A few weeks ago, the Democratic congresswoman from DeKalb County drew widespread criticism for suggesting on a radio show that the administration had prior knowledge of the attack.

On Thursday, McKinney explained what it was like to be ridiculed.

"I was derided by the White House, right-wing talk radio, and spokespersons for the military-industrial complex as a conspiracy theorist," McKinney said in a one-page statement. "Even my patriotism was questioned because I dared to suggest that Congress should conduct a full and complete investigation into the most disastrous intelligence failure in American history."

McKinney vowed to continue to express her opinions and reissued a call for a congressional probe.

She accused the Bush administration of engaging in "a conspiracy of silence" by opposing congressional hearings.

"If committed and patriotic people had not been pushing for disclosure, today's revelations would have been hidden by the White House," she said.

"Ever since I came to Congress in 1992, there are those who have been trying to silence my voice. I've been told to "sit down and shut up" over and over again. Well, I won't sit down and I won't shut up until the full and unvarnished truth is placed before the American people."

Friends, foes stand firm

The furor over McKinney's comments came soon after her March 25 appearance on the "Flashpoints" public affairs program on KPFA, a public radio station in Berkeley, Calif.

"Now is the time for our elected officials to be held accountable," McKinney said on the show. "Now is the time for the media to be held accountable. Why aren't the hard questions being asked? We know there were numerous warnings of the event to come on Sept. 11. Vladimir Putin, president of Russia, delivered one such warning. Those engaged in unusual stock trades immediately before Sept. 11 knew enough to make millions of dollars from United and American Airlines, certain insurance and brokerage firm stock. What did this administration know and when did it know it about the events of Sept. 11? Who else knew, and why did they not warn the innocent people of New York who were needlessly murdered?"

McKinney also detailed how some associates of the White House stood to gain from the response to the attacks.

"Persons close to this administration are poised to make huge profits off America's new war," McKinney said. "Former President Bush sits on the board of the Carlyle Group. The Los Angeles Times reports that on a single day last month, Carlyle earned $237 billion selling shares in United Defense Industries, the Army's fifth-largest contractor. The stock offering was well-timed. Carlyle officials say they decided to take the company public only after the Sept. 11 attacks. The stock sales cashed in on increased congressional support and hefty defense spending."

At the time of her radio comments, a Carlyle Group spokesman dismissed McKinney's remarks as fiction.

McKinney's critics demanded to know why she would question the president, and dismissed her comments as unpatriotic. Her supporters said they appreciate that McKinney is not afraid to give her side of the story.

The recent criticisms were among the loudest she has attracted since coming to Congress in 1992. One of her colleagues, Sen. Zell Miller (D-Ga.), called her remarks "dangerous, loony and irresponsible."

On Thursday, McKinney's supporters remembered those harsh words. Some of them, members of a civil rights organization, went to Miller's office in Atlanta to demand an apology.

"When Cynthia came out and said what she did, Zell Miller leveled some very harsh, belligerent and somewhat unreasonable comments about Cynthia McKinney," said the Rev. Markel Hutchins, president of the National Youth Connection, a nonprofit group based in Atlanta.

"Now, I think it is important for the gentleman from Georgia to do the gentlemanly thing and apologize to the lady from Georgia," Hutchins said.

Miller did not follow their advice.

"I have no intention of apologizing to Representative Cynthia McKinney for my reaction last month to her comments about the Bush administration," Miller said. "McKinney charged that the Bush administration deliberately covered up advance knowledge of the attacks in order to profit from them. It was a loony statement last month, and it is still a loony statement today."

The congresswoman acknowledged Miller's remarks.

"Zell Miller was elected by the people of the state of Georgia, and of course it's a free country and he can say whatever he wants to say."

Rep. Charlie Norwood (R-Ga.), who had asked House members to alienate McKinney, also was unapologetic. When asked if Norwood intended to say he was sorry, Norwood spokesman John Stone replied, "Of course not."

Stone added, "She's going to say what she has to say and from now to the end of time, it'll be outlandish."

But Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), who opted not to comment immediately after the radio show revelations, heralded McKinney for speaking her mind despite the threat of criticism and ridicule. Like McKinney, he said the episode revealed the need for a congressional probe into how much the administration knew.

"I think she had some information that she was able to retain from some source and, I hate to put it in this vein, but she may have the last laugh," Lewis said.

"I'll tell you one thing -- this is a very, very serious matter," Lewis said. "If the White House knew, there's a question of why they didn't share this information with the American people. They've known all these many months and they've disclosed everything else, building a case for going into Afghanistan and tracking down the terrorists, but they never released this information until now."

Who should conduct probe?

McKinney's comments also drew attention to another issue evolving on Capitol Hill -- whether Congress or an independent group should probe what the administration knew and when.

Sen. Max Cleland (D-Ga.) and Miller are co-sponsors of Senate legislation to set up an independent commission.

Cleland said he does not believe the administration had prior knowledge. While the FBI and CIA had some information, Cleland said, there was no system in place to encourage the agencies to share information. An outside panel would allow a detailed accounting of what happened because Capitol Hill is too close to examine the issue objectively, he said.

Lewis, however, said the question should remain with House and Senate members.

"I think it's the obligation of the Congress to conduct the hearings on a matter of this nature," he said. "We provide the FBI, the CIA and other intelligence agencies with millions and billions of dollars."