Quite honestly: is 9/11 "conspiracy" really an extremely important topic on the left? Can you provide some references? I find this very unlikely a claim... let us consider the entire left spectrum: starting with Democrats and ending with Marxists/Communists (on the one hand) and 9/11 alternate theorists (on the other). Are there Democrats, liberals, activists, progressives who spend significant time on 9/11 alternate stories? I don't see that in either the party's messages, in the liberal blogosphere, on left/progressive mailing lists, in liberal media publications (AlterNet, The Nation, MoJo, etc -- there have been a few pieces on the matter in one or two of these publications). How about anarchists? I do not know where and how they discuss such things, but are their forums and activities dominated by 9/11 hypotheses? Humanists (as I use that term), pacifists, ethicists -- don't see much coming from that segment either. How about communists? Marxists? Anyone know?
Of course all this hinges heavily on the meaning and use of this bogus term "conspiracy theory", under which can be included anything that the author wishes to dismiss: after all, the left is seen as conspiracists by centrists, "realists"/"pragmatists", and right-wingers.
> As to where Miegs stand, I dunno since I never met him. Why don't you
> ask him and report back to this list your findings. I am sure we will
> all just be quite fascinated!!!!!
I would be fascinated indeed. Perhaps the original poster who found it important to discuss 9/11 "conspiracies" by forwarding the all-mighty opinion of Miegs, should be the one to bear the burden of finding out the views of this great intellectual ;-) on the real issues that are extremely important to leftists, such as LBO members, and forwarding that to us in penance ;-).
--ravi