From: Jonathan Davis (jonathan.davis@lineone.net)
Date: Tue Dec 16 2003 - 07:41:14 MST
Hey Blunderlov,
I don't really get Moore's points.
He asks if the Bush family and Osama bin Laden's family have some links with
Bush. If they do, so what? If would be virtually impossible to avoid Saudi
money if you dealt with the non-Israeli middle east over the last 25 years.
This looks like a simple smear attempt by Moore and is as such basing his
implied arguments on a fallacy fallacious.
The central question in my opinion, is not about Bush and Bin Laden, but
about a multi-decade refusal by various American administrations to face up
to the nasty horror that is Saudi Arabia? In her new book - Modern Jihad -
Loretta Napoleoni shows how every post-war US administration has squashed
attempts to investigate the Saudis. I expect this will be a fascinating
story when it emerges.
The Bin laden on dialysis story is a feint. He planned and financed the
operation before he was sent to (probably die) in his Afghan cave. See
Operation Holy Tuesday for an in-depth look at the run up to 9/11 and
Osama's involvement:
http://www.limbicnutrition.com/blog/archives/020958.html
Regards
Jonathan
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of
Blunderov
Sent: 15 December 2003 19:34
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: RE: virus: Osama bin Laden and the Bushes (was Saddam arrested)
Dr Sebby
> Sent: 15 December 2003 0835
<snip>
> ...it will be interesting to see if he has any info on bin laden.
> politics aside...just as a curiosity
</snip>
[Blunderov]
Judging by what Michael Moore has to say, it is possible that Bush already
knows far more about Osama and the bin Laden clan than Saddam will ever be
able to tell him.
Best Regards
<q>
Dude, Where's my Country? Michael Moore, Penguin Books.
Question #1: Is it true that the bin Ladens have had business relations with
you and your family off and on for the past 25 years?
Mr. Bush, in 1977, when your father told you it was time to get a real job,
he set you up with your first oil company, something you called "Arbusto"
(Spanish for "shrub"). A year later, you received financing from a man named
James A. Bath. He was an old buddy of yours from your days (the ones when
you weren't AWOL) in the Texas Air National Guard.
He had been hired by Salem bin Laden-Osama's brother-to invest the bin
Ladens' money in various Texas ventures. Some $50,000-or 5% of control of
Arbusto-came from Mr. Bath.
Was he acting on behalf of the bin Ladens?
Most Americans might be surprised to learn that you and your father have
known the bin Ladens for a long time. What exactly is the extent of this
relationship, Mr. Bush? Are you close personal friends, or simply on-again,
off-again business associates? Salem bin Laden first started coming to Texas
in 1973 and later bought some land, built himself a house, and created Bin
Laden Aviation at the San Antonio airfield.
The bin Ladens are one of the wealthiest families in Saudi Arabia. Their
huge construction firm virtually built the country, from the roads and power
plants, to the skyscrapers and government buildings. They built some of the
airstrips America used in your dad's Gulf War, and they renovated the holy
sites at Mecca and Medina. Billionaires many times over, they soon began
investing in other ventures around the world, including in the United
States. They have extensive business dealings with Citigroup, General
Electric, Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, and the Fremont Group-a spin-off of
energy giant Bechtel. According to The New Yorker, the bin Laden family also
owns a part of Microsoft and the airline and defense giant Boeing. They have
donated $2 million to your alma mater, Harvard University, $300,000 more to
Tufts University, and tens of thousands more to the Middle East Policy
Counc1l, a think tank headed by a former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia,
Charles Freeman. In addition to the property they own in Texas, they also
have real estate in Florida and Massachusetts. In short, they have their
hands deep in our pants.
Unfortunately, as you know, Mr. Bush, Salem bin Laden died in a plane crash
in Texas in 1988 (his father, Mohammad, also died in a plane crash in 1967).
Salem's brothers-there are around 50 of them, including Osama-continued to
run the family companies and investments.
After leaving office, your father became a highly paid consultant for a
company known as the Carlyle Group. One of the investors in the Carlyle
Group was none other than the bin Laden family. The bin Ladens put a minimum
of $2 million into the Carlyle Group.
Until 1994, you headed a company called CaterAir, which was owned by the
Carlyle Group. The same year you left the soon-to-be-bankrupt CaterAir, you
became governor and quickly oversaw the University of Texas-a state
institution-make an investment of $10 million in the Carlyle Group. The bin
Laden family had also gotten on the Carlyle gravy train in 1994.
The Carlyle Group is one of the nation's largest defense contractors, among
their many other lines of work. They don't actually build weapons
themselves. Rather, they buy up failing defense companies, turn them around
by making them profitable, and then sell them for huge sums of money.
The people who run the Carlyle Group are a Who's Who of past movers and
shakers, everyone from Ronald Reagan's defense secretary, Frank Carlucci, to
your dad's secretary of state, James Baker, to former British Prime Minister
John Major. Carlucci, the head of Carlyle, also happens to sit on the board
of directors of the Middle East Policy Council along with a representative
of the bin Laden family business.
After September 11, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal both ran
stories pointing out this strange coincidence. Your first response, Mr.
Bush, was to ignore it, hoping, I guess, that the story would just go away.
Your father and his buddies at Carlyle did not renounce the bin Laden
investment. Your army of pundits went into spin control. They said, we can't
paint these bin Ladens with the same brush we use for Osama. They have
disowned Osama! They have nothing to do with him! They hate and despise what
he has done! These are the good bin Ladens.
And then the video footage came out. It showed a number of those "good"
bin Ladens-including Osama's mother, a sister and two brothers-with Osama at
his son's wedding just six and a half months before September 11. It has
been reported in The New Yorker that not only has the family not cut ties to
Osama, but they have continued to fund him as they have been doing for
years. It was no secret to the CIA that Osama bin Laden had access to his
family fortune (his share is estimated to be at least $30million), and the
bin Ladens, as well as other Saudis, kept Osama and his group, al Qaeda,
well funded.
Mr. Bush, weeks went by after the attacks on New York and the Pentagon, yet
your father and his friends at the Carlyle Group refused to buckle in their
support for the bin Laden empire.
Finally, nearly two months after the attacks, with more and more people
questioning the propriety of the Bush family being in bed with the bin
Ladens, your father and the Carlyle Group were pressured into giving the bin
Ladens their millions back and asked them to leave the company as investors.
Why did this take so long?
To make matters worse, it turned out that one of bin Laden's
brothers-Shafiq-was actually at a Carlyle Group business conference in
Washington, D.C., the morning of September 11. The day before, at the same
conference, your father and Shafiq had been chatting it up with all the
other ex-government Carlyle bigwigs.
Mr. Bush, what is going on here?
You've gotten a free ride from the media, though they know everything I have
just written to be the truth (and, in fact, I have taken it from the very
same mainstream news sources they work for). They seem unwilling or afraid
to ask you a simple question: WHAT IS GOING ON HERE?
In case you don't understand just how bizarre the media's silence is
regarding the Bush-bin Laden connections, let me draw an analogy to how the
press or Congress may have handled something like this if the same shoe had
been on the Clinton foot. If, after the terrorist attack on the Federal
Building in Oklahoma City, it was revealed that President Bill Clinton and
his family had financial dealings with Timothy McVeigh's family, what do you
think your Republican Party and the media would have done with that one? Do
you think at least a couple of questions might have been asked, like, "What
is THAT all about?" Be honest, you know the answer. They would have asked
more than a couple of questions. They would have skinned Clinton alive and
thrown what was left of his carcass in Gitmo.
<...snip>
Question #3: Who attacked the United States on September 11 -a guy on
dialysis from a cave in Afghanistan, or your friends, Saudi Arabia?
I'm sorry, Mr. Bush, but something doesn't make sense.
You got us all repeating by rote that it was Osama bin Laden who was
responsible for the attack on the United States on September 11. Even I was
doing it. But then I started hearing strange stories about Osama's kidneys.
It turns out that there have been reports on Osama's health problems for
years. For example, In 2000 The Associated Press reported, a Western
intelligence official said Osama is suffering from kidney and liver disease.
Bin Laden has kidney failure and' his liver is going,' the official said. .
. . He said bin Laden's followers were trying to find a kidney dialysis
machine for their ailing leader.
After September 11, these reports escalated. I was watching Hardball witb
Chris Matthews one night on MSNBC, and one of the guests-a Taliban
expert-said, ". . . Osama bin Laden appears to need dialysis treatment for
his kidney problem, so he's got to be close to some dialysis. He really
can't travel far. Did he just say "dialysis"? The world's biggest monster,
the most sinister, evil man on all of planet Earth-and he can't even piss in
a pot without help? I don't know about you, but if I'm told to be seriously
frightened by an evildoer, especially the top evildoer, I want that evildoer
to have all his bodily functions working at 110 percent! I want him strong,
scary, and omnipresent-and the possessor of two working kidneys. How am I
supposed to be supporting all these Homeland Security measures when the lead
bad guy is flat out on a table somewhere hooked up to a kidney machine?
Suddenly, I don't know who or what to trust. I started to ask other
questions. How could a guy sitting In a cave in Afghanistan, hooked up to
dialysis, have directed and overseen the actions of nineteen terrorists for
two years in the United States and then plotted so perfectly the hijacking
of four planes and then guaranteed that three of them would end up precisely
on their targets? How did Osama do this? I mean, I can't get this computer
to stop crashing every time I type the word "gingivitis." I can't get a cell
signal from here to Queens! And he's supposed to have pulled off all of
September 11 from his little cave, 10,000 miles away? What was he doing,
then, when we started the bombing over there? Was he running from cave to
cave in Afghanistan with his tubes and dialysis machine trailing behind him?
Or, um, maybe there was a dialysis machine in every third cave in
Afghanistan. Yeah, that's it! A real modern country, Afghanistan! It has
about fifteen miles of railroad track. And lots of dialysis machines, I
guess.
None of this is to say that Osama isn't a baddie or even that he didn't have
something to do with the attacks. But it seems that maybe a few journalists
might want to ask a few commonsense questions, like how could he have really
pulled this off while his skin was turning green and he was living in a
country with no Kinko's, no FedEx, no ATMs. How did he organize,
communicate, control and supervise this kind of massive attack? With two
cans and a string?
Yet, we're told by you to believe it. The headlines blared it the first day
and they blare it the same way now two years later: "Terrorists Attack
United States." Terrorists. I have wondered about this word for some time,
so, George, let me ask you a question: If fifteen of the nineteen hijackers
had been North Korean, and they killed 3,000 people, do you think the
headline the next day might read, "NORTH KOREA ATTACKS UNITED STATES"?
Of course it would. Or if it had been fifteen Iranians or fifteen Libyans or
fifteen Cubans, I think the conventional wisdom would have been, "IRAN (or
LIBYA or CUBA) ATTACKS AMERICA!"
Yet, when it comes to September 11, have you ever seen the headline, have
you ever heard a newscaster, has one of your appointees ever uttered these
words: "Saudi Arabia attacked the United States"?
Of course you haven't. And so the question must-must-be asked: WHY NOT?
Why, when Congress releases its own investigation into September 11, you,
Mr. Bush, censor out twenty-eight pages that deal with the Saudis'
role in the attack? What is behind your apparent refusal to look at the one
country that seems to be producing the "terrorists" that have killed our
citizens?
I would like to throw out a possibility here: What if September 11 was not a
"terrorist" attack but, rather, a military attack against the United States?
What if the nineteen were well-trained soldiers, the elite of the elite,
unquestioning in their duty to obey their commander's orders? That they
lived in this country for nearly two years and were not discovered-that
takes a certain amount of discipline, the discipline of a soldier, not the
erratic behavior of some wild-eyed terrorist.
George, apparently you were a pilot once-how hard is it to hit a five-story
building at more than 500 miles an hour? The Pentagon is only five stories
high. At 500 miles an hour, had the pilots been off by just a hair, they'd
have been in the river. You do not get this skilled at learning how to fly
jumbo lets by being taught on a video game machine at some dipshit flight
training school in Arizona. You learn to do this in the air force. Someone's
air force. The Saudi Air Force?
What if these weren't wacko terrorists, but military pilots who signed on to
a suicide mission? What if they were doing this at the behest of either the
Saudi government or certain disgruntled members of the Saudi royal family?
The House of Saud, according to Robert Baer's book, is full of them, and the
royal family-and the country-is in incredible turmoil. There is much
dissension over how things are being run, and with the king incapacitated by
a stroke he suffered in 1995, his brothers and numerous sons have been in a
serious power struggle. Some favor cutting off all ties to the West.
Some want the country to go the more fundamentalist route. After all, this
was Osama's originally stated goal. His first beef wasn't with America; it
was with the way Saudi Arabia was being run-by Muslims who weren't true
Muslims. There are now thousands of princes in the royal family, and many
observers have commented that Saudi Arabia is on the brink of civil war, or
perhaps a people's revolution. You can only behead so many of your citizens
and then, before long, they lose their heads and go crazy and overthrow your
ass. That is what is on the "To Do" list for many Saudi citizens these days,
and the royals are circling the wagons.
A 1999 article in the political journal Foreign Affairs pretty much spelled
out why: "Like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia would like to leave bin Laden in
Afghanistan. His arrest and trial in the United States could be highly
embarrassing, exposing his continuing relationship with sympathetic members
of the ruling elites and intelligence services of both countries.""
So, did certain factions within the Saudi royal family execute the attack on
September 11? Were these pilots trained by the Saudis? One thing we do know:
Nearly all the hijackers were Saudis and they were apparently able to enter
the United States legally, thanks, In part, to the special arrangement set
up by our State Department and the Saudi government that allowed Saudis to
get quickie visas without going through the normal vetting process.
Mr. Bush, why have the Saudis received red-carpet treatment? Sure, we need
their oil. And, yes, they received the same kissy~face welcome from all the
presidents before you.
But why have you blocked attempts to dig deeper into the Saudi connections?
Why do you refuse to say, "Saudi Arabia attacked the United States!"?
Mr. Bush, does this have anything to do with your family's close personal
relationship with the ruling family of Saudi Arabia? 1 would like to think
that's not possible. But what is your explanation? That it was just some nut
in a cave (who just happened to be on dialysis)? And, after you couldn't
find this nut, why did you try to convince us that Saddam Hussein had
something to do with September 11 and al Qaeda, when you were specifically
told by your intelligence people that there was no connection?
Why are you so busy protecting the Saudis when you should be protecting us?
Question #4: Why did you allow a private Saudi jet to fly around the U.S. in
the days after September 11 and pick up members of the bin Laden family and
then fly them out of the country without a proper investigation by the FBI?
Mr. Bush, not that this is personal or anything, but 1 was stranded in Los
Angeles on the morning of September 11. I scrambled to find a rental car,
and then drove 3,000 miles to get back home-all because traveling by air was
forbidden in the days following the attack. Yet, members of the bin Laden
family were allowed to fly in private jets, crisscrossing America as they
prepared to leave the country-can you explain that to me?
Private jets, under the supervision of the Saudi government and with your
approval-were allowed to fly around the skies of America and pick up
twenty-four members of the bin Laden family and take them first to a "secret
assembly point in Texas." They then flew to Washington, D.C., and then on to
Boston. Finally, on September 18, they were all flown to Paris, out of the
reach of any U.S. officials. They never went through any serious
interrogation, other than a few questions that the FBI asked them and a
request to check each of their passports before leaving. One FBI agent I
spoke to told me that the FBI was "furious" that they were not allowed to
keep the bin Ladens in the country to conduct a real investigation-the kind
police like to do when they are trying to track down a murderer. Usually,
the police like to talk to the family members of the suspect to learn what
they know, who they know, how they might help capture the fugitive.
None of the normal procedures were followed.
This is mind-boggling. Here you have two dozen bin Ladens on American soil,
Mr. Bush, and you come up with some lame excuse that you were worried about
"their safety." Might it have been possible that at least one of the
twenty-four bin Ladens would have possibly known something?
Or maybe just one of them could have been "convinced" to help track Osama
down?
Nope. None of that. So while thousands were stranded and could not fly, if
you could prove you were a close relative of the biggest mass murderer in
U.S. history, you got a free tip to gay Paree! of course, the bin Ladens
have been your business associates. Why wouldn't you do a little favor for
some old family friends? But, to use the Clinton analogy again, imagine, in
the hours after the Oklahoma City bombing, Bill Clinton suddenly started
worrying about the "safety" of the McVeigh family up in Buffalo-and then
arranged a free trip for them out of the country. What would you and the
Republicans have said about that?
Suddenly, a stain on a blue dress probably wouldn't have been the top
priority for a witch hunt, would it?
With all that was happening in the days after September 11, how did you find
the time to even begin thinking about protecting people named bin Laden? I'm
amazed at your ability to multi-task.
As if bin Ladens Over America ("Air Laden?") wasn't enough, The Tampa
Tribune reported that the authorities also found the time to help even more
Saudis. Apparently, another Saudi jet, this one a private Lear jet (arranged
by a private hangar owned by defense contractor Raytheon, which also happens
to be a hefty GOP donor), was allowed to fly from Tampa on September 13
(during the air-travel lockdown) to Lexington, Kentucky, to drop off some
members of the Saudi royal family to be with other Saudi royals who had been
in Kentucky looking at horses. Two bodyguards for the Tampa Bay Buccaneers
were hired to travel along on the flight and they told their story to the
Tribune about how the pilot revealed to them upon returning to Tampa that he
had still another run to make to Louisiana."
Why, Mr. Bush, was this allowed to happen?
A frightened nation struggled to get through those days after September 11.
Yet, in the sky above us, the bin Ladens and Saudi royals jetted home.
I think we deserve an explanation.
</q>
--- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l> --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 16 2003 - 07:43:25 MST