Quote:
|
Originally Posted by strandinthewind
How many people in America know that OBL is disowned by his family and he is one of hundreds of BL's - many of which do not even know him or have seen him in years :shurg: Does MM say that?
|
This has been widely reported. From about Sept. 12, when Osama's name became a household word, it was reported again and again that he was the black sheep of the bin Ladin family.
Besides, I do believe that Moore does mention that the family disowned him. But Moore also points out that some of the family remains in contact with him and, in fact, some of them went to Osama's son's wedding in Afghanistan. That's in the movie.
Quote:
|
Interestingly, Richard Clark has said he bears the responsibility for allowing the Saudis to leave.
|
Interestingly, and this is what I hoped our friend Rob67, who has scurried back to his hole after being challenged on his assertion about mistruths in the movie, would touch on for us. Because as of the release of the 9/11 commission report, these flights have come into question. Evidently the report says the flights took place after the airports reopened.
Let's say Moore got this wrong. Whose fault is that? These flights taking place during the shutdown of US airspace have been reported for at least a year. I believe even the Times and Washington Post reported them. If the 9/11 commission debunks this as a myth after the movie has already been made, whose fault is it? After all, the flights had been accepted as fact until then. And why didn't the commission release its report earlier? Didn't the administration have something to do with the delays?
Having said all that, I am still skeptical about the story of these flights. If Clarke says, in the context of the flights taking place during the shutdown of the airspace, that he approved them, not the White House, but the commission says they took place after the airspace was reopened, who is right? If the commission has taken Clarke's testimony and made it part of its findings in some things but has chosen to differ with him on this, then I must ask why. Am I missing something?
Quote:
|
In the end, the film, by his own admission, is one sided and is propoganda.
|
"By his own admission" being the key phrase. Are you somehow, afraid that everybody doesn't know that?