DAS Blog

Heard an interview on NPR regarding this a while back ... I thought it would be the talk of the left-wing blogs, but it isn't.

Louis Freeh reminds me of the boy who murders his parents and then pleads for mercy from the court on account of being an orphan: if you head a politically motivated investigation of your boss, don't whine and complain about your boss not talking so much to you.

And while Siegal did have Freeh backpeddling faster than Lance Armstrong peddles forward, he still didn't nab Freeh on Freeh's biggest allegation, which really shows Freeh for all of his brazen gall and "I'm a boy from Jerz" "toughness" to be gullible enough to be sold a certain bridge about an hours' drive from my neck of the woods in NJ ... but maybe this was too complicated for even the "sophisticated" NPR? --

The biggest complaint Freeh has about Clinton's handling of the war on terror is that Clinton's people couldn't get the Saudis to let the FBI talk to Saudi prisoners about the Khobar towers bombing. This is a fair enough complaint ... Clinton, not wanting to piss off a major source of oil, probably did not persue the sensative case as doggedly as he probably should have.

But ... Freeh claims G.H.W. Bush was able to get the FBI access to prisoners very quickly. Why is Freeh not suspicious of this? One oilman talking to a bunch of other oilmen and suddenly the FBI gets what it "wants"? Why didn't Mr. Tough Jerzy Boy bother to look a gift horse in the mouth?

After all, what the FBI learns is that Iran may have been behind the bombings ... which is likely true. But doesn't Wahabbi Saudi Arabia have an interest in having its 'enemy' in the Islamic world, uber-Shiite Iran, blamed for this attack while shielding the Al Qaeda terrorists funded by people associated with the royal family? What did G.H.W. Bush promise to the Saudis to allow the FBI to "talk" to the prisoners? Was the reason why the difference that Clinton's people perhaps were demanding conditions that would allow the prisoners to talk a bit more freely about what really happened? Did G.H.W. Bush promise that the U.S. would focus on Iran and avoid focus on Al Qaeda? And was Freeh "in on this" or just duped?

All of this is speculation, of course, but it would be nice if a member of the media, NPR, which prides itself on in depth reporting, would have gone in depth and actually asked Freeh the tough questions about his claims regarding Iran and the Khobar towers and whether G.H.W. Bush actually got the FBI what it really wanted ...