I mean, that is exactly what we're talking about here. Instead of making them wait their turn, wait until the FBI could thoroughly review their backgrounds and financials, this process was expedited... When American families were still digging out their dead!!
**Six degrees of separation (2-3 when talking about family)
**Blood is thicker than water (to find out what they might have known the FBI should have conducted individual interviews and extensive background checks which takes more than a few days)
**Due Diligence can take weeks in a criminal investigation. (Tell them to shack up in the St. Regis and we'll get to them when we're done holding funerals for firemen and policemen. 'kay?)
That's all I'm saying. So what if these people had to be inconvenienced for a few weeks/months.
Hey SuperCrash, why don't you bring up Election 2000 too???
Might as well bring all the nutty stuff out...:D
And jeez people, SC is obviously baiting us, why even answer this retarded shit? :p
And everyone in "Teh Know" knows Lord Rove let the Saudi's out first.
The FBI was not on the Bin Laden family 24/7 -- why? Because the Bin Laden family has a lot of money and influence. They have lawyers and representatives who pave the way for them when traveling or living in the U.S. and make a lot of noise anytime they are bothered.
No, I don't think a young niece being killed or harmed would have be good PR for the US. However, to the extent that in the days following 9/11 any FBI agent had to waste 1 minute of his time to help expedite a rushed vetting of Bin Laden relatives and other Saudis is not right.--IMO.
Gee, weren't there people all over this country that wanted to get to NYC to see if their son or daughter who worked the WTC was still alive? How about getting those people on a plane before we worry about the Bin Ladens feeling safe. How many average Americans wanted some sort of special consideration in days following 9/11?
We know how many average muslims (some American citizens) were 'vetted' and investigated by the FBI in the days and months following 9/11.
Due Diligence. Sure the FBI had all the papers and info filed by the Bin Laden's lawyers and reps. But in a criminal investigation you're looking for the stuff people don't want to tell you about. Every cell phone call, every hotel bill, ever credit card charge, every bank statement, every known associate-- that is all normal in a criminal investigation. But when the order comes down--we must clear these folks ASAP -- due diligence is gone because then it's happening on someone else's time table.
Show me where we can get this info:
Out of all the Bin Laden relatives, who was the last to see Osama and when?
Did any of the Bin Laden relatives ever give any money to any type of moderate or extreme group with any type of anti-west or anti-American view? (I already know the answer - yes - but getting more details - good luck)
Did any of the Bin Landen relatives ever go to school or room with anyone affiliated with an anti-American group?
Did any person(s) working for a Bin Laden relative ever hear him/her mention their brother? Or contact their brother?
The list of reasonable questions you would ask the relatives of someone behind a mass murder of American citizens could go on and on. How long were these people interviewed for after 9/11?
Money and economics. They pull their money from our banks and the S hits the fan.
4th and 5th Amendment.
FOURTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution] - 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.'
FIFTH AMENDMENT [U.S. Constitution] - 'No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.'
Last edited by Teetop; 07-10-2009 at 12:12 AM. Reason: adding 4th and 5th
Give me one crime that they had committed and would be prima facie grounds for arrest and I'll change my mind. If not, then they had every right to leave and o justrifiable cause to hgold them.Sounds like you're more 'liberal' than me on the issue of giving preferential treatment to wealthy foreign nationals -- :eek:
Do the words "false imprisonment" ring a bell?
On what premise? On what charges? With what evidence?**Blood is thicker than water (to find out what they might have known the FBI should have conducted individual interviews and extensive background checks which takes more than a few days)
Illlegal search and seizure, not to mention false arrest, false imprisonment..it's called rule of law, jackass.**Due Diligence can take weeks in a criminal investigation. (Tell them to shack up in the St. Regis and we'll get to them when we're done holding funerals for firemen and policemen. 'kay?)
A pesky little thing called the US Constitution.That's all I'm saying. So what if these people had to be inconvenienced for a few weeks/months.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|