Have forwarded the LA Times piece by Chalmers Johnson. As to Bush administration complicity, or culpability, you have to admit, the pieces add up in a strange way. Coleen Rowley, (sorry, misspelled her name earlier) couldn't get a FISA warrant against Zacarias Moussaoui, even though she had confirmation from French Intel that he was Al Qaeda. Her supervisor in Washington, before submitting the FISA request (and previously, NO FISA requests had been refused!) deleted the confirmation from French Intel. This supervisor, just this last week, got an award at the White House. French Intel says they gave a full and substantial dossier on Moussaoui to both the CIA and the FBI - they say they received only 'sketchy' information. Like I say, add to this Ashcroft's actions, etc. and a case could be made that the attacks were allowed to happen. Then, many conservatives say FDR allowed the original Pearl Harbor to happen.
As for the Saudi's, the criticism of them is coming from everyone but the Bush administration; after all, Neil Bush last year took a contract to do PR work for the House of Saud......- Kent ----- Original Message ----- From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Kent Southard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 3:54 PM Subject: Re: The True Bush Agenda In Iraq NJC PC
But Kent, are you saying you believe the Bush administration may have caused 9/11? And the FBI was involved? This is arch-conspiracy stuff. It's like the Arabs saying the Jews caused it because there were no Jews in the WTC at the time. If you have time, I'd very much appreciate a link to the comment that America needs another Pearl Harbour, as I'd like to read the article. As for it being important to Bush to protect the Saudis, I've never read such anti-Saudi material coming from any administration before. Bush, unlike previous presidents, has put the Saudis firmly on notice that their days of working both sides are numbered. Sarah At 2:52 PM -0800 01/17/2003, Kent Southard wrote: >5. As for 'Americans having something to do with 9/11' - I look at facts >such as John Ashcroft, who had the USA-Patriot Act all ready to go when
the
>attack came; Ashcroft stopped flying commercial at the end of July due to
a
>'threat assessment.' Bush himself got out of town for the whole next
month,
>as did Cheney. It's fairly inexplicable that while CIA Director Tenet was >distraught with fear of an attack, was giving briefings, etc., that the
Bush
>administration had still not put a priority for the NSC to translate >transmissions from Al Qaeda and the Taliban - so when the messages came
thru
>that basically said 'Tomorrow's the big one!' they sat without attention. >And look at the FBI warnings that were not just ignored, but actively >subverted. The supervisor who cut off Cowley's investigation just got >promoted and an award, for pete's sake. If it's not all a matter of
criminal
>intent, that they let it happen on purpose, then it's certainly a matter
of
>criminal negligence. And as John O'Neill, the FBI counter-terrorism chief >who quit to die at the WTC said, 'It all goes back to the Saudi's, and
while
>protecting the Saudi's was important in every administration, it became
much
>more so with Bush.'
