White House refuses to release Sept. 11 info

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on May, 8 2003 @ 11:04 AM
link   
So all this actions in the world, after 9/11 and then
they don´t wanna give explanations to their own people? Weird ha?



WASHINGTON - The Bush administration and the nation's intelligence agencies are blocking the release of sensitive information about the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, delaying publication of a 900-page congressional report on how the terrorist assault happened.

Intelligence officials insist the information must be kept secret for national security reasons. But some of the information is already broadly available on the Internet or has been revealed in interim reports on the investigation, leading to charges that the administration is simply trying to avoid enshrining embarrassing details in the report.

Disputed information includes a well publicized warning from an FBI agent that al-Qaida supporters might be training in U.S. flight schools and the names of the president and his national security adviser as people who may have received warnings that a terrorist attack was possible before Sept. 11, one official said.

"We're trying to keep in this report some matters that have been talked about in public, discussed in newspapers, and not to do that, flies in the face of common sense," Rep. Porter Goss, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Monday.

"The White House is continuing a trend of presenting obstacles to us rather than cooperating with us," said Tim Roemer, a former House member who participated in the congressional inquiry and is now a member of the independent commission investigating Sept. 11.

Goss, a Florida Republican, and Sen. Bob Graham, a Florida Democrat who headed the Senate Intelligence Committee last year, co-chaired a joint investigation over 10 months that detailed security lapses, bad communication and missed clues by the CIA and FBI that preceded the Sept. 11 attacks.

In December, the joint inquiry produced a summary of findings and recommendations on how to improve intelligence, but the complete report was withheld so agencies could review and declassify some portions of it.

Graham, who will officially announce his presidential campaign Tuesday, has said he thinks much of the delay is because agencies and the administration want to avoid embarrassment, not for valid national security reasons.

Goss, Graham and staff director Eleanor Hill had hoped to release the final report by February or March. Now they are hoping to release it Memorial Day, Goss said.

"I'm very frustrated this has taken this long," said Goss, a retired CIA officer with close ties to the administration. "There's a tendency for every executive to keep matters closed up, but most of what's in dispute should be made public."

Hill said she could not discuss the specifics of the information in dispute, but said a working group of intelligence officials objected to including some testimony from public hearings last fall and some data in her interim reports.

"Maybe they didn't realize it had already been made public, but we see no reason to keep it out of the report," said Hill, a former Pentagon inspector general.

An intelligence official familiar with the review process said on condition of anonymity Monday that "the process has taken time because many portions of the report need to remain classified to protect sources and methods."

The official would not comment on specific issues in the report, and said "we hope to complete the process by the end of this month."

But an official familiar with the report said one topic of disagreement was the so-called Phoenix memo of July 2001, in which an FBI agent warned his supervisors that Osama bin Laden's followers might be enrolling in U.S. flight schools.

The joint inquiry, in a Sept. 24 staff report, included portions of the memo and summarized how it was handled and ignored by FBI officials. Most of the memo is on several Internet sites. Now intelligence officials want to block releasing excerpts of the memo.

Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama, the ranking Republican on the Senate committee during the investigation, said: "The memo should be declassified except for portions that might compromise an ongoing investigation."

The Bush administration also consistently have fought identifying top officials, including the president and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, who may have received warnings in 2001 that bin Laden's network planned to hijack commercial aircraft.

As a result, the report includes vague references to "senior administration officials."

"We fought that argument (to name officials) and lost," said Goss. "There's a history in these types of reports, going back many presidencies, that you do not mention the president of the United States, period."

Goss said there was "no cover-up of vital information" and predicted the final report will include some embarrassing details but "no 'gotcha' material about any administration."

Roemer, an Indiana Democrat, said he sees a pattern of "overclassification" by an administration unwilling to disclose information and agencies that reflexively fight disclosure.

When Roemer recently tried to read transcripts of closed-door interviews from last year's probe, the Justice Department blocked him, citing possible executive privilege.

Bush officials relented after Roemer publicly complained the administration was not following its pledge of cooperation with the independent investigation.

"There is a tight definition of what should be classified, and it does not include references to mistakes, missed communications or political embarrassments," he added.




posted on May, 8 2003 @ 11:29 AM
link   
something to hide perhaps?



posted on May, 8 2003 @ 11:34 AM
link   
The fact that if they had followed up on several important indicators, (at least they seem important after the fact), that they could have prevented it from happening. Hindsight is 20/20, and they know how it's going to look....but the simple fact is, if some in government had not been so complacent, 9/11 would be just another date, instead of a date of infamy....



posted on May, 8 2003 @ 11:42 AM
link   
Dont wanna release embarrassing details, like the total foreknowldge and allowing the thing to happen, even aiding the operation? Dont want people to discover that fighter jets were deliberatly not dispatched until the last minute, and then from Airbases too far away to make it on time? Embarrassing to learn that fighter hets were told to stand down? That the Bush admin, needing a good reason to begin a campaign against the middle east, decided this attack would open the floodagtes to new opportunities to attack whoever wherever, and present new laws to violate the constitution?

Yes, the truth of Sep 11 would be more than embarrassing: if the fulls tory got out, it would be the mother of all criminal conspiracies and investiagtions: and the traitor in this case would be high level officals all the way up to the very highest levels.

Wait about 100 years after we are all dead, then the truth will come out, when no one alive will remeber or care what happened on sep 11.



posted on May, 9 2003 @ 06:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Dont wanna release embarrassing details, like the total foreknowldge and allowing the thing to happen, even aiding the operation? Dont want people to discover that fighter jets were deliberatly not dispatched until the last minute, and then from Airbases too far away to make it on time? Embarrassing to learn that fighter hets were told to stand down? That the Bush admin, needing a good reason to begin a campaign against the middle east, decided this attack would open the floodagtes to new opportunities to attack whoever wherever, and present new laws to violate the constitution?

Yes, the truth of Sep 11 would be more than embarrassing: if the fulls tory got out, it would be the mother of all criminal conspiracies and investiagtions: and the traitor in this case would be high level officals all the way up to the very highest levels.

Wait about 100 years after we are all dead, then the truth will come out, when no one alive will remeber or care what happened on sep 11.


I agree with you, but i was wondering if they even don´t wanna show in manipulated media anything more (while they blame terrorists...) what do they have to feel so afraid of? the control the media, they lie everyday , i just don´t understand why all these military campaign and then they are not able to explain 11-S to it´s own country at least to make them know what´s going on...
It shows again how much do they care about ¨us¨



posted on May, 9 2003 @ 09:11 AM
link   
I mean come on now. You act like your supprised. Bush could give a rat's a** about letting us know what really happened.

"The great masses of people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a
small one. Especially if it is repeated over and over."
-- Adolph Hitler

If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm
the dictator.
-- President G. W. Bush

"Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of
September the 11th.."
--President Bush, speaking to the United Nations.

Nuff said



posted on May, 9 2003 @ 09:16 AM
link   

"The US Vice-President, Dick Cheney, revealed in a television interview over the
weekend that President George Bush had given an order last Tuesday for the
military to shoot down any civilian aircraft that disregarded instructions from
air traffic control and appeared to be a threat. The fourth hijacked plane,
United Airlines Flight 93 from Newark to San Francisco, was thought to be on its
way to Washington but crashed in rural Pennsylvania following some kind of
altercation between the hijackers and a group of passengers determined to thwart
their plans. The rumors that this plane was shot down are based on the fact that
debris was found up to eight miles from the crash site, that one of the
passengers talking on a mobile phone reported hearing an explosion and seeing a
plume of white smoke in the cabin, and that eyewitnesses saw a second aircraft
in the sky at the time of the crash."
—The Independent, London, England, September 20, 2001


Who knows....



posted on May, 9 2003 @ 12:14 PM
link   
If America knew the extent of influence that a foreign power holds over it, i think there would be an unfortunate backlash. the backlash would be against normal, everyday non Zionist jews.

The Zionists, as Sharon so boldly stated, pretty much have a strong arm on america and an abnormal and unhealthy amount of influence. The Zionists dont care if individual jews suffer, like any shadow power. The concequences of such would harm the average jew in america.

We can only hope that if people wake up to how much Zionism has a stranglehold on the US govornment and society, that they will remeber that it was only because of a few brave disgusted jews that we even know about thier motives and methods.

If anyone even doubts the true power and methods of the zionists, and thier purely evil motives, go read books by Prof Israel Shahek and Ben Friedman. You will find in thier works a very scary picture painted.



posted on May, 9 2003 @ 12:30 PM
link   
then HOW DARE THEY presume to use 911 as a pretext for war, or even mention it in the same sentence with Iraq, when they wont even release the f'ing documents!!!!





top topics
 
0

log in

join