Bob Graham: Attempted 9/11 Cover-Up by the Bush Administration - The Orange Mane

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 09-05-2004, 03:50 AM

Graham book: Inquiry into 9/11, Saudi ties blocked

By FRANK DAVIES

WASHINGTON - Two of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers had a support network in the United States that included agents of the Saudi government, and the Bush administration and FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship, Sen. Bob Graham wrote in a book to be released Tuesday.

The discovery of the financial backing of the two hijackers ''would draw a direct line between the terrorists and the government of Saudi Arabia, and trigger an attempted coverup by the Bush administration,'' the Florida Democrat wrote.

And in Graham's book, "Intelligence Matters," obtained by The Herald Saturday, he makes clear that some details of that financial support from Saudi Arabia were in the 27 pages of the congressional inquiry's final report that were blocked from release by the administration, despite the pleas of leaders of both parties on the House and Senate intelligence committees.

Full story:

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/9584265.htm

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 09-05-2004, 03:54 AM

Graham also revealed that Gen. Tommy Franks told him on Feb. 19, 2002, just four months after the invasion of Afghanistan, that many important resources -- including the Predator drone aircraft crucial to the search for Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda leaders -- were being shifted to prepare for a war against Iraq.

Graham recalled this conversation at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa with Franks, then head of Central Command, who was ``looking troubled'':

``Senator, we are not engaged in a war in Afghanistan.''

''Excuse me?'' I asked.

''Military and intelligence personnel are being redeployed to prepare for an action in Iraq,'' he continued.

Graham concluded: 'Gen. Franks' mission -- which, as a good soldier, he was loyally carrying out -- was being downgraded from a war to a manhunt.''

I suppose that is why Graham voted against the IRW later that year--citing as his reason that we SHOULD be fighting the war on terrorism. Certainly, more knew of this than he. Sigh.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 09-05-2004, 03:58 AM

When the weapons were not found, one year after the invasion of Iraq, Bush attended a black-tie dinner in Washington, Graham recalled. Bush gave a humorous speech with slides, showing him looking under White House furniture and joking, ``Nope, no WMDs there.''

Graham wrote: ``It was one of the most offensive things I have witnessed. Having recently attended the funeral of an American soldier killed in Iraq, who left behind a young wife and two preschool-age children, I found nothing funny about a deceitful justification for war.''

orinjkrush · 09-05-2004, 08:41 AM

i really don't think there is a "war against terrorism". if there really was one, then it's being waged in a bizarre way. the most terrorists are from: saudi arabia, pakistan and indonesia. if there was a war against terrorists then we should have invaded those countries to retaliate and flush them out. it seems to me we are mostly protecting the saudis and their oil again. then, assuming that, michael moore's movie takes on uncanny import. i don't want to think this way, but our "rebuilding" Iraq is the most ridiculous foreign affairs undertaking I've ever seen. It is VIETNAM II. We should build a few Iraq "mega-forts" to use to launch attacks, and get ready to take out our good buddies, IRAN.

Rohirrim · 09-05-2004, 03:18 PM

These are remarkable charges with ten times more weight (and relevance) to current events than, say, the Swiftliar's BS. What do you want to bet the major media don't even mention it? Senator Graham's charges back up the contentions of "House of Bush, House of Saud" and (I hate to say it) even some of Moore's more reasonable contentions regarding Bush favoritism toward the Saudis (for those who don't know it yet - our "true" enemies).

If it does somehow move from page 20 to the front pages of the nation's newspapers, I can already predict the response from the Bush team: "Senator Bob Graham is a transgendered, communist, child molester."

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 09-05-2004, 03:41 PM

These are remarkable charges with ten times more weight (and relevance) to current events than, say, the Swiftliar's BS.

Yep.

What do you want to bet the major media don't even mention it?

My first-born?

If it does somehow move from page 20 to the front pages of the nation's newspapers, I can already predict the response from the Bush team: "Senator Bob Graham is a transgendered, communist, child molester."

Bank on it.

TheDave · 09-05-2004, 03:48 PM

Here is one that i don't throw out much, probably because i like to still believe in the basic decency of our government...

A friend of mine is a V.P. at APL (american presidents line) they are an internation shipping company and therefore he has access to cargo listings on all major carriers. About 3-4 months before 9/11 he was telling me that there was an incredible movement of govenment/military supplies going to kuwait. I kept blowing it off, and he kept telling me that something was going on, and that he had seen nothing like his since before desert storm... What does this prove ... Nothing. But it does add fuel to the fire that folks had their eye on Iraq long before anything happened.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 09-05-2004, 03:56 PM

But it does add fuel to the fire that folks had their eye on Iraq long before anything happened.

There's already plenty of evidence that this was indeed the case.

orinjkrush · 09-05-2004, 04:22 PM

Part of me believes the coverup theory re. 9/11. after 50 years we finally found out that Rooseveldt knew about Pearl harbor beforehand. Also, LBJ and McNamara fabricated the Bay of Tonkin escapade. however, the other half of me thinks: we can't keep a secret to save our lives. Rosenbergs anyone? How about Watergate? But then again, there's Vince Foster or Area 51 or TWA flt 800. I just don't know.

I do believe that the Republicrats are owned by big business. And that the military officer corps is about 90% republicrat. and that the Demoniacs are owned by big "guilt" money. as in Bolleywood and other guilt ridden n'er do wells. Tweedle dum and tweedle dee. just name your poison.

TheDave · 09-05-2004, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orinjkrush

after 50 years we finally found out that Rooseveldt knew about Pearl harbor beforehand.

We Do? Must of missed this in U.S. History

orinjkrush · 09-05-2004, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDave

We Do? Must of missed this in U.S. History

sorry dude. while i think FDR was maybe the greatest prez ever, research has pretty much nailed that one. you'll have to go dig, but the data are there.

Rohirrim · 09-05-2004, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orinjkrush

sorry dude. while i think FDR was maybe the greatest prez ever, research has pretty much nailed that one. you'll have to go dig, but the data are there.

"That's just ludicrous, ridiculous, and totally unacceptable."

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 09-07-2004, 07:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rohirrim

"That's just ludicrous, ridiculous, and totally unacceptable."

If the media pays as much attention to Graham's charges as the Garbage Scow Vets for Bush, then the WH will be back in damage control mode (where they've spent most of the past four years) and Smirk & Sneer will be running for cover.

L.A. BRONCOS FAN · 09-08-2004, 04:30 AM

Now the NY Times is picking up the story.

Senator Bob Graham Accuses Bush of 9/11 Saudi Cover-up

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/08/po...8e31b91773cb74

WASHINGTON, Sept. 7 (AP) - Senator Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat who is a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused the White House on Tuesday of covering up evidence that might have linked Saudi Arabia to the Sept. 11 hijackers.

How much longer can the rest of the good puppy press protect the frat boy?

09-05-2004, 03:50 AM	#1
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	Bob Graham: Attempted 9/11 Cover-Up by the Bush Administration Graham book: Inquiry into 9/11, Saudi ties blocked By FRANK DAVIES WASHINGTON - Two of the Sept. 11, 2001, hijackers had a support network in the United States that included agents of the Saudi government, and the Bush administration and FBI blocked a congressional investigation into that relationship, Sen. Bob Graham wrote in a book to be released Tuesday. The discovery of the financial backing of the two hijackers ''would draw a direct line between the terrorists and the government of Saudi Arabia, and trigger an attempted coverup by the Bush administration,'' the Florida Democrat wrote. And in Graham's book, "Intelligence Matters," obtained by The Herald Saturday, he makes clear that some details of that financial support from Saudi Arabia were in the 27 pages of the congressional inquiry's final report that were blocked from release by the administration, despite the pleas of leaders of both parties on the House and Senate intelligence committees. Full story: http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/9584265.htm

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

09-05-2004, 03:54 AM	#2
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	Graham also revealed that Gen. Tommy Franks told him on Feb. 19, 2002, just four months after the invasion of Afghanistan, that many important resources -- including the Predator drone aircraft crucial to the search for Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda leaders -- were being shifted to prepare for a war against Iraq. Graham recalled this conversation at MacDill Air Force Base in Tampa with Franks, then head of Central Command, who was ``looking troubled'': ``Senator, we are not engaged in a war in Afghanistan.'' ''Excuse me?'' I asked. ''Military and intelligence personnel are being redeployed to prepare for an action in Iraq,'' he continued. Graham concluded: 'Gen. Franks' mission -- which, as a good soldier, he was loyally carrying out -- was being downgraded from a war to a manhunt.'' I suppose that is why Graham voted against the IRW later that year--citing as his reason that we SHOULD be fighting the war on terrorism. Certainly, more knew of this than he. Sigh.

09-05-2004, 03:58 AM	#3
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	When the weapons were not found, one year after the invasion of Iraq, Bush attended a black-tie dinner in Washington, Graham recalled. Bush gave a humorous speech with slides, showing him looking under White House furniture and joking, ``Nope, no WMDs there.'' Graham wrote: ``It was one of the most offensive things I have witnessed. Having recently attended the funeral of an American soldier killed in Iraq, who left behind a young wife and two preschool-age children, I found nothing funny about a deceitful justification for war.''

09-05-2004, 08:41 AM	#4
orinjkrush ... Prospects for the future... Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DistrictOfCorruption Posts: 4,914 Adopt-a-Bronco: Ben Garland	i really don't think there is a "war against terrorism". if there really was one, then it's being waged in a bizarre way. the most terrorists are from: saudi arabia, pakistan and indonesia. if there was a war against terrorists then we should have invaded those countries to retaliate and flush them out. it seems to me we are mostly protecting the saudis and their oil again. then, assuming that, michael moore's movie takes on uncanny import. i don't want to think this way, but our "rebuilding" Iraq is the most ridiculous foreign affairs undertaking I've ever seen. It is VIETNAM II. We should build a few Iraq "mega-forts" to use to launch attacks, and get ready to take out our good buddies, IRAN.

09-05-2004, 03:18 PM	#5
Rohirrim Partisan Human Cannonball Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Twixt Hell & Highwater Posts: 48,833	These are remarkable charges with ten times more weight (and relevance) to current events than, say, the Swiftliar's BS. What do you want to bet the major media don't even mention it? Senator Graham's charges back up the contentions of "House of Bush, House of Saud" and (I hate to say it) even some of Moore's more reasonable contentions regarding Bush favoritism toward the Saudis (for those who don't know it yet - our "true" enemies). If it does somehow move from page 20 to the front pages of the nation's newspapers, I can already predict the response from the Bush team: "Senator Bob Graham is a transgendered, communist, child molester."

09-05-2004, 03:41 PM	#6
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	These are remarkable charges with ten times more weight (and relevance) to current events than, say, the Swiftliar's BS. Yep. What do you want to bet the major media don't even mention it? My first-born? If it does somehow move from page 20 to the front pages of the nation's newspapers, I can already predict the response from the Bush team: "Senator Bob Graham is a transgendered, communist, child molester." Bank on it.

09-05-2004, 03:48 PM	#7
TheDave Sauced... Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 15,120	Here is one that i don't throw out much, probably because i like to still believe in the basic decency of our government... A friend of mine is a V.P. at APL (american presidents line) they are an internation shipping company and therefore he has access to cargo listings on all major carriers. About 3-4 months before 9/11 he was telling me that there was an incredible movement of govenment/military supplies going to kuwait. I kept blowing it off, and he kept telling me that something was going on, and that he had seen nothing like his since before desert storm... What does this prove ... Nothing. But it does add fuel to the fire that folks had their eye on Iraq long before anything happened.

09-05-2004, 03:56 PM	#8
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	But it does add fuel to the fire that folks had their eye on Iraq long before anything happened. There's already plenty of evidence that this was indeed the case.

09-05-2004, 04:22 PM	#9
orinjkrush ... Prospects for the future... Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: DistrictOfCorruption Posts: 4,914 Adopt-a-Bronco: Ben Garland	Part of me believes the coverup theory re. 9/11. after 50 years we finally found out that Rooseveldt knew about Pearl harbor beforehand. Also, LBJ and McNamara fabricated the Bay of Tonkin escapade. however, the other half of me thinks: we can't keep a secret to save our lives. Rosenbergs anyone? How about Watergate? But then again, there's Vince Foster or Area 51 or TWA flt 800. I just don't know. I do believe that the Republicrats are owned by big business. And that the military officer corps is about 90% republicrat. and that the Demoniacs are owned by big "guilt" money. as in Bolleywood and other guilt ridden n'er do wells. Tweedle dum and tweedle dee. just name your poison.

09-08-2004, 04:30 AM	#14
L.A. BRONCOS FAN Mo' holla fo' yo' dolla! Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: In a bunker in an undisclosed location Posts: 52,694	Now the NY Times is picking up the story. Senator Bob Graham Accuses Bush of 9/11 Saudi Cover-up http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/08/po...8e31b91773cb74 WASHINGTON, Sept. 7 (AP) - Senator Bob Graham, the Florida Democrat who is a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, accused the White House on Tuesday of covering up evidence that might have linked Saudi Arabia to the Sept. 11 hijackers. How much longer can the rest of the good puppy press protect the frat boy?