You may think
this is the United States of America. It's not. USA
now means "Under
Saudi Arabia." The Saudis bought both
George W. Bush
and his father. Ties between the Bush and bin
Laden families,
the Carlyle Group and Saudi Arabia let the
Riyadh regime
beat America like a rented camel.
As the Boston
Herald reported, "Many of the same American
corporate executives
who have reaped millions of dollars from
arms and oil
deals with the Saudi monarchy have served or
currently serve
at the highest levels of U.S. government, public
records show."
According to
the Herald, we have to worry because, "Those
lucrative financial
relationships call into question the ability of
America's political
elite to make tough foreign policy decisions
about the kingdom
that produced Osama bin Laden and is
perhaps the
biggest incubator for anti-Western Islamic terrorists."
How close are
Bush family ties to Saudi Arabia? "Nowhere is the
revolving U.S.-Saudi
money wheel more evident than within
President Bush's
own coterie of foreign policy advisers, starting
with the president's
father, George H.W. Bush," explains this Herald expose'.
Columnist Jimmy
Breslin wrote: "Our government knows …
that Saudi Arabians
were the murderers on the planes on Sept.
11. The leader
was this guy Atta, from Saudi Arabia, and he flew
the plane into
the north tower." But these are just terrorists, out
of favor with
the Saudis, right? Wrong. "Listen to the tape that
finally got
out Friday, here is a cleric saying with exuberance that
people in Saudi
Arabia thought bin Laden had done a great
thing, killing
all those people in New York."
How does all
this Saudi money in the pockets of Bush's friends
and family hurt
us? On the BBC Newsnight program, Greg Palast asks:
"The CIA and
Saudi Arabia, the Bushes and the Bin Ladens. Did their
connections
cause America to turn a blind eye to terrorism?"
On that program,
National security expert Joe Trento answers
clearly.
These conflicts of interests mean: "[T]housands of
Americans had
to die needlessly." Peter Elsner wonders: "How
can it be that
the former President of the US and the current
President of
the US have business dealings with characters that
need to be investigated?"
Citing a document
marked "'Secret'. Case ID - 199-Eye WF 213
589," Palast
explained: "Washington field office special agents were
investigating
[Osama Bin Laden's brother Abdullah Bin Laden, president
and treasurer
of WAMY - a suspected terrorist organisation]"
Palast identified
"3411 Silver Maple Place [in Washington DC
suburb Falls
Church, Virginia as] the former home of Abdullah
and another
[Osama bin Laden] brother, Omar, also an FBI
suspect. It's
conveniently close to WAMY, [located] in the
basement at
5613 Leesburg Pike. [And] a couple blocks down
the road at
5913 Leesburg [Pike] where four of the hijackers that
attacked New
York and Washington ... lived."
Trento explains,
"The FBI wanted to investigate these guys.
[But] they weren't
permitted to. [WAMY has] connections to
Osama Bin Laden's
people. [And] They fit the pattern of groups
that the Saudi
royal family … have funded who've engaged in
terrorist activity.
[And] as far back as 1996 the FBI was very
concerned about
this organisation...."
National security
agents told Palast that Bush ordered them to
"back off" their
investigations into the bin Ladens, WAMY, and
the terrorists
living nearby. This Bush obsequiousness toward
Saudis with
alarming connections to terrorism is nothing new.
Also on the BBC,
former head of the American visa bureau in
Jeddah, Michael
Springman appeared explaining: "In Saudi
Arabia I was
repeatedly ordered by high level State Dept
officials to
issue visas to unqualified applicants." [And] I
complained bitterly
at the time there." [Because] "What I was
protesting was,
in reality, an effort to bring recruits, rounded up
by Osama Bin
Laden, to the US for terrorist training by the CIA."
The BBC reported
"The attack on the World Trade Center in
1993 did not
shake the State Department's faith in the Saudis,
nor did the
attack on American barracks at Khobar Towers in
Saudi Arabia
three years later, in which 19 Americans died. FBI
agents began
to feel their investigation was being obstructed."
Bush concerns
for Saudi sensibilities fatally compromised our
national security.
According to a Minneapolis-St. Paul Star
Tribune story
the Pan Am International Flight Academy reported
suspicious behavior
to the FBI and FAA. Some Arab nationals
were lying about
their background, and trying to learn to fly 747s.
According to
this report, published December 21, 2001, "Besides
alerting the
FBI about [Zacarias] Moussaoui, the school's
Phoenix office
called the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
early this year
about another student -- Hani Hanjour, who was
believed to
be the pilot of the plane that flew into the Pentagon
on Sept. 11."
But the Bush administration did nothing.
Look how specific
the warning was: "Do you realize how
serious this
is?" the instructor asked an FBI agent. "This man
wants training
on a 747. A 747 fully loaded with fuel could be
used as a weapon!"
this quoted from briefings to Congressional
offices, as
reported in the Star Trib. One of the suspicious men
reported to
the FBI flew the jet into the Pentagon. The other is
about to stand
trial for terrorism.
Pan Am reported
suspicions about these men to the Bush FBI
and the Bush
FAA. Because Bush's family makes $millions in
business with
the bin Ladens and other Saudis, Bush ordered the
investigators
to "back off," jeopardizing our national security to
coddle Saudis.
Again, as reported in the Star Tribune:
"An FAA representative
sat in on a class to observe Hanjour,
who was from
Saudi Arabia." Did this Bush official report
Hanjour to the
FBI? No. He "discussed with school officials
finding an Arabic-speaking
person to help him with his English,
said Oberstar
and others with direct knowledge of the school's
briefings."
Rather than haul in this terrorist in training for
questioning,
the Bush FAA helped him learn to fly one of our
jets into one
of our buildings..
Pan Am personnel
weren't as trusting as the Bush administration,
and sought to
alert law enforcement. The Star Trib reports:
"When the instructor
phoned, the FBI agent strongly urged him
to pursue the
matter but gave him the wrong agent to call, the
sources said.
The instructor made three more calls before
reaching the
right agent on Aug. 15, the sources said. Moussaoui
was arrested
the next day and held on an immigration violation."
Clearly the
problem was not the FBI, at least not the local agents.
"The FBI then
checked Moussaoui's name with foreign
intelligence
agencies, and was warned by the French intelligence
service that
he may have terrorist connections. But the
Minneapolis
agents were unable to persuade FBI lawyers in
Washington,
D.C., to seek a warrant." Was this because Bush
ordered the
FBI to drop its investigations which might embarrass
Bush's Saudi
bosses?
"[Minnesota Rep.
Jim] Oberstar, the ranking Democrat on the
House Transportation
and Infrastructure Committee, said Pan
Am 'acted in
the public interest' with both Moussaoui and
Hanjour." Too
bad that concept is alien to the oil obsessed
Bushes, who
sold out thousands of American lives to appease
Saudi sensibilities.
The Tribune added:
"Oberstar and Minnesota Rep. Martin Sabo
[House appropriations
transportation subcommittee Chairman],
who also was
briefed by the school, praised Pan Am for its
efforts to safeguard
the skies and for passing federal authorities
clues to possible
terrorist activities before Sept. 11."
Bush--more afraid
of us offending Saudis than of Saudis killing
us--ordered
our watchdogs to ignore those critical clues. Now
1,000s of us
are dead. Reports from ABC News prove Bush even
doctored the
bin Laden tapes to avoid embarrassing the Saudis
who support
bin Laden, and praised the 9/11 murders.
Why did the Bush
administration delay releasing the bin Laden
videotape, and
why did their translation omit or change critical
passages? "The
translation [of the bin Laden video tape]
commissioned
by ABC News [contradicts the Bush version, and]
reveals new
elements that raise questions about what the [U.S.]
government left
out of the official version and why."
The explanation
is obvious, as ABC answers their own question:
"The new translation
uncovers statements that could be
embarrassing
to the government of Saudi Arabia," and "Bin
Laden's visitor,
Khalid al Harbi, a Saudi dissident, claims that he
was smuggled
into Afghanistan by a member of Saudi Arabia's
religious police."
ABC News doesn't
question why the Saudi police would be
helping a so
called "dissident" meet with supposed pariah bin
Laden, but reports:
"[On the tape, Harbi] tells bin Laden that in
Saudi Arabia,
several prominent clerics - some with connections
to the Saudi
government - made speeches supporting the attacks
on America."
These statements
are not merely embarrassing to the Saudi royal
family. This
is evidence of top-level Saudi government support
for bin Laden,
even after the 9/11 attacks.
"It shows that
bin Laden's support is not limited to the radical
side of Islam
but also among the Saudi religious establishment,"
says Fawaz Gerges,
professor of Middle Eastern studies at Sarah
Lawrence College.
"And that is bad news for Saudi Arabia,"
reports ABC.
Our government covering up Saudi complicity is
bad news for
all of us.
Despite two generations
of Bushes slavishly serving Saudi
interests, the
arrogant oil sheiks escalate their demands and flout
their support
of bin Laden and terror.
ABC news reports:
"U.S. officials and diplomats still privately
gripe about
the lack of Saudi cooperation in investigating
previous anti-U.S.
terrorist incidents in the kingdom." Saudi
state-run media
and top officials lash out at "U.S. media [they
consider] critical
about the lack of Saudi support for the ongoing
investigations."
The New York
Times rang the alarm bell in an October 14, 2001
editorial called:
"Reconsidering Saudi Arabia." Critically, "One
of the disturbing
realities clarified by last month's terror attacks
is Saudi Arabia's
tolerance for terrorism," The Times noted.
Also: "America's
deeply cynical relationship with Riyadh"
includes Saudi
support for "Islamic extremists," and our "muted
… objections
to keep oil flowing."
On September
11, this oil soaked quid-pro-quo exploded,
revealing "that
the Saudi behavior was more malignant" than
we'd pretended.
Our blood is on Saudi hands, because "money
and manpower
from Saudi Arabia helped create and sustain
Osama bin Laden's
terrorist organization."
According to
this insightful editorial: "Saudi Arabia sponsor[ed]
Afghanistan's
ruling Taliban movement, along with Pakistan.
Saudi money,
religious teachings and diplomats helped the
Taliban secure
and keep control of Afghanistan. The country
was then used
to provide sanctuary and training camps for the
bin Laden network."
Also, "The Saudi government has allowed
Saudi … organizations
to funnel money to Al Qaeda and its
terrorist network."
Rather than rush
to help remedy the catastrophic damage their
policies inflicted
on innocent Americans, the Saudis stonewall.
"Since Sept.
11, Riyadh has refused pleas from Washington to
freeze Mr. bin
Laden's assets and those of his associates." Arab
news services
confirm these facts.
Noting that,
"Of the 19 hijackers who carried out last month's
attacks, at
least 10 were Saudi nationals," the Times reports,
"Riyadh has
so far refused to cooperate fully with Washington's
investigations
of hijacking suspects." The Saudis supported our
enemies when
they "barred Washington from using Saudi air
bases to launch
attacks against Afghanistan." Above from NY
Times Editorial.
Our so-called
"allies" act more like diffident imperial overlords.
According to
ABC, "[Saudi leaders] are bitter about what they
regard as a
U.S. media campaign blaming Riyadh for tolerating
or even breeding
religious fanaticism, financing guerrilla and
terrorist movements
like bin Laden's al Qaeda, crushing zealous
reformers and
tolerating widespread corruption." This although
the Saudis are
"breeding religious fanaticism, financing guerrilla
and terrorist
movements like bin Laden's al Qaeda," and have for
several years!
Arab sources
are even more specific about Saudi resentment and
lack of cooperation.
The Arabic News.Com reported, "The
Saudi defense
minister Sultan Bin Abdul Aziz has accused
Zionism of being
behind the media campaign against Saudi
Arabia in the
US. This was expressed in statements issued on
Thursday in
the Saudi press." The same source reported: "Saudi
Arabia has refused
to comply to a US request to freeze bank
accounts Washington
suspects that they have links to certain
terrorist groups."
[sic]
Saudi officials
see nothing wrong with their support for terror
and their obstruction
of American efforts to combat terror. They
dismiss even
deferential questioning of their pro-terror activities
as "Zionism"
in the US media. It comes down to this: Americans
want to defend
ourselves against terrorism. The Saudis want to
keep supporting
terrorists and undermining our efforts. Who's
side is Bush
on?
On BBC's Newsnight,
Palast asks: "Does the Bush family also
have to worry
about political blow-back?" We should hope so,
because, "The
younger Bush made his first million 20 years ago
with an oil
company partly funded by Salem Bin Laden's chief
US representative.
[He] also received fees as director of a
subsidiary of
Carlyle Corporation, a little known private
company which
has, in just a few years of its founding, become
one of Americas
biggest defence contractors. His father, Bush
Senior, is also
a paid advisor. And what became embarrassing
was the revelation
that the Bin Ladens held a stake in Carlyle,
sold just after
September 11."
Here's the smoking
gun that links Bush family financial interests
to the break
down in national security on 9/11: Palast reports: "I
received a phone
call from a high-placed member of a US
intelligence
agency. [Saying] under George Bush … the agencies
were told to
'back off' investigating the Bin Ladens and Saudi
royals, and
that angered agents."
The Bushes, James
A. Baker III the fixer who helped Bush steal
the election,
Dick Cheney, the Carlyle Group, and the band of
Texas oil barons
who have backed Bush's political career have
put their financial
interests above our national interests long
enough. Their
big money interests clearly rest with the Saudis,
not Americans.
Like his father
before him, Bush placates his Saudi masters like
some appointed
colonial satrap or toady. He goes to any length
to avoid annoying
his bosses in Riyadh, whose demands and
indignation
escalate constantly.
This goes far
beyond Bush lying under oath and helping his
cronies cover
up ghoulish grave robbing. Bush can only serve
one nation:
the US or Saudi Arabia. He and his father and their
rich, powerful
friends have to make a choice: us or them. They
have sold our
soul and sovereignty for oil, and it is killing us!
This has to
stop.
Doesn't Bush
care how many of us die? How much American
blood will Bush
risk for Saudi oil? Where is the outrage? When
do we stand
up and demand our independence from Saudi
Arabia and the
Bushes, who behave more like colonial
governors than
elected leaders? When do we start the
impeachment?
When do we get the United States back from
under the Saudis?
Mike Hersh is a contributing writer for Liberal Slant
Links to articles referenced above:
Bush Advisers Cashed in on Saudi Gravy Train
Published on Tuesday, December 11, 2001 in the Boston Herald
http://commondreams.org/headlines01/1211-05.htm
Jimmy Breslin: Diagnosis: It's All About Oil
http://www.newsday.com/news/columnists/ny-nybres232521056dec23.column?coll=ny%2Dnews%2Dcolumnists
BBC News | NEWSNIGHT | Greg Palest report transcript - 6/11/2001
news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/events/newsnight/newsid_1645000/1645527.stm
Eagan flight trainer wouldn't let unease about Moussaoui rest
http://www.startribune.com/stories/484/913687.html
Tape Missing Subtleties. Bin Laden Translation Omitted Sections
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/WorldNewsTonight/OBLtape_missing011220.html
Reconsidering Saudi Arabia
"One of the disturbing realities clarified by last month's terror attacks
is Saudi Arabia's tolerance for terrorism."
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/14/opinion/14SUN1.html
Saudi Arabia-USA, Politics, 12/22/2001
"Saudi Arabia: Zionism is behind the American campaign"
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/011222/2001122210.html
Saudi Arabia-USA, Politics, 11/28/2001
Saudi Arabia abstains from freezing certain bank accounts
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/011128/2001112806.html
Greg Palast: FBI and US spy agents say Bush spiked bin Laden probes
http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=103&row=0
Bush Watch: Bush Oil Deal With Murky Ties To Saudi Financiers
http://www.bushwatch.org/bushcarlyle.htm/
Justice had denied Minneapolis FBI request on suspected terrorist
http://www.startribune.com/stories/843/730512.html
from http://www.liberalslant.com/daily2.htm