In the movie Fahrenheit 911, which we can all agree has a pretty heavy leftist slant; a number of factual questions about 911 were raised that deserve discussion, no matter what the source:

Three days after 9/11, Sept 14, all planes in the US were still grounded, thousands of them. Not a single plane could fly. In the midst of this two planes were allowed to leave. The planes contained 142 Saudi nationals, among them members of the bin Laden family, including a brother and numerous cousins and uncles. They were flown directly to Saudi Arabia, and after which the Saudi government refused any access to these people to the FBI, and none of them were ever interviewed or called as witnesses in any probe, even tho both the FBI and the 911 commission were desirous to do so. It was stated that the arrangements for these people to leave were made by the White House. Given the incredible national security state of the country that day, I would assume the order to allow the plane to fly would come from Bush himself.

This brings up a number of disturbing questions:

Why were these people, people who may have had telephone or email or some other kind of contact with OBL, or knowledge of rumors, or knowledge of anything that would shed light on the greatest tragedy to strike this nation, allowed to leave, and to travel to a place beyond the reach of the FBI? The official reason the administration gave was they were protecting the safety of these people, but the FBI agent who attempted to investigate this aspect asks in the film, if that was the case, why they weren't flown to Montreal, or London? Why Arabia? And given the enormous apparatus the FBI has for protecting the safety of Mob witnesses, was this not considered as well? And if the immediate family was in danger, why was everyone involved with them, 142 people total, allowed to leave on a day when anyone with a Middle Eastern accent at an airport in this country was being arrested, some spirited away for months and years?


At the same time, the film pointed out that all these people where either dependents of, or worked for, or where stockholders in a company known as the Carlyle Group, a company both the Bush family and the bin Laden family are heavily invested in.

I know if I robbed a convenience store, the police might want to talk to members of my family for purposes of investigation. Seeing how the people who handled this were probably attorneys of great accomplishment as is usually found in high government office, this would have been a well known fact. Why did they allow this to happen?

Several months later, the US Senate released a Senate intelligence committee report on the 911 tragedy. 28 pages of that report, all having to do with Saudi Arabia, were removed from that report. The senators who wrote the report are prohibited by law from disclosing what was in it, and most of them, were furious about this.

Mr. Moore does not offer his own conclusions. The questions raised are incredible enough.

Myself, I have arrived at one plausible scenario. Perhaps others on this board might wish to speculate as well. Would especially like to here those who routinely support Mr. Bush give a reasonable explanation for this incredible event given the tragedy that happened in the days before.

To me these facts point to the possible conclusion that some person or persons in that group of 142 people had foreknowledge of the attack, which the president became aware of after the fact. If communications systems of the Carlyle Group were involved, the question of potential civil liability of both the Saudis involved and the Carlyle Group in over 3,000 deaths and the destruction of the two tallest buildings in the world would have been devastating. It is my conclusion that these people were probably spirited out of the country to keep this particular company from being sued into penury. There are even more sinister theories, but I think it was probably simply money. What other possible explanation could there be?

I would guess if you were running the world so to speak that you would shed points like this as we might shed wet socks........

William Rogers........

That's not so hard:
- France
- Saddam
- both

__________________
2011 Prius

If I were trying to make a point about Bush's failure to a skeptical crowd, Michael Moore's movie would not be on my citation list.

B

I think the movie you and Botsnst should really see is "Dodgeball"

As I understand it the date of departure of these people is up to debate. I've also heard that they left when airspace was opened (not sure what the date is) and that the 14th departure date is merely a rumor.

I'm not sure that this is a really big point. I don't need conspriacy theories to believe that Bush has done a crappy job.

Thank you for actually answering the post. After two personal attacks, one a warning not to speak of the movie, and a personal kudo to the personal attacks from Narwhal, I was wondering if anyone was going to actually attempt to answer the question.

I don't know if you have seen the movie yet, But they had the actual flight manifests, listing the passengers and the flight dates, from which they identified the members of the Bin Laden family. Thanks to your post I am going to do some research to see if this assertion sits on a firm foundation of facts on Mr. Moores part.

I am not really looking for a confirmation of any conspiracy theory - I am looking for a plausible explanation for why this was done. It points to the fact that the American people are missing some kind of piece of crucial information here - the blacked out section of the Senate report and this mysterious flight raise this question: What is it we are not being told and why?

Well, I admit "warning" was too strong of a word, but it would be nice if we could actually discuss the topic instead of my socks.

I think a bunch of rich Saudi's, many with security guards, or the means to get them on short notice, could comfortably hide in their suite at the Four Seasons or could lock the gates to their mansions in Aspen, Palm Springs or wherever.

I just don't think a lot of them were gonna be pulled out from behind the counter of their conveinience store in Jasper TX.

The first question is always qui bono. Follow the money.

Narwal,

The protection explanation works for me if the individuals being whisked away were actually convenience store owners and clerks, such as the ones who were attacked. In my town, all the local convenience stores are owned and operated by Americans with obvious ethnic backgrounds. India being the most common. However, none of these people would have given up their stores or homes to escape from any aggressive activities. They are committed to being Americans and owning their stores. So, none of the locals the area around where I live were hiding or fleeing. They were in their stores, exposed to a potentially dangerous situation.

These Saudis Kirk speaks of were likely not store owners and had no personal safety issues to deal with, in reality. They were rich visitors to our country, living in facilities with excellent security already. So I don't buy the personal safety argument. Not only that, I see no reason why, before they left they were not subject to being questioned by local law enforcement authorities in NYC, the FBI and the CIA. Or from wherever they were living at the time.

I am with Kirk suggesting the rush to let them leave, even if it was just after the ban on commercial flights was lifted, needs to be explained. They were from the region where the attack originated. They were related to the mastermind of the attack. We have held others without charging them with a crime for a few years in response to suspicions they were involved. I would like to know how these people were cleared of suspicion and released. Seems like a reasonable question, and if the answer is so clear and easy to understand, why not just ask the question and get the answer? Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

If the question has no easy answer then it becomes a more interesting question that demands a response. If the answer is easy, as most of us hope it is, then the answer should be forthcoming. Hiding information like this, for whatever reason, just feeds speculation to distraction and detriment of everyone. Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

I guess the 28 pages of missing information in the 9/11 report pertaining to Saudi Arabia's involvement sounds like someone is withholding information. May not be the exact same thing as hiding it. And, without some idea of what the 28 pages are about, and why this information is considered so delicate it is being withheld, it is natural to connect the circumstances of the evacuation of these individuals of Saudi nationality to the missing 28 pages. This question has been around long before this movie arrived. As far as I can tell there is no answer to this available to the public. If the movie brings the issue to a head, great. I would rather the administration err on the side of giving too much information than assuming the public can't handle simple explanations if they are in fact simple. If they are not, then, like I said, the information needs to be out in the open and debated. If that takes time and effort, well, I can't think of a much more worthy and important task than keeping the American public informed on the details of how we were attacked and what is being done to get the bastards that are responsible, and how we are making sure it does not happen again. Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

Too much information that gives the terrorists insight into our means for gathering information about them, I agree, is not necessary for the public. I am at a loss to figure out how the involvement of the Saudi wealthy class that left the United States and went back to Saudi Arabia somehow gives up strategic information about our anti-terrorist plans. Jim

__________________
Own:
1986 Euro 190E 2.3-16 (291,000 miles),
1998 E300D TurboDiesel, 231,000 miles -purchased with 45,000,
1988 300E 5-speed 252,000 miles,
1983 240D 4-speed, purchased w/136,000, now with 222,000 miles.
2009 ML320CDI Bluetec, 89,000 miles

Owned:
1971 220D (250,000 miles plus, sold to father-in-law),
1975 240D (245,000 miles - died of body rot),
1991 350SD (176,560 miles, weakest Benz I have owned),
1999 C230 Sport (45,400 miles),
1982 240D (321,000 miles, put to sleep)

Pleasseeee.... Michael Moore is a total leftest propagandist. Not worth viewing. The people on this forum are too smart to comment on his garbage.

__________________
Bruce Hat
2000 ML320 50K miles
1997 Jaquar XJ6 41K miles
1992 300SL 70K miles - Mint
1995 E320 Wagon 105K miles "Sold" - 10-6-04
1998 E320 "Totalled" - 1-14-04

If you want to know how crooked a stick is, just lay a straight one next to it.

It's not the tall sails that bring a ship to the port of destination, but the unseen wind.

Uncle's quote to me at 12 yrs old "Why walk when you can Bogaloo"

If only the Executive branch could be trusted to decide what should be released. Ashcroft has been his usual, out-of-control self on this issue - classifying things that hurt his agenda (here's an example) and declassifying things that he thinks will help him (e.g., the Gorelick 1995 memo).

This issue is yet another example of why government officials should not squander their credibility. This administration, perhaps more than any other, has institutionalized deception as an official policy. For them, all benefits of the doubt should be resolved in favor of disclosure. Get someone in office who has at least a semblence of credibility, then we can talk about the need for more national security secrets.