have any Democrats suggested a Congressional investigation into 9/11?

[Syrinx]

I would REALLY like to see hearings on C-SPAN on the 9/11 issue. (Or, better, wall-to-wall coverage on the major networks, as I remember, vaguely, from the Watergate hearings.)

The Democrats have subpoena power now, and they really should use it on this, among many other important topics and scandals.

Even discounting the possibilities of LIHOP and MIHOP, there are many questions that need to be asked, and answered, and the Democrats finally have the apparatus to compel answers.

The question is will they use what that have been given by the American people, to find the truth about one of the darker days in the history of our nation.

[MnFats]

1. i agree. the 911 commish report..

..had some useful information but was essentially a whitewash.
start putting pressure on your Sen. and Rep. now.

[Syrinx]

4. yep, you know when you start out with Kissinger heading the thing...

It's not likely to be a "truth-seeker" of a commission. I know that Kissinger was replaced when he refused to list his criminal clientele, but come on. Appointing Kissinger to find the truth is like (insert some obvious analogy here). ;)

[rock]

13. Like putting a war-criminal in charge of the investigation

Oh wait! That's not an analogy, that's the literal truth.

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

2. Not that I have heard, but I would dearly love to see them too...

I have been handing out 'deception dollars' for years as public education information. http://deceptiondollar.com/
Check out issue #9 at the above link. I still have number 8, and some 'election deception' and Corporate Media Deception bills, from an earlier issue that I display at the Farmers Market and give to any interested parties.

Peace,

[Syrinx]

6. I had not heard of that before

Thanks for letting me know!

But I want to stress that this thread isn't conspiracy oriented. I don't want to get thrown in the dungeoun.

I just want honest hearings on the issue. Hell, if Clinton is to blame (I seriously doubt it), let it come out. Let the evidence lead the way.

[solara]

9. Clinton? Holy merde.....

That is so way off the beam ... But yeah I get your point - let the evidence, -all- the evidence be heard and released to the public no matter who ends up in the crosshairs.

[Syrinx]

10. you get my point.

Just put the truth on the table. The truth.

[newyawker99]

16. Hi AnotherDreamWeaver!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[porphyrian]

3. I'm convinced that, as our Congress attempts to put into place the 9/11...

...Commission's recommendations, enough evidence will emerge as to at least warrant further investigation.

[Syrinx]

5. I hope so

And I'm not necessarily talking about anything sinister (note to mods). Incompetence deserves a good look. And let things go from there.

[autorank]

7. This Democrat does! The nation demands the truth! K&R

What do we have to hide. Even if one is convinced that the basic structure of the crime has been outlined, it is highly appropriate to re-evaluate the evidence. It's a dynamic process, lets take it serously, what ever you believe. I believe that the national defense failed miserably that day and that there is much to examine. Why, for example, did the Commissioners (911) consider referring those who described the air response to the DOJ? Why did they then send that referral to an Inspector General (in Trnasportation I belive)? Simple questions, profound answers perhaps.

Great post.

[Syrinx]

8. thanks autorank!

You rock! And I never use that teenybopper phrase! Okay, maybe I do. ;)

:patriot:

[quickesst]

11. Sibel Edmunds....

will be a key player if it happens. Check out her new article. Thanks.
quickesst

http://www.nswbc.org/Op%20Ed/Op-ed-Part1-Nov15-06.htm

[petgoat]

21. thanks autorank! It's great to see election fraud heavyweights

like you and garybeck supporting the call for new 9/11 investigations.

[puebloknot]

32. Elementary!

It doesn't take a conspiracy mindset to want to know why, when the country was under attack from terrorists of *some* stripe, our air response just melted away.

[radfringe]

12. tweety asked Hoyer about it the other night

I think it was on Wednesday's Hardball. Tweety interviewing Hoyer, asked that now Dems have subpoena power and able to do investigations would they be looking into things like 9-11 and the WMD's

Hoyer seemed reluctant to give a "yes or no" answer, but did say Waxman and Conyers are very experienced. He also said the issues over the reliability of intel v.s. what the bushies put out needs to be looked at again.

The feeling I got was not that Hoyer was tap-dancing away from a commitment to investigate, but rather he didn't want to tip the Dems hand as the focus of investigations...

[Syrinx]

33. that sounds great!

I hope your interpretation of Hoyer proves correct!

[Katzenjammer]

14. No. And they won't, either. It wouldn't be "playing the game" (nt)

[leveymg]

15. This is still viewed as a political live wire. Will have to be careful not to look like

a partisan witch hunt.

There's plenty of room for actual investigations that complement the 9/11 Commission or look into some issues with the commission's operations, personnel selection and decision-making. I'm sure that the role of Richard Zelikow, the Staff Director and close Condi confidant, will be reviewed. Expect that the prior warning issue raised by the revelation that Tenet gave Condi and Bush an emergency CIA briefing in July will also be explored. Finally, Congress and the press can't escape delving further into the circumstances under which several of the 9/11 hijackers were being tracked by CIA when they entered the US, and a cable was drawn up by the FBI liaison at the Counterterrorism Center, but an order was issued to withhold notification to John O'Neil's FBI National Security Unit in NY.

There's plenty of room for hearings.

[petgoat]

19. 200 of the Widow's 300 questions got no response at all.

Only 27 were adequately answered.

So what's partisan about thinking they should get the answers?

http://www.justicefor911.org/Appendix4_FSCQuestionRatings_111904.php

Evidence has been destroyed and suppressed. What's partisan about
asking for release of the evidence?

http://www.st911.org/

The position that any questioning of official actions or any objection
to a coverup is inappropriately partisan is itself an inappropriately
partisan position. What's partisan is declaring certain issues taboo
because they might be embarrassing to the president--for example, the
Senate Intelligence Committee's hearings on the Iraq intel. They
completed the Phase 1 investigation on the nature of the pre-war
intelligence available, and promised that Phase 2, on the uses to which
the intelligence was put, would take place after the 11/04 elections.
But in 2005 Pat Roberts, the chairman, said he saw no reason they should
"replow old ground."

http://mediamatters.org/items/200511020008

[leveymg]

25. Along the same lines, the 9/11 Comm pointedly didn't assign blame

So that job hasn't even been touched.

I agree about unanswered questions and the right the American people have to straight answers. Even if there isn't an answer found to every question posed, there's a substantial bulk of excavation work into the facts that has to happen before we cab say there's been a full and fair investigation of who's responsible for 9/11.

I think we'll see substantial excavation of the evidence in the next couple of years. A great many Americans aren't going to be happy about what they see uncovered. But, I doubt if many of us here at DU will be greatly shocked. The essential features of the crime scene are already pretty clear:

* the CIA and NSA had been monitoring severalof the 9/11 hijackers abroad for years
* the CIA monitored the planning meeting in Kuala Lumpur in January 2000 where the attack was panned
* the CIA,NSA and DIA were running several warrantless surveillance operations against AQ inside the US
* the CIA withheld a notification cable to the FBI when the Flt. 77 hijackers entered on 1/15/00
* the FBI had informants who housed and gave money to the Flt. 77 hijackers
* the CIA was repeatedly warned by foreign intelligence agencies about anticipated attacks. and was provided with the names of 15 of the 19 hijackers.
* the Bush Administration ordered at least some of these surveillance operations closed in 2001

[Beam Me Up]

22. Given the percentage of Americans who want an investigation

shouldn't Democrats be concerned how they're going to be viewed if they do NOT help establish a thorough, non partisan and transparent investigation?

Poll results indicate 42% believe there has indeed been a cover up (with 10% unsure) and 45% think "Congress or an International Tribunal should re-investigate the attacks, including whether any US government officials consciously allowed or helped facilitate their success" (with 8% unsure). The poll of American residents was conducted from Friday, May 12 through Tuesday, May 16, 2006. Overall results have a margin of sampling error of +/- 2.9.

From: http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060522022041421">Zogby Poll Finds Over 70 Million Voting Age Americans Support New 9/11 Investigation, May of this year. I suspect that the percentages are even higher now.

[CarolNYC]

17. Wes Clark did....

back in March during an interview with Stephanopoulos....

"GENRAL WESLEY CLARK: ....I think when you look at this country, right now, we need a 2-party system that works, we need Congress to do its job, we need real investigation of some of the abuses of authority that are apparently going on at the Executive branch, we need <crosstalk>

George Stephanopoulos: Like what?

GENERAL WESLEY CLARK: We need to really get to the bottom of the Abramoff scandal, we should have a special prosecutor appointed for that, we really need a congressional investigation of the whole business of the NSA wiretapping and how far that goes, there's been a lot of squirreling around the edges; we've never completed the investigation of 9/11 and whether the administration actually misused the intelligence information it had - the evidence seems pretty clear to me, I've seen that for a long time."

Transcript and video of full interview is here: http://securingamerica.com/node/692

YouTube short clip is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyw8wpazC5Q

[Beam Me Up]

18. To me, this is THE most important issue. Everything that has befallen us

in this country via the neocons and "W" flows through 9/11. More to the point, flows through the interpretation of the events that has been given to us by the Bush administration -- nearly all of it faith based. They want us to "trust them", want us to believe the interpretation they've given us without supporting it with hard evidence. They've used their interpretation of 9/11 as justification for the "War on Terror" (tm), including radical changes in foreign and domestic policies that have dramatically altered the laws of this country -- and our foreign policy.

Moreover, there is one final point: IF you are going to declare a "War on Terror" then you'd better know who the real terrorists are and why they are terrorizing you. Anyone here not clear about this point should read this blog: http://fortherecordessays.blogspot.com/">YET ANOTHER REASON FOR WORLD PEACE -- a 13 part series of essays exploring the many current and historical connections between terrorist financing, organized crime, arms trafficking, intelligence operations, the global financial markets, powerful politicians, wealthy dynasties, fascists, religious extremists of all stripes, and general thuggery.

[Individualist]

20. Agreed.

As has been pointed out numerous times before, the 9/11 attacks were the neocons Reichstag fire.

[helderheid]

23. I think Kucinich has LINK

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0609/S00303.htm

[helderheid]

24. kick with link

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/WO0609/S00303.htm

[robertpaulsen]

26. Hooray for DK!

I love that guy!

[dfgrbac]

27. Sign this petition.

I know there are other petitions out there asking for a new 9/11 investigation, but with our new Democratic Congress I felt a new one addressed to the new congressional leaders would be appropriate.

Read it, and if you agree with the statement, sign the petition. It will be delivered on January 2nd.

[let us vote]

28. kick

[let us vote]

29. kick

[Selatius]

30. Cynthia McKinney of Georgia did, I believe

She was voted out though.

[puebloknot]

31. Questionable elections, illegal war, 9/11

How can we even *think* about "working with" these people?

We need to scream without ceasing until we get some answers about 9/11. It isn't as if there are no answers out there.