Senate Won't Reveal Part of 9/11 Report

[mth44sc]

http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-us-saudi-intelligence,0,1633120.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines

Senate Won't Reveal Part of 9/11 Report


By KEN GUGGENHEIM
Associated Press Writer

September 12, 2003, 5:17 PM EDT

WASHINGTON -- Rejecting a request from other senators and the Saudi government, leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee said they would not seek to declassify a secret section of a report dealing with foreign support for the Sept. 11 hijackers.

Releasing the information "could adversely affect ongoing counterterrorism efforts," committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kan., and Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., said in a letter this week to Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla.

Graham asked the committee in July to start procedures to declassify the material. Graham, a presidential candidate, was co-chairman of the Sept. 11 inquiry and a former chairman of the Intelligence Committee.

"This is a serious disappointment from the current leadership of the Senate Intelligence Committee," said Graham spokesman Paul Anderson. He noted that both Graham and Sen. Richard Shelby, the inquiry's top Senate Republican, have said that most of the section could be released without harming national security.

more

[arcane1]

1. "we expect there to be transparency..."

"people who have got something to hide make us nervous"

-GW Bush

[DeathvadeR]

15. nice quote....... n/t

[gratuitous]

2. I thought We the People paid for this report

We're not entitled to see what it is we're paying for?

[Resistance]

3. do the American people

have any say left in the affairs of their government?

I want to see the full report.

[Demobrat]

4. When President Dean gets ahold of that report

the defacation will be meeting the oscillating rotor blades with deadly force. I for one can't wait.

[Old and In the Way]

5. Why is Jay Rocerfeller signing on to this crap?

Wasn't he complaining about the lack of transparency awhile back? As long as we have Democrats aiding and abetting these criminals, the American public is the loser.

It's not about national security, it's about Bush/Cheney personal security.

I really think that the evidence is so incriminating that we'd be faced with the prospect of having the first pResident impeached and tried for capital crimes against this country. Think about that for a second. If he was guilty, at minimum, for gross negligence in the deaths of 3000 people, the man could face capital punishment.

Think how that would affect the psyche of this country....

[MuseRider]

11. Well, some of us

would be relieved and maybe just a little bit smug. All of us would be better off. I do not believe in the death penalty however, imprisonment would be A OK with me.

[DuctapeFatwa]

6. Nothing will be leaked that might embarrass Israel

Even if the decision is made to put a Democrat face on the PNAC strategies.

[Resistance]

7. careful there

you might cut yourself

[hang a left]

8. oh I think that you are so so right

[MasonJar]

9. I just called Jay

I just called Rockefeller and Pelosi. They both have a responsibility to all Americans by virtue of their positions. Nancy made a serious blunder for coming down on Dean because he wants to have a balanced approach to the Middle East; in my opinion we will never have peace there if we don't. (Look at Sharon's last foible.) The thing though I really like and admire about Sharon is that when Stump told Sharon what he had to do, Sharon did not do it. As for Jay, it is pretty clear that Bob Graham knows as much if not more about the 9/11 coverup. Jay should stick with the program on this. It is way too important.

[KoKo]

10. Rockefeller's = Oil=Standard Oil (which made the fortune) = Break up of

Standard Oil=Rockefellers still have oil interests=Saudi Information=money=money.......

[lightbulb]

12. They are correct

Releasing the information "could adversely affect ongoing counterterrorism efforts,"...

Ironically, this is probably the truth. The information would likely invalidate some key justifications for the "war on terror" as it is being waged. What remains of public support for this $ham and its architects would evaporate, which would adversely affect "counterterrorism efforts", to be sure.

[leesa]

14. Those justifications have already been invalidated, before the war.

[Nottingham]

13. The Saudis were involved that kinda says it!

and the sheik dined at Kennebunport the other day! :bounce: