I would just like to know if there are any people on this forum who would support a new investigation into the events of 9/11. My main complaint about the 9/11 Commission is that it was directed by Philip Zelikow who was practically a member of the Bush administration. This seems to be such an obvious conflict of interest that I am surprised that there wasnt more objections to this raised by other politicians, lawyers, and the media. I know that some of the victim's family members were vehemently opposed to him directing the Commission.
I am not asking if you buy into all the conspiracy theories but is there anyone on this forum that thought that the 911 Commission lacked neccesary impartiality and/or credibility for other reasons?
1. The investigations that have already taken place were extremely thorough. There is nothing they will find of any consequence to who attacked on 9/11 and why (except in the warped mind of a truther).
2. How is Zelikow a conflict of interest? Was Bush a suspect at the time the commission was chosen? Was the USG suspect at the time? No they were not (except for the occasional idiotic paranoid at the time).
3. No I do not think that the commission lacked impartiality any more than any other commission asked to investigate such a matter.
4. Where is the overwhelming evidence to support the idea of $30 Million Dollars for a new investigation??????
CurtC,
Why wouldnt you want your tax dollars to pay for a new investigation? 9/11 was used as a pretext for two wars already and military spending accounts for almost half of your tax dollars as it is. Are you that confident in the ruling of an investigation that had a major conflict of interest? Perhaps you are. Fair enough.
Would you feel the same way if you had lost a loved one in the tragedy or would your priorities shift from finances to having your questions and concerns dealt with in a more complete and candid manner?
So you are whining about the alleged impartiality of the commission, and then ask us to look at things from the PARTIAL aspect of someone who had lost a loved one in the tragedy?
9/11 was used, no doubt. The first war was justified, as a means to overthrown those who hid and kept the leader of the organization that carried out 9/11. The second war, while influenced by the events of 9/11, was conducted based on intelligence (looks like faulty intelligence at this point) that Saddam had Weapons of Mass Distruction, and by revenge for Daddy.
Wow, there have been a lot of quick replies. Thank you all for your comments and your welcomes. A couple of posters have asked for more details about such a hypothetical investigation. These are good questions. The following quote is not my idea but the idea of another poster on a different forum. I liked his idea so I will repost it:
"FUNDING
$30 million dollars initially provided by the federal government (more if necessary, subject to government approval)
Like I said earlier, where is the justification? The evidence to lead investigators on a chase for more? What has not been covered that has a body of evidence surrounding it to prove it should have been looked into?
Get the truthers to call Bill Gates and get him to fund it.
NEW 9/11 COMMISSION
It would be comprised of thirty-six people in four groups (nine in each group):
Fom the federal government:
(1) Congress
(2) Judiciary
(3) Executive
and,
(4) Concerned Citizens- comprised from the following: 9/11 surviving family members, 9/11 first responders in health crisis, actual 9/11 survivors. All concerned citizens from these groups (organization and group membership must first take place) would decide by group election initial nine members for (4) Concerned Citizens.
The initial nine members of (4) Concerned Citizens would choose the twenty-seven members for the other three groups.
Should an investigative committee be formed (dealing in extreme hypotheticals now), here is what is right/wrong with the above...
1. The first three groups are fine. The 4th group seems fair. The role of the 4th group to pick the other 27 is ridiculous. What credentials appropriate for picking the members do the Concerned citizens have? This is a ploy, written by someone who believes they can get enough people on the citizen committee to determine which investigators will listen to what they want looked into...so much for IMPARTIALITY.
The Commission would be guided and led by an Action Committee comprised of twelve people from the four groups (three from each group). The nine members of (4) Concerned Citizens group would choose all members of the Action Committee.
Once again ridiculous.
When there is a murder, does the widow(er) get to chose which officers, which detectives look into the murder????
Commission members can each employ three assistants to aid them in their duties. In addition, Action Committee members can each employ two additional assistants to add to their original complement of three.
Commission members may decide from time to time (subject to Action Committee approval) to have representatives placed in their stead, acting with their full authority.
Each group on the Action Committee would have percentage voting rights of:
15% = (1) Congress
15% = (2) Judiciary
15% = (3) Executive
55% = (4) Concerned Citizens
Voting in the Action Committee would be done by each person in each group having a YEA-NAY vote, with votes subject to each groups voting rights percentage.
Example, vote tally and resulting decision:
15% = (1) Congress
1 YEA ... 2 NAY.......YEA 05.00% NAY 10.00%
15% = (2) Judiciary
0 YEA ... 3 NAY.......YEA 0.00% NAY 15.00%
15% = (3) Executive
0 YEA ... 3 NAY.......YEA 00.00% NAY 15.00%
55% = (4) Concerned Citizens
3 YEA ... 0 NAY.......YEA 55.00% NAY 00.00%
FINAL TALLY:
4 YEA ... 8 NAY.......
YEA 60.00% NAY 40.00%
Action item passes.
I almost spit out my coke when I saw that the 9 concerned citizens (out of 36 members on the committee) get 55% voting share.
What insane template is this based on?
Members in all four groups can be rotated in and out from time to time subject to voting approval by the Action Committee, and the (4) Concerned Citizens group can remove and replace any members in any of the four groups by at least a simple two-thirds majority vote.
The goal of the New 9/11 Investigation would be to identify, apprehend, and bring to justice those charged in the commission of crimes regarding the events of September 11th, 2001.
Regarding subpoena power of the New 9/11 Commission, only Executive Privilege personally exercised by the President of the United States (for himself only) will be honored. All others would be subject to the subpoena power. This means everyone else, including up to the Vice-President of the United States.
Lastly, the American people should be kept up-to-date and fully informed on the progress of the Commission.
The time for the New Investigation is now; it is long past-due.
Another hoped-for result to the above being done would be an opportunity to restore faith in American government...something also in need of and long past-due.
"...that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain--that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom--and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth." Abraham Lincoln
Gettysburg, 1863
"... and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free."
John 8:32"
This is only one possible idea. Any thoughts on this poster's idea?
Absolutely ridiculous, ill conceived, unattainable suggestions, that would only ever come to be in a fantasy world of the truth movements creation.
Good luck with that.
TAM
