Home | Community | Message Board


The Best Salvia
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Original Seeds Store Buy CBD, Cannabis Seeds, Compare CBD   Amazon Ayahuasca, DXM, Hemp, Ranch Dressing, San Pedro, Scales

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1
InvisibleIsaacHunt
Stranger
Registered: 05/27/05
Posts: 176
Ending prohibition, how can we help?
    #4258688 - 06/05/05 04:59 AM (12 years, 27 days ago)

Assuming many of us are "drug" users I wondered how many of us are involved in any way in supporting attempts to end prohibition and legalise all drugs.

Any suggestions for how we can all help?

Here's a website for those of us in the UK:

http://www.tdpf.org.uk/


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Ending prohibition, how can we help? [Re: IsaacHunt]
    #4258920 - 06/05/05 09:11 AM (12 years, 26 days ago)

A good start would be donating the cost of a few joints to NORML. Their minimum membeship is $25, but trust me when I tell you that they will gratefully accept anything you can send them even it it's just a couple of bucks.

http://norml.org  :bong2:


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDieCommie
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 28,165
Re: Ending prohibition, how can we help? [Re: Diploid]
    #4259864 - 06/05/05 02:39 PM (12 years, 26 days ago)

NORML aint gonna do shit imo.

Have they done anything good? If so, I would like to read about it...


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineWanderingStudent
terminal learner

Registered: 06/02/05
Posts: 78
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
Re: Ending prohibition, how can we help? [Re: DieCommie]
    #4260131 - 06/05/05 04:18 PM (12 years, 26 days ago)

It seems to be the first group with potential for accomplishing change. Seeing as how no activist group of that sort has accomplished anything, I don't think it's fair to say norml is useless for it's efforts.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDieCommie
Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 28,165
Re: Ending prohibition, how can we help? [Re: WanderingStudent]
    #4260228 - 06/05/05 04:52 PM (12 years, 26 days ago)

What have they accomplished? Id really like to know.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleDiploidM
Cuban

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
Re: Ending prohibition, how can we help? [Re: DieCommie]
    #4262605 - 06/06/05 04:29 AM (12 years, 26 days ago)

NORML aint gonna do shit imo.

It's attitudes like this that leave those in favor of oppressive and draconian drug laws free to promote their agenda without opposition.

From the NORML web site:

What does NORML do?

NORML lobbies Congress and state legislatures for more rational and cost- effective marijuana policies. We provide expert witnesses for legislative hearings in support of marijuana reform legislation and to provide testimony to assist defendants charged with marijuana offenses. NORML also serves as a marijuana-law reform advocate with the media nationwide, publishes a periodic newsletter, and maintains a comprehensive web site, which includes a 50-state legislative tracking system, where visitors can inform themselves about the issue and send a free fax or an e-mail to their state and federal elected officials. In addition, we maintain a legal committee comprised of 350 criminal defense attorneys nationwide who specialize in the defense of individuals charged with marijuana-related offenses.


Is that not worth the cost of a joint or two? :syringe:


--------------------
Republican Values:

1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you.
2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child.
3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer.

4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleIsaacHunt
Stranger
Registered: 05/27/05
Posts: 176
Re: Ending prohibition, how can we help? [Re: Diploid]
    #4275561 - 06/09/05 01:15 PM (12 years, 22 days ago)

Good point. It seems like even the people who take drugs do little if anything to end prohibition. No wonder the government feels so comfortable about passing harsher and harsher drug laws.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblefungusflip
visionary

Registered: 12/08/02
Posts: 284
Loc: texas
Re: Ending prohibition, how can we help? [Re: IsaacHunt]
    #4278167 - 06/10/05 01:22 AM (12 years, 22 days ago)

i put up a thread about the same thing about a week ago in this forum called Help! Psilocybin legal, in which i made a few suggestions and gave some reasons why we should come together and support organizations like MAPS and NORML. It seems that too many people have pessimistic attitudes and outlooks on reality and the current drug policies. Lack of education in certain aspects of the laws that affect all of us and how to go about making the changes that we would like to see. I guess the mushrooms aren't speaking to these individuals like they speak to me and some of the rest of us who are actively supporting these organizations and bringing about public awareness, and harm reduction.Oh well i'm gonna keep on truckin' Eventually things will change when peoples thoughts and attitudes start to change. it'll happeen


--------------------
let it be know, there is a fountain that was not made by the hands of men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineWhiteRabbitt
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 06/06/02
Posts: 3,486
Last seen: 9 years, 1 month
Re: Ending prohibition, how can we help? [Re: IsaacHunt]
    #4281085 - 06/10/05 08:31 PM (12 years, 21 days ago)

you can start by not doing anything at all, because things will never change. Drink beer. It's legal.


--------------------
You gotta jump and swing up to hit me in the knees.



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLSDempire
LibertarianEnforcer
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/23/05
Posts: 581
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
Re: Ending prohibition, how can we help? [Re: WhiteRabbitt]
    #4484353 - 08/02/05 06:58 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

prohibition (drugs)
The prohibition of drugs through legislation or religious law is a common means of controlling the perceived negative consequences of recreational drug use at a society- or world-wide level. Present-day attempts to enforce drug prohibition are frequently considered to be part of the ongoing war on drugs instituted by United States president Richard Nixon in 1972.

The prohibition of non-medical drug use is controversial. Opponents often feel that prohibition unfairly impinges on the perceived right of the individual to alter their consciousness. They also argue that prohibition is an expensive and ineffective means of controlling the negative effects of non-medical drug use. Proponents of prohibition feel that the use of psychoactive drugs outside of a medical context is dangerous, and that prohibition is the best means of control. Some people also oppose the use of certain drugs on moral or dogmatic grounds. For further elaboration see: Arguments for and against drug prohibition.


Scope
Most countries have a similar set of prohibited drugs. Some exceptions exist; most notably, Islamic countries mostly prohibit the use of alcohol, while most other states allow at least adults to purchase and consume alcohol. The United States, Finland, Canada, and the USSR also instituted alcohol prohibition in the first half of the 20th century. All countries regulate the manufacture, distribution, marketing and sale of some or all drugs, such as by using a prescription system. Only certain drugs are banned with a "blanket prohibition" against all use. However, the prohibited drugs generally continue to be available through the illegal drug trade. Many countries allow a certain amount of personal use of certain drugs, but not sale or manufacture. Some also set a specific amount of a particular drug, above which is ipso jure considered to be evidence of trafficking or sale of the drug.

In July 2000, the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan ruled opium to be "against Islam" and outlawed it, with verbal and foreign aid support of the US government. After the Taliban was swept out of power by the USA (for other reasons), opium cultivation resumed. In April 2004, Afghan interim president Hamid Karzai declared a jihad on drugs (after opium output reached a near-record 3,600 tonnes in 2003 -- equivalent to three-quarters of world supply).


History

Early Drug Laws
Although the present War on Drugs is a distinctly modern phenomenon, drug laws have been a common feature of human culture throughout history.

Perhaps the earliest recorded example in the Old World is the prohibition of the use of alcohol under Islamic law (Sharia), which is usually attributed to passages in the Qur'an purportedly dating from the 7th century. Although Islamic law is often interpreted as prohibiting all intoxicants (not only alcohol), the ancient practice of hashish smoking has continued throughout the history of Islam, against varying degrees of resistance. A major campaign against hashish-eating Sufis was conducted in Egypt in the 11th and 12th centuries resulting among other things in the burning of fields of cannabis, and the public torture of hashish users (Ref 1).

Religious intolerance was also the motivation for drug prohibition in Christian Europe. In a move interpreted as support of the efforts of the Spanish Inquisition against the Arabs, in a 1484 fiat Pope Innocent VIII banned the use of cannabis. The persecution of heretics in the form of witch-hunts also gathered momentum around this time, and frequently targeted users of medicinal and hallucinogenic herbs. The Inquisition proceeded apace in Central America and South America, where peyote, ololiuqui, toloache, teonanacatl and other sacred plants of the Aztec culture were prohibited as works of the devil.

In Northern Europe, the Protestants were also guilty of passing drug laws motivated by religious intolerance, according to Stephen Harrod Buhner (Ref 2). Buhner argues that the 1516 Reinheitsgebot, which stipulates that beer may only contain water, malt and hops was a "reflection of Protestant irritation about 'drugs' and the Catholic Church". Unlike the typically stimulating herbal blends widely used at the time (e.g. gruit), hops cause sedation and reduce libido. In 1536 Edward VI commended hopped beer as "notable, healthy and temperate", while the exclusive use of hops had been compulsory in France since 1268 (Ref 3).

Coffee almost followed the same fate as cannabis as its use spread from Ethiopia through the Middle East to Europe. Its use was banned in the Middle East on numerous occasions as in conflict with Islamic law, but eventually it came to be accepted. The introduction of coffee in Europe from Muslim Turkey also prompted calls for it to be banned as the Devil's work, however Pope Clement VIII sanctioned its use, declaring that it was "so delicious that it would be a pity to let the infidels have exclusive use of it."

In late Qing Imperial China, opium imported by the British East Indian Company was vastly consumed by all social classes in Southern China. Between 1821 and 1837 imports of the drug increased five-fold. The Chinese government attempted to end this trade, on public health grounds. The effort was initially successful with the destruction of all British opium stock in May 1839. However to protect this trade, the British declared war on China (First Opium War). China was defeated and the war which ended with the Treaty of Nanking, in which the opium trade is legalized. The resulting trade greatly weakened Chinese society, and set into motion a chain of events that would lead to the massive Taiping Rebellion.


Twentieth century
The next great wave of anti-drug legislation began in the late 19th century, and continues to the present day. The United States has been the driving force in the present-day war on drugs.

The first law outright prohibiting the use of a specific drug was a San Francisco, California ordinance which banned the smoking of opium in opium dens in 1875. The inspiration was "many women and young girls, as well as young men of respectable family, were being induced to visit the Chinese opium-smoking dens, where they were ruined morally and otherwise." The primary cause of the movement for the law was a moral panic based on a fear of Chinese immigrants and other railroad workers seducing white women with the drug. This was followed by other laws throughout the country, and federal laws which barred Chinese people from trafficking in opium. Though the laws affected the use and distribution of opium by Chinese immigrants, no action was taken against the producers of such products as laudanum, a mixture of opium and alcohol, commonly taken as a panacea by white Americans. The dividing line was usually the manner in which the drug was ingested. Chinese immigrants smoked it, while it was included in various kinds of (generally liquid) medicines for white people. The laws were aimed at smoking opium, but not otherwise ingesting it. 1 (http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/cu/cu6.htm) As a result of this discrepancy, modern commentators believe that these laws were racist in origin and intent.

Cocaine was prohibited in the first part of the 20th century. Newspapers used terms like "Negro Cocaine Fiends" and "Cocainized Niggers" to drive up sales, causing a nationwide panic about the rape of white women by black men, high on cocaine. Many police forces changed from a .32 caliber to a .38 caliber pistol because the smaller gun was supposedly unable to kill black men when they were high on cocaine.

This was followed by the Harrison Act, which required sellers of opiates and cocaine to get a license (which were usually only distributed to white people). The supporters of the Harrison Act did not support blanket prohibition of the drugs involved 1 (http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/studies/cu/cu8.html). This is also true of the later Marijuana Tax Act in 1937. Soon, however, the people who were allowed to issue the licenses did not do so, effectively banning the drugs.

The American judicial system did not initially accept drug prohibition. Prosecutors argued that possessing drugs was a tax violation, as no legal licenses to sell drugs were in existence; hence, a person possessing drugs must have purchased them from an unlicensed source. After some wrangling, this was accepted as federal jurisdiction under the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution.

The prohibition of alcohol commenced in the United States in 1920 and Finland in 1919. Because alcohol was the most popular recreational drug in these countries, reactions to its prohibition were very different to those of other drugs, which were commonly perceived to be associated with racial and ethnic minorities. Public pressure led to the repealing of alcohol prohibition in 1933 in the United States, 1932 in Finland. Residents of many provinces of Canada also experienced alcohol prohibition for similar periods of time in the first half of the 20th century.

In Sweden a referendum in 1922 decided against an alcohol prohibition law (with 51% of the votes against and 49% for prohibition), but starting in 1914 (nationwide from 1917) and until 1955 Sweden employed an alcohol rationing system with personal liquor ration books ("motbok").

1937 saw the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act. Harry J. Anslinger (Bureau of Narcotics Commissioner) testified in hearings on the subject that the hemp plant needed to be banned because it had a violent "effect on the degenerate races". This specifically referred to Mexican immigrants who had entered the country, seeking jobs during the Great Depression. The law passed quickly and with little debate. The American Medical Association (AMA) protested the law soon after, both on the grounds of actual disagreement with the law and the supporters' lies on the subject; Anslinger and others had claimed the AMA had vocalized support when, in fact, the opposite was true.

In response to rising drug use amongst young people and the counter-culture in particular, efforts to enforce prohibition were strengthened in many countries from the late 1960s onwards. In 1972 United States president Richard Nixon announced the commencement of the so-called War on Drugs. Later, President Reagan added the position of drug czar to the President's Executive Office.

Lobbying at an international level for the prohibition of non-medical drug use has been a feature of United States policy since the beginnings of the modern War on Drugs in the late 20th century, to such an extent that US support for foreign governments is sometimes contingent on adherence to US drug policy. Major milestones in this campaign include the successful introduction of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs in 1961, the Convention on Psychotropic Substances in 1971 and the United Nations Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances in 1988.


Methods of enforcement
The War on Drugs utilizes several techniques to achieve its goal of eliminating recreational drug use:

specialized law enforcement agencies, officers and techniques
information campaigns to educate the public on the real or perceived dangers of recreational drug use
streamlined enforcement and evidence-gathering procedures
The War on Drugs involves action taken against three groups of criminals:

Manufacturers (whether through chemical synthesis or agriculture)
Traffickers and dealers
Users
A War on Drugs is usually run like a modern war with police and other law enforcement officers instead of military personnel. The apparatus prepared for the War is ordinarily organized to face guerrilla situations, armed attacks or counter-attacks and bombings. These tactics include espionage, as undercover agents (spies) are used to infiltrate drug use and trafficking circles.

Investigation on drug trafficking often begins with the recording of unusually frequent deaths by overdose, monitoring financial flows of suspected traffickers, or by finding concrete elements while inspecting for other purposes. For example, a person pulled over for traffic violations may have illicit drugs in his or her vehicle, thus leading to an arrest and/or investigation of the source of the materials. Most investigations into trafficking or manufacturing are fruitless, and casual users remain at a greater risk of arrest, conviction and imprisonment than others.


Legal Provisions
The following frequently used drugs are prohibited or otherwise regulated for recreational use in most countries:

Alcohol
Benzodiazepines such as diazepam (Valium)
Cannabis products, e.g. marijuana, hashish and hashish oil
Dissociatives such as dextromethorphan (DXM), phencyclidine (pcp), and ketamine
Hallucinogens such as LSD, mescaline, peyote, and psilocybin
Opium, opiates such as heroin and morphine, and opioids such as codeine, hydrocodone (Vicodin), methadone, and oxycodone (Percocet, Oxycontin)
Sedatives such as GHB, and methaqualone (Quaalude)
Stimulants such as amphetamines (Adderall, Dexedrine), coca leaves and their derivative cocaine, MDMA (Ecstasy), methamphetamines, methcathinone, methylphenidate (Ritalin), and nicotine
The regulation of the above drugs varies in many countries; cannabis and hashish, for example, are sometimes legal for personal use, though not sale. In some countries Dextromethorphan is available in ordinary over-the-counter products such as cough medicines. Alcohol possession and consumption by adults is today banned only in Islamic countries and various parts of India. The United States, Finland, and Canada banned alcohol in the early part of the 20th century; this was called Prohibition. Tobacco is not illegal for adults in any country, with the notable exception of Bhutan. In some parts of the world, provisions are made for the use of traditional sacraments like Ayahuasca, Iboga, and Peyote.

In countries where alcohol and tobacco are legal, certain measures are frequently undertaken to discourage use of these drugs. For example, packages of alcohol and tobacco sometimes communicate warnings directed towards the consumer, communicating the potential risks of partaking in the use of the substance. These drugs also frequently have special sin taxes associated with the purchase thereof, in order to recoup the losses associated with public funding for the health problems the use causes in long-term users. Restrictions on advertising also exist in many countries, and often a state holds a monopoly on manufacture, distribution, marketing and/or the sale of these drugs.

In the United States, there is considerable legal debate about the impact these laws have had on Americans' civil rights. Critics claim that the War on Drugs has lowered the evidentiary burden required for a legal search of a suspect's dwelling or vehicle, or to intercept a suspect's communications. However, many of the searches that result in drug arrests are often "consent searches" where an arresting officer does not have probable cause or a warrant, but has asked for and received permission to search a person or the person's property.

The sentencing statutes in the United States Code that cover controlled substances are notorious for their illogical and incoherent structure. For example, a first-time offender convicted in a single proceeding for selling marijuana three times, and found to have simply carried a gun on him all three times (but did not use it), is subject to a minimum sentence of 55 years in federal prison. U.S. v. Angelos, 345 F. Supp. 2d 1227 (D. Utah 2004).

Sometimes, crimes not directly related to drug use and sale are prohibited. For example, the United States recently brought charges against club owners for maintaining a place of business where a) Ecstasy is known to be frequently consumed; b) paraphernalia associated with the use of Ecstasy is sold and/or widely tolerated (such as glow sticks and pacifiers); and c) "chill-out rooms" are created, where Ecstasy users can cool down (Ecstasy raises the user's blood temperature). These are being challenged in court by organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and Drug Policy Alliance.

Many countries allow the use of undercover law enforcement officers solely or primarily for the enforcement of laws against recreational use of certain drugs. Many of these officers are allowed to commit crimes if it is necessary to maintain the secrecy of the investigation, or in order to collect adequate evidence for a conviction. Some people have criticized this practice as failing to ensure equality under the law because it grants police officers the right to commit crimes that no other citizen could commit without potential consequences.

The War on Drugs has stimulated the creation of international law enforcement agencies (such as Interpol), mostly in Western countries. This has occurred because a large volume of illicit drugs come from Third-World countries.


References
Abel, Ernest L., Marijuana -- The First Twelve Thousand Years, 1980. [1] (http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/history/first12000/abel.htm)
Buhner, Stephen Harrod, Sacred and Herbal Healing Beers: The Secrets of Ancient Fermentation, Sirius Books, 1998.
Hops: The Bitter Herb. [2] (http://www.greydragon.org/library/hops.html)
Leavitt, Fred. (2003) The REAL Drug Abusers. Rowman & Littlefield.
McCoy, A. (1991) The Politics of Heroin. Lawrence Hill Books.
Miller, R. (1996) Drug Warriors and Their Prey. Praeger.

See also
Legal issues of cannabis
Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs

External links
Drug Policy Alliance (http://www.drugpolicy.org/homepage.cfm)
Transform Drug Policy Foundation (http://www.tdpf.org.uk/)
After the War on Drugs: Options for Control (Report) (http://www.tdpf.org.uk/Transform_After_the_War_on_Drugs.pdf)
Partnership for Drug Freedom in America (http://deoxy.org/pdfa/index.htm)
The Drug War as a Socialist Enterprise by Milton Friedman (http://www.druglibrary.org/special/friedman/socialist.htm)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLSDempire
LibertarianEnforcer
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/23/05
Posts: 581
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
Re: Ending prohibition, how can we help? [Re: LSDempire]
    #4484358 - 08/02/05 07:01 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

Saudi Arabian Justice - Torturing and Beheading Drug Trafficers

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

RIYADH, Saudi Arabia (AP) -- Three Saudi security guards were beheaded Sunday in northern Saudi Arabia after being convicted of trafficking in hashish and using government vehicles to transport the drug, the Interior Ministry said.

Khamis bin Mabrouk al-Sayeri, Nasser bin Mohammed al-Fahadi and Zidan al-Oqaili al-Anzi were arrested loading an undisclosed amount of hashish into vehicles belonging to Saudi border guards, officials said....

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/....ap/index.html
http://www.cyburbia.org/forums/showthread.php?t=13603
_________________
If you support the war on drugs you support torture! Anyone that supports the war on drugs is a sadist that does not deserve to live.
http://groups.msn.com/LibertarianShadowDivision


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLSDempire
LibertarianEnforcer
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/23/05
Posts: 581
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
Re: Ending prohibition, how can we help? [Re: LSDempire]
    #4484362 - 08/02/05 07:03 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

The Bush-Saudi Connection






By Michelle Mairesse


Ancestral Voices


In 1920, under a League of Nations mandate, officials from France and Great Britain carved up vast tracts of warlord-dominated territories in Arabia into what they imagined would be nation states devoid of the complex historical, cultural, and tribal realities of the Mideast.

Instead of establishing European-style nation states, the strongest warlords quickly entrenched themselves with the aid of standing armies and spy networks. In much of the Mideast, fealty is often accorded to tribal overlords and the Islamic sects they favor rather than to the territory and people within the boundaries of the nation state. Jonathan Rabin succinctly defines the reality, past and present, of the desert sheikdoms: "The systems of government that have evolved in Syria, Iraq and Saudi Arabia are paranoid family dictatorships with ancestral roots in a single city or village." (1)


Islamic fundamentalists like Osama bin Laden make their appeals to the nation or community of believers, not to any particular nation state, although the rich and powerful among the Muslims have founded Western-style businesses and formed corporations both inside and outside the boundaries of their native countries. Because Osama himself is a scion of a rich Saudi family with wide-ranging business interests throughout the world, the split Saudi personality is most evident in him and the bin Laden clan. Osama, who calls America "The Great Satan," has done business with the infidel Americans whenever it suited him.

Throughout the eighties, when the United States assisted the Saudis in a giant military buildup of airfields, ports, and bases throughout the kingdom, many of the contracts were awarded to the largest construction company in Saudi Arabia, the Saudi Binladen Group, founded by Osama bin Laden?s father.


At the same time, the United States trained and armed troops in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets. The United States and Saudi Arabia spent about $40 billion on the war in Afghanistan, recruiting, supplying, and training nearly 100,000 radical mujahideen from forty Muslim countries, including Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Algeria, and Afghanistan itself. Among the recruits were Osama bin Laden and his followers. (2)

With C.I.A. funding, Osama bin Laden imported engineers and equipment from his father?s Saudi construction company to build tunnels for guerrilla training centers and hospitals, and for arms dumps near the Pakistan border. After the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan, the C.I.A. and the Pakistani intelligence agency sponsored the Taliban organization, a government composed of the fanatic Wahhabi Islamic sect, the same sect that is the state religion in Saudi Arabia. Although followers of the Wahhabi sect do not refer to themselves as Wahhabis, the label is useful because it applies to a single Muslim group with a set of beliefs peculiar to them alone: Wahhabis maintain that Shi'ites and Sufis are not Muslims, and that Muslims should not visit shrines or celebrate Mohammed?s birthday. (3)


The Saudi sheiks have been Wahhabis since they intermarried with the family of a puritanical Muslim scholar, Mohammed ibn Abd al-Wahhab, in 1774. Supported first by Britain and later by the United States, the Saudis captured the Muslim holy cities of Mecca and Medina, easily gaining control of the entire Arabian peninsula.

Wherever they ruled, the Wahhabis imposed their medieval code on their hapless subjects, making public spectacles of stoning adulterers to death and maiming thieves, destroying decorated mosques and cemeteries, prohibiting music, sequestering women, and promoting war on infidels. The Saudi sheiks have lavished funds on anti-American and anti-Israeli terrorists-in-training while indoctrinating other Muslims through its worldwide network of religious schools, mosques, newspapers, and presses.

Jihad


The Wahhabi Taliban in Afghanistan had the blessings of the Saudi royal family and of The Big Three--the bin Laden family, the al Ahmoudi family, and the Mahfouz family--the richest clans in that medieval kingdom. (Khalid bin Mahfouz is bin Laden?s brother-in-law, according to the C.I.A.). The desert oligarchs profited from world-wide investments as well as sleazy banking schemes such as the infamous Bank of Credit and Commerce International.


Salem bin Laden, Osama?s brother, has conducted all his American affairs through James Bath, a Houston crony of the Bush family. Bath?s former business partner Bill White testified in court that Bath had been a liaison for the C.I.A. In 1979 Bath invested $50,000 in Arbusto, George W. Bush?s first business venture. Rumor had it that Bath was acting as Salem bin Laden?s representative. "In conflicting statements, Bush at first denied ever knowing Bath, then acknowledged his stake in Arbusto and that he was aware Bath represented Saudi interests." (4)


In addition to doing aviation business with Saudi sheiks, Bath was part owner of a Houston bank whose chief stockholder was Ghaith Pharaon, who represented the Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI), a criminal global bank with branches in 73 countries. BCCI proceeded to defraud depositors of $10 billion during the ?80s, while providing a money laundry conduit for the Medellin drug cartel, Asia?s major heroin cartel, Manuel Noriega, Saddam Hussein, the C.I.A., and Islamist terrorist organizations worldwide. (5)

Big Three wheeler-dealer Khalid bin Mahfouz, one of the largest stockholders in the criminal bank, was indicted when the massive BCCI banking scandal blew apart in the early 1990s. The Saudi royal family placed him under house arrest after discovering that Mahfouz had used the royal bank to channel millions of dollars through fake charities into bin Laden?s organizations, but Mahfouz was not so much punished as inconvenienced. (6)


Members of the Wahhabist Saudi oligarchy are driven by the sometimes conflicting emotions of power lust and religious fervor. Their support of radical Islamists follows from their ambition to dominate the Muslim world, but their fear that radical Islamists might overthrow the Saudi regime at home motivates them to fund and encourage holy warriors in countries other than their own.

As Daniel Pipes points out, jihad (holy war) is a central tenet of Muslim belief . "According to one calculation, Muhammad himself engaged in 78 battles, of which just one (the Battle of the Ditch) was defensive. Within a century after the prophet's death in 632, Muslim armies had reached as far as India in the east and Spain in the west. " (7)


Pipes traces the bloody advance of fundamentalist jihadists against their twentieth century co-religionists. "Islamists, besides adhering to the primary conception of jihad as armed warfare against infidels, have also adopted as their own Ibn Taymiya's call to target impious Muslims. This approach acquired increased salience through the 20th century as Islamist thinkers . . . promoted jihad against putatively Muslim rulers who failed to live up to or apply the laws of Islam. The revolutionaries who overthrew the Shah of Iran in 1979 and the assassins who gunned down President Anwar Sadat of Egypt two years later overtly held to this doctrine. So does Osama bin Laden."

In 1989, bin Laden established al Qaeda (the Base) in Afghanistan to organize extremist Wahhabis and disperse their networks throughout the country. A year later, he returned to Saudi Arabia and founded a welfare agency for Arab-Afghan veterans. Bin Laden hoped to mobilize the veterans as a kind of religious-military army, but King Faud discouraged the venture. When King Faud invited 540,000 American troops to the kingdom to fight in the Gulf War, bin Laden lambasted the royal family and urged religious authorities to issue fatwahs (religious rulings) condemning the American infidels.

In 1991, Osama bin Laden and a band of Afghan veterans agitated in Sudan for a holy war against the enemies of Islam. In 1992, he claimed responsibility for the attack on American soldiers in Yemen, and again for attacks in Somalia in 1993. He was mum about the terrorist truck bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, the explosion that killed six people and injured more than a thousand, but investigators knew bin Laden had donated heavily to the religious "charity" that financed the bombing operation.

Spiked Investigations


In February 1995, when he was appointed chief of the F.B.I.'s counter-terrorism section in Washington, John O?Neill immediately assembled and coordinated a team to capture Ramzi Yousef, who was en route from Pakistan to Afghanistan. Yousef was strongly suspected of planning and directing the World Trade Center bombing in 1993.

In three days, the kingpin of the World Trade Center bombing was in custody, and O?Neill went on to accumulate damning evidence against the 1993 World Trade bombers that led to their conviction in American courts. For the next six years, John O?Neill tirelessly investigated terrorist strikes against Americans and American interests in Saudi Arabia, East Africa, and Yemen, often encountering American officials? roadblocks on the way. Even in 1996, after Jamal Ahmed al-Fadl turned himself in at the American Embassy in Eritrea and divulged details of bin Laden?s and al Qaeda?s organization and operations, the State Department refused to list al Qaeda as a terrorist organization.

In February 1998, bin Laden assembled a number of terrorist groups, including Islamic Jihad, and issued a fierce fatwa calling for the deaths of all Americans. On August 7, 1998, 226 people died in the simultaneous bombing of American embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. Investigators blamed bin Laden for the attacks. On August 20, 1998, President Clinton amended Executive Order 12947 to add Osama bin Laden and his key associates to the list of terrorists, thus blocking their US assets--including property and bank accounts--and prohibiting all U.S. financial transactions with them. The United States conducted a missile attack against bin Laden's facilities in Afghanistan.



On October 12, 2000, two suicide bombers ignited their boatload of explosives next to the USS Cole, an American destroyer refueling in Aden, off the coast of Yemen. The blast killed seventeen sailors and wounded thirty-nine others. O?Neill and his crack investigating team were dispatched to Yemen and hit a stone wall. He had hoped satellite intercepts of phone calls between an al Qaeda operative in Aden and Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan would lead him to the mastermind of the Cole attack, but the American ambassador and the Yemeni officials blocked the investigation at every turn.

O?Neill resigned from the F.B.I. in July 2001 and signed on as security chief for the World Trade Center in September. He died in the WTC attack on September 11, 2001.

Oil Diplomacy



In Forbidden Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy and the Failed Hunt for bin Laden, two French intelligence analysts, Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, claim that the Clinton and Bush administrations impeded investigations of bin Laden and his al Qaeda terrorist group in order to maintain good relations with Saudi Arabia and to maintain the stability of the oil market. "As the late John O?Neill told one of the authors [Brisard] of this book, ?All of the answers, all of the clues allowing us to dismantle Osama bin Laden?s organization, can be found in Saudi Arabia.'" (

In articles and interviews, Brisard has expanded on this statement, pronouncing the official story about bin Laden?s exile from his native Saudi Arabia in 1994 and his frozen assets to be a canard. Not only did O?Neill and the F.B.I. have extensive information concerning the finances of bin Laden and al Qaeda, but the business connections between the bin Ladens, the Mahfouzes, the al Ahmoudis, the Saudi royal family, and the Bush family kept turning up in their investigations.

Mahfouz, who owns Nimir Petroleum, has conducted joint ventures with the al Amoudi family, which owns Delta Oil. Delta Oil and Unocal planned to build a pipeline through Afghanistan before the Taliban backed away. These Saudi companies are still partnered with bigger oil companies (such as Texaco and Unocal) in developing Central Asian oil projects.

Although Brisard?s interpretation of events has been disputed, the documentation of Forbidden Truth is impeccable. Clearly, the finances and fortunes of the Saudi oligarchs and the Bush family have been intertwined for many years, and oil has been the lubricant of choice, even non-existent oil.

In The Conspirators, Al Martin describes an instance of the latter. He says that the Gulf Oil Drilling Supply, of New York, Miami, and Bahrain, was Jeb Bush?s favorite artifice for oil and gas frauds:

"The fraud was rather simple. Richard Secord arranged through then Vice President George Bush Sr.?s old friend, Ghaith Pharaon, the then retired head of Saudi intelligence, for Gulf Oil and Drilling to purchase from the Saudi government oil and gas leases in the Gulf which were effectively worthless."

The leases would be embellished to appear extremely valuable and then used as loan collateral. Great American Bank and Trust of West Palm Beach subsequently failed under the weight of unpaid Iran-Contra loans.

"Also, in the case of Gulf Oil Drilling Supply, there was some moderately large international lending to that company. As you would suspect, it was principally out of the old George Bush friendly banks--Credit Lyonnais and Banque Paribas, which, combined lent $60 million dollars to Gulf Oil Drilling Supply, which, of course, was defaulted on later." (9)

Special Saudis

Michael Springmann, formerly chief of the visa section at the US Embassy in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, claims that he rejected hundreds of suspicious visa applications, but the C.I.A. officer overruled him and ordered the visas to be issued. Springmann protested to the State Department, the Office of Diplomatic Security, the F.B.I., the Justice Department and congressional committees, but in vain. (10)

Springmann observed that 15 of the 19 people who allegedly flew airplanes into buildings in the United States got their visas from the same CIA-dominated consulate in Jeddah. As a special favor to residents of Saudi Arabia (including non-Saudi citizens), applicants for non-immigrant visas can apply at private travel agencies and receive their visa through the mail. During the months following the 9-11 attack, 102 applicants received their visas by mail, 2 more were interviewed, and none were rejected.


The Saudis always got special treatment. In a November 6, 2001 BBC broadcast Greg Palast revealed just how special that treatment was. Even after Pakistan expelled the World Association of Muslim Youth (WAMY) and India claimed that the organization was linked to terrorist bombings in Kashmir and the Philippines military accused WAMY of funding Muslim insurgency, the F.B.I. got orders to leave the "charitable association" alone.

After 9/11, investigators of the Islamic charities discovered overwhelming evidence that Saudis at all levels worked in tandem with the terrorists. David Kaplin reports, ?At the Saudi High Commission in Bosnia, which coordinated local aid among Saudi charities, police found before-and-after photos of the World Trade Center, files on pesticides and crop dusters, and information on how to counterfeit State Department badges. At Manila's international airport, authorities stopped Agus Dwikarna, an al Haramain representative based in Indonesia. In his suitcase were C4 explosives.? The interlocking charities make it difficult to follow the money trail. ?Many share directors, office space, and cash flow. For two years, investigators have followed the money to offshore trusts and obscure charities which, according to court records, they believe are tied to Hamas, al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups.? (US News and World Report, December 15, 2003).


"The White House official line is that the Bin Ladens are above suspicion --apart from Osama, the black sheep, who they say hijacked the family name. That's fortunate for the Bush family and the Saudi royal household, whose links with the Bin Ladens could otherwise prove embarrassing. But Newsnight has obtained evidence that the FBI was on the trail of other members of the Bin Laden family for links to terrorist organisations before and after September 11th." (11)

In the Boston Globe, March 11, 20004, Carl Unger, author of House of Bush, House of Saud: The Secret Relationship Between the World?s Two Most Powerful Dynasties, states that the 9/11 commission should ask who authorized the evacuation of 140 Saudi nationals on at least 8 aircraft making stops in 12 cities immediately following the attacks. ?Many of the passengers were high-ranking members of the royal House of Saud. About 24 of them were members of the bin Laden family, which owned the Saudi Binladin Group, a multibillion-dollar construction conglomerate.? Unger obtained passenger lists for 4 of the flights, which are posted on his website: www.houseofbush.com and includes the name of Prince Ahmed bin Salman.

?As reported last year by Gerald Posner in 'Why America Slept,' Prince Ahmed not only had alleged ties to Al Qaeda, but may also have known in advance that there would be attacks on 9/11. According to Posner, Abu Zubaydah, an Al Qaeda operative who was part of Osama bin Laden's inner circle and was captured in 2002, made these assertions when he was interrogated by the CIA. The commission should ask Mueller about Zubaydah's interrogation. They should also ask whether the FBI interrogated Prince Ahmed before his departure.

"But Prince Ahmed will never be able to answer any questions because not long after the CIA interrogation, he died of a heart attack at the age of 43. Yet we do know that he was on one of the flights.?

Unger believes that this episode ?raises particularly sensitive questions for the administration. Never before in history has a president of the United States had such a close relationship with another foreign power as President Bush and his father have had with the Saudi royal family, the House of Saud. I have traced more than $1.4 billion in investments and contracts that went from the House of Saud over the past 20 years to companies in which the Bushes and their allies have had prominent positions -- Harken Energy, Halliburton, and the Carlyle Group among them. Is it possible that President Bush himself played a role in authorizing the evacuation of the Saudis after 9/11? What did he know and when did he know it??

www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2004/04/11/unasked_questions?mode=PF


In October 2001, the Treasury Department identified the Muwafaq Foundation, largely endowed by Khalid bin Mahfouz, as an al Qaeda front that had funneled millions of dollars to bin Laden. Some families of the 9/11 victims have named Mahfouz and dozens of prominent Saudis, including members of the royal family, in a lawsuit that accuses the Saudis of funding the 9/11 terrorists. Bush administration officials stated that they would seek to have the suit dismissed or delayed. (12)

Senators Bob Graham and Richard C. Shelby, leaders of the congressional panel ending an investigation of the 9/11 attacks, said the administration should declassify information concerning Saudi funding of terrorists.

"Citing ?their people and a lot of their leaders and probably even the royal family,? Shelby said: ?I believe [the Saudis] cannot support so-called charities that support terrorism on a big scale, and then pretend that they're our friends or our allies.

"?As we get into the money trail, it might be embarrassing, but the American people need to know; the victims and their families need to know,? he added. Shelby and Graham said avoiding embarrassment and maintaining good relations with Saudi Arabia are not legitimate reasons to withhold information from the public.

"?The question is,? Graham said after the news conference, ?will we get [the information declassified] in 30 years when the archives are open, or will we get it in time, before the next attack??" (13)


Doubtless one of the connections the senators referred to was the Princess Haifa, the wife of Prince Bandar, Saudi ambassador to the United States for the last twenty years, the longest serving ambassador in Washington. Princess Haifa had been making monthly transfers, $130,000 in all, from her Washington bank account to a needy woman who relayed some of the checks to her husband and another man who assisted and funded the two hijackers who were based in San Diego. (14)

"The money moved into the family?s bank account beginning in early 2000, just a few months after hijackers Khalid Almidhar and Nawaf Alhazmi arrived in Los Angeles from an Al Qaeda planning summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, according to the sources. Within days of the terrorists? arrival in the United States, Al Bayoumi befriended the two men who would eventually hijack American Flight 77, throwing them a welcoming party in San Diego and guaranteeing their lease on an apartment next door to his own. Al Bayoumi also paid $1,500 to cover the first two months of rent for Al Midhar and Alhazmi, although officials said it is possible that the hijackers later repaid the money." (15)


Prince Bandar and Princess Haifa professed their ignorance of the whole affair.

Mark Stein speculates about the recent visit Prince Bandar and Princess Haifa paid to George and Laura at the Crawford ranch, where they were received with the accolades usually reserved for heads of state. Bush must have known about the money transfers and Bandar must have known Bush knew, but apparently a good time was had by all.


"Meanwhile, Majeda Ibrahin, the woman the princess was sending all that money to, turns out to be married to Osama Basnan, another buddy of the al-Qa?eda duo, and one who subsequently celebrated 11 September as a ?wonderful, glorious day?. But here?s an odd little thing: Mr Basnan is known to have been in Texas in April when Crown Prince Abdullah and his entourage flew in to the state to see Bush at the ranch. Just another coincidence? Well, sorta: he?s supposed to have had a meeting in Houston with some big-time Saudi prince who deals with ?intelligence matters.? This seems an unusual degree of access for some schlub from San Diego who?s in the US illegally, as it transpires. He is variously described as a Saudi government agent and al-Qa?eda sympathiser, as if these positions are mutually exclusive. The Saudi embassy say they?ve only received queries about this matter from the media, not from the FBI. Odd that. The federal government claims it needs vast new powers to track every single credit-card transaction and every single email of every single American, yet a prima facie link between the terrorists and Prince Bandar?s wife isn?t worth going over to the embassy to have a little chat about." (16)

Apparently it is not only the Saudis? oil riches that insulates them from criticism, but also their calculated distribution of largesse. The Saudis have contributed to every presidential library in recent decades. Not surprisingly, former ambassadors to Saudi Arabia from the United States end up being apologists for the corrupt, despotic Saudi regime. The Saudis have arranged that American ambassadors to their country not speak Arabic. The American embassy in Saudi Arabia gets all its information about the reactionary regime from the rulers.


Some of the Washington politicians who found the Saudi connection lucrative include Spiro Agnew, Frank Carlucci, Jimmy Carter, Clark Clifford, John Connally, James Baker, George H. W. Bush, William Simon and Caspar Weinberger. (17)



Profits before Patriotism


The Bush dynasty has always been comfortable putting profits before patriotism. Prescott Bush, Bush Senior?s father, extended credit to Adolph Hitler and supplied him with raw materials during Word War II. The U. S. seized his assets under the Trading with the Enemy Act, but grandfather Bush found other ways to replenish the family coffers.

Bush Senior struck it rich in oil and in the defense industry. Mahfouz (yes, that Mahfouz), Prince Bandar and Prince Sultan (Bandar?s father) were also heavily invested in the defense industry through their holdings in the Carlyle Group, where Bush Senior served on the board of directors. Founded in 1987 as a private investment group with strong connections to the Republican Party establishment, Carlyle increased its original investment of $130 million to $900 million when it went public in 2001.

"In recent years, Carlyle has been successful both at raising and making money. It has raised $14 billion in the last five years or so, and its annual rate of return has been 36 percent. Its 550 investors consist of institutions and wealthy individuals from around the world including, until shortly after September 2001, members of the bin Laden family of Saudi Arabia. The family ? which has publicly disavowed links with Osama bin Laden ? had been an investor since 1995." (1


"As the eleventh largest US defence contractor, Carlyle is involved in nearly every aspect of military production, including making the big guns used on US naval destroyers, the Bradley Fighting Vehicle used by US forces during the Gulf War and parts used in most commercial and military aircraft. United Defense has joint ventures in Saudi Arabia and Turkey, two of the United States? closest military allies in the Middle East." (19)

It?s passing strange that even as the hijacked planes smashed into the World Trade Center, the Carlyle Group was holding its annual investor conference. Shafig Bin Laden, brother of Osama Bin Laden, attended.

Bush Junior once served as an executive with Caterair, one of hundreds of companies Carlyle has bought and sold over the past 15 years, but he removed the record of this period from his resume.

In 1986, Bush Junior, to date a flop as a businessman, joined Harken Energy Corporation as a director and was awarded 212,000 shares of stock and other plums.

In 1987, Khalid bin Mahfouz arranged for BCCI investor Abdullah Bakhsh to purchase 17% of Harken. A Harken official acknowledged that Bush?s White House connections had everything to do with the appointment. Somehow, the inexperienced, obscure firm was awarded a prime drilling contract by Bahrain, and Harken?s stock price soared.

In June 1990, Bush Junior sold his Harken stock for a juicy $848,000, enabling him to pay off the loan he had assumed on buying shares in the Texas Rangers. Never mind that the Harken stock promptly tanked when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, for Abdullah Bakhsh, a major Harken shareholder and an investor in BCCI, who had purchased 17% of Harken Energy in 1987, got his money?s worth. By 1990, Bakhsh?s representative on Harken?s board, Talet Othman, began attending Middle East policy discussions with President Bush Senior.


Now that Bush Junior occupies the White House, Bush Senior receives frequent CIA briefings (his prerogative as a former president). "In July 2001, Bush personally contacted Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah to ?clarify? his son's Middle East policies. Also during the summer of 2001, Bush forwarded his son a North Korea policy plan penned by ?Asia expert? and former ambassador to Korea, Donald Gregg. Gregg is a 31-year CIA veteran and the elder Bush's former national security adviser whose expertise involved participation in the Vietnam-era Phoenix Program (death squads), Air America heroin smuggling, ?pacification? efforts in El Salvador and Guatemala, the ?October Surprise,? and the Iran-Contra operation (for which Gregg received a Bush pardon in 1992)." (20)


Bush Junior has received more than advice from his father. He has taken on the team of hustlers and criminals that worked with George Herbert Walker Bush when he was Vice President and President of the United States of America.

Just as his father did, he invokes executive privilege to hide all evidence of collusion with the petroleum pashas who have enriched the Bushes and intimidated the rest of us.

Sandy Tolan, an I.F. Stone Fellow at the Graduate School of Journalism at UC Berkeley, asserts that what the Bush administration really wants in Iraq is a remapping of the Mideast. "The plan is, in its way, as ambitious as the 1916 Sykes-Picot agreement between the empires of Britain and France, which carved up the region at the fall of the Ottoman Empire. The neo-imperial vision, which can be ascertained from the writings of key administration figures and their co-visionaries in influential conservative think tanks, includes not only regime change in Iraq but control of Iraqi oil, a possible end to the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and newly compliant governments in Syria and Iran -- either by force or internal rebellion."

The Bushes are carriers of the deny-destroy-and-be-damned virus. Prescott Bush never apologized for trading with the Nazis. George Bush Senior professed to know nothing of the drug and arms dealing that funded the bloody, illegal Iran-Contra operations, although it was common knowledge that he directed them. He and his sons enriched themselves through shady real estate deals and financial manipulations that brought down entire banking and savings and loan institutions. They are all consummate inside traders, looting and leaving ruin in their wake.


President-Select George Bush is no exception. He has no scruples about exploiting his office for personal and family gain. The Texas governor who could joke about frying prisoners in the electric chair will not, as president, agonize over the decision to send young men and women into battle--or over denying them medical care when they are injured.

There is irrefutable evidence that highly-placed Saudis aided and supported the terrorists who murdered over 3000 American citizens on September 11, 2001. Yet George Bush persists in protecting and colluding with those who sponsor terrorists. Is this not an an act of treason?

George Bush should be impeached.

Notes:

(1) Jonathan Raban, "Western conceit of nation-building ignores culture and history of Arabia," Seattle Times, November 24, 2002

(2) Michael Parenti, 9-11 Terrorism Trap: September 11 and Beyond (2000) City Lights Books, San Francisco

(3) Laura Secor, "Which Islam?," Boston Daily Globe, December 15, 2002

(4) Wayne Madsen, "Questionable Ties: Tracking bin Laden's money flow leads back to Midland, Texas,"

(5) "The Press on the BCCI-bin Mahfouz-bin Laden Intelligence Nexus, " Boston Herald , December 11, 2001

(6) Jonathan Beaty & S. C. Gwynne, The Outlaw Bank: A Wild Ride Into the Secret Heart of BCCI, (1993) Random House, New York

(7) Daniel Pipes, "Jihad: How Academics Have Camouflaged Its Real Meaning," December 2, 2002

( Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, Forbidden Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy and the Failed Hunt for bin Laden (2002) Thunder's Mouth Press/Nation Books, New York

(9) Al Martin, The Conspirators: Secrets of an Iran-Contra Insider (2002) National Liberty Press, LLC

(10) Center for Cooperative Research, "Hijackers who were under surveillance before 9/11"

(11) Greg Palast and David Pallister, "FBI and US Spy Agents Say Bush Spiked Bin Laden Probes Before 11 September," The Guardian, November 7, 2001

(12) Jeff Gerth and Judith Miller, "Saudis Called Slow to Help Stem Terror Finances," New York Times, November 28, 2002

(13) Dana Priest and Susan Schmidt, "9/11 Panel Criticizes Secrecy on Saudi Links," Washington Post, December 12 2002

(14) Greg Miller, Greg Krikorian and H.G. Reza, "FBI Looks at Saudi's Links to 9/11," Los Angeles Times, November 23, 2002

(15) Michael Isikoff, Newsweek, November 22, 2002

(16) Mark Steyn, "Bush and the Saudi Princess"

(17) Daniel Golden, James Bandler and Marcus Walker, Wall Street Journal, September 27, 2001 Posted at globalresearch.ca 5 October 2001

(1 James Hatfield, "Why would Osama bin Laden want to kill Dubya, his former business partner?" Online Journal, July 13, 2001

(19) Steve Lohr, "Gerstner to Be Chairman of Carlyle Group," New York Times, November 22, 2002

(20) Tim Shorrock uncovers the Bush connection to US defence giant the Carlyle Group, New Internationalist 347, July 2002


Updates



From the Progressive Populist, February 1, 2003 -- Bush?s uncle, Jonathan Bush, is an executive at Riggs Bank, where Saudi Princess Faisal had the checking account through which she made her donations to charities.


Saudi Arabia has transferred $500 million to Al Qaida over the past decade, according to a report prepared for the United Nations


New Chairman of 9/11 Commission had business ties with Osama's Brother in Law


Documentation that Bush Junior and James Bath both served together in the National Guard at Ellington Air Force Base and were suspended for failure ?to accomplish annual medical inspection?


An investigation of Saudi banks


Confirmation that the U.S. has a long-standing agreement with Saudi Arabia to train pilots at U.S. bases
_________________
If you support the war on drugs you support torture! Anyone that supports the war on drugs is a sadist that does not deserve to live.
http://groups.msn.com/LibertarianShadowDivision


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLSDempire
LibertarianEnforcer
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/23/05
Posts: 581
Last seen: 11 years, 6 months
Re: Ending prohibition, how can we help? [Re: LSDempire]
    #4484363 - 08/02/05 07:04 AM (11 years, 10 months ago)

QUESTIONABLE TIES
Tracking bin Laden's money flow leads back to Midland, Texas
by Wayne Madsen
On September 24, President George W. Bush appeared at a press conference in the White House Rose Garden to announce a crackdown on the financial networks of terrorists and those who support them. ?U.S. banks that have assets of these groups or individuals must freeze their accounts,? Bush declared. ?And U.S. citizens or businesses are prohibited from doing business with them.?


But the president, who is now enjoying an astounding 92 percent approval rating, hasn?t always practiced what he is now preaching: Bush?s own businesses were once tied to financial figures in Saudi Arabia who currently support bin Laden.


In 1979, Bush?s first business, Arbusto Energy, obtained financing from James Bath, a Houstonian and close family friend. One of many investors, Bath gave Bush $50,000 for a 5 percent stake in Arbusto. At the time, Bath was the sole U.S. business representative for Salem bin Laden, head of the wealthy Saudi Arabian family and a brother (one of 17) to Osama bin Laden. It has long been suspected, but never proven, that the Arbusto money came directly from Salem bin Laden. In a statement issued shortly after the September 11 attacks, the White House vehemently denied the connection, insisting that Bath invested his own money, not Salem bin Laden?s, in Arbusto.


In conflicting statements, Bush at first denied ever knowing Bath, then acknowledged his stake in Arbusto and that he was aware Bath represented Saudi interests. In fact, Bath has extensive ties, both to the bin Laden family and major players in the scandal-ridden Bank of Commerce and Credit International (BCCI) who have gone on to fund Osama bin Laden. BCCI defrauded depositors of $10 billion in the ?80s in what has been called the ?largest bank fraud in world financial history? by former Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau. During the ?80s, BCCI also acted as a main conduit for laundering money intended for clandestine CIA activities, ranging from financial support to the Afghan mujahedin to paying intermediaries in the Iran-Contra affair.


When Salem bin Laden died in 1988, powerful Saudi Arabian banker and BCCI principal Khalid bin Mahfouz inherited his interests in Houston. Bath ran a business for bin Mahfouz in Houston and joined a partnership with bin Mahfouz and Gaith Pharaon, BCCI?s frontman in Houston?s Main Bank.


The Arbusto deal wasn?t the last time Bush looked to highly questionable sources to invest in his oil dealings. After several incarnations, Arbusto emerged in 1986 as Harken Energy Corporation. When Harken ran into trouble a year later, Saudi Sheik Abdullah Taha Bakhsh purchased a 17.6 percent stake in the company. Bakhsh was a business partner with Pharaon in Saudi Arabia; his banker there just happened to be bin Mahfouz.


Though Bush told the Wall Street Journal he had ?no idea? BCCI was involved in Harken?s financial dealings, the network of connections between Bush and BCCI is so extensive that the Journal concluded their investigation of the matter in 1991 by stating: ?The number of BCCI-connected people who had dealings with Harken?all since George W. Bush came on board?raises the question of whether they mask an effort to cozy up to a presidential son.? Or even the president: Bath finally came under investigation by the FBI in 1992 for his Saudi business relationships, accused of funneling Saudi money through Houston in order to influence the foreign policies of the Reagan and first Bush administrations.


Worst of all, bin Mahfouz allegedly has been financing the bin Laden terrorist network?making Bush a U.S. citizen who has done business with those who finance and support terrorists. According to USA Today, bin Mahfouz and other Saudis attempted to transfer $3 million to various bin Laden front operations in Saudi Arabia in 1999. ABC News reported the same year that Saudi officials stopped bin Mahfouz from contributing money directly to bin Laden. (Bin Mahfouz?s sister is also a wife of Osama bin Laden, a fact that former CIA Director James Woolsey revealed in 1998 Senate testimony.)


When President Bush announced he is hot on the trail of the money used over the years to finance terrorism, he must realize that trail ultimately leads not only to Saudi Arabia, but to some of the same financiers who originally helped propel him into the oil business and later the White House. The ties between bin Laden and the White House may be much closer than he is willing to acknowledge.


Wayne Madsen, an investigative journalist based in Washington, is the author of Genocide and Covert Operations in Africa 1993-1999.

http://www.inthesetimes.com/issue/25/25/feature3.shtml
_________________
If you support the war on drugs you support torture! Anyone that supports the war on drugs is a sadist that does not deserve to live.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1

Shop: Original Seeds Store Buy CBD, Cannabis Seeds, Compare CBD   Amazon Ayahuasca, DXM, Hemp, Ranch Dressing, San Pedro, Scales

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* "Drug Czar" calls for end to "War on Drugs"
( 1 2 all )
phi1618 951 23 05/15/09 06:24 AM
by Seuss
* LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition) supersapien 608 3 02/19/06 05:29 PM
by blaze2
* Law Enforcement Against Prohibition (LEAP) 13eetleJuice 651 6 02/07/05 08:52 PM
by 13eetleJuice
* What the hell are we going to do about this prohibition???
( 1 2 all )
DirtMcgirt 780 23 12/12/04 09:12 PM
by kadakuda
* Support Local Progressives to End the Drug War Clean 230 0 10/29/04 01:49 PM
by Clean
* Iron Triangle: Carlyle Group Exposed (video) kotik 288 1 05/26/06 06:05 PM
by Vvellum
* The only beneficiaries of Prohibition were bootleggers, crime bosses, and the forces of big govrnmnt Search59 341 2 12/14/04 11:09 PM
by DNKYD
* The First Amendment - Void Where Prohibited by Law Evolving 2,590 17 02/10/04 03:28 PM
by silversoul7

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil
1,527 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
High Mountain Compost
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.07 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 19 queries.