1. See also online version of this Complaint and Petition, annotated with hyperlinks to supporting documents and news reports, at www.Justicefor911.org.

2. “The Crisis of Accountability,” Law Day Remarks, Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, May 1, 2002 (available online at www.oag.state.ny.us/press/statements/law_day-2002.html.)

3. Additional complainant signatories will be added and noted at www.Justicefor911.org, as will additional supporting individuals and organizations including those from other states.

4. Reportedly, planned hearings of several Congressional committees were curtailed or cancelled after pressure by the White House and Vice-President Cheney personally on Daschle, who had also been targeted with an anthrax mailing a month after September 11 when he was speaking out against the White House proposal for the USA PATRIOT Act.

5. Note: a statutory provision adopted in the late 1990s allows the FBI to take over as the lead investigative agency in the case that an airline disaster is determined to be the result of criminal acts.

6. Presumably, if these 19 Middle Easterners, mostly Saudis, were not solely responsible for the September 11 attacks, many instances of criminal law violations arise under New York and federal laws.

7. If this assumption is not true, the question presents itself, “Is not participation in or knowledge of activities in furtherance of murder a crime under New York law?” See, [Part I], Paragraph 11.

8. If there were such pressure or influence, it might be worth investigating whether such pressure or influence are elements of crimes such as criminal facilitation, criminal conspiracy and accessorial conduct under New York law.

9. See Appendix A7. According to Indira Singh, the raid occurred after several whistleblowers exposed hidden relationships to terrorist financing, specifically investments by Sheikh Yasin Al-Qadi who was placed on the US list of specially designated terrorists late in 2001. She says that Ptech’s board members, investors and employees have been the subject of other Treasury and Justice Department investigations and operations related to the events of 9/11.

Singh was informed of Ptech’s contracts with the FAA, the Executive Office of the President and the Air Force, relationships providing disturbing questions into how NORAD [including–relevant to this Complaint–the Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) in Rome, New York] and other agencies the FAA coordinates with during emergencies may have been deliberately undermined from within on the morning of the attacks. Multiple communication breakdowns, software glitches and other technical snafus documented by the 9/11 Commission raise serious questions about potential Ptech or related software induced vulnerabilities. As far we are aware, assurances from the White House that the software is safe have not been backed up by an official inquiry into a scenario in which Ptech provided a “Trojan horse” for 9/11 co-conspirators.

In addition, Singh was provided information into potential prior knowledge within Ptech of the attacks; Ptech/BMI was itself the subject of FBI Agent’s Robert Wright’s pre-9/11 terrorist financing investigation, which was repeatedly obstructed or undermined by senior officials at the FBI. After the attacks, whistleblowers were repeatedly threatened to keep silent about the company.

10. The actual words used by Fleischer, according to Singh, are: “None of it involved any classified products used by the government, ” and “they have detected absolutely nothing in their reports to the White House that would lead to any concern about any of the products purchased from this company.” See, www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/12/20021206-4.html#17. Fleischer was proven wrong and admitted his previous dismissal of concern was inaccurate and premature, but the damage was done, and no known follow-on investigation has been conducted or reported.

11. There also have been numerous allegations that many families were financially forced into the Victims’ Compensation Fund and its legal constraints by deliberately calculated delays in the disbursement of public charity funds. It should be explored whether, if the object of the creation of the Victims’ Compensation Fund was to constrain victims from presenting evidence of criminal acts, the very creation of such a fund might involve obstruction of justice.

12. Judge Reggie Walton of the US District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the case following Attorney General John Ashcroft’s invocation of the “state secrets privilege” over Edmonds. Reportedly, Ashcroft maintained that, “information about her case would cause serious damage to the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States if publicly disclosed.” Walton admitted that, since “the imminent threat of terrorism will not be eliminated any time in the foreseeable future,” the case would never be heard (Chris Strohm, “Whistle Stop,” www.govexec.com, 7/9/04).

13. Project on Government Oversight v Ashcroft, US Dist. Ct, Washington, DC.

14. A question arises whether classification of evidence of a crime that arises in a civil lawsuit for the purpose of preventing examination during a contemporaneous criminal investigation, constitutes obstruction of justice of the criminal investigation that necessarily is opened the moment the crime is committed under New York law.

15. Mariani faced fierce legal challenges to her administration of her late husband’s estate (by a stepdaughter who charged the widow’s refusal of the Victims’ Compensation Fund and suit against the White House were evidence that she was not sane). In consequent court proceedings, the stepdaughter (advised by Bush-connected lawyers) effectively forced Mariani to pass the RICO suit to a new lead plaintiff, William Rodriguez, 9/11 rescue effort hero and founder of the Sept. 11 Hispanic Victims Group. The challenge to Mariani was assisted by attorneys from Greenberg Traurig, which co-defended Bush/Cheney in the 2000 Florida recount, represents Florida Governor Jeb Bush and hired Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s son on Election Day, 2000.

16. David Schippers on “Alex Jones Radio Show,” 10/10/01, www.infowars.com/transcript_schippers.html.

17. Question whether this is an indication of foreknowledge constituting official misconduct or a crime under certain circumstances.

18. This case is factually supported by EPA internal memos and third party scientific reviews like the Sierra Club’s September 18, 2004 report “Air Pollution and Deception at Ground Zero,” as well as by a report by EPA’s own Inspector General, which found that the White House Council on Environmental Quality changed EPA’s press releases in order to reassure the public and re-open Wall Street. An investigation is needed to determine who in the White House was ultimately responsible for these changes.

19. Attorneys for the plaintiffs in this case, the firm of Motley-Rice, maintain a website [www.motleyrice.com/911_victims/911_victims_in_the_news.html] containing hyperlinks to many 9/11-related news stories that may be of interest in connection with the conduct of an investigation into culpability for the September 11 tragedy.

20. Again, suppression of witness testimony in a state criminal investigation may give rise to liability for obstruction of justice under state law.

21. They are said to be held by US authorities at undisclosed locations (and Guantanomo, in the case of Zubaydah) and have never been produced in public. Two German criminal cases against alleged co-conspirators in Hamburg, Mounir El-Motassadeq [Original link dead: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A59420-2004Apr7?language=printer] and Abdelghani Mzoudi, [Original dead link: ttp://www.faz.com/IN/INtemplates/eFAZ/archive.asp?doc={FC58A36E-D7AA-4AE3-A85D-830FBC6110B7}&width=1024&height=768&agt=explorer&ver=4&svr=4] also failed for the same reason.

22. A question arises as to whether official action of falsely invoking the National Security Act to cover up a crime constitutes accessory-after-the-fact criminal conduct.

23. Presumably, destruction of evidence of a New York crime constitutes obstruction of justice under New York law.

24. In some cases, harassment of witnesses and potential witnesses is a crime in itself.

25. Note: On May 16, 2002, Dan Rather publicly admitted on BBC that there was widespread self-censorship within his industry for fear of being “necklaced” (evoking the flaming tires used to kill informants in South Africa) for asking “unpatriotic questions” about 9/11 and the “War on Terror.”

26. For example, The 9/11 Commission Report, which itself was compiled by a group riddled with grave conflicts of interest, was obligingly submitted to the White House and potentially implicated government agencies for vetting before its July 22nd public release.

(Forward to Complainant Signatures)