Sen Gravel agrees an independent inquiry is needed to get to the bottom of what happened on 9/11

[seemslikeadream]

http://www.gravel2008.us /

On July 7, Gravel's Press Secretary, Alex Colvin, posted this statement in a thread discussing September the 11th, on the Senator's campaign website forum;


Thanks to everybody committed to the 9/11 truth movement who have forwarded us films and literature concerning 9/11. We have taken considerable amount of time to look into this issue, there is a lot of evidence to sift through. After careful consideration and much study, Senator Gravel agrees that an independent inquiry is indeed needed to get to the bottom of what happened on September 11, 2001.

[Chippy]

1. Guess what? You guys are the ones who have to put this together

You know why? Because the government sure as hell won't give you an independent inquiry. If the government is innocent and they do put together an independent inquiry, they will find no conspiracy because, as I said, the government is innocent. But you won't believe it. Why would you? There's plenty of evidence out there that puts 9/11 to rest already and you just deny it, so why wouldn't you deny the results of this investigation? Flight 93 is a perfect example. It wasn't shot down because it rose in elevation by 5,000 feet before crashing, which it wouldn't do if it was mortally wounded. And the plane DID crash there because several eyewitnesses saw it, and 95% of the plane was recovered, and all the remains of all the victims were positively identified. This is conclusive evidence that there was no conspiracy with Flight 93, and if what happened on Flight 93 was for real, then all of 9/11 was for real. It makes no sense to argue anything else. These are simple, straightforward facts that put 9/11 to rest, but you deny them so that you can keep up with your ridiculous "truth movement".

Back to my point...if the government actually is guilty, then obviously the independent inquiry they put together is going to be filled with criminals who will put out a report saying that there was no conspiracy. So no matter what, if the government puts this inquiry together, you truthers are screwed. So you have to do this yourselves. Hire your own investigators, engineers, physicists, professors, whatever the hell you want. Nobody is stopping you from putting together a team to investigate this, are they? No, they aren't. So how about you get to work?

[seemslikeadream]

2. debunk this

DIANA: FIAT DRIVER 'SHOT IN THE HEAD'

Monday July 9,2007
By Martin Evans, The Daily Express

[Chippy]

3. I'm pretty sure Princess Di was not involved with 9/11

So no, I will not debunk that. Why are you bringing this up here anyway? That's pretty random.

[seemslikeadream]

4. Pretty random?

Oh you're just a 9/11 debunker?

[Chippy]

7. Yes.

That's why my journal username is "911debunker". I don't debunk anything else.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

5. "This is conclusive evidence that there was no conspiracy with Flight 93, and if what happened on

Flight 93 was for real, then all of 9/11 was for real."

Well that seals it for me, everyone can now go home. Nothing more to see here.

[parasim]

50. Yeah, that cracks me up...

Oh, here's the proof that no aliens came down in a holographic spaceship and zapped the WTC with their laserbeams, so everything the government says about 9/11 must the truth!

Gaaawd...

[Ezlivin]

6. Just check out the FDR from Flight 77

If the "official" theory holds, then something is terribly amiss with the "official" FDR.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/pentagon.html

So in regards to your final statement(s) "Nobody is stopping you from putting together a team to investigate this, are they? No, they aren't. So how about you get to work?"

There are plenty of teams working right now. People are getting "to work."

[William Seger]

27. You said it

> "If the 'official' theory holds, then something is terribly amiss with the 'official' FDR."

Some people state that the other way around -- if the P4T altitude analysis is correct then the plane couldn't have hit the Pentagon -- and apparently end up with the perfectly idiotic conclusion that the plane must not have hit the Pentagon. That kind of logic takes a special kind of stupid, huh.

[Diane_nyc]

55. Flight 93 vs. other 9/11 questions, and what an "independent" investigation means

Chippy wrote:

1. Guess what? You guys are the ones who have to put this together

...

...if what happened on Flight 93 was for real, then all of 9/11 was for real. It makes no sense to argue anything else.

I don't agree. I've always considered the question of what happened to Flight 93 to be irrelevant to most other, and more important, questions concerning the events of 9/11, for the following two reasons:

1) On the one hand, it can be argued that Flight 93 should have been shot down, and indeed it was widely reported that there was an order to shoot it down. So, if we were to encounter proof that Flight 93 was shot down, this would not prove MIHOP, or even LIHOP, or even criminal negligence or treason. It would prove only that a perfectly legitimate order had been carried out, but that then someone got cold feet about the possibility of being sued by the families of the passengers or something. It would prove a "conspiracy" only of essentially the same kind as, say, your typical coverup of police brutality.

2) On the other hand, if the official story is proven correct for Flight 93, this would disprove some of the wackier MIHOP hypotheses such as remote-controlled planes and fake phone calls, but it would not disprove demolition of the WTC buildings, nor would it disprove, say, a NORAD "stand down" for the flights that actually caused damage to their targets. Nor would it disprove foreknowledge or the specificity of warnings.

So, I've always considered the question of what happened to Flight 93 to be pretty much orthogonal to most other 9/11 questions. Hence I've never paid a whole lot of attention to question of what happened to Flight 93.

Back to my point...if the government actually is guilty, then obviously the independent inquiry they put together is going to be filled with criminals who will put out a report saying that there was no conspiracy.

It is certainly possible for a congressional inquiry, or a commission created by Congress, to investigate wrongdoing in the executive branch. It just needs to be run by people without conflicts of interest. The 9/11 Commission was supposed to be such an independent commission. The problem is that its executive director was Philip Zelikow, who was a friend of Condoleeza Rice and had other ties to the Bush Administration.

So you have to do this yourselves. Hire your own investigators, engineers, physicists, professors, whatever the hell you want. Nobody is stopping you from putting together a team to investigate this, are they?

What we as private citizens don't have is subpeona power.

[LARED]

8. On a completely different note

Who gives a rats rear end what a Senator that left Congress in 1981 has to say. And why do you think his feelings make a difference?

In 1980 Gravel was challenged for the Democratic Party's nomination by State Representative Clark Gruening, the grandson of the man Gravel had defeated in a primary 12 years earlier. Gruening won the primary. As an insurgent candidate in 1968, Gravel had never established a firm party base;<9> a group of Democrats, including future governor Steve Cowper,<13> led the campaign against Gravel, with Gravel's actions against 1978 and 1980 lands bills in Alaska a major issue.<6> Another factor may have been Alaska's primary system, which allows unlimited cross-over voting across parties and from its large unaffiliated electorate.<13> In any case, Gravel would later concede that by the time of his defeat, he had alienated "almost every constituency in Alaska.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Gravel#Loss_of_Senate...

For crying out loud, the Democrats (his own party) ran him out of office.

[seemslikeadream]

9. On a completely different note Nov. 5, 1971

Rev. Robert N. West, UUA President, and Senator Mike Gravel (D-Alaska) hold a press conference on Nov. 5, 1971 concerning Beacon Press' publication of "The Pentagon Papers" and ongoing harassment of the UUA by the FBI. Photo courtesy Robert N. West.



Rev. Robert N. West, UUA President, and Senator Mike Gravel (D-Alaska) hold a press conference on Nov. 5, 1971 concerning Beacon Press' publication of "The Pentagon Papers" and ongoing harassment of the UUA by the FBI. Photo courtesy Robert N. West.





In 1971, he waged a successful one-man filibuster for five months that forced the Nixon administration to cut a deal, effectively ending the draft in the United States. He is most prominently known for his release of the Pentagon Papers, the secret official study that revealed the lies and manipulations of successive U.S. administrations that misled the country into the Vietnam War. After the New York Times published portions of the leaked study, the Nixon administration moved to block any further publication of information and to punish any newspaper publisher who revealed the contents




you kinda left this part out by mistake I'm sure

[LARED]

10. Odd coincidences abound with 9/11 CT'ers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Gravel#Barnes_Review_...

Barnes Review controversy

In June 2003 Gravel gave a speech on direct democracy at a conference hosted by the American Free Press. The event was cosponsored by the Barnes Review, a journal that endorses Holocaust denial.<19> Gravel has said repeatedly that he does not share such a view, stating "You better believe I know that six million Jews were killed. I've been to the Holocaust Museum. I've seen the footage of General Eisenhower touring one of the camps. They're nutty as loons if they don't think it happened". The newspaper had intended to interview Gravel about the National Initiative. Senator Gravel recounts the background to the event:

"He liked the idea of the National Initiative. I figured it was an opportunity to discuss it. Whether it is the far right, far left, whatever, I'll make my pitch to them. They gave me a free subscription to American Free Press. They still send it to me today. I flip through it sometimes. It has some extreme views, and a lot of the ads in it are even more extreme and make me want to upchuck. Anyways, sometime later, Carto contacted me to speak at that Barnes Review Conference. I had never heard of the Barnes Review, didn't know anything about it or what they stood for. I was just coming to give a presentation about the National Initiative. I was there maybe 30 minutes. I could tell from the people in the room (mainly some very old men) that they were pretty extreme. I gave my speech, answered some questions and left. I never saw the agenda for the day or listened to any of the other presentations."<20>


Why is it so many 9/11 troothers get mixed up with rabid anti-Semites, and historical revisionists?

Sounds to me like he is a looser that got lucky with the Pentagon Papers. Now there's a new CT in town and he is trying to relive his glory day.

[seemslikeadream]

12. here I'll save you some time

now you've done your job aren't you proud of yourself

[LARED]

13. I'm sure on your planet that has deep meaning (n/t)

[seemslikeadream]

15. just as deep as you and yours

[Snazzy]

20. Sounded like a balanced and politcally inclusive response

Knowing people who worked in WTC (my mom and cousin both were lucky yet knew many who were not, add a grade school classmate, dead, and countless stories of close connections being in NY) and in the Pentagon and on one of the planes (college friend of friend died in each case), I don't buy into some wacky thought about 9/11.

But what I can tell you I don't like with sincere certainty is people who shut down discussion. That's very cool that conspiracy theorist has its own acronym now. I had to look it up to see what the hell you were talking about. Amazing thing what a loaded term that is, and probably an interesting story on how that came to be. I suspect there is a 'conspiracy theory" conspiracy theory, but that's another story. Will say this though: white collar crime, conspiracy to X is probably the most highly prosecuted crime there is next to lying to Fed agent. But our new conventional wisdom somehow says that there aren't conspiracies anymore, just lone gunmen and us clearly psychotic citizens who bother to question when we are clearly getting fed a line.

Thankfully some of us got a education that can't be beat. How many failed or exposed government acts of malfeasance does it take before to break though that barrier of 'there are no conspiracies' anyway? BCCI? MKULTRA? Enron? Halliburton? The Downing Street Memos? The (hey back on topic!) Pentagon papers? Iran/Contra or hell most anything we have done in last 30 years in our name in Latin America? I could write a book and probably should, but I need not since it's all here on DU.

Well this bit of rant was far more than you deserved. But you are hanging out here in the 9/11 dungeon thinking you will get away with painting Gravel as an anti-semite with a nudge nudge wink wink.

That ain't cool.

He's a democrat. He running for prez. He doesn't have a chance in hell, but he does have a platform and he's not going to impact our other candidates. So you, sir, are denigrating our guy and our party.

----------

Haha Halliburton is in the MS2003 dictionary, now that’s a conspiracy.

[LARED]

22. But, but, but, I was only applying standard CT sophistry

See, first you find something unusual, typically something where there is likely a mundane explanation, but you are ignorant of it. Then you make a sinister insinuation making it seem, well unseemly. Then ignore all possible explanations

That my friend sums up about 95% of troother evidence

BTW, anyone that speaks at an AFP event, then claims ignorance, is blowing smoke in my view.

[seemslikeadream]

25. Anyone who takes one moment in a person's life and labels him

is also blowing something, in my view

[LARED]

31. Now you are getting the big picture

Can I assume you now see the billowing fumes of smoke blown by many CT'er that take one mundane issue they fail to understand and make it out to be sinister with insinuating questions.

[seemslikeadream]

33. NO

[Grateful for Hope]

26. but, but, but -- "they" do it too!

Accepting personal responsibility does not include pointing out that, in one's opinion, others do it too.

Republicans do this all the time ("Clinton did it too", for instance). Just sayin'.

[leftchick]

23. what is a "looser"??

do tell?

[William Seger]

28. Neologism

Looser = Loose Change fan.

[seemslikeadream]

29. so Gravel is a fan of Loose Change?

link?

[William Seger]

30. Right there in the OP

"Thanks to everybody committed to the 9/11 truth movement who have forwarded us films and literature concerning 9/11."

[seemslikeadream]

32. FAN

Where in the hell is the word fan?

BTW do you realize we just might be at war with Turkey soon? Keep sweatin the small stuff William Seger

[William Seger]

34. Oh, OK

I'm willing to presume that the press secretary wasn't referring to the 9/11 crap like Loose Change, 9/11 Mysteries, and In Plane Site. He was referring to the good 9/11 films like... um... such as... uh... for example... er....

So why do you suppose Gravel is sweatin the small stuff when there are so many real things to be concerned about, Dreamy?

[seemslikeadream]

35. again you folks are so good at takin one moment in time aren't you?

[William Seger]

42. Talking to you...

... seems like a dream....

[SidDithers]

56. Are "we" at war with Turkey yet?...nt

Sid

[graphixtech]

37. Again, Loose Change does not represent the 911 truth movement

Perhaps Gravel received these quality films and literature:
http://911research.wtc7.net/resources/books/index.html
http://911research.wtc7.net/resources/videos/index.html
Perhaps he received this powerful little book, which has opened many eyes:
http://wtc7.net/store/books/wakingup/samples/index.html

Despite repeated attempts to portray otherwise, the
911 truth movement existed long before Loose Change
suddenly appeared on the horizon in 2005.

To address historical revisionism, the original, national
9/11 Truth Movement originated in 2003 with the National
9-11 Visibilty Project. What began with two cities grew
into a clearinghouse with over 40 city contacts and
a mailing list of over 3000.
http://septembereleventh.org/about.php .
Founding 9-11 truth activism video:
http://www.digitalstyledesigns.com/movies/Citizen_Invol...
Bill Douglas, founder speaks at Green event in NYC:
http://digitalstyledesigns.com/movies2/NYCGreens.mov
First nationally coordinated 911 protest action, on a bitter
cold day in Nov. 2003 (photo album).
http://snapshots.graphicswithstyle.com /


Audience scan of a huge original 9-11 Visibilty Project event,
with over 800 in attendance:
http://digitalstyledesigns.com/movies2/kcovation.mov
A few photos of coverage of founding activist movement:
http://digitalstyledesigns.com/pages/signarchive.htm


Jim Hoffman's 9-11 Research has been at the forefront
in critiquing various disinfo campaigns.
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/index.html


http://911review.com /

[seemslikeadream]

38. I just love the tactic used by some folks

It's so revealing

[William Seger]

48. Oh? Who owns the trademark?

As could easily be predicted for a "movement" based on paranoia and egos, the "truth movement" is too splintered now to say that anyone "represents" it. Ya pays yer money and ya takes yer choice.

[graphixtech]

52. the state of the truth movement is an irrelevant factor

We are each free to speak out individually without association to any 9-11 organization or movement. That the current 9-11 truth movement has been fractionalized by a combination of factors which includes infiltration campaigns, calculated media complicity, left-gatekeeping walls, disinformation campaigns, organizational strategic errors and simply human restraints does not in any way diminish the individual responsibility to share information and speak out about the crime of the century.

On May 29th, architect Richard Gage gave an outstanding speech in front of hundreds in Manitoba, Canada. I encourage everyone to share the video clip with other professionals and encourage their potential membership. The video can be found on the top left of ae911tuth.org.
http://ae911truth.org /



From the Summer of Truth website:
http://www.summeroftruth.org/09-11-2005.html
"September 11 is a specific incident, a crime. What really happened involves questions of literal facts, not opinions or ideologies: Was there an air defense stand-down?
http://justicefor911.org/iiA1_AirDefense_111904.php
Did administration big-wigs know about the plot in advance and deliberately allow it? Were wargames used as a cover for a false-flag attack? Were the WTC buildings blown up using explosives?
http://911research.wtc7.net/disinfo/collapse/explaining...
Were the alleged hijackers under surveillance by US and other agencies prior to September 11th? Who financed the alleged hijackers, and why does The 9/11 Commission Report say it doesn't matter? Does the report omit important lines of inquiry?
"The bodies of evidence indicating complicity in the attack by US and allied foreign intelligence networks have yet to be examined at all by either, the official investigations or the US corporate media..."



Jan Hoyer
Graphics and Media for Effecting Change
http://janhoyer.wordpress.com /

[Diane_nyc]

57. The OP doesn't mention "Loose Change," specifically ....

So we don't know what Mike Gravel thought of "Loose Change," as distinct from, say, "9/11: Press for Truth." The O.P. doesn't mention any specific videos by name.

[parasim]

51. Wow, you guys must really not like Gravel...

moving into the whole anti-semitism stage already...

[LARED]

11. Also sounds like Mike figured out troothers have disposable income

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Gravel#Presidential_b...

Through February 2007, opinion polls of contenders for the Democratic nomination have all shown Gravel with a 1% or less support level. At the end of March 2007, his campaign had less than $500 in cash on hand against debts of nearly $90,000.

I could be wrong. but in true CT'er style, why not make some sinister insinuations.

[seemslikeadream]

14. good for you LARED

never pass up a chance to call someone an anti-semite

[LARED]

16. When you speak at an American Free Press conference

it's a question that's bound to come up.

[seemslikeadream]

17. and like I said you've done your job

[seemslikeadream]

18. yea LARED that is extremely fair of you

isn't it. Take one incident out a man's life and label him an anti-semite. How generous of you. You did leave out just a little bit now didn't you. Look around some more maybe you can find a photo of Gravel having lunch with David Duke

[LARED]

21. Hey, I didn't label him an anti-Semite, I was just asking

questions

[seemslikeadream]

36. bullshit

[LARED]

39. Prove it !!!!!

[seemslikeadream]

40. I realize you are a very cagey person LARED

Odd coincidences abound with 9/11 CT'ers
Edited on Wed Jul-11-07 09:39 PM by LARED
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Gravel#Barnes_Review_ ...

Barnes Review controversy

In June 2003 Gravel gave a speech on direct democracy at a conference hosted by the American Free Press. The event was cosponsored by the Barnes Review, a journal that endorses Holocaust denial.<19> Gravel has said repeatedly that he does not share such a view, stating "You better believe I know that six million Jews were killed. I've been to the Holocaust Museum. I've seen the footage of General Eisenhower touring one of the camps. They're nutty as loons if they don't think it happened". The newspaper had intended to interview Gravel about the National Initiative. Senator Gravel recounts the background to the event:

"He liked the idea of the National Initiative. I figured it was an opportunity to discuss it. Whether it is the far right, far left, whatever, I'll make my pitch to them. They gave me a free subscription to American Free Press. They still send it to me today. I flip through it sometimes. It has some extreme views, and a lot of the ads in it are even more extreme and make me want to upchuck. Anyways, sometime later, Carto contacted me to speak at that Barnes Review Conference. I had never heard of the Barnes Review, didn't know anything about it or what they stood for. I was just coming to give a presentation about the National Initiative. I was there maybe 30 minutes. I could tell from the people in the room (mainly some very old men) that they were pretty extreme. I gave my speech, answered some questions and left. I never saw the agenda for the day or listened to any of the other presentations."<20>


Why is it so many 9/11 troothers get mixed up with rabid anti-Semites, and historical revisionists?

Sounds to me like he is a looser that got lucky with the Pentagon Papers. Now there's a new CT in town and he is trying to relive his glory day.

[LARED]

41. So you agree I called no one an anti-Semite?

In fact I asked a very legitamate question.

[seemslikeadream]

43. no I don't agree

I said you are a very cagey person and that's what I meant


on edit

Let me help you by all means, imply it enough maybe some one will "get it"


Odd coincidences abound with 9/11 CT'ers
Edited on Wed Jul-11-07 09:39 PM by LARED
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mike_Gravel#Barnes_Review_ ...

Barnes Review controversy

In June 2003 Gravel gave a speech on direct democracy at a conference hosted by the American Free Press. The event was cosponsored by the Barnes Review, a journal that endorses Holocaust denial.<19> Gravel has said repeatedly that he does not share such a view, stating "You better believe I know that six million Jews were killed. I've been to the Holocaust Museum. I've seen the footage of General Eisenhower touring one of the camps. They're nutty as loons if they don't think it happened". The newspaper had intended to interview Gravel about the National Initiative. Senator Gravel recounts the background to the event:

"He liked the idea of the National Initiative. I figured it was an opportunity to discuss it. Whether it is the far right, far left, whatever, I'll make my pitch to them. They gave me a free subscription to American Free Press. They still send it to me today. I flip through it sometimes. It has some extreme views, and a lot of the ads in it are even more extreme and make me want to upchuck. Anyways, sometime later, Carto contacted me to speak at that Barnes Review Conference. I had never heard of the Barnes Review, didn't know anything about it or what they stood for. I was just coming to give a presentation about the National Initiative. I was there maybe 30 minutes. I could tell from the people in the room (mainly some very old men) that they were pretty extreme. I gave my speech, answered some questions and left. I never saw the agenda for the day or listened to any of the other presentations."<20>


Why is it so many 9/11 troothers get mixed up with rabid anti-Semites, and historical revisionists?

Sounds to me like he is a looser that got lucky with the Pentagon Papers. Now there's a new CT in town and he is trying to relive his glory day.

[LARED]

44. So please in a specific way point out where I labeled someone

an anti-Semite

[seemslikeadream]

45. 9/11 SaddamHussein 9/11SuddamHussein

9/11SaddamHussein9/11SuddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein9/11SuddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein
9/11SaddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein9/11SuddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein
9/11SaddamHussein9/11SuddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein9/11SuddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein
9/11SaddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein9/11SuddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein9/11SaddamHussein

[LARED]

46. Incoherent rambling will get you nowhere (n/t)

[seemslikeadream]

47. Good we finally agree on something!

[leftchick]

24. SLaD I am confused....

I absolutely HATE Israel's foreign policy of Apartheid. Does that make me an instant anti-Semite? I need to know because my Jewish Mother, who hates the same policies, would love to hear this!

[graphixtech]

19. Ray McGovern 9-11 Commission cover-up, DSM "anti-Semitic" label

(newly published)

1) Speaking in front of a packed room of diverse students at Kansas City, KS Community College, Ray McGovern charges the official 9-11 Commission as "part of the cover-up" and shares a limited take on other 9-11 truth questions. McGovern states his related conclusion that the biggest obstacle is "the lack of a free and independent media". (videotaped with permission of the local AFSC organizer)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvWnnEx0ruU


2) Ray McGovern speaking behind the scenes at KCK Community College. Be sure to listen to entire video. Frank comments about US/Israel politics and McGovern's response to the label of "anti-Semite" caused by his mention of Israel at the DSM hearing. Also Howard Dean's related response. (videotaped with permission of the local AFSC organizer)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvZkl8l6k7g


3) Responding in a press interview at UMKC, Ray McGovern dicusses US Isreal/Palestinian policies and the label 'extremist terrorists' as it relates to populations with legitimate grievances, and suggests alternative solutions other than killing everyone. (videotaped with permission of the local AFSC organizer)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GN09cZvUb38


(added on edit)
4) Ray McGovern enthusiastically responds to interview question about the successful and historical 2004 "Call to Patriotic Whistleblowing" Truthteller Appeal to Current Government Employees that Daniel Ellsberg and himself drafted. He mentions specific responses to the appeal which contributed to public outrage surrounding the Iraq war and dangerous potential consequences for the US.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EY-41UgVELg

[superbeachnut]

49. No fact on 9/11, now you know Gravel is not able to think rationally

like the rest of 9/11 truth. Some people are not able to research 9/11, if Gravel has a team who can think logically, he will not fall for 9/11 truth disinformation.

[MinM]

53. Mike Gravel Calls For Independent 9/11 Investigation and Prosecution of President Bush and Vice Pres

Democracy Now: Former Senator Mike Gravel Calls For Independent 9/11 Investigation and Prosecution of President Bush and Vice President Cheney

June 17, 2008

The former Democratic Senator from Alaska discusses his presidential campaign, his role in the releasing of the Pentagon Papers and his support for NYC 9/11 Ballot Initiative Campaign, a grassroots group seeking to place an initiative on the ballot of the November 6th general election allowing registered New York City voters to create a new Commission to investigate 9/11.

Former Alaska Senator and 2008 Presidential Candidate Mike Gravel is holding a news conference in New York City today to join a call for a new independent investigation into 9/11.

Gravel will be speaking on behalf of the NYC 9/11 Ballot Initiative Campaign, a grassroots group seeking to place an initiative on the ballot of the November 6th general election allowing registered New York City voters to create a new Commission to investigate 9/11.

The group is looking to appoint between nine and fifteen commissioners on the panel to conduct the investigation. Some of the people who have reportedly already agreed to serve as commissioners include Lori Van Auken, a 9/11 widow and one of the so-called “Jersey Girls,” Lincoln Chafee, a former Republican Senator from Rhode Island, Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, a pastor in Detori, Michigan as well as former Democratic Senator, Mike Gravel who joins me today in the firehouse studio...
http://www.democracynow.org/2008/6/17/former_senator_mi...

[Bassman66]

54. Good luck to Milke Gravel nt.

[seemslikeadream]

58. Government—90 percent of what the government does is held secret

AMY GOODMAN: Senator Gravel, when you say we don’t know the truth about 9/11, what do you mean?


MIKE GRAVEL: Government—90 percent of what the government does is held secret. It’s a whole cult. And that’s the thing that is really strangling our democracy, that we just don’t know what’s going on. And so, you need to rip off the scab and see the wound of what the government is damaging. And so, it’s a cult. And I don’t know how I can phrase it. I’ve written about the subject.


When I was—here, best example I can give you. When I was twenty-three years old, I was in a communications intelligence service. I was an agitant of the communications intelligence service, and I was a top-secret control officer. I was twenty-three years old. Now, I’m forty-two years old, I’m a United States senator, and I could not go in and take notes and read the Pentagon Papers, because they were under guard in the Senate. Now, does it get any stupider than that? And that—and I didn’t even go in. When that was—Nixon sent them to the House, sent them to the Senate, and no staff could read it or senator could read it, couldn’t even take notes. I mean, we are so steeped in this.


And when you hear—and keep this in mind, Amy, any member of the Congress could release any secret about the government’s activities right today, because the court case, the Supreme Court ruled in my case 5-4 that a senator, under—or a House member, under the speech and debate clause of the Constitution of the United States, could not be held accountable. I was talking to Congressman Moran, and he had made the statement, “Well, you know, George Bush is about to do something in Iran.” I said, “My god! Say something about it. They can’t touch you.”

[Bassman66]

59. He's right.

The scab that is the CIA and FBI needs removing and the Government has to be forced to stop hiding behind secrecy. This is supposed to be a democracy and those in power are supposed to be answerable to the people - who elected anyone in the CIA?

[SDuderstadt]

60. Oh, christ....

are you now suggesting that federal agencies should be elected? How in the world woulf the government get anything done?