9/11 commission should ask who authorized the evacuation of Saudi nati

[jbfam4]

Unasked questions
The 9/11 commission should ask who authorized the evacuation of Saudi nationals in the days following the attacks
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2004/04/11/unasked_questions/

By Craig Unger, 4/11/2004

IN ITS TOUGH QUESTIONING of Richard Clarke and Condoleezza Rice, the 9/11 commission has already shown itself to be more resolute than some skeptics predicted. Many Americans now realize that multiple warnings of an Al Qaeda attack on American soil crossed the desks of Bush administration officials in the months leading up to 9/11. The administration's previously unchallenged narrative has begun to unravel.

But when hearings resume on Tuesday, we may learn exactly how tough the commission is prepared to be. This time the stars will be Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI director Robert S. Mueller III, among others. When they testify -- especially Mueller -- we will see whether or not the commission has the stomach to address what may be the single most egregious security lapse related to the attacks: the evacuation of approximately 140 Saudis just two days after 9/11.

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?

That may be the most difficult question of all for the commission to tackle. If the commission dares to confront this issue, it will undoubtedly be accused of politicizing the most important national security investigations in American history -- in an election year, no less. If it does not, it risks something far worse -- the betrayal of the thousands who lost their lives that day, and of the living who want answers.

[Eurobabe]

1. good to see this in print

who authorized that flight and why? ask them tomorrow....

[adriennui]

2. this question must be asked

and if not answered we'll know the hearings are a sham. i will never figure out how these people (the saudis)were whisked out of this country post-9/11. the BS about being concerned for their safety is a smokescreen.
bush will always live under a cloud of suspicion if it isn't answered.

even the freepers would find it difficult to give him a pass on this one.

[Sgt. Peppers]

3. I was wondering the same question. thank for the post :)

Burn Bush Burn

[ixion]

4. is it possible?

I'd say it's a given. Bushie protected his investors. Period.