Tom DeLay Rejects Notion of New 9/11 Investigation but Agrees to Hearing Whistleblowers

Former House Majority Leader from 2003 to 2006 Tom DeLay, notoriously associated with lobbyist corruption and gerrymandering in the Texas legislature, took the floor at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia to speak about his book, "No Retreat, No Surrender." DeLay began his oration with a self proclamation of religious reverence and then emphasized his conscientious observance of the Constitution exemplified with a pocket version removed from his blazer which he allegedly keeps always on his person. As an proponent of the Patriot Act and other legislation profoundly deleterious to our constitutional republic, Tom DeLay has adopted a psyche of the classic Orwellian archetype. It was no surprise then to hear DeLay speak of terrorism and the Iraq war while endorsing the "sacrifice of liberty" for "security". What was indeed a surprise however was DeLay's non-endorsement of a presidential candidate from the Republican party and instead his laudation for Hillary Clinton. At the book signing at the end of the speaking engagement, Philly 9/11 Truth members had the opportunity to engage Mr. DeLay about the reality of several of the presidential candidates' declaration for a new 9/11 investigation and the need for the 9/11 whistleblowers to be securely brought forward. Mr. DeLay responded that he would not support another investigation into the September 11th attacks because to do so would be to "live in yesterday" and that "we know we are at war" with "radical Islamists trying to kill us". DeLay did however extend that if any whistleblowers have "any real evidence, other than myth" they should contact him.

Tom Delay on New 9/11 Investigation and Whistleblowers

Not to be too critical in

Not to be too critical in your fine and patriotic effort here which was a fantastic job overall. However, I think a better question for Delay types, those who clearly are out of power and would obviously never support an investigation, a better question would be fully loaded. Something like this (with a totally straight face): "Mr. Delay, thanks for coming today. Do you think the death penalty by electrocution would be the appropriate penalty for anyone in DC found to be involved with the mass murder of 9/11? Or would it be better to push them off the tops of skyscrapers?" You can finish it off by asking him has he spoken to legal counsel in case he has to defend himself against such charges.

Again, great job here, guys. I carry my video camera everywhere waiting for an opportunity to nail one of these creeps.

Love it.

Do you think the death penalty by electrocution would be the appropriate penalty for anyone in DC found to be involved with the mass murder of 9/11?

Do you think the death penalty by electrocution would be the appropriate penalty for anyone in DC found to be involved with the mass murder of 9/11?

Do you think the death penalty by electrocution would be the appropriate penalty for anyone in DC found to be involved with the mass murder of 9/11?