Wednesday, 18 December 2013




(VIRALTHIS)) List Of Purged Military High Officers 'Terrifying'  ((VIRALTHIS))


#CROWDACTIVISM Arrest Obama! #DICTATOR PLANET #EARTH  #CrowdActivism You Do Big Things!


Quantum Correction 911 COUP!

- See more at:

Press TV Does it agaiin; RIDING RESCUE to the United States of MK-Ultra Victims & the Free HERO HUMANS of PLANET EARTH!!!!
We DID tell Ewe:

Monday, 21 October 2013

- See more at:

"Two members of Congress, specially authorized to view documents on 9/11 censored under the personal authority of President Bush (43), have come away “absolutely shocked,” demanding immediate action.

However, the full story, told for the first time below, explains “why now” and who is really being targeted by revelations of cover-up and conspiracy.

In accusations published yesterday by the leading Tea Party publication, Family Security Matters, Saudi Defense Minister and Intelligence chief Prince Bandar referred to as “Bandar Bush” in his Wikipedia biography for his close relationship with that family, was said to be the planner of 9/11.

In an article by Paul Sperry of the Hoover Institute, Bandar was cited with fleeing the US to avoid prosecution. Here, Sperry quotes a government source: “Our investigations contributed to the ambassador’s departure,” an investigator who worked with the Joint Terrorism Task Force in Washington told me, though Bandar says he left for “personal reasons.”

Despite these pronouncements, these accusations may well be unfounded speculation. What we have to ask is why are they being made now and why by political groups long close to the Saudi government. Why has Saudi Arabia failed to respond to these very public accusations coming from some of the highest authorities in Washington? “Why are the rats turning on each other?”

Startling disclosures?

This week, Congressional representatives Stephen Lynch (D-MA) and Walter Jones (R-NC) have officially requested a congressional resolution demanding President Obama declassify the heavily redacted Congressional Investigative Report on 9/11.

The two representatives had just been given authority under penalty of “national security secrecy” to read the censored 28 pages of the 800-page report that had not been seen.
For nearly a decade, the US has maintained security policies, both domestic and international, based on threats now known to have been totally fabricated. The cost, trillions of dollars, thousands of Americans dead in wars against “enemies” long known to have never been involved in terror attacks on America, the phony “hunt for bin Laden,” all of it, nothing but utter hogwash.

Bush cited as conspirator

What has been made clear is that President Bush was fully aware that neither Afghanistan nor Iraq were involved in 9/11 and that military action against those two nations was done to cover involvement of his administration in 9/11, involvement that included support from foreign intelligence agencies.

The representatives, while reviewing the report, came to the portion titled “Specific Sources of Foreign Support.” A 28-page section here had been “butchered” by the White House on the personal orders of President Bush. On the original report given to Congress, an estimated 5-10,000 words were omitted from this section with page after page of dotted lines replacing text.

The full report carries a tale of not only broad complicity of foreign intelligence agencies but, in the use of the term “complicity,” indications of full knowledge of the funding and planning of 9/11 by the Bush administration.

However, the lawmakers, without the support of a resolution, are under a “gag order” and unable to name the nation or nations that supplied.

Israel, Saudi Arabia or both

Recent revelations tied to events in Syria and Egypt have exposed an unimagined level of cooperation between the intelligence services of Israel and Saudi Arabia. For years, Israel has cited Saudi Arabia as the greatest threat to their security, much greater than Iraq under Saddam or their claims of a “nuclear Iran.” This and much else of what Israel has publicly claimed as part of their “mythology of victimization” is now recognized as falsehood. Though both Israel and Saudi Arabia are known as allies of the US, their partnerships with America have been with specific groups, extremists within government and the military willing to back the plots now plainly evident even when US interests are sacrificed or even American lives are lost.

Telling, today, is the relationship between Al-Nusra and other al-Qaeda “franchises” and the Israeli/Saudi alliance, a relationship that has provided both financial support and weapons, used against Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.

The sections of the 9/11 report that were censored by President Bush may well include reference to that al-Qaeda/Israel/Saudi nexus. What is clear is that not only did the Bush administration wrongly blame bin Laden or “al-Qaeda,” a spurious and illusory group at best, but that those cited, Israel, Saudi Arabia or both, though named for funding and supporting the 9/11 attack, were always under the full control of the Bush administration.

What does exist is proof that the war on terror was, in reality as confirmed by General Wesley Clark, a plan to invade and occupy 7 oil- and gas-rich nations.

Israel put the blame on Saudi Arabia

In an article released yesterday , Paul Sperry of the Hoover Institute cited, not just the Saudi government as having been behind 9/11 but set the relationship between George W. Bush and Prince Bandar at the crux of the conspiracy.

After the 9/11 attacks, the public was told al-Qaeda acted alone, with no state sponsors. “But the White House never let it see an entire section of Congress’ investigative report on 9/11 dealing with “specific sources of foreign support” for the 19 hijackers, 15 of whom were Saudi nationals.

It was kept secret and remains so today. President Bush inexplicably censored 28 full pages of the 800-page report.”

Sperry goes on: “Saudi consulate official Fahad al-Thumairy allegedly arranged for an advance team to receive two of the Saudi hijackers - Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi - as they arrived at LAX in 2000.”
Sperry goes on citing instance after instance where Saudi intelligence directly aided al-Qaeda every step of the way.

What is important is that we understand who Sperry represents. Family Security Matters isn’t a simple blog. It is the voice of not just the extreme right but AIPAC as well. Their editors include Senator Ted Cruz, top GOP domestic policy maker and former UN Ambassador John Bolton, Islamophobe extremist, “Israel Firster” and a man who never saw a war he didn’t love.

“Family Matters” is the power center for everything pro-money, pro-hate and pro-Israel. Self-proclaimed “investigative journalist Paul Sperry serves with the Hoover Institute, along with former Secretary of State Condi Rice. The critical aspect of yesterday’s article is that it represents the first time the Israel lobby has been willing to throw former President Bush “under a bus” in order to distance themselves from accusations of complicity in 9/11.

Prior to the exposure of Israel’s role as “mentor” for al-Qaeda in Syria, America’s media was able to suppress not just “conspiracy theories” but accusations backed by evidence and testimony that placed Israel at the center of the 9/11 attacks.

Prince Bandar accused of planning 9/11

Though there is no reason to assume Saudi Arabia is mentioned whatsoever in the redacted Congressional report, Sperry cites payments by Bandar to the alleged 9/11 hijackers and other funding to al-Qaeda.

“Other al Qaeda funding was traced back to Bandar and his embassy - so much so that by 2004 Riggs Bank of Washington had dropped the Saudis as a client. The next year, as a number of embassy employees popped up in terror probes, Riyadh recalled Bandar.”

Real from conjecture

Members of Congress have openly admitted that they have seen documentation that would support an immediate criminal investigation against President Bush (43) and his closest advisors. Further, those agencies involved in compiling this report, key portions of which have remained secret, were also responsible for lying to the 9/11 Commission, not just through omission. All the intelligence that sent America into two wars is now not just suspect, it is proven false.

Recognizing that the nations responsible have not yet been named, though attempts by Family Security Matters to subvert this process are underway, what does stand is evidence of the same conspiracy.

From a CIA transcript dated September 24, 2001, Osama bin Laden is quoted: “The United States should try to trace the perpetrators of these attacks within itself; the people who are a part of the US system, but are dissenting against it. Or those who are working for some other system; persons who want to make the present century as a century of conflict between Islam and Christianity so that their own civilization, nation, country, or ideology could survive.”

Family Security Matters celebrates the death of Osama bin Laden as a terrorist fanatic. They also celebrate the death of Nelson Mandela as a terrorist fanatic. Mandela was right, as history has shown.




Mor! ... From HEROES over @ cauazzie ... you're LATE understanding, U HUMAN!

"These are constructive and valid suggestions from the Global Monetary forces who do care. They have no intentions of running any government. We are all in this boat together, and the key Trust's job is purely to help humanity. They are collectively seeking to withdraw from the squalid Cabal/Treasury/Fed run Banking operations and placing capital to underpin Nations and Humanitarian causes. 
If the Federal Reserve becomes a government entity, the Trusts will forgive debts of the Fed Reserve both owed to and owed from. This includes the US Govt and the UK too. They offer to cooperate, we will pay the debts, not just "write off". And in your country it is THE COUNTRY, not a private entity as in the US. This is not solely limited to your Nation, but all others as well. This is something the "squatters" have no capacity to do. The Treasury at this moment has the asset base to print currency (instead of issuing a debt instrument, it can be a hard asset) over to the Reserve, shall it be a "govt entity". So assets are moving from the left hand to the right hand. The cost to buy USD by Foreign Entities is around 10%,( this includes England), and is the base reason your Petrol prices are substantially higher than USA prices at the pump...none of this "fee" goes to the government at all at this we suggest if it is nationalized, the 10% can be dropped to 5% (either slowly or at one time) and the fee would now go to the govt for budget as "income" of the govt. This alone will create an impact in many aspects as you can imagine. It directly and positively affects the situation with China, and allows the govt a positive flow. Overtime there wouldn't be talk of a "debt ceiling".. Further this improves our relationship with our neighbors, does not have any impact on the Oil producing Nations, and the consumer would see a reduction in everything from Petrol to Food at the local grocery. 

Secondly, there are budget allocations in place to support the US and UK Govt during the period of Transition. We have had those orders for 2 years, and we did make the assignment but have been blocked at every turn from submitting. 

Now we have the issue of the CUSIP bonds, aka the "citizen future tax payment bonds". When we stopped buying the end result was the market crash. These bonds were originally created to provide education and other needs of citizens. These trade proceeds were supposed to go to the Department of Education for one example not as a debt, but to provide for the nation. These funds and proceeds are locked up now in the Trust and are ready for disbursement. The program clearly didn't work under old management, however, we can re-collateralize these bonds with gold and solve some of our social issues with the proceeds, whilst fixing the market and the Pension funds at the same time. This is all of course up to the government. Then we have the toxic asset programs as discussed in our previous letters. A mortgage program that works both for the banks and for the people is sorely needed. Our people need food, healthcare, education, shelter. 

These to momentous steps can create a better way forward, merely suggestions and they can "mock up" impact, as we have done for their own comfortably. 

In the interim, we are coming on the holiday season, and our citizens and direct holiday spending is going to be an issue. We need to find a way to fill the "gap" during the time the decisions are being made at the top. A level of certainty needs to be put in place, and confidence in our Government restored. We can talk about suggestions of both sides on how to fill gaps. Of course this would be in addition to the budget allocations. Remember, our dollars are bought and paid for already. So we granted gold to the Treasury with our left hand, and will monetize it in USD with our right hand, no debt instrument necessary;

  • Grants for the SNAP program to allocate to all the food stamp cards 100 to 150 USD 2x. Once this week/next week, once again in December.
  • For the disruption in pay to our Government workers, additional bonus in first week of Dec. Uncertainty of this situation arising again in January will most assuredly affect the holiday this year for all these families.
  • Funding for the Obamacare program.
  • Distributions of Gift Cards via the Public School System (they can pick the foundation who donated this) for holiday spending in some nominal amount.
  • Supplements in Social Security, Welfare and Disability for the month of December.

(Remember, the proceeds from the trade of the CUSIP bonds is sitting here for all these programs already, every Social Program including pensions and Social Security is there)

We can then begin working on the debts owed to foreign creditors and establishing a long term recovery plan. All this is available now with a responsible minded US Government and joint UK initiative.

These, ARE the Collective Negotiations developing, seeking to free the nations from economic bondage controlled by self serving Cabal and old Banking bloodline families.""


HEROES ARISING IN NEW YOORK   ****HOORAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!***

After the 9/11 attacks, the public was told al Qaeda acted alone, with no state sponsors.
But the White House never let it see an entire section of Congress’ investigative report on 9/11 dealing with “specific sources of foreign support” for the 19 hijackers, 15 of whom were Saudi nationals.
It was kept secret and remains so today.
President Bush inexplicably censored 28 full pages of the 800-page report. Text isn’t just blacked-out here and there in this critical-yet-missing middle section. The pages are completely blank, except for dotted lines where an estimated 7,200 words once stood (this story by comparison is about 1,000 words).
A pair of lawmakers who recently read the redacted portion say they are “absolutely shocked” at the level of foreign state involvement in the attacks.
Reps. Walter Jones (R-NC) and Stephen Lynch (D-Mass.) can’t reveal the nation identified by it without violating federal law. So they’ve proposed Congress pass a resolution asking President Obama to declassify the entire 2002 report, “Joint Inquiry Into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001.”
Some information already has leaked from the classified section, which is based on both CIA and FBI documents, and it points back to Saudi Arabia, a presumed ally.
The Saudis deny any role in 9/11, but the CIA in one memo reportedly found “incontrovertible evidence” that Saudi government officials — not just wealthy Saudi hardliners, but high-level diplomats and intelligence officers employed by the kingdom — helped the hijackers both financially and logistically. The intelligence files cited in the report directly implicate the Saudi embassy in Washington and consulate in Los Angeles in the attacks, making 9/11 not just an act of terrorism, but an act of war.
Modal Trigger
The findings, if confirmed, would back up open-source reporting showing the hijackers had, at a minimum, ties to several Saudi officials and agents while they were preparing for their attacks inside the United States. In fact, they got help from Saudi VIPs from coast to coast:
LOS ANGELES: Saudi consulate official Fahad al-Thumairy allegedly arranged for an advance team to receive two of the Saudi hijackers — Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi — as they arrived at LAX in 2000. One of the advance men, Omar al-Bayoumi, a suspected Saudi intelligence agent, left the LA consulate and met the hijackers at a local restaurant. (Bayoumi left the United States two months before the attacks, while Thumairy was deported back to Saudi Arabia after 9/11.)
SAN DIEGO: Bayoumi and another suspected Saudi agent, Osama Bassnan, set up essentially a forward operating base in San Diego for the hijackers after leaving LA. They were provided rooms, rent and phones, as well as private meetings with an American al Qaeda cleric who would later become notorious, Anwar al-Awlaki, at a Saudi-funded mosque he ran in a nearby suburb. They were also feted at a welcoming party. (Bassnan also fled the United States just before the attacks.)
WASHINGTON: Then-Saudi Ambassador Prince Bandar and his wife sent checks totaling some $130,000 to Bassnan while he was handling the hijackers. Though the Bandars claim the checks were “welfare” for Bassnan’s supposedly ill wife, the money nonetheless made its way into the hijackers’ hands.
Other al Qaeda funding was traced back to Bandar and his embassy — so much so that by 2004 Riggs Bank of Washington had dropped the Saudis as a client.
The next year, as a number of embassy employees popped up in terror probes, Riyadh recalled Bandar.
“Our investigations contributed to the ambassador’s departure,” an investigator who worked with the Joint Terrorism Task Force in Washington told me, though Bandar says he left for “personal reasons.”  CONTINUES

nb fkd up adding sources; updating in a mo <gg>


New House Resolution Calls for Declassifying Secret Portion of 9/11 Report

Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) introduced a resolution this week in the House of Representatives urging President Barack Obama to declassify 28 pages of a joint House and Senate Intelligence Committee report that includes information concerning foreign governments' involvement in terrorist attacks in the US. The George W. Bush administration redacted the pages from the December 2002 report of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 2001.

The text of the resolution Jones, an RPI Advisory Board member, introduced along with cosponsor Rep. Stephen Lynch follows:
H. Res. 428


Urging the president to release information regarding the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks upon the United States.

Whereas President George W. Bush classified 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 2001;

Whereas the contents of the redacted pages are necessary for a full public understanding of the events and circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001, attacks upon the United States;

Whereas the Executive Branch's decision to maintain the classified status of these pages prevents the people of the United States from having access to information about the involvement of certain foreign governments in the terrorist attacks of September 2001; and

Whereas the people of the United States and the families of the victims of the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks deserve full and public disclosure of the results of the Joint Inquiry: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that--

(1) the President should declassify the 28-page section of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 2001; and

(2) the families of the victims and the people of the United States deserve answers about the events and circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001, attacks upon the United States.
For background information regarding the subject of Jones's resolution, read below, from the Congressional Record, the October 28, 2003 US Senate debate on an amendment that offered a similar resolution. In the debate, Sens. Byron Dorgan and Bob Graham, who was the chairman of the Senate committee jointly responsible for the report, provide arguments for a "yes" vote. Immediately following their speeches, debate is shut down and a vote prevented based on an objection made by Sen. Mitch McConnell.
Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.

The assistant clerk read as follows:

The Senator from North Dakota [Mr. Dorgan], for himself and Mr. Schumer, proposes an amendment numbered 1994.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The amendment is as follows:

(Purpose: To urge the President to release information regarding sources of foreign support for the 9-11 hijackers)

At the appropriate place, insert the following:

Sec.  . Sense of the Senate on declassifying portions of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 2001.

(a) Findings.--The Senate finds that--

(1) The President has prevented the release to the American public of 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 2001.

(2) The contents of the redacted pages discuss sources of foreign support for some of the September 11th hijackers while they were in the United States.

(3) The Administration's decision to classify this information prevents the American people from having access to information about the involvement of certain foreign governments in the terrorist attacks of September 2001.

(4) The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has requested that the President release the 28 pages.

(5) The Senate respects the need to keep information regarding intelligence sources and methods classified, but the Senate also recognizes that such purposes can be accomplished through careful selective redaction of specific words and passages, rather than effacing the section's contents entirely.

(b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate that in light of these findings the President should declassify the 28-page section of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 2001 that deals with foreign sources of support for the 9-11 hijackers, and that only those portions of the report that would directly compromise ongoing investigations or reveal intelligence sources and methods should remain classified.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, this amendment is a sense-of-the-Senate amendment. I note there are other sense-of-the-Senate amendments in this legislation. I will at the end of my statement ask consent that we consider waiving points of order.

Let me describe what the amendment is and why I have offered the amendment. I offer this amendment on behalf of myself and Senator Schumer from New York.

The Congressional Joint Intelligence Committee inquiry into the intelligence community activities before and after the terrorist attacks of September 2001 finished its work. This past summer, when the report was finally authorized for release by the administration, we discovered that the report, which took 9 months to write and 7 months to declassify, contained 28 pages that had been redacted by White House lawyers.

I will quote a couple of people, one who is in the Chamber now. I will quote Senator Shelby and Senator Graham, the chair and ranking member of the Intelligence Committee while this inquiry was underway. As I indicated, 28 pages of this report were redacted by White House lawyers. That means the American public cannot see what was in that report. We will have no knowledge and no information about what was contained in that rather exhaustive report.

The Bush administration has refused to declassify these pages, citing concern for intelligence-gathering ``sources and methods.'' I don't think that is an insignificant issue, by the way. I think intelligence gathering and the sources and methods for doing so are important. But it is also important, it seems to me, to ask the question, Should these 28 pages have been redacted? Should the 28 pages have been outside the view of the American people, given the fact that this report was done in order to evaluate what happened leading up to 2001, what was happening with respect to our intelligence community, what was happening with respect to other countries?

There has been a great deal of speculation about Saudi Arabia. It is assumed that somehow in these pages there is discussion about the Saudis. The Saudi Government is implicated by some because 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. Even the leaders of the Saudi Government, who some have said are the object of the redacted pages, want it declassified. They are angry and embarrassed at being singled out and want to defend themselves, and therefore they want this declassified.

How much of the 28 pages could be declassified? Senators Graham and Shelby, the former chair and cochair of the Intelligence Committee who directed the report are quoted saying the following: ``I think they are classified for the wrong reason,'' the former vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee told NBC's ``Meet the Press.'' ``I went back and read every one of those pages thoroughly. My judgment is 95 percent of that information should be declassified and become uncensored so the American people would know.'' Asked why the section was blacked out, Shelby said: ``I think it might be embarrassing to international relations.''

Senator Bob Graham of Florida, who was the chairman of the committee investigating this, also called for declassification. He said releasing the report would permit ``the Saudi Government to deal with any questions which may be raised in the currently censored pages and allow the American people to make their own judgment about who are our true friends and allies in the war on terrorism.'' Senator Graham made that request in a letter to President Bush.

This is a very important issue and it has gone on for months and months and months. This report was developed after an extensive amount of study and investigation. The report was then published after being edited by the Bush administration and the White House. And a rather substantial portion of that report--most speculate dealing with the Saudis--was censored, classified, or redacted. That is, the American people are not permitted to see that which is included in the report on those 28 pages.

Again, the chairman and vice chairman of the committee that led or that directed the preparation of this report say most of that information of the 28 pages should be declassified, implying, I believe, since they are not quoted directly, that declassifying that would not compromise sources and methods and not compromise our intelligence community.

My hope is that the Senate, with a sense-of-the-Senate resolution, will weigh in on this in a very significant way and say to the administration these 28 pages should be made available.

Now, in the sense-of-the-Senate resolution, I point out that it is the sense of the Senate that in light of the findings--and I have a series of findings—the President should declassify the 28-page section of the joint inquiry into intelligence community activities before and after the terrorist attacks of 2001 that deal with the foreign sources of support for the 9/11 hijackers and that only those portions of the report that would directly compromise ongoing investigations or reveal intelligence sources or methods should remain classified.

In point of fact, those whose expert opinions I respect have said they have read the redacted or the censored or classified portions very carefully and believe most of it should not have been classified; most of it should have been made available to the American people. If that is the case, and if the Saudi Government itself has said this information ought to be declassified, let us deal with it on the public record. Then I believe the American people ought to expect a right to see this information.

My hope is we will have a vote on this amendment, a sense-of-the-Senate amendment that will allow the Senate in this forum to send a message to the President and to the White House that we believe the bulk of this 28-page redaction should be made available to the American people posthaste.

I yield the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Florida.

Mr. GRAHAM of Florida. Mr. President, I commend my colleague, the Senator from North Dakota, for having offered this sense of the Senate. The sense of the Senate has an additional significance as we face some fundamental issues in the closing days of this session.

First, I will talk about the base concerns. As the Senator from North Dakota said, the principal purpose of the joint inquiry was to determine what had been the role of the intelligence community in the events leading up to September 11. In many instances in the course of that pursuit, the committee staff came to unearth FBI reports, CIA reports, and other intelligence community reports. We were not in a position, either in terms of our staff capabilities or our jurisdiction, to then go behind those reports to attempt to validate them. These were reports written by agents of these appropriate intelligence agencies, but we could not, from primary sources, validate them. The FBI, primarily--and some other intelligence agencies, as well--were tasked to do exactly that, to find out if their own documents in many cases could be substantiated.

Those requests were made approximately a year ago. Still, today, many of those requests have not been answered. The administration has said, either directly or in some cases through intermediaries, that our report is deficient in that there is not second- and third-party confirmation of the statements we include. We included exactly what the FBI or CIA or other agencies had written. We asked the appropriate agencies, primarily FBI, to pursue these to determine if they were substantiated, and in many instances that has not occurred.

There is also an issue not of micro but of macro importance: This report makes a very compelling case, based on the information submitted by the agencies themselves, that there was a foreign government which was complicitous in the actions leading up to September 11, at least as it relates to some of the terrorists who were present in one part of the United States.

There are two big questions yet to be answered. Why would this government have provided the level of assistance—financial, logistical, housing, support service--to some of the terrorists and not to all of the terrorists? We asked that question. There has been no response.

My own hypothesis--and I will describe it as that--is that in fact similar assistance was being provided to all or at least most of the terrorists. The difference is that we happened, because of a set of circumstances which are contained in these 28 censored pages, to have an unusual window on a few of the terrorists. We did not have a similar window on others. Therefore, it will take more effort to determine if they were, in fact, receiving that assistance. That effort has, in my judgment, been grossly insufficiently pursued.

An even more serious question is what would lead us to believe that if there was this infrastructure of a foreign government supporting some of the 19 terrorists, that as soon as September 11 concluded, as soon as the last flames were put out at the Pentagon, the World Trade Center and on the field in Pennsylvania, all that infrastructure was immediately taken down? Again, this is my hypothesis: I don't believe it was taken down. I believe that infrastructure is likely to still be in place assisting the next generation of terrorists who are in the United States.

Those are very fundamental questions, and if the public had access to these 28 pages, they would be demanding answers.

As I mentioned in the beginning of my remarks, there is another issue which is going to emerge in the next few days. We had a long debate in this Chamber on the supplemental appropriations bill, the bill providing $87 billion for the reconstruction and occupation of Iraq. We had a long debate as to whether some of that reconstruction money should be in the form of loans rather than, as the President has insisted, all of it being in grants.

What is one of the practical effects of making all of the U.S. Money which will go into the reconstruction of Iraq a grant? The answer to that question is that one of the consequences, ironically, will be that we will make all of the countries which currently have loans to Iraq that much more solvent because we will have, without any request for repayment, made a significant investment in enhancing the economic viability of Iraq and, therefore, the ability of whatever government is placed in ultimate control of Iraq more capable of repaying those loans.

There is a further irony that some of those countries, which are disclosed in the 28 censored pages as having been complicitous with the terrorists, are among the list of those creditors of Iraq that are going to get this indirect economic benefit. I believe the Members of Congress, who are going to be called upon to vote on whether we should grant this indirect benefit to a country that has been less than supportive of our Nation's war on terror, ought to know that before we vote and then find out later the full consequences of what we have done.

So there was an issue as to why these 28 pages should have been released when the report was initially completed in December of 2002. Those issues remain today. And there is the additional issue of whether we are going to inadvertently grant a significant financial benefit to a country that has been to say less than our ally in the war on terror would be a gross understatement.

I commend the Senator from North Dakota for having offered this sense of the Senate. It is a very important issue. I hope this Senate will adopt the sense of the Senate. If not, if the President continues to refuse to allow the American people to have access to this information, then I hope the Congress will be willing to use some of the authorities that it has to declassify information. Because the higher interest is not in placating this administration's unwillingness to be forthcoming on the issue. The higher interest in this democracy is that the people have access to relevant information which is not an issue of national security but which is a significant issue in terms of understanding the consequences of decisions that we have and will soon be making.

I urge adoption of the sense of the Senate and again express my admiration to the Senator from North Dakota for having presented it this afternoon.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.

Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, let me make a few additional comments. My colleague from Florida is in a very unique position. Having worked with his colleague from Alabama, Senator Graham and Senator Shelby provided a great public service as they initiated this inquiry.

The inquiry, as described by my colleague in part, is an evaluation of whether there were other governments that participated in supporting groups of terrorists who committed acts of terror against this country. The answer to that question is very important. My colleague indicates that if such a program were in place or had been in place by another government to support groups of terrorists, what leads us to believe that parts of that program are not continuing to still operate and, therefore, continue to threaten our country?

The very important question with this sense-of-the-Senate resolution is: Should we not have the ability to know, should full disclosure not be the routine rather than the exception? Should the 28 pages that have been withheld from the American people be made available to them so we all are able to evaluate exactly the same set of information?

My conclusion is, yes, absolutely. It ought to be done sooner rather than later.

I have been intending to offer two amendments to this appropriations bill. One dealt with this sense of the Senate which I have just offered. The second dealt with a sense of the Senate with respect to the cooperation that is now being received or lack of cooperation by the 9/11 Commission, the other commission that is headed by former Governor Kean that is looking into 9/11 and the relationship of a series of issues, both prior to 9/11 and following, by our intelligence community and others.

One of my great concerns is reading in the newspapers just in recent days about the 9/11 Commission. This is a blue-ribbon commission. One of our former colleagues, Senator Cleland, is on the Commission. It is a commission that has to finish its work by May of next year. It has a relatively short timeframe. Now we hear that they have had to issue a subpoena to one of the Federal agencies to get them to cooperate giving information to them. There were other stories yesterday and the day before. They are concerned about not getting information from the White House.

We are not going to be satisfied until we have everything we need to do our job. Governor Kean says--he is a former Republican Governor from New Jersey--this is not about politics. It is about a blue-ribbon commission having access to all of the information so it can do its job.

I find it unbelievable that any agency or crevice or any corner of this Government would not open its records and provide full and immediate cooperation with the 9/11 Commission. That is the least we should expect of every single agency. They have had to subpoena information from the FAA and yet they are not getting information from the White House that they are requesting. Kean said in an interview that he will resume negotiations with the White House this week and hopes to reach a resolution one way or the other on documents the panel is seeking. The Commission has the power to issue subpoenas and Kean says he does not rule out sending one to the White House.

Why should we read this in the papers? I don't understand it. There ought not be any agency, including the White House, that does not fully cooperate in every respect immediately with the request for information from this 9/11 Commission.

We have had two studies, one initiated by the Senate Intelligence Committee. That is the one that was the focus of my first amendment. The second was to have been the focus of the second amendment. Both were sense of the Senate--first, to declassify the information so that the American people will be able to see what was there. Don't censor this material; give the American people information. The second is to say to all Federal agencies, cooperate with the 9/11 Commission fully, completely, and immediately.

Now, my understanding is, having consulted with the majority, they will raise a point of order against the amendment I have offered just moments ago because it is ``legislating on an appropriations bill.'' My second amendment would be the same. They would make a point of order against them, and the point of order would stand, I expect. So when such a point of order is made, I will regret it. I understand those are the rules of the Senate. But on the very next piece of legislation that comes to the floor--and I believe one is coming later this week that is an amendable vehicle and is a nonappropriations bill--we will vote on both of these sense-of-the-Senate amendments.

I might also say that while a point of order will be raised on these, there are sense-of-the-Senate provisions, I believe, in the underlying bill, or sense-of-the-Senate provisions to be added to it. I will not raise similar points of order. My hope is that all Senators will join me in understanding that this is not partisan or political, it is about this country's interests--our interests in preventing future acts of terrorism, our interests in finding out what happened, what went wrong, and how we can improve the intelligence-gathering system in this country. Who did what? Were foreign governments involved? If so, which ones and to what extent? These questions need to be answered. Both of my resolutions are designed to do one thing--provide more information to the American people, No. 1; No. 2, to ask every corner of our Government in every official working of this Government to decide that they will completely, cooperatively, and immediately work with the 9/11 Commission to provide the requested information.

We ought not to have to come to the Senate floor to ask why the White House, the FAA, or this or that agency has not already fully cooperated with the 9/11 Commission. It is in this country's interest to see that happen.

Mr. President, I ask for consideration of my amendment.

Mr. McCONNELL. Was consent requested, Mr. President? I am sorry, I didn't hear.

Mr. DORGAN. I asked for consideration of my amendment. I ask unanimous consent that we waive points of order and have my amendment be considered.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I object.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, in accordance with the precedent of May 17, 2000, I raise a point of order that the amendment is not germane.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The point of order is sustained. The amendment falls.

Mr. McCONNELL. Thank you, Mr. President."

We DID tell you:

Friday, 5 October 2012

I think you might need, to take the time, to learn, some REAL REALITY:

The White Rabbit!  
PS Send friends Hero Humans! That's how we grow!  Send:
TWEET/FACEBOOK(1): #OccupyTheBanks Operation #OTB

No comments :

Post a comment

Only members (obviously) can comment; no moderation; direct to page.

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.