Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is it insane to believe Bush started this war to profit from it?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:16 AM
Original message
Is it insane to believe Bush started this war to profit from it?
Edited on Tue Mar-30-04 01:17 AM by Classical_Liberal
If you believe it is why?

reference metadiscussions involving myself in this post.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=484493&mesg_id=484493
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
LSdemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:19 AM
Response to Original message
1. If by profit, you mean get a 10-20 point bump in the polls,
then, no it's not insane.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:20 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. I am also referring to all the ties Bushco has to defense contractors
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSdemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:43 AM
Response to Reply #2
14. Yeah, that too
but I'm fairly convinced that everything big Bush does is done for short-term politiical gain to allow him to cover up all the crap he gives to his political contributors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlinPA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #1
33. I think Rove did it to make Bush* the "war president".
Remember the strategy found on the CD's?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kera Donating Member (294 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:22 AM
Response to Original message
3. it has always been from dawn of the world
the main pupose of a war don't you know , plus a little dose of fear is very good for business
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
not systems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:23 AM
Response to Original message
4. Not at all.
Insane would require believing something at odds with
the evidence. The evidence shows that the constellation
of companies and individuals tied to the Bush family
are profiting nicely from the war.

Just because the answer is obvious doesn't make it wrong.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:25 AM
Response to Original message
5. you might want to ask these guys...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SilasSoule Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:31 AM
Response to Reply #5
9. Bin Laden, Baker, Bush

THey all profit when the blood goes GUSH!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tjwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:29 AM
Response to Original message
6. It's insane to believe he started it to NOT profit from it.
Edited on Tue Mar-30-04 01:29 AM by tjwash
Not only oil, Kuwait has BILLIONS invested in the US stock market and in US treasury bills that can be liquidated immediately. Gotta keep an eye on those funds

Thank you Ronald Reagan for selling our country out from under our feet.

:mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
not systems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:29 AM
Response to Original message
7. Fyi...
Edited on Tue Mar-30-04 01:29 AM by ezmojason
when having a discussion with a hardliner warhawk like
your last posts remember their definition of "insane"
is anything that doesn't boost the righteous moral
imperative of killing their perceived enemies by the score.

:toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cat Atomic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:29 AM
Response to Original message
8. I think the Neo-Cons really believe that they're great patriots.
Edited on Tue Mar-30-04 01:31 AM by Cat Atomic
I believe the main impetus for the Neo-Con's invasion of Iraq was to control the oil supplies, and to establish a strategic foothold there.

They probably see that as a very patriotic act, because for them, Corporate America is America. Everything else; the parks, the schools, the general population, etc., is only a bothersome leach on Corporate America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nothingshocksmeanymore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:33 AM
Response to Original message
10. Mobuto was referencing 9/11 not the war in that post as far as I can tell
It is NOT insane to suggest Bush manufactured a WAR so that he could profit from it...but it ISN'T at this point in time credible to claim he MANUFACTURED 9/11 in order to profit from it...having SAID that, I don't agree with Mobuto that that is what McKinney actually said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thebigidea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:36 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. yep, she didn't say that at all - but some do find it a convenient stretch
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Classical_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:37 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. You're right
Edited on Tue Mar-30-04 01:41 AM by Classical_Liberal
I misread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Daisey Mae Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:34 AM
Response to Original message
11. NOO NOO NOO !!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xxqqqzme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 01:50 AM
Response to Original message
15. I thought that WAS the reason
there certainly are not any others!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 02:43 AM
Response to Original message
16. they can loot the treasury only while they are in power
all their thought is bent on staying in power
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WitchWay Donating Member (558 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 03:41 AM
Response to Reply #16
21. Unfortunately
they are always in power, whichever guise they wear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neebob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 03:09 AM
Response to Original message
17. What I wanna know is
why more people can't see it! Really, though, it's more of a rhetorical question.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nailzberg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 03:14 AM
Response to Original message
18. Is believing the truth insane?
Bush has never done anything without considering profit. I believe he doesn't even care if he wins a second term or not. He made enough money for him and his cronies off his first, and that's all he cares about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOHICA06 Donating Member (886 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 03:23 AM
Response to Original message
19. Not insane, but not right either ...
Edited on Tue Mar-30-04 03:25 AM by BOHICA04
Bush took out Iraq because he believes it was the right thing to do. Don't attribute any great thinking or plotting here, we are dealing with an accutely color-blind guy - he only sees black & white and he only see his version of black & white.

And as a black & white seeing Cowboy - he cowboyed up and blundered into a messy situation - believing there has to be WMD in Iraq, there just has to be and no Euro-loving Hans boy is going to tell me (Bush)different.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neebob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 03:26 AM
Response to Reply #19
20. Hey, Bohica!
Edited on Tue Mar-30-04 03:28 AM by neebob
Like her handle. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
el_gato Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. they wanted this war for the Billions that went to halliburton et al

war profiteering is the primary reasons wars are waged

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #19
39. Speaking of tunnel-vision...
...I guess you haven't noticed all of the major corporations that not only backed the NeoCon Junta, but are now major contractors in Iraq. Junior may be a couple of six-packs short of a case, but his backers know exactly what they're doing and why.

Money. Money. Money.

And Junior will get his piece of the action just as he always has in the past, and as his father and grandfather did before him.

Too believe otherwise is just too naive, IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Festivito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
23. He wanted a GROUND war in Iraq.
Ground wars not using missiles offer use of tanks and other hardware.
Lots of rebuilding money with ground war.
Lots of campaign money with ground war.

More control over pipeline sign-offs with ground war.

He dropped the cap on military profits.
Lots of borrowed money. Note for every dollar we put into government each Bush year he borrows and additional 25 cents. That's 25% tax increase. More if you count interest. (150% if borrowed at 7% for 15 years)

Poppy invested in conventional war companies through Carlye.
W gets to inherit it when poppy dies.
W wants to inherit that money untaxed. (Death tax limit was one million, we wanted it at five million, Republicans got it set at no tax for a permanent patrician class.)

If it was just to get back at Saddam for threatening poppy, that threat was dubious at best. It wasn't WMD. It wasn't 9/11.

There is not much left.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 02:09 PM
Response to Original message
24. Starting wars is usually for profit, isn't it? We need oil so we
start a war to steal it. The Bush family's entire empire has been built on starting and perpetuating wars. Can't move arms stock and spend lots of oil money on domestic needs. Of course he did it to get money...and because he's power mad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radwriter0555 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. we don't need oil.
we have plenty.

the oil in iraq is intended for the burgeoning industrial and manufacturing markets in india and china.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sticky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 02:12 PM
Response to Original message
25. I think the reasons are as follows:

Stupidity
Corruption
Ineptitude
Inexperience
and the
Inability to think for himself

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chelsea0011 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 02:13 PM
Response to Original message
26. Oil Baby....Squirt..Squirt
US Oil Companies are invading Iraq
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radwriter0555 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 02:15 PM
Response to Original message
27. I've been saying this would happen since 11/7/00, and it did...
Edited on Tue Mar-30-04 02:16 PM by radwriter0555
I said bush would steal the election.

I said bush would start phony wars.

I didn't know about his reichstag, but it all fell into place.

His PNAC will stop at NOTHING to take over the freaking planet, just like HITLER.

http://www.newamericancentury.org
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WilliamPitt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
29. The payout
At the end of the day, however, ideology is only good for bull sessions in the board room and the bar. Something has to grease the skids, to make the whole thing worthwhile to those involved, and entice those outside the loop to get into the game.

Thus, the payout.

It is well known by now that Dick Cheney, before becoming Vice President, served as chairman and chief executive of the Dallas-based petroleum corporation Halliburton. During his tenure, according to oil industry executives and United Nations records, Halliburton did a brisk $73 million in business with Saddam Hussein's Iraq. While working face-to-face with Hussein, Cheney and Halliburton were also moving into position to capitalize upon Hussein's removal from power. In October of 1995, the same month Cheney was made CEO of Halliburton, that company announced a deal that would put it first in line should war break out in Iraq. Their job: To take control of burning oil wells, put out the fires, and prepare them for service.

Another corporation that stands to do well by a war in Iraq is Brown & Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton. Ostensibly, Brown & Root is in the construction business, and thus has won a share of the $900 million government contract for the rebuilding of post-war Iraqi bridges, roads and other basic infrastructure. This is but the tip of the financial iceberg, as the oil wells will also have to be repaired after parent-company Halliburton puts out the fires.

More ominously is Brown & Root's stock in trade: the building of permanent American military bases. There are twelve permanent U.S. bases in Kosovo today, all built and maintained by Brown & Root for a multi-billion dollar profit. If anyone should wonder why the administration has not offered an exit strategy to the Iraq war plans, the presence of Brown & Root should answer them succinctly. We do not plan on exiting. In all likelihood, Brown & Root is in Iraq to build permanent bases there, from which attacks upon other Middle Eastern nations can be staged and managed.

Again, this casts Bush's speech on Wednesday in a new light.

Being at the center of the action is nothing new for Halliburton and Brown & Root. The two companies have worked closely with governments in Algeria, Angola, Bosnia, Burma, Croatia, Haiti, Nigeria, Rwanda, and Somalia during the worst chapters in those nation's histories. Many environmental and human rights groups claim that Cheney, Halliburton and Brown & Root were, in fact, centrally involved in these fiascos. More recently, Brown & Root was contracted by the Defense Department to build cells for detainees in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The bill for that one project came to $300 million.

Cheney became involved with PNAC officially in 1997, while still profiting from deals between Halliburton and Hussein. One year later, Cheney and PNAC began actively and publicly agitating for war on Iraq. They have not stopped to this very day.

Another company with a vested interest in both war on Iraq and massively increased defense spending is the Carlyle Group. Carlyle, a private global investment firm with more than $12.5 billion in capital under management, was formed in 1987. Its interests are spread across 164 companies, including telecommunications firms and defense contractors. It is staffed at the highest levels by former members of the Reagan and Bush Sr. administrations. Former President George H. W. Bush is himself employed by Carlyle as a senior advisor, as is long-time Bush family advisor and former Secretary of State James Baker III.

One company acquired by Carlyle is United Defense, a weapons manufacturer based in Arlington, VA. United Defense provides the Defense Department with combat vehicle systems, fire support, combat support vehicle systems, weapons delivery systems, amphibious assault vehicles, combat support services and naval armaments. Specifically, United Defense manufactures the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, the M113 armored personnel carrier, the M88A2 Recovery Vehicle, the Grizzly, the M9 ACE, the Composite Armored Vehicle, the M6 Linebacker, the M7 BFIST, the Armored Gun System, the M4 Command and Control Vehicle, the Battle Command Vehicle, the Paladin, the Crusader, and Electric Gun/Pulse Power weapons technology.

In other words, everything a growing Defense Department, a war in Iraq, and a burgeoning American military empire needs.

http://truthout.org/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=1&num=53

======================

But is it all ideology for these men? Of course not. There is the payout. Have you ever heard of a company called United Defense, out of Arlington, Virginia? Let me introduce you. United Defense provides Combat Vehicle Systems, Fire Support, Combat Support Vehicle Systems, Weapons Delivery Systems, Amphibious Assault Vehicles, and Combat Support Services. Some of United Defense's current programs include:

The Bradley Family of Fighting Vehicles, the M113 Family of Fighting Vehicles, the M88A2 Recovery Vehicle, the Grizzly, the M9 ACE, the Composite Armored Vehicle, the M6 Linebacker, the M4 Command and Control Vehicle, the Battle Command Vehicle, the Paladin, the Future Scout and Cavalry System, the Crusader, Electric Gun Technology/Pulse Power, Advanced Simulations and Training Systems, and Fleet Management. This list goes on and on, and includes virtually everything an eternal war might need.

Who owns United Defense? Why, the Carlyle Group, which bought United Defense in October of 1997. For those not in the know, the Carlyle Group is a private global investment firm. Carlyle is the eleventh largest defense contractor in the US because of its ownership of companies making tanks, aircraft wings and other equipment. Carlyle has ownership stakes in 164 companies which generated $16 billion in revenues in the year 2000 alone. The Carlyle Group does not provide investment or other services to the general public.

Who works for the Carlyle Group? George Herbert Walker Bush works for the Carlyle Group, has been a senior consultant for Carlyle for some years now, and sits on the Board of Directors. This company is profiting wildly from this war in Iraq, a tidy gift from son to father.

And then, of course, there is Dick Cheney's Halliburton, profiting in the millions from the oil in Iraq. Halliburton subsidiary, Brown & Root, is also in Iraq. Their stock in trade is the building of permanent military bases. Here is your permanent military presence in Iraq, and all for an incredible fee. Cheney still draws a one million dollar annual check from Halliburton, what they call a 'deferred retirement benefit.' In Boston, we call that a paycheck.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/081003A.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #29
35. What I've always found interesting
was that the whole idea of military "outsourcing" to companies like Brown and Root began when Dick Cheney was Secretary of Defense. I mean, which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radwriter0555 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #29
38. Will have you ever put forth on the premise that the ONLY reason 'we'
bombed bagdad was simply in order to be able to rebuild it? And for those lucrative contracts to be scooped by halliburton ala brown and root?

This has long been a position of mine, but I haven't seen it discussed elsewhere.

I didn't see any reason to bomb the crap out of bagdad. There was no military, no resistence, very little opposition.

Thoughts? Pontification?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Insider Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #38
41. absolutely
these contractors are like pigs at the trough. i believe it paid off in more ways: shift of federal recources from social services to M.I.C. and energy. trillions. it really is nauseating.

and btw, i wonder about the bombing in afghanistan laying the groundwork for that pipeline. i've never looked at a map of the bombings. scared to, i guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuba Donating Member (12 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
30. He wanted to save the economy
I believe that gov. bush saw that the economy was taking a downturn at the end of 2000 and early 2001 and decided to plan the invasion of Iraq under the assumption that a war will help the economy, and why not invade an already hobbled Iraq. He and the rest of the business men in the administration could also profit personally from other areas such as Haliburton and oil.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
31. yeah and it's also insane to think bush 911 LIHOP for profit....i'm a nut.

Now you would think that being a business partner of the brother in law and alleged financier of "Enemy No. 1" would be considered a bona fide "conflict of interest", particularly when your mandate --as part of the 9/11 Commission's work-- is to investigate "Enemy No. 1"...

Unknown to most, UNOCAL's partner in the Cent-Gas trans-Afghan pipeline consortium, the Saudi Company Delta Oil is owned by the bin Mahfouz and Al-Amoudi clans which allegedly have ties to bin Laden's Al Qaeda.

According to a 1998 Senate testimony of former CIA director James Woolsey, powerful financier Khalid bin Mahfouz' younger sister is married to Osama bin Laden,. (US Senate, Senate Judiciary Committee, Federal News Service, 3 Sept. 1998, See also Wayne Madsen, Questionable Ties, In These Times,12 Nov. 2001 )

Bin Mahfouz is suspected to have funnelled millions of dollars to the Al Qaeda network.(See Tom Flocco, Scoop.co.nz 28 Aug. 2002)

Now, "by sheer coincidence", former New Jersey governor Thomas Kean, the man chosen by President Bush to lead the 9/11 commission also has business ties with bin Mahfouz and Al-Amoudi.

Thomas Kean is a director (and shareholder) of Amerada Hess Corporation , which is involved in the Hess-Delta joint venture with Delta Oil of Saudi Arabia (owned by the bin Mahfouz and Al-Amoudi clans). Delta-Hess "was established in 1998 for the development and exploration of oil fields in the Caspian region...In Azerbaijan Delta Hess is involved in the Azeri-Chirag-Gunashli PSA (2.72%) and the Garabaghli-Kursangi PSA (20%). It is also an equity holder in the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline":

"An air of mystery hangs over Delta- Hess, which... is registered in the Cayman Islands. Hess is in no hurry to reveal the terms of the alliance, which it says are subject to confidentiality clauses. 'There's no reason why this should be public information,' a Hess spokesman says." -(Energy Compass, 15 Nov. 2002)

Coincidentally, the former Governor of New Jersey is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations, together with another prominent member of the board of directors of Amerada Hess, former Secretary of the Treasury Nicholas Brady:

In other words, Delta Oil Ltd. of Saudi Arabia --which is a partner in the Hess-Delta Alliance--is in part controlled by Khalid bin Mafhouz, Osama's brother in law.

And former Governor Thomas Kean not only sits on the board of directors of a company which has business dealings with Khalid bin Mahfouz, he also heads the 9/11 Commission, which has a mandate to investigate Khalid's brother in law, Osama bin Laden.

Dr. Kissinger had a conflict of interest and resigned! The vice chairman of the Commission, former Sen. George Mitchell of Maine, resigned for the same reason. (See Xymphora, 19 Dec 2002 )

Now you would think that being a business partner of the brother in law and alleged financier of "Enemy No. 1" would also be considered a bona fide "conflict of interest", particularly when your mandate --as part of the 9/11 Commission's work-- is to investigate "Enemy No. 1".

And the corporate media applauds. Without acknowledging his Saudi business connections, Thomas Kean is heralded as "a man of extraordinary integrity, decency and intellect." In the words of the Baltimore Sun: "he lacks obvious conflicts of interest" (26 Dec.2002). To which I respond: "how more obvious can you get"!

It is also worth mentioning that Thomas Kean also sits as co-chairman of the Homeland Security Project (HSP) under the auspices of the Century Foundation. In this capacity, Kean has played a key role in the draft recommendations of the Century Foundation, which laid the groundwork of the Office of Homeland Security legislation.

The Saudi Connection

Thomas Kean, described as a "moderate Republican" is not alone in this Saudi business relationship.

Extensively documented, other prominent members of the Republican party including the Bush family have had business dealings with the bin Laden family. (See George W. Bush Financial Scams: CRG selection of articles)

Moreover, it would appear that Delta officials (involved in the UNOCAL trans-Afghan pipeline consortium) played a key role in negotiations with the Taliban. In turn, Enron, the infamous energy giant - whose former CEO, Ken Lay, had close connections to the Bush family - had been contracted in a cozy relationship to undertake feasibility studies for the Unocal-Delta consortium. Enron Corporation had also been entrusted --in liaison with Delta-- with pipeline negotiations with the Taliban government.

Carefully documented by Wayne Madsen, George W. Bush also had dealings with Osama's brother in law Khalid bin Mafhouz, when he was in the Texas oil business. Both George W. Bush and Khalid bin-Mahfouz were implicated in the Bank of Commerce International (BCCI) scandal:

"Other links between Bush and Mahfouz can be found through investments in the Carlyle Group, an American investment firm managed by a board on which former president George Bush himself sat. The younger Bush personally held shares in one of the components of the Carlyle group, the Caterair company, between 1990-94. And Carlyle today ranks as a leading contributor to Bush's electoral campaign. On Carlyle's advisory board is found the name of Sami Baarma, director of the Pakistani financial establishment Prime Commercial Bank that is based in Lahore and owned by Mahfouz.
- (See Maggie Mulvihill, Jonathan Wells and Jack Meyers: Slick deals; the White House connection; Saudi 'agents' close Bush Friends,Boston Herald, 11 December 2001).

In The Wake Of 9/11

In the wake of 9/11, Khalid bin Mahfouz (Osama's brother in law) was carefully exempted from the Treasury investigations (another "sheer coincidence") which led to the freezing of the financial assets of some 150 Saudi businesses, charities and individuals:

"The US Treasury has frozen the assets of 150 Saudi individuals, companies and charities suspected of financing terrorism. It has named Blessed Relief, a Saudi "charity" as a front organisation providing funds to Osama bin Laden. "Saudi businessmen have been transferring millions of dollars to Bin Laden through Blessed Relief," the agency said.

One rich Saudi patriarch under suspicion is Khaled bin Mahfouz, owner of the National Commercial Bank, banker to the Saudi royal family, US and British authorities have also investigated Mohammed Hussein Al-Amoudi, another billionaire Saudi, for possible financial ties to Bin Laden. Al -Amoudi, who oversees a vast network of companies involved in construction, mining, banking and oil, has also denied any involvement with Bin Laden. His Washington lawyers said he "was unalterably opposed to terrorism and had no knowledge of any money transfers by Saudi businesses to Bin Laden.

Both Al-Amoudi and Bin Mahfouz have been left untouched by the US Treasury Department. The case against them, let alone against the government itself, is unproven. But the post-September 11 spotlight on Saudi Arabia has brought into sharp focus the fundamental question facing the country's rulers."
- (Scotland on Sunday, 11 August 2002)

The 9/11 Victims Families Law Suit

According to one press report, Thomas Kean --in contrast to Dr. Henry Kissinger-- was selected to head the 9/11 Commission because he was "close to the families of the 9/11 victims, an important credential to the White House, which was coming under increasing criticism from those families" (Scripps Howard News Service, 17 December 2002)

Yet in a cruel irony, the $1 trillion lawsuit filed last August by the families of the victims of the September 11 attacks , lists two of Thomas Kean's business partners in the Hess-Delta joint-venture, among the accused: Khalid Bin Mahfouz (Osama's brother in law), and Mohammed Hussein al Amoudi. Both individuals have been tagged in the lawsuit as alleged "financiers" of Al Qaeda. Now, how will Thomas Kean deal with that in the context of the 9/11 Commission?

Mystery Surrounding The 1998 Embassy Bombings

Former CIA director James Woolsey's testimony confirms that the Sudan pharmaceutical company bombed in 1998 on the orders of President Clinton was owned by Salah Idris, a business associate and protegé of Khalid bin Mahfouz, The bombing was in retribution for the alleged Al Qaeda African Embassy bombings.

The Mahfouz conglomerate, which owns the largest bank in Saudi Arabia, the National Commercial Bank, was preparing to pump money into the trans-Afghan pipeline deal. (For further details, see Michel Chossudovsky, 2002, Chapter VI) Delta-Hess was also set up in 1998 to explore and develop oil and gas resources in the Caspian Sea basin.

Now why would the Clinton administration order the bombing of a factory which was controlled by a business crony of Unocal Corporation and Amerada-Hess?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #31
40. No, you're crazy to think like that!...
...and I think you have a lot of company including me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spinbaby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 02:30 PM
Response to Original message
32. Yeah, that's crazy
He's not smart enough to plan anything like that. Cheney planned it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
denverbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
34. IMHO, this is Cheney's war. And it is about profit.
Cheney has always been a staunch opponent of sanctions. Sanctions meant Halliburton couldn't sell oil equipment to Iraq, Iran, Libya, etc, and all the business was going elsewhere.

Now, if we ended the Iraq sanctions, no only would Saddam not have given US companies any business, but it would've been an enormous slap in the face to Shrub & Daddy, because Saddam would've still been in power, unsanctioned, unpunished.

But support for the sanctions worldwide was decreasing, and so it was only a matter of time before oil equipment contracts started to go out, and Halliburton et al would've been cut off cold by Saddam.

Cheney would've been SOL if 9-11 hadn't happened, cause they've had needed some other excuse to invade Iraq. Americans didn't really give a damn about WMD until 9-11, and notice that every speech Shrub gave about Iraq mentioned Iraq, WMD, and 9-11 without ever tying Saddam directly to 9-11.

Shrub wanted to get even for Daddy, and Cheney wanted the oil contracts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobthedrummer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
36. No, it is one of the more rational viewpoints in my opinion.
Edited on Tue Mar-30-04 03:20 PM by bobthedrummer
All in the (Profiteering) First Family
http://www.populist.com/04.7.burns.html

9-11 Profiteering
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/FIT403A.html

Firms Awarded Iraq Pacts Tied to D.C.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-3851109,00.html

9/11: The BCCI Connection
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/KUP310A.html

Friends of the Family
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1048205,00.html

And don't ever forget the Bush family tradition of profiteering with the enemy.

How The Bush Family Wealth is Linked to the Jewish Holocaust
http://globalresearch.ca/articles/ROG309A.html

Gold Fillings, Auschwitz and George Bush
http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/bushies.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iceburg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 03:20 PM
Response to Original message
37. Read the House of Saud
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 04:10 PM
Response to Original message
42. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
hippiegranny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 04:11 PM
Response to Original message
43. it's insane
to believe this war was about anything OTHER THAN profit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-30-04 04:11 PM
Response to Original message
44. No.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC