Rand Paul Seeks To Tie Pentagon Funding To Release Of Classified 9/11 docs

The Kentucky Senator and GOP presidential candidate Rand Paul filed an amendment to a military funding bill, demanding the release of 28 pages from the 9/11 report that have been classified since 2002 and allegedly link Saudi Arabia to the attacks.

Paul originally submitted a separate bill, titled the “Transparency for the Families of 9/11 Act” (S.1471), earlier this week, with the backing of Senators Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-New York). On Friday afternoon, however, he said there would also be an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) – a bill funding military operations for the next fiscal year.

The 28 pages were redacted from the final 9/11 report by the George W. Bush administration. Rumors have persisted that this was done to protect senior officials in Saudi Arabia, homeland of Al-Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden, who were allegedly complicit in the attacks.

Members of Congress with a security clearance can apply for permission to read the 28 pages, inside a secure room in the basement of the US Capitol. They are not allowed to bring aides, or take notes, and very few legislators have ever taken the opportunity.

Another Bold move by by the man Rand , Not sure how far he is going to get with it but hey at least he is trying !

I am sure if this thing does pass we most likely won't see the docs for some time.

Your thoughts ?


Kap

Read more HERE

Rand better avoid any private airline flights or lone walks, methinks.

Personally, I think this is where Rand should be focusing his energies (much like his anti-NSA mass surveillance fight), rather than the usual GOP time-waster issues like abortion, gay rights, etc.

Second. Good jerb.

a reply to: Kapusta

APRIL 9, 2004--Days after September 11, 2001, with commercial flights grounded throughout the United States, the Bush administration allowed select commercial jets to fly out of the country.

Four manifests from these flights have been released by Craig Unger, author of the nonfiction bestseller House of Bush, House of Saud. The passenger lists are posted online.

A September 13 flight from Lexington KY to London carried 15 passengers including eight Saudis; a Las Vegas-to-Switzerland flight the next day carried seven Saudis; a "VIP flight" from New York to Paris on September 22 carried 12 passengers including four Saudis; and another Las Vegas-to-Paris VIP flight on September 24 carried 24 passengers including 11 Saudis. Some individuals who jetted away would have been "persons of interest" in any traditional investigation, and others had round-the-clock knowledge of them.

Former Clinton and Bush counterterrorism adviser Richard Clarke was asked about the flights at the April 8 hearing of the 9-11 Commission. Clarke responded that "someone" in the Saudi embassy had requested that some persons be allowed to fly out and that he refused, kicking the request over to the FBI, which permitted them.

baltimorechronicle.com...

Bush and Cheney refused to testify under oath. Bush met with members of the 911 Commission panel members at a closed door meeting at the white house. Grand-daddy bush had ties to Nazis.

Although Rand Paul may appear to be waving the banner of honour and integrity and open transparency towards what happened that fateful day and the days immediately either side of September 11th 2001, any information within those 28 pages which may shine a light on a high level political affiliation with the house of Saud will, imo, simply be irrelevant.

Unfortunately, Rand, this is too little too late - America is brainwashed that 19 Sauds hijacked 4 planes and caused the destruction of 4 buildings (twin towers, tower 7, pentagon) and US alphabet agencies simply dropped the ball and had no prior warning, other Americans were too young to remember, and still today the next generation are being taught THIS CRAP

a reply to: Sublimecraft

Rodger that !

But.......

I think their is more to this Bill then meets the eye , If i understand it correctly He wants to use the bill to Amend the NDAA for transparency regarding military funding .


Also I can't say that I agree with the whole "it's to late " bit ... Its never to late IMHO .

Besides if not for us then

“For over 13 years, the family members of the victims of September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks have been deprived of the details surrounding the redacted 28 pages of the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry,” Paul said. ”I firmly believe the American people deserve a government that instills trust and a restoration of their sense of security, and think my amendment is a step in the right direction.”

for them .

a reply to: Kapusta

I'm glad that Rand is trying, but if he learnerd anything from his father's campaign (Ron Paul), these types of advocacys won't get him elected, just mocked or shunned by the media. But will the MSM actually cover this in-depth? If so, they would have to talk about why these pages are classified and held fro the public which could cause backlash, likley leading to straight denial that they even exist and that Rand is just a conspiracy baffoon like his dad. Being that popular vote means very little when electing a new POTUS, it will be up to TPTB if he makes the final few that have a chance in hell to be the next president, and those few will be their puppets, Rand is showing he does not respect the ones that pull the strings. So, he will either learn from TPTB the power they have (blackmail, releasing his personal info, entrapment, etc) through coersion, or he will stand his ground and fall through the cracks like his dad and Ralph Nader both did in very siilar ways.

In the next few months pay close attention to how the candidates get spun and how it evolves over time, it is critical to the establishment. Maybe Rand knows he has no chance in winning and TPTB want hi to bring this subject up? Maybe they have many pieces in place already so releasing this info (likley altered) will put trust in the government; give reason for citizens to want a total end to the war, withdraw troops in the Mid East, put them on US soil for martial law to take place, CIA-ISIS co-op attacks the states, military steps in as everyone is a suspect, keep collecting the oil and have shadow troops overseas to instill the government they want while reconstructing our own in order to make it more "China" like; resulting in either "China like" governent or a full revolution (cyber attacks, armed revolutionaries, monetary crash, etc).

I am still unsure if Rand is actually sincere in his posistion or if he is a created pawn using the "Paul" name. It's been awhile since I've paid close attention to these candidates as I lost interest and see where it is going and it won't be where even the minority of ATS voters would want. A two party system is ridiculous, and as he is on one side, there is a reason for it. Everything has more than one side to it, and the minimum is 2 sides, so our governent not only offers us the bare minimum in candidates but does the bare minimu in work as well.

a reply to: Kapusta

Rand Paul is sticking to his guns . If I understand the process right. When a amendment is filed on a house approved bill. If anyone in the house has any objection it has to go to committee . So they can omit or submit more amendments .

Unfortunately if the information comes out and if it doesn't satisfy the conspiracy theorist it will be called a lie. If by chance it comes out and the truthers like the opinion they will then approve of it.


Either way it will not settle the issue here .

a reply to: iDope

Whelp if i settle for what you are saying then I guess we will just have to look back in History for His name

Under the title

True Patriot .


Look Ill be honest I have never in my 32 years voted . I never felt compelled to because I understood at a very young age that Politicking = corruption. I guess my 6th sens would kick in when these politicians started talking and my BS meter would go off .

But then came Ron Paul and i didn't get that feeling from him so i started researching him but by that time i was too late to cast a vote .

I fully believe Rand is solid and honest 100% His political background will say as much .

I understand the whole two party thing is crap but I am certain Rand is a Libertarian at heart .

As of now we have no choice and when faced with picking "two evils " I would go with the lessor .

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: Kapusta

Rand Paul is sticking to his guns . If I understand the process right. When a amendment is filed on a house approved bill. If anyone in the house has any objection it has to go to committee . So they can omit or submit more amendments .

Unfortunately if the information comes out and if it doesn't satisfy the conspiracy theorist it will be called a lie. If by chance it comes out and the truthers like the opinion they will then approve of it.


Either way it will not settle the issue here .

Then we will stand a bit more educated on the events of that tragic day wont we ?

originally posted by: Kapusta

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: Kapusta

Rand Paul is sticking to his guns . If I understand the process right. When a amendment is filed on a house approved bill. If anyone in the house has any objection it has to go to committee . So they can omit or submit more amendments .

Unfortunately if the information comes out and if it doesn't satisfy the conspiracy theorist it will be called a lie. If by chance it comes out and the truthers like the opinion they will then approve of it.


Either way it will not settle the issue here .

Then we will stand a bit more educated on the events of that tragic day wont we ?

Partially it depends on what the report says as with anything here some people will like it and some people won't. That's all I'm trying to say, you do agree that regardless of the content of the report soon afterwards a whole a lot of sites will pop up with different opinions ?


Hey I want it released also. It's just with all the speculation that's been going on I don't think everyone will be happy with it .

originally posted by: Greathouse

originally posted by: Kapusta

originally posted by: Greathouse
a reply to: Kapusta

Rand Paul is sticking to his guns . If I understand the process right. When a amendment is filed on a house approved bill. If anyone in the house has any objection it has to go to committee . So they can omit or submit more amendments .

Unfortunately if the information comes out and if it doesn't satisfy the conspiracy theorist it will be called a lie. If by chance it comes out and the truthers like the opinion they will then approve of it.


Either way it will not settle the issue here .

Then we will stand a bit more educated on the events of that tragic day wont we ?

Partially it depends on what the report says as with anything here some people will like it and some people won't. That's all I'm trying to say, you do agree that regardless of the content of the report soon afterwards a whole a lot of sites will pop up with different opinions ?


Hey I want it released also. It's just with all the speculation that's been going on I don't think everyone will be happy with it .

I am sure many Opinions will be voiced no doubt , But maybe it will bring closure to some as well .

a reply to: Kapusta

It may I agree.

But I've seen where all the speculation and opinions lay with the expected testimony of those 28 pages .



What do you think is going to happen if the 28 pages are released and and they don't agree with the anticipated results .

Offhand and this is a hypothetical question . What would happen if they prove there was no saudi involvement ?

Sometimes I wonder if the existence of Ron Paul and Rand Paul is to *appease the opposition* to TPTB.

They stand for everything the opposition wants.

So lets just say TPTB were geniuses, and thought, 'hey, lets create our own opposition to us' and let the people who support the opposition to us stand behind them, and support them; that way, it will take all of the energy and organization away from any genuine opposition.

.. 'because we will never let the opposition succeed in their goals, since they work for us.' - say TPTB.

I don't know, just a thought. Not too far fetched for me to believe.

Anything released is going to look roughly like this:

Anyone in a position of power who demands transparency from the government should have every ones vote. To many lies, propaganda and classified documents on just about everything one can imagine go un-vetted.

a reply to: Kapusta

I agree with much of what you are saying, and if I had to vote today it would probably be for him, but I don't know a lot about less public figures in the race yet. I would have rather had Ron Paul than Rand, Ron said a few years back that Rand differs from his own political views quite a bit, but it's still in the right direction. It's going to be a Everest of a hill battle I believe unless those behind the curtains will benefit from what he speaks. Without their backing, he will get little attention besides bad press, or spinning his words and stance on policy by pundits and journalists in order to question his judgement, belittle his stance, then praise someone else in hope that listeners will believe their inside knowlege instead of researching "complicated" political mumbo jumbo.

The problem is IMHO, majority voters know very little about the candidates unless they do their own research and look at how they voted on matters in the past. Such a small number of people do this, as I really don't blame them, but they will vote with little knowledge as a result of peer pressure (family friends and media). If Hillary is there in the end, she will get millions of votes even though she has been surrounded by a plethora of scandals and seemingly treasonous activities, yet it will be past and her campaign will see to it that as the voting time gets closer, her past is expunged from the medias lips and will concentrate only on her issues if elected.

It's sad that when you see a Dem and Rep left towards the end debating eachother, you know one of those must win, as if we already voted to eliminate the rest of the field. Many won't be allowed to debate at all, and those that get to either have mega bucks or mega (percieved) followers, and if we percieve a candidate has millions of followers, it is then easier for a novice that just wants to vote to cast it for the popular choice. This would be even worse if we were required to vote, people with no care would just pick red or blue or vote regarding a stance on one issue important to them.

But honestly, as Rand seems like the best choice to alter the direction America is heading and want our freedoms restored etc, wouldn't you question his true moral objective and promise if he were the last one standing against Hillary? To imagine the entire nation of Republican backing him over some other goon seems out there, but I need to look into his views more to see how he compares to typical republicans and their conservative/religious/pro military/pro life/anti gay/etc typical belief rhetoric majoritizing a mass of individuals. I've never really associated myself with republican viewpoints and am disgusted how big businesses have more power over the government than the people. Until there is a candidate that has a plan on how to stop mass outsourcing of jobs, rebuilding our infrastructure, focusing on Americans over global power and money, fixing the consume consume consume mentallity, and ending the Fed and most of the banking system, then I will be on the phones and in the streets until they are in office.

To me it is simple. Instead of Focusing on ensuring oil and controlling other areas of the world, why not make our nation the best it can be and have everyone as happy as can be, and allow alternative energy and technologies be an area we openly strive for. Even strengthinng our own communities to rely less on foreign goods or transported food and clothes would help, and if a community was actually cohesive, fear would be far less of an issue as everyone knows their neighbors and pitches in to help one another. It's the only way unless we have free renewable energy and possibly robots doing all labor for us.

a reply to: 727Sky

Yep. JFK did exactly that. Opposed the secret societies and promised open government. Watch his final speech - plenty of youtube links. And suddenly his assassination becomes very clear and simple.
As someone said earlier - its way too late. They have won. Look at Sandy Hook and the Boston marathon firecracker... so much clear evidence of total hoax yet a criminal trial and conviction (and dead brother). So glad i dont live in USA.

Unless there is some national secret in there that would allow enemies to hurt us then withholding the documents for pure political reasons is tyranny. They have no right to deny any everyday American access to anything. It means our government is not following the constitution and by default is an unlawful government. The military and Homeland security have no obligation to protect or obey an unlawful government.

As far as I know, classification of documents was not intended as a way to protect the interest of politicians weather retired or current. It was not intended to protect secret enemy actions against the American people either AKA Saudi Royals.

I don't believe the entire Saudi Royal family was in on 911 especially those running their governments highest offices BUT I do believe that some of that Family were directly involved in Al-Qaida and the 911 attacks.

I also don't believe Dick and George really believed the Intel reports that Al-Qaida was planning to attack us in the way they did. It was simply incompetence and being a sleep at the wheel that they missed the opportunity to stop those planes. Bush was to busy basking in his new power to focus on intelligence warnings. He got a wake up call then over reacted.

The lie that came after are another thing entirely. They are where the Bush admin broke the law and the trust to cover their incompetence. Iraq was a side show to hide the 911 truth.

Neither intended to be bad men (Bush Cheney), they broke the law to avoid embarrassment by hiding and lying. They dug a hole so deep there was no where to go but down.

Not sure however what Rand Paul will gain from exposing this.

So they release the 28 pages and in it shows that a member of the royal family funded the hijackers.

No news there.
Especially since the royal family is 15,000 strong.
There's a black sheep in every family.

a reply to: Kapusta

Sounds like a sensitive way to swing votes.

Poli-tic-ions.

Always at it eh?