Baculus Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 McKinney reopens 9/11 Conspiracy theories implicating president aired at 8-hour hearing http://www.ajc.com/hp/content/auto/epaper/editions/saturday/news_241efd8d9666d13800b4.html Bob Kemper - Staff Saturday, July 23, 2005 Washington --- Revisiting the issue that helped spur her ouster from Congress three years ago, Rep. Cynthia McKinney led a Capitol Hill hearing Friday on whether the Bush administration was involved in the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. The eight-hour hearing, timed to mark the first anniversary of the release of the Sept. 11 commission's report on the attacks, drew dozens of contrarians and conspiracy theorists who suggest President Bush purposely ignored warnings or may even have had a hand in the attack --- claims participants said the commission ignored. "The commission's report was not a rush to judgment, it was a rush to exoneration," said John Judge, a member of McKinney's staff and a representative of a Web site dedicated to raising questions about the Sept. 11 commission's report. The White House and the commission have dismissed such questions as unfounded conspiracy theories. McKinney first raised questions about Bush's involvement shortly after the attacks in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, generating a furious response from fellow Democrats in Washington and voters in Georgia, who ousted her in 2002. "What we are doing is asking the unanswered questions of the 9/11 families," McKinney, a DeKalb County Democrat who won back her seat in 2004, said during the proceedings. She rebuffed a reporter's repeated attempts to ask her why she would so boldly embrace the same claims that led to her downfall. "Congresswoman McKinney is viewed as a contrarian," panelist Melvin Goodman, a former CIA official, said. "And I hope someday her views will be considered conventional wisdom." Though she left the testimony and questioning of panelists to others, McKinney was the main attraction, presiding over more than two dozen participants, including the author of a book that claims the U.S. government had advance knowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack and allowed it to happen, and Peter Dale Scott, who wrote three books on President John F. Kennedy's assassination. Georgia peanuts, Cokes and coffee were available to more than 50 attendees, whose casual dress was a decided change from the gangs of blue-suited lobbyists who usually crowd Capitol Hill hearings. McKinney herself offered witnesses bottled water and found additional trash cans to place around the room. Nearly a dozen 9/11 enthusiasts lined one side of the room, camcorders at the ready, broadcasting the hearing live over the Internet or recording it for later release. C-SPAN cameras documented the hearing, and a DVD recording of the proceedings will soon be available. Ten people sat in a section reserved for family members of 9/11 victims. "Nine-eleven could have been prevented," said Marilyn Rosenthal, a University of Michigan professor who lost a son in the attacks, echoing the premise of the hearing. Panelists maintained that Bush ignored numerous warnings from the CIA, the Federal Aviation Administration, foreign governments and others who told him before 9/11 that Osama bin Laden was planning to attack the United States and that terrorists were likely to use hijacked airliners as weapons. But why would the president or his administration want the 9/11 attacks to occur? Power, the panelists agreed. In the wake of the attacks, the administration was able to greatly expand the president's power and the reach of the federal government, they said, but whistle-blowers and other potential witnesses who could have testified to the Sept. 11 commission about such things were either prevented from speaking or ignored in the commission's final report. Panelists called the commission's report "a cover-up." "The American people have been seriously misled," said Scott. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 How does this dumb beeeotch keep getting re-elected? Maybe she should run for mayor of DC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dreamingwolf Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 easy, there are many whou put party above country. Now bac Im sure doesnt have a party, he will be as fierce against any administration. Im sure he will sell some song and dance about hes just about truth, but really he just likes crapping on administrations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 How does this dumb beeeotch keep getting re-elected? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Jones Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Originnally posted by Sarge How does this dumb beeeotch keep getting re-elected? The same way people like Tom Delay get re-elected. That being said, she needs to shut up and end this nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief skin Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Bush and his neocons are not that cleaver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cdowwe Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Originally posted by Chief skin Bush and his neocons are not that cleaver Yes but they are CLEVER Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 So they wanted Bush to: 1. Profile Muslim Men at airports *We can't do that now after*.. 2. Stop all boxcutters and knives. 3. Change the way people react to a terrorist on the plane from go along, 99% of the time you get out safe, to bum rush them at all costs and sacrifice one or two of you.. 4. Tell Everyone its going to happen *IN MAY* (they were in high alert then) then when it doesnt, have everyone on Full alert with no Vacations through September because the Terrorist fell behind and werent ready... (Have you gone a year without vacation pulling 12 hour days?) yeah thats going to happen with government workers.... 5. And do all of this while he was just "selected" not elected and cant get any cooperation from the other side in the 1st 9 months of his administration... What could be easier.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baculus Posted August 12, 2005 Author Share Posted August 12, 2005 I like McKinney; she has courage. Along with John Conyers (D) and Ron Paul ®, she is one of the members of congress that does not fear to touch upon subjects that others would rather ignore. And you're right, Dreaming. I would be fierce against any party, as long as I see cause and reason for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Hey, should it be looked into? Absolutely. It is but another side or opinion on the topic, and we should leave no stone unturned when looking for answers. There are a LOT of brutal connections between the Bushies and the 9-11 hijackers, mostly by one degree of seperation. I mean Bush allowed all of the Bin Ladens to be rounded up and exported out of the country before a week was up. There are many redacted papers linking Bush's business partners with the Saudi's, and their "charities" which would funnel money to radical Islamic groups. Should it be ignored, NEVER, should it be looked at? Yes. We as Americans deserve the truth, and I don't think Bush has been up front with us about ANYTHING!!!! Why should we think this to be any different? Some research needs to be done on short selling of United stocks, in the week prior to 9-11. It DID happen, and we have redacted the names of the guilty who short sold. I read once about an Egyptian man who made 300K by short selling the stocks, and was on trial in Cali, but I heard nothing else about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Again Chomerics: Are you saying in the 1st 9 months of his 1st term he helped facilitate the 9/11 or covered it up because the terrorists are 2nd cousins persay? Even though they spent years planning it... Its easy to say why they could then and still could if they wanted too... We are a free society that has 11 million people we don't track... Freedom doesnt come cheap.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Originally posted by Thiebear Again Chomerics: Are you saying in the 1st 9 months of his 1st term he helped facilitate the 9/11 or covered it up because the terrorists are 2nd cousins persay? Even though they spent years planning it... No I am not saying that at all. I am just saying it should be looked into. There are a LOT of connections between Bush, the CIA and Bin Laden, and ALL should be examined to the fullest. We know now the 9-11 commission did not do their job correctly, for if they did, the Pentagon dossier of Atta would have been included. Its easy to say why they could then and still could if they wanted too... We are a free society that has 11 million people we don't track... Freedom doesnt come cheap.... You are right, freedon does not come cheap, and being a free society calls for eliminating some security. Statistically speaking, the chances of dying in a terrorist attack are as slim as being hit by lightning. I don't propose stopping the sale of autos because they kill people, similarly, I don't think freedoms should have been revoked because of the terrorist attacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 (Starting the stopwatch to see how long it takes for some neocon to claim that there haven't been any rights revoked. Which will then, if allowed, spiral off into the land of "But, the government hasn't made you disapear, so that doesn't count" and "There's nothing in the Constitution that says people have a right to travel without having to show their papers. Or a right to read a library book without it going into a database. Or a right to send e-mail without it being read. Or to attend a speach by the President without having to prove that you've never publicly supported the Democratic Party.") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chomerics Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Originally posted by Larry (Starting the stopwatch to see how long it takes for some neocon to claim that there haven't been any rights revoked. Which will then, if allowed, spiral off into the land of "But, the government hasn't made you disapear, so that doesn't count" and "There's nothing in the Constitution that says people have a right to travel without having to show their papers. Or a right to read a library book without it going into a database. Or a right to send e-mail without it being read. Or to attend a speach by the President without having to prove that you've never publicly supported the Democratic Party.") :laugh: I thought the same exact thing as I was typing it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted August 12, 2005 Share Posted August 12, 2005 Your Right Larry: Thats the there are 3 branches that are supposed to regulate each others powers.... The Patriot act is a scary thing that needs to be proven over and over... I think they do that though or it expires? There were people on the 9/11 commission that never should have been... the information will come out over time and our intelligence was Skeerewed by the nondisclosure memo *so yes i believe the British over our for a while there*... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.