March 12, 2004

• Is anybody surprised? Not me. Look back to November 1963, the coup d'etat began there, and the same names figure in the behind the scenes dealings in Amerikkka right up to the present day. I have many American friends, and all but one of them think they live in a democratic country. They regard the idea that elements within the government would sacrifice American lives for political ends to be inconceivable. This I find naive. My friends mock my 'conspiracy' theories - even tho' I'm certainly no crazy-ass conspiracy-head, merely a student of history - and the history of the world is replete with real conspiracies. Human history is one long list of secret societies warring against one another. Stupid fucking humans and their paltry, superficial social games. People wonder why extraterrestrials, if they exist, don't make open contact with humanity. I say it's pretty damn obvious. Live in peace, love one another, become one with nature. Join me in the greatest war one can fight; the greatest battle that a human being can undertake: the path of the spiritual warrior. blah blah pass the bong
• It's no secret that the Bush Family and the Saudi Royal Family are close friends, and I don't think any student of politics has any doubt that buckets of money and influence have been shopped in either direction for decades. To your list of naivete, my good prophet, I might add anyone who thinks that a person or family can reach the levels of power discussed here at all without alliances of this kind. As far as the bin Laden airlift? I hadn't heard about any "alleged al-Qaeda go-betweens", and it wasn't all that secret (Hersh had published most of the details in the New Yorker, iirc, over a year ago) but my understanding was that the bin Laden family and various Saudi royal family were both innocent of involvement in 9/11 but, in light of their associations both familial and political, could have been in very real danger here and abroad. Are you suggesting that the entire bin Laden family and members of the House of Saud ought to have been detained on no evdience of involvement other than their surnames? There's been a lot of talk of Osama in the aftermath of 9/11, but I have yet to hear anyone say that his family is anything but successful building contractors. I'm not saying that this was some very special favors for very special friends, which may or may not have been warranted; but as for putting Bush in bed with al-Qaeda? To what end? Perhaps, you are in many ways correct, Nostrildamus, when you say that history is replete with conspiracy. But one cannot discount the fact that the human mind is a pattern-seeking organ, it will manufacture pattern where there is none, and that coincidence and randomness is far more prevalent human activity than cabal and conspiracy.
• "Are you suggesting that the entire bin Laden family and members of the House of Saud ought to have been detained on no evdience of involvement other than their surnames?" Well, yes, actually, to intercept the question. I think this would have been a good start. That sort of weak evidence has been enough to detain various other individuals of no real linkage to the events. Under the circumstances, it would at least have been reasonable to ask them a few pertinent questions, rather than zap them out of the country on a day when all other aircraft were grounded, to say the least. In fact, it would seem to have been far better to place these people in a secure location in the U.S. rather than fly them straight out, if their security was indeed the prime motivation. There was no time to have conducted a definitive analysis of potential connection at that point. As it happens, there was (if memory serves) some sort of wedding ceremony some months after the events of September 2001 which involved Usama Bin Laden (it might actually have been his or one of his brothers; I haven't time to check Google just now) in which several members of his family actually attended also, so the story that he is in some way a family 'outcast' is questionable. Of course, one does not expect the US government to do anything to the House of Saud considering the importance of the alliances with them, but it still stinks to high heaven that the alleged 9-11 hijackers were mostly, I think, Saudis, and little has been done to chase up possible Saudi involvement in the atrocities. I don't think anyone really doubts where the money was coming from. On the point about the human mind seeking out patterns in every scenario; I agree. That is why a healthy dose of skepticism and logical rigour is needed when looking at this stuff. Even with this filter in place, though, the patterns of connectivity are worrisome.
• What I suspect happened is that the bin Laden family and the scions of the House of Saud asked their good friends the Bush's for a ride home on a day when they knew that getting out of America was going to be (ahem) problematic. I may have issues with Bush and his policies, but I don't think the man would knowingly provide a getaway to terrorists on the day that they've killed 2000 of his fellow citizens. And yes, I would hazard that some people have been detained for reasons as specious as surname. This doesn't make it right, not does the idea that "everyone's doing it, why shouldn't we?" hold water, imo. Isn't this one of the greater criticisms of the Bush Administration's prosecution of the war on terror, that it sidesteps constitutional protections? Yet you seem to advocate doing the same when it suits. As for bin Laden's family relations, I made mention that they were apparently uninvolved in 9/11. I hadn't heard about wedding thing, but...? Are we to be shocked today at the lackluster antipathy for terrorism and terrorists that the vaunted majority of Muslims are purported to hold? As for Saudi involvement, that's a little more trenchant, I agree. At the same time, can we blame the Bush Family (or for that matter, the Clinton family, since it happened during their tenure) for the actions of McVeigh and Nichols? And in the Saudi defense, they have been working far more proactively with us against terrorism recently than in the past, especially since (of course) the Riyahd bombings. But I agree with you on the Saudi money connection to both Bush and al Qaeda. Not exactly breaking news, though.
• "Ron Motley is suing prominent Saudis for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks — and, as a result, meddling in international affairs. Do plaintiffs' lawyers have a place in foreign policy?"

• Are you suggesting that the entire bin Laden family and members of the House of Saud ought to have been detained on no evdience of involvement other than their surnames?

  Far be it for me to advocate such a thing, but Camp X-Ray is full of people who have been detained without trial or representation for two years simply because they happened to be in a particular part of the world. The present administration clearly has no problem imprisoning people on pretty flimsy pretexts.
• The Arabian candidate. Bush's close ties to Islamic lobbying groups -- and to an accused supporter of Palestinian terrorism -- may have brought him his razor-thin margin of victory in Florida. Part 3 of Salon's exclusive excerpt from "House of Bush, House of Saud"
• Lost in transition. While the votes were counted in Florida, Bush Sr. went hunting in Spain with Prince Bandar -- and the incoming administration ignored warnings about al-Qaida. Part 4 of Salon's exclusive excerpt from "House of Bush, House of Saud"
• Saudis for Human Rights (get arrested.)
• How long until the hydrogen economy? I'm thoroughly sick of all this.
• Fearful of Saudi lawsuits, the British publisher of "House of Bush, House of Saud" has backed down from issuing the book
• The 9/11 commission should ask who authorized the evacuation of Saudi nationals in the days following the attacks
• According to Bob Woodward's new book, the Saudi ambassador, Prince Bandar, was told about the plan to invade Iraq before Colin Powel was told.
• Saudis Pledged Oil Price Cut Before U.S. Vote
• I think you'd have to ask Prince Bandar about that. MR. McCLELLAN: Our view is that the markets should determine -- QUESTION: The market doesn't. It's a cartel. MR. McCLELLAN: But our view is that that's what -- that the markets should determine prices. And that's the view we make very clear to producers around the world, including our friends in OPEC.
• Disney Forbidding Distribution of Film That Criticizes Bush: The new documentary by Michael Moore highlights connections between President Bush and prominent Saudis.
• /me runs in with link of Disney Forbidding Distribution of new Michael Moore film *pant* *pant* . . dammit!
• Bush's Uncle Is Executive At Bank Fined for Lax Oversight of Saudi Money
• a true bush....seize control, plunder and destroy, then retreat after paying fines and enjoy the spoils. and now it seems the house of cards is coming down. the bushmaster king applied the family technique to the whole country and will now be making his hasty exit...or maybe not...perhaps he is designated as the official scapegoat....as he may have been only the puppet to implement it all. of course, the obscure marvin bush is perhaps the best of all
• Abolish the terror tax
• The former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee tells Salon that the White House has suppressed convincing evidence that the Saudi royal family supported at least two of the hijackers. Hooray crooked administration! Screw those constituents!