Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (1923)	1/9/2002 4:20:12 PM
From: Mephisto	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 15516

"Just two weeks, TWO WEEKS, prior to the attack, O'Neill had left his job with the FBI. O'Neill had quit because he believed that the Bush administration had stymied the intelligence agency's investigations on terrorism. O'Neill charged that it had done so even as it bargained with the Taliban on handing over of Osama bin Laden in exchange for political recognition and economic aid. In the ultimate irony, O'Neill had gone public with these charges at the same time that he was leaving the FBI to become the head of security at the World Trade Center. "The main obstacles to investigate Islamic terrorism were US oil corporate interests, and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it," O'Neill reportedly told the authors of an explosive new book, Hidden Truth, by intelligence analysts Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie. Brisard met O'Neill several times last summer and reports that O'Neill complained bitterly that the US State Department - and behind it the oil lobby who make up President Bush's entourage - blocked attempts to prove bin Laden's guilt. " Pat, I've heard this b4. The information may have come from several sources. I'll have to watch for it to show up again. Recently, I read that a former FBI agent left the Bush administration because he was upset. I hope I can find the reference again.

To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (1923)	1/9/2002 8:20:04 PM
From: Mephisto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15516

I saw General Tommy Franks on the Jim Lehrer News Hour last night, and I heard him say that he did not possess documented proof that Bin Laden was behind the Sept. 11 attacks, although he later said in the interview that he believed, like the rest of us, that Al Qaeda was involved. I've given the reference so you can read the transcript of the interview for yourself. A problem with the transcript. The date should be 2002 but, I checked the transcript and it said 2001 ................................................................ GEN. TOMMY FRANKS: The head of the U.S. Central Command discusses recent al-Qaida captures and the latest in the war on terrorism. Excerpt from The Jim Lehrer News Hour January 8, 2001 The al-Qaida network JIM LEHRER: Have we found enough that makes you able to conclude that, hey, this really was where this - this really was the main base of al-Qaida, this is where Osama bin Laden and his people were calling the shots as much as they were? GEN. TOMMY FRANKS: My honest answer is no. What we have found is a number of places where we believe terrorist control activities have taken place inside Afghanistan. But to be able to pick one and say, this is the one, no, Jim, we haven't found that. JIM LEHRER: Did they - you don't have any evidence that they controlled something outside of Afghanistan from Afghanistan? GEN. TOMMY FRANKS: I'm not sure I understand - JIM LEHRER: Well, let's talk about September 11. Have you found anything on the ground that is directly ties somebody - anybody on the ground in Afghanistan to what happened here on September 11? GEN. TOMMY FRANKS: I have not - I have not seen evidence of this direct tie to which you made reference, aside from the film that I think was widely publicized, which I think each American has to decide whether he believes that bin Laden was truly behind this thing on the 11th of September, as indicated in that film. pbs.org