The Greatest Crisis In Modern History

[PolyNewbie]

I cannot tell you what happened on 911, I can only deduce what didn't happen. Its like you may not know how a helicopter works but you know they do not run on water jets.

From All The Proof You Need That 911 Was An Inside Job

"Before you read this article, conduct this test. Try to purchase some stock, or some futures, a mutual fund or some put options, without providing your identity. Go ahead and try it! See if you get anywhere. Find out what happens when you tell the investment firm that you want to make a huge investment anonymously. It can’t be done.

Then ask yourself this question: How could someone have placed anonymous put options on American Airlines and United Airlines just prior to the attacks of 9/11? Then ask yourself why no one has investigated this suspicious deal. Ask yourself why there has been no attempt by the US government to identify the person who anticipated huge profits from a disaster that was yet to occur. Is it because the trail possibly leads to the CIA?

"

By the way this is what people mean by "cover up".

[Black Dog]

I cannot tell you what happened on 911, I can only deduce what didn't happen. Its like you may not know how a helicopter works but you know they do not run on water jets.

So basically, you are conceding you're arguing from ignorance and inserting a theory that makes sense to you in order to fill the hole. Like I said, it's the same "god-in-the-gaps" logic creationists use to try and "prove" evolution is false.

Unless you can make a detailed case for how this massive plot was carried out with such precision, you can't expect to be taken seriously.

From All The Proof You Need That 911 Was An Inside Job

Oh look another shitty web site that starts with an conclusion and works backwards to find "evidence" to support it. Hmm.. maybe if I click it they'll tell me how the 9-11 Inside Job was pulled off....

There is a mountain of unanswered questions concerning the events surrounding the 9/11 attacks. Anyone willing to listen or look at the inconsistencies would have to draw an obvious conclusion: the official explanation of the events of 9/11 is nothing more than a desperate attempt to distract the American people from investigating the truth. There can be no denying that there are a number of strange and puzzling occurrences that have never been, and seemingly cannot be explained.

Damn.

It's interesting, too, that they concede that "there are a number of strange and puzzling occurrences that have never been, and seemingly cannot be explained," but that doesn't stop them from cooking up a cockamamie dues-ex-machina explanation for them.

You and your ilk are like primitive savages squatting on logs who, when confronted by a phenomenon they can't explain or understand (say, lightning) resort to perposterous and contorted explanations to give their world some order. "The government did it" is the new "the gods are angry with us!"

[PolyNewbie]

BlackDog:So basically, you are conceding you're arguing from ignorance and inserting a theory that makes sense to you in order to fill the hole. Like I said, it's the same "god-in-the-gaps" logic creationists use to try and "prove" evolution is false.

Unless you can make a detailed case for how this massive plot was carried out with such precision, you can't expect to be taken seriously.

I'm not argueing from ignorance, I am argueing from fact. I am using fact after fact after fact. You saying that only shows your foolishness.

Nuclear reactors run on chocoalte bars. If you don't agree then show me your equations.

How did 911 take place ? I don't know but here is a theory:

(1) Foreign nationals were brought in from a USA enemy country as supposed enemies secretly to plant explosives in the building during an abnormal shut down of the wtc's

(2) The CIA got some arabic people to board planes so that they could be blamed for the terrorist attack. They had no idea what was about to happen and were seen partying with strippers the night before. These guys were on a CIA payroll.

(3) The planes were wired with automatic controls to guide them into the towers. The passengers have long since been put to sleep or dead. The planes were wired up by the same CIA that bring the drugs into the USA. They work for the criminal elemnt within the US government.

[PolyNewbie]

Black Dog:Damn.

It's interesting, too, that they concede that "there are a number of strange and puzzling occurrences that have never been, and seemingly cannot be explained," but that doesn't stop them from cooking up a cockamamie dues-ex-machina explanation for them.

You and your ilk are like primitive savages squatting on logs who, when confronted by a phenomenon they can't explain or understand (say, lightning) resort to perposterous and contorted explanations to give their world some order. "The government did it" is the new "the gods are angry with us!"

I'm not posting conspiracy theories, all my arguements are facts. Call them strange or puzzling if you want but they are facts. The facts point to a conspiracy.

Show me some evidence that Osama did it. Call the FBI with your evidence so that they can be convinced enough to put Osama on their most wanted list for the 911 attacks.

Have you ever heard of the USS Liberty ? Did you know that they found three additional bombs inside the buildings after the Oklahoma city bombing ? Do you remember the Iran Contra affair ? Who shot Kennedy ?

How many times can you be lied to before you wake up ? How about a game of three card monte. Bring 100's only.

[PolyNewbie]

Tell us why you think Islamic terrorists did 911.

[cybercoma]

How did 911 take place ? I don't know but...

...I am argueing from fact. I am using fact after fact after fact.

This is fun.

[Canadian Blue]

Tell us why you think Islamic terrorists did 911.

Because they hate the United States, dude do you actually think people in the Middle East love America. How many American flags have been burned. Honestly, where the hell have you been for the past 15 years.

I'm not posting conspiracy theories, all my arguements are facts. Call them strange or puzzling if you want but they are facts. The facts point to a conspiracy.

Not according to the The American Society of Civil Engineers who have said in detail what caused the towers to collapse. Apparently you know more than civil engineers, but I think I'm willing to take the word of a civil engineer over some loonie who believes in plenty of wacky theories.

The planes were wired with automatic controls to guide them into the towers. The passengers have long since been put to sleep or dead. The planes were wired up by the same CIA that bring the drugs into the USA. They work for the criminal elemnt within the US government.

Dude, do you have an Acid you wanna lend me......

QUOTE

No, because there is no police state. If there were a police state, you wouldn't have internet wackjobs peddling stories about there being a police state because the police state would get them. The preponderance of such wackjobs is a refutation of the theory.

See HR 6166 & The Military Commissions act.

So why aren't you in jail yet, or for that matter all the wacko's who believe in this conspiracy. If America was a police state, these people would be in jail.

The things that you say the NIST and FEMA reports say are not contained in the reports !!! The building collapses were never even investigated. Osama isn't on the FBI most wanted list because they don't have enough evidence to make an indictment. Maybe you should call the FBI and tell them why you are so sure Osama did it.

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/topten/fugitives/fugitives.htm

Yeah, I don't see Bin Laden anywhere on that list.

I posted a debate between the editor of popular mechanics, and some of these conspiracy theorists. It's a great read, it show's just how little these people know about what happened on that day.

This is no different than people who say only 200,000 Jew's died in the holocaust, they try to find any unanswered question, and then use it to say it was a conspiracy.

You are right but pointing out both a subsequent cover up and destruction of evidence and the prior stand down of the defence forces is evidence on its own.

No it isn't. You have absolutely no military experience. When a jet is hijacked, it's not like in the movies where a fighter can be there within ten minutes. As well in a hijacking no one would have imagined that it would turn out like September 11th. I think that their were problem's with intelligence, and the government could have done more. However I'm not gonna get into these crazy delusion's that Sept 11 was done by the American government.

[Black Dog]

I'm not argueing from ignorance, I am argueing from fact. I am using fact after fact after fact. You saying that only shows your foolishness.

You said it yourself:

I cannot tell you what happened on 911, I can only deduce what didn't happen.

Can I take this as a confession of your foolishness?

Nuclear reactors run on chocoalte bars. If you don't agree then show me your equations.

I can show you a nuclear reactor. You can't show me any evidence that the U.S. government actually planned and carried out 9-11. Oh you can point to problems with the official version alright. You've got gaps galore (some valid, some way, way out there). But you haven't shown (and nor any members of the "Truth" movement) concrete evidence indicting the U.S. government. So, even if one were to accept, for example, that the towers were brought down by a controlled demolition, where's the evidence that the U.S. government was responsible? Why not Mossad? Or CSIS? Or Al Qaeda?

Of course, the biggest flaw of all is the claim that it was carried out to put in a police state. If so, we're dealing with the kindest, gentlest police state in the history of police states. People so ruthless that they would sacrifice 3,000+ Americans so that they could acheive their nefarious goal of gradually introducing legislation granting them slightly increased powers of detention and surveillance. If you think that's a police state, then you've got some reading to do.

(1) Foreign nationals were brought in from a USA enemy country as supposed enemies secretly to plant explosives in the building during an abnormal shut down of the wtc's

(2) The CIA got some arabic people to board planes so that they could be blamed for the terrorist attack. They had no idea what was about to happen and were seen partying with strippers the night before. These guys were on a CIA payroll.

(3) The planes were wired with automatic controls to guide them into the towers. The passengers have long since been put to sleep or dead. The planes were wired up by the same CIA that bring the drugs into the USA. They work for the criminal elemnt within the US government.

Yeah that's way less far-fetched tha a plot organized and carried out by a small group of foreign terrorists.

I'm not posting conspiracy theories, all my arguements are facts. Call them strange or puzzling if you want but they are facts. The facts point to a conspiracy.

So you claim to be posting conspiracy facts. Er...except you haven't offered any evidence of a conspiracy. So really, the ide ahat it was an inside job is just a theory about a conspiracy. A conspiracy theory, if you will.

Show me some evidence that Osama did it. Call the FBI with your evidence so that they can be convinced enough to put Osama on their most wanted list for the 911 attacks.

Show me the evidence the U.S. government did it. Again, even if one accepts just about every alternate theory (the Pentagon missile, the controlled demolition, the Flight 93 shoot down, yadda yadda yadda) there's still nothing pointing to the U.S. government as opposed to, say, aliens on the loose from Area 51.

Have you ever heard of the USS Liberty ?

Yes. Shot up by Israeli jets during the Six Day War. What about it.

Did you know that they found three additional bombs inside the buildings after the Oklahoma city bombing ?

I know a lot of right-wing conspiracy nuts postulated as much (actually a lot of the 9-11 alternate* theories borrow heavily from the many that emerged after OK City).

Do you remember the Iran Contra affair ?

Yeah what about it?

Who shot Kennedy ?

Some guy. Probably more than one guy, actually. And?

Tell us why you think Islamic terrorists did 911.

Occam's razor.

This is fun.

It really is.

[Canadian Blue]

I can show you a nuclear reactor. You can't show me any evidence that the U.S. government actually planned and carried out 9-11. Oh you can point to problems with the official version alright. You've got gaps galore (some valid, some way, way out there). But you haven't shown (and neither have any members of the "Truth" movement) concrete evidence indicting the U.S. government. So, even if one were to accept, for example, that the towers were brought down by a controlled demolition, where's the evidence that the U.S. government was repsonsible? Why not Mossad? Or CSIS? Or Al Qaeda?

Of course, the biggest flaw of all is the claim that it was carried out to put in apolice state. If so, we're dealing with the kindest, gentlest police state in he history of police states. People so ruthless that they would sacrifice 3,000 Americans so that they could acheive their nefarious goal of gradually introducing legislation granting them slightly increased powers of detention and surveillance. If you think that's a police state, then you've got some reading to do.

BD, Poly has claimed that America is the most tyrannical state in the last thousand years. Apparently Nazi Germany wasn't as fascist as the United States. Poly is a strong supporter of Lyndon Larouche, and apparently that congressman that was the president of the John Birche Society. Not to mention the unguarded FEMA deathcamps, all that was provided was a video of a train yard, with some strange looking building additions.

I've posted several links to he ASCE, NIST, Popular Mechanics, and several sites showing 9/11 really was caused by OBL. Poly only gives links to truth911, whatreallyhappened, etc.

[Black Dog]

BD, Poly has claimed that America is the most tyrannical state in the last thousand years.

That claim isn't as amazing or far out as the cognitive dissonance required to believe such a thing because you read it on the internet. If the U.S. was the most tyrannical state of the last 1,000 years, folks like Lyndon Larouche and David Ray Griffin would be rotting in an unmarked mass grave, not peddling their hokum on the internet.

Unless they're in on it too!!!!

[PolyNewbie]

where's the evidence that the U.S. government was responsible? Why not Mossad? Or CSIS? Or Al Qaeda?

The fact that US defence forces did nothing to stop the attack proves they were in on it. The evidence coverup shows they have something to hide.

Canadian Blue:I've posted several links to he ASCE, NIST, Popular Mechanics, and several sites showing 9/11 really was caused by OBL. Poly only gives links to truth911, whatreallyhappened, etc.

NIST does not investigate why the buildings collapsed they only put forth a weak hypothesis that is unsupported by any evidence.

Popular Mechanics twists the 911 truth movement around and then addresses their interpretation of what 911 truyth is and attempts to debunk that. If you heard the interview on DemocracyNow you would know that popular mechanics position on the Pennslyvania crash is that the plane buried itself into the ground and that the coroner went in and dug up all the bodies

The American Society of Civil Engineers depends on the US government for contract work. James Fetzer and King have proven that the buildings could not have fallen straight down like that from an airplane crash using the second law of thermodynamics. Civil engineers do not study building collapses - how they happen they build buildings to prevent them from happening. Going to a civil engineer about 911 is like going to a dentist because you have diarrea. Its stupid and it doesn't make any sense.

The several sites you mention such as 911Myths can be dissected easily. They do the same trick as PM.

You have presented facts that show I must be wrong, I have shown you that your facts are wrong wrt cell phone calls and the details of the contruction of the wtc. Nova and Popular mechanics both said the building was built like a hollow shell and all the strength was on the outside. Anyone can look up construction details and see this isn't true./

How often can people lie to you before you stop believeing them ? Have you called the FBI to explain how you know Osama did it - if you did then they would have some evidence and be able to put him on the most wanted list for 911.

Is there anything that I have not addressed ? Three card monte anyone ?

[PolyNewbie]

Black Dog: You and most people on your side seem to use Occams razor as some kind of proof.

Occams Razor does not allow you to set aside or ignore evidence in your explanation. Its about finding the simplest explanation that explains all the evidence.

[Riverwind]

Black Dog: You and most people on your side seem to use Occams razor as some kind of proof.

You, OTOH, seem to belief that finding minor errors or inconsistancies in the official explaination constitutes "proof" of whatever bizarre alternate explaination that you dream up. You really have no business lecturing people on the meaning of "proof".

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind: You really have no business lecturing people on the meaning of "proof".

Tell me where I am wrong. I'd like it if you folks could give me a challenge but your facts are all wrong and your use of Occams Razor misapplied.

I don't call the defence stand down, the evidence cover up, the secret trading on futures inconsequential evidence. This is "in your face" evidence and needs to be explained.

The building collapses have never been investigated. I do not see how you can be so sure of your position. You have no supporting science and no supporting facts. All you have is your TV telling you what to believe.

Riverwind:You, OTOH, seem to belief that finding minor errors or inconsistancies in the official explaination constitutes

No straight answers on wtc7 yet. No NISt investigation into wtc7 collapse. Do you consider a 47 story super wide complex a minor issue ?

[Black Dog]

The fact that US defence forces did nothing to stop the attack proves they were in on it. The evidence coverup shows they have something to hide.

If the cops can't prevent someone from stealing your car, doe sthat mean they were in on the theft? As for the cover-up, it must have been a pretty crappy one if a bunch of yahoos on the internet can get a hold of all this "evidence".

NIST does not investigate why the buildings collapsed they only put forth a weak hypothesis that is unsupported by any evidence.

Except physics, chemistry, engineering....

Popular Mechanics twists the 911 truth movement around and then addresses their interpretation of what 911 truyth is and attempts to debunk that. If you heard the interview on DemocracyNow you would know that popular mechanics position on the Pennslyvania crash is that the plane buried itself into the ground and that the coroner went in and dug up all the bodies

This is a perfect example of the intellectual perfidy of the truthers. Here's what Jim Meigs, the editor-in-chief of Popular Mechanics; actually said about the movie "Loose Change":

If you look at the sources that were used throughout that clip, they’re all things that came up in the first day or two after the attacks. In some cases, somebody is standing across the field and saying, “I don't see a plane.” Well, when a plane strikes the ground at 500 miles an hour, flying almost straight down, there typically isn't much visible above ground.

They also quote the coroner in the Shanksville area. We talked to the coroner. He had the horrific job of collecting the body parts and cataloging and performing all the necessary tests. Those bodies were identified. The plane wreckage in the pieces -- the tiny pieces it was in after it had hit the ground was, you know, collected from the hole, cataloged.

So he's not saying "the plane buried itself into the ground". He's saying the pklane hit the ground with such velocity and force that there wasn't much left of it. If you look at any photos, you see a smoking hole in the ground where the plane hit.

The American Society of Civil Engineers depends on the US government for contract work. James Fetzer and King have proven that the buildings could not have fallen straight down like that from an airplane crash using the second law of thermodynamics. Civil engineers do not study building collapses - how they happen they build buildings to prevent them from happening. Going to a civil engineer about 911 is like going to a dentist because you have diarrea. Its stupid and it doesn't make any sense.

Yeah, you don't go to civil engineers, you go to freelance special effects designers (Michael Rivero, whatreallyhappened.com), film school rejects (Dylan Avery "Loose Change") and ex-theologians (David Ray Griffin).

[Riverwind]

No straight answers on wtc7 yet. No NISt investigation into wtc7 collapse. Do you consider a 47 story super wide complex a minor issue ?

The collapse of WTC7 has been adequately explained in a number of places. I don't really care whether there is an official NIST report nor do I care if every last detail has been analyzed and explained. The problem with your line of argument is you expect that every last detail must be explained and that is not practical or reasonable. Especially when much larger gaps and flaws exist within your theories that you refuse to back up with proof or logic.

[PolyNewbie]

Riverwind:The collapse of WTC7 has been adequately explained in a number of places. I don't really care whether there is an official NIST report nor do I care if every last detail has been analyzed and explained.

So you don't care if they investigated it or not - a 47 story building is just a minor detail ?

The problem with your line of argument is you expect that every last detail must be explained and that is not practical or reasonable.

So its not practical or reasonable to investigate the collapse of these buildings ? Are you for real ?

Especially when much larger gaps and flaws exist within your theories that you refuse to back up with proof or logic.

For example ? (substance please - no more presstitute commentary substitutions for proof)

[PolyNewbie]

Yeah, you don't go to civil engineers, you go to freelance special effects designers (Michael Rivero, whatreallyhappened.com), film school rejects (Dylan Avery "Loose Change") and ex-theologians (David Ray Griffin).

You go to who has evidence and Michael Riveros site has evidence. David Ray Griffin does a great job of ripping NIST in his book on the subject.

[PolyNewbie]

They also quote the coroner in the Shanksville area. We talked to the coroner. He had the horrific job of collecting the body parts and cataloging and performing all the necessary tests. Those bodies were identified.

Sorry but that is another lie.

Here's what Jim Meigs, the editor-in-chief of Popular Mechanics; actually said about the movie "Loose Change":

Stop using commentary as evidence.

[PolyNewbie]

If the cops can't prevent someone from stealing your car, doe sthat mean they were in on the theft? As for the cover-up, it must have been a pretty crappy one if a bunch of yahoos on the internet can get a hold of all this "evidence".

If your car is obviously broken into right in front of a gang of cops its a pretty good bet that they were paid off.

As far as your second sentence goes, they only need to fool some of the people. They have to make it obvious enough so that some people see it for what it is. They don't want to fool everyone, just the fast food guzzling simpletons are enough.

Oklahoma was obviously an inside job - THEY FOUND THREE OTHER BOMBS INSIDE THE BUILDING - THAT WAS ON TV !!! Still some folks think McVeigh did it alone. They even had a military expert on explosives saying the official version was impossible !! Still there are some morons who will believe it.

[Riverwind]

So you don't care if they investigated it or not - a 47 story building is just a minor detail ?

Others have investigated it. Explanations are available online.

So its not practical or reasonable to investigate the collapse of these buildings ? Are you for real ?

Try reading what I wrote. I said it is not necessary to explain every detail and clear up every possible inconsistency. Conspiracy theories always ignore the majority of evidence - find one or two oddities and then use that to claim that the rest of the evidence is wrong. Or, even worse, claim that those oddities prove a much more ridiculous theory.

Especially when much larger gaps and flaws exist within your theories that you refuse to back up with proof or logic.

For example ? (substance please - no more presstitute commentary substitutions for proof)

Why would a gov't do such a thing? Your theory is a waste of time unless you can prove motive. Paranoid rants about malevolent secret societies are _not_ proof.

[Canadian Blue]

You go to who has evidence and Michael Riveros site has evidence. David Ray Griffin does a great job of ripping NIST in his book on the subject.

A little bit of information on Michael Riverio. He blames Israel for alot of the worlds terrorist attacks, and is also a strong supporter of allowing people to promote holocaust denial. The thing that I love about his is that he is just a visual effects artist, and doesn't really have much experience in anything.

Oklahoma was obviously an inside job - THEY FOUND THREE OTHER BOMBS INSIDE THE BUILDING - THAT WAS ON TV !!! Still some folks think McVeigh did it alone. They even had a military expert on explosives saying the official version was impossible !! Still there are some morons who will believe it.

Apparently Oklahoma was perpetrated by Bush, who was using Clinton to bring about a new Patriot Act. Even though Bush was defeated by Clinton, Clinton was secretly in Bush's pocket, and it was a puppet regime for the entire 8 year presidency.

Apparently a large majority of people have been duped into believing Oklahoma was caused by that great guy Timothy McVeigh. Can you get a link for that expert saying the official explanation is impossible, and no visual effects artists don't count.

HEY POLY, WHY HAVEN'T YOU RESPONDED BACK ABOUT BIN LADEN BEING ON THE TEN MOST WANTED LIST WHEN YOU SAID HE WASN'T BECAUSE THE FBI DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH PROOF.

I'm also getting sick and tired of hearing the fact the military didn't do anything is proof. Like I said before it takes a hell of alot longer to react to this situation than in the movies. Many people had no clue what was going, it was complete chaos. Nobody expected it to happen, military, ATC, and emergency responders.

One thing I noticed about these experts is their shotty pasts, and many of them have other kooky theories as well. Perhaps Poly should give a full biography of the people who are providing the proof 9/11 was a conspiracy.

[PolyNewbie]

CanadianBlue:Apparently Oklahoma was perpetrated by Bush, who was using Clinton to bring about a new Patriot Act. Even though Bush was defeated by Clinton, Clinton was secretly in Bush's pocket, and it was a puppet regime for the entire 8 year presidency.

Where did you get that idea ?

CanadianBlue:Can you get a link for that expert saying the official explanation is impossible, and no visual effects artists don't count.

From WhatReallyHappened.com:

"This report on the bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City was prepared by Brigadier General Benton K. Partin, USAF (Ret.) and dated July 30, 1995.

The report was submitted to the U.S. Congress and is a matter of the Congressional Record.

"

Brigadier General Benton K. Partin, USAF (Ret.)

Read the conclusions and peer comments at the bottom of the conclusions.

HEY POLY, WHY HAVEN'T YOU RESPONDED BACK ABOUT BIN LADEN BEING ON THE TEN MOST WANTED LIST WHEN YOU SAID HE WASN'T BECAUSE THE FBI DIDN'T HAVE ENOUGH PROOF.

Bin Laden is not on the most wanted list for attacks on 911. He is on the list for the crimes he has supposedly committed but 911 isn't part of the reason.

[Canadian Blue]

No doubt to protect us from terrorists. I believe it was Clinton that tried this in '95. They all play for the same team. You should be able to figure that out from main stream news reports showing Clinton & Bush Sr togather.

QUOTE

CanadianBlue:Apparently Oklahoma was perpetrated by Bush, who was using Clinton to bring about a new Patriot Act. Even though Bush was defeated by Clinton, Clinton was secretly in Bush's pocket, and it was a puppet regime for the entire 8 year presidency.

Where did you get that idea ?

Well it was you Sherlock.

That is absolutely true ! I have a bachelors degree in EE and I have argued 911 with many civil engineers. By and large they do not understand basic principles of science or they have just been told to go along with it. I'm inclined to believe the second hypothesis because some of the science I have heard civil engineers (or people that claim to be engs) wrt 911 is flat out rediculous.

As a matter of fact, I have had civil engineers tell me that the building went straight down because "gravity points down" this was hailed as an incredible piece of logic put forth by multiple civil engineers and they laughed about it thinking how smart they were. Really. (they forgot there was a building in the way)

So you have a bachelors degree in electrical engineering, how does that make you an expert on 9/11. I'm sure that people who specialize in something like engineering know more about building structures than an electrical engineer.

Who told them to go along with it? Any time we show you proof your wrong, all you ever do is say its due to government control or corporations forcing them to say it. Apparently we have to put our faith into people who create BS sites since they dropped out of college and need a new hobby.

Perhaps we should engage in the debate were you said the term "anti-semitism" is a form of thought control.

I love your idea that people are afraid of your "ideas" because they you think they are "facts". Despite the fact people much more qualified than a visual affects artist have shown that 9/11 wasn't this massive conspiracy your claiming it to be.

[Black Dog]

You go to who has evidence and Michael Riveros site has evidence. David Ray Griffin does a great job of ripping NIST in his book on the subject.

See what I did there? The same thing you did: attacked the person's credentials and not what they were saying.

The difference being of course, the people I cited actually have no credentials to make the kinds of claims they are making.

Sorry but that is another lie.

Which part? The hole? The body parts? The debris?

Stop using commentary as evidence.

It's called "correcting the record." You said PM's view was that the plane "buried itself in the ground". Clearly that's not what the editor-in-cheif said, nor was such a phrase included in the the article they ran. So that makes you wrong.

If your car is obviously broken into right in front of a gang of cops its a pretty good bet that they were paid off.

What if the cops were just incompetent? Or at the doughnut shop? There's a host of other possibilities. And once again:" you have no direct evidence of government involvement. None. Zilch. Nada. Bupkis.

As far as your second sentence goes, they only need to fool some of the people. They have to make it obvious enough so that some people see it for what it is. They don't want to fool everyone, just the fast food guzzling simpletons are enough.

Again: what a crappy police state to allow so much dissent and anti-government information to flourish.

Oklahoma was obviously an inside job - THEY FOUND THREE OTHER BOMBS INSIDE THE BUILDING - THAT WAS ON TV !!!

No. No they didn't.

Still some folks think McVeigh did it alone. They even had a military expert on explosives saying the official version was impossible !! Still there are some morons who will believe it.

Let's say someone helped Mcveigh. It's possible, I suppose. Let's say there were othe rbombs. Also a possibility. But what evidence is there to suggest the government did it?

For you sane people out there, here's Matt Tabibi, who is a very funny and very smart writer, going to town on the OK city and 9-11 nuts.

Oh, one last thing for Candian Blue:

I love your idea that people are afraid of your "ideas" because they you think they are "facts". Despite the fact people much more qualified than a visual affects artist have shown that 9/11 wasn't this massive conspiracy your claiming it to be.

Don't you understand? All the qualified people are in on it! That's why it's up to the rubes and armchair scientists to tell us what's really happening...