Article

2006-12-12 Home Front: Politix

James Baker, Baker Botts and Saudi Arabia

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by anonymous5089 2006-12-12 15:21|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 That James Baker works for the Saudi royal family is beyond relevant--it's revelatory. And so is the fact that the media is NOT reporting that interesting little tidbit. As far as journalism goes ( or used to go) that fact that the members of this "study group" which is purportedly aimed at directing US foreign policy in the Middle East, actually represent "the largest power in the Persian Gulf" is most definitely "newsworthy." Unreal that the news is not covering it and bringing that out in the open.

Maybe someone could inform the Times and the Post. I can't. It's possible they don't know, and it might be likely since credible investigative reporting has mostly gone the way of the dinosaurs.

Posted by ex-lib 2006-12-12 16:09|| 2006-12-12 16:09|| Front Page Top

#2 Someone will take the story. It's a matter of getting it out there and letting the info get scooped.

Posted by ex-lib 2006-12-12 16:10|| 2006-12-12 16:10|| Front Page Top

#3 Face it, it's all over for Baker and Hamilton. It's off to the tomb for this crew

Posted by Captain America 2006-12-12 16:12|| 2006-12-12 16:12|| Front Page Top

#4 Someone will take the story. It's a matter of getting it out there and letting the info get scooped.

I dunno, this blog entry for instance is already almost a week old, and I had received a forwarded email (posted in the last comment here) about the Baker/Botts/saudy connection at about that time too. I don't think the msm are really interested, because they see this rapport as going "the right way".

Posted by anonymous5089 2006-12-12 16:18|| 2006-12-12 16:18|| Front Page Top

#5 I think it is likely those MSM journalists haven't a clue about Baker's connections. The disconnect between the reverence some people still hold for the New York Times and the like and the blue water of idiocy that is modern journalism is difficult to credit. Read LGF for a couple days and never go back to newsprint.

Posted by Excalibur 2006-12-12 16:20|| 2006-12-12 16:20|| Front Page Top

#6 It's not reported because it fits the MSM agenda on top of that follow the money. The money will tell you who is behind this, that money has no loyalty to this nation nor it's long term interests.

My opinions on lawyers are well known.

Posted by Sock Puppet of Doom 2006-12-12 17:18|| 2006-12-12 17:18|| Front Page Top

#7 Bakers law firm has appeared to successfully either deap sixed or tied up in court forever the 911 victim's 1 trillion dollar lawsuit against the Saudi Shieks.

Of course the same shieks now own %20 of FoxNews so... don't hold your breath. Now its more likely that the commies at LinkTV will report it on some show like Democracy Today.

Posted by 3dc 2006-12-12 17:38|| 2006-12-12 17:38|| Front Page Top

#8 Two Clinton Ambassadors to the terror kingdom, later became shills for the House of Saud. With Baker, the problem is: he is bound by attorney-client privilege to the Sauds. The privilege prohibits him from doing anything to their detriment, and obligates him to act to their benefit. So, how the hell can he be impartial and objective?

Of course, everybody-is-doing-it is no excuse. The solution is to ban Ambassadors from future representation of foreign states, in any capacity.

Posted by Sneaze Shaiting3550 2006-12-12 22:25|| 2006-12-12 22:25|| Front Page Top

23:58 anymouse
23:46 Frank G
23:38 3dc
23:32 Grunter
23:31 Mick Dundee
23:30 Mick Dundee
23:18 Grunter
23:17 Old Patriot
23:14 Mick Dundee
23:12 Old Patriot
23:06 Grunter
22:56 gorb
22:56 Frank G
22:51 trailing wife
22:51 .com
22:49 Grunter
22:43 Lancasters Over Dresden
22:42 Glenmore
22:38 Zenster
22:32 trailing wife
22:32 Frank G
22:31 Barbara Skolaut
22:30 Barbara Skolaut
22:25 Jonathan