9/11 criminal investigation

Hindsight and dealing with 9/11

Comment in today's UK London Evening Standard by Sam Leith, thought I would share.

"Ten years on from the horror of 9/11, I find myself returning to a counterfactual that has preoccupied me on and off ever sice. A thought experiment: what if, instead of responding as they did, the US had made the ultimate gesture of a hyperpower's self-confidence and simply turned the other cheek?

If they'd mourn their dead, rebuit the city, and treated the murders as a police matter - a grotesque crime rather than a military or political statement worthy of a response in kind?

Would it really have encouraged al-Qaeda? Or would it rather have made them seem vicious and small? And would the world, on balance, have been a better and safer place 10 years on than it is now? It's an open question - but I strongly suspect that it would."

Mike Gravel Supports 9-11 Criminal Investigation On Air, a week after Mike Medved says "No" to Respectful and Rational Dialogue

Today, August 21, 2007, on the Michael Medved show, Presidential candidate Mike Gravel reconfirmed his support for an independent investigation of 9-11-01 and affirmed his support for a criminal investigation as well. I wanted to see if he would go a little further than he has in the past, having learned a bit in the interim from the 9-11 Truth movement, but he fell back on things he has said before. Still, he affirmed support for a criminal investigation and made it explicit that any investigation should be free of government interest. Here is the recording: Click here to watch 'Mike-Gravel-part-1--asked-about-9-11-Investigation-on-Medved-show-8-21-07'

After I got cut off, Medved asked Gravel whether he thought JFK's assassination was a conspiracy. Gravel, having referenced the Warren Commission before, said he didn't think so, but he had questions about Ruby shooting Oswald. Medved told him to read Vincent Bugliosi's book "Reclaiming History."