W199I

I am trying to find more out about the executive order w199i that bush allegedly signed when he came into office. This E.O. told FBI agents to 'back-off' their investigation into the Bin Ladens. I would like to at least know when exactly this was signed by Bush, who leaked this out, etc.

I have done a search on google but mostly all I come up with is something from 1996 and news articles saying that bush signed this document soon after taking office. How do we know this?

I searched ybbs and only came up with one hit which again only accused bush of signing this with no other evidence.

--shoot I have to go, I won't get back till tomorrow anyway thanks to anybody in advance!

Why don't you watch this?

Greg Palast is the one who broke that story.

thanks Gold I will watch it this afternoon.

o.k. I watched it and looked up Greg Palast. I still do not see where he says Bush signed this document, maybe I missed it in the movie. I certainly have not seen a signature. From what I can tell this document is from 1996, which if any presedent signed it, it would be clinton.

Perhaps I am simply not understanding said scenerio.

[This is a transcript from Palast's book. With the exception of the Note I added about French translations, it is the entirely his work. Any spelling mistakes are my own, but bolding, italics and brackets are all Palast's too.


There is also an image of a document with an explanation underneath, which I will scan for you in a minute. Hope its of use, but it all appears rather confused to me. I always thought this was the weakest section of this book, because he doesn't seem to know what he wants to say other than to paint the Bushes in a bad light somehow.]




From The Best Democracy Money Can Buy, Greg Palast, Pluto Press, London (2002 UK Edition), pp.143-45

Did Bush Spike the investigations of Bin Laden?

During the days of innocence just before September 11, 2001 our unelected president's favors for his monied buddies appeared as vaudeville of venality, but not life-threatening. Then, after September and into the new year, darker tales began to seep out of the pus-holes of America's intelligence agencies.

After September 11th, the BBC's and Guardian's investigation teams, in coordination with the National Security News Service of Washington, set out to find out why the CIA, FBI and other well-funded spooks could neither prevent nor know about the most deadly attack on America since Pearl Harbor. From inside the agencies we heard that government chiefs stopped key investigations into allegations of the funding of Al Quaida and other terrorist organizations by top Saudi royals and some members of the Bin Laden family, not just Osama. Crucially, one top placed operative told me that, even under Bill Clinton, investigations that implicated Saudis were subject to "constraints". But after the elections, under Bush's control, the agencies were ordered to "back off" from any inquiries into the Saudi royals of the Bin Laden family, except for the supposed lone black sheep, Osama.

As a result, one agent told me, "There were particular investigations that were effectively killed." We learned that the Bush administration's ruling killed the secret hunt for the funding, possibly from Saudi Arabia, for Pakistan's successful manufacture of an "Islamic" atom bomb. Without realizing the black humor of his comment, the insider added that the restrictions on the investigations ended on September 11.

And there was a lot to investigate - or in the case of the CIA and FBI under Bush, a lot to deliberately ignore. One international arms dealer (I'm sorry, but in this business sinners are better sources than saints) described a meeting of Saudi billionaires at the Hotel Monceau in Paris in May 1996 to decide who would pay, and how much, to Osama bin Laden's operations. (Our information is that this was not an act of support for Osama but protection money to keep the mad bomber away from Saudi Arabia.) At a lower level, FBI agents let slip a document showing that, on September 11, 1996, the FBI closed an investigation on Bin Laden family members - not Osama - and their links to "alleged terrorist" organizations. FBI agents were livid that these investigations were shut down for five years - until September 11, when they were, for sad and obvious reasons, reactivated.

Was the FBI's case closed because there were no grounds to watch these groups and the Bin Ladens? At the time the FBI agents were directed to look away, one organization, the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY) was accused of connections to terror in India and the Philippines. Maybe they are completely innocent (the FBI targets lots of innocents, too many in fact), but the question was, why was the FBI blocked - then unblocked on September 11? When we asked, the answer came back from several sources: "Arbusto" and "Carlyle". A young George W. Bush made his first million as principal of Arbusto Oil, Texas. The nearly worthless venture ended up a gold mine for the little Bush ("Arbusto" means "shrub" in Spanish), with financing and contracts from Saudi-linked businessmen and Gulf Arabs.

Carlyle is a holding and investment bank which, through its ownership of United Technologies and other arms makers, has become one of America's to defense contractors. It also has the distinction of having both Bush pére and fils as paid retainers [Note: see below]. In 1999, the elder Bush traveled to Saudi Arabia as Carlyle representative.

James Baker, Bush the First's pro-Saudi secretary of state, works for Carlyle; its chairman is Frank Carlucci, Bush Sr's former defense secretary. The Bin Laden held a stake in the secretive private company until just after the September 11 attack. It would be absurd to say that the Presidents Bush spiked investigations of terrorist funding by the Saudis in return for packets of money. The system is not so crude. But it is quite natural to conclude that these smiling billionaires, where associates made your family wealthy, are unlikely to have funded mass murder of Americans, despite the evidence.


Note: pére and fils are French for "father" and "son" respectively

Here is the image, from page 144

http://xs106.xs.to/xs106/06364/bdmcb-palast-p144.gif

Thanks for the reply. I have seen that image elsewhere too and still my questions cannot be answered. In Alex Jones' movie road to tryanny he says:
" the biggest smoking gun of them all....President George W. Bush signed presidentail decision directive W199I telling FBI agents that if they tried to stop Al Qaida they would be arrested under National Security implications."


Nowhere can I find anything stating that he signed this document. According to Palask this document describes an investigation into WAMY starting in 96 and ending sept. 11 2001. Which would mean Clinton signed it if anybody.

I am going to have to call bullshit on Jones' part. This really bothers me. How much more of his work is riddled with falsisms? There is no need for this.

As truthers we have a bias towards anything that promotes our stance. Which makes us susceptable to such lies and selective judgements which we then could start recalling them as truths. I think it is safe to also say that a majority of us despise Bush. With that I can only imagine Jones' reason for saying Bush signed this was to appease his viewers. This can be damaging. Unless I am proven wrong here, and I very well could be, from now on anything Jones says will have to be referenced.

FBI AND US SPY AGENTS SAY BUSH SPIKED BIN LADEN PROBES BEFORE 11 SEPTEMBER
Officials told to 'back off' on Saudis before September 11

http://www.gregpalast.com/detail.cfm?artid=103

by Greg Palast and David Pallister
Wednesday, November 7, 2001
The Guardian (London)

FBI and military intelligence officials in Washington say they were prevented for political reasons from carrying out full investigations into members of the Bin Laden family in the US before the terrorist attacks of September 11.

US intelligence agencies have come under criticism for their wholesale failure to predict the catastrophe at the World Trade Centre. But some are complaining that their hands were tied.

FBI documents shown on BBC Newsnight last night and obtained by the Guardian show that they had earlier sought to investigate two of Osama bin Laden's relatives in Washington and a Muslim organisation, the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), with which they were linked.

The FBI file, marked Secret and coded 199, which means a case involving national security, records that Abdullah bin Laden, who lived in Washington, had originally had a file opened on him "because of his relationship with the World Assembly of Muslim Youth - a suspected terrorist organisation".

WAMY members deny they have been involved with terrorist activities, and WAMY has not been placed on the latest list of terrorist organisations whose assets are being frozen.

Abdullah, who lived with his brother Omar at the time in Falls Church, a town just outside Washington, was the US director of WAMY, whose offices were in a basement nearby.

But the FBI files were closed in 1996 apparently before any conclusions could be reached on either the Bin Laden brothers or the organisation itself. High-placed intelligence sources in Washington told the Guardian this week: "There were always constraints on investigating the Saudis".

They said the restrictions became worse after the Bush administration took over this year. The intelligence agencies had been told to "back off" from investigations involving other members of the Bin Laden family, the Saudi royals, and possible Saudi links to the acquisition of nuclear weapons by Pakistan.

"There were particular investigations that were effectively killed."

Only after the September 11 attacks was the stance of political and commercial closeness reversed towards the other members of the large Bin Laden clan, who have classed Osama bin Laden as their "black sheep".

Yesterday, the head of the Saudi-based WAMY's London office, Nouredine Miladi, said the charity was totally against Bin Laden's violent methods. "We seek social change through education and cooperation, not force."

He said Abdullah bin Laden had ceased to run WAMY's US operation a year ago.

Neither Abdullah nor Omar bin Laden could be contacted in Saudi Arabia for comment.

WAMY was founded in 1972 in a Saudi effort to prevent the "corrupting" ideas of the west ern world influencing young Muslims. With official backing it grew to embrace 450 youth and student organisations with 34 offices worldwide.

Its aim was to encourage "concerned Muslims to take up the challenge by arming the youth with sound understanding of Islam, guarding them against destructive ideologies, and instilling in them level-headed wisdom".

In Britain it has 20 associated organisations, many highly respectable.

But as long as 10 years ago it was named as a discreet channel for public and private Saudi donations to hardline Islamic organisations. One of the recipients of its largesse has been the militant Students Islamic Movement of India, which has lent support to Pakistani-backed terrorists in Kashmir and seeks to set up an Islamic state in India.

Since September 11 WAMY has been investigated in the US along with a number of other Muslim charities. There have been several grand jury investigations but no findings have been made against any of them.

Current FBI interest in WAMY is shown in their agents' interrogation of a radiologist from San Antonio, Texas, Dr Al Badr al-Hazmi, who was arrested on September 12 and released without charge two weeks later. He had the same surname as two of the plane hijackers.

He was also questioned about his contacts with Abdullah bin Laden at the US WAMY office.

Mr Al-Hazmi said that he had made phone calls to Abdullah bin Laden in 1999 trying to obtain books and videotapes about Islamic teachings for the Islamic Centre of San Antonio.

As far as Bush's signature goes... I don't know, but Alex is well-known for his sensationalistic approach.

Yeah you're right and I know his style. I don't know why I get so worked up.
I am just worried that if I get into an argument and end up using something of Jones' that isn't true. It would be my fault I guess in the end but when you read read read watch documentaries, etc; it becomes ever easier for the information and its origins to be muttled.

Well that and the fact that there is so much fact out there that I just can't see a reason to 'sensationalize'.(though I think he went beyond that with this)

Yes, Palast never says it was Bush who SIGNED the order. That is Jones' own view - but like you say, if anyone did in the first place, it was Clinton.

Of course, Big Saudi Money is no doubt just as important to Democrats as to Republicans.

That it apparently got much worse under Bush can probably give you an indication of just how close the Bush-wing of the ruling class is to Saudi, and particularly Bin Laden, money.

This is often a major problem I have noticed with Alex Jones' work - which is why I don't rely on his work ever, other than his links to interesting articles (rather like I do with WhatReallyHappened.com) and interviews with people.

Yes I had read prior of course many examples of how under Bush investigations were stifled. It was just when Jones says that this document which states of persecution for investigating the Bin Ladens(according to Jones)is signed by Bush. If that were the case you could bet the folks at blogger would chalk that up with building 7 and the pentagon.

So since I never really heard it anywhere else before I looked into it.

Only a few minutes prior that statement in Road to Tyranny he says that Bin Laden was treated in a hospital in Dubia and met with CIA and discussed the plans for 9-11. Now, though there may be reports for Bin Laden being in said hospital and a CIA agent was there it is a major jump to blindly conclude that they were discussing 9-11.
Again there is no reason for such blatant, disgusting speculation.

I was too quick to slight blogger in my last response..... actually if this document did exist I would as well tout it as damn good proof of complicity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by werther

Thanks for the reply. I have seen that image elsewhere too and still my questions cannot be answered. In Alex Jones' movie road to tryanny he says:
" the biggest smoking gun of them all....President George W. Bush signed presidentail decision directive W199I telling FBI agents that if they tried to stop Al Qaida they would be arrested under National Security implications."


Nowhere can I find anything stating that he signed this document. According to Palask this document describes an investigation into WAMY starting in 96 and ending sept. 11 2001. Which would mean Clinton signed it if anybody.

I am going to have to call bullshit on Jones' part. This really bothers me. How much more of his work is riddled with falsisms? There is no need for this.

As truthers we have a bias towards anything that promotes our stance. Which makes us susceptable to such lies and selective judgements which we then could start recalling them as truths. I think it is safe to also say that a majority of us despise Bush. With that I can only imagine Jones' reason for saying Bush signed this was to appease his viewers. This can be damaging. Unless I am proven wrong here, and I very well could be, from now on anything Jones says will have to be referenced.

---

Why not email hime directly. Or go through his myspace account?

because I am a fucking idiot and never thought of that. The email anyway....I don't know a damn thing about myspace and do not intend to learn.

Quote:

---

I don't know a damn thing about myspace and do not intend to learn.

---

I fell ya on that one. I HAD a myspace, tha I used strictly to promote 911 awareness. Then Alex Jones blew it UP to the nth power. It's definitely worth a gander anyway.

I have no real quarrels with myspace, I just know I would never update the damn thing. I don't have that much to say.