> Sexual assault in military 'jaw-dropping,' lawmaker says
>  a.. Official: "My jaw dropped" after women described rape, sex abuse in
> military

>  b.. Hearing prompts allegations of "cover-up" after top Defense official
> doesn't show

>  c.. Mom of slain pregnant soldier: Victim shouldn't have burden to
> "generate evidence"

>  d.. Woman describes rape: "He still comes after me in my dreams"

> WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A congresswoman said Thursday that her "jaw dropped"
> when military doctors told her that four in 10 women at a veterans
> hospital reported being sexually assaulted while in the military.

> A government report indicates that the numbers could be even higher.

> Rep. Jane Harman, D-California, spoke before a House panel investigating
> the way the military handles reports of sexual assault.

> She said she recently visited a Veterans Affairs hospital in the Los
> Angeles area, where women told her horror stories of being raped in the
> military.

> "My jaw dropped when the doctors told me that 41 percent of the female
> veterans seen there say they were victims of sexual assault while serving
> in the military," said Harman, who has long sought better protection of
> women in the military.

> "Twenty-nine percent say they were raped during their military service.
> They spoke of their continued terror, feelings of helplessness and
> downward spirals many of their lives have taken since.

> "We have an epidemic here," she said. "Women serving in the U.S. military
> today are more likely to be raped by a fellow soldier than killed by enemy
> fire in Iraq."

> As of July 24, 100 women had died in Iraq, according to the Pentagon.

> In 2007, Harman said, only 181 out of 2,212 reports of military sexual
> assaults, or 8 percent, were referred to courts martial. By comparison,
> she said, 40 percent of those arrested in the civilian world on such
> charges are prosecuted.

> Defense statistics show that military commanders took unspecified action,
> which can include anything from punishment to dismissal, in an additional
> 419 cases.

> But when it came time for the military to defend itself, the panel was
> told that the Pentagon's top official on sexual abuse, Dr. Kaye Whitley,
> was ordered not to show up despite a subpoena.

> "I don't know what you're trying to cover up here, but we're not going to
> allow it," Rep. Henry Waxman, D-California, said to the Defense official
> who relayed the news of Whitley's no-show. "This is unacceptable."

> Rep. John Tierney, the panel's chairman and a Democrat from Massachusetts,
> angrily responded, "these actions by the Defense Department are
> inexplicable."

> "The Defense Department appears to be willfully and blatantly advising Dr.
> Whitley not to comply with a duly authorized congressional subpoena,"
> Tierney said.

> An Army official who did testify said the Army takes allegations of sexual
> abuse extremely seriously.

> "Even one sexual assault violates the very essence of what it means to be
> a soldier, and it's a betrayal of the Army's core values," Lt. Gen.
> Michael Rochelle said.

> The committee also heard from Mary Lauterbach, the mother of Lance Cpl.
> Maria Lauterbach, a 20-year-old pregnant Marine who was killed in
> December, allegedly by a fellow Marine.

> Mary Lauterbach said her daughter filed a rape claim with the military
> against Marine Cpl. Cesar Laurean seven months before he was accused of
> killing her.

> "I believe that Maria would be alive today if the Marines had provided a
> more effective system to protect the victims of sexual assault," she said.

> In the months after her daughter filed the rape claim, she said, the
> military didn't seem to take her seriously, and the onus was on "Maria to
> connect the dots."

> "The victim should not have the burden to generate evidence for the
> command," Lauterbach told the Subcommittee on National Security and
> Foreign Affairs. "Maria is dead, but there will be many more victims in
> the future, I promise you. I'm here to ask you to do what you can to help
> change how the military treats victims of crime and to ensure the victims
> receive the support and protection they need and they deserve."

> Another woman, Ingrid Torres, described being raped on a U.S. base in
> Korea when she worked with the American Red Cross.

> "I was raped while I slept," she said.

> The man who assaulted her, she said, was a flight director who was found
> guilty and dismissed from the Air Force.

> Fighting back tears, Torres added, "he still comes after me in my dreams."

> The Government Accountability Office released preliminary results from an
> investigation into sexual assaults in the military and the Coast Guard.
> The GAO found that the "occurrences of sexual assault may be exceeding the
> rates being reported."

> "At the 14 installations where GAO administered its survey, 103 service
> members indicated that they had been sexually assaulted within the
> preceding 12 months. Of these, 52 service members indicated that they did
> not report the sexual assault," the GAO said.

> The office found that the military and Coast Guard have established
> policies to address sexual assault but that the implementation of the
> programs is hampered by an array of factors, including that "most, but not
> all, commanders support the programs."

> "Left unchecked, these challenges can discourage or prevent some service
> members from using the programs when needed," the GAO said.

> Tierney said, "what's at stake here goes to the very core of the values of
> the military and the nation itself.

> "When our sons and daughters put their lives on the line to defend the
> rest of us, the last thing they should fear is being attacked by one of
> our own."

> zasochimti wrote:
> > "Patrick Keenan" <t...@dev.null> wrote in messagenews:-I-dnVofu535fw3VnZ2dnUVZ_uadnZ2d@supernews.com...

> >>"zasochimti" <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:g6q0q1$ham$6@registered.motzarella.org...

> >>And yet you not only fail to produce anything to show that what I've posted is false or incorrect,  your refusal to take simple,
> >>MEANINGFUL action,

> > Like you're taking some "meaningful" action, Pat.

> > You believe the official story of 9/11, and by doing that you're disregarding the accounts
> > of people who were there and who reported explosions going off in all three WTC buildings
> > prior to their collapses. Since none of those "leads" were ever investigated, and since you
> > find absolutely nothing wrong/strange about that fact, your pathetic and oh so seethru cry
> > about "meaningful action" is worth - jack shit.

> > So, please. Do spare me of your usual "oh, I'm a victim here, but I don't care that there was
> > no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11" routine, Keenan, mmkay?

> >>specifically buying shares in insurers and attending their AGM's to demand that they recover payments on the grounds of controlled
> >>demolition, shows that you know perfectly well that what I've posted is true and correct.

> > And again. A dumbass "debunker" named Patrick Keenan tells a "kook" to go and see
> > about the money that Larry "Zombie" Silverstein got from the insurers. And when it comes
> > to ol' Patrick Keenan, money seems to be the solemn motive for taking any sort of "meaningful"
> > action.

> > But still, he finds absolutely nothing wrong with the fact that there was no criminal investigation
> > into the events of 9/11.

> >>You present nothing factual

> > I have. There was no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11.

> Even after being told about PENTTBOM and provided a link to the FBI page
> on the same, you continue to parrot the lie that there was no criminal
> investigation.

> That's one of the 436,321 reasons people laugh at you.

"Disneygeek" <edrho...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:bea60dc5-d17d-4b0f-a188-880a4a77e6cd@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...

> zasochimti wrote:
> > "Patrick Keenan" <t...@dev.null> wrote in messagenews:-I-dnVofu535fw3VnZ2dnUVZ_uadnZ2d@supernews.com...

> >>"zasochimti" <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:g6q0q1$ham$6@registered.motzarella.org...

> >>And yet you not only fail to produce anything to show that what I've posted is false or incorrect, your refusal to take simple,
> >>MEANINGFUL action,

> > Like you're taking some "meaningful" action, Pat.

> > You believe the official story of 9/11, and by doing that you're disregarding the accounts
> > of people who were there and who reported explosions going off in all three WTC buildings
> > prior to their collapses. Since none of those "leads" were ever investigated, and since you
> > find absolutely nothing wrong/strange about that fact, your pathetic and oh so seethru cry
> > about "meaningful action" is worth - jack shit.

> > So, please. Do spare me of your usual "oh, I'm a victim here, but I don't care that there was
> > no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11" routine, Keenan, mmkay?

> >>specifically buying shares in insurers and attending their AGM's to demand that they recover payments on the grounds of
> >>controlled
> >>demolition, shows that you know perfectly well that what I've posted is true and correct.

> > And again. A dumbass "debunker" named Patrick Keenan tells a "kook" to go and see
> > about the money that Larry "Zombie" Silverstein got from the insurers. And when it comes
> > to ol' Patrick Keenan, money seems to be the solemn motive for taking any sort of "meaningful"
> > action.

> > But still, he finds absolutely nothing wrong with the fact that there was no criminal investigation
> > into the events of 9/11.

> >>You present nothing factual

> > I have. There was no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11.

> Even after being told about PENTTBOM and provided a link to the FBI page
> on the same, you continue to parrot the lie that there was no criminal
> investigation.

> That's one of the 436,321 reasons people laugh at you.

> "Disneygeek" <edrho...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:bea60dc5-d17d-4b0f-a188-880a4a77e6cd@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...

> On Aug 1, 2:22 am, Vandar <vanda...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > zasochimti wrote:
> > > "Patrick Keenan" <t...@dev.null> wrote in messagenews:-I-dnVofu535fw3VnZ2dnUVZ_uadnZ2d@supernews.com...

> > >>"zasochimti" <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:g6q0q1$ham$6@registered.motzarella.org...

> > >>And yet you not only fail to produce anything to show that what I've posted is false or incorrect, your refusal to take simple,
> > >>MEANINGFUL action,

> > > Like you're taking some "meaningful" action, Pat.

> > > You believe the official story of 9/11, and by doing that you're disregarding the accounts
> > > of people who were there and who reported explosions going off in all three WTC buildings
> > > prior to their collapses. Since none of those "leads" were ever investigated, and since you
> > > find absolutely nothing wrong/strange about that fact, your pathetic and oh so seethru cry
> > > about "meaningful action" is worth - jack shit.

> > > So, please. Do spare me of your usual "oh, I'm a victim here, but I don't care that there was
> > > no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11" routine, Keenan, mmkay?

> > >>specifically buying shares in insurers and attending their AGM's to demand that they recover payments on the grounds of
> > >>controlled
> > >>demolition, shows that you know perfectly well that what I've posted is true and correct.

> > > And again. A dumbass "debunker" named Patrick Keenan tells a "kook" to go and see
> > > about the money that Larry "Zombie" Silverstein got from the insurers. And when it comes
> > > to ol' Patrick Keenan, money seems to be the solemn motive for taking any sort of "meaningful"
> > > action.

> > > But still, he finds absolutely nothing wrong with the fact that there was no criminal investigation
> > > into the events of 9/11.

> > >>You present nothing factual

> > > I have. There was no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11.

> > Even after being told about PENTTBOM and provided a link to the FBI page
> > on the same, you continue to parrot the lie that there was no criminal
> > investigation.

> > That's one of the 436,321 reasons people laugh at you.

> Of course there was "no criminal investigation" because he can't
> concieve that such an investigation might not give him the results he
> wants.
> ---------

> Logic of a whacko "debunker".

> "No, there wasn't any investigation and that's not suspicious. And since there
> was no investigation that means that no explosive devices could have been planted
> in any of the WTC buildings on 9.11.2001. And them "truthers" wouldn't
> believe the results of such an investigation even it had been conducted".

> Clap-clap-clap, Dinsyegeek.

> I must say, I am impressed by your persistance and your belief how no one
> will notice your evasiveness and your oh so obvious ignorance concerning
> certain facts about 9/11. And what's even more interesting, is the fact that
> by some kind of magic you expect people to believe you, whacko "debunker".

> As I've said many times before, each and every single "debunker" out there is
> crazy as shit. And each and every crazy "debunker" out there lies as obviously
> as George Walker Bush and his admin.

> Dunno. Maybe it's some kind of a trend among the current admin and "debunkers".
> Lie blatantly and obviously and just ignore anything that comes your way as a
> result of your blatant and oh so obvious lying.

"Al Dykes" <ady...@panix.com> wrote in message news:g6t49m$n6q$1@panix5.panix.com...
> In article <g6srl3$bq...@registered.motzarella.org>,
> zasochimti <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>"Patrick Keenan" <t...@dev.null> wrote in message news:-I-dnVofu535fw3VnZ2dnUVZ_uadnZ2d@supernews.com...

>>> "zasochimti" <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:g6q0q1$ham$6@registered.motzarella.org...

>>> And yet you not only fail to produce anything to show that what I've posted is false or incorrect,  your refusal to take simple,
>>> MEANINGFUL action,

>>Like you're taking some "meaningful" action, Pat.

>>You believe the official story of 9/11, and by doing that you're disregarding the accounts
>>of people who were there and who reported explosions going off in all three WTC buildings
>>prior to their collapses. Since none of those "leads" were ever investigated, and since you
>>find absolutely nothing wrong/strange about that fact, your pathetic and oh so seethru cry
>>about "meaningful action" is worth - jack shit.

>>So, please. Do spare me of your usual "oh, I'm a victim here, but I don't care that there was
>>no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11" routine, Keenan, mmkay?

>>> specifically buying shares in insurers and attending their AGM's to demand that they recover payments on the grounds of
>>> controlled
>>> demolition, shows that you know perfectly well that what I've posted is true and correct.

>>And again. A dumbass "debunker" named Patrick Keenan tells a "kook" to go and see
>>about the money that Larry "Zombie" Silverstein got from the insurers. And when it comes
>>to ol' Patrick Keenan, money seems to be the solemn motive for taking any sort of "meaningful"
>>action.

> BEEP BEEP BEEP   k00k makes ad hominem attack instead of addressing point  BEEP BEEP BEEP

> Buying stock in the company that insured WTC7 would get to talk to the
> people who's money was used to pay off Silverstein.  Based on this
> thread, Twoofers don't have a clue about how insurance or the stock
> market works.

> Funny how you've cut out the rest of my post, georgieboy, especially this part:

> "There was no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11".

> "Al Dykes" <ady...@panix.com> wrote in messagenews:g6t49m$n6q$1@panix5.panix.com...
> > In article <g6srl3$bq...@registered.motzarella.org>,
> > zasochimti <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >>"Patrick Keenan" <t...@dev.null> wrote in messagenews:-I-dnVofu535fw3VnZ2dnUVZ_uadnZ2d@supernews.com...

> >>> "zasochimti" <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:g6q0q1$ham$6@registered.motzarella.org...

> >>> And yet you not only fail to produce anything to show that what I've posted is false or incorrect,  your refusal to take simple,
> >>> MEANINGFUL action,

> >>Like you're taking some "meaningful" action, Pat.

> >>You believe the official story of 9/11, and by doing that you're disregarding the accounts
> >>of people who were there and who reported explosions going off in all three WTC buildings
> >>prior to their collapses. Since none of those "leads" were ever investigated, and since you
> >>find absolutely nothing wrong/strange about that fact, your pathetic and oh so seethru cry
> >>about "meaningful action" is worth - jack shit.

> >>So, please. Do spare me of your usual "oh, I'm a victim here, but I don't care that there was
> >>no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11" routine, Keenan, mmkay?

> >>> specifically buying shares in insurers and attending their AGM's to demand that they recover payments on the grounds of
> >>> controlled
> >>> demolition, shows that you know perfectly well that what I've posted is true and correct.

> >>And again. A dumbass "debunker" named Patrick Keenan tells a "kook" to go and see
> >>about the money that Larry "Zombie" Silverstein got from the insurers. And when it comes
> >>to ol' Patrick Keenan, money seems to be the solemn motive for taking any sort of "meaningful"
> >>action.

> > BEEP BEEP BEEP   k00k makes ad hominem attack instead of addressing point  BEEP BEEP BEEP

> > Buying stock in the company that insured WTC7 would get to talk to the
> > people who's money was used to pay off Silverstein.  Based on this
> > thread, Twoofers don't have a clue about how insurance or the stock
> > market works.

> Funny how you've cut out the rest of my post, georgieboy, especially this part:

> "There was no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11".

> And you have the nerve to talk about "addressing points".

"george" <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote in message news:70669f03-9ba8-46c2-9457-c9785ba913a5@u12g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 3, 2:52 am, "zasochimti" <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "Al Dykes" <ady...@panix.com> wrote in messagenews:g6t49m$n6q$1@panix5.panix.com...
>> > In article <g6srl3$bq...@registered.motzarella.org>,
>> > zasochimti <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote:

>> >>"Patrick Keenan" <t...@dev.null> wrote in messagenews:-I-dnVofu535fw3VnZ2dnUVZ_uadnZ2d@supernews.com...

>> >>> "zasochimti" <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:g6q0q1$ham$6@registered.motzarella.org...

>> >>> And yet you not only fail to produce anything to show that what I've posted is false or incorrect,  your refusal to take
>> >>> simple,
>> >>> MEANINGFUL action,

>> >>Like you're taking some "meaningful" action, Pat.

>> >>You believe the official story of 9/11, and by doing that you're disregarding the accounts
>> >>of people who were there and who reported explosions going off in all three WTC buildings
>> >>prior to their collapses. Since none of those "leads" were ever investigated, and since you
>> >>find absolutely nothing wrong/strange about that fact, your pathetic and oh so seethru cry
>> >>about "meaningful action" is worth - jack shit.

>> >>So, please. Do spare me of your usual "oh, I'm a victim here, but I don't care that there was
>> >>no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11" routine, Keenan, mmkay?

>> >>> specifically buying shares in insurers and attending their AGM's to demand that they recover payments on the grounds of
>> >>> controlled
>> >>> demolition, shows that you know perfectly well that what I've posted is true and correct.

>> >>And again. A dumbass "debunker" named Patrick Keenan tells a "kook" to go and see
>> >>about the money that Larry "Zombie" Silverstein got from the insurers. And when it comes
>> >>to ol' Patrick Keenan, money seems to be the solemn motive for taking any sort of "meaningful"
>> >>action.

>> > BEEP BEEP BEEP   k00k makes ad hominem attack instead of addressing point  BEEP BEEP BEEP

>> > Buying stock in the company that insured WTC7 would get to talk to the
>> > people who's money was used to pay off Silverstein.  Based on this
>> > thread, Twoofers don't have a clue about how insurance or the stock
>> > market works.

>> Funny how you've cut out the rest of my post, georgieboy, especially this part:

>> "There was no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11".

>> And you have the nerve to talk about "addressing points".

> I never use the term 'addressing points'
> You shouldn't lie about the language people use !
> And the FBI did investigate 9/11. They know who caused 9/11

> Most of the report consists of their findings.

zasochimti <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote:

>"george" <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote in message news:70669f03-9ba8-46c2-9457-c9785ba913a5@u12g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
>> On Aug 3, 2:52 am, "zasochimti" <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> "Al Dykes" <ady...@panix.com> wrote in messagenews:g6t49m$n6q$1@panix5.panix.com...
>>> > In article <g6srl3$bq...@registered.motzarella.org>,
>>> > zasochimti <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>> >>"Patrick Keenan" <t...@dev.null> wrote in messagenews:-I-dnVofu535fw3VnZ2dnUVZ_uadnZ2d@supernews.com...

>>> >>> "zasochimti" <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:g6q0q1$ham$6@registered.motzarella.org...

>>> >>> And yet you not only fail to produce anything to show that what I've posted is false or incorrect,  your refusal to take
>>> >>> simple,
>>> >>> MEANINGFUL action,

>>> >>Like you're taking some "meaningful" action, Pat.

>>> >>You believe the official story of 9/11, and by doing that you're disregarding the accounts
>>> >>of people who were there and who reported explosions going off in all three WTC buildings
>>> >>prior to their collapses. Since none of those "leads" were ever investigated, and since you
>>> >>find absolutely nothing wrong/strange about that fact, your pathetic and oh so seethru cry
>>> >>about "meaningful action" is worth - jack shit.

>>> >>So, please. Do spare me of your usual "oh, I'm a victim here, but I don't care that there was
>>> >>no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11" routine, Keenan, mmkay?

>>> >>> specifically buying shares in insurers and attending their AGM's to demand that they recover payments on the grounds of
>>> >>> controlled
>>> >>> demolition, shows that you know perfectly well that what I've posted is true and correct.

>>> >>And again. A dumbass "debunker" named Patrick Keenan tells a "kook" to go and see
>>> >>about the money that Larry "Zombie" Silverstein got from the insurers. And when it comes
>>> >>to ol' Patrick Keenan, money seems to be the solemn motive for taking any sort of "meaningful"
>>> >>action.

>>> > BEEP BEEP BEEP   k00k makes ad hominem attack instead of addressing point  BEEP BEEP BEEP

>>> > Buying stock in the company that insured WTC7 would get to talk to the
>>> > people who's money was used to pay off Silverstein.  Based on this
>>> > thread, Twoofers don't have a clue about how insurance or the stock
>>> > market works.

>>> Funny how you've cut out the rest of my post, georgieboy, especially this part:

>>> "There was no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11".

>>> And you have the nerve to talk about "addressing points".

>> I never use the term 'addressing points'
>> You shouldn't lie about the language people use !
>> And the FBI did investigate 9/11. They know who caused 9/11

>Well then, how come:

>http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm

>Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies
> in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden
>is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world."

>Not one word about 9/11, poor goergieboy.

> In article <g7e181$df...@registered.motzarella.org>,

> zasochimti <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >"george" <gbl...@hnpl.net> wrote in messagenews:70669f03-9ba8-46c2-9457-c9785ba913a5@u12g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
> >> On Aug 3, 2:52 am, "zasochimti" <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> "Al Dykes" <ady...@panix.com> wrote in messagenews:g6t49m$n6q$1@panix5.panix.com...
> >>> > In article <g6srl3$bq...@registered.motzarella.org>,
> >>> > zasochimti <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >>> >>"Patrick Keenan" <t...@dev.null> wrote in messagenews:-I-dnVofu535fw3VnZ2dnUVZ_uadnZ2d@supernews.com...

> >>> >>> "zasochimti" <zasochi...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:g6q0q1$ham$6@registered.motzarella.org...

> >>> >>> And yet you not only fail to produce anything to show that what I've posted is false or incorrect,  your refusal to take
> >>> >>> simple,
> >>> >>> MEANINGFUL action,

> >>> >>Like you're taking some "meaningful" action, Pat.

> >>> >>You believe the official story of 9/11, and by doing that you're disregarding the accounts
> >>> >>of people who were there and who reported explosions going off in all three WTC buildings
> >>> >>prior to their collapses. Since none of those "leads" were ever investigated, and since you
> >>> >>find absolutely nothing wrong/strange about that fact, your pathetic and oh so seethru cry
> >>> >>about "meaningful action" is worth - jack shit.

> >>> >>So, please. Do spare me of your usual "oh, I'm a victim here, but I don't care that there was
> >>> >>no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11" routine, Keenan, mmkay?

> >>> >>> specifically buying shares in insurers and attending their AGM's to demand that they recover payments on the grounds of
> >>> >>> controlled
> >>> >>> demolition, shows that you know perfectly well that what I've posted is true and correct.

> >>> >>And again. A dumbass "debunker" named Patrick Keenan tells a "kook" to go and see
> >>> >>about the money that Larry "Zombie" Silverstein got from the insurers. And when it comes
> >>> >>to ol' Patrick Keenan, money seems to be the solemn motive for taking any sort of "meaningful"
> >>> >>action.

> >>> > BEEP BEEP BEEP   k00k makes ad hominem attack instead of addressing point  BEEP BEEP BEEP

> >>> > Buying stock in the company that insured WTC7 would get to talk to the
> >>> > people who's money was used to pay off Silverstein.  Based on this
> >>> > thread, Twoofers don't have a clue about how insurance or the stock
> >>> > market works.

> >>> Funny how you've cut out the rest of my post, georgieboy, especially this part:

> >>> "There was no criminal investigation into the events of 9/11".

> >>> And you have the nerve to talk about "addressing points".

> >> I never use the term 'addressing points'
> >> You shouldn't lie about the language people use !
> >> And the FBI did investigate 9/11. They know who caused 9/11

> >Well then, how come:

> >http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm

> >Usama Bin Laden is wanted in connection with the August 7, 1998, bombings of the United States Embassies
> > in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya. These attacks killed over 200 people. In addition, Bin Laden
> >is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world."

> >Not one word about 9/11, poor goergieboy.

>  "In addition, Bin Leden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world."

> What part of "other" do you not understand?  

> So what?