It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Florida congressman denied access to censored pages from Congress’ 9/11 report

page: 1
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 08:30 PM
link   
U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson has been denied access to 28 classified pages from the 2002 report of Congress’ Joint Inquiry into the 9/11 terrorist attacks. This is just another blatant example of how Obama has reneged on his campaign promises of government transparency. This report supposedly shows specific sources of financial support for the 9/11 hijackers.

Our government was quick to label Snowden as a traitor, yet our government is preventing the American public from knowing who financed these hijackers which caused over 3 thousand American citizens to lose their lives. A traitor is someone who betrays a country's cause or trust. This clearly defines our current government who are really betraying the American public.

Alan Grayson was instrumental in publicizing the pervasive domestic spying by the NSA. This congressman is doing what his constituents expect him to do, uphold the constitution and the rights of it's citizens. It's unbelievable to me that it's been 13 years and these pages are still kept classified.


House Resolution 428, sponsored by Rep. Walter B. Jones Jr., R-NC, asks President Obama to release the 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry’s report, saying they are “necessary for a full public understanding of the events and circumstances” surrounding the 9/11 attacks.

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., is one of 21 co-sponsors including Florida Reps. Alcee Hastings, D-Miramar, and Ted Yoho, R-Gainesville. Massie has challenged all members of Congress to read the report, which he said poses no threat to national security.


SOURCE




posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 08:35 PM
link   
I'm guessing if they released those redacted pages we'd see Saudi Arabia & Israel mentioned a couple of times.



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs




I'm guessing if they released those redacted pages we'd see Saudi Arabia & Israel mentioned a couple of times.


Saudi Arabia is supposedly clearly implemented in these papers. Whether Israel also financed 9/11 and considering our government gives them billions in foreign aid, I think the American people have every right to know if they were involved in murdering American citizens. Any murder trial would lay all the evidence on the table, yet our government, in my opinion, is illegally withholding evidence from the victim's families.

If they are withholding information because they don't want to divulge that our so called "friendly allies" were involved, than we have a government who is committing treason against it's own citizens.



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 09:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
I'm guessing if they released those redacted pages we'd see Saudi Arabia & Israel mentioned a couple of times.


Not Israel, but I'm 100% with you on Saudi royals.



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 09:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
I'm guessing if they released those redacted pages we'd see Saudi Arabia & Israel mentioned a couple of times.


There defiantly is a connection between those two and 9/11. All the hijackers were from SA and Israel sent people over here to document the event. These two nations can attack America whenever they want and we will do nothing about it thanks to them owning our politicians.
edit on 30-12-2014 by buster2010 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 09:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: NOTurTypical

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
I'm guessing if they released those redacted pages we'd see Saudi Arabia & Israel mentioned a couple of times.


Not Israel, but I'm 100% with you on Saudi royals.

Why not Israel? It wouldn't be the first time they attacked America.



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Wiki - described him as a democrat anti military complex.


"waging a one-man war against contractor fraud in Iraq" and as a "fierce critic of the war in Iraq" whose car displayed bumper stickers such as "Bush lied, people died".


So what would he be looking for from a FOI request?
They don't like to see people profit from cherry picking that stuff..
edit on 30-12-2014 by Cauliflower because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: WeRpeons

I bet you'd find a lot of american tax payers were financial contributors to the attrocities.....



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 09:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: NOTurTypical

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
I'm guessing if they released those redacted pages we'd see Saudi Arabia & Israel mentioned a couple of times.


Not Israel, but I'm 100% with you on Saudi royals.

Why not Israel? It wouldn't be the first time they attacked America.


One event, 40 years ago, by 1 pilot? I suppose it possible, many things are possible, but quite a few less possible things are probable things.



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 09:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: NOTurTypical

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: NOTurTypical

originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
I'm guessing if they released those redacted pages we'd see Saudi Arabia & Israel mentioned a couple of times.


Not Israel, but I'm 100% with you on Saudi royals.

Why not Israel? It wouldn't be the first time they attacked America.


One event, 40 years ago, by 1 pilot? I suppose it possible, many things are possible, but quite a few less possible things are probable things.

By one pilot? Don't know your history very well do you? First the were several planes involved not just one. Second Israel sent people out in boats to machine-gun life-rafts unless you believe that was done by one plane as well. Since then Israel has murdered numerous Americans not to mention the terrorist cells they have in America like the JDL.
edit on 30-12-2014 by buster2010 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: buster2010

Hey I granted you the fact that anything is possible didn't I? But what is possible is not always probable. I'm far more inclined to believe the Saudi royals were financiers than the Knesset. Unless you want to say it was some rogue agents, then the Knesset wouldn't be responsible.



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Here we go blaming Obama for everything again. Are you aware of the fact that this report was issued back in 2004? Bush had years to release it, yet he did not. And I can guarantee you that he would have done everything in his power to prevent this information from being released, as evidenced by the fact that he was the president that withheld the existence of the information in the first place. So Obama is doing absolutely nothing different than Bush where this report is concerned. It could actually be claimed that Bush's behavior was worse, again considering that apparently nobody was allowed to read these pages. At least under Obama you had a handful of congresspeople who were allowed to read it. So again, stop blaming Obama for everything. This is the republican mindset however. Whenever a republican in office does something it is fine, but let a democrat do it and it is suddenly the worst thing in the world. That is essentially what it boils down to, although some are too blind to realize this fact. Or they attempt to justify it in some asinine manner, which can easily be seen for what it is- transparent.



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 10:23 PM
link   
To me it is clear as the light of day. The Mossad discovered the plan by the hijackers. They did not reveal the information, but instead layered their own operation on top. Wiring the buildings with explosives, which is totally apparent as building 7 was without doubt a controlled demolition.

Thus the "dancing Israelis" who knew it was going to happen. I would not rule out involvement by elements of the CIA either as our government at all levels is infiltrated with dual U.S./Israeli citizens, that in itself should be illegal as we all know where their first allegiance lies.



posted on Dec, 30 2014 @ 10:30 PM
link   


This clearly defines our current government who are really betraying the American public


Yes, Bush was a traitor for covering this up as well as letting the Bin Laden family fly out of the country so they couldn't be thoroughly questioned. Obama's just following his lead.



posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 12:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: CB328



This clearly defines our current government who are really betraying the American public


Yes, Bush was a traitor for covering this up as well as letting the Bin Laden family fly out of the country so they couldn't be thoroughly questioned. Obama's just following his lead.

So you agree, Obama is a traitor. Thanks.



posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 05:16 AM
link   
a reply to: JiggyPotamus




Here we go blaming Obama for everything again.


I can agree with you that Obama is blamed for a lot of things. However, in this case he ran on the premise of government transparency. He's been in office for 6 years, yet hasn't once addressed re-opening the investigation into 9/11 when many Americans, Engineers, Pilots, and Architects still question the official story.

I don't give Bush or his administration any pass on their secrecy and criminality involving 9/11 and the Iraq war. Bush and Dick Chaney's secret testimony surrounding 9/11 was a slap to the face of all Americans. Here we had the worst attack on American soil since Pearl Harbor, and we had a president who allowed Saudia Arabian nationals to fly home before any investigation into their possible involvement was cleared.

My blood boiled after Nancy Pelosi declared impeachment investigation of George Bush was "off the table!" I'm neither a conservative nor a liberal, but I do call it as I see it. If American's let party affiliations affect their judgement on a president's poor decisions or character, it will only prevent Americans from getting to the truth and stomping out corruption within government.

After the secrecy surrounding the Bush Administration during their years in office, a majority of Americans voted for Obama because of his declaration of being a president who believed in government transparency. I unfortunately was one who voted for him based upon that declaration. He denounced the secrecy of the Bush administration, and declared he would increase oversight of the Patriot Act. Yet, he continued on the same course as his predecessor.


"As president, Barack Obama would revisit the PATRIOT Act to ensure that there is real and robust oversight of tools like National Security Letters, sneak-and-peek searches, and the use of the material witness provision."


So the "here we go again blaming Obama," doesn't apply here. If this president stood by his word, these papers would have been declassified during his first year in office.



posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 05:27 AM
link   
No Luck with Freedom of Information act ?



posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 06:22 AM
link   
so what's the rationale for the denial of request ? I thought that congressmen are allowed to see it upon request ? or did I misread ?



posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: charles911
No Luck with Freedom of Information act ?


Doesn't work with Top Secret classifications.



posted on Dec, 31 2014 @ 11:29 AM
link   
Just how would the country benefit by hearing that the Saudis had a bigger hand in things beyond what we have been told?
Would we bomb them ? No
Would we stop buying their oil ? No







 
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join