The "28 pages" thread

[Brainster]

Great post, Oystein.

Just to add one final thought, as noted Philip Zelikow has stated that the Senate Intelligence Committee report was preliminary in nature and presented a one-sided (Grand Jury type) case against Saudi Arabia. The 9-11 Commission apparently included staffers involved in drafting that report who subsequently determined that much of the information in the SIC report did not establish a convincing enough culpability link on the part of the Saudis to justify its inclusion in the final report.

So suppose it's all an overblown exercise. Remember, despite all the pissing and moaning of the Truthers that the 9-11 Commission did not have enough time, in fact, their report came out about 3 years after the attacks, while the SIC report was issued barely a year after the fact. Suppose the claims of Saudi involvement are based on preliminary information and were later proven unfounded. And so, as Zelikow noted, any release of the 28 pages would require the release of hundreds if not thousands of pages of interviews that disprove many of the allegations of Saudi involvement.

The media tend to ignore these distinctions. Remember, the whole flap about the 8/6/2001 PDB? The media summarized that as "Bush Knew", which is a ridiculous simplification.

In general I am in favor of greater transparency from the government. But I can see why it might not be in the interest of finding the "truth" to release those pages.

 

[Sabrina]

This will be a moot point in ten years or so anyway. The documents will be very likely up for declassification then and will probably not include anything particularly damning against the Saudis. It certainly won't include a smoking gun type of evidence leading to us being able to point a finger at someone.

Having worked in and around the US government and intelligence community for most of my adult life, I can absolutely agree with the statement that we overclassify at times. Not having perused the documentation that Edward Snowden released directly (thanks to a DoD directive prohibiting me from doing so in order to limit the amount of spillage as much as possible), I'll have to take your word for it that a lot of it was memos relating to the office copier or what have you. However, a lot more of it was information that definitely needed to be classified and was, rightfully so.

It's a difficult line to walk; trying to balance the need for sharing information and the need for protecting national security. One can't help falling on one or the other side of the fence more often than one straddles it. The regulations regarding classification are often nebulous and difficult to interpret. It's all well and good to call for more transparency when you don't directly work with the government, but I defy anyone to actually work in the environment I typically do and not recognize that the vast majority of classifications are valid and correct. Because until you do, you just don't know exactly how it works.

I will maintain, however, that the office of the President does not have the classification authority to declassify these documents. Then President Bush's administration may have directed or negotiated with whomever produced the report to classify the pages, but they did not directly classify them, therefore, regardless of anything else, the classification authority STILL does not rest with the office of the President and will never rest with it, no matter how much legislation is introduced in Congress. That being said, if Congress manages to pass something that directs that the pages be declassified, so be it. But I would ask that people cease saying the President can declassify the documents, because until someone can produce evidence that the office of the President actually authored something in this document, the classification authority will remain with whatever agency or committee produced the document, directive or negotiation with the Presidential administration nonwithstanding. That's just how it works, all right? I deal with this crap every day, so unless you do the same, please don't correct me on this.

I've said my piece on this, so I'll leave the topic alone hereafter.

 

[JSanderO]

It hardly matters what the flakey number supporting the "truth movement". What matters is that one can extract an anti government... message which in its most benign form is incompetence and its worst planned murder of its own citizens. THAT is the truth the truth movement coalesces around.

One needs also to look at the associations of the "personalities" and how their "star" power is leveraged. If you take some like Cynthia McKiney or Cindy Sheehan... both well meaning pacifists are completely clueless about the technical issues and will find common cause with anyone who opposes government interventionist policy. Both of these women should stick to the war / peace policy issues / actions and tread carefully in technical matters... like building collapses, or building demolitions and so forth.

If you don't know what your talking about... and you can't evaluate technical arguments... stay out of the discussion.

 

[JonGold]

The 9-11 Commission apparently included staffers involved in drafting that report who subsequently determined that much of the information in the SIC report did not establish a convincing enough culpability link on the part of the Saudis to justify its inclusion in the final report.

Dieter Snell didn't want it in the report, and Zelikow agreed with him (one of the few who don't want them released. Even Thomas Kean said he wanted them released). Mike Jacobson and Raj De apparently didn't agree with them. Apparently Mike and Raj said that the amount of proof they wanted would "exonerate the guilty."

Oddly enough, Dieter Snell was one of the witnesses that helped to make the argument that Iran was responsible for 9/11 (I'm sure he had SO MUCH MORE evidence for that than Saudi Arabia), resulting in Judge George Daniels (the same judge presiding over the case between Saudi Arabia and the 9/11 Families) ruling that Iran was responsible for 9/11.

They said they might call Mike Jacobson and Dana Lesemann to testify at the trial. Mike came over from the Joint Inquiry as did Dana. During the 9/11 Commission, Zelikow blocked Dana's access to the 28 redacted pages, and so she went through a back channel to gain access to them. Zelikow fired her for it. I would like to see her on the stand.

 

[JSanderO]

This will be a moot point in ten years or so anyway. The documents will be very likely up for declassification then and will probably not include anything particularly damning against the Saudis. It certainly won't include a smoking gun type of evidence leading to us being able to point a finger at someone.

Having worked in and around the US government and intelligence community for most of my adult life, I can absolutely agree with the statement that we overclassify at times. Not having perused the documentation that Edward Snowden released directly (thanks to a DoD directive prohibiting me from doing so in order to limit the amount of spillage as much as possible), I'll have to take your word for it that a lot of it was memos relating to the office copier or what have you. However, a lot more of it was information that definitely needed to be classified and was, rightfully so.

It's a difficult line to walk; trying to balance the need for sharing information and the need for protecting national security. One can't help falling on one or the other side of the fence more often than one straddles it. The regulations regarding classification are often nebulous and difficult to interpret. It's all well and good to call for more transparency when you don't directly work with the government, but I defy anyone to actually work in the environment I typically do and not recognize that the vast majority of classifications are valid and correct. Because until you do, you just don't know exactly how it works.

I will maintain, however, that the office of the President does not have the classification authority to declassify these documents. Then President Bush's administration may have directed or negotiated with whomever produced the report to classify the pages, but they did not directly classify them, therefore, regardless of anything else, the classification authority STILL does not rest with the office of the President and will never rest with it, no matter how much legislation is introduced in Congress. That being said, if Congress manages to pass something that directs that the pages be declassified, so be it. But I would ask that people cease saying the President can declassify the documents, because until someone can produce evidence that the office of the President actually authored something in this document, the classification authority will remain with whatever agency or committee produced the document, directive or negotiation with the Presidential administration nonwithstanding. That's just how it works, all right? I deal with this crap every day, so unless you do the same, please don't correct me on this.

I've said my piece on this, so I'll leave the topic alone hereafter.

I have not worked in the environment you claim to have worked in. But I can tell you that the national security state is INVESTED in there being a real threat to the security of the USA, its citizens, infrastructure and economy. It is my belief that is largely exaggerated and this misconception / mis-perception of threat is what drives the national security state and things like secrecy and classification of information. Information and knowledge is power and so "keeping" it assures that only a few have this power and control.

The DOD national security state is not interested nor will they "invest" in peace... because... most of "them" would be out of a job.

I can't for the life of me find a single justification for a nuclear missile submarine... even an aircraft carrier battle group. But no one (few) will question the wisdom of these security measures.

If security is ... continuance of our way of life... access to and use of fossil fuel type energy... then national security is about the USA securing these resources around the world for domestic use. There are better ways to get this... like just pay for it!

No democracy needs secrecy such as this one maintains... period.

 

[jimd3100]

I think it we can reasonably expect the Kingdom to cooperate on the matter, apprehend the guilty, and make sure they are handed a fitting verdict and punishment. (I have a hunch that some of this has been done clandestinely already; and perhaps compensation to victims has in part beemn funded out of secret deals taking care of this problem)

A small sample of why your fantasy is nonsense......

U.S. Government’s hope of eventually obtaining Saudi cooperation was unrealistic because Saudi assistance to the U.S. Government on this matter is contrary to Saudi national interests -- page 142/858

The Treasury Department General Counsel testified at the July 23, 2002 hearing about the lack of Saudi cooperation

A number of U. S. Government officials complained to the Joint Inquiry about a lack of Saudi cooperation in terrorism investigations both before and after the September 11 attacks --- page 143/858
http://fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf

The unclassified sections of the report quote a host of U.S. officials as saying the Saudis were unhelpful at best in the years before the attacks, and that they did little to help investigate them for at least 18 months afterward.
http://articles.latimes.com/2003/jul/29/nation/na-saudi29

And the highest authority that can declassify something is not the President, but rather the DNI.

What nonsense-from your own link......

Sec. 1.3. Classification Authority. (a) The authority to classify information originally may be exercised only by:

(1) the President and the Vice President;

(2) agency heads and officials designated by the President; and

(3) United States Government officials delegated this authority pursuant to paragraph (c) of this section.

(b) Officials authorized to classify information at a specified level are also authorized to classify information at a lower level.

(c) Delegation of original classification authority.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information

Sec. 3.1. Authority for Declassification. (a) Information shall be declassified as soon as it no longer meets the standards for classification under this order.

(b) Information shall be declassified or downgraded by:

(1) the official who authorized the original classification, if that official is still serving in the same position and has original classification authority;

(2) the originator's current successor in function, if that individual has original classification authority;
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information

(e) If the Director of the Information Security Oversight Office determines that information is classified in violation of this order, the Director may require the information to be declassified by the agency that originated the classification. Any such decision by the Director may be appealed to the President through the National Security Advisor. The information shall remain classified pending a prompt decision on the appeal.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information

BTW where are these rules coming from? The President. Who according to you...

The President does not usually classify documents, therefore he has little or no declassification authority.

So the notion that the declassification authority rests with the President is rather absurd.

What nonsense.

I HIGHLY doubt that President Bush actually classified the document in question.

So do you have a conspiracy theory that Graham and Shelby classified their own report and then blamed Bush? What nonsense......

Summers and Swans' book, where on page 416 they write..."Inquiries established that, while withholdings were technically the responsibility of the CIA, the Agency would not have obstructed release of most of the twenty-eight pages. The order that they must remain secret had come from President Bush himself."

On page 417 they write.."The material was withheld from the public on the orders of President Bush."
http://www.amazon.com/Eleventh-Day-.../ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=&qid=

Pulitzer Prize winner Lawrence Wright...

In 2002, the Administration of George W. Bush excised those pages from the report of the Joint Congressional Inquiry into the 9/11 attacks. President Bush said then that publication of that section of the report would damage American intelligence operations, revealing “sources and methods that would make it harder for us to win the war on terror.”
http://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/twenty-eight-pages

It would also make it harder to invade Iraq.

Influential Senate Republicans are questioning the administration's decision to keep secret 28 pages of the congressional report on intelligence failures prior to Sept. 11, 2001.

"The American people are crying out to know more about who funds, aids and abets terrorist activities in the world," said Sen. Richard C. Shelby of Alabama, who served on the joint inquiry that wrote the report, released July 24.

"I've reviewed the 28 pages twice, and my judgment is that 90 to 95 percent could be released and not compromise our intelligence in any way," added Shelby, who stepped down from the Intelligence panel in January.
http://business.highbeam.com/437054...ors-report-full-release-repairs-declassifying

I suppose you'll want to say that "Bush Administration" means somebody other than Bush, but you'd be wrong.

Forty-six senators, spearheaded by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and including almost all the Democratic members, signed a letter to President Bush urging the release of the 28 pages.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...fication-28-pages-911-saudis-column/28926283/

If only they read this board they'd know from you that .....

And the highest authority that can declassify something is not the President, but rather the DNI.

Maybe you should tell the Saudi's as well......

Senior Saudi officials have denied any links between their government and the attacks and have asked that the section be declassified, but President Bush has refused.
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/02/us/report-on-9-11-suggests-a-role-by-saudi-spies.html

And tell Bush as well.....

Bush said he could not comply with a request by the Saudi foreign minister for a chance to clear the Arab kingdom's name because publication of the report could hurt U.S. intelligence operations.

"I absolutely have no qualms at all because there's an ongoing investigation into the 9-11 attacks, and we don't want to compromise that investigation," Mr. Bush said at an earlier news conference with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in the Rose Garden.

"If people are being investigated, it doesn't make sense for us to let them know who they are," Mr. Bush told reporters before meeting with al-Faisal.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bush-wont-reveal-saudi-9-11-info-30-07-2003/

Did you fall for the dog and pony show? Mean nasty Bush is screwing the Saudis by not letting them explain why they helped murder 3000 people on 9/11. Gosh, I hope they can somehow forgive him for keeping all that classified.

The foreign minister, Saud al-Faisal, said he was disappointed but understood.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bush-wont-reveal-saudi-9-11-info-30-07-2003/

Gosh, what a swell guy. Very understanding. I'm glad he didn't hold a grudge.

Do we know who the author of the original report was, by chance?

Yes, The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence so your theory that Graham and Shelby classified their own report and fooled everybody into thinking Bush did is not believable.

The Bush administration decided to classify the controversial twenty-eight pages which allegedly dealt with allegations about links between Saudi Arabia and the hijackers. The committee called for further investigations and the Saudi government again called for its release. Senator Graham later noted that "this material was developed by the joint inquiry" and was "not classified information that was made available to Congress by the executive."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint...r_the_Terrorist_Attacks_of_September_11,_2001

King George even decided he can pick who they could talk to during their congressional investigation. A U.S. Counter terrorism informant who coincidentally has financial Saudi contacts was housing some hijackers, but King George doesn't think he needs to be questioned by the Congress or Senate....

The Administration has to date objected to the Inquiry’s efforts to interview the informant in order to attempt to resolve those inconsistencies. The Administration also would not agree to allow the FBI to serve a Committee subpoena and deposition notice on the informant. Instead, written interrogatories from the Joint Inquiry were, at the suggestion of the FBI, provided to the informant. Through an attorney, the informant has declined to respond to those interrogatories and has indicated that, if subpoenaed, the informant would request a grant of immunity prior to testifying. -- page 51/858
http://fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf

As an American Taxpayer I'm not thrilled with rewarding that informant $100,000 when the Joint Inquiry report was finally released in July 2003......


The OIG was not able to interview the asset. The Joint Intelligence Committee Inquiry had attempted to interview the asset without success. The Committee then submitted interrogatories that the asset declined to answer, asserting his Fifth Amendment privilege. The asset indicated through his attorney that if subpoenaed by the Committee, he would not testify without a grant of immunity.

Initially the asset was not paid. In July 2003 the asset was given a $100,000 payment and closed as an asset. -- page 38/141
http://fas.org/irp/agency/doj/oig/fbi-911/chap5.pdf

I will maintain, however, that the office of the President does not have the classification authority to declassify these documents....... I deal with this crap every day, so unless you do the same, please don't correct me on this.

Yea, Whatever. The bottom line is Obama is going to pass the buck to the Mandatory Declassification Review process......

“Earlier this summer the White House requested that (Office of the Director of National Intelligence) review the 28 pages from the joint inquiry for declassification. ODNI is currently coordinating the required interagency review and it is ongoing.”

Complicating the declassification picture is the fact that the 28 pages are also being scrutinized under a process called Mandatory Declassification Review, which was initiated last year by a request from attorney Tom Julin on behalf of investigative reporters Dan Christensen, Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan.

The MDR process is managed by the Interagency Security Classification Appeals Panel (ISCAP). The NSC’s Price told us “(The ODNI) request is separate from the ISCAP request.”
http://28pages.org/tag/mandatory-declassification-review/

 

[Oystein]

A small sample of why your fantasy is nonsense......

U.S. Government’s hope of eventually obtaining Saudi cooperation was unrealistic because Saudi assistance to the U.S. Government on this matter is contrary to Saudi national interests -- page 142/858

The Treasury Department General Counsel testified at the July 23, 2002 hearing about the lack of Saudi cooperation

A number of U. S. Government officials complained to the Joint Inquiry about a lack of Saudi cooperation in terrorism investigations both before and after the September 11 attacks --- page 143/858
http://fas.org/irp/congress/2002_rpt/911rept.pdf

The unclassified sections of the report quote a host of U.S. officials as saying the Saudis were unhelpful at best in the years before the attacks, and that they did little to help investigate them for at least 18 months afterward.
http://articles.latimes.com/2003/jul/29/nation/na-saudi29
...

Thanks for the links and quotes, I'll adjust my opinion

 

[Mark F]

Even I have promoted the petition, by linking it, with encouragement to sign, on two of the largest "Truth" groups on Facebook - with almost zero reactions.

I think the debunkers here at ISF have more sympathy for the 9/11 families and victims than the leading "truthers" of today. It needs to be exposed that, for example, Richard Gage is firmly opposed to helping them.

I tried promoting the White House petition on another forum populated by so-called "truthers" and got absolutely no response at all - even from the one guy who has been banging on about the 28 pages for over a year!

The few people that remain active in what we identify as the 9/11 Truth Movement have motivations that are overwhelmingly political. I can't remember the last time I encountered one that showed an ounce of empathy towards any of the victims or their families. They seem far more concerned about real-estate than human casualties.

 

[JonGold]

I tried promoting the White House petition on another forum populated by so-called "truthers" and got absolutely no response at all - even from the one guy who has been banging on about the 28 pages for over a year!

The few people that remain active in what we identify as the 9/11 Truth Movement have motivations that are overwhelmingly political. I can't remember the last time I encountered one that showed an ounce of empathy towards any of the victims or their families. They seem far more concerned about real-estate than human casualties.

So called "leaders" of the 9/11 Truth Movement, and many others are discouraging people from caring about the 28 redacted pages because they say it is a "limited hangout." Back in 2006, it was a different story when we managed to get 17k signatures on a petition started by the September Eleventh Advocates (the "Jersey Girls").

I work with the families all of the time, and have supported them as much as I can for as long as I can remember. Lorie just gave me this quote yesterday...

“We, the family members, and the American public, have been waiting for too many years to find out what is contained in those 28 redacted JICI pages (the pages are not from the 9/11 Commission report. The JICI preceded the 9/11 Commission, looking into "intelligence failures". The Commission's work was supposed to pick up where the JICI left off). Please sign the petition, and share it!” - 9/11 Family Member and “Jersey Girl” Lorie Van Auken

 

[JSanderO]

So called "leaders" of the 9/11 Truth Movement, and many others are discouraging people from caring about the 28 redacted pages because they say it is a "limited hangout." Back in 2006, it was a different story when we managed to get 17k signatures on a petition started by the September Eleventh Advocates (the "Jersey Girls").

They truth leaders are making money at this and anything which will show their BS goes nowhere may end the cash flow. If they were interested in the truth and the whole truth this testimony would be part of it... even if it is not the holy grail.

Griffin, Chandler, Sarns and of course Gage is a fake... several others are well intentioned and self deluded such as Ted Walter or Graham MacQueen, Wayne Coste etc. because they hate the US government and have knee jerk reactions. They are no better than Scientology deceiving people with their snake oil... selling THEIR truth.

 

[DGM]

So called "leaders" of the 9/11 Truth Movement, and many others are discouraging people from caring about the 28 redacted pages because they say it is a "limited hangout."

For what it's worth. Have you ever considered distancing yourself from the "truth movement"? There is no truth in the vast a majority of that movement (If you want to call it that). It started with lies and for the most part has continued with no concern for the truth. A perfect point, there can be no respect for truth in any one advocating a controlled demolition.

If "truthers" want respect, they need to clean house.

Out of curiosity, how many real "truthers" do you think there are? By real "truthers" I mean, ones that have dismissed all the stupid "thermite", "CD" and "NWO" claims.

 

[JSanderO]

For what it's worth. Have you ever considered distancing yourself from the "truth movement"? There is no truth in the vast a majority of that movement (If you want to call it that). It started with lies and for the most part has continued with no concern for the truth. A perfect point, there can be no respect for truth in any one advocating a controlled demolition.

If "truthers" want respect, they need to clean house.

Out of curiosity, how many real "truthers" do you think there are? By real "truthers" I mean, ones that have dismissed all the stupid "thermite", "CD" and "NWO" claims.

and the inside job, false flag, deep state, mossad...zionists done it... and the crazy claims go on and on... mini nukes, DEWs... no planes....

 

[JonGold]

For what it's worth. Have you ever considered distancing yourself from the "truth movement"? There is no truth in the vast a majority of that movement (If you want to call it that). It started with lies and for the most part has continued with no concern for the truth. A perfect point, there can be no respect for truth in any one advocating a controlled demolition.

If "truthers" want respect, they need to clean house.

Out of curiosity, how many real "truthers" do you think there are? By real "truthers" I mean, ones that have dismissed all the stupid "thermite", "CD" and "NWO" claims.

I have tried to distance myself from what I call the "circus." By the way, the phrase is "9/11 Truther." I coined the phrase, and I defined it as such...

"In my mind, a "9/11 Truther" is someone who fights alongside the family members seeking truth and accountability for the 9/11 attacks. In my mind, a "9/11 Truther" is someone who fights for the sick and dying 9/11 First Responders who need health care desperately. In my mind, a "9/11 Truther" is someone who does not like how the day of 9/11 is being used to inflict pain and suffering around the world, and is trying to stop it. Stop it by using the truth. Something we have been denied by our Government regarding the 9/11 attacks."

As for "Controlled Demolition," I have always said that that argument shouldn't be front and center. I have always played "devil's advocate" with it. I remember a time in the "9/11 Truth Movement" when that argument was frowned upon. Go look at the 9/11 Omission Hearings in Sept. 04 or the 9/11 People's Commission in Sept. 04. Or the 9/11 Congressional Briefing in July 2005. There were no buildings presentations. Eventually, however, it became front and center. I did my best to make sure that didn't happen, but I failed.

As for how many people genuinely care about this issue, whether they are misinformed or not, there are millions. How many are active? That's another story entirely.

 

[DGM]

I have tried to distance myself from what I call the "circus." By the way, the phrase is "9/11 Truther." I coined the phrase, and I defined it as such...

I knew that. It's been awhile though.

"In my mind, a "9/11 Truther" is someone who fights alongside the family members seeking truth and accountability for the 9/11 attacks. In my mind, a "9/11 Truther" is someone who fights for the sick and dying 9/11 First Responders who need health care desperately. In my mind, a "9/11 Truther" is someone who does not like how the day of 9/11 is being used to inflict pain and suffering around the world, and is trying to stop it. Stop it by using the truth. Something we have been denied by our Government regarding the 9/11 attacks."

The problem is, this is in your mind. The damadge to the name is well known and not repairable. For what it's worth, It was not debunkers that killed it.

As for "Controlled Demolition," I have always said that that argument shouldn't be front and center. I have always played "devil's advocate" with it. I remember a time in the "9/11 Truth Movement" when that argument was frowned upon. Go look at the 9/11 Omission Hearings in Sept. 04 or the 9/11 People's Commission in Sept. 04. Or the 9/11 Congressional Briefing in July 2005. There were no buildings presentations. Eventually, however, it became front and center. I did my best to make sure that didn't happen, but I failed.

They have to go with what they can sell. "9/11 truth" is a marketing scam. Maybe a more aggressive campaign by what you call "9/11 truthers" to expose this would help, but I doubt it.

As for how many people genuinely care about this issue, whether they are misinformed or not, there are millions. How many are active? That's another story entirely.

Funny thing is, the group that 9/11 truthers claim are against them are likely some of the largest group of people that care about 9/11. Personally, I lost a close friend. I care when people lie to advance some personal agenda at the expense of my friend.

 

[JonGold]

"9/11 Truther" was destroyed by the corporate news/media, by debunkers, and by those in the "circus" who gave plenty of ammunition to those fighting against us. Now the phrase is the equivalent of a baby killer or a dog torturer. That's why I refer to myself as an "advocate for 9/11 Justice." However, I have done and continue to do everything that was in my "definition." I'm sorry you lost your friend.

 

[DGM]

"9/11 Truther" was destroyed by the corporate news/media, by debunkers, and by those in the "circus" who gave plenty of ammunition to those fighting against us. Now the phrase is the equivalent of a baby killer or a dog torturer. That's why I refer to myself as an "advocate for 9/11 Justice." However, I have done and continue to do everything that was in my "definition." I'm sorry you lost your friend.

I understand. The problem is, I think you're looking the wrong place for the justice. Our own complacency was our down-fall on 9/11. Every one of us that "expected our freedoms" is at fault. The best part about the 9/11 commission report is it's pledge to find flaws in the system and not just look for a scapegoat. They succeeded in this.

I need to ask again. What are you hoping to find in the "28 pages", and how can it possibly help everyone move on?

 

[ozeco41]

I tried promoting the White House petition on another forum populated by so-called "truthers" and got absolutely no response at all - even from the one guy who has been banging on about the 28 pages for over a year!

The few people that remain active in what we identify as the 9/11 Truth Movement have motivations that are overwhelmingly political. I can't remember the last time I encountered one that showed an ounce of empathy towards any of the victims or their families. They seem far more concerned about real-estate than human casualties.

Mark I take a different slant on that small subset of alleged "truthers" on that "other forum".

My opinion i that most of them are either Trolls or Poes - a handful trolls, only one definite "Poe" given the recent compulsory retirement from activity of the most devious of the Poes.

I agree with your comment for the truth movement at large.

Those who have genuine honest motivations are IMO legitimate in their political goals. And operate with the disadvantages resulting from allies who still hold to technical false claims such as CD at WTC OR are pursuing personal ego and financial goals. R Gage the most prominent who fits both categories.

I suspect that the time for political activism to succeed is past. However I could well be wrong. Here's why:

The animosity/sensitivity based opposition to truth seeking criticism will decline as the events become more remote.

If the political issue truth seekers can remain united whilst dumping affiliation with CD and other false technical claimants their power could grow and - at the same time - the opposition become less by natural attrition of historical sensitivities.

It's not my main area of interest so I can easily say "time will tell'.

I'm still not seeing any focused specific reasons why I should support any of the political truth issues of concern. And being specifically focused will always be harder in politics than in the technical domain. "There was no CD" and "it was that plane" are simple binary yes no issue in the technical domain. Try being that tight with definitions/conclusions in politics???

 

[JonGold]

I understand. The problem is, I think you're looking the wrong place for the justice. Our own complacency was our down-fall on 9/11. Every one of us that "expected our freedoms" is at fault. The best part about the 9/11 commission report is it's pledge to find flaws in the system and not just look for a scapegoat. They succeeded in this.

I need to ask again. What are you hoping to find in the "28 pages", and how can it possibly help everyone move on?

It's been shown time and time again that the 9/11 Commission was corrupt and compromised. Fixing flaws in the system, without having the real truth to base their decisions on, is impossible in my opinion.

What am I "hoping" to find in the 28 redacted pages? Something truthful. There were good people on the JICI like Eleanor Hill.

Just yesterday, this was reported...

"The pages—an entire chapter of the joint inquiry report—were classified by the Bush White House. “After reading those pages, I will tell you that I can understand (why)…because the Bush admin was very close to the Saudis, if you remember. The king actually visited Crawford, Texas,” said Jones." - [28pages.org, 9/8/2015]

I suspect that people like Bandar are mentioned in those pages. Bandar's Memoranda For The Record (MFR) from the 9/11 Commission is classified. When questioned by John Lehman about Bandar's wife's supposed connection to money given to two of the hijackers, Bush apparently "dodged the questions." I know that he has called for the release of those pages in the past, but I suspect he did that knowing full well that Bush wouldn't release them.

 

[ozeco41]

"9/11 Truther" was destroyed by the corporate news/media, by debunkers, and by those in the "circus" who gave plenty of ammunition to those fighting against us....

Understood and agreed.

I've given up using the term "truther" - at least where it would carry unintended derogatory meanings - where necessary I use "genuine truther" to distinguish those I judge to be genuine seekers of truth from the collection of trolls and poes and others who on forums are only playing games. And the game players are not only on one "side".

The bête noire on the debunker side - and especially this forum - is the split of the camp between those who explain the real collapse mechanisms and those who remain loyal to a parody interpretation of the work of Prof Z Bazant. The parody vehemently promulgated by AE911 affiliated truther T Szamboti - with the funny situation that many debunkers have become loyal supporters of parts of the Szamboti explanations. The mental gymnastics get ...."interesting"

analogous I think to - on the"truther side" - legitimate political concerns being held back IMO by having to carry the burden of being associated with false technical issues.


And what I think of the false dichotomy polarisation into two camps is not suitable for work.

 

[Brainster]

The reason it's so important right now is because on 8/9 it was reported that Judge George Daniels, the judge presiding over the lawsuit between Saudi Arabia and the 9/11 Families, was going to take 60-90 days to decide on whether or not he's going to let the trial continue. If the families could introduce the 28 pages as evidence, it may influence him to let the trial continue. This is a judge that has a history of letting Saudis off the hook regarding 9/11. He just did it on 8/15. It has been reported on in the past that he has problems. He was the judge to rule that Iran was responsible for 9/11.

So, Jon, what's your thought on Iran? Were they responsible (partly)?