posted on September 29, 2001 10:00:03 AM
that I wondered why there had been a stop in the reporting of the FBI progress into finding who it is who profited from short selling prior to the attack on WTC, saying that it seemed strange and that I wondered if they'd run across something that someone didn't want us to hear. Chris is my wife, for those who don't know that.
This morning I find that there is quite a buzz going on over the fact that the FBI has subpeonaed the records of the Bin Laden family because, it appears, the senior Bush has been doing business with them through something called the Carlyle Group.
There is a very large concern over the possibility that the Bin Ladens, who supposedly disowned the wayward terrorist may profit hugely from the increase in US defense spending. And because of the Carlyle Group if Bin Ladens profit wouldn't Bushes also profit?
Some bad fish smell in Washington D.C. this morning
"(Washington, DC) Judicial Watch, the public interest law firm
that investigates and prosecutes government corruption and
abuse, reacted with disbelief to The Wall Street Journal report of
yesterday that George H.W. Bush, the father of President Bush,
works for the bin Laden family business in Saudi Arabia through the
Carlyle Group, an international consulting firm. The senior Bush had
met with the bin Laden family at least twice. (Other top
Republicans are also associated with the Carlyle group, such as
former Secretary of State James A. Baker.) The terrorist leader
Osama bin Laden had supposedly been “disowned” by his family,
which runs a multi-billion dollar business in Saudi Arabia and is a
major investor in the senior Bush’s firm. Other reports have
questioned, though, whether members of his Saudi family have
truly cut off Osama bin Laden. Indeed, the Journal also reported
yesterday that the FBI has subpoenaed the bin Laden family
business’s bank records.
“This conflict of interest has now turned into a scandal. The idea
of the President’s father, an ex-president himself, doing business
with a company under investigation by the FBI in the terror
attacks of September 11 is horrible. President Bush should not ask,
but demand, that his father pull out of the Carlyle Group,” stated
Judicial Watch Chairman and General Counsel Larry Klayman.
“This has the potential of making ‘Billygate’ (Jimmy Carter’s
brother’s dealings with Libya) look like small potatoes,” added
Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton."
posted on September 29, 2001 10:22:06 AM
My own Brother-in-Law is a crook and an ass but what am I supposed to do? They won't let me put a ball between his beady little eyes anymore because we can't duel. Just because we are related is nothing I can do anything about. You can't pick your relatives. Am I supposed to treat the other members of the family badly because of that snake?
posted on September 29, 2001 10:28:06 AM
But your Brother-in-Law wasn't once President of the US, was he?
I don't think the issue is about picking and choosing relatives.
We do elect our Presidents, though.
(edit: I read it again, Gravid. We're you referring to a Bin Ladin relative or a Bush relative with your post?)
[ edited by Zoomin on Sep 29, 2001 10:30 AM ]
posted on September 29, 2001 11:05:42 AM
Actually, I just watched a report on MSNBC that covered just this story. The thing to remember here is that the Bin Laden family is NOT your regular old "nuclear family" as we call it here in America.
Osama is the 17th child of 54 born to the senior Bin Laden from multiple(16?)wives. Upon the death of the father, each child came into an inheritance of millions. Many of the siblings do have homes in the United States, and are involved in business ventures here and also philanthropic foundations they established (Harvard Business School). Sheik Bin Laden (the father)was very successful in Saudi Arabia due to his close relationship with Saudi royals, those very royals against whom Osama is determined to overthrow. While there is some evidence that there IS sympathetic and possibly financial support from SOME Bin Laden siblings, certainly NOT ALL (or even most)of them are in cahoots with Osama. Remember, that there were 54 kids born to Bin Laden senior, and they were not raised together or even necessarily in the same household. One wonders precisely how much time that Bin Laden senior could even have had to spend with each child and still run his very successful business. I mean this is not a guy who came home from work every night to toss a few baseballs and help with the homework. It's an extremely large and varied "family" loosely connected by virtue of having the same "father".
posted on September 29, 2001 11:14:55 AM
A Bin Laden relative.
You can't blame the whole family because they have one crappy member. That is just wrong.
A fool makes an enemy where there is no need. There are enough real ones. If you treat the whole family as enemies then I could not blame them for saying - "Well if we are going to have the blame we may as well have the game
The fact that they are "under investigation" by the FBI means nothing to me when they are investigated because they are related. This is a family of hundreds of members.
This under investigation stuff is like the cop who has the suspect in the station and asks "So if you are so innocent why did I bring you in? Circular logic.
The police here in Detroit do the same thing.
Assume if you are related you are involved with a criminals acts. They even locked a pregnant woman up for a couple weeks because they refused to believe she did not know where her husband was they had a warrent for.
No other connection but she was married to the fellow.
posted on September 29, 2001 11:21:14 AM
And if it matters at all, the United States contracted with the Bin Laden construction group to rebuild the Marine barracks that were bombed in Saudi Arabia. Who was president when that bombing happened? Clinton or Bush?
posted on September 29, 2001 12:26:18 PM
Thanks for clarifying, Gravid.
When I re-read your post I realized that I must have misinterpreted (I initially thought you were referring to the Bush Boys!).
I had no idea that the Bin Laden family was *that* large!
Odds would say that more than just Osama are terrorists, doncha think?
In the US, we'd have lotsa rebellious/anti-establishment/authority defying sons when Daddy is busy becoming successful and reproducing.
Hey, it looks like I blamed Daddy for the crimes of his terrorist son up there.
oops!
posted on September 29, 2001 01:43:02 PM
It is also worth mentioning that the Koran allows that one can have 3 wives and you must treat them all equally. To have 54 kids he had to exceed 3 for sure. And I would like to know who could treat them equally.
You're missing the point at two levels. You said "The fact that they are "under investigation" by the FBI means nothing to me when they are investigated because they are related." when there is no indication that relationships are the reason that the family records are under subpeona. Consider the possibility at least that they are demanding those records because they have been shown to be amongst those who DID profit from the short sell prior to the attack. Also, you may have a rotten brother in law, he may feel that he does. But neither circumstance has a thing to do with this one.
If it is the case, and it appears that it is, that the bin laden family may have profited as above, is it a comfortable prospect that the president's father may also have thus profited? I don't think that it is and at the least Bush senior should remove himself from any possible appearance of having done so in order to both demonstrate a support for the country, his son, and the general feeling of our people toward anyone who may have made money from that act.
There are enough reports flying around describing various early warnings received prior to this attack to make the closeness of the bin laden siblings irrelevant.
There should not be any connection between any US citizen and any profiteer in this, however that profiteer got the news. If this truly is a state of war then any such activity should be seen as traitorous or at the least as giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
posted on September 29, 2001 04:43:09 PM
as zoomin said, it is more likely that out of so many offspring there is more than one who just might have unholy tendencies! if that one is still well concealed within the brood he may even be part of the business entity that crosses paths with the Bush/Baker/Carlyle advisory. makes for interesting possibilities!
