NYT puts W very close to Saudis hijackers friends:

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/02/national/02SAUD.html?hp
August 2, 2003
Report on 9/11 Suggests a Role by Saudi Spies
By JAMES RISEN and DAVID JOHNSTON
snip
People familiar with the report and who spoke on condition of not being
named said that the two Saudi citizens, Omar al-Bayoumi and Osama
Bassnan, operated in a complex web of financial relationships with
officials of the Saudi government. The sections that focus on them draw
connections between the two men, two hijackers, and Saudi officials.
snip
One unresolved issue in the classified part of the report concerned Mr.
Bassnan's visit to Houston after the attacks. While Saudi Crown Prince
Abdullah met with President Bush, Mr. Bassnan met with a Saudi in his
entourage, according to the report. It is not known what they discussed.

who came to the US asking for the 28 pages of the 9/11 reportto be released was a big gamble. The benefit, if successful, would be to make the Saudis look innocent by begging the question: "Why would they want to have damning evidence revealed"? Bush, would also be able to "distance himself" from the Saudi elites by "not cooperating" with them. The cost/risk to this Saudi reaction is that the Press will continue to focus on this issue with greater zeal now that the Saudi elites are trying to cover their more than ample asses. The action--reaction dynamic fuels more interest.

This article shows that the Press is not going to let it go, but instead is taking what little information it has on the Saudi hijacker link and working it for all its worth.

Call me an optimist, but I think the Press and Congress (Schumer) are one step away from the next question: "Is our President a traitor?"

They would not have said anything about declassifying the pages if they didn't know that Bush would refuse.

Bush owes his wealth to the Saudis, he will stay their humble servant.

The gamble was with the public and Press following the story further instead of being satisfied with the Saudis "apparent" innocence and letting it drop. For sure the Saudis knew Bush would use the "national security" card to try to keep the info under wraps.

The shitstorm coming down on Bush is unstoppable and they are just trying to make the best out of a very, very weak hand.

If a shitstorm lands on a politician that population will follow over the edge of the cliff, does it matter?

Sounds deep and interesting . . . I just can't follow your question.

My point is that it doesn't matter what kind of shitstorm lands on Shrub since the drooling masses will adore him even if he ordered Sept 11 himself. The drooling masses don't want to hear bad things about Great Leader so they'll just ignore any bad news that happens to leak out.

But if people keep dying in Iraq and the economy goes belly up, which it already has if we include the debt, then Bush will be in doodoo. The groundswell of the brewing scandal over Iraq is just starting, IMHO.

Provided that the fundies and neo-cons are the first ones to jump ! We can work with the rest.

....really a threat to Bush.

"Keep your mouth shut, George, and keep in line. Or we're going to force the release of those 28 pages. And you'll be back herding armadillo."

Part of the population that has been following him will come to a huge screeching halt at the cliff's edge. Those that go down with him....eh. :shrug: :)

fact is, it's pretty likely that those 28 pages get leaked to the press in the next few months.

Why? because it's a *congressional* report. Plenty of congressmen, plenty of congressional staff, have seen it and have copies. This isn't something that is buried in the vault at Langley...there's probably copies sitting in the "Recycled" folders on staffers laptops.

So if there's a Saudi calculation, it's probably that the 28pp will come out eventually, so they might as well come out now. Besides,
it's not like they have elections or anything.

ShrubCo would just like to keep a lid on it until '05, or at least until the 9/11 report is "old news".

and Graham bit by bit is leaking out stuff too...

Saudis have quite an influence on the price of gas and it has been suggested they could really screw Bush out of re-election by hiking gas prices at a strategic moment, if he doesn't (or really, if his daddy doesn't) do what the Saudis want him to do.

I keep thinking about the good old days when each town had AT LEAST two newspapers and they were always trying to scoop each other on stuff. Some of them had two or three editions a day. Come to think of it just about every town I have ever lived in had a paper that was a merger of two others: Asheville Citizen-Times, Richmond Times-Dispatch, Monroe Enquirer-Journal, Hendersonville Times-News. It must have been great to live in times when newspapers competed with each other for stories and reporters were driven to report in order to keep up with the paper across town. They'd have had those 28 pages in print by the next morning probably, or at least plenty of leaks as to what is in them, and have the Saudis interviewed, etc.

I just wonder if the whole Saudi trip over here was staged, for whatever reason.

The last I heard, none of the Saudi royal family are worried about losing any votes. The US is mortgaged to the hilt and the Saudis hold much of the paper. When they sell oil for dollars, just what do folks really think they're doing with those dollars? (Other than military hardware, they don't buy our goods. The US 'services' they buy are mostly crony capitalists connected to the global corporatists in bed with the Busholinis.)

Just another Win-Win for the Bush Organized Crime Family. Where's the Trifecta? Oh yeah, they own Congress.

that the hijackers lived with in San Diego ?

i believe he was an Arab-American

is there a connection to these two Saudi nationals ?

What if SA is effectively the rulers of the USA with a bush in office?

Think about it. They sell us a huge chunk of the oil (real wealth) we buy with our pieces of green paper (not worth the paper its printed on if we don't have a shitload of oil - our industry depends on their oil). Because of this relationship, they have massive investment in the us, and practically own our Pretzeldent due to past favors granted like investment in bush family ventures). But the thing they don't have over us is military power, so they support terrorists who eventually unleash 9/11 on us. terrorists are a 'wildcard' against bush&co - SA saying that even though they don't have the might to take us head-on, they sure as heck can royally screw with us if they want. The reason that SA people can get visas whenever they want to come to the US is because, in effect, they OWN our ass! bush/cheney don't really mind the whole 9/11 situation though because the existence of the terrorists will help them keep power/control and also enrich there buddies at Carlyle and Halliburton, and gives them the ability to take over Iraq and possibly get out from under SA ruling the US by getting oil of our own. Plus I bet SA has mass investments in defence contractors, too, right? Anybody know? But now, bush can't come out and take SA to the woodshed for committing 9/11 because a)Maybe SA told him it was coming and wont hesitate to tell the world bush knew, and b)Iraq's oil isn't up and pumping yet, and shrub has a mighty mess on his hands there, so we don't have the leverage to call them out on it. Don't forget SA has that lawsuit hanging over their head from the victims families, which could cost them billions, and SA has told bush he has to keep the 28 pages under wraps to protect them, otherwise they tell the world bush knew 9/11 was coming, or they just shut off our oil and we instantly default on our loans and go broke. They just might really have bush and hence the US completely over a barrel and we the people are too dense to realize it. Them calling for the release of the 28 pages is just fronting, they know bush will never do it. The existence of the 28 pages is something SA didn't have control over because they don't own our Congress the way they own bush&co. But it explains why bush didn't want anything but the intel failures to be investigated.

I know it sounds totally tin-foil as you guys like to say, but just maybe SA really has more control over the US than we are being led to believe, esp. with a bush in power due to the past associations, and the fact that bush sold his soul to the devil by allowing 9/11.

Oh, never mind, I'm just babbling!

The Saudis hate the Al-Queda that's trying to kill them and us.

They find out that Al-Queda's planning a strike at the U.S., and grease the skids a little. Surprisingly (or not) they find out that our justification-hungry administration lets it through. Everybody wins: the faithful get some big-dick publicity by smiting the crusaders, the Saudis now have the might of America to thump on their foes and the Bushies have a justification to kill anyone they see fit and curtail civil liberties.

The Saudis only wanted to let us get angered enough to stomp their foes for them; they had no interest in really hurting us or any conceit that they could. To me, that's always been the big puzzle.

But there are problems: by exploiting their countrymen's fear, the Bushies take Iraq, threatening the oil balance. Now they're both in bed together, and if we don't cover for them, they'll blow the whistle on us, even though that would hurt them too. All it would show of the Saudis is that there may have been some rogue elements, and they can lop off a few heads and it's all hugs and kisses; they know it'll show our administration as treasonous.

Meanwhile, the Al-Queda gets the Americans out of Saudi Arabia, and the hatred against us spreads.

Hmmm...