Slashdot Mirror
Blackmail: Obama Under Pressure To Declassify Secret 9/11 Report (cbsnews.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Families of Sept. 11, 2001 terror attack victims are pressuring Obama to support legislation allowing them to sue the Saudi government. A recent "60 Minutes" investigation has stirred up some controversy by looking at possible links between Saudi officials and the 9/11 hijackers, which revealed that new information may be hiding in a classified section of a Congressional report. The Saudis said in a report in the New York Times that they might sell "up to $750 billion in treasury securities and other assets in the United States" if the bill passes. The bill in question is being considered by Congress and it would permit lawsuits against countries that "contribute material support or resources" for "acts of terrorism." Van Auken, who is among those convinced that the 9/11 hijackers were helped by Saudi agents, said, "It feels like blackmail. The government, the president is siding with Saudi Arabia over the 9/11 families. If someone you loved was murdered and the person was just able to go away Scott free, would you be okay with that? I don't think anybody would." Last week the royal embassy of Saudi Arabia said, "The 9/11 commission confirmed that there is no evidence that the government of Saudi Arabia supported or funded Al Qaeda."
in their own way
The government, the president is siding with Saudi Arabia over the 9/11 families.
Is anybody really shocked by this? Obama has made it a habit of failing to live up to his campaign promise to "run the most transparent administration in American history."
I remember when he first ran and got elected. I thought, "I don't agree with a lot of his policy ideas, but if he lives up to his word on just that one point by making things transparent, I would be impressed and he will have proved that he's not a politician's politician." I don't think that promise even made it to the end of his inauguration speech. Oh well.
Let them sell the bonds. Who's gonna buy 'em? Lots of people. It can only hurt the Saudis. However, in our game of empires, we need them desperately, so I doubt anybody is going to seriously ruffle any feathers.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
If the Bushes are Saudi agents, we should sieze 2 trillion in assets for the Iraq disaster plus more for the 9/11 attack. Not to mention a lot of the Saudi oil was seized ("nationalized") from American companies for a song.
"...no evidence that the government of Saudi Arabia supported or funded Al Qaeda..."
"...if the bill that would let you sue us for supporting Al Qaeda passes, we'll sell our shares in your country."
Both a bunch of fucking liars. That last sentence in the summary is hilarious!
was to not immediately arrest the previous administration, give them a fair trial and a public hanging. Instead, he doubled down on the Bush legacy of the "war" on "terror." I'm sure the next president will do the same for their predecessor.
[citation needed]
The Saudis said in a report in the New York Times that they might sell "up to $750 billion in treasury securities and other assets in the United States" if the bill passes.
Tell me again how running up a big national debt isn't a problem, and how we shouldn't be worries because "sovereign debt" isn't the same as "private debt".
(And how China won't turn around and try to blackmail us economically, because they'd be cutting their own throat in the process.)
Saudi Arabia is hot. Iran is not.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Let the regime posture and threaten all it wants. They're in enough trouble already with gas prices in the toilet, a state budget about to collapse, and a discontent/unemployed population that is chomping at the bit for reform of the ruling classes....
Let's assume for a moment that everything 60 minutes claims is in fact true. Exactly how do they propose to force a foreign government to put themselves under the jurisdiction of a domestic civil court?
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
Citizens suing foreign governments? One of the linked articles quotes: "For years, Van Auken and other 9/11 families have tried to hold the Saudi government accountable in federal court" - so federal courts have jurisdiction over countries now?
I'm not defending anyone, just astonished that some people think their courts rule over the whole world.
It'll always be "THEIR" terrorist, "OUR" (freedom fighter/martyr).
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
Yeah, way too many that have reasonable cognitive function now realize that the main culprits can only be Israel, Mossad, and a clique of evil psychopaths within the CIA, other agencies and high up US government.
The protection of the Saudi regime has nothing to do with either their oil nor their US treasury roll-overs. The informed western powers cannot afford to allow the Saudi clan to fall because the potential of what may arise in its place is so great that it would overwhelm even the Russia-China alliance, not to mention the EU and the US
To make Iran's oil profits low and financially cripple their government.
Saudi Arabia gets their oil for 50 cents a barrel, they make a massive profit even now.
"The 9/11 commission confirmed that there is no evidence that the government of Saudi Arabia supported or funded Al Qaeda."
Then what are the Saudi's worried about?
Because Jews bought the politicians?
FOLLOW. THE. MONEY.
50 cents a barrel? HAHAHAHA no. Even the Saudis are beginning to hurt right now, their cash reserves are delpeting.
9/11 Was An Inside Job
Yeah, not really. Saudi's budget breakeven oil price is >$100 per barrel.
Is Saudi going to stop selling oil in dollars or something?
Their pumping costs might be the lowest in the world.
But their fixed overhead is the highest...how many Saudi princes are there again...5 figures last I heard.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
It's "scot free," not "Scott free.".
Technicality: there is no "government" of The Haus of Saud. They're closer to a family - an organization (if you will).
Why?
George Bush's company "Arbusto" was bailed out by the Bin Laden family. The links go to Bush.
it's just a really, really low bar...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The last two administrations have sided with the Saudis. There was a lot of talk about Saudis being involved and secretly escorted out of the country but that was swept under the rug. Sounds like it's rearing it's head again.
Yet you emigrated to America and I assume pay taxes, a country with a long history of funding terrorism, including funding the House of Saud.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
The attack on the WTC on 9/11 is an attack on America, much the same way of the Pearl Harbor attack back in WW2
I was in NJ at that very day, and I watched in horror what happened
I lost some friends in the attack --- and if 'friends of friends' are tallied, then I've lost more than 50 'friends of friends' in that terrorist incident
As this been an attack on the sovereignty of the United States of America we must strike back at the perpetrators --- and whomever funded / aided them
No matter who's the motherfucker, they should *NEVER* be allowed to walk away from the crime
THEY MUST PAY DEARLY
If it is Israel which sponsored the attack, then Israel must pay
If China was the one funding the terrorists, --- yes, speaking as an immigrant from China --- then the US should attack China
And if it is the Saudis, then they must pay, and pay dearly
I do not care what the government thinks --- I do not even give a fuck to whoever the POTUS happens to be --- if they ever side with those who attack us, then that POTUS has become a criminal, a traitor to our nation
If the US does not punish the perpetrator the world will say to themselves --- USA is nothing, a paper tiger, a useless piece of garbage
What kind of future USA is going to have if the whole world perceive us as a pussy?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
I agree with you . But the problem is that Obama has depended on foreign nation to buy treasure debt to fund is smoke and mirrors economy .if China or Saudi Arabia stop buying our debt , we would need to offer a higher interest rate on the debt we need to refinance which will collapse Obama raise the debt ceiling economy
Larry Silverstein admitted that the fire department demolished building 7. How in the fuck did they do that at the last minute with all the turmoil?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq-0JIR38V0
The USA should think it over twice before they approve such a law. The entire world can Sue them for their activities In the last decades
As a person who operates businesses in countries around the world I can tell you one thing ---
STOP WORRYING !!
This world needs America more than America needs the world
And I am not kidding !
I am not saying this because I am an American --- I am saying this as a fact --- without America this world's trade will be reduced by at least 57% and the impact of that much of a reduction to the world economy will be many times of that 57% !
Without American green backs (I know, they are worthless if we count them in term of true networth) but at this juncture, THERE IS NO OTHER WORLD CURRENCY able to substitute the American green backs, at least, not yet
Furthermore, this world has over 20 trillion dollars in excess cash --- yes, 20 fucking trillion dollars --- waiting for something to invest, and one day they are not used to invest in something, THEY LOSE MONEY ON THE CASH THEY KEEP
That is why something / someone / somehow must purchase the American treasury bills --- it is one of the surest form of guarantee in the world. No other bonds in the world gets to enjoy that
So let me repeat --- Please stop worrying so much
The world will keep on buying the American bonds. If not the towel heads, then the Chinese or the Japanese or the Koreans or the Singaporeans will snatch them up
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Obama has done things that I wanted him to do as president. But after Snowden, it became readily apparent that he isn't going to do the things I need him to do as president.
I am from China, and Russia is just north of China
You go ask any Chinese in China --- whether they want to buy the Russian bond or the American treasury bill, 99.9% will tell you they prefer the American treasury bill
Why?
Because nobody else can guarantee their treasury bill like us, the United States of America --- the US has an excellent good track record when compare to the others
So, stop being such a Chicken Little, my friend --- them towel heads can go buy up all the treasury bonds from Russia and they will end up with nothing but icy sludge
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
You can't sue sovereign states. It's a foundation of international law.
If congress is is stupid enough to ignore this the US is screwed. We lose that protection.
I know it sucks. But, we have to tell these people they have NO recourse against Saudi Arabia.
Lots of people want and try to sue the US government. Constantly! Not just in the US
They all get thrown out at stage one. you can't sue sovereign states.
Just for instance:
If this bill passes
Millions of Vietnamese could sue the US
think about it!
You know what?
The entire United States of America -- from land to building to IPs to companies, everything grouped together, is at least 1,000 times that "$750 billion" which you quote
Why are you so afraid of them?
If the US of A is only worth $800 billion and the towel heads own $750 billion of those, then we have great cause for worry
But truth is, what they own is merely a fraction of 1% of what our country is worth --- so if they want to dump all of their assets, LET THEM !!
Our country might be poor, but our people still have enough cash to snatch up the assets which they want to dump
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
This tells me all I want to know about the whole damned mess...
http://www.hermes-press.com/Bu...
This is off-topic, but hear me out.
I have to applaud the Saudi Arabian government for "seeing the writing on the wall" about the soon-coming phase-out of dinosaur-burning (fossil fuels) as the major source of energy for the world. They are investing very heavily in renewable energy technologies, as well as some other areas in an attempt to use their sovereign wealth to shift their economy – before the shit really hits the fan – to other potential GDP-producing sectors.
Yeah, they have sold a big portion of the oil – the burning of which has been clearly destructive to our own planet – but other countries wanted to buy this cheap source of concentrated, transportable energy. Recall that "Saudi Aramco" = "Saudi Arabian–American (oil) Company". The US has long since sold off its stake, but that is the genesis of the country.
All other issues (e.g., human rights) aside, Saudi Arabia's leaders are way ahead of the US and many other governments on planning for a post-carbon-energy world. That is long-term planning, and does deserve some respect.
There are forces in the American and global ruling systems that absolutely do not want a real investigation of 9/11. If the full truth comes to the light of day there will be executions warranted. Don't be surprised that powerful elements will fight to the death to prevent that.
When the king heard the words of the Book of the Law he tore his robes.2Kings22:11
Before Juden control comes down, remember: They wrote this about you all, biggest racists of all (for which they "jew guilt" you for no less, hypocrites known as thieves all thru history). God's chosen people? Easy to say when THEY wrote the bible too but gave it away here - Revelation 3:9 "Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie" (seems they like lying too, see below, subterfuge wording):
1. Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim is like killing a wild animal."
2. Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles should be killed."
3. Sanhedrin 59a: "A goy (Gentile) who pries into The Law (Talmud) is guilty of death."
4. Yebhamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."
5. Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording."
6. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Do not save Goyim in danger of death."
7. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Show no mercy to the Goyim."
8. Choschen Hamm 388, 15: "If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth."
9. Choschen Hamm 266,1: "A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum (Gentile). For he who returns lost property (to Gentiles) sins against the Law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the Law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely, if by so doing, Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people."
10. Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17: "A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them."
11. Baba Necia 114, 6: "The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts."
12. Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D: "When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves."
13. Nidrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L: "Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night."
14. Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."
15. Gad. Shas. 2:2: "A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl."
16. Tosefta. Aboda Zara B, 5: "If a goy kills a goy or a Jew, he is responsible; but if a Jew kills a goy, he is NOT responsible."
17. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 388: "It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces."
18. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348: "All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which, consequently, is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples."
19. Tosefta, Abda Zara VIII, 5: "How to interpret the word 'robbery.' A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or from a Jew. But a Jew is NOT forbidden to do all this to a goy."
20. Seph. Jp., 92, 1: "God has given the Jews power over the possessions and blood of all nations."
21. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 156: "When a Jew has a Gentile in his clutches, another Jew may go to the same Gentile, lend him money and in turn deceive him, so that the Gentile shall be ruined. For the property of a Gentile, according to our law, belongs to no one, and the first Jew that passes has full right to seize it."
22. Schulchan Aruch, Johre Deah, 122: "A Jew is forbidden to drink from a glass of wine which a Gentile has touched, because the touch has made the wine unclean."
23. Nedarim 23b: "He who desires that none of his vows made during the year be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, 'Every vow which I may make in the future shall be null'. His vows are then invalid."
Really nice people guess all nations are nazis (france, spain, egypt, poland and more kicked them out) but those ovens fire
Back in 2013, Senator Bob Graham gave interviews with TheRealNews.com in which he talked frankly, as well as he could without divulging classified information, about the Saudi Involvement in 9/11 (See: http://therealnews.com/t2/inde... ). So what if the Whitehouse declassifies the files that are the smoking gun as far as the Saudis are concerned? What do you think will happen? The alleged threat by the Saudis to sell off US debt is either an obvious bluff or they're even more incompetent and reactionary than I previously thought. Seriously trying to dump $750 billion in debt in an attempt to sabotage the US economy would hit the Saudis' and quite a few other economies along with them, not to mention souring the milk between the Saudi military and the Pentagon. The Saudis have bought tens of billions of military hardware that it doesn't know how to use. They're totally reliant on the Pentagon's support to help them to use it effectively: The moment that the Saudis lose Pentagon support, they're effectively a sitting duck for a potential attacker.
Saudi Arabia spends enormous amounts of money on social programs to keep their peasants from revolting. The small number of Royals can only spend so much in comparison, and any Royal assets will be up for grabs during the revolution.
That even he, isn't beholden to others with regard to policy, especially when it comes to Saudi Arabia, Israel, or Oil, is an extremely naive view of the world.
What honestly make you think, he could ever release what they are wanting declassified?
Might as well ask him to open up Area 51 while we're at it.
I suspect the reason(s) why the Administration doesn't declassify the redacted pages of the 9/11 report has to do with intel sources and methods, rather than any smoking gun.
G-fucking-WB didn't help his PR when he facilitated flying home members of the House of Saud and their retainers who happened to be in the US on 9/11. Sure, the King and lead princes were probably worried about Arabs being beaten in the streets of the US, and at that point not knowing whether or not one of their number had a direct hand in the attacks, whether family in the US would be rotting in jail during a prolonged investigation.
Plus, the extended Bush family and their Dallas cronies owe their personal connections to the Sauds for making buckets of money on SA business. The President should have sucked it up and reordered his priorities. Like I said, bad PR, at the very least, when he didn't know if the Royal family was involved.
Declassification or no, the real issue we already know: in the 1930s, the Royal family handed over the religious education and indoctrination of SA to the knuckle-dragging Wahhabi imams in exchange for keeping the S in SA, while cranking billions into foundations that have fed Wahhabi crap into generations of international Moslem youth.
Luke, help me take this mask off
Yea, sorry, but CNBC is shit when it comes to Energy reporting.
Saudi break even is more like $27~ a barrel. There was a reason it plummeted to around $30 a barrel recently, which the Saudis prompted, to tank all the US investment in fraking, which it did. The US is now loathe to throw a crap ton of money back into that to start it back up, since the Saudis are keeping it under-inflated to hurt US local oil development. The irony is that, despite the per barrel plummet on crude, US economy is still chugging along just fine, and growing in certain sectors, despite the wonton 'fears' of recession.
Perhaps the Saudis should not have made frakking a profitable exercise by pushing up the oil price to $150/barrel. Greed got them in this situation. The Saudis created their own monsters.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
While is no argument over the weak and incompetent leadership for America, I would argue that the so-called 'leadership' of many foreign countries (not all, many) are as weak, as stupid, as incompetent as Obama
Take Angela Merkel, of Germany, for rexample --- that broad single-headedly opened the floodgate allowing the flood of millions of moslem migrants into the European continent
Take Xi Jin Pin of China, for example --- that guy tried to flex his muscle in South China Sea, only to be met with shit on his own face
Take David Cameron of England, for example -- that guy went to China with hat in hand hoping for handouts, only to have the so-called 'nuclear power plant' halting its construction for an indefinite time
Yes, our so-called 'leader' is weak, stupid, incompetent, but what makes America great is not only the person in the White House, but the FUNDAMENTALS of America
I am an immigrant of China, and I do business all over the world. I get to compare different characteristics of different countries, and I can tell you, so far, not even Japan, an island nation with millions of patents issued to them, can compete against America in terms of fundamentals
True, our education system is in shit
True, our young generations are mostly ignorant brats
True, there are a lot of things in America which has broken down
But still, fundamtnatlly America is still the strongest --- not even China, the so-called 'new power house' can match the United States (and I am from China, I know China very very well)
This ain't a 'three bag full' theory', btw
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
If this Bill is passed by Congress it will be vetoed by the President, whoever is president. And if signed will Americansare be struck down by the Supreme Court.
What do the Bill's supporters think America stands for?
Is America a syndicate of thugs that will enact vengeance upon an ally for the crimes of its rogue nationals?
I'm curious at how all of this is Blackmail? It's more damaging to keep this information classified than it is to disclose it. This legislation isn't threatening the POTUS because after all unless they can raise a 2/3 majority in both houses it won't become law without his signature. Again, declassify the information and make it public since It'll probably be more embarrassing for the US anyway on how we missed a lot of indicators that something was happening and that the US government was incompetent. As a US citizen I'd like to know who our friends are and who our enemies are and ultimately the truth over the attacks.
On the flip side, the Saudis have been conducting economic war on the US and Canada by flooring oil prices with over production. They want the world hooked on oil and want to still dominate the ability to control that market. Threatening to sell $750B worth of assets pales by comparison to the damage OPEC and Saudi policies have done to the US already. The US government has stood by and let this happen and frankly I'm more disgusted that we seem to be in the back pockets of the Saudi's in letting this happen.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
...to sell the $750 billion in notes/securities etc if the bill passes.
Nah, the U.S. has been more than fine with that dumping....because geopolitics. Crashing the oil market has hurt Russia, allowed for the right-wingers in Venezuela to come back into power, and will greatly delay Iran's ability to make up for the billions they lost to sanctions. Sanctions, levied against the Iran for the nuclear weapons program that both the CIA and Mossad say Iran didn't have. Because geopolitics.
Who is an 'ally'?
Someone who help us when we need their help, or someone who backstab us whenever they got the chance?
The Saudis have backstabbed America many, many times --- 9/11 is only one of the more glaring ones
Over three thousand people had perished in 9/11, and someone has to pay for the crime
So far the 'characters' we have gotten are the 'donkeys', those who took part in the act, but we have yet to apprehend any of those who have bankrolled and/or sponsored the terrorist act
There was a 'summit' organized by the '9/11 donkeys' in Kuala Lumpur of Malaysia and over there they discussed the procedures of the attacks
That 'summit' was sponsored by the government of Malaysia - an islamic government which has been sponsoring many islamic terrorist organization, since the 1980's
So far, none of the characters from the Malaysian government has been apprehended for the 9/11 incident, and we should go find out who is responsible for what and carry out the prosecution accordingly
As for your accusation 'syndicate of thugs', them islamists are the syndicate of thugs, not us
We did not bomb their Mecca, nor their Kuala Lumpur
They bombed us
It's pay back time and we must make sure that those who are responsible will get whatever they deserve
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
You need to get a Calendar and some history books, because the US Politicians have been in bed with the Saudis since I was a kid in the 70s. Oddly we have a "travel at your own risk" warning for anyone going there, they are one of the most oppressive tyrannies on Earth, have a worse human rights record than China and close to the DPRK, and have a history of undercutting US businesses attempting to compete in the Oil business.
Did we know about the Saudis and 9/11? Well the Government gave people a fairy tale and the public eats it up. Nobody wants to believe that their own government would fuck them over, so the delusion is incredible. The brain washing around the event is still very strong, with the populace having an irrationally strong emotional reaction to any mention of 9/11, FDNY, or the Twin Towers.
Be prepared for nothing to happen and nothing to change. Remember, if you question anything the Government tells you about anything related to 9/11 you are a "Conspiracy theorist". (queue the *dun dun dun* music).
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
This has zero to do with the collapse of the WTC and 100% to do with political smear campaigns.
Pretty sure you can only sue the US if it agrees to be sued. The US does not recognize a higher authority than its own Supreme Court.
It's not just that. The Saudis and Turkey are the obvious supporters behind Daesh (ISIS) as well, and everyone with three working brain cells knows it. But everyone is so tied up with them that it took Putin of all people to point it out.
A 9/11 lawsuit would potentially bring all these ties to light as well, and open up a whole can of worms that would probably end with the Saudi ruling family on Interpols Most Wanted list.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Don't make me laugh !
The Euros?
Everybody can see how useless, how spineless them Europeans are
It's not only about the money, but also the people behind the money --- it's the psychology after all
The world will not switch to Euro because Euro just ain't worth shit (the American green backs ain't worth shit also, but compare to the Euros, at least the world believes the USA a little bit more than EU)
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
So... how's that 9/11 Commission due process working out for everyone?
Whistler: I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
Bernard Abbott: Oh, this is ridiculous.
Martin Bishop: He's serious.
Whistler: I want peace on earth and goodwill toward men.
Bernard Abbott: We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
~From the movie 'Sneakers', 1992
If the pages should become leaked, there are several respected lawmakers who have seen them and are presently on record as supporting their public release. Those are the people who can attest to the veracity of what is leaked, and help sort through any bogus versions that may appear also. As one who has seriously researched the bizarre circumstances (and odd coincidences) of 9/11 I was really disgusted by Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 'thing', in which Moore clumsily attempts to smear Saudi Arabia with complicity without any real foundation. He disguised his Bush-rant it as a 9/11 truth documentary to score at the Box Office. Meanwhile many a more reasonable approach and fascinating film has gone unseen.
It may be that certain Saudis participated in the funding and planning of 9/11, just as certain Pakistanis seemed to be in the loop, and some bizarre murders may have an explanation to do with the events of 9/11. More likely than not the (presumed) Saudis were not acting on behalf of or with full knowledge of their government, but it's time for the information to be aired publicly. Saudi Arabia is the head-choppingoffest country around these days and it would be interesting to see that if true evidence surfaces, whether they consider 9/11 complicity to be worth losing one's head over.
The way to do it if for the pages to be leaked. The way not to do it is to pass a bill that nurtures a growing vilification/sanction 'industry' such as the PNAC wet dream which sent us headlong into the Middle East for oil (ostensibly, revenge). I remember the good old days when acts of terrorism were met with efforts to trace and bring to justice the individuals and specific organizations involved.
<blink>down the rabbit hole</blink>
We might find out that Bandar Bush knew more in advance than we thought, and that George W is even more of a war criminal , and his father, and likely clinton and most of the CIA and other 3 letter agencies but there are no surprised , we already know that bush seinor funneled money through the isi to form al qidea for screw with the russians, we already knew that rumsfeild sold chemical weapons to saddam these people are all murderers and crimminals, they hang out with murderers and criminals there are no surprises in the 28 pages.
"funding the House of Saud."
Beyond ridiculous! Their net worth in 2015 was approximately 1.4 Trillion.
"I don't agree with a lot of his policy ideas, but if he lives up to his word on just that one point by making things transparent, I
That was the promise I was hoping he would keep, too. Would have been a lasting change in the world. Oh well.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
--
Yay, verily, he that liveth by Saud, so shall he die by the Saud!
Whatever we gathered information from the blogs, we should implement that in practically then only we can understand that exact thing clearly, but it’s no need to do it, because you have explained the concepts very well.
Java training in Chennai
That's racist.
Why not declare General Motors as terrorists?
It may be close to your home, but in the grand scale of things, 9/11 was piddling.
And absolutely trivial compared to the number of civilians killed by Americans each year in other countries.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
It's the dictionary one, but all they do to get around it is claim that the civilians are legitimate targets.
You know, like they might be "Collateral Damage" or "A Human Shield", and therefore their killing isn't terrorism, it's legitimate war.
We just called them criminals and did them for murder.
But that was before US home soil got terrorist attacks. Everyone else was fine with it being just an ordinary criminal, just done for "political" reasons.
When the USA had it happen to them at home where they live, as opposed to abroad where some of them live, but very few, and it's mostly foreigners anyway over there, it all went from "We won't deign to call them terrorists, they're just common criminals with high minded excuses" to "WE WILL NOT TOLERATE TERRORISM!!!!!"
When the USA was paying a shitload to the IRA, it was "unfortunate" but it was a free speech issue and nothing to be done about.
When the USA got hit, anyone paying terrorism, even if the money never went anywhere near the USA, it was to be tracked, stamped and taken if uncertain. Because the USA threatened the world and the banks if they refused to crack down on potential terrorism funding.
When they were risking their homes to it.
When foreigners were taking the hits? Bah, it's not that serious!
And I want to go back to the days when we realised that.
I'm glad it worked for you.
it really doesn't matter if the report is declassified, it's still a fake report.... It was an inside job, just look at what laws have been made possible due to 9/11.. a few thousands deaths is well the worth to the people who orchestrated it.. One big hint is the pulling(collapse) of building 7, it's just impossible to pull a building in a matter of hours (and it wasn't even hit by a plane).
Remember, if you question anything the Government tells you about anything related to 9/11 you are a "Conspiracy theorist". (queue the *dun dun dun* music).
Um... no, not really. If you go off concocting wild theories on the loose conjunction of facts not inconsistent with those theories, which is what most people who get labelled as conspiracy theorists do, sure. But plenty of people can bring up one inconsistency and ask why did X happen. If it's a question rather than a part of a grand theory involving a conspiracy of secret actors, it will be listened to by most intelligent people.
So people who say "jet fuel doesn't ordinarily burn hot enough to ignite structural steel, so that's odd..." or "isn't it convenient so many people hadn't gotten to work yet" are generally not painted as crazy conspiracy theory nuts. But if you turn that into "GWB and all those Arabs caused 9/11" then you'll be called a conspiracy theorist.
I mean, at the point where Noam Chompsky says it wasn't a conspiracy and you say it was, you're further away from the norm than Noam Chompsky, which means that statistically, you've got a 50/50 chance whether you're insane or just so far outside society that you barely have a common frame of reference.
Over three thousand people had perished in 9/11, and someone has to pay for the crime
Given the body count in both Afghanistan and Iraq (which, as was evident even when the war began, had fuck all to do with 9/11, but hey, collateral damage), it can be argued many people already have.
Yes. Every person who flies on an airplane in America pays for it, as well as every kid who is easier to recruit as a terrorist because we bombed countries rather than building schools in them.
Exactly, this is how Sanders and various other so-called "liberals" play their game. These people accomplish nothing, but they still win with their "feel good" bullshit.
It's not limited to one side; it's not just liberals. It is one basic tactic of politics, right up there with sponsoring bills to get referred to committee you know will never get passed, or telling different stories to your domestic population than you do at the negotiating table with a foreign nation, and crafting your agreements explicitly to let each of you pretend to your people that you agreed to different things.
Not Scott. Certainly not capitalised.
Apparently "scot" in this context has nothing to do with scotland (which was new to me) but is an old word for tax.
Obama has made it a habit of failing to live up to his campaign promise...
To be fair, it isn't only Obama. By now, Americans ought to have caught on to the fact that all politicians promise way more than they can realistically achieve. and as a consequence, they will without fail disappoint people. Perhaps enough people are now tired of this situation and want to change it, but will inevitably take much more effort and cost everybody much more than they imagine. All of the part of the establishment will have to be dismantled in some way to allow something better to grow up and replace it; and the danger is that you either end up with the same old crap with a fresh layer of paint, or something worse - a dictatorship, maybe.
We see much the same in Europe - in UK, people are listening to a guy like Jeremy Corbyn - not a hugely charismatic fellow, and his support for EU is clearly lukewarm at best, but I think that very fact rings true with people, because they feel the same way: nobody likes EU a lot, but staying is still better than leaving. I don't get to vote in the American election, but if I may offer a bit of advice, it would be this: whatever you do, think carefully and realistically about it first. Breaking things in a fit of anger is easy, building them up again afterwards is most definitely not. And who knows, after thinking carefully, perhaps you still find that you need to break things - but then you will know why and how, and what to do after that.
To get back to the topic: how much of a chance does one man have against an establishment that most certainly doesn't want him to succeed? I don't really know another country where big business can steer the public opinion to such a degree that even those who would benefit from a new initiative like public healthcare, are turned against it. In a climate like that, how much could Obama actually achieve? I'm not the least surprised that he is now trying to ram as many executive orders down the establishment's throat as humanly possible; at least it will take whoever comes next a while to unravel, and who knows, maybe some of it will survive.
"The 9/11 commission confirmed that there is no evidence that the government of Saudi Arabia supported or funded Al Qaeda."
So all is well, no? Why would they want to threaten to flood the markets with US securities?
... in huge quantities from the falling pieces of the twin towers as they collapsed. Where did the energy come from, to create huge, billowing clouds of dust coming from thousands of objects in FREE FALL? It's all clearly visible in all the videos of the collapsing buildings.
I do not fund terrorist
Yes you do, or at least you did if you pay taxes and are a US citizen. The USA has actively funded terrorists in the past (and probably still does). Moreover, there are many people who would classify targeted political assassinations via drone strikes as terrorist acts, especially because they kill (on the average) more civilians than 'intended targets'. Opinions differ, it hinges on how you define and interpret 'side effects' and what role they play in your moral system.
Thank God, for a moment I was thinking you'd want to blow up Persia, too. But it's only Arabia... those lucky Iranians!
+3 for this worthless shit? What the fuck, Slashdot?
If someone you loved was murdered and the person was just able to go away Scott free
We need to ask this Scott guy.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Yes but the president has nearly unilateral power to declassify documents. There is a process but largely within the executive branch. Congress could take active steps to interfere, riders on bills that 'require documents to remain classified' they have not done that in this case and I am not aware of many others.
Call them obstructionist if you like but this is a case where Obama and his people actually clearly are allowed to act without resorting to any really imaginative interpretations of the law and they have not done. Obama is and has always been self interested liar, like a lot of them. People need to disabuse themselves of this notion that he is somehow different. Obama has been Bush Lite.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Can someone explain exactly how culpable the president is? As someone who doesn't live in the US I alternately hear that he is totally responsible for all the bad stuff and yet the office has no real power and it's all down to the two houses (which I note are currently controlled by the Republicans, who seem to oppose Obama on pretty much everything).
With that in mind, it seems like a miracle that he managed to get a socialist policy like Obamacare through, even if it was watered down. How much power and responsibility for the actions of the US does he really have?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Clinton is a square shooter.
Will this bill have a special exception to prevent the victims of the US drone program in Warizistan from suing the US government?
... collapses?
Why was all the steel removed from the crime scene and MELTED DOWN or shipped abroad to be melted down, before it could be examined? Every single beam should have been catalogued, photographed, and matched to the original blueprints of the building, so that they could see EXACTLY where the collapse started, and how. Why wasn't that done?
There is no way the entire buildings (WTC 1 and 2) could have collapsed - the core columns that initially (allegedly) gave way would have caused the core columns above to (obviously) shift to the side of the core columns below them - following the path of least resistance. There is no way that all of the core columns above the collapse point could have hit all of the core columns directly below the collapse point, and so on as the top part fell into the lower part - and the collapse would have been arrested due to the potential energy of the upper part being turned into kinetic energy (in this case during destruction of both upper and lower parts of the building) and thus THE COLLAPSE WOULD HAVE BEEN ARRESTED.
Add to this the fact that we clearly saw huge quantities of the buildings falling OUTSIDE the footprint, and thus those parts were incapable of hitting any parts of the building below! Add to this fact the huge clouds of dust that were being CONTINUOUSLY EJECTED from the falling pieces of the building - all clearly shown in all the videos of the collapses. Where did that energy come from? How can a falling piece of concrete BILLOW dust out of itself? Where is the energy coming from to turn it into dust?
Well, it's complicated. For instance, Obama has been trying to close down Guantanamo (I have to give him credit for that), which means he has to find a place for people in the facility who probably need to be segregated from society, yet don't necessarily need to be in a military facility that's outside the country. To date, many prisoners have been moved to other host countries. I don't know what they do with them.
The reason he's had to send them to other countries is because our congressional reps refuse to let the prisoners be moved to prisons in the country. Not sure what they are worried about.
Define terrorism. Was the bombing of Berlin and Dresden terrorism? No.
Was the funding of the Viet Cong by the Russians and Chinese terrorism? If no then neither was the US funding of the Sandinistas.
Terrorism is a tactic. The deliberate targeting of civilians to make a political rather military point. That is what separates terrorism from standard run-of-the-mill war.
Define your terms please.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
...but in the grand scale of things, 9/11 was piddling.
They attacked and devastated one of our main financial hubs. They attacked and severely damaged our military headquarters. If not for the bravery of the passengers of flight 93, they would have been successful in an attack on our seat of government itself. Those are acts of war and you call it piddling. Fuck you.
I do not fund terrorist
I abhor terrorism - I despise those who fund terrorists
Yeah, but you buy gasoline, which could be made from Saudi crude. So that funds terrorism. And you pay taxes in the US, and the US funds terrorism when it suits the purpose. Yeah, they don't call it terrorism, but it is. So that funds terrorism.
It's not you personally, it's just that one cannot live in the modern world with a clean conscience. Look hard enough and you find some terrible thing you are indirectly supporting.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
Obamacare is decidedly NOT socialist. It was based on the healthcare reform Mit Romney instituted in his state as governor, with enhancements suggested by the Heartland Foundation - one of the most far-right uber-capitalist "thinktanks" (actually lobyists) in the United States. The guys who lead the climate-denial brigade wrote that damn healthcare law.
Its as far removed from socialist as you can get - it's far right ultra-capitalist healthcare with some regulatory reform thrown in.
The amazing thing has been watching republicans fight tooth and nail against a law THEY WROTE - and demanded for years. They apparently stopped loving it the moment a democrat (and a black one at that) actually passed it.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Didn't take very long for this thread to be overrun with the usual gibbering idiots...('truthers" etc.)
The government, the president is siding with Saudi Arabia over the 9/11 families.
Is anybody really shocked by this? Obama has made it a habit of failing to live up to his campaign promise to "run the most transparent administration in American history."
It's not about Obama though. Or, it is bigger than Obama. The Bush Administration did the same thing. Absent some outside pressure, the next administration would likely do it as well. But you're right, it's not shocking or it should not be.
Most people wouldn't think that a national government would prioritize ongoing economic, strategic and military goals and partnerships over telling the truth about the worst terrorist attack in the country's history. But that's actually exactly what they would do. These people send others off to die in war on a regular basis. They take actions that ensure the deaths of thousands of people. They know that, in the abstract, human life is cheap. They won't let something like knowing who funded the 9/11 attacks stand in the way of geo-strategic concerns; especially if that funding came from a valuable partner. If they are paying attention, this is when the people of the US can find out just how much their government cares about them.
"What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
In a democracy, getting decent administration requires people to be political - to actually devote time and energy into political research, rather than just treat elections like a wrestling match. They don't, and thus what gets elected is con artists, actors and the occasional genuinely insane maniac.
I'm not sure the problem is solvable this side of letting AI handle governing.
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
Since about 9/13/01.
The rumors of Saudi government involvement started almost immediately, and credible reports started in about 2 days. That anyone would reject this is unfortunate, but some people don't pry too much.
The only open question for me is at what level of Saudi government does this originate? Mid-level I can understand, many civil servants will sympathize with Jihad, and understood. If it is originated or supported at the highest levels, we should not be surprised. No, we should not.
And we should make efforts to make oil obsolete. This will force the issue, and the sooner the better, as we are seeing our resolve and willingness to fight for freedom diminished daily.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Got any evidence to prove government involvement?
Just another day in Paradise
This is off-topic, but hear me out.
I have to applaud the Saudi Arabian government for "seeing the writing on the wall" about the soon-coming phase-out of dinosaur-burning (fossil fuels) as the major source of energy for the world. They are investing very heavily in renewable energy technologies, as well as some other areas in an attempt to use their sovereign wealth to shift their economy – before the shit really hits the fan – to other potential GDP-producing sectors.
Yeah, they have sold a big portion of the oil – the burning of which has been clearly destructive to our own planet – but other countries wanted to buy this cheap source of concentrated, transportable energy. Recall that "Saudi Aramco" = "Saudi Arabian–American (oil) Company". The US has long since sold off its stake, but that is the genesis of the country.
All other issues (e.g., human rights) aside, Saudi Arabia's leaders are way ahead of the US and many other governments on planning for a post-carbon-energy world. That is long-term planning, and does deserve some respect.
The Saudi Royals are preparing a lot more than their economy. America and China are obviously #1 and #2 in military spending, but let's name #3, and it's NOT Russia. It is none other than the Saudis.
Let's be more frank on their economy too. Efforts to make improvements are good and all, but they are still in a very bad place. The official employment(not unemployment) rate is 12%. Basically, the entire country just floats on top of oil revenues using it to employ foreign workers to extract the oil, hand out money to everyone born in Saudi Arabia, and as an aside buy more military hardware than Russia.
If oil prices cease to sustain themselves Saudi Arabia ends up sitting near 90% unemployment of a religiously indoctrinated population that controls the third most expensive military on the planet,
Forgive me if I'm not enthusiastic towards the Saudi Royal's economic vision just yet.
The US funded Osama Bin Laden. Does that count?
Rinse^w, money launder, repeat.
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
Or, Obama is siding with America and trying to not screw the entire country over by triggering the sale of $750million in US assets
I'd say "Sell them, and you'll never buy another piece of American military equipment again, and there won't be a single US soldier within your borders within six months."
As oil's importance fades, I think the response to anything from Saudi Arabia should "Fuck you, fuck you very very much."
From a principled perspective I agree whole heartedly. They are probably the worst regime in the region as regards terrorism and religious extremism. Practically speaking though there is the list of countries sort by military spending:
1.USA $597.5 billion
2.China $145.8 billion
3.Saudi Arabia $81.8 billion
4.UK $56.2 billion
5.Russia $51.6
When the oil runs out, and Saudi Arabia can no longer just hand out oil money to everybody living there for simply being alive things are gonna get ugly. The're 85% standing unemployment rate is gonna translate into 85% of hungry people with the best military equipment money can buy...
They just paid the right people to keep it quiet.
Money talks.
Let the regime posture and threaten all it wants. They're in enough trouble already with gas prices in the toilet, a state budget about to collapse, and a discontent/unemployed population that is chomping at the bit for reform of the ruling classes....
1.USA $597.5 billion
2.China $145.8 billion
3.Saudi Arabia $81.8 billion
4.UK $56.2 billion
5.Russia $51.6
That's global military spending. Your right about how shaky the future for the regime looks but they are preparing for the future by outspending Russia and the UK on military hardware. Powder keg hardly touches it.
You have your Democrat talking points wrong.
1: Romneycare was indeed in some ways similar to Obamacare, which was only one reason why so many conservatives did not trust Mitt Romney and also expected him to fail to effectively attack Obama, but it was NOT "with enhancements suggested by the Heartland Foundation". Both Obamcare and Romneycare contained the ultimate "crony capitalist"/fascist concept of government forcing citizens to buy a particular product (insurance in this case) from corporations tied to politicians (insurance lobbyists supported both and funneled money to the politicians involved) but this had nothing to do with the Heartland Foundation. There was a single paper published by the Heritage Foundation (a different think tank) which was then disavowed by conservatives for how misguided it was. The paper was never the official position of the particular think tank or of any conservative group.
2: The Heartland people, who you rightly associate with climate arguments due to their positions favoring various American energy policies, did NOT have anything to do with the creation of Obamacare and certainly did not write "that damn healthcare law", as you put it.
3: Obamacare is NOT as far from socialism as possible and CERTAINLY not "ultra-capitalist". It is fascist, occupying the turf between the two systems. Obamacare/Romneycare is a government/corporate lovefest which is Mussolini's mutant form of socialism (actual fascism) where government controls the market and allows the illusion of private ownership and freedom - as long as everybody who "owns" the stuff uses it the way government wants it used. The health insurance corporations are allowed to still be in business and make profits as long as they provide the policies the feds mandate, at prices the fed approve, with profit margins set by the feds, serving customers assigned by the feds, and pumping campaign finance kickbacks to the right politicians. NOTHING about any of that is "free market" economics, or traditionally American. The left is wrong to call this "capitalism" as they try to distance themselves, and the right is wrong to call it "socialist" as they try to build support to uproot it.
4: You claim the Republicans wrote the Obamacare law. This is a massive lie. No Republican was involved in writing the ACA. President Obama in 2009 declared "I won, you lost" and never held the "live, on C-SPAN" negotiations between all interested parties that he campaigned on. Instead, Then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) had locksmiths change the locks on the doors of several congressional meeting rooms because she was concerned some republican might have a key and might get in. Then, behind CLOSED AND LOCKED DOORS, Democrats from the House, Senate, and White House met with insurance company lobbyists and drug company lobbyists, and other unknown individuals to negotiate and write the ACA which was then rammed-through into law without a single Republican vote. No Republican has ever been able to get a list of the people who were in those closed-door meetings; it's quite possible that the Democrats either kept no such records, or destroyed the records, or moved the records to some private Democrat party archives. Nobody outside the leadership of the Democrat party will apparently every know what went into this monumental change in the US economy
Finally, drop the racist assertion. Any conservative would be repelled by Obamacare no matter the color of the skin of the evil person who launched it. No Democrat has any right to throw such slurs implicating racist tendencies or motives considering that Democrats voted to be led in the Unites States Senate by actual Klansman Robert Byrd up until only about a decade ago (Hillary and Bernie BOTH voted for the vile Klansman even though everyone in DC knew full well who he was).
U.S. government 101: Laws are passed by congress however they are implemented by the executive branch, whihc is organized into departments run by political appointments made by the president. Each law results in hundreds or sometimes even thousands of regulations issued by each department. Because he appoints and is the boss of each department head, such as the U.S. Attorney General the president can chose to enforce a particular law or regulation or ignore it. SO if congress passes a law saying that people in the U.S. illegally are to be deported the president if he doesn't want to do that can just say he doesn't have the resources to capture and deport anyone under 18 who came into the country illegally.
The president can use regulation to advance his agenda by issuing rules which laws don't call for. For example trying to make religious institutions which are against abortion pay for abortions through Obamacare. The law doesn't require it, and many of the moderates of his own party were promised it wouldn't happen, which is why they voted for it instead of against it.
Obama's party controlled congress for the first two years of his presidency. He got Obamacare passed without a single Republican vote and had to lie to the moderates of his own party to get them to vote for it. Off the record I expect the party leadership dug up some old skeletons to get some congressional party members to vote for it. It is so unpopular that many of those people lost their seats over it.
It's mostly a good thing that he is mostly incompetent. A real strong man leader could have jammed through hundreds of things that most liberals and socialists like and have fundamentally changed the country. As it was they barely got one bad law passed, which will likely be gutted by later legislation or court action, and which cause the careers of hundreds of people to go belly up.
In this case the president can control how transparent his departments are. These departments include the FBI, CIA and NAS. So if the FBI is lying the president can order them to knock it of. If they don't he can fire the people in charge. He can certainly control how transparent his own White House staff is, and the staffs of the major military branches.
How powerful is the president? He can have the IRS audit you. He can have the Secret Service investigate you. He can have the EPA investigate your business's environmental practices. He can allocate funds, through departmental grants to your competitors. He can have EPA issue regulations that penalize you as compared to your competitors, or which are just overhead for big corporations but which would bury your mom and pop operations. He can have the military, the FBI or federal agents raid your house, confiscate all your stuff and throw you in a holding cell somewhere. How legal that would be might take years of court time and a couple of million dollars on your part to determine, but meanwhile you'd be in the cell. If you don't have any rich friends to fight for you you might never be heard from again.
So how powerful is the president? Pretty darn powerful.
But he still can't make the trains run on time.
>Plenty of freedom fighters around the world and throughout history refrain from inciting terror among civilians.
There's probably nobody in the world who strikes more terror into the hearts of civilians than the US Military. There's a reason Noam Chomsky keeps pointing out that the unwritten part of the FBI's definition of "terrorism" must be "unless it's us doing it".
The Iraqi Kurds cheering at the site of American forces and jets since the first Gulf war being a notable exception.
The Iraq civilian death toll is well over a hundred thousand.
Saddam executed a deliberate genocide of Iraqi Kurds long before that, with an estimated 150-350 thousand killed. And those were not collateral casualties due to the use of human shields or suicide bombings by the Kurdish resistance. Those were civilians loaded unto buses to be shot in the desert and burried by bulldozer.
Saddam committed a second genocide at the end of the first Gulf War as Bush listened to chaps like yourself and stopped short of marching in Iraq. American forces were ordered to stand down and watch as Saddam's gunships led the charge that would kill another estimated 100+ thousand civilians.
Apologies, I know that context messes with your agenda.
Nobody even knows exactly how many people have been killed by drones in Pakistan but we do know that a lot of them were civilians - often civilians who just happened to park next to a target that may or may not be a legitimate target (we can't really tell if they are because we don't get to know who they are).
I'll tell you what people do know about the number of people killed in Pakistan. The TTP(Pakistani Taliban) kill 100 plus Pakistanis for every life lost in drone strikes. The number of Al Qaida and Taliban leaders killed by drone strikes is also too long to include here, but notably has more than once knocked off the head leader of the Pakistani Taliban in Baitullah Mehsud(2009) and Hakimullah Mehsud(2013). Baitullah also being a top suspect for the assassination of Benazir Bhutto if we are to keep track of dead 'good' and 'bad' guys.
How many civilians got killed in Libya?
Gaddafi had declared his intention to end the Arab spring uprisings in Libya by "hunting the cockroaches down house by house" and his military advance was within a single city of seizing the control required to implement his promised genocide. Finally at the urging of the Arab League the world(not the US) agreed to act and aborted Gaddafi's genocide of his people.
Or you know, tell it your way and blame the dead Libyan's on the fact things weren't all roses after the genocide was blocked.
Your abject ignorance of all context to the tragedies you reference is growing tiresome.
I'm glad this is finally getting attention it deserves. I'm so deeply sick and tired of politicians spewing "Saudi Arabia are allies" crap and getting away unscathed. Even if it just shuts them up or makes them think twice it is progress.
The government, the president is siding with Saudi Arabia over the 9/11 families.
Is anybody really shocked by this? Obama has made it a habit of failing to live up to his campaign promise to "run the most transparent administration in American history."
I remember when he first ran and got elected. I thought, "I don't agree with a lot of his policy ideas, but if he lives up to his word on just that one point by making things transparent, I would be impressed and he will have proved that he's not a politician's politician." I don't think that promise even made it to the end of his inauguration speech. Oh well.
The more interesting aspect of this is not so much Obama siding with KSA, but rather, who he sides with and when. Like when it is Iran vs Saudi Arabia, he sides with Iran. But when it is American citizens vs Saudi Arabia, he sides with Saudi Arabia. If only the 9/11 families could get Iran to toss their compensation from Saudi Arabia into the Iran nuke deal, they might have gotten support from this president.
Forget for a second where you fall on this one way or the other. I'm so tired of lawyers trying to convince people that they should sue because they were wronged. It's such total bullshit because after expenses that they rack up and then contingency fees and then taxes the only ones that really profit in lawsuits are lawyers and the government. These fuckers get everyone to turn on each other and then laugh all the way to the bank. Who's the real terrorist?
And I lived in the People's Republic of Massachusetts when this happened and I said 'Oh this RINO is now going to bankrupt private insurance and destroy the health system' Idiots, all of you.
...it seems like a miracle that he managed to get a socialist policy like Obamacare through...
In the firs two years of his administration (2009 and 2010) his party controlled both houses of congress (House of Representatives and Senate). He got it through without any votes from Republicans. Single payer is what the democratic base wanted, what they got was to be forcibly pushed into the arms of the insurance companies.
Can someone explain exactly how culpable the president is? As someone who doesn't live in the US I alternately hear that he is totally responsible for all the bad stuff and yet the office has no real power and it's all down to the two houses (which I note are currently controlled by the Republicans, who seem to oppose Obama on pretty much everything).
With that in mind, it seems like a miracle that he managed to get a socialist policy like Obamacare through, even if it was watered down. How much power and responsibility for the actions of the US does he really have?
That is an interesting question. I don't think there is any doubt the President is the most powerful political person in the government, but might not be saying all that much. The President is the head of the Executive branch of the government. They doesn't write laws or decide what they mean but they enforce them. So all the stuff the three letter agencies are doing pretty much goes back to him, but deniable plausible deniability has been a thing since at least Nixon. He probably doesn't know what they are doing, but certainly isn't trying to stop them in doing it even though it's mostly public knowledge. He could probably give orders and start cleaning house, firing anybody who disobeyed, but they'd probably just made sure he was even more in the dark and once the new President, they'd still be there and the new guy would be in the dark. His main job is being the head of the country and representing the USA to the rest of the world and their governments. The State department makes treaties, which have the power of law, but those still have to be confirmed by the legislative branch. His other big job is commander of the armed forces, however pretty much needs congress's approval. However, in the case of war and many other things, congress has written the laws so that the President can use various powers and do other things without congress's approval, at least for a limited time. They often gripe when the president uses those powers, but you see very little effort to try and take them back. The President also has the bully pulpit which is pretty powerful, as anybody who could get on TV, give a speech about whatever they wanted, and do so pretty much any time they want. As the President was voted into office supposedly by the majority of voting people in the US, there is some mandate in that. Also, usually, the President is the head of his political party. Not sure what that means in real terms, but generally, their party will stand behind him if told to, however, there's nothing binding in that.
This is why Obama got elected - folks wanted "hope and change" and now, eight years later, have less freedom and are significantly poorer, unless you were at .1%er to start with.
Odd how Obama-care has done the exact OPPOSITE of bankrupting private insurance or destroying the health system. Having millions more people actually able to GET healthcare is the opposite of destruction and as for the insurance companies - they've been raking it in and scoring record profits under this newly regulated regime.
If there is a reason to be critical of obamacare it's the one the liberals have: it was a giant hand-out to the insurance companies and you could achieve a lot more a lot cheaper if you just did medicaid for all.
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
You're setting a pretty high bar if you try to separate war from politics as war is often if not always a form of politics.
Any military action against purely civilian targets is a form of terrorism as civilians are not the military and the main point of targeting them is political. The military value of bombing Dresden was pretty low, while the political value was very high. The same can't be said about bombing Berlin as at least there was a high military value.
Same can be said about nuking the most western orientated towns of Japan, especially when the target is a cathedral, a cathedral.full of refugees. The nuking could have started with military targets, of which there were many in Japan. But the Americans wanted to make a political statement to the Russians.
But yes, I was originally thinking of the various terrorist groups that America has trained and financed to push American politics in Central and South America by targeting civilians. There are other groups such as the Taliban and in particular Obama Bin Laden who America financed and trained to push American politics in the Middle East.
I also find it quite distressing to see a Chinese person, a nationality that has been extensively mistreated by Americans, including acts that if done to white men that would be called terrorist act, putting out blanket statements against "towel heads" which includes quite a large population, Muslims, Hindi, Sikh and I'm sure more. Some of my friends are Sikh and wear turbans and some of my family are brown people, including Hindi who also wear turbans and Native Americans who have a long history of having terrorist acts committed against them with the goal of stealing their land.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Since 1971, OPEC is bullied/bribed to sell Crude Oil exclusively in US dollars resulting in friction between Islam and the West; http://www.zerohedge.com/print...
Casteism
This is why Obama got elected - folks wanted "hope and change" and now, eight years later, have less freedom and are significantly poorer, unless you were at .1%er to start with.
I'm sure you are right, but I think the problem - and the solution - has less to do with Obama than with an establishment, that resists any change from the status quo, unless it means more money in their pockets.
Defining terms needs to be done.
There is a difference between state and non-state actions.
There is a difference non-state actors blowing up a bus, shooting up a magazine, or bombing a foot race and a state at war with another state.
The difference isn't the death or the destruction of even the individual act.
Example a soldier blowing himself up to kill other soldiers is not terrorism.
The bomb in the israeli bus the other day will do nothing militarily. The bombing of Dresden and Hiroshima was part of state actors at war with each other. There was a purpose for them. The bombing of Dresden was a specific target; chosen carefully; requiring 1000s of people to coordinate an attack. There were many competing targets and military people chose this one for a specific military reason. Degrade Nazi Germany's ability to conduct war.
We could declare "ALL WAR EQUAL TERRORISM" and we would accomplish nothing except degrade our ability to communicate
The KKK lynching people was terrorism. Funding Osama bin Laden when he was fighting the Russians in Afghanistan was not terrorism. Did OBL use acquired skills and reputation to lead a movement against the US? Yes. But you've heard the saying "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." When the enemy is no longer (USSR pulling out) we became enemies again. Remember OBL and others thought that the USSR was the tough-guy-on-the-block and the US to be a bunch of weak, effeminate paper tiger.
If you're scared of your govt then you need to further restrict its powers
Vote 3rd Party in 2016 and beyond
Hughnon reflected that 'entirely transparent' meant either that you could see right through them or that you couldn't see them at all.” Terry Pratchett, The Truth.
So where are all the dead companies? Surely that made the evening news.
As ex-military, I can tell you this is a terrible idea for one not often cited reason: It's better to blow up their back yard than yours, If we pull back, the problems don't go away, they come here to finish their business. That's why armchair strategists need to stick with Risk.
I love it when foreigners try to insult people with a language they aren't used to!
They funded him in a MILITARY war against Russia in Afghanistan. The US did not fund Bin Laden in murdering civilians. Do you understand the difference?
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
So? Exxon Mobil had repeatedly broken worldwide profit records and we still find them. You ignore the general tendency for conservatives to equate more money with more power. No amount of money that exists is enough even if they managed to get it all.
Um, no. Remember, most of the folks coming onto Obamacare are quite sick. Look at the most recent news.
secretary at MalwareBytes took a look at his source code and said it looked all good - by Coren22
My code's verified by Mr. S. Burn of Malwarebytes
"I've seen the code and yes it is safe." FROM http://forum.hosts-file.net/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4290
NOT a secretary!
I don't give it away to be stolen or misused like GOOGLE CHROME http://it.slashdot.org/story/15/10/20/1254225/efast-malware-hijacks-browser-with-chrome-clone
won't demonstrate security of his product be exposing the source - by Coren22 (1625475)
57 antiviruses show different https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/e01211ca36aa02e923f20adee0a3c4f5d5187dc65bdf1c997b3da3c2b0745425/analysis/1433430542/
MalwareBytes' employee hosts & recommends it -> http://hosts-file.net/?s=Download
* EAT YOUR WORDS Coren22
APK
P.S.=> See subject - & remember a lesson Google had w/ Chrome above (even gov't.'s not opening all their code & same reason https://slashdot.org/submission/5780853/dhs-walks-back-comments-on-feds-open-source-policy )
9/11 - Hard Facts, Hard Truth
So... it gave healthcare to people who especially *needed* it ? People who, any non psychopath, would say has to be first in line in any healthcare system or it has ALREADY failed ? How is that a *bad* thing ? It may not be great for insurance company profits, but nobody (least of all the government) is obligated to protect those. It is certainly a sufficiently profitable industry that they can afford a few million losses without actually getting measurably poorer anyway.
But any hardships they may suffer is just more reason why universal healthcare would be even better than Romneycare (let's give credit where it's due - he was the first to implement Heartland's rightwing-capitalist-as-they-can-ever-be plan)
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
Guess what? Now that Obamacare has been revealed as the failure it is you guys keep saying "Romneycare" Romney might as well be a Democrat -- heck he moved from Massachusetts to California. That man is an awful human being and a social justice warrior to the core. May he consume faeces and expire. Now, guess what? If you destroy the health system the way you leftists are, there won't be one. But that's your goal, because universal human misery is your goal.
That's true - just like at Mrs. Clinton. Just put 'Establishment' under her picture. Or Mitt Romney. Or Joe Biden. It's very, very, very disheartening to see my country die.
Check my post history - I was pointing this out 8 years ago - as was most other people. The insanity of hating the man for doing what republicans had wanted to do all along will never look any less crazy.
Oh - and where did Romney get the idea from ? That's right, the fucking Heartland Institute - literally the most conservativ organisation in all of America !
Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
It took you that long? I gave up on Obama when he voted in favor of telecom immunity. That was in 2008 before he was even elected.