Posted on 02/11/2002 9:15:10 AM PST by Triple
If they stand up to scrutiny - wow.
The article links Bush to Sandy Kress but never mentions that Kress is a Democrat. Not only that, Kress is the former chairman of the Dallas Democratic Party! Further, it says that the Holy Land foundation is in Richmond, Texas -- it's actually just a few blocks from where I work here in lovely Richardson, Texas.
Other than totally botching up the facts and having no basis for drawing its sensationalist Bush conspiracy theories, it's a pretty good article. Perhaps someone should inform the the Boston Herald of their goofs.
Perhaps that someone should be you?!
The Boston Herald
One Herald Square
Boston MA 02106
P.O. Box 2096
Boston MA 02106-2096
E-mail: feedback@bostonherald.com
Switchboard: 617.426.3000
Tips, comments: 617.619.6789
This includes evidence the Boston Globe knows of and has written about concerning the FBI, under Bush and Mueller, ignoring repeated warnings from active FBI agents form Chicago and Minneapolis as well as attorney David Schippers. It also includes evidence that the FBI knew the hijacker pilots were training in OKC flight schools for two years for terror attacks on buildings with the help of Hamas an Iraq terror individuals in OKC right up until the time of 9/11.
I have been getting bashed by those who do not like my writing about the bad appearances of Bush lawyer connections with these Saudis and Holy Land. GWBush has been involved in business deals with Mahfouz before his Presidency as well. And GW Bush ordered the FBI to not investigate Saudi business connections in the US involving the Bin Laden family one month before the 9/11 attacks.
These are all facts which must be examined and investigated if for no other reason than maintain public trust and put changes in place that will prevent Saudi terror businessmen men from putting Bush and the country in any further danger.
In all fairness Clinton was involved with Mahfouz and knew about Holy Land and Hamas connections just like Bush and the FBI (since 1993). But this should not remove the FBI , DOJ and Bush from close public scrutiny and criticism to make sure they do not repeat any mistakes or bad policies that do not do an adequate job of preventing terror attacks within the US. The buck does stop with the current President not just Clinton. Bush is now responsible for correcting any mistakes and bad policies of his personnel (and even ones he may have made) and anyone leftover from Clinton administration now serving in the Bush administration especially since Bush has been publicly and privately briefed and told about these failures.
InfoCom, next door to Holy Land was raided by the FBI on 9//6/2001, just 5 days before the 9/11 attacks. InfoCom ran a website and transferred funds for Holy Land and was a nerve cell for terror group transactions including Hamas and ALQeada and the Saudis. InfoCom also ran a website for Iraq.
A Washington Post article on January 30, 2002, "Bush Seeks to Restrict Hil Probes of Sept 11" by Mike Allen reported that Bush was trying to convince Congress to hold only closed door, secret hearings and no public hearings on the failures of the FBI and CIA that led to the 9/11 attacks.
I think public hearings need to be held on these failures to make it more likely that any failures will not be repeated and to make the necessary changes in policy, personnel and procedures. Not holding public hearings and keeping these matters too secret will also in the long run erode public trust and confidence in the war on terror at home by the FBI, CIA and the Bush administration in my opinion.
I believe public and closed door hearings can be held while protecting legitimate security and intelligence issues.
Please see reply #15.
I don't like the title - but according to posting rules - did not change it.
Whoever implied that I must be a democrat for posting this -why would you think that?
I agree with most comments that in spite of the title, bush is not tarred by this brush? Do you see it differently?
and
Was your screen name assigned, or did you pick it?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59376-2002Jan30.html
The link is still good.
glad you found this.
Regards,
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.