Are you bothered at all that many of the 9/11 Commission records are still classified?

[noise]

[Ohio Joe]

1. oh my

What a bullshit poll, I think I will decline to vote.

[Ghost in the Machine]

3. You think our Government should keep secrets from us?

You don't think it's absurd that the ones we elect to represent us want to hide things from us?

I'm not ok with that. I want to know to know the unadultered truth, no matter how hurtful or 'scary' some people may deem it, or how ugly it gets. People can't make informed choices when they're fed a diet of bullshit, half truths and flat out lies.....

[Ohio Joe]

5. I never said any such thing

I believe I said the poll was bullshit and that I would decline to vote. I don't buy into "your either with us or against us", and that is how the poll frames it's question.

[Ghost in the Machine]

8. No, that's not how it's framed at all...

You have a very clear choice... "Yes. The secrecy is absurd."


Why would the Government want, or need, to hide anything from us... even under the guise of 'National Security'? That's what's bullshit, my friend...

Seriously, do you think it's ok for your Government to hide things from you?

You either A.) Trust them fully & allow them to hide things from you or, B.) Think it's absurd that they would want to hide things from you.


Think about it, Joe... you'd *have* to fully trust them to be ok with them hiding stuff from you. Who chooses what they hide? That's right, they do. How do you know *what* they're hiding?

What do you think is ok for them to hide from you? Are there certain things you feel is ok for them to hide?

[Ohio Joe]

13. Yes, some things are ok to hide from me...

Some are not.

"You have a very clear choice... "Yes. The secrecy is absurd.""

What secrecy? Be specific and maybe I can say if it is ok or not.

"Why would the Government want, or need, to hide anything from us... even under the guise of 'National Security'? That's what's bullshit, my friend... "

Really? You believe that? Nothing? Exactly what should be released first? Nuke codes? Locations of women placed in shelters because of abuse? Your income? Health records?

"Seriously, do you think it's ok for your Government to hide things from you?"

Some things, yes. Do you really believe all information should be public?

"You either A.) Trust them fully & allow them to hide things from you or, B.) Think it's absurd that they would want to hide things from you."

Nonsense. This is again a total either/or proposition.

"Think about it, Joe... you'd *have* to fully trust them to be ok with them hiding stuff from you. Who chooses what they hide? That's right, they do. How do you know *what* they're hiding?"

Two different issues. Believing it is ok (or not, as the case may be) for some things to be secret has nothing to do with being psychic. How do you know what your significant other is hiding from you? Thats right, we all have secrets. How do you know *what* your SO is hiding? What do you propose is done to make sure no one has any secrets?

"What do you think is ok for them to hide from you? Are there certain things you feel is ok for them to hide? "

Again with the same questions... Do you need to keep repeating this?

As long as you feel it should all be open though, will you be the first to post all your personnel information? I mean, the government knows, so by your idea, so should I. Everyone else as well.

I could go on but... I'm tired and am going to bed now. I look forward to knowing simply everything about you tomorrow when I check in though.

Good night all, sleep well!

Edit - I see there are now three people with no secrets, I now look forward to knowing all three of you, I'm sure you will all post every bit of your personnel information.

[Ghost in the Machine]

15. I bet you're worn out from battling those huge strawmen you built, huh?

You sure like building those strawmen, don't you? This isn't about my identity, or nuclear warhead blueprints (proprietary trade secrets). The Government already knows who I am, they have all of my info...

As for your strawman, *I'm* not the Government, I don't have to reveal my identity to you or anyone else. However, if I were under investigation, the Government would have no problem passing along my information they have on me.

After you've had some rest why don't you see if you can comprehend the difference between nuclear weapons plans and testimony in an investigation and trial about the biggest attack ever on American soil.

Now you're gonna make me get all Rummyesque on you, Joe. You see, you have the things that you know (Knowns), then you have the things that you know that you know (known knowns), things that you don't know (unknowns), things you know you don't know (known unknowns), things you don't know that you know (unknown knowns) and things you don't know that you don't know (unknown unknowns).

Unknown unknowns don't faze you. You already don't know what's being hidden from you, but you never give it any thought. Once a secret gets out though, we have a known unknown... we know there's something there, but don't know quite what it is. Things can move rapidly through the other stages as more information comes out, or it can stay stuck in the unknown unknowns, unknown knowns and known unknowns territory. I want to arrive at the known knowns, myself.

You can't stuff the genie back in the bottle once he's out, Joe. "National Security Concerns" is a bullshit excuse, Joe.... apparently they weren't too interested in National Security if these attacks occurred as they say they did, right? National Security was bent, folded, broken, busted, fractured, mutilated & blown wide fucking open, Joe. We need to know who was responsible, and why. Who failed at their job, Joe?

All we've had so far is a big finger pointing party between the Government & Intelligence Agencies. Why were these failures promoted and given medals when they should have been fired and possibly prosecuted for criminal negligence and/or criminal dereliction of duty?

It's really sad, Joe. There are so many unanswered questions, yet some people are more than happy to accept "Hey, things went wrong and we know what it was... but we can't tell you about it because it's classified information sensitive to National Security. You can rest assured, though, that we've fixed the problem and it will neeeeeeeeeeeever happen again..." yeah, that's the ticket..

Lap up what they spoon feed you and never question the source, my friend, if that's what makes life easier for you.

Remain Blissful,

Ghost

[Ohio Joe]

16. The strawman is not mine, it is yours

Go back and read your post #8 (hell, go back and read the OP again). Done? Read it again... Good. Now, seems you (and the OP) were pretty absolute there to me. No Govt. secrets... None... No exceptions... No excuses. We still on the same page? Good.

Do you think the govt. does not have the information I spoke of earlier? Guess again, because they do. Not only do they have it but... and this is the good part... They keep it a secret. Thats right, they don't tell anyone. Still with me? Good, follow along.

Now, you want to try and make exceptions. As you said:

"After you've had some rest why don't you see if you can comprehend the difference between nuclear weapons plans and testimony in an investigation and trial about the biggest attack ever on American soil."

Sooooo... What? Only your pet theory deserves answers? Only your questions are valid in terms of "No secrets"? What if I think it was mini nukes? I want every last bit of information on nukes, yes, including the codes and the plans, past and present. No secrets. Still with me? Another part of my theory, involves everyone that votes for #2 in internet polls... I will need all information on them, past and present, gotta be able to trace these damn #2 voters... it is part of the pattern, they always vote #2.... I'm certain. There were after all... two towers...

Are we making exceptions yet? No secrets... Who draws the line? Still on the side of absolutes? Still think it was I who built a strawman?

Next up... Ghost builds his own strawman after falsely accusing me of building one.

"Lap up what they spoon feed you and never question the source, my friend, if that's what makes life easier for you."

geh... Do I really need to prove that I don't question things I am told? Strawman.

There is a list of questions... from widows... or families of 9/11 victims... honestly, I forget (and instead of sleeping as I intended, I was playing Sacred 2 and drinking all night, so I'm not all here). It has about 100 or so questions that they feel the govt. should answer regarding 9/11 and has been posted here many times. It is broken down by the person/agency that the question is directed at. Most of these questions, have never been answered (a few have... very few). I was once asked (on this forum) if I thought they deserved an answer. I read the list carefully and replied something to the effect of... yes, I think some of the questions are directed at the wrong person/agency (they will not know the answer but a different person or agency will, still a valid question) and that a very few may fall under national security... maybe not... but that I would be OK with the answers being given to Congress if a NS reason was given. I'm sure you know the questions I am talking about, and I still stand by that answer, I still think they deserve to be answered. If you want, I will go find the link to my saying such here previously. I also still stand by that.

I do not believe that any of the answers will show MIHOP/LIHOP but I also do not think they should not be answered. I also do not think there are no boundaries to what information that the govt. holds that should be revealed.

I still think the poll is bullshit.

Now... those that voted for #2, you ready to give up your information yet? Because I have a theory... It is goofy but I want answers.... and I can come up with a bunch of even goofier theories... That all involve YOU!

Yes, I believe there are some things the govt. should not tell me just because I ask.

Ghost... go look at my posting history in this forum. I am uninterested in MIHOP/LIHOP, I do not believe it but I don't care who does, go get your new investigation, good luck, I'm not in the way. I will not support "No secrets" in regards to the information the govt. holds either though. I am a mainframe programmer (well... when I am employed) and I have worked with the govt., DMV work with Nationwide and also with the state of Ohio in Child Services (ODJFS), I have no doubt, even with my limited knowledge of just how much information is kept by the govt., that the path you are walking down, is not one you want to go.

There must be another way other then "No Secrets".

[SDuderstadt]

9. "Truther Logic"...

"I should be able to call up LANL and demand they disclose the design of the W-88 to me because 'our government should not keep secrets from us'."

[noise]

10. I could have included

No. Many records remain classified for valid national security reasons.

I find it odd how some posters appear convinced that the classified records aren't a big deal. We constantly hear something like "Truthers have no evidence after 7+ years. Ridiculous. Enough already." The point is that all citizens remain ignorant due to the continuing secrecy. The secrecy is contradictory. On one hand 9/11 skeptics are told they are full of shit. OTOH, key records remain classified even though it has been over 7 years since the attacks. In relation to two classified 9/11 documents (the CIA 9/11 IG report* and 28 pages of the JI which deal with reported Saudi involvement), government officials (i.e. Sen. Wyden in regards to the IG report and Sen. Graham in regards to the JI report) have stated that there are no national security reasons for the classification. Yet the documents remain classified. I highly recommend the book Nation of Secrets by Ted Gup. In his book he explains how in many cases national security classification procedures are abused in order to conceal criminal and/or embarrassing conduct by government officials.

*The executive summary of this report was declassified in 8/07. The full report is still classified.

[SDuderstadt]

12. If you had included, "No. Many records remain classified for valid national security reasons"...

I would not have called it a "bullshit poll" and I would still have included what I noted about the dangers of over-classification. At the same time, I am of the mind that the "all the evidence is classified" excuse for the lack of progress by the 9/11 "truth movement" is nothing more that a post hoc rationalization.

Again, I raise the question: if, as some in the "truth movement" claim, the evidence needed to prove that "9/11 was an inside job" is missing, been suppressed (classified, etc.), isn't that tantamount to an admission that the "inside job" conclusion was reached without real evidence to support it?

[noise]

14. The classification effects all citizens

not just people who believe inside job theories. I find the secrecy obscene in light of the claims (by people like Cheney) that torture and warrantless surveillance were absolutely required to prevent terrorist attacks. Cheney is able to get away with this in large part because the public has been prevented from fully understanding 9/11. I posted an example: The Scheuer contradiction

[SDuderstadt]

4. This is, essentially, a stupid either/or (false dilemma) poll which assumes...

there are never any national security reasons that prevent absolute full disclosure. Even though it appears to give 3 choices, there are, in effect, only 2.

Having said that, it's painfully obvious that many things are unnecessarily classified (to prevent embarrassment, evade accountability, etc.) and I don't know as much as I would like with respect to checks and balances in this area. That doesn't mean the government should disclose troop movements, information about our defense capabilities which could be exploited for another attack and even some details about the 9/11 attacks which could be similarly exploited.

Seeking the highest degree of transparency possible in government doesn't mean we need to enter into a suicide pact.

[Ohio Joe]

6. Well said, I agree - nt

[SDuderstadt]

2. Actually, I'm bothered by...

bullshit polls like this.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

7. Do you believe in a new 9/11 commission to ascertain what went on?

[Name removed]

11. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Make7]

17. "the Commission shall have the right not to publicly disclose activities of a secret ... nature"

"the Commission shall have the right not to publicly disclose activities of a secret or confidential nature"
 

[Realityhack]

19. Which is reasonable.

Though as usual there are probably cases where things were not disclosed that may not have been all that secret etc. because of a tendency to err on that side rather than on the side of disclosure.
OPs poll seems poorly worded.

[Realityhack]

18. come up with some better choices. n/t

[gwashington2650]

20. Of course I'm bothered

Why keep this information secret?