From the text, full story appears here: http://www.tikkun.org/article.php?story=20090908084856114

"As to how Jones could have signed the statement below, let me make clear that neither he nor I, who also signed the statement, signed something accusing Bush of being directly involved in 9/11. I did authorize my name to be used to call for an investigation of the claims of those who deny the official story of 9/11.

I am now and was then an agnostic about what actually happened to make 9/11 possible, but do agree with those who say that there are enough inconsistencies and problems with the official story to warrant an impartial investigation by people not connected to the government of the US and not bound by political considerations. I think that such an investigation would be a great advantage to everyone.

I have often found myself surrounded by people obsessed with 9/11 and acting in ways that I would call "nut cases" because they are so sure that they know not only what I agree with--namely that the inconsistencies deserve further investigation-- but also what I disagree with, namely that there is a prima facie reason to believe that President Bush had concrete prior knowledge of an attack on the US and for political reasons allowed it to happen. Frankly, I don't believe that one bit, but that is one of the reasons why I'd like to see an impartial investigation by people who have no political stake in the outcome of that investigation,and with the power to subpoena all relevant documents. Such an investigation could once and for all put these paranoid types to rest or at least silence them. So that is why I signed the call."

Michael Lerner

http://www.tikkun.org/article.php?story=20090908084856114

It looks like Lerner didn't like the editorial comment posted on 911truth.org at the heading of the petition, implicating the Bush Administration. That petition text appears in his article. He does assert that a new independent investigation is nonetheless called for. There were many distinguished names on the petition like Daniel Ellsberg and Kevin Danaher, Paul Hawken and Randy Hayes. Lerner says he saw some "nut cases" in the list, but doesn't identify them. Michael's a decent guy and certainly has stuck his neck out in advocating for peace and social justice in Palestine, Israel and all over the globe and an end to US militarism. Like his progressive colleague, Howard Zinn, he seems put "off" by the gritty, compelling science that we have produced in our movement, science that serves the purpose of any new independent investigation. Lerner seems to have also fallen victim to the scourge of the "conspiracy" misnomer and group think.

It may be advantageous to our movement, to have a studious sit down with the some of the left's more open members like Lerner and Kathy Kelly of Voices For Creative Nonviolence. The horrible wars, the deterioration of civil liberties, the phony war on terrorism and its numbing consequences, all could end if the events around 9-11 were truly examined in an independent investigation. Truth loving people all over the globe would deeply desire that