Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

What the Little Turd from Crawford said 6 Years Ago Today

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 03:54 PM
Original message
What the Little Turd from Crawford said 6 Years Ago Today
The crazy monkey received a briefing from the CIA entitled:

Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the United States



Of course, the dysfunctional ignoramus couldn't connect a dot if our lives depended on it.



The Covered-Up Meeting

By Dan Froomkin
Special to washingtonpost.com
Monday, October 2, 2006; 1:12 PM

The "State of Denial" in the title of Bob Woodward's new book describes President Bush's ongoing refusal to see the true consequences of the war he launched in Iraq.

But one of the book's most notable revelations suggests that the Bush White House was in another state of denial more than five years ago, this one about the threat of terrorism before September 11, 2001.

If the omniscient narrator of Woodward's book is to be believed, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice waved off warnings that should by any reasonable standard have put the government on high alert for an al-Qaeda attack.

And in what looks like a potential administration cover-up, Rice and the other participants in that meeting apparently never mentioned it to anyone, including investigators for the 9/11 Commission.

SNIP

And a month later, as Ron Suskind reported in his book, "The One Percent Doctrine," an unnamed CIA briefer flew to Bush's Texas ranch to call the president's attention personally to the now-famous Aug. 6, 2001, memo titled 'Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.' According to Suskind, Bush heard the briefer out and replied: "All right. You've covered your ass, now."

CONTINUED

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/...



"All right. You've covered your ass, now."

How different our world would be if this gangster had, instead, said All right. What can we do about it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
kimmerspixelated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
1. Correction-
You mean, the BIG TURD!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Miers Briefed Bush on bin Laden PDB, Papers Handle Photo From That Day Quite Differently
More on the photo from Editor and Publisher:



Miers Briefed Bush on Bin Laden PDB, But Papers Handle Photo From That Day Quite Differently

By E&P Staff

Published: October 04, 2005 10:45 AM ET

NEW YORK On its front page Tuesday, The New York Times published a photo of new U.S. Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers going over a briefing paper with President George W. Bush at his Crawford ranch in August 2001, the caption reads.

USA Today and the Boston Globe carried the photo labeled simply 2001, but many other newspapers ran the picture in print or on the Web with a more precise date: Aug. 6, 2001.

Does that date sound familiar? Indeed, that was the date, a little over a month before 9/11, that President Bush was briefed on the now-famous PDB that declared that Osama Bin Laden was determined to attack the U.S. homeland, perhaps with hijacked planes. But does that mean that Miers had anything to do with that briefing?

As it turns out, yes, according to Tuesday's Los Angeles Times. An article by Richard A. Serrano and Scott Gold observes that early in the Bush presidency Miers assumed such an insider role that in 2001 it was she who handed Bush the crucial 'presidential daily briefing' hinting at terrorist plots against America just a month before the Sept. 11 attacks.

So the Aug. 6 photo may show this historic moment, though quite possibly not. In any case, some newspapers failed to include the exact date with the widely used Miers photo today. A New York Times spokesman told E&P: "The wording of the caption occurred in the course of routine editing and has no broader significance."

CONTINUED...

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_di...



You are correct, FitzmasAgain.

I meant to separate the phony pretzeldent from his daddy, the wimp.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue Gardener Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 05:13 AM
Response to Reply #1
33. I would call him a Little Prick
No more than an inch or two at best.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rateyes Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #1
38. I prefer...
BasTurd. (yeah, I know, I spelled it wrong on purpose.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MiniMe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
2. Almost seems as if he knew....
hmmmmmm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Agreed. ''Go away kid. Ya bother me.''
Bush knew.

Here he is, just told a second plane has been hijacked and flown into the World Trade Center, a half hour after hes been informed that a plane was hijacked and flown into the World Trade Center. He doesnt even wink when Andy Card tells him, America is under attack, let alone scramble the Air Force.



At BEST, this shows criminal dereliction of duty. Most LIKELY, it shows treason.

Plot to assassinate Bush reports

Ashcroft Flying High

Why would Osama bin Laden want to kill Dubya, his former business partner?

Genoa braces for G8 summit


Heres more on the warnings the administration received BEFORE SEPTEMBER 11, 2001:

Rice More Sordid Than Foley

On her recommendation, Tenet briefed Ashcroft and Rumsfeld (not Powell, though).

Rumsfeld, Ashcroft said to have received warning of attack

An exasperated Tenet then ordered an underling to brief Monkey in Crawford in August.

While Bush vacationed, 9/11 warnings went unheard.

Heres what seals the deal for me:

Bin Laden determined to strike in US

Then, he turned around and said to the CIA briefer:

"All right. You've covered your ass now."



The crazy monkey IS a traitor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #4
13. His vermin like mind was thinking of all the possibilities
after all he said he wanted to be America's dictator - that is on record too. Guess people just yuck it up until we all get locked up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Myrina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 07:19 AM
Response to Reply #4
34. "Plausible Denial" at its height ...
Blivet's thinking: "I'm covered, heh heh ... here I am ... in a room full of snot-nosed little brats ... in Florida ... heh heh ... they bad stuff is going on up there in New York ... it's all good ... if I just act a little surprised ... nobody will even guess that we knew this was coming ... heh heh ... I AM the Preznent, after all ..."


:spank: :spank: :spank:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pacalo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #4
54. Discreetly excusing himself & walking out would have upset the children & scarred them for life.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #4
60. Nah, more like "2 in. 2 to go"
93 and 77 were 20 minutes delayed in taking off. George was ad libbing.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobthedrummer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Aug-12-07 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #4
79. "The crazy monkey IS a traitor"-kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bananarepublican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #2
28. They did whatever they could to enable the attacks - pure and simple. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:23 PM
Response to Original message
5. It's pathetic
to think this person is in the role of president.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. ''Role'' is the operative word.




Is this the real president of the United States?

He rarely speaks in public and closely guards his privacy. But there's a growing consensus in America that it's Dick Cheney who calls the shots at the White House, on everything from the war in Iraq to climate change policy. Ed Pilkington reports


Monday July 23, 2007
The Guardian

It is a party trick well known to curious teenagers across America. Zoom down on Washington via Google Earth and you get an extraordinary eagle-eyed view of the world's greatest powerhouse. There's the White House and its West Wing. There's the spot where they put the national Christmas tree festooned with lights. Sweeping south-east across the Potomac you soar above the pentagon of the Pentagon; then back up a bit north and you can sit for hours counting the tiles on the roof of the Lincoln memorial. But there is one thing you can't do. If you scroll over the site of the vice-president's official residence, all you will see, mysteriously, is a blurry fuzz.

SNIP...

But what started as a single, unguarded gaffe last October appears nine months on to be developing into a pattern. Increasingly, the focus is switching from President Bush to the man who stands in the shadows behind him. This month sees the publication of two books analysing the role of Cheney, one by Stephen Hayes of the neocon bible the Weekly Standard, the second a more critical work called Opportunist, by Robert Sam Anson.

Those volumes will land before the dust has settled over a classic piece of Washington Post journalism. Under the headline "The Angler" - a reference to Cheney's secret service code name - two Post journalists, Barton Gellman and Jo Becker, have dissected Cheney's approach to his job in forensic detail. Virtually a book in its own right - the series runs to 20,000 words - they reveal how Cheney has dictated policy in several crucial areas, including the war on terror, the economy and the environment.

In all these polarised accounts Cheney is universally presented as the most powerful vice- president in American history. He has taken an institution that John Adams, its first holder, described as "the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived" and turned it into a seat of power. "He has expanded the power of the vice-president fiftyfold," says Bruce Fein, a lawyer who served in the Reagan administration and who worked with Cheney during the Iran-Contra hearings. "Previous VPs typically handed out blankets in disaster zones or attended funerals in Burkina Faso."

Not Cheney. So dominant has he been in a traditionally submissive role that some commentators are now wondering whether it is time to drop the "V" from his title. "Cheney is de facto president in all areas of policy, bar just a few aspects of the domestic agenda," Fein says. Cheney's biographer, John Nichols, the Washington correspondent of the left-leaning Nation magazine, goes as far as to argue that "this was not George W Bush's presidency. It was Dick Cheney's."

CONTINUED...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/guantanamo/story/0,,2132625,0...



If there's Justice, Leavenworth will soon become a most exclusive club.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobthedrummer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #10
56. Some of those "roles" are dangerous as are his operators
"Dangers of a Cornered George Bush" 7-27-2007 VIPS and Dr. J. Frank via consortiumnews.com
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/072707a.html

Here's a link to an archived information warfare ammo-dump for those that give a damn and NGU-it is valuable for indictments, among other things.

"Information warfare ammo-dump #2" 6-13-2007
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

:patriot:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrary1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
6. He certainly has aged in the last 6 years...
Little consolation, but I'll take whatever I can get.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. Portrait of Dorian Monkey
Imagining what Fate has in store for mass-murdering fascist traitors may lie beyond the ken of mortal minds.



Too bad we are at the mercy of such, um, men:



Foiled Plot Doesn't Make Us Safer

Britain may have averted a plot to bomb passenger planes, but lets not imagine that we are safer now than we were before 9/11.


WEB-EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY
By Christopher Dickey
NEWSWEEK
Updated: 4:05 p.m. ET Aug 10, 2006

Aug. 10, 2006 - This time, it seems, the terror was stopped. But as news broke this morning of a plot to blow up as many as 10 airliners between Britain and the United States, there were disturbing echoes of that slow-moving August before September 11, 2001. Then, American, European and friendly Arab intelligence services were getting frantic. From the chatter they picked up among known terrorists, it was clear that a group called Al Qaeda was plotting something big. But what? Where? How?

Just five years ago this week the CIA sent a memo to President George W. Bush, vacationing then as now in Crawford, Texas, with the heading Bin Laden determined to Strike in U.S. But there was more, as Ron Suskind wrote at the beginning of his recent book, The One Percent Doctrine: Deep Inside Americas Pursuit of Its Enemies Since 9/11 (Simon & Schuster). Panicked CIA analysts flew to Texas to brief Bush personally in 2001, to intrude on his vacation with face-to-face alerts. Bush sized them up, as is his wont, looking to judge the content of what they told him by the confidence with which the message was delivered. Bush wasnt convinced. All right, said the president, Youve covered your ass now.

The president would never be so dismissive again about the threats to the United States. Weeks later, after the devastation of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, he would make the War on Terror the central theme of his presidency. And much good has been done. On the tarmac of an airport in Wisconsin this morning, Bush sounded the themes that have become so familiar since then. The recent arrests that our fellow citizens are now learning about are a stark reminder that this nation is at war with Islamic fascists who will use any means to destroy those of us who love freedom, to hurt our nation. Cooperation with Britain, and cooperation among the often-competing agencies inside the United States was excellent, he said. Thats a significant improvement, for sure.

This country is safer than it was prior to 9/11, the president told us. Weve taken a lot of measures to protect the American people, but obviously were not still completely safe, because there are people that still plot, he said. True enough. And people who want to harm us for what we believe in, the president went on, drifting into those generalities he loves. "It is a mistake to believe there is no threat to the United States of America. And that is why we have given our officials the tools they need to protect our people."

SNIP...

The American failure to limit these scenes of carnage in the Muslim world, or even to understand them, has combined with shortsighted military policies to create a kind of breeder reactor for explosive terrorism. Today we are looking at a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan, even as Osama bin Laden and his ideologue Ayman Zawahiri remain at large. Iraq is in the midst of an intensifying civil war that will only grow worse after todays ghastly bombing in Najaf, which killed at least 34 people. Lebanon has become a cause that can cement ties among radical Sunnis and Shias against the United States, the United Kingdom and Israel. Iran is cooking up nukes and the inflammatory issue of Palestine is farther than ever from resolution.

So lets be thankful that the plot in Britain was broken up when it was. But lets not imagine for a moment that we are safer now than we were in August 2001. We should be. But we are not.

SOURCE:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14290815 /



A war monkey is driving me crazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SoCalDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:29 PM
Response to Original message
7. Didn't Condi say that SHE and Tenet briefed him??
I could have sworn that she said that...and all the time it was his "Gal Friday", Harriet who showed him the memo..

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
16. Rice More Sordid Than Foley
I think it went:

Tenet went to Condi.

Condi said, "So what? OK. Go tell it to Ashcroft and Rumsfeld."



Rice More Sordid Than Foley

by Robert Scheer
Published on Wednesday, October 4, 2006 by Truthdig.com

They are such liars. And no, I am not speaking only of the dissembling GOP House leaders led by Speaker Dennis Hastert who, out of naked political calculation, covered up for one of their own in the sordid teen stalking case of Rep. Mark Foley.

Call me old school, but I am still more concerned with the Republicans molesting Lady Liberty while pretending to be guarding the nations security, an assignment which they have totally botched. The news about the Foley coverup, while important as yet another example of extreme hypocrisy on the part of the Republican virtues police, should not be allowed to obscure the latest evidence of administration deceit as to its egregious ineptness in protecting the nation.

On Monday, a State Department spokesman conceded that then-National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice had indeed been briefed in July 2001 by George Tenet, then-director of the CIA, about the alarming potential for an Al Qaeda attack, as Bob Woodward has reported in his aptly named new book, State of Denial.

I dont remember a so-called emergency meeting, Rice had said only hours earlier, apparently still suffering from some sort of post-9/11 amnesia that seemed to afflict her during her forced testimony to the 9/11 Commission. The omission of this meeting from the final commission report is another example of how the Bush administration undermined the bipartisan investigation that the president had tried to prevent. Surely lying under oath in what was arguably the most important official investigation in the nations history should be treated more seriously than the evasiveness in the Paula Jones case that got President Bill Clinton impeached. Nor is it just Rice who should be challenged, for Tenet seems to have provided Woodward with details concerning the administrations indifference to the terrorist threat that he did not share with the 9/11 Commission.

SNIP

Such weaseling would be funny if the topic were not so serious. But there is no way Rice can squirm out of this one, despite her impressive track record of calculated distortion on everything from Iraqs nonexistent WMDs to the trumped-up ties between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Can there be any better case for turning over control of at least one branch of Congress to the opposition party so that we might finally have hearings to learn the truth of this matter, which is far more important, and sordid, than the Foley affair?

CONTINUED...

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/1004-33.htm



I'm at the rabbit. I'll check the files at World HQ later this noche.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 05:24 PM
Response to Reply #7
19. You are correct, SoCalDem. Harriet delivered the word to monkey.
More on the subject:



Olbermann Connects Harriet Miers to Pre-9/11 Memo

By Brad Wilmouth | October 5, 2005 - 00:32 ET

Leave it to Keith Olbermann to link the topics of Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers and the 9/11 attacks. On his Countdown show on Tuesday night, the MSNBC anchor relayed that Miers was the person who handed President Bush a memo in August 2001 that warned of Osama bin Laden's desire to attack the U.S. This was the same memo that some on the left have used to justify their criticisms that the President should have foreseen and prevented the 9/11 attacks based on the memo's general warnings about bin Laden's intentions.

Olbermann teased his Tuesday night show with a photograph of Miers handing the President a memo. He dated the photograph as "August 6, 2001, the day got the PDB titled 'Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.'"

SOURCE: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/brad-wilmouth?page=6



Even if he can't read, Bush was warned.

Too bad the guy didn't warn the flying public.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
8. I love threads like this when they have lots o' pictures.
I gave it a rec just for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #8
17. Here's one of Smirko's Grampoppy Prescott fixin' Tricky Dick up all nice.


W Bush Fulfills His Grandfather Prescott's Dream

Thanks for giving a damn, quantessd!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #17
47. The rotten fetid apples don't fall far from the tree..
Edited on Tue Aug-07-07 10:45 AM by Virginia Dare
hmmm, I wonder what vileness the newest generation of Bush's will stain this country with... :scared:





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 10:18 PM
Response to Reply #47
65. Wonder whatever happened to those photographers?
People who cross paths with the Corleones get more respect.

American Media publishes The National Enquirer which printed the nice image of Jenna and her friend.

http://www.newsgarden.org/columns/anthrax/anthraxtarget...



Widow of Photo Editor Killed by Anthrax Wants Information, Financial Help.

From: South Florida Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale, Florida) (viaKnight-Ridder/Tribune Business News) Date: October 10, 2002
Byline: Kathy Bushouse

Oct. 10--It's been a year since her husband became the United States' first victim of an anthrax attack.

But the attorney for Maureen Stevens says the widow of American Media Inc. tabloid photo editor Bob Stevens has gotten scant information about what led to her husband's death, nor has she received any financial help from the federal government.

A lawsuit could be Maureen Stevens' only option for getting answers and money, said attorney Richard Schuler.

"We're in a position where she's out on an island, isolated," Schuler said. "The FBI ...

CONTINUED for those with the buck$.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-120087593.html



Then there's Danny Casolaro, and Abbie Hoffman, and Mark Lombardi, and a whole bunch more brave people who have opposed the Bushes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Patsy Stone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
9. Blecccch
I wish he'd been a better baseball owner, that's for sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. Even then -- as ''head '' of the Rangers -- Bush was a con man.
From our friends at LookingGlassNews.org:



Bush Condemned Property Via Eminent Domain to Build Rangers Stadium - And Made $14 Million Off the Deal

Posted in the database on Saturday, November 05th, 2005 @ 13:44:39 MST (486 views)
by Jon Pensito Review




Governing elite: The recent Supreme Court decision that allows local governments to use eminent domain to evict property owners in order to use their property for private development set off a howl on the Right.

To counter the ruling, Republicans in Congress are working on legislation that would cut off all federal funding to local governments who use eminent domain to evict property owners.

The president may have a hard time keeping a straight face when he signs the bill, however. In his past life as a baseball team owner, Mr. Bush profited from exactly this sort of eminent domain eviction - to the tune of $14.3 million.

The story was first rerported by Texas reporter Robert Brice in May 1997, late in Bushs first term as governor of Texas:
    Since he took to the stump three and a half years ago to run for governor, Bush has railed against big government. On the very first day of his campaign, November 8, 1993, Bush told supporters in Houston, San Antonio, Austin, and Dallas that the best way to allocate resources in our society is through the market place. Not through a governing elite, not through red tape and over-regulation, not through some central bureaucracy.

    But through the Arlington stadium deal, Bush, who owns 1.8 percent of the Rangers, has been personally enriched by using the governing elite and the central bureaucracy not only to confiscate land for private purposes, but to get a huge public subsidy for a stadium that generates profits for himself and the Texas Rangers. Though Bushs present ownership percentage of the team is relatively small, the asset represents a large part of his personal wealth; moreover, Bushs deal with the team includes a provision that will almost certainly multiply his future ownership interest to 11 percent.

    Briefly, heres what happened on the Ballpark deal. Bush and his partners in the Rangers convinced Arlington officials to:

    Pass a half cent sales tax to pay for 70 percent of the stadium;

    Use the governments powers of eminent domain to condemn land the Rangers couldnt or didnt want to buy on the open market;

    Give the Rangers control over what happens in and around the stadium;

    Allow the Rangers to buy the stadium (which cost $191 million to construct) for just $60 million;


Bush and company went into action on the stadium in late in 1989, when Bushs father was still vice president and as the project was getting off the ground he became president. The younger Bushs company exercised its considerable political clout and used the Texas state government to take the property for the stadium involuntarily from its rightful owners

    In April of 1991, the Rangers shepherded through the Legislature a bill would create the Arlington Sports Facilities Development Authority, a quasi-governmental entity endowed with the power of eminent domain. Shortly after the bill was signed into law by former Governor Ann Richards, three parcels of land located near the stadium, nearly thirteen acres in all, were condemned by the ASFDA. The land was owned by the heirs of television magnate Curtis Mathes.

    Among court documents is an unsigned Rangers memo by a team representative, discussing the history of the Mathes tracts. The representative notes that in his first contact with the Mathes family concerning the land, on November 6, 1990, I was not well received. The memo goes on to say that the ASFDAs appraiser assigned the land a value of $3.16 per square foot, for a total value of $1.515 million. An offer was made by the Authority at this price. This offer was rejected & the Sellers countered with $2,835,000.00 for all three tracts, i.e.: $5.31 p.s.f. In mid-December, the ASFDA offered the Mathes heirs just $817,220 for the three tracts, far below even what the ASFDAs first appraiser had suggested. The Mathes family refused to sell, and the ASFDA seized the land through eminent domain.

    Glenn Sodd, a Corsicana attorney who represents the Mathes family, says he has found little evidence that Bush was directly involved in the decisions to condemn the property for the stadium. But he adds, What happened to my folks was pretty audacious. It was the first time in Texas history that the power of eminent domain has been used to assist a private organization like a baseball team.

    (In May 1996), a Tarrant County jury found that the sports authoritys offer of $817,220 for the Mathes property was too low, and it awarded the Mathes heirs $4.98 million, plus accumulated interest. For the past year, the city of Arlington and the Rangers have been arguing over who will pay the tab.


Bush sold his interest in the Rangers in 1998 for $14.9 million. He had invested a total of $606,302.27 (in 1989) and was one of two managing partners.

http://www.lookingglassnews.org/viewstory.php?storyid=3...



Why this crazy monkey isn't in Leavenworth shows me there are two types of American "Just-Us."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Patsy Stone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 08:43 PM
Response to Reply #18
26. As they say in Raising Arizona
"Well, first there's a matter of who knows who, then over here you got favoritism."

If only he'd been able to make one thing work. Just one. The man is a colossal failure, and a criminal of the highest order (although, really, you can't blame him; he comes by it honestly), but if only one of these endeavors had allowed him to steal a decent amount and it actually flourished, the world would be a much better place.

Thanks for the additional info, Octafish. Your posts always make me think.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LuckyLib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #26
53. Though he is a massive screw-up, investing $600,000 and walking away 9 years later with 14 million
was a nice payoff for his criminal activity. Too bad the rest of us don't get that kind of return on our work or investment efforts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Major Hogwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
11. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, I'm gonna fuck you up!
Edited on Mon Aug-06-07 04:33 PM by Major Hogwash
No doubt about it, Bush knew something big was coming.

And looked the other way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #11
69. I really like the sound of that.
The sooner Bush faces Justice, the better.

Truth speeds up the process:



Banking scandal figure seeks claim to airport contract

By JERRY URBAN
Staff Writer, Houston Chronicle
Sept. 10, 1994

A key figure in the world's largest banking scandal is participating in an attempt to take control of a major city of Houston aviation contractor, according to a lawsuit filed in federal court here.

National Commercial Bank-Jeddah, Saudi Arabia (NCB), which is controlled by the family of Sheik Khalid Bin Mahfouz, has claimed rights to 90 percent of the outstanding shares of Southwest Airport Services, according to documents accompanying the lawsuit filed by Sandra C. Bath , president of Southwest Airport Services.

Southwest Airport Services provides fuel and other services for general aviation aircraft at the city-owned Ellington Field. The company also provides fuel to NASA and transient military aircraft, and to Air Force One, the president's plane, when it comes to Houston.

Bath filed the lawsuit against the bank and her former husband, James R . Bath , a local entrepreneur.

"Mr. Mahfouz, as owner of National Commercial Bank, hopes to accommodate Mr. Bath 's desire to assume control of Southwest Airport Services

CONTINUED...

http://sugarinthegourd.com/bath/bath02.html



Bath represented the the bin Mahfouz and bin Laden families in the United States. Here's the document:



And Maj. Bath was on the Texas Air National Guard flight line, right along with his buddy, Lt. George W. Bush. Here's when they both got drummed off it:



Testimony in court establishes business ties between the Bushes and the petrodollar rich bin Mahfouz and bin Ladens.

QUESTIONABLE TIES - Tracking bin Laden's money flow leads back to Midland, Texas


http://www.bushwatch.com/bushmoney.htm

May the day soon arrive where Bush and his cronies face a jury of their peers, hearing cases developed by all the Grand Juries necessary. Leavenworth has the room.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Major Hogwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-08-07 07:31 AM
Response to Reply #69
72. What really bothers me after this much time has passed.
Is how so many people on the internet, like you, who have saved so much of the evidence needed to impeach Bush to your hard drives and on web sites and researched the begezzus out of Bush, how the mainstream media has simply looked the other way in order to make it sound like Bush is a rational President - when it is almost as obvious as the nose on our face that he is totally incompetent, probably insane, and definitely not capable of leading this great nation.

I didn't know that about Salem bin Laden and James Bath.
I thought I already knew all of the bad stuff about the Bath/Bush connection there was to know.
So, I thank you for providing still more evidence why this President should be impeached.
I'm totally shocked by the Saudi/Bush crime family connection.
The threads here about Bush senior and the Saudi prince going back to the mid-70's is not only appalling, it is outright treason!

The more I learn about the Bush crime family, the more I want to move to another country and hide.
The more I learn about this cabal that is in control of our government, the more I feel like I wasted my entire life supporting it.
And the more I learn, the more I realize that Congress is not only aware of the Bush crime family's crimes against humanity, they are willing accomplices allowing it to continue!

We don't have a working Constitution in this country anymore.
There is no one enforcing the law, it is just a greedy grab for power, money, and more money to get more power!
They've used the FBI, the CIA, and the NSA to sell out this country!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-08-07 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #72
74. Here's something ABCNNBCBSFauxNoiseNutwork missed about Poppy...
FBI Memos show Poppy played a role in Dallas.

Our government's own historical records show George Herbert Walker Bush was involved in the assassination of President Kennedy. Here are official FBI memos from within MINUTES of the assassination chronicle what George H.W. Bush, President of Zapata Off-Shore Drilling Company called the FBI to report hearsay that someone wanted to kill President Kennedy. The problem was, Bush reported his suspicions just minutes after JFK was dead. Why didnt Bush say something sooner?



Here are the memos, without all the tags and mimeograph blots:



TO: SAC, HOUSTON DATE: 11-22-63

FROM: SA GRAHAM W. KITCHEL

SUBJECT: UNKNOWN SUBJECT;
ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT
JOHN F. KENNEDY

At 1:45 p.m. Mr. GEORGE H. W. BUSH, President of the Zapata Off-Shore Drilling Company, Houston, Texas, residence 5525 Briar, Houston, telephonically furnished the following information to writer by long distance telephone call from Tyler, Texas.

BUSH stated that he wanted to be kept confidential but wanted to furnish hearsay that he recalled hearing in recent weeks, the day and source unknown. He stated that one JAMES PARROTT has been talking of killing the President when he comes to Houston.

BUSH stated that PARROTT is possibly a student at the University of Houston and is active in political matters in this area. He stated that he felt Mrs. FAWLEY, telephone number SU 2-5239, or ARLINE SMITH, telephone number JA 9-9194 of the Harris County Republican Party Headquarters would be able to furnish additional information regarding the identity of PARROTT.

BUSH stated that he was proceeding to Dallas, Texas, would remain in the Sheraton-Dallas Hotel and return to his residence on 11-23-63. His office telephone number is CA 2-0395.

# # #



In the second memo, a Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency reports that the anti-Castro (and largely anti-JFK) Cuban exile community in Miami say the assassination represents a great loss to the US and Latin America. The pro-Castro community, Bush apparently, says they regret the assassination.

Less than a week after the assassination, Mr. Hoover details his discussions with Mr. Bush...





Date: November 29, 1963

To: Director
Bureau of Intelligence and Research
Department of State

From: John Edgar Hoover, Director

Subject: ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY
NOVEMBER 22, 1963

Our Miami, Florida, Office on November 23, 1963, advised that the Office of Coordinator of Cuban Affairs in Miami advised that the Department of State feels some misguided anti-Castro group might capitalize on the present situation and undertake an unauthorized raid against Cuba, believing that the assassination of President John F. Kennedy might herald a change in U. S. policy, which is not true.

Our sources and informants familiar with Cuban matters in the Miami area advise that the general feeling in the anti-Castro Cuban community is one of stunned disbelief and, even among those who did not entirely agree with the President's policy concerning Cuba, the feeling is that the President's death represents a great loss not only to the U. S. but to all of Latin America. These sources know of no plans for unauthorized action against Cuba.

An informant who has furnished reliable information in the past and who is close to a small pro-Castro group in Miami has advised that these individuals are afraid that the assassination of the President may result in strong repressive measures being taken against them and, although pro-Castro in their feelings, regret the assassination.

The substance of the foregoing information was orally furnished to Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency and Captain William Edwards of the Defense Intelligence Agency on November 23, 1963, by Mr. W. T. Forsyth of this Bureau.

# # #



Now I don't know if Poppy was a trigger man or only there to watch what happened or what. He's never explained these memos. He's never even admitted where he was the day JFK was killed. The FBI says Bush Sr told them he was in Dallas. Seeing how his dim crazy monkey for a son is hell-bent on estroying the planet, it's vitally important that we tell the Truth.

The information above connects George CIA Bush with the assassination. It also helps explain a LOT of whats gone wrong in America since November 22, 1963. The United States and the world haven't been the same since that awful day. And not a single major player in the nation's mass media have stepped up and demanded a real investigation. So, it's up to us, my Friend. With people like you giving a damn, Major Hogwash, we got a really good chance of getting these turds in Leavenworth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:32 PM
Response to Original message
12. And the information Sibel was not allowed to bring to our attention.
You know, there's only a few "Bushes", but there are millions who voted for him. I am far more nervous about those who gave him votes. They can vote for another one, again. Even though he lost, in actuality.

It's the people who must not have known or cared about his attitude toward Carla Faye Tucker. That alone speaks volumes about the man. But then we all know the list of things that follow. Too voluminous to even mention in a post.

Too many stupid Americans. Bush just represents them. A minority. But all it takes is a single out of tune instrument to make the music bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #12
70. National Security Whistleblowers Coalition building a solid case against Bushco.
Sibel Edmonds and the NSWBC are still on the case:



Bush administration's abuse of FISA warrants linked to Sibel Edmonds case

By Bill Conroy,
Posted on Sun Feb 25th, 2007 at 05:20:11 PM EST

FBI whistleblower Sibel Edmonds is continuing her fight to expose what she claims is serious corruption within the Bush administration. To date, the Bush administration has used the state-secrets privilege claim to silence Edmonds and prevent her from presenting evidence in the courts or Congress.

However, it now appears Edmonds has found a way to beat the state-secrets gag order.

In the coming weeks, insiders tell Narco News, Edmonds and the group she founded, the National Security Whistleblowers Coalition, will be coming forward with hard evidence, obtained legally from third-party sources, demonstrating that the Bush administration has used FISA warrants to engage in unauthorized surveillance of members of Congress and their staffs, and allegedly the FISA court was not aware of this misuse of the warrants.

CONTINUED w Links...

http://narcosphere.narconews.com/story/2007/2/25/172012...



Details on the above:

http://www.nswbc.org/Press%20Releases/PressRelease-Marc...

Every single one of We the People need to know. And the sooner We do, the quicker these treasonous turds go in the crapper.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Blue Flower Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 04:37 PM
Response to Original message
15. "Reading Makes a Country Great"
Could the message behind our caligular chimp be any more ironic, considering the photo at the top of this post?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-08-07 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #15
76. Contrast with JFK, who ordered his generals to read a variety of sources of info...
From "The President Wants to Know: Memos from the President's office, 1961-1963" by Edward B. Claflin (pp. 281-284):



President In November 1963, after Paul nitze took over as secretary of the navy, Kennedy sent a detailed memo describing what he viewed as the military and political responsibilities of the chiefs of the armed forces, the importance of education and languate training, and the role of Special Forces units. The memo was also addressed to Admiral David L. mcDonald, chief of naval operations.

7 November 1963

MEMORANDUM FOR:
Secretary Nitze
Admiral McDonald

I recently sent to the Senate the nomination of (Rear) Admiral (Charles C.) Kirkpatrick (Superintendent of the United States Naval Academy) as Chief of Naval Personnel. When I did so I was reminded that I have transmitted to the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Navy, and the Chief of Naval Operations a number of thoughts during the last two and one-half years, many relating to personnel matters. It might e well to summarize them for your information.

I believe that military and political factors are so interwoven that they cannot be separated into clear, well-defined categories, and that both must be mastered as a prerequisite to sound military and naval concepts. High ranking officers who hold positions of responsibility in the military departments must be thoroughly aware of the delicate sensitivities involved throughout the broad spectrum of international policy. The education, outside reading, duty patterns, and promotion processes of the officer corps must be designed to achieve this result.

It seems to me that service as an attach is extremely valuable for preparing officers for high command positions. It gives them much of the political breadth so necessary in senior officers if our military and political policies are to form an integrated national policy. Furthermore, attaches can make both short- and long-term contributions of major significance. In the short term, a valuable assessment of the political and military situation in a country can be made by attaches because of their access to information resulting from respect held by most foreigners for our military power. This will be particularly true where the military of the country have a prominent role.

To exploit this advantage they must be bilingual to verify what they hear. Otherwise they will be merely an information channel for what the government to which they are accredited wants us to believe In the long term, the admiration attaches earn for the United States and the bonds of friendship they forge with the coming leaders of these countries can be of inestimable value to this country. For these reasons, I believe that only our best officers should be assigned as attaches, that they and their staffs must be language qualified, and htat their creditable performance in this billet must carry added weight in the promotion process.

In August and September of 1961 I had an exchange of correspondence with the Secretary of the Navy concerning an officer whom the Secretary called the finest scientist in uniform; yet this officer had been passed over by the selection board for the grade of Rear Admiral. At the time I inquired if there were not values other than technical achievement which carried greater weight with selection boards. I was advised that there was in process a reorientation of thought throughout the Navy relative to the demands of the times for greater education and specialization in science, technology, and other fields. I said then that I would be glad to write a letter to selection boards, or take any other course of action you deem necessary, to emphasize this need. I still stand ready to do so. I would like to assure that officers who devote the time and energy to improving their capabilities through study do not lose promotion opportunity. Not only would such losses waste the resources that such trained officers represent, but they would discourage our bright young officers from so applying themselves.

One of the best ways for one to expand his horizons is through a regular reading program. That is why I have been so interested in the Service programs. The books proposed, and provided, must cover the full range of national security policynot just professional military subjects.

I know that much weight is placed on military assignments for developing the decision-making processes and sense of responsibility of our officers. Equally important is the need to serve in a staff capacityparticularly joint staffswhere the officer will be required to analyze, study, and prepare position papers on acute problems. I, therefore, support the present requirement that an officer must have served on a joint staff or an equivalent billet to be eligible for flag rank.

When I was in Norfolk in 1962 I noted particularly the members of the Seal Team. I was impressed by them as individuals and with the capability they possess as a group. As missiles assume more and more of the nuclear deterrent role and as your limited war mission grows, the need for special forces in the Navy and Marine Corps will increase.

I could summarize my thoughts by saying that an officers career must not consist of four years education and thirty years of experience. Throughout his career her must continue to study and to grow mentally if he is to provide the base upon which balanced decisions can be made. Personnel policies must be specifically pointed and administered to this end.

Since many of these points were raised with your predecessors as much as two years ago, I would appreciate your views on the following:

1. Has the quality of our attaches increased during this time? As a group how would you compare them with their contemporaries?

2. What percent of naval personnel assigned to attach staffs are bilingual?

3. To what degree has there been a reorientation of thought on the need for special training for officers? Is this reflected in their promotion success?

4. Do you have any quantitative measure of the success of th reading program?

5. What is the status of your Special Forces?

/s/ John F. Kennedy



The United States once had an intelligent, compassionate, well-traveled, well-read and charismatic leader for President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flirtus Donating Member (500 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 05:56 PM
Response to Original message
20. K&R - best post of the day
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wiggs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
21. I wonder if they're data mining for "turd", "Crawford", and "monkey" used in the same post.
I mean, if they want to find out who is posting critical speech, they wouldn't just use B*sh or King George...they'd have to enter in everyone's favorite epithets. That must be a fun list to see.

M sidetrip notwithstanding, your point is well heard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AuntPatsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 06:09 PM
Response to Original message
22. Sad how fast these threads drop, kicking to allow others to recall who is to blame
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
23. It's still a legitimate question: Where are the missing 10 pages?
Hello, All,

On October 1, 2002 the English-language German newspaper Die Zeit posted their long previously-published 9/11 timeline on the Net. Below is one paragraph from that timeline. You will notice the following sentence concerning the Aug 6, 2001 PDB delivered to Bush in Texas:

"On this morning, the report is straight from the CIA director. His PDB runs 11 and one-half printed pages, instead of the usual two to three, and carries the title, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S."

It appears that the Bush administration has redacted ten pages from the August 6, 2001 PDB before releasing it to the public. Maybe we all need to be asking what was in those ten removed pages.

Barbara

* * *

"Crawford, Aug. 6, 2001. U.S. president George W. Bush is on vacation. He wants to spend the whole month at his ranch in Texas. Every morning, however, he still receives his Presidential Daily Brief, or PDB, wherein the CIA informs the president about the country's security situation. On this morning, the report is straight from the CIA director. His PDB runs 11 and one-half printed pages, instead of the usual two to three, and carries the title, "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S." Therein the CIA chief explains that Qaeda has decided to carry out attacks within the United States, and that presumably members of the terrorist organization have been in the country for some time. It is unclear whether the CIA director informed the president about the statements of arrested Qaeda members. According to their confessions, the terrorist organization for some time has been thinking about hijacking planes and using them as missiles." from Die Zeit

http://www.buzzflash.com/mailbag/04/04/mai04101.html


April 12, 2004
Did the White House Pull a Bait and Censor with the August 6th PDB?

Wasn't the actual August 6, 2001, PDB a LOT longer?

First Indication That the Released PDB is Probably Not the Entire PDB:

CNN posted the August PDB in .pdf format.

It seems to be a photocopy of the redacted memo.

One problem is that the page 2 format is different in layout/font!

http://ledge.fleetwoodmac.net/showthread.php?t=13796&pa...


And then there's this old DU thread:

8/6/01 PDB -- Was It Really *11* Pages??
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Canuckistanian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. And speaking of "missing pages"
Edited on Mon Aug-06-07 08:02 PM by Canuckistanian
Whatever happened to the 2002 UN Iraq Report that Bush confiscated? The one where he "removed" over 8,000 pages of the 11,800 page original report?

http://www.mltoday.com/Pages/IraqWar/IraqCensored.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Yeah, what happened to those?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #24
48. Or the pages that the Saudis redacted from the 9/11 Commission report?..n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chulanowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
27. Obviously the clenis' fault
Divert! Terra! Liberal! Divert! Terra! Liberal!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
29. Makes me so angry just thinking about it
:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bravo Zulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-06-07 09:56 PM
Response to Original message
30. bu$h the businessman:
Bush the businessman:


What did we learn from this exercise?
1. Failed businessman Bush was rescued multiple times because he was the son of a politically powerful father.
2. How Bush got rich:
o He was invited to be a part owner of the Texas Rangers because his last name was Bush.
o He was able to secure his partnership in the team through the questionable sale of Harken stock.
o The Rangers got government to pay for, and confiscate, assets that enriched the team.
o Bush assisted in the effort to get government financial and legal support for the Rangers, and was rewarded with additional shares in the team.
o When governor, his support of Hicks management of state university finances was a factor in Hicks later paying handsomely for the Rangers.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quantess Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 01:05 AM
Response to Reply #30
31. Kick, and, an invitation for anyone to dispute this
or to concur.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 01:43 AM
Response to Original message
32. He wouldn't want to piss off his benefactors.....
besides, they have him over a barrel:

http://www.aijac.org.au/updates/Aug-03/040803.html#Arti...


28 Pages
by John B. Judis & Spencer Ackerman
The New Republic Online, Post date: 08.01.03


...there's been considerable speculation about the 28 pages blanked out from the section entitled "Certain Sensitive National Security Matters." The section cites "specific sources of foreign support for some of the September 11 hijackers," which most commentators have interpreted to mean Saudi contributions to Al Qaeda-linked charities. But an official who has read the report tells The New Republic that the support described in the report goes well beyond that: It involves connections between the hijacking plot and the very top levels of the Saudi royal family. "There's a lot more in the 28 pages than money. Everyone's chasing the charities," says this official. "They should be chasing direct links to high levels of the Saudi government. We're not talking about rogue elements. We're talking about a coordinated network that reaches right from the hijackers to multiple places in the Saudi government."

This week, Saudi Foreign Minister Saud Al Faisal flew to Washington for a hastily convened meeting with President Bush. Faisal publicly demanded that the 28 pages be declassified, but he had to have known in advance, and welcomed the fact, that his request would be denied--ostensibly friendly nations don't normally send their foreign ministers to meetings halfway around the world to be surprised. For his part, Bush has insisted that revealing the 28 pages would compromise "sources and methods that would make it harder for us to win the war on terror." But the chairman and vice-chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee at the time of the joint inquiry, Florida Democrat Bob Graham and Alabama Republican Richard Shelby, rejected that argument, contending that perhaps only 5 percent of the 28 pages would compromise national security if made public.

...

The Bush administration has, of course, good reason for not wanting to ruffle the Saudis by declassifying the 28 pages. Saudi Arabia sits atop 25 percent of the world's proven oil reserves and, through its dominant position in OPEC, essentially controls the global energy market. In addition to stabilizing world oil prices--most recently during the run-up to the war with Iraq--the Saudis also directly subsidize American consumers by offering oil at lower prices to the United States.

...

"If the 28 pages were to be made public, I have no question that the entire relationship with Saudi Arabia would change overnight."



Osama's Saudi Moles
Arnaud de Borchgrave, UPI Editor at Large
UPI, Friday, Aug. 1, 2003

...

Crown Prince Abdullah, who is de facto ruler due to the king's long illness, and most of his royal and non-royal Cabinet colleagues are firmly opposed to bin Laden and his evil terrorist enterprise. They know they are first on al-Qaeda's hit list.

But Abdullah doesn't speak for 24,000 royals. He doesn't even speak for Prince Naef bin Abdul Aziz, the interior minister who gives bin Laden a pass on 9/11. And who, as one of the seven Sudeiri brothers, is in line to inherit the throne. After Abdullah, Defense Minister Prince Sultan is next in line. Prince Salman, the popular governor of Riyadh, has made clear he will jump Naef when the time comes.

The 27 pages excised from a 900-page-long congressional report on the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks do not shed any light on the kingdom's split personality and the love/hate relationship its people have, with both Osama bin Laden and the United States.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 07:22 AM
Response to Original message
35. "On the bright side, the golfing was great." - Commander AWOL
Edited on Tue Aug-07-07 07:22 AM by SpiralHawk
"Oh yeah, almost forgot my republicon Homelander propaganda talking point: 'Too bad about all the dead people and stuff.' Now watch this drive."

- Commander AWOL

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-08-07 10:26 PM
Response to Reply #35
75. One of the most hard-hearted phrases ever uttered.
The satanic turd also is responsible for observing:



George W. Bush on 9/11: "But the day ended on a relatively humorous note."

Ladies Home Journal:

Peggy Noonan (the interviewer): You were separated on September 11th. What was it like when you saw each other again?

Laura Bush: Well, we just hugged. I think there was a certain amount of security in being with each other than being apart.

George W. Bush: But the day ended on a relatively humorous note. The agents said, youll be sleeping downstairs. Washingtons still a dangerous place. And I said no, I cant sleep down there, the bed didnt look comfortable. I was really tired, Laura was tired, we like our own bed. We like our own routine. You know, kind of a nester. I knew I had to deal with the issue the next day and provide strength and comfort to the country, and so I needed rest in order to be mentally prepared. So I told the agent were going upstairs, and he reluctantly said okay. Laura wears contacts, and she was sound asleep. Barney was there. And the agent comes running up and says, Were under attack. We need you downstairs, and so there we go. Im in my running shorts and my T-shirt, and Im barefooted. Got the dog in one hand, Laura had a cat, Im holding Laura

Laura Bush: I dont have my contacts in , and Im in my fuzzy house slippers

George W. Bush: And this guys out of breath, and were heading straight down to the basement because theres an incoming unidentified airplane, which is coming toward the White House. Then the guy says its a friendly airplane. And we hustle all the way back up stairs and go to bed.

Mrs. Bush: And we just lay there thinking about the way we must have looked.

Peggy Noonan (interviewer): So the day starts in tragedy and ends in Marx Brothers.

George W. Bush: Thats right we got a laugh out of it.

SOURCE (via DUers elehhhhna and merh):

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/20060601_bu... /



They are evil, evil bastards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norrin Radd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 07:38 AM
Response to Original message
36. k+r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 08:14 AM
Response to Original message
37. Serious question - not flame bait...
What could have been done to prevent the attacks of 9/11, assuming the PDB went to someone who was actually paying attention? I'd really like to know what actions could have been taken that would have been legal and within jurisdictional rules in place at the time.

CT'ers and LIHOP and MIHOP believers needn't answer, since you believe Bush was in on it anyway.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 08:42 AM
Response to Reply #37
39. You say it's not flamebait, then eliminate the posters who may respond.
My response is this:

Look to what was done by the Clinton administration to thwart the 2000 New Year's celebration attacks. Law enforcement and international cooperation.

Richard Clarke outlines this very clearly in his book.


MKJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 09:17 AM
Response to Reply #39
40. By definition, LIHOP and MIHOP disqualifies the question.
I know what they will say. Nothing could have prevented it, because Bush was in on it.

I haven't read Clarke's book yet, so maybe the answers are in there.

But I have asked this several times here on DU and have never gotten an answer with any specifics. Like, could we have closed down US airspace? Did we have enough probable cause to arrest those hijackers whose names we had? Did we have specific names to arrest? What would the charges have been?

As far as I can tell, the Millenium plot was foiled by an alert border guard, not any specific action by the Clinton administration.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #40
42. Looks pretty bad that he did nothing though. Almost like he wanted to "bring it on."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 12:24 PM
Response to Reply #42
51. Clearly he did not do anything... but I'm disinclined to blame anyone
Edited on Tue Aug-07-07 12:57 PM by Flatulo
for the attacks - from either the Clinton or Bush administrations.

Bush seems dumber than a bag of hammers, but I hadn't heard anyone claim that if thus and so had been done, the attacks would have been foiled.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #40
61. Both governments cooperated, and it was treated as a criminal case, with a thorough investigation.
You can't beat that methodical approach to problem solving.

I think you'd like his book...I've just decided to reread it, in light of recent events.

It marches out what happened in the hallways of DC, without a lot of emotive interpretation.

MKJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. I will read it. Clearly the Bush Doctrine is absolutely the wrong approach.
Anyone who believes that there *are* really terrorists out there would have to agree that we are not "winning" against them.

My personal opinion, and I am not all that smart, is that Muslims themselves will have to deal with this problem. Any interference from Western powers will drive more fence-sitters over to the radicals' side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 09:02 PM
Response to Reply #62
64. Bush Doctrine? Do you have a link?
MKJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #64
66. You know, pre-emptive war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BleedingHeartPatriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #66
68. Hmmm, Thanks for the link, it's a good one.
MKJ
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YankmeCrankme Donating Member (576 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 10:24 AM
Response to Reply #37
46. Lots of things could have been done
Heighten security at airports. Increased surveillance of suspects, detain and interrogate. Alerted FAA and military to be on guard. Run simulated hijackings to determine steps to take if happens. Gather intelligence to get more information on exact operational plan. Work closely with international law enforcement agencies to track suspects and disrupt operations. Coordinate efforts of all agencies involved.

Maybe they did all or some of these, but I don't recall any information coming out that they did.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginia Dare Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #37
49. I have a friend who was travelling abroad just prior to 9/11..
and there had been warnings issued to Americans flying on foreign airlines. Why no warnings here in the U.S.? Why wasn't security in the airports and on the airlines tightened? No guarantees, but that may have helped. At least people could have made an informed decision about their travels.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spacelady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #37
71. Nothing could have been done because the fix was in....I sincerely
believe that if Al Gore who was the duly elected President had taken office, this attack would not have occurred. Not because Gore would have done anything differently, just that it would not have occurred, period. The * Residency WAS the enabling momentum.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flatulo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-08-07 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #71
73. Sorry, but your logic eludes me.
If Gore would not have done anything different, then what would have deterred the attacks? Remember, the operational planning started in 1996.

Are you suggesting that the attacks were a response to Bush's presidency? If so, how do you explain that al Qaeda attacked the WTC when Clinton was president?

And what does 'enabling momentum' mean?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stephanie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 09:19 AM
Response to Original message
41. the Crawford Coward fled DC as soon as he heard the JULY briefing
So what did he care? He was already out of harm's way, safe in Texas. Why should he worry his beautiful mind about the rest of the American citizens. That would be hard work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gonnuts Donating Member (525 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
43. General Strike
Impeach/Out of Iraq GENERAL STRIKE SEPT.11th

Buy nothing - do nothing! Tell your co-workers, friends, neighbors, strangers, stay home from work, be you cab-driver, baker, banker, waitress, manager, painter, contractor, whatever. Is you future and the future of this country worth one day out of your life? Bring this country to a standstill!

Pass it on. Post a sign.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 08:10 PM
Response to Reply #43
63. Welcome to DU Gonnuts!

That would be an interesting and poignant date to stage a general strike. Let's do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bagrman Donating Member (889 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 09:54 AM
Response to Original message
44. They connected the dots, watch this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 10:07 AM
Response to Original message
45. He connected the dots all right. He let the 9/11 attack occur.
Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and those who had so much to gain in profits from the war machine needed a "Pearl Harbor" to convince the U.S. and the rest of the world to let them do it.

Remember the Maine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 11:01 AM
Response to Original message
50. Happy Anniversary, Shithead.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
52. Octafish ....
get over here so I can kiss you!!!

I couldn't agree more with your post. Sad thing is, many lives DID depend on his reaction to that memo. And, we all know how that chapter ended, don't we?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dragon82a Donating Member (68 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 01:47 PM
Response to Original message
55. Al Qaeda Gives Bush Award For Aiding Recruitment
Al Qaeda Gives Bush Award For Aiding Recruitment

Karachi, Pakistan - In their yearly awards ceremony, televised live throughout the entire Middle East, Al Qaeda today bestowed upon President George W. Bush their highest honor, the Golden Codpiece, in recognition of his many contributions to Al Qaeda over the last six years.

Presenting the award was Omar Ali, head of Al Qaeda's human resources division, who said "We are deeply indebted to President Bush. Nowhere in our wildest dreams did we believe he would be such a good ally to Al Qaeda and its many affiliates around the world. Six years ago, we were on our last legs and it was very difficult to attract fresh recruits who were willing to blow themselves up. Now, we have a long list of volunteers waiting to join the organization as well as a wonderful training facility in Iraq, all courtesy of the great George W. Bush. The best friend we could have ever hoped for."

Previous winners of the Golden Codpiece were Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Joe Lieberman and Condoleeza Rice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alcibiades Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 02:17 PM
Response to Original message
57. Don't insult monkeys!
I was born in a monkey year, according to the Chinese Zodiac.

W. was born on July 6, 1946, which makes him a rooster, and a cancer.

Cancer cock/cock cancer. However you spin it, it fits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brigid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 02:53 PM
Response to Original message
58. I seem to recall . . .
Clinton saying in his autobiography that he tried to engage the Bushies in a coversation about terrorism during the transition period, but they just didn't seem interested. Is it January 20, 2009, at 12 noon yet? :grr:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 02:59 PM
Response to Original message
59. K&R. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kip Humphrey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-07-07 10:26 PM
Response to Original message
67. And, here, I always assumed he said, "Condi... Did you bring the Vaseline?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobthedrummer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-09-07 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
77. Thursday's first kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobthedrummer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-10-07 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #77
78. Friday kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Sep 18th 2014, 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC