Call It What It Is, Treason

9/11 Family Member Lorie Van Auken holding up the JICI showing redacted pages on CNN.

Jon Gold

You may have heard of the 28 redacted pages from the Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11. They have been redacted for years, and the 9/11 families and others have been fighting for their release since the day it was announced they were redacted. According to people like former Senator Bob Graham, those pages talk about alleged Saudi Government support for the hijackers.

Recently, there was a short segment on 60 Minutes about the pages. This resulted in a much needed push for the release of the 28 redacted pages. When Obama first came into office, it was reported that he told 9/11 Family Member Kristen Breitweiser “that he was willing to make the pages public.” A few years later, according to 9/11 Family Member Bill Doyle, Obama told him “Bill, I will get them released.”

Many times throughout Obama’s Presidency, we have seen him protect the Saudis against the 9/11 Families who want their day in court. Right now, he is threatening to veto a bill called JASTA that would finally give the families that day in court.

The 28 pages were originally classified by the Bush Administration “for reasons of national security.” Obama said that “Jim Clapper, our director of national intelligence, has been going through to make sure that whatever it is that is released is not gonna compromise some major national security interest of the United States.”

We have heard from many people who have read them say that there is nothing in those pages that would affect national security. Rep. Walter Jones said “there's nothing in it about national security.” Former Sen. Bob Graham has said “they do not affect national security.”

Yesterday, the former Chair and Co-Chair of the discredited 9/11 Commission, Thomas Kean & Lee Hamilton released a statement that said “we would recommend that steps be taken to protect the identities of anyone who has been ruled out by authorities as having any connection to the 9/11 plot.”

In other words, they don’t want all of the names within the 28 redacted pages released. As 9/11 Family Member Lorie Van Auken stated the other day on CNN, one of the names listed might be Prince Bandar. Or “Bandar Bush."

Indeed. Former 9/11 Commissioner John Lehman said “yes. The average intelligent watcher of 60 Minutes would recognize them instantly,” and Rep. Walter Jones said “it’s about the Bush Administration and its relationship with the Saudis.”

If a close personal friend of the Bush family and George Tenet’s is listed within those pages, I think the American people, and the people of the world deserve to know about it. When the 9/11 Commission met with Bush and Cheney behind closed doors, not under oath, with no transcripts allowed, 9/11 Commissioner John Lehman asked Bush about an allegation concerning Princess Haifa and Prince Bandar. Apparently, Bush “dodged the questions.” After his meeting with the 9/11 Commission, Bush held a press conference and said that he “answered every question they asked." Certainly doesn’t sound like it.

Today, it was reported that the Obama Administration “will likely soon release at least part of a 28-page secret chapter from a congressional inquiry into 9/11…” That is a slap in the face to the 9/11 families and to the people of the world.

All documents pertaining to 9/11 should immediately be released, and completely unredacted. President Bush’s PDBs that came before 9/11 that Kurt Eichenwald reported on, and said “the Aug. 6 document, for all of the controversy it provoked, is not nearly as shocking as the briefs that came before it.” The 80k documents pertaining to the Sarasota/Atta/Saudi story that Dan Christensen is working on. All of the documentation from the 9/11 Commission, including Prince Bandar’s Memorandum For The Record which is currently classified. Any and all documentation pertaining to 9/11 should be released. PERIOD!!!

Protecting those allegedly involved in the murder of 2,976 people is Treason, and the American people shouldn’t stand for it.

As the September Eleventh Advocates recently stated “no amount of money, no greed, no power, no regional interest could ever be worth such treason.”

He would be...

One of the idiots advocating for war I bet.


When Bolton talks all I hear is "Goo goo g' joob"

Jon, Impressive Report

This is a really impressive summary report of the current events with nice ties to previous scenarios.
Unlike some of the news stories, your article is very appropriate for anyone. In other words, a person unfamiliar with 9/11 could grasp the significance.




Treason. Exactly! Good write up.

This is how I expect they will try and spin the 28 pages...


Kristen Breitweiser has her say....

"9/11 Commission Did Not Exonerate Saudis"


Is an article I wrote a while back. I think it's important for people to see.

If you're wondering about my finger count, I exaggerated to try and make a point.

9/11 Commission Did Not Exonerate Saudis by Kristen Breitweiser

By Kristen Breitweiser, one of the four 9/11 widows – known as the “Jersey Girls” – instrumental in forcing the government to form the 9/11 Commission to investigate the 2001 attacks.

The time has come to clarify some inaccuracies and misleading statements being made in the media regarding the 28 pages, the 9/11 attacks, the investigation of the 9/11 attacks, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). In doing so, perhaps the American public will come to understand the importance of passing JASTA (Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act) and releasing the 28 pages in their entirety.

A reponse

Paul Sperry is on it....

The establishment is lying about the 9/11 report


“There’s no reason to classify it (the 28 redacted pages) anymore. Even if some of the facts are wrong, THAT CAN BE POINTED OUT (emphasis mine).” - Thomas Kean, 7/22/2014

Almost 2 years later, and now he and Hamilton have stipulations for their release. Like withholding names.

What Will Secret 28 Pages Reveal About 9/11? - 5/4/2016

Curious About Kean & Hamilton

Part of Hamilton's statement was covered here:

Here is the full text of what he said:
From Jan 2015 (after he supposedly called for their release in July 2014) -

"But Hamilton told Newsweek that he DID NOT FAVOR DECLASSIFICATION OF THE 28 PAGES FROM THE CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATION (emphasis mine), just his own 9/11 Commission report. “I do not favor the declassification” of the the congressional probe’s pages, he said in a telephone interview. He added that he had "NEVER READ (emphasis mine)" that section of the other probe and “I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S IN IT...NO ONE EVER CAME TO ME AND SAID YOU OUGHT TO READ THESE PAGES (emphasis mine).” (He later amended that to say, “I can’t say I’ve never read them; I have no recollection of having read them.”)”

You would think reading the ”famous" redacted pages from the JICI would be a memorable experience for Mr. Hamilton (re: his amendment).

Lee Hamilton selected Philip Zelikow (someone instrumental in the cover-up pertaining to Saudi Arabia, among other things).

Did Lee Hamilton read the 28 redacted pages between the 60 Minutes piece and this statement released by Hamilton and Kean that was full of lies?

Something Hamilton said on the day of the release of the report...

“We have found no evidence of the involvement of the Saudi Government in the plot.” - Lee Hamilton, 7/22/2004

He certainly didn't or seemingly care to.

And look at what Tom Kean said in 2014. "There’s no reason to classify it anymore. Even if some of the facts are wrong, THAT CAN BE POINTED OUT (emphasis mine).” - Thomas Kean, 7/22/2014

He went from a reasonable response, to having stipulations on their release. Must not be confident he could point out wrong facts.

Comissioner John Lehman : Saudi officials supported hijackers

There was an awful lot of participation by Saudi individuals in supporting the hijackers, and some of those people worked in the Saudi government," Lehman told the Guardian. "Our report should never have been read as an exoneration of Saudi Arabia."

Hat tip...

Is anyone concerned over the

Is anyone concerned over the possibility that these papers are a misleading plant, meant to be released all along? It seems they are getting an awful lot of attention from both the media and a number of politicians that have spent years taking part in the attempt to cover up the truth.


They've already been "debunked" by the 9/11 Commission, right? So what kind of threat are they, right? Also, if they are released, it looks like they're only going to release a portion of them. Also, Bush and Obama have done everything within their power to protect Saudi Arabia with regards to 9/11.

A Theory on Truth

Is anyone concerned over the possibility that these papers are a misleading plant


Well, it depends. If the "unnamed foreign government" is Israel, and it indicates the non existent hijackers had help and assistance from Israeli Government Agents then I'd say no. If however, the "unnamed foreign government" is an Islamic Government, then obviously it is a clever "misleading plant", because we already know that Muslims don't drink alcohol and they certainly don't kill people. Only Americans and Israelis do that. So we can add Michael Jacobson, and Dana Lesemann to our list of people who are "in on it" since they are the main authors and investigators of the "28 pages".

..meant to be released all along?


Yup, makes sense because when Jacobson and Lesemann wrote the 28 pages under the direction of secret undercover NEOCON Bush/Cheney Agent Sen. Bob Graham, they all knew that years into the future, the Illuminati would have conditioned the masses to accept that protecting countries that attack the United States, is not treason when you attack them years later when you finally reveal the cover up.

Clever bastards that they are.

It seems they are getting an awful lot of attention from both the media....


Which obviously is a dead giveaway. They wouldn't be covering this if it were not part of the New World Order Agenda. When the media starts reporting on "Lloyd the cab driver'" and his ridiculous story, and how voice morphing was used on the obviously fake phone calls, only then would I seriously re-examine whether the calls were real or if he wasn't an agent. This is always a dead giveaway. Good Call, and very observant of you to notice this.

It seems they are getting an awful lot of attention from ........ a number of politicians that have spent years taking part in the attempt to cover up the truth.


No one has come close to giving them the attention Sen Graham has. And he has a lot of explaining to do. For instance it was Graham who was "intimately involved in what happened on 9/11". How do I know this? Because James Corbett said so, and also points out that by coming out against the cover up from day one and up till now, proves that Graham helped participate in the 9-11 cover up. Senator Bob Graham should be playing golf, but instead has appeared in countless television interviews demanding an end to the 9/11 cover-up ever since the report was released. This certainly seems suspicious, and obviously makes him a participate in the 9-11 cover up, as Corbett points out. But the real smoking gun is Bob Graham having pancakes on the morning of 9-11. Yup, the very morning Graham is having pancakes, the WTC pancakes. Coincidence? Maybe. But how many coincidences does it take until a sinister picture appears? It turns out Graham was having his pancakes with Sen. John Kyl, R-Ariz. Looks like this secret undercover NEOCON Bush/Cheney Agent got sloppy and was seen in public with a Republican. But there is even more. Also at this breakfast was Porter Goss, not only another Republican, further destroying Grahams now proven role as a NEOCON Agent, but Goss was also the Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and with him were some other members of the House Intelligence Committee. As if that weren't enough to put Graham behind bars forever, it turns out that also at this breakfast was General Mahmud Ahmed, the Head of Pakistani Intelligence. So one has to ask. Isn't it highly suspicious that the Heads of the Senate and Congress Intelligence committees would meet with the Head of Intelligence from a visiting foreign country? People who have not "woken up" might say, "no, that wouldn't be suspicious, that would be normal", however this meeting was on 9-11!! 9/11 Normal? I think not. Giving immunity to the other members of the House Intelligence Committee that were at this breakfast might get them to talk, so far they've been scared into silence. Also a new real investigation could sort out why a Muslim might be somehow involved in the 9-11 attacks when we already know Muslims didn't do 9/11, and whether or not General Mahmud Ahmed is in fact really a Muslim. And why Pakistani's enemy India reported he was "the money man" and wired $100,000 to Mohammad Atta who isn't really a Muslim and probably didn't hijack any plane. A real investigation would sort this out. It looks as if the perps want us to blame Bandar Bush as the money man for at least two of the alleged hijackers (not Muslims)when it was General Mahmud Ahmed, who was financing an alleged hijacker named Mohammad who couldn't be Muslim because he drank alcohol. Making it against the law to expose any role Bandar Bush had was a clever way to hold on to the "Get into Saudi Arabia free card" until Jeb could reveal it later...until Trump ruined everything. However, since Bandar Bush himself drank alcohol proves that whether he was involved or not Muslims certainly weren't.

So yes, a misleading plant, meant to be released all along, seems to be a very logical conspiracy theory. Logical enough for me to believe it. Beliefs always trump Truth. So it's the Truth to me. It seems I have "woke up" even more. I'm so woke up I might never sleep again.


...politicians that have spent years taking part in the attempt to cover up the truth.


What "Truths" of yours have they been covering up?


Jimd3100Stein CON
Proud member of MIHOP Warriors Alliance
Discoverer of the FlyUnder Theory of 9/12
Endorsed by LOLz For 9-11 Truth



Sweet Sacrifice - What you mention is on another thread

There are comments & videos about your topic on a long thread posted in April: "Bob Graham on 60-Minutes".

After months of no media about the 28 pages (since around October-November 2015), suddenly in April 2016 "60 Minutes" did a headline show about the 28 pages.
It has been a "full-court press" since the show.

Suitcases full of cash...

"While in Texas, it is believed that Basnan “met with a high Saudi prince who has responsibilities for intelligence matters and is known to bring suitcases full of cash into the United States.” The still-classified section of the 9/11 Congressional Inquiry is said to discuss the possibility of Basnan meeting this figure at this time."

"How rich is Bandar? A friend of mine used to drive for the prince. I can't mention the name for fear of a fatwa, but I was told that there were often suitcases taken off the prince's airplanes that were literally bulging with cash."

Could it be Bandar? I don't know.

Suitcases of cash

make more sense than traceable payments diverted from Princess Haifa's bank account.


This is quite an exchange from Graham's interview with Paul Jay

GRAHAM: Well, and also the fact that it was so pervasive that virtually all of the agencies of the federal government were moving in the same direction, from a customs agent at an airport in Orlando who was chastised when he denied entry into the United States to a Saudi, to the president of the United States authorizing large numbers of Saudis to leave the country, possibly denying us forever important insights and information on what happened. You don't have everybody moving in the same direction without there being a head coach somewhere who was giving them instructions as to where he wants them to move.

JAY: So that includes before and after the events.

GRAHAM: Primarily before the event. After the event, it shifts from being an action that supports the activities of the Saudis to actions that cover up the results of that permission given to the Saudis to act.

JAY: So I'll put you a little bit on the spot here. Would it be--in this new commission that we hope comes, would it be a legitimate line of inquiry into whether President Bush and/or Vice President Cheney knew something might be coming and didn't do anything about it, in fact may have actually taken action in the sense of creating a culture of not wanting to know?

GRAHAM: Well, without by giving this answer inferring that I believe that they did in fact have reason to believe that this attack was about to occur and made a conscious decision to suppress that information, if there were any evidence--and to my knowledge there is none--of course that would be a line of inquiry that would be central to answering the question of what was the Saudis' role and why did the United States cover it up.

Reality Asserts Itself pt4

Some advice...

With the cover-up of Saudi Arabia, we have a chance to show people that we were lied to about 9/11. A chance to show people that we aren't so crazy. At the same time, we don't want to overwhelm people with information. Right now, I suggest using the 28 pages as a starting point, and build from there. I don't suggest going from the 28 pages to missiles at the Pentagon (something I don't believe in) or any other such thing. All I'm trying to do is give advice. You can either take it, or not. We have to use this opportunity wisely.

Things that "go along" with the 28 pages:

1) The Bush Administration's relationship with certain Saudis, particularly Prince Bandar. Also, George Tenet's relationship with Prince Bandar.

2) The U.S.'s enabling and collaboration with Saudi Arabia with regards to terrorism. Years before 9/11, and years after 9/11.

3) Bush & Cheney going to Tom Daschle, and asking him to not investigate 9/11 at all.

4) The leaks from the NSA during the Joint Inquiry that supposedly came from Richard Shelby (though he denies it). Leaks that the Bush Administration tried to use to justify not cooperating with the inquiry.

5) How the 9/11 Commission dealt with it. Particularly Philip Zelikow and Dieter Snell. I firmly believe these 28 pages can expose for the world to see how corrupt and compromised the 9/11 Commission was.

6) Other documents that need to be released unredacted. Many of the documents from the 9/11 Commission have yet to be released, and many that have been released are greatly redacted. 80k documents pertaining to the Sarasota/Atta/Saudi Family story that Dan Christensen is working on. The multitude of Presidential Daily Briefings that Bush got prior to 9/11.

7) Everything the Bush and Obama Administration's have done to protect the Saudis from the 9/11 Families.

8) How many efforts took place over the years to try and get the 28 redacted pages released.

9) The 9/11 Commission saying that the source of the funding for the attacks is "of little practical significance."

10) Alec Station, Doug Miller, Mark Rossini, Michael Anne Casey, Tom Wilshire, Alfreda Frances Bikowsky.

11) Bush telling the different alphabet agencies to "back off" the Saudis and the Bin Ladens after coming into office. This obstruction made John O'Neill furious. Also, look up whistleblower Robert Wright.

12) Moussaoui's statements about particular Saudis.


14) The families being able to use the 28 pages as evidence in a court of law.

These are all different topics that go along with the 28 redacted pages. I hope this helps with regards to expanding on the topic.


Is my way of helping people prevent them from portraying that Saudi Arabia is the only cover-up because it's simply not. If you want to use the 28 pages as a "foot in the door," this is my way of helping you.

Jon, Do you have a list of names / entities being sued?

Over the years the lawsuit has changed repeatedly.
Some defendants have been dropped because of diplomatic immunity or because of some judicial ruling.

I am curious about a list of defendants being sued.
Also, I am curious about a list of names which were dropped from the lawsuit for whatever reason.

You have been following this more closely than I have, so I figured you might have the scoop.


From what I remember, the Bin Laden Group has been dropped, but that's all I can remember off the top of my head.

Thanks Jon

If you catch wind of something, let me know.

Bin Ladin Group - More than 50,000 layoffs & pay months behind

I often have been following the Saudi news for more than 6 months.

"The numbers of layoffs range from 50,000 to 77,000, many of who say they were not paid for several months."

Also, evidently from another news report (TV video) the Saudi government has stonewalled on paying the Bin Ladin Group for construction projects.


Re-listening to my interview with Bob Graham, I THINK the incident regarding Princess Haifa (Bandar's wife) IS listed in the 28 redacted pages, but since that information was leaked, he no longer considers them a "28 page issue." Or a "redacted" issue.

Starting from 26:00 and listen especially to 28:17:

However, I do think based on something else he said, Bandar MAY be listed in the 28 redacted pages for another reason. That is NOT a fact. Just a hunch. The Princess Haifa issue is NOT addressed in the 9/11 Report, but a monograph released by the 9/11 Commission said "Despite persistent public speculation, there is NO EVIDENCE (emphasis mine) that the hijackers who initially settled in San Diego, Mihdhar and Hazmi, received funding from Saudi citizens Omar al Bayoumi and Osama Bassnan, or that Saudi Princess Haifa al Faisal provided any funds to the hijackers either directly or indirectly."


"Administration officials reluctantly confirmed to NEWSWEEK that money had moved from Princess Haifa's account to al-Bayoumi, but they stressed that they do not know the purpose of the payments or whether any Saudi officials were even aware of them. "The facts are unclear, and there's no need to rush to judgment," said one administration official."

Newsweek of 2002 - Informative

Good find. Thanks.

New video...