Discussion of the Ideal New 9/11 Investigative Panel

So we are all screaming for a new investigation into the 9/11 attacks, seeing as the 9/11 Commission did not cut it. And the obvious question that comes from this is who would be the ideal panel to head up such an investigation?

Should this be headed up by the GAO, for instance?

Or should this be headed up by some of the more prominent 9/11 researchers? Or both?

I am not sure, but there are a few things that would seem evident:

1) Conflicts of interest need to be eliminated. And that one's going to be tough, especially when political and monetary interests are involved. Do you include someone like Alex Jones, for instance, when he makes his living on conspiracy issues?

2) Subpoena power is going to be an issue.

3) Executive privilege and National Security interest are going to be an issue. How can this be overcome? Remember that the only way Bush and Cheney agreed to testify to the 9/11 Commission was in secret, together, and not under oath.

4) The legal aspects of this. Does at least one attorney need to be involved?

5) Funding issues. Where would the money for this come from, and just as importantly, how would these funds be best distributed and allocated?

I have so far seen little talk of these issues, and if we are serious about a new investigation, then it's time we engaged in serious discussions and planning for this new investigation that will satisfy the literally millions of discontent people on this issue.

reply to post by TrueAmerican


interesting thread starter..

Discussion of the Ideal New 9/11 Investigative Panel

So we are all screaming for a new investigation into the 9/11 attacks, seeing as the 9/11 Commission did not cut it. And the obvious question that comes from this is who would be the ideal panel to head up such an investigation?

first off not everyone is screaming for a new investigation.. but its a very good question..

Should this be headed up by the GAO, for instance?

under the circumstances, no government involvement would be acceptable.. as the conclusions would still be suspect..

Or should this be headed up by some of the more prominent 9/11 researchers? Or both?

the case would of nescesity, have to be pursued by said researchers..

I am not sure, but there are a few things that would seem evident:

1) Conflicts of interest need to be eliminated. And that one's going to be tough, especially when political and monetary interests are involved. Do you include someone like Alex Jones, for instance, when he makes his living on conspiracy issues?

you would have to decide what evidence to bring and that alone should limit the list somewhat..

2) Subpoena power is going to be an issue.

if it were to come to an actual trial, no.. but for questioning and interview purposes, yes kinda tricky.. as you have to be assured that they are telling the truth as they believe it..

3) Executive privilege and National Security interest are going to be an issue. How can this be overcome? Remember that the only way Bush and Cheney agreed to testify to the 9/11 Commission was in secret, together, and not under oath.

another tough call, someone would have to arbitrate the details.. how would we know what is a security issue and what is not without them revealing it?

4) The legal aspects of this. Does at least one attorney need to be involved?

possibly.. at least the documents supplied as evidence should at least be notarized with dates and signatures..

5) Funding issues. Where would the money for this come from, and just as importantly, how would these funds be best distributed and allocated?

it would have to be privately funded I think.. the public is pretty sensitive to government expenditures at the moment..

I have so far seen little talk of these issues, and if we are serious about a new investigation, then it's time we engaged in serious discussions and planning for this new investigation that will satisfy the literally millions of discontent people on this issue.

very true.. the first thing I would do before any new investigation, is get all my ducks in a row..
first decide on which angles you want to use for the main points.. do you introduce hologram planes? nano thermite?bombs? missiles?
secondly, the first onus would be to write some precise technical papers that deal with the elements of the collapse
of the towers.. and get them peer reviewed and accepted.. the scientific community would be the judge.. if that passes, then you can proceed to enter that as evidence..
when the majority of chemists, structural engineers, pilots, explosive demolition experts, and members of other various fields, find the anomalies of 911 suspicious.. you have a start..
personally, I think mihop is impossible to prove with the evidence at hand..
and in a court most of the current evidence would be countered effectively..
you would have to be prepared to effectively debunk the debunkers..
I would actually like to see this.. I am willing to change my point of view if I am wrong..
but I would hate for an investigation to just result in even more questions.. with no conclusions..
you have to be thorough, as there would probably be only one chance at this..
remember the house assassination committee? they said four shots.. and a conspiracy.. but no change on Oswalds status..

Oooh, some shining, unbiased stars like...

Rumsfeld.
Cheney.
Bush(es)
Obama.
Powell.

And half of the other useless eaters in the party houses in Washington.


Some unbiased scientists would be good candidates as they can reason using facts, not disinformation. One way to do it would be to get an independent group to appoint them. Or multiple independent groups, this way we can be more sure of an unbiased decision, from multiple POVs.
If it comes from one source, it's much easier for the govt to position people of influence.

Originally posted by pccat
Should this be headed up by the GAO, for instance?

under the circumstances, no government involvement would be acceptable.. as the conclusions would still be suspect..

Or should this be headed up by some of the more prominent 9/11 researchers? Or both?

under the circumstances, no prominent 9/11 researchers involvement would be acceptable.. as the conclusions would still be suspect..

There. I fixed it for you. If you are going to exclude government for any perception of "bias", you must exclude any non-government for any perception of "bias".

Can you imagine? Having any PfT or CIT or AE9/11 or Loose Change idiots involved with this? Just save money and have them start summary executions in the street since that is the only thing they want.

How about the cast from the original Predator movie?

...Actually I am serious.

Discussing this sort of thing is just fanciful as far as I am concerned. Another "panel" is guaranteed to give you another whitewash. Just look at the performance of the House Select Comittee on Assassinations back in the day. They concluded that Kennedy was probably murdered as the result of a conspiracy and then exonerated all of the prime suspects.

The only way 9/11 will be exposed is if criminal charges are laid against someone. The 9/11 Comission considered laying charges aginst military officers they thought were lying to them. That is where you start. Then you see where it leads. Even if you are laying charges against small fry on technicalities, it may lead to bigger charges against bigger fish.

We need court cases. Are we going to get court cases in the country that invented no-fault insurance. The country whose last president made a career of presidential signing statements and ignoring congressional subpoenas? Don't make me laugh.

Forget a new panel. Go for political reform. Rescind the Patriot Act and get the lobbyists out of the country's business. #can the Fed. Then you might have a chance. Take back your effing government.

To really go after the perps in this case you will need to audit all the legislation that Bush passed to make perpetrators immune from prosecution. A lot can be hidden behind the Patriot Act.

It may also be possible to get Bushco on war crimes charges. That's worth looking into.

reply to post by pccat


Well thanks pccat, for at least making some reasonable attempt to further the discussion.

So where are all the innovators? Where are all the truthers that want a new investigation? It has been said a zillion times around here that new investigation with some real teeth is needed. But yet when it comes time to make suggestions on how this would take place, everyone bails? Come on now folks, we had better get to talking about this so that some concrete ideas are put forth!

A new, thorough investigation is long overdue and greatly welcomed and it should cover absolutely every aspect of 9/11 with no omissions.

As to who should be on the panel, I really have no idea, but I hope and pray that the people selected are as neutral and unbiased as possible given the time that has passed, and that they should have no ulterior motives or hidden agendas etc.

I really look forward to the day when all the speculating can stop and we can all say, this is what happened on 9/11 and it is indisputable.

These days I don't concern myself too much with the dynamics of how such an operation was planned and carried out because it's in the past, we can't turn the clock back and we're going to find out anyway. I worry more about the future and how a country and it's people recover from being lied to by its government and not just lied to, but actively murdered or allowed to be murdered by its government.

I don't think it's that much of a stretch of the imagination to predict rioting and civil unrest on a major scale in every single state.

I think that is something that is also going to have to be greatly considered and plans put in place for, before the release of the findings of the new investigative panel.

Mark

Some of the people I would like to see on such a investigative panel

From the US political side
Ron Paul
Dennis Kuncinich
Jesse Ventura
Mike Gravel
Cynthia McKinney

From the US military side
Major General Albert Stubblebine (Retired)
General Wesley Clark (Retired)


Pilots
Rob Balsamo
Lt. Col. Jeff Latas, U.S. Air Force (ret)
Maj. Brian Power-Waters, U.S. Air Force (ret)


If these guys were on it they would really shake things up.

I would set it up like a court case, imho I think something of this magnitude should not be burdened upon the shoulders of one person. A chair person should be involved but to sit in and instruct like a Crown Court Judge. A jury built from people who reside in neutral Countries whose careers cover every single aspect that would be needed from architects to rescue workers and military personal including counter terrorism experience.

Every single witness that can give a solid reliable account will all have their say, along with everyone involved with the government and people who oppose the OS, also pre-hearing any test that can prove or disprove certain aspects to be duly prepared beforehand, and certain witnesses from both sides of the fence to undergo polygraph tests to prove integrity to the cause and not to gain from personal benefits.

It's been plain to see that after 8 years 9/11 Truthers have not come up with anything to warrant any "new" investigation.

reply to post by jthomas


Oh no, not at all. That's why there are so many prominent people asking so many questions.

patriotsquestion911.com...

If you've got nothing to add to the thread constructively jthomas, why bother?

Originally posted by TrueAmerican
reply to post by jthomas

 

Oh no, not at all.

That's why there are so many prominent people asking so many questions.

patriotsquestion911.com...

Tell us why they haven't listened to the answers.

If you've got nothing to add to the thread constructively jthomas, why bother?

It should be obvious to you by now that you should give up your fanciful 9/11 conspiracy theories. If helping you do that is not constructive than don't bother reading my replies.

Originally posted by jthomas
It should be obvious to you by now that you should give up your fanciful 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Why? Cause you and your "Q" unit say so?

Umm no. If the 9/11 Commission was a real investigation to you, and totally satisfactory, then why do you bother even coming to this site with such vigor to defend the official story? I mean it's like every single thread, you, cameron and swampfox just keep repeating the same exact thing over and over again. Which really amounts to much of nothing, most of the time.

This thread is about ideas for a new investigation, and who should participate in it. Any chance you could discuss this subject with any degree of intellect instead of spewing your usual sarcasm and condescending tone?

I might even listen and consider your opinion. *Might.*

Originally posted by TrueAmerican

Originally posted by jthomas
It should be obvious to you by now that you should give up your fanciful 9/11 conspiracy theories.

Why? Cause you and your "Q" unit say so?

Umm no. If the 9/11 Commission was a real investigation to you, and totally satisfactory, then why do you bother even coming to this site with such vigor to defend the official story?

I hate to break the news to you, but the term "Official Story" was used by 9/11 conspiracists within 48 hours of the attacks of 9/11 and ever since then, and long before a 9/11 Commission was even conceived.

Second, the 9/11 Commission's mission had NO mission to re-investigate the fact that 4 passenger jets were hijacked by Arabs reporting to bin Laden, nor the causes of the collapses of WTC 1 , 2, and 7, nor the fact that AA77 hit the Pentagon, nor anything you 9/11 Deniers claim are in question despite the evidence.

Third, you still can't understand that your "Official Story" canard is nothing more than a front to hide the fact that you have been wholly unable to refute the massive, independent evidence of what happened on 9/11 that neither originated with, nor was in control of, the "government" to begin with.

I mean it's like every single thread, you, cameron and swampfox just keep repeating the same exact thing over and over again.

Some people take longer than others to finally realize they've been a victim of their own illusions. Apparently, it doesn't bother you that you 9/11 deniers keep repeating the same worn-out nonsense year after year despite it having been debunked. We're here to show why your claims are irrational.

This thread is about ideas for a new investigation, and who should participate in it. Any chance you could discuss this subject with any degree of intellect instead of spewing your usual sarcasm and condescending tone?

I already have. That you don't like the answer is a problem that is yours alone. There will be no new investigation until and unless you can present compelling and overwhelming evidence to support the claims you have made (and that have been debunked) for the last 8 years.

- There will be no new investigation of why and how the WTC Towers collapsed. That is known, understood, and accepted by the overwhelming majority of structural engineers, architects, physicists, chemists, and forensic scientists. None of the claims from your 9/11 Denial Movement or irrational architects with no training in skyscraper constriction or design like Richard Gage is going to convince any rational person to the contrary.

- There will be no new investigation on whether or not UA 175, AA 11, or AA 77, were hijacked by identified Arabs and deliberately crashed into WTC 1, 2 and the Pentagon. The conclusion from multiple independent lines of evidence and hundreds of independent eyewitnesses is overwhelming and has never been touched by the claims of you 9/11 Deniers. Yet you continue under the self-deception that none of that evidence is true, verifiable, and is, instead, only controlled by a few government agents. With no evidence or proof provided by any of you.

Denial is denial is denial. You don't understand that rational people will accept the evidence wherever it leads. But we will also point out irrational beliefs and when claims don't hold up. You guys never like the fact that we don't have to have a political agenda like you, that we can hate Bush as much as you, and distrust government when and where it is demonstrably warranted. Be we can also fight nonsense from whatever source it comes, like I fight Creationists who try to control educational standards.

That is the value of free speech. You can make and support claims. We can agree or disagree and show why. And we can show why you hide behind all the canards like your "Official Story" canard.

It's a dead giveaway.


[edit on 29-7-2009 by jthomas]

Originally posted by jthomas

Some people take longer than others to finally realize they've been a victim of their own illusions. Apparently, it doesn't bother you that you 9/11 deniers keep repeating the same worn-out nonsense year after year despite it having been debunked. We're here to show why your claims are irrational.

Gotta disagree with you here, jthomas. It's perfectly obvious by their behavior that the problem *isn't* with the truthers, per se, but with these damned fool conspiracy websites feeding them utter trash.

These sites have an ulterior motive to get people as paranoid as possible and instigate unrest in order to sell them a cornucopia of books,DVDs t-shirts, baseball caps, posters, decals, etc. If the operators of these websites truly and honestly believed there was any real conspiracy they'd be screaming it out to anyone within earshot, not demanding people to pay them for "the truth". Imagine that instead of Paul Revere riding around yelling "the redcoats are coming" he was yelling "something really bad is coming and I'll tell you what it is for $19.95 plux tax, and I have a wonderful assortment of T-shirts, baseball caps, etc". It's ridiculous.

Here's a beautiful example, posted right here on the ATS forum- Apparently one Truther researcher or another visited the NIST headquarters unannounced to give them his "research". Their building security asked him what he was doing there, he told them and gave them his research, then left. You'd have thought this was pretty much a non-story until you see the headline for the article -"TRUTH MOVEMENT RESEARCHER DETAINED BY NIST, RESEARCH SIEZED." Facts are nothing but a plaything for these con artists to strecth and bend to their liking.

The truthers certainly aren't stupid, far from it. Many of them are quite intelligent and a pleasure to talk to. They're simply being suckered by a bunch of self serving grifters, and of course they're going to repeat the exact same bad information again and again and again. That's all the information these websites are telling them. Those sites have gotten these people so screwed up, they actually believe it's valid and honest research to actively AVOID looking at anything that contradicts what these conspiracy websites are telling them.

The truth never has to run and hide from falsehoods. It's falsehoods that have to run and hide from the truth, as I like to say.





[edit on 30-7-2009 by GoodOlDave]