George W. Bush: “My Dad Was Meeting with the Brother of Osama on September 
11, 2001. Does That Make Him a Terror Suspect?”
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky 
<http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/michel-chossudovsky>
Global Research, March 17, 2015
Region: USA <http://www.globalresearch.ca/region/usa>
Theme: 9/11 & 'War on Terrorism' 
<http://www.globalresearch.ca/theme/9-11-war-on-terrorism>
<http://www.globalresearch.ca/george-w-bush-my-dad-was-meeting-with-the-brother-of-osama-on-september-11-2001-does-that-make-him-a-terror-suspect/5436650#>

<http://www.globalresearch.ca/george-w-bush-my-dad-was-meeting-with-the-brother-of-osama-on-september-11-2001-does-that-make-him-a-terror-suspect/5436650?print=1>
 2142 
  240  22 
 
  5047
[image: osama]

*Under the anti terrorist legislation adopted in Western countries, a 
person can be arrested for visiting an “anti-American” or “Islamist” 
website on the internet.  **In the US, habeas corpus has been scrapped, the 
police can arrest a citizen on mere suspicion of “terror activities” 
without a warrant. Moreover, under Obama, the practice of “extrajudicial 
killing” applies to suspected US citizens.   *

In Canada, under the clauses of  Canada’s proposed C-51 “Anti-terrorism” 
Bill, 
<http://www.globalresearch.ca/canadas-antiterrorism-bill-c-51-a-legal-primer-expands-the-powers-of-canadas-spy-agency-allows-arrest-on-mere-suspicion/5436727>
 Canadian 
citizens can be arrested on a mere suspicion:

 Six Muslim young adults stand in front of a mosque late at night in heated 
discussion in some foreign language. … They may be talking about video 
games, or sports, or girls, or advocating the overthrow of the Harper 
government. Who knows? … But the new standard for arrest and 
detention—reason to suspect that they may commit an act—is so low that an 
officer may be inclined to arrest and detain them in order to investigate 
further. … They could act on mere suspicion that an arrest is likely to 
prevent any terrorist activity. Yesterday, the Muslim men were freely 
exercising constitutional rights to freedom of expression and assembly. 
Today they are to be arrested. (Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives, 
 February 15, 2015) 

*Anti-Terrorism Double Standards*

Ironically, the anti-terrorist legislation does not apply to politicians in 
high office, namely to the “State sponsors of terrorism”; nor does it apply 
to U.S. or Canadian diplomats, intelligence officials, who are routinely in 
liaison with terrorist organizations in the Middle East.  
<http://www.globalresearch.ca/canada-state-sponsor-of-terrorism-role-of-canadian-embassy-in-jordan-in-isis-recruitment/5436660>

Individuals can be arrested but presidents and prime ministers are allowed 
to mingle and socialize with family members of the World’s most renowned 
terrorist and alleged architect of the 9/11 attacks:* Osama bin Laden. *

Lest we forget, one day before the 9/11 attacks, the dad of the sitting 
President of the United States of America,* George Herbert Walker Bush* was 
meeting none other than Shafig bin Laden, the brother of terror mastermind 
Osama bin Laden. It was a routine business meeting on September 10-11, no 
conflict of interest, no relationship to the 9/11 attacks which allegedly 
were carried out on the orders of Shafiq’s brother Osama.

Confirmed by the Washington Post, “fellow investors” of the Carlyle Group 
including Osama’s brother *Shafiq bin Laden* and Dubya’s dad former 
President *George H. W. Bush* met in the plush surroundings of the 
Ritz-Carlton Hotel on September 10-11, 2001. Their business encounter under 
the auspices of the Carlyle Group was unfortunately interrupted on 
September 11 by the 9/11 attacks.

It didn’t help that as the World Trade Center burned on Sept. 11, 2001, *the 
news interrupted a Carlyle business conference at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel 
here attended by a brother of Osama bin Laden [Shafiq bin Laden]. Former 
president Bush* [senior], a fellow investor, had been with him at the 
conference the previous day. (Greg Schneider, Pairing the Powerful With the 
Rich, Washington Post, March 16, 2003)

A timely business meeting on September 10-11 at the Ritz Carlton with 
Osama’s brother disrupted by the 9/11 attacks: pure coincidence,  totally 
unrelated to the 9/11 attacks.

A day later, on the evening of September 11, 2001, president George W. Bush 
pronounced a historic speech in which he defined the relationship between 
“terrorists’ and “state sponsors of terrorism”:

The search is underway for those who are *behind these evil acts*. I’ve 
directed the full resources of our intelligence and law enforcement 
communities *to find those responsible and to bring them to justice. We 
will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts 
and those who harbor them.*

Also in attendance at the Ritz Carlton meetings were former secretary of 
defense Frank Carlucci, former secretary of state James Baker III, and 
other unnamed members of the bin Laden family.

The bin Laden – Bush Carlyle Group meeting was also confirmed by The 
Economist in a June 2003 article entitled C- for Capitalism 
<http://www.economist.com/node/1875084>:

ON the day Osama bin Laden’s men attacked America, Shafiq bin Laden, 
described as an estranged brother of the terrorist, was at an investment 
conference in Washington, DC, along with two people who are close to 
President George Bush: his father, the first President Bush, and James 
Baker, the former secretary of state who masterminded the legal campaign 
that secured Dubya’s move to the White House. The conference was hosted by 
the Carlyle Group, a private equity firm that manages billions of dollars, 
including, at the time, some bin Laden family wealth. It also employs 
Messrs Bush and Baker.

In the immediate aftermath of the attacks, *when no one was being allowed 
in or out of the United States, many members of the bin Laden family in 
America were spirited home to Saudi Arabia. The revival of defence spending 
that followed greatly increased the value of the Carlyle Group’s 
investments in defence companies.*(emphasis added)

The Carlyle Group is  embroiled  with the defense and intelligence 
establishment. “It is widely regarded as an extension of the US government, 
or at least the National Security Agency, the CIA, and the Pentagon.”

Double standards in anti-terrorism legislation? Double standards in police 
and law enforcement? No questions asked. No police investigation or 
interrogation of Osama’s brother Shafig.
Normally, under established rules of police investigation, both Shafig bin 
Laden and the president’s dad George Herbert Walker Bush should have been 
remanded in custody for police questioning and in all likelihood, Shafig 
bin Laden would have been arrested as a potential suspect. But that did not 
happen.

The presence of members of the bin Laden family meeting up with the father 
of the president of the United States was hushed up and 13 members of the 
bin Ladens including Shafig were flown out of the US on September 19, 2001 
in a plane chartered by the White House. Meanwhile, suspected Muslims are 
arrested on a mere suspicion, –e.g. that they have an old school friend, 
who’s cousin’s 86 year old grandmother is an alleged sympathizer of the 
“jihad”.

Timely departure of Shafig et al: On the day following the departure of the 
bin Ladens, President Bush delivered an address to a joint session of the 
House and the Senate (September 20, 2001), in which he stated unequivocally 
his administration’s intent to *“pursue nations that provide aid or safe 
haven to terrorism”*, with no exceptions (e.g. Saudi Arabia and Pakistan)

“We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive 
them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. *And we will 
pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism.* Every nation, 
in every region, now has a decision to make.

Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.)

>From this day forward, *any nation that continues to harbor or support 
terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime* [state 
sponsor of terrorism].  President George W. Bush, 20 September 2001 
(emphasis added)

*Osama behind 9/11?*

According to CIA Director George Tenet in a late morning statement on 
September 11, 2001, Al Qaeda under the helm of Osama bin Laden was “behind 
these evil acts”.

The alleged responsibility of Osama bin Laden in carrying out the 9/11 
attacks was later confirmed by Britain’s Prime Minister Tony Blair in a 
statement to the the House of Commons on October 4, 2001.  This did not, 
 however,  prevent Tony Blair from socializing with Saudi Prince Bandar bin 
Sultan, who prior to 9/11 had allegedly provided millions of dollars of 
financial assistance to the Al Qaeda terror network:

In testimony [accused hijacker] Moussawi said he created a database of 
al-Qaeda donors, including members of the royal family such as former 
intelligence chief Prince Turki al-Faisal and Prince Bandar bin Sultan, who 
was Saudi ambassador to the United States for 22 years until 2005. Mint 
Press, 
<http://www.mintpressnews.com/911-plotter-says-saudi-royal-family-directly-involved-in-911-attacks/201903/>
 February 
14, 2015)

[image: Tony Blair, Bandar bin Sultan]

Prince Bandar bin Sultan, right receives Mideast envoy Tony Blair, the 
ex-prime minister of Britain after his arrival in Jiddah, Saudi Arabia.  
Bandar bin Sultan, was accused of direct support for al-Qaeda before the 
9/11 attacks (undated). (Mint Press, February 15, 2015)

Known and documented, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Pakistan have been 
harboring Al Qaeda affiliated terrorists for more than twenty years.

In accordance with George W. Bush’s September 2001 address to the House and 
the Senate, America’s staunchest allies –which routinely provide support to 
terrorists– should have been categorized as “hostile regimes”. Yet in 
practice, these “nations that provide a safe haven to terrorism” are acting 
on behalf of the US. They are in permanent and close liaison with 
Washington and NATO headquarters in Brussels.

“You are either with us or with the terrorists”, said George W. in the wake 
of 9/11. In fact the US government is both “with us” and “with the 
terrorists”. *The United States is the ultimate “state sponsor of 
terrorism” which has entrusted its allies (Saudi Arabia, et al) with the 
tasks of recruitment and training of terrorists. *

*Flash Forward: NATO and The Islamic State (ISIS)*

State sponsorship of terrorism prevails, with NATO playing a central role 
in the process of financing, training and recruitment of terrorists. 
According to Israeli intelligence sources,  *NATO and the Turkish High 
Command have been involved in the recruitment of ISIS and Al Nusrah 
mercenaries* from the outset of the Syrian insurgency in March 2011.

 *“a campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle East 
countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the Syrian rebels. The 
Turkish army would house these volunteers, train them and secure their 
passage into Syria.* (DEBKAfile, NATO to give rebels anti-tank weapons, 
August 14, 2011.)

Similarly, Western Special Forces and Western intelligence operatives had 
integrated the ranks of the ISIS. British Special Forces and MI6 have been 
involved in training jihadist rebels in Syria. In turn, US, Canada embassy 
officials are in liaison with terrorist entities.

Update (March 18, 2015)

*Concluding Remarks*

What should be clear to Western public opinion is that *“the war on 
terrorism” is a lie. The architects of terrorism are the Western 
governments and their intelligence services. The anti-terrorism legislation 
serves the following objectives: *

1. It conveys the illusion that Western society is threatened by Muslim 
terrorists and that Western governments are committed to the security of 
their citizens. This in itself constitutes the basis of the demonization 
campaign directed against Muslims;

2. It presents the “Global War on Terrorism” against an outside enemy as a 
legitimate undertaking, thereby providing a justification for US-NATO’s 
wars of aggression;

3. It protects the political and intelligence architects of terrorism. It 
upholds the legitimacy of the “State sponsors of terrorism” (State 
officials in high office) and their intelligence services involved in the 
covert financing, recruitment and training of terrorists on behalf of the 
Western military alliance;

4. “The Global War on Terrorism” is a criminal undertaking. Those who 
uphold the truth will be targeted. The Anti-terrorism legislation will be 
used against  those who question the  validity of the “Global War on 
Terrorism” consensus. That campaign has already commenced through the 
targeting of so-called “conspiracy theorists”.

These issues have been amply documented, see:

*Canada, State Sponsor of Terrorism? Role of Canadian Embassy in Jordan in 
ISIS Recruitment? 
<http://www.globalresearch.ca/canada-state-sponsor-of-terrorism-role-of-canadian-embassy-in-jordan-in-isis-recruitment/5436660>*
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky 
<http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/michel-chossudovsky>, March 15, 2015

*The Ultimate War Crime: America’s “Global War on Terrorism” 
<http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-ultimate-war-crime-americas-global-war-on-terrorism/5434478>*
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky 
<http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/michel-chossudovsky>, March 08, 2015
*Twenty-six Things About the Islamic State (ISIL) that Obama Does Not Want 
You to Know About 
<http://www.globalresearch.ca/twenty-six-things-about-the-islamic-state-isil-that-obama-does-not-want-you-to-know-about/5414735>*
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky 
<http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/michel-chossudovsky>, January 09, 2015
The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Prof Michel Chossudovsky 
<http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/michel-chossudovsky>, Global Research, 
2015

On Sunday, February 28, 2016 at 7:53:40 AM UTC-6, Travis wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Pamela Geller <http://freedomoutpost.com/author/pamelageller/> February 
> 26, 2016 
> <http://freedomoutpost.com/marco-rubio-our-issue-is-not-with-islam/> 
>
> *Marco Rubio: Our issue is not with Islam *
>
>  
>
> This is one very excellent reason (among many) why  Marco Rubio 
> <http://freedomoutpost.com/?s=marco+rubio> (aka Jeb 2.0) should not be 
> our nominee. The fact is that the Islamic doctrine of jihad 
> <http://www.amazon.com/The-Complete-Infidels-Guide-Koran/dp/1596981040/ref=as_li_bk_tl/?tag=freedomoutpos-20&linkId=b0d70bf684f1d7fac181733c9fb51311&linkCode=ktl>[image:
>  
> Description: 
> https://ir-na.amazon-adsystem.com/e/ir?source=bk&t=freedomoutpos-20&bm-id=default&l=ktl&linkId=b0d70bf684f1d7fac181733c9fb51311&_cb=1456494328214]
>  
> (holy war) is very much the problem.
>
> And as for his asinine response on the gun-range — here is the back story 
> on that: Muslim Who Is Suing Gun Range Demanded CAIR Float for Veteran’s 
> Day Parade. 
> <http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/22/pamela-geller-muslim-who-is-suing-gun-range-demanded-cair-float-for-veterans-day-parade/>
>
> In his response, he shows an astonishing ignorance that is unforgivable 
> considering the danger jihad presents and the human toll it has taken
>
> “Marco Rubio: It Is ‘Wrong’ And ‘Immoral’ To Ban Muslim-Americans From Gun 
> Ranges,” by Charlie Spiering, Breitbart, 
> <http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/02/25/marco-rubio-it-is-wrong-and-immoral-to-ban-muslim-americans-from-gun-ranges/>
>  
> 25 Feb 2016:
>
> Senator Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) condemned a recreational gun range that 
> banned Muslims from their facility, during a presidential forum with Fox 
> News host Megyn Kelly.
>
> One member of the audience asked Rubio about the incident, where a 
> Muslim-American army reservist was denied access to the facility in 
> Oklahoma, and asked for his reaction to the incident.
> *“The story you just told me is wrong. It’s immoral. We should not be 
> doing that to people,” Rubio said. “The bottom line is there are millions 
> of patriotic Muslim Americans.”*A lawsuit against the gun range was filed 
> by 29-year-old Raja’ee Fatihah, a board member of the Oklahoma chapter of 
> the Muslim Council on American-Islamic Relations. The gun range owner 
> argues that Fatihah was denied service because he was “belligerent” and 
> that the “Muslim free” signage in his business was protected by free speech.
>
> Rubio told the audience that patriotic Muslims had died defending the 
> country in the Armed forces, separating them from the dangerous radical 
> Islamists that were threatening America.
>
> *“Our issue is not with patriotic Muslim Americans. It’s not even with 
> Islam.* It is with radical jihadis. It with radical Islam, which is a 
> politicization and a radical ideology that threatens Islam,” he said.
>
> Rubio cited ISIS as a threat to not only Americans, but to Muslims who 
> refused to practice their radical form of the religion.
>
> Also incorrect. ISIS kills no-Sunni and secular Muslims because they are 
> considered heretics all in accordance with Islamic law.
>
> “I think we are capable of recognizing the threat of radical Islam without 
> having to demonize an entire religion, especially those Americans here that 
> are so loyal to America.”
>
>
> __._,_.___
> ------------------------------
> Posted by: "Beowulf" <[email protected] <javascript:>> 
> ------------------------------
>
>
> Visit Your Group 
> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmcGYxNWs4BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NTY2MTQ0NjU->
>  
>    
>    
> [image: Yahoo! Groups] 
> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlcnJlOWZwBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ1NjYxNDQ2Nw-->
>  
> • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • 
> Unsubscribe <javascript:> • Terms of Use 
> <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> 
>
> __,_._,___
>
>
>

-- 
-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to