It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Thomas Kean is a director (and shareholder) of Amerada Hess Corporation ( www.hess.com/index/html ), 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 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.
Surely being a business partner of the brother in law, and alleged financier, of Bin Laden would be considered a conflict of interest would be a conflict of interest when investigating 9/11 and Bin Laden. However, after 9/11 Bin Mahfouz was exempted from treasury investigations. Why would he not be investigated? The law suit against the Bush Administration actually names him as one of the accused
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?
Nice to know that the comission will be completely open in their investigation 9/11. . .
Kean Says 9/11 Attacks Could Have Been Prevented
By Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, December 19, 2003; Page A25
The chairman of the commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks said he believes that the strikes could have been prevented, a claim that President Bush's spokesman rejected yesterday.
In an interview with CBS News broadcast Wednesday night, Tom Kean, the former Republican governor of New Jersey who was chosen by Bush to head the panel, said the attacks could have been avoided. "I do not believe it had to happen," he said in the interview.
Asked whether people should have been fired, he replied: "There were people certainly, if I was doing the job, who would certainly not be in the position that they were in at that time, because they failed. They simply failed."
rest at
www.washingtonpost.com...
Originally posted by ThePrankMonkey
well if his in laws are anything like my former in laws then they probably hate him...dont think too many in laws get along with each other. especially when your in law is a known terrorist.
you know....ALL politicians do these things...dont think pretend or act like only one side or one politician does this. they all do whatever it takes to stay in power. saying one is worse than the other is a rather moot and foolish point to argue.
[Edited on 2-1-2004 by ThePrankMonkey]
Originally posted by ThePrankMonkey
well if his in laws are anything like my former in laws then they probably hate him...dont think too many in laws get along with each other. especially when your in law is a known terrorist.
Originally posted by ThePrankMonkeyyou know....ALL politicians do these things...dont think pretend or act like only one side or one politician does this. they all do whatever it takes to stay in power. saying one is worse than the other is a rather moot and foolish point to argue.