<html> <head> <style> P { margin:0px; padding:0px } body { FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma } </style> </head> <body>Chuck wrote: "If you are suggesting that additional independent criminal investigations should have been conducted, you'll get my agreement about the lack of independent investigations. Of course, this isn't what the 9/11 "truth" movement is asking for. They've already assumed that the government blew up the buildings through pre-set demolition charges." So Chuck -does the below mean that we can henceforth dismiss any declaration you make on this topic as a lie or distortion:- http://www.justicefor911.org/press.php On November 19, 2004, the "Justice for 9/11" Steering Committee submitted a Citizens' Complaint and Petition to the offices of the Attorney General of New York State, Eliot Spitzer, citing probable cause for an independent grand jury investigation to examine unsolved crimes committed in connection with the events of September 11, 2001. We are publishing the complete Complaint and Petition online in this space as a living, growing document.   furthermore, why did has the admnistration blocked investgations into 9-11? http://www.interventionmag.com/cms/modules.php?file=article&name=News&op=modload&sid=447 Chuck - how do you know or why do you assume that the plot - whoever put it together - was planned it in 8 the months prior to it happening? The main claim made by consiracy people about certain members of the administration is that they *knew* not that they necessarily planned it - an operation of such a scale would have to transcend whoever was in the  White House and would probably have to involve the intelligence apparatus of other countries and I would assume that a pla of such magnitude would take years to set up - but what do I know? I think the real question that goes begging about the official story -even if one accepts it on its face - is - who within the US security apparatus enabled the alleged hijackers - they must have had, as a practical matter, even a little help from *someboy* 'inside' - no? Joe W. <hr id="stopSpelling">> Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 01:27:03 -0500 > From: chuck@mutualaid.org > To: lbo-talk@lbo-talk.org > Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] A question for the anti-"conspiracy"-theorists about9/11 > > joanna wrote: > > > --I don't like the way those buildings imploded. > >  > > --I don't like the way every bit of the debris was carefully carted away  > > and dumped somewhere where no one could every get at it again > >  > > --I don't like the way there was no attempt at an investigation > > There were a variety of investigations. I watched a program about 9/11  > the other night that mentioned the following investigations: > > 1) Investigations by city agencies and outside labs to identify body  > fragments, mostly by using DNA testing, but also by using personal items  > found in the rubble. > > 2) Investigations by engineering firms, academics and other people into  > why the buildings collapsed the way they did. > > If you are suggesting that additional independent criminal  > investigations should have been conducted, you'll get my agreement about  > the lack of independent investigations. Of course, this isn't what the  > 9/11 "truth" movement is asking for. They've already assumed that the  > government blew up the buildings through pre-set demolition charges. > > Of course, this begs the question about how an administration that is so  > incompetent could have organized such a conspiracy in its first 8 months  > of being in office despite the distractions of taking office. > > Chuck > ___________________________________ > http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk </body> </html>