top
Anti-War
Anti-War
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Michael Moore questions 9-11 story

by soula
Anybody. who would steal our White House in that manner. is capable of doing anything.
...
How many more Americans have to die because of your greed? That's what I want to know.
Copy the code below to embed this movie into a web page:
Comedian, author, and truth-teller Michael Moore speaking in Berkeley on his book tour for "Stupid White Men". These are the parts pertinent to September 11, which were not broadcast on KPFA. Listen to the audio for effect.
-----

[howls] Awoooo -- The wolf is always at the door when you're an American. Yeah, I interviewed all these Canadians, up in the cities, they don't lock their doors, You know why they don’t lock their doors? I say, haven't you ever been a victim of crime?

Oh, yeah.

You don't lock your doors?

No.

What are you, nuts?

No, I choose not to live my life behind a locked door. I don't see it as locking them out, I see it as locking me in.

Huh. Wow. Man!


But what about THEM? the them, the them, the them that are coming to the door. The hordes. Aren't you worried, aren't you afraid? And you see, you create a nation like this, that's so freaked out, it's very easy then to convince people that there's one boogie man out there, who is going to kill all of you -- and his name is "Osama bin Laden, the Master Evil-Doer" – "Oh, Oh, Osama, Oh, Oh, he's gonna kill me! He's gonna kill me! No, don't let ‘im kill me, George W. Bush! Kill 'im first! Go kill ‘im for me!"

"I will, I'm gonna smoke 'im out of his cave, and I'm gonna kill 'im!"

That was our mission: we're gonna go "kill Osama bin Laden". Ah, that's like brilliant foreign policy, man. "I'm gonna KILL Osama bin Laden. (laughs) Can you imagine Franklin Roosevelt 50-60 years ago standing in front of a podium -- or sitting -- in front of a podium, going "Our job is, we're gonna go kill Hitler! We're gonna go kill 'im. Gonna kill that Hitler guy." It's a little more complex than that, isn't it? It's not just Hitler. Jeez.

Okay, so we're all gonna go kill Osama bin Laden. We're gonna kill 'im! Mm! Yeah! Right! Let's go kill 'im! And then, two days after September 11th, I go to the junk page of the Washington Post, on some story -- and I gotta tell you folks, ...

...

Well anyways, I started reading the junk page, man, that's where the shit is, it's on the junk page, the stuff is on the junk page, you gotta go to the junk page, cause here's what it said on the junk page, 2 days or three days after September 11th, "Osama bin laden," buried now in paragraph 54, "Osama bin laden" -- or "Usama bin laden", if you happen to be watching the Fox Nuisance Channel -- they spell it with a "U" -- "USA-ma". Hey, we funded him, we trained him to be a terrorist, "We put the USA in Usama bin Laden". (laughter and applause). Osama bin Laden, the paragraph says, is on dialysis, and has been for 18 months. He has failing kidneys, and some believe he is near death. Did anybody? Did anybody catch that at the time? Did you see this? They've started to talk about it now, you know months later – and I never saw it again after that. And it's like, what happened? cause right there bush lost me, man. You're telling me that the monster, "THE MASTER MIND OF ALL EVIL" is hooked up to a KIDNEY MACHINE in a cave? And he's running from cave to cave with a kidney machine hooked up?

He not only doesn't have a pot to piss in, he CAN't piss in the pot? This is the guy? Who's gonna kill me? What is it, like, is there a dialysis machine in every fifth cave in Afghanistan? I mean, What is this?

But you see whoever, wrote that story was off-message, was off script. [starts talking smooth and low:] Because you see here in Hollywood, we like to have it simple. Just one antagonist will do, just one bad guy, that's all the American people can handle. Just one evil-doer, right? One evil-doer at a time, at least. So it's Osama bin Laden [cracks up laughing].

...

my apologies to all in the room with bad bladders, but Come ON! Are we stupid? Are we supposed to believe this?

Then you go to another junk page and you find out that the bin Laden family funded George W. Bush's first oil venture, called Arbusto, back in the '80's. Are you aware of this? Arbusto, funded with bin. Laden. money. And then George Sr. has been in business with the bin Ladens for the last 10 years, with James Baker and his Carlyle group, a little investment thing they got going, with the bin Laden family, and whenever George Sr. stays in Saudi Arabia, he stays at the bin Laden palace.

You know, some guy said to me, Hey Mike, you can't just be painting all the bin Ladens with one big brush stroke like that, come on. You can't blame the parents because the kid goes wrong, hmm, right? No, I said you know, you're absolutely right, I hope nobody misunderstands me, and that's not what I mean, that's not what I'm saying, but I'm just wondering you know, do you think like Barbara and George Bush would be having a sleepover at Charles Mansons's parents house? I'm sure they're good people too, salt of the earth, Mother Teresa types, no fault of their own that Charlie went bad, you know, but do you think you'd see them there.. maybe , maybe NOT? What's that all about? What's that all about?

Go to the BBC website and you can look up a story from 1995 where it says: Taliban delegation hosted by Houston oil executives in Houston, while George W. Bush was governor, to discuss the building of a Unocal pipeline across the country of Afghanistan. Are you aware of this? Is anybody jumping to the junk page? This is all, you can get this from very mainstream sources, it's all there, it's in the Times, it's in the Post, it's in the LA Times, I mean you can get it in the Nation, you can get it from KPFA, you can get it from all those other .. but you know, it's actually there in their media, if you look for it. It's there, it's there.

What's it all mean? I don't know, I'm not drawing any CONCLUSIONS here (audience laughter) -- but I sure have a few questions!

I'm reading the November 12th New Yorker, a 'fine publication', an article by a woman by the name of Jane Maher, and in the article it says, in the days after Sept 11th, when ‘no plane was allowed to fly and no cell phone was allowed to go off anywhere in America’,
...

In the skies over America, on September 12 and September 13, no planes were allowed to fly, except one, a private Saudi jet that went to 4 or 5 American cities and picked up nearly 2 dozen members of the bin Laden family and their associates. Are you aware of this? Check it out, don't take my word for it, it does not come from my black helicopter site, it is in the Nov. 12 New Yorker magazine.

Why? The FBI was furious. Because usually, the police in a murder investigation, when they can't find the murderer, like to go in and talk to the family members: "What do you know? What can you tell us?" You know, a little interrogation, not arrest them or hurt them, just a couple questions. Usually, when they can't find the murderer, that's what the police do. But no, the Bush administration told the FBI, NO you cannot talk to the bin Ladens, and they scooted them out of the country.

Why? Why?

What's the deal with this Unocal pipeline? And, Oh my god, what's this on THIS junk page: Halliburton was going to be involved in the building of this Unocal pipeline across Afghanistan? And that Cheney was involved in numerous conversations with the Taliban in the '90s about the Unocal pipeline? What happened, deal go south? Taliban do something wrong?

15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia, but we bomb Afghanistan. Do you know what the Martians would think if they landed here and were watching us right now? "Hmmm 15 of the 19 came from Saudi Arabia but they bombed Afghanistan. Maybe they missed.

Can't bomb the oil supply can we? can't bomb the business associates of Poppy

15 of the 19 were from Saudi Arabia. Do you think, if 15 of the 19 were from Cuba, we'd be bombing Peru? [laughter] Just, just, I'm just floatin’ the question, whatdo you think? Think so? No, I don't think so

"Well Mike, Afghanistan, the Taliban, they were harboring bin Laden and Alquaeda, they were harboring them."

Well then, Bush why'd you give them $43 million of our tax money last May, why'd you do that?

"It was humanitarian aid"

Oh really? Humanitarian, oh we're humanitarians, and the Taliban are humanitarians, so we're gonna give them $43 million of our tax money??! May 2001. Look it up. It's in the May 22nd issue of the LA Times!

Are we stupid? huh? Are we stupid? Huh? I guess they think we're stupid?

What's really goin' on here? What's really going on?

Since when ... I mean bombing Afghanistan and killing all those people, it's like Ralph said the other day, we went over to burn down the haystack to find the needle, and we didn't find the needle

What’s that all about, man? I mean since when does the government first of all, our government ever go after the landlord, that's what Afghanistan was, the landlord for Al Quaeda. Huh? When does the local government here ever go after the landlord on our behalf. Can't bomb the oil supply, gotta keep the SUVs going, gotta keep the business relationships going. Ok? Well, I'm not in favor of bombing anybody actually, but I find it kind of curious, the whole thing.

And now we've got our Axis of Evil, to distract us from Enron. Isn't that brilliant? Well, I guess he believes we don't see through that, right? Enron, I don't have to tell this crowd, you know all about it, right? Enron, stinks to the high heavens,

...

The pod people have taken over, folks. It's like Ken Lay handpicks the head of the regulatory agency that's supposed to oversee Enron, and then Enron's accountants, Arthur Anderson, a lawyer of theirs becomes the head of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the very agency that's supposed to oversee the phoney baloni crappaloni stock prices of Enron -- "The 7th largest company in America" -- and it's just a house of cards, it's all a bunch of BS.

Are they the only ones? I don't think so. Are they the tip of the iceberg? I think so. I think so folks, and I'll tell ya, you gotta thank George and Kenny Boy for this great organizing tool because Mr. and Mrs. America are right now tonight, scared shitless that their 401k is not gonna be there -- that was the one thing we were sure was gonna be there, the 401K, because we knew that Social Security wasn't going to be there. So instead of doing our work as citizens and organizing and making sure it would be there, "Oh no, let's just go play the stock market and get our 401ks, then we'll be safe, we'll have our retirement, I'll be safe." Right?

So all of middle America gets sucked into the stock market, and they get their 401ks, and now all of them tonight, are wondering, are they going to lose their pensions, are they going to be without -- do you know what that feels like, do you have any idea? And do you think that they can't put two and two together? They're thinking, "You mean, all those people down in Houston who worked for the best friend and the number one contributor to the ‘president’ (for those of you listening on radio, those were quotation marks) ‘president’ of the United states? You mean, if that company isn't gonna to be saved -- What's gonna happen to me? What's this guy up to? Who is this guy in the White House?"

You know what, I gotta say it and I'm gonna say it as plainly and as clearly as I can say it and I'm gonna say it -- I've said it for two weeks and I'm gonna say it for the rest of this book tour and I'll say it until they stop me from sayin' it [laughs nervously]

[slow and low:]
Anybody. who would steal our White House in that manner. is capable of doing anything.

If they (applause) just think about this folks. If you so detest the American public, if you hold them in such contempt that you would actually take their house when they didn't vote for you, when you are not there at the will of the people, but at the good graces of your dad's friends on the Supreme Court and the funny business that took place with Katharine Harris and Jeb Bush and how they prevented thousands of African Americans from voting down in Florida, if that's why you're there, and you hate us and this country that much that you would do that? -- what else would you do to us?

How many more Americans have to die -- because of your greed? That's what I want to know.

And I would like everybody in this room to call the White House. Don't be afraid, of course they're taking your phone number down. But -- they can't take all of us away.

I want you to call the White House. What's that number? 202 456 1414

...

and ask 5 questions:

How come you let the plane fly around to pick up the bin Ladens

What are the financial connections between the bin Ladens and the Bushes?

What about that Unocal pipeline across Afghanistan?

What else did you do for Ken Lay?

And number 5, when are you gonna resign and take Dick Cheney with ya?

-- I personally have called for GW Bush to resign on opening day of baseball season ...





--------
[about minute 90 during Q & A.
Question is inaudible)]

Well, it could be a number of reasons. First of all, you're assuming that he was reading. I believe I make a very strong case in this book that this man is illiterate. I might be wrong, just a guess.

[more inaudible from the questioner]

Well, there's a number of answers. One answer is "Hey, shit happens. There is no explanation. we're not as prepared as we look in the movies and in real life that's the way it happens." Another answer could be found in any of the five questions that I've asked you to ask George W Bush or any of the politicians that represent you...

....

Let me finish answering this question. We shot a piece on the Awful Truth down in front of the pentagon, on the lawn in front of the pentagon. We weren't there two seconds and they were all poured out of the building, I mean they were all over us. There must literally be, I'm not exaggerating this, a hundred security cameras all around that building, the parking lot, the building, the whole area. Has anyone seen one single piece of footage of that plane hitting the building? I'm not saying it didn't hit the building, it hit the building, but I'm just saying, Where's the footage? It's gotta exist, right? Show us the footage. Because you know, I think most of us, those of us who aren't pilots, would like to know how you fly something at 400 or 500 miles per hour and score a direct hit when you just learned a little flight training at some dipshit training school down in Florida? Just a question. Is that how they learned how to do that? Or was this a military operation? was it somebody who knew what they were doing? I don't know. I'm just asking a question, not drawing any conclusions, you know. I don't know. I don't know...









by max k
Thanks for producing and posting this transcript! Your labor is appreciated -- the many things you do for us all! We are many, and we know our real friends. See you on the other side of the river of fire!
by darkhand (darkhand [at] earthlink.net)
ATT: MICHAEL MOORE & STAFF: Jane Maher Article Pulled. I have searched the net and especially the New Yorker's archives. Please re-publish the Nov. 12, 2001 article by Jane Maher. We can't "look it up" as Michael suggests, because the article has vaporized.
by anon
Try under "Jane Mayer" - New Yorker, 12 Nov. 2001, p. 54, by Jane Mayer.

Post a link to the story if you can find it online; otherwise, try your local library.
by Edwin Bergmann
Many thanks for the transcription of some important parts of Michael Moore's UC Berkeley presentation. I heard most of his discourse on WBAI in New York City this week.
Often I want to share what have heard with a friend who has a hearing disability, but I don't have the time to produce transcriptions, even if I have made the occasional recording of an on-air broadcast; and often I am not in a position to record much that turns out to be significant anyway.
Your transcription, Soula, is much appreciated and will be passed on to my friend.
by Mike Rofone
A few of us tried to shout down Moore in the name of freedom of speech, yet we were shushed by the though police. I guess that freedom only applies to Bezerkeley liberals shouting down ideas THEY don't like.
by Jackson Harbor
This guy is a raving nut!

<i>"I'm just asking".</i> What a moron.

Ask those five questions. Ask away. What's your point? Bush is responsible for, or worse yet, <i>wanted</i> 9/11? Oh yeah, there's <font color=purple>real hard</font color=purple> evidence for that logical leap.

To address just one (there's so many holes in each of his arguments, there's just not enough time). The one where Bush "armed" al Queda. (Aside: This is TOTALLY wrong, but just for argument's sake, I'll concede). Say you have a gun. Say you give that gun to someone. Say that someone comes back years later and without provocation blows your spouse's head off with that gun and then runs and hides. Say you then consolidate all of your assets and time toward the eradication of the murderer, the one who used a gun you gave to him in the crime. Say you have a crackpot out there who ridicules you and encourages others to call your home to ask questions. Questions about why you are the one actually responsible since you gave the murderer the murder weapon. Questions about business dealings in the past with the murder's family.

I'm sure it wouldn't be amusing. Moore is an absolute waste of humanity.
by Sheepdog
Supose I payed some thugs to make trouble for a
neighbor sitting on valuable property untill the cops came in to restore orde;, then recruited, trained and armed
even more thugs to harrass the cops untill they
responded with force to protect the neighbor untill
they over-react and begin to trash the neighbor's
house. Much of the house is smashed, with blood spilt
everywhere, untill the cops figure they should leave
before the house gets burnt down.

Then I leave the sceen. The thugs, their hardware
and motivation still intact, decide to move in and
have fun with the remaining members of the familly.

Now I decide that it's time to take the property
and I come in and burn the house down myself.
Now the property is mine.
by The Left is Wrong
http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/this_just_in/documents/01839506.htm


Another leftist lie debunked.

by Lice blizzard
MEDIA
Did the White House give the Taliban $43 million?

BY DAN KENNEDY

In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks, a little-noticed decision by the Bush administration last May has emerged as a powerful symbol of US fecklessness.

According to commentators of all ideological stripes — from the Nation’s Christopher Hitchens on the left to the New Yorker’s Hendrik Hertzberg in the center to the Fox News Channel’s Bill O’Reilly on the right — the US gave $43 million to Afghanistan’s Taliban government as a reward for its efforts to stamp out opium-poppy cultivation. That would have been a shockingly inappropriate gift to a government that had been sanctioned by the United Nations for its refusal to hand over international terrorist Osama bin Laden.

Would have been, that is, if it had really happened. It didn’t.

The truth is contained in the transcript of a briefing given by Secretary of State Colin Powell, who on May 17 announced the $43 million grant; it was aimed at alleviating a famine that threatened the lives of four million Afghans. Far from handing the money over to the Taliban, Powell went out of his way to criticize them, and to explain the steps the United States was taking to keep the money out of their hands.

" We distribute our assistance in Afghanistan through international agencies of the United Nations and non-governmental organizations, " Powell said. " We provide our relief to the people of Afghanistan, not to Afghanistan’s ruling factions. Our aid bypasses the Taliban, who have done little to alleviate the suffering of the Afghan people, and indeed have done much to exacerbate it. "

Powell did say one favorable thing about the Taliban: " We will continue to look for ways to provide more assistance for Afghans, including those farmers who have felt the impact of the ban on poppy cultivation, a decision by the Taliban that we welcome. " The bottom line, though, was — or should have been — easy enough to comprehend: humanitarian aid for Afghans, yes; money for the Taliban, no. (On Tuesday, the Taliban reversed themselves, announcing that opium production will resume if the US attacks.)

Most media reports of Powell’s announcement got it right. Within days, though, the commentators began making hash of it. Among the first was Los Angeles Times columnist Robert Scheer, who on May 22 criticized the Bush administration for its " recent gift of $43 million to the Taliban rulers of Afghanistan, the most virulent anti-American violators of human rights in the world today. " Scheer did not respond to my requests for comment, so I can’t be sure where he got his information. But his Web site credits a New York Times article of May 18 that, though accurate, glosses over the matter of who precisely would receive the $43 million. Scheer apparently drew the wrong conclusion.

A computer search for " Taliban " and " $43 million " since September 11 shows that Scheer’s error has become accepted wisdom. News organizations from Salon to the Denver Post have all repeated it as proof that the US has been coddling terrorists. Locally, Jay Severin, a talk-show host on WTKK Radio (96.9 FM), has been eviscerating the Bush White House. Asked where he got his information, Severin cited a column by the New York Post’s Michelle Malkin. Now, I’ll concede that Malkin got it more right than most. She noted that the money was intended to relieve Afghan suffering, but went on to say, " It’s money the Taliban don’t have to spend feeding their people, buying them medicine or building them houses, " thus freeing them to buy " guns and bombs ... missiles and aircraft " and " pilot training and living expenses for bin Laden’s followers in the US. " But that’s a specious argument, given that the Taliban have never shown the slightest inclination to feed, clothe, or otherwise care for the people of Afghanistan.

Eli Lake, who covers the State Department for UPI and who wrote an accurate report about the $43 million grant last May, calls the notion that the White House gave the money to the Taliban as a reward for their anti-drug efforts " just absurd. " He notes that one of the Bush administration’s first actions upon taking office was to shut down the Taliban’s mission in New York, in compliance with UN sanctions.

Lake recalls a conversation he had with Andrew Natsios, the former Massachusetts politico who is now the White House’s point man for foreign aid, around the time that the $43 million grant was announced. " He explained that the Bush administration, as a matter of policy, did not want to link needed aid to political considerations, " Lake says — whether it be in Afghanistan or in other rogue states with starving, suffering populations, such as Sudan and North Korea.

It’s too bad, but not surprising, that some elements of the media couldn’t get it right. After all, no good deed, as they say, goes unpunished.

Note: After this item was posted, I heard from Brendan Nyhan, of the Web site Spinsanity.org, letting me know that he had reported on Scheer's error last June - and that he, in turn, had picked up on this from the Web site LeftWatch.com, which got the goods on Scheer way back on May 22, the very day his column appeared in the Los Angeles Times. Nyhan's Spinsanity piece can be found at http://www.spinsanity.org/posts/200106-3.html#12a, and that, in turn, includes a link to the original LeftWatch.com report. Obviously I'm going to have to start reading both Web sites more regularly.

by Sheepdog
And because we were worried about them starving, we twice bombed the Red Cross Food Stores. Then we gave them a
trailmix of poptarts and clusterbombs for all
the little kiddies. Trick o treat!
by sheepshitferbrains
Mmm, do you mean that collaborating liberal leftist puke activist organization that stole money from the 911 donations and gave it to the IslamoFascists? Are you talking about Red Cross/Red Crescent? What a fucking moron.
by zioislamoliberoconservonazi
you mean the islamozioliberofascistocapitodemocratonazis don't you? (snicker)
by itsy bitsy spider
I was finding value in the article posted above, with the title "Going to Work" and attributed to Ann Marlowe. Marlowe began to lose me when too much misinformation had worked its way into the story so I skipped to the end and began reading backwards (maybe because that's how I tend to read this ever engorging thread).

I found this sentence particularly apropos, especially for its use of the term, "BUMP":

"One of the reasons why work is good for the character is that it is, for most of us, frictional: Where it makes us bump into the world is where we need to look at ourselves".

Work comes in many forms, whether one subjects themselves to "[an] economic rationality". Creating and affixing bumper stickers is work, as is the expected but not inevitable act of removing the bumper sticker.

(Actually: that article is so full of **it. It would take a longer article to talk about all the slack reasoning, misuse of diction, and erroneous historical citations.)

However, what gripped me was not the errors, which I let pass by, nor the use of the term "bump", which gave me a smile as the poster likely did not intend its support, but rather the idea that society has evolved to the point of individual effect on mass society becoming culpable.

This, if true, is a very good sign.

But the reality is we've all, always been individually culpable. Societies have worked well or poorly based on the responsibilities taken by individuals.

Perhaps the reason frustrations are more likely to be taken out on individuals today rather than the salient figures of control (e.g., to assasinate the president) is not so much because individual power has increased, but because individual access to authority has decreased. Centralization and military technology help ensure that there is no recourse but to change the behavior of the "common person".

This second notion, while tempered in its fire, still excites me. If individuals begin to see that not only do they have some power, but that the actions of those around them are critical to its full effect and our collective futures, then more painlessly may crumble the corrupt who overlord.


by itsy bitsy typer
Sorry dear reader, that last post was presented to you in error. It was intended for the bourgeoning thread regarding patriotic bumper stickers.

I must say I enjoyed reading this page more though. Thank you for that excellent transcript!

If you're interested in the article I was commented on, it is posted in this story's comments:

http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/09/147423

Be warned, however, that the thread is rather full of controversy and civil discourse therein can be difficult to locate.
by I'm a vandal and I want sainthood
Like there should be civil discourse with vandals and traitors?
by Sen Surd
Jane Maher's 12Nov2001article HAS been erased from the web, history, even Google. Someone please scan or type the entire article & post it on any or your personal website. Please add a link here. Any copyright cease & desist order would publicize Bush complicity in escorting the bin Ladens safely home (accessory after the fact--proves Bush a terrorist). The New Yorker: Issues going back to 1970 are available through our Back Issues Dept for $9 each (sent first class). To order by credit card, call 800-825-2510 If you would like to place an order, please send your request—including the cover date of the issue (Nov 12 2001)—to: The New Yorker Back Issues
P.O. Box 37684 Boone, Iowa 50037-0684
Your order must be accompanied by a check payable to The New Yorker Magazine. At this time, we do not have a searchable index to past issues available for public use.

Can't polish a turd, try spray paint, or just keep adding more channels to cable TV to keep 'em overwhelmed & distracted. Tradition & ignorance is no excuse for obviously wrong policies.
by .............
"Like there should be civil discourse with vandals and traitors?"

There shouldn't be, which is why the President deserves a good solid beating and a life in the slammer.
by Mark A. Hershberger (mah [at] everybody.org)
The article states: Around two dozen other American-based members of the bin Laden family, most of them here to study in colleges and prep schools, were said to be in the United States at the time of the attacks. The New York Times reported that they were quickly called together by officials from the Saudi Embassy, which feared that they might become the victims of American reprisals. With approval from the F.B.I., according to a Saudi official, the bin Ladens flew by private jet from Los Angeles to Orlando, then on to Washington, and finally to Boston. Once the F.A.A. permitted overseas flights, the jet flew to Europe. United States officials apparently needed little persuasion from the Saudi Ambassador in Washington, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, that the extended bin Laden family included no material witnesses.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$60.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network