge of investigative journalism, by no one less than Naomi Klein: Stark message of the mutiny

Quote:
the soldiers were not the first to accuse the Philippine government of bombing its own people. Days before the mutiny, a coalition of church groups, lawyers and NGOs launched a "fact-finding mission" to investigate persistent rumours that the state was involved in the Davao explosions. It is also investigating the possible involvement of US intelligence agencies.

These suspicions stem from a bizarre incident on May 16 2002, in Davao. Michael Meiring, a US citizen, allegedly detonated explosives in his hotel room, injuring himself badly. While recovering in hospital, Meiring was whisked away by two men - who witnesses say identified themselves as FBI agents - and flown to the US. Local officials have demanded that Meiring return to face charges, to little effect. BusinessWorld, a leading Philippine newspaper, has published articles openly accusing Meiring of being a CIA agent involved in covert operations "to justify the stationing of American troops and bases in Mindanao".

0 Replies
 
wolf
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2003 01:33 am
I guess that does it: they allowed it to happen. Ergo: they should go to jail. And the men behind Dubya deserve the death penalty.

Quote:
Germany told US intelligence about one of the September 11 hijackers two and a half years before the suicide plane attacks, but the crucial information was not passed on, German media reported August 13, 2003.


http://www.prolog.net/webnews/wed/cp/Qus-attacks-germany-warn.Rj0U_DaD.html
0 Replies
 
wolf
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2003 04:45 am
More courageous FBI leaks

Quote:
The United States let in one of the future September 11 hijackers in mid-2000 for flight lessons despite suspicions of his links to al-Qaeda, a German magazine reported Wednesday.

The weekly Stern news magazine, citing from a confidential FBI report, said that Ziad Jarrah was questioned for four hours during a January 2000 stopover in the United Arab Emirates.
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2003 09:41 pm
Wolf: Do you by any chance have a list of those who were flown OUT by US gov planes (and private planes) on 9/11, 9/12?
0 Replies
 
mamajuana
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2003 10:48 pm
They flew out a number of the binLadens. That was in the Times, but I don't know where else.
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 21 Aug, 2003 11:20 pm
Re: The bin Ladens.

What should we have done? Allowed them to be killed by crazy mobs? Arrested them? What would you have done?

It was pretty scary for your average Middle Easterner after 911. Imagine what would have happened to Bin Ladens... And, of course, Bush would have been blamed.
0 Replies
 
wolf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Aug, 2003 04:35 am
They should have been incarcerated and investigated instead of those hundreds and hundreds of muslims who were captured on little grounds but racism.

Now that I'm here, the Kampf on the coast of Cuba can now adeqately be called a nazi-camp. The Bush administration now says it doesn't even know all the names of who is there.

This hurts.
0 Replies
 
wolf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Aug, 2003 04:40 am
Tartarin, remember this?

Quote:
Complicity by the Bush administration in the attacks of 9/11 is no longer in doubt: the secret Saudi flight on 9/13 could be the key to the Bush-Saudi-Al Qaeda connection

About a month after the September 11th attacks, I read an article in the Tampa Tribune by Kathy Steele entitled "Phantom Flight From Florida." The intriguing report told the tale of a flight out of Florida that allegedly took place on September 13 - a day when ALL civilian air traffic in the United States was grounded.

"This was out of a Tom Clancy movie," according to a retired homicide detective who was hired for the flight. Its mission was to spirit the son of a Saudi prince, the son of a Saudi army commander, and another unidentified Saudi from Florida to Kentucky, because "there was a perceived threat, and the family of the person wanted him home right away."

The "person" in danger was the son of Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz, who is no minor figure in the Saudi Royal family. Rather, Prince Sultan is the kingdom's minister of defense, the third-ranking position in the Saudi Government, whose powers exceed those of even America's super-powerful Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

Dan Grossi and Manuel Perez were the two Floridians who were hired to serve as private bodyguards on the flight.

According to the article in the Tampa Tribune, Dan Grossi is a retired Tampa cop who worked in internal affairs and homicide. Perez is a retired FBI man whose experience was in counter-terrorism and bomb-making. Perez now runs a detective agency and the two men provided security for the National Football League at Raymond James Stadium in September of 2001.

The article reported that shortly after the September 11 attack, Lexington police Lt. Mark Barnard received a request from a prominent Saudi Kingdom official for the protection of three young Saudi men in Florida, at least one of whom - Prince Sultan's son - had been studying English at the University of Tampa for three weeks. (Tampa police records listed Sultan Bin Fahad as the individual who specifically requested protection for the three men. That is probably Prince Sultan Bin Fahad, head of the Saudi General Presidency of Youth Welfare. In family-run Saudi Arabia, there is apparently a whole Ministry devoted to keeping Royal youth out of trouble - something the Bush family elders no doubt dream of copying.)

Apparently Barnard then contacted the Tampa police department and two "off-duty" Tampa intelligence detectives were assigned to watch the three Saudis for their protection. At around 11:00 AM on September 13, Dan Grossi received a phone call from the Tampa police detectives who needed help with a problem: escorting the Saudi men they were protecting on a flight to Kentucky.

Grossi and Perez evidently felt they were up to the task, and at 2:30 PM Grossi was contacted by the Tampa Police Department with specific instructions. And by 4:35 PM a plane carrying Grossi, Perez, Prince Sultan's son, the son of an unidentified Saudi military commander, and third unidentified Saudi, was in the air and en route to Kentucky. The private Lear jet flew from Ft. Lauderdale to Tampa, where it parked at Raytheon Airport Services, which owns a private hangar on the outskirts of the Tampa International airport.

(Tampa, of course, is home to General Tommy Franks and the Pentagon's Central Command (CentCom), which now rules Afghanistan and Iraq directly, and indirectly rules the entire oil-rich Middle East and Central Asia through its growing network of Halliburton-supplied military bases. Raytheon, of course, is the massive arms manufacturer that supplied many of the high-tech weapons used in Afghanistan and Iraq. Tampa is also near Venice FL, where Mad Cow Morning News has exposed numerous secrets about the training of 9-11 pilots Mohamed Atta and Marwan Al-Shehhi at shadowy local flight schools. And Tampa is in Florida, where Gov. Jeb Bush stole the 2000 election for his brother George, and where Jeb issued Executive Order 2001-261 to prepare the FL National Guard for a terrorist attack on 9-7-01.)

Their destination, according to the two bodyguards, was the Blue Grass Airport in Lexington, Kentucky, where the three Saudis were to link up with relatives who were in Kentucky to purchase race horses.

Grossi and Perez further stated that upon landing they saw several 747's parked on the tarmac with Arabic writing. The article suggests that at least one of these 747's flew back to Saudi Arabia with the boys, although their Floridian chaperones appear to have left the airport before that occurred. If true, the flight of these 747's would validate at least part of the Michael Moore story about powerful Saudis being allowed to fly out of the U.S. on the second day of the prohibition of all civilian flights.

Perez stated that he was unaware of who their charges were until they landed. Both men told of what a strange feeling it was to fly in an almost empty sky, and Perez recalls asking the pilot, "We're not going to get shot down are we?" - a legitimate fear, given the fact that fighter jets were urgently patrolling the skies looking for any more terrorists.

Regarding the curious fact that the flight had taken place when all other air traffic was still grounded, Dan Grossi said "he was told that clearance for the flight had come from the White House after the Prince's family pulled a favor from former President Bush."

If so, this was no ordinary ex-Presidential favor. In debunking a Michael Moore-inspired Internet rumor about a secret flight of relatives of Osama Bin Laden, Snopes.com describes exactly how restricted the skies were that day:

The Federal Aviation Administration ordered all flights in the United States grounded immediately following the terrorist attacks, and that ban stayed in effect until September 13. (Even then, for that first day commercial carriers were either completing the interrupted flights of September 11 or were repositioning empty aircraft in anticipation of the resumption of full service. New passenger flights did not resume until the 14th.) During that two-day period of full lock-down, only the military and specially FAA-authorized flights that delivered life-saving medical necessities were in the air. The enforcement of the empty skies directive was so stringent that even after the United Network for Organ Sharing sought and gained FAA clearance to use charter aircraft on September 12 to effect time-critical deliveries of organs for transplant, one of its flights carrying a human heart was forced to the ground in Bellingham, Washington, 80 miles short of its Seattle destination, by two Navy F/A-18 fighters. (The organ completed its journey after being transferred to a helicopter.)
After reading the Tampa Tribune article, I distinctly remember blinking and checking the URL to see if I had accidentally clicked on a link to one of those "publications" that spots Elvis, or reports that ninety year old women have just given birth to Bigfoot's baby. But no, this was indeed the Tampa Tribune.

I remember wondering how on earth our government could have authorized a flight out of the country before they even knew who the perpetrators of the attacks were?

And further, why did the families of the young men "perceive a threat" when it wasn't yet clear on the 13th of September exactly WHO had attacked America or where they were from?

According to a transcript on the State Departments website of a statement given by a "Senior White House Official" on September 13 at 5:22 PM it had not yet been announced that Bin Laden was behind the attacks when protection was requested for the three young men.

When this "Senior White House official" was asked if Osama Bin Laden had perpetrated the attacks against the US at 5:22 PM on September 13th, to which he replied: "I think that right now what we need to do is -- as I said, again, this happened 60 hours ago. We don't want to be premature, not because we don't want to name or finger someone, but because we want to make sure that we understand all the connections, not just a connection."

Was Prince Sultan a psychic who somehow mysteriously predicted that 15 of the 19 hijackers would turn out to be Saudi nationals? Or did he perhaps know who was behind the attacks since he was funding charities linked to Al Qaeda?

Now fast forward about a year and a half and imagine my surprise last week when I read a "Newsweek web exclusive" that reported that Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz - THE VERY SAME defense minister of Saudi Arabia - is being sued on the behalf of the victims of 9-11 for his alleged role in the financing of groups suspected to have links to the terrorist attacks of 9-11!

"Wow," I thought, "wasn't this the SAME Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz who had the kid on the Phantom flight?"

After further checking, I discovered that - yes, my friends - they are one and the same!

According to the Newsweek article, when three attorneys from the "prestigious Houston firm" that represents Sultan bin Abdul Aziz filed a motion in court in the Prince's defense, they also inadvertently provided evidence in the form of "stacks of affidavits and canceled checks" that indicated that the Prince had personally authorized the funneling of millions of dollars on the behalf of Saudi Arabian government to organizations that the US has identified and raided as terrorist front operations sympathetic to Osama Bin Laden.

But it gets worse...

The name of the "prestigious Houston Law firm" that is representing this suspected supporter of terrorism?

Why that would be none other than Baker Botts of Houston - as in JAMES Baker, as in THE James Baker: George Herbert Walker Bush's former Secretary of State and George W. Bush's counsel during the 2000 election recounts (you know, "Mr. the votes have been counted and recounted and counted again and even though we still lost we're taking the crown"?)

It seems that in spite of the fact that Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz and his government have been accused of funding charities linked to Al Qaeda, James Baker's firm still feels the need to defend the Prince against those "evil" trial lawyers representing the orphaned families of the 9-11 victims.

Bush devotees would probably claim that this is not a conflict of interest, that all powerful mover and shaker types in the private sector cross paths with "our friends" the Saudis - but what is little known is the fact that James Baker is not actually, wholly, in the private sector, since Mr. Baker is also serving as Counsel for Intelligence Policy to the Justice Department's Office for Intelligence Policy and Review (OIPR).

For those who are not familiar with OIPR, I am going to copy and paste right from the horse's mouth:


The Office of Intelligence Policy and Review, under the direction of the Counsel for Intelligence Policy, is responsible for advising the Attorney General on all matters relating to the national security activities of the United States. The Office prepares and files all applications for electronic surveillance and physical search under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, assists Government agencies by providing legal advice on matters of national security law and policy, and represents the Department of Justice on variety of interagency committees such as the National Counterintelligence Policy Board. The Office also comments on and coordinates other agencies' views regarding proposed legislation affecting intelligence matters.
The Office serves as adviser to the Attorney General and various client agencies, including the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the Defense and State Departments, concerning questions of law, regulation, and guidelines as well as the legality of domestic and overseas intelligence operations.

So Baker Botts, a law firm whose senior partner advises the nation on all matters of national security as well as a host of other spooky activities, is defending an individual and a kingdom that have been accused of being complicit in the funding of the attacks of the September 11th against the United States.
But perhaps what is just as shocking to me is the allegation that the son of this SAME Prince Sultan bin Abdul Aziz was reportedly flown out of the United States when all other planes were grounded following the special orders of Bush's own father!

Moreover, the entire 9-13 mission of the Lear jet is shrouded in mystery. That mission began in Ft. Lauderdale, stopped in Tampa and Lexington, and returned to Tampa to bring Grossi and Perez home. But then the jet flew to New Orleans "to pick up someone who needed a ride to New York." So this plane made AT LEAST 5 flights on 9-13, but the FAA told the Tampa Tribune, "it's not in our logs... it didn't occur." The White House, the State Department, and the National Security Council all refused to answer the Tribune's questions.

Now the Bush administration is refusing to make public an 800-page Congressional report on the attacks of 9-11. In fact, this administration is so hell-bent on keeping the report from the public that they are even "re-classifying" information that was already a part of the public record!

According to a new Newsweek bombshell by Michael Isikoff,


Among the portions of the report the administration refuses to declassify, sources say, are chapters dealing with two politically and diplomatically sensitive issues: the details of daily intelligence briefings given to Bush in the summer of 2001 and evidence pointing to Saudi government ties to Al Qaeda. Bush officials have taken such a hard line, sources say, that they are refusing to permit the release of matters already in the public domain -- including the existence of intelligence documents referred to on the CIA Web site.
As average citizens struggle to carry on their daily business and keep their blood pressure in check in the midst of a new "orange alert," Mr. Bush & Co. are still busy protecting their buddies in Saudi Arabia and lying to the American public.

Why can't we know the truth about who our enemies are, Mr. Bush?

One has to wonder when George W. said, "You're either with us or against us" - just exactly who he meant by "us." "Us" is beginning to look like a Bush-Saudi-Al Qaeda conspiracy, especially when one includes the well-known business ties between George H. W. Bush, James Baker, and the Bin Laden family through the infamous Carlyle Group.

In a scandal this potentially huge - one implicating the President's close family and family lawyer - shouldn't a Special Prosecutor be appointed? If the President was Bill Clinton, the family member was Hillary Clinton, and the family lawyer was Webster Hubbell, the media - not to mention the Republican Party - would be demanding a Special Prosecutor at the top of their lungs 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Even though the post-Watergate Special Prosecutor law was repealed after Ken Starr's legal lynching of President Clinton, pre-Watergate-style Special Prosecutors can still be appointed by the Attorney General.

But the Attorney General's lawyer on such sensitive matters is none other than James Baker. And with the media entirely "in-bed with" the Bush organized crime family, the term "Special Prosecutor" has been scrubbed from the media lexicon - and with it, the last hope for fighting corruption and deadly conspiracy at the very top of our government.



By Catherine Arnie
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Aug, 2003 10:17 am
One question remains unanswered
One question remains unanswered: Why did the Saudi's and bin Laden family members wait until after 9/11 to leave the U.S.? If they knew the attack was to take place, it seems reasonable that they would have left the U.S. long before it occurred.

Just wondering-----BumbleBeeBoogie
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Aug, 2003 10:41 am
BBB, It might be that their movement before 9-11 would have been a tip-off to our "intelligence." I realized that my first sentence is a oxymoron as soon as I finished typing it. Wink
0 Replies
 
wolf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Aug, 2003 11:21 am
I believe they knew it was going to happen, but not exactly when. Operations like this are very compartmentalized. The surprise had to be somewhat genuine.
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Aug, 2003 02:15 pm
I do remember that, Wolf -- am I right in remembering that Arnie is/was in Ruppert's stable? Another question remains (for me, anyway) about the activity on the futures market on and around 9/11.

And in my view, the ongoing attempts to prevent deep investigation of the matter in Congress and elsewhere is as condemnatory as anything we have.
0 Replies
 
Cephus
 
  1  
Reply Fri 22 Aug, 2003 02:27 pm
wolf wrote:
I believe they knew it was going to happen, but not exactly when. Operations like this are very compartmentalized. The surprise had to be somewhat genuine.


Bush certainly knew something was going to happen. After all, he spelled out his response to terrorism on September 10, the day *BEFORE* the attacks.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if he and bin Laden were in bed on this the whole time. It's amazing how fast Bush went from "getting bin Laden is job #1" to "bin Laden who?"

About the only terrorist out there right now is in the Oval Office.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/19/2024 at 11:43:41