You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Questions for those who argue as skeptics against 9/11 skepticism [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
JackRiddler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-13-07 03:12 PM
Original message
Questions for those who argue as skeptics against 9/11 skepticism
Advertisements [?]
(NOTE: No name calling. I want to open a serious discussion with those who are willing. I ask people who support inside job theories to comment on the OP if they wish but to avoid snark in this thread and wait on adding their own new questions for 48 hours.)

Isn't Cheney's continued linking of the Saddam regime to al-Qaeda and the 9/11 events the most "outrageous conspiracy theory" of all? Did it not have more real-world impact than any other conspiracy theory? Note that he did it again yesterday:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/200...

Should 9/11 have been responded to as a crime against humanity, or as an act of war?

Is it untrue that 9/11 was employed as the justification for military actions and domestic policies that would have otherwise been politically difficult or infeasible? Is it untrue that each of these actions and policies was explicitly desired and planned in advance by the main players of the Bush administration?

Do you justify the appointment of Philip Zelikow as the executive director of the 9/11 Commission? Does not this appointment on its face indicate a cover-up?

What did you think of the original appointment of Henry Kissinger to be the chairman of the 9/11 Commission?

Did Condoleezza Rice commit perjury with regard to the Aug. 6th PDB in her testimony before the Commission? Should this not be a priority for prosecution?

Do you agree with the 9/11 Commission conclusion that the question of who financed the alleged hijackers is "of little practical significance"?

Should the Pakistani money connection have been pursued? Should this not be a high priority?

Should Sibel Edmonds be allowed to speak openly on all that she knows? Should this not be a high priority for opponents of the Bush regime?

Should an investigation be pursued to determine which agencies and officials consciously and repeatedly upheld false accounts of the air-defense response timeline? (Suspects to include FAA, NORAD and Gen. Myers, who produced and repeated mutually contradictory accounts in the 2001-2003 period?)

Shouldn't the whereabouts of Gen. Myers (in light of his contradictions with Clarke's account) and of Donald Rumsfeld during the attacks be known?

Should Christie Todd Whitman be indicted for her false statements to the public concerning the dangers of Ground Zero emissions? Shouldn't it be a high priority to investigate which White House officials suppressed the initial EPA report? Wouldn't consciously downplaying this risk and ultimately raising the fatality rate constitute a high crime?

Were the questions posed by the Family Steering Committee the right roadmap for the 9/11 Commission, as Jamey Gorelick and others acknowledged? Is it untrue, as two members of the FSC have detailed, that 70 percent of these questions were fully omitted from consideration the 9/11 CR?

Would you support a new investigation that uses these questions as its basis?

Do you agree there is probable cause for a criminal investigation or grand jury into as-yet unsolved crimes relating to the events of September 11th and their aftermath?
(See http://justicefor911.org - Have you read the actual 2004 complaint to Spitzer up at that site?)

Do you agree with the Commission's deal with the White House on WH documents including PDBs?

What do you think of Cleland's resignation, and his statements that the 9/11 Commission was a whitewash and White House treatment of the investigation was a scam?

Should we know who the sources were for the alleged discovery of the "Brooklyn Cell" including Mohamed Atta by Able Danger in 1999-2000? Was Able Danger of minor historical significance, as the 9/11 Commission claimed?

Wouldn't a serious investigation of September 11th pursue all stories of foreknowledge and forewarnings, especially those from foreign intelligence agencies, with the goal of finding out the sources of such information? (I.e., avoiding any assumptions about their significance until the sources are known?)

Are you aware that claims of put options and suspect financial deals suggesting foreknowledge range far, far beyond the well-known sets of put options placed on United and American stock on the CBOE?

Do you believe that United 93 crashed at 10:03 am without causing a measurable seismic event, and that a natural seismic event of the size usually associated with a plane crash followed in the same area at 10:06 am by coincidence?

Why do you think the anthrax mailings were sent to Daschle and Leahy? (Reports of any other anthrax targets in the government have since been discounted as hoaxes and mistakes.)

What do you think of the FBI's investigations of leaks from the intelligence committee senators and their staff during the Joint Intelligence Committee Investigation of 9/11? Might the FBI actions have been intended as intimidation?

Sibel Edmonds and Anthony Shaffer were disciplined. The FAA tapes of accounts by air traffic controllers who handled the two flights that hit the Towers, taken on the afternoon of September 11th, were destroyed. Myers, Eberhard, Frasca, Maltbie and Bowman all received promotions after 9/11. George Tenet got a medal. Would this combination have an effect on potential whistleblowers contemplating coming forward with whatever bits they know?

Do you believe all hijacker identities have been resolved beyond doubt?

Where was Mohamed Atta in the period from April to June, 2000?

When if ever do you think the al-Qaeda networks that grew out of the "Afghan Arab" movement during the 1980s anti-Soviet jihad stopped having links to US intelligence networks?

Was Osama Bin Ladin allowed to get away from Tora Bora? Was there an airlift of Pakistani ISI and al-Qaeda operatives out of Kunduz, Afghanistan via an air corridor cleared by US forces in November 2001, as Seymour Hersh reported?

Do US intel/military agencies or related networks amongst their contractors have a significant history of engineering false-flag terrorism? Should this enter at all into considerations of 9/11?

What is the significance of Ali Mohamed? Was his story worthy of inclusion in the official 9/11 investigations?

Do these questions, most of which relate to official statements and actions of geopolitical consequence, not indicate higher priorities for skeptics to pursue than the debunking of errors and distortions by amateur researchers as seen in "Loose Change 2," Alex Jones's works, dustification theories, "no planes" theories and the like?

Have you read Michael Ruppert? The 9/11 Timeline edited by Paul Thompson? Nafeez Ahmed? Michel Chossudovsky? Daniel Hopsicker? Were these not the most prominent 9/11 skeptic-researchers by far until 2005?
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
  -Questions for those who argue as skeptics against 9/11 skepticism JackRiddler  Mar-13-07 03:12 PM   #0 
  - Cheney's statements  CJCRANE   Mar-13-07 03:36 PM   #1 
  - Pretty low response rate from our OCTs.  BushDespiser12   Mar-13-07 08:24 PM   #2 
  - Give them some time - it's a big post...  JackRiddler   Mar-13-07 09:03 PM   #3 
  - kick nt  petgoat   Mar-14-07 09:41 AM   #4 
  - Where are the replies? nt  HamdenRice   Mar-14-07 10:47 AM   #5 
  - The bar exam had fewer questions  jberryhill   Mar-14-07 11:21 AM   #6 
  - A person's priorities give others information about them, Jberryhill  Bryan Sacks   Mar-14-07 02:08 PM   #8 
  - Have I seen you (any of you) denouncing the "nutjob crap"?  MervinFerd   Mar-14-07 04:37 PM   #10 
  - If you haven't, it's because you don't want to look...  JackRiddler   Mar-15-07 03:06 PM   #70 
     - We're looking at your own words at your sig links.  greyl   Mar-15-07 04:19 PM   #72 
        - WE?  JackRiddler   Mar-15-07 04:42 PM   #76 
           - "hey, that's good stuff!"  Twist_U_Up   Mar-16-07 03:47 PM   #107 
           - You also liked  greyl   Mar-16-07 04:26 PM   #109 
           - The One Thing OCTers Can't Abide And Have No Answer For Is Honest Self Examination...  Fainter   Mar-17-07 01:10 PM   #123 
              - Funny.  greyl   Mar-17-07 01:37 PM   #126 
                 - I don't think that...  JackRiddler   Mar-17-07 02:14 PM   #127 
                 - "WE're looking at your own words at your sig links"  Fainter   Mar-17-07 03:03 PM   #129 
                    - Yeah, I own it and I've explained it.  greyl   Mar-18-07 12:06 PM   #134 
  - An F-bomb inside of the first ten words....  jberryhill   Mar-14-07 06:10 PM   #12 
  - dude...  JackRiddler   Mar-15-07 08:58 PM   #85 
     - Hmmm....  jberryhill   Mar-16-07 11:18 AM   #102 
  - Uhhh, no.  AZCat   Mar-14-07 09:27 PM   #16 
  - He means structural in the anthropological /linguistic /political sense  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 06:27 AM   #20 
     - Structuralism and the "global warming hoax".  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 07:34 AM   #23 
     - All you are saying is  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 08:01 AM   #26 
        - No, I'm saying that you are misusing "structuralism".  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 08:20 AM   #28 
           - 9/11 is a political crime, not an engineering issue  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 09:29 AM   #29 
              - Does industrial activity cause global warming? YES or NO.  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 10:04 AM   #33 
              - The OP is NOT about collapse of a steel building  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 10:13 AM   #37 
              - WTF? "flatly denied that inductive science exists."  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 11:57 AM   #44 
              - Double blind studies are inductive science  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 12:23 PM   #48 
              - Yes....That's what I said.  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 12:59 PM   #56 
                 - You really don't get it! It's amazing!  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 01:11 PM   #60 
                    - You flatter yourself.  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 03:57 PM   #71 
                    - fabulist nt  greyl   Mar-15-07 04:28 PM   #75 
                    - As regards the jury...  LeftishBrit   Mar-23-07 11:40 AM   #141 
              - Please point out where the OP discusses WTC 7 nt  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 12:29 PM   #49 
              - I have two hats  jberryhill   Mar-15-07 01:00 PM   #57 
              - Simply examining 'whose interests were served' does not prove guilt  LeftishBrit   Mar-24-07 04:29 AM   #143 
              - A structuralist answer  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 10:26 AM   #40 
              - That's perfectly clear. Why do you, then, use Structural Analysis to discover..  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 11:59 AM   #46 
              - Here's yet another question MervinFerd cannot answer  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 12:22 PM   #47 
                 - You flatter yourself. OF COURSE there are questions without YES or NO..  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 02:30 PM   #68 
                 - You didn't address the question about thee FBI and KKK in post 47  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 02:37 PM   #69 
                    - You didn't address post 68, nor are you being truthful.  greyl   Mar-15-07 04:24 PM   #73 
                    - I did, too, answer that question.  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 10:05 PM   #90 
                       - Hey Mervin, interesting answer.  HamdenRice   Mar-18-07 10:25 AM   #131 
                 - An Exceptional Post!  Fainter   Mar-16-07 01:31 AM   #97 
              - Hamden, 9/11 Chafes The Epistemology...  Fainter   Mar-15-07 12:59 PM   #55 
              - Thanks! But it's not just 9/11  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 01:12 PM   #61 
              - Then why oh why are those who insist 9-11 was an inside job  vincent_vega_lives   Sep-20-07 02:52 PM   #178 
     - Actually you're wrong  salvorhardin   Mar-15-07 10:05 AM   #34 
     - Saussure  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 10:16 AM   #38 
     - Okay.  AZCat   Mar-15-07 12:32 PM   #50 
  - I don't have an issue with most of the stuff JR posted  vincent_vega_lives   Mar-15-07 07:50 AM   #24 
  - Please do  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 08:02 AM   #27 
     - After you (n/t)  vincent_vega_lives   Mar-15-07 09:34 AM   #31 
        - I'm not a debunker or OCTer  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 09:46 AM   #32 
           - "nexus of Afghanistani, Pakistani, Saudi and American .., and drug networks"  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 10:09 AM   #35 
  - "the nutters who can't be helped anyway"  jberryhill   Sep-21-07 09:00 PM   #182 
  - Your support of David Ray Griffin gives me all the information about you I need to know.  boloboffin   Sep-21-07 09:11 PM   #183 
     - more ad hominem nonsense from you  Bryan Sacks   Sep-22-07 04:40 PM   #190 
        - Oh, please. Those that dish it out should learn to take it.  boloboffin   Sep-22-07 05:46 PM   #193 
           - Apology accepted (you'll need a new one for the new lies, though)  Bryan Sacks   Sep-22-07 07:49 PM   #194 
              - Since Hillary is the current frontrunner for the Democratic nomination...  boloboffin   Sep-22-07 09:48 PM   #195 
  - Perhaps Deep Politics and Structuralism should be applied to the Titanic.  MervinFerd   Mar-16-07 10:10 AM   #101 
     - The Titanic is not beyond the reach of social analysis...  JackRiddler   Mar-16-07 02:44 PM   #103 
        - Can "social analysis" demontrate whether an iceberg sank the Titanic?  MervinFerd   Mar-17-07 08:17 AM   #121 
           - And your analysis here...  Fainter   Mar-17-07 03:57 PM   #130 
  - kick n/t  Hope2006   Mar-14-07 02:07 PM   #7 
  - Aw, c'mon OCTers! No takers? Not on even one issue?  HamdenRice   Mar-14-07 02:41 PM   #9 
  - You really miss the point  jberryhill   Mar-14-07 06:25 PM   #13 
  - the 3 patsies  CGowen   Mar-15-07 06:50 AM   #21 
  - Like Your Idea Of Jumping Into The"...breach of incomplete knowledge..." Very Much...  Fainter   Mar-15-07 09:14 PM   #86 
  - IGNORE  vincent_vega_lives   Mar-15-07 07:57 AM   #25 
  - CD Remains A Worthy Avenue If Perspective Is Kept  Fainter   Mar-14-07 06:09 PM   #11 
  - That's a great post  jberryhill   Mar-14-07 06:33 PM   #14 
  - It's an excellent post, yes  Bryan Sacks   Mar-14-07 08:32 PM   #15 
  - Do -you- have even the vaguest idea what you are talking about?  MervinFerd   Mar-14-07 09:28 PM   #17 
  - Mythic Space  LARED   Mar-14-07 09:45 PM   #18 
     - Take a piss in the Structuralist Bathroom...  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 07:23 AM   #22 
        - Ask Philip Zelikow about mythic space if you don't understand it  Bryan Sacks   Mar-15-07 09:31 AM   #30 
        - Can he design a plumbing system that will drain properly..  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 10:10 AM   #36 
           - Dude, you admitted you don't even know what structuralism is  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 10:18 AM   #39 
           - Deleted message  Name removed   Mar-15-07 01:06 PM   #58 
              - Deleted message  Name removed   Mar-15-07 01:13 PM   #62 
                 - I missed it.  vincent_vega_lives   Mar-15-07 02:19 PM   #67 
           - So far, plumbing jokes and "not my table" pleadings and sal's  petgoat   Mar-15-07 11:47 AM   #41 
              - Their inability to address these issues is telling  HamdenRice   Mar-15-07 12:35 PM   #52 
                 - It's very easy to mistake a fog of words and "deep" bullshit, for ...  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 01:09 PM   #59 
                    - Deleted message  Name removed   Mar-15-07 01:14 PM   #63 
                       - What bizarre definition of name calling are you using?  greyl   Mar-15-07 04:27 PM   #74 
                          - Deleted message  Name removed   Mar-18-07 10:36 AM   #132 
                             - Deleted message  Name removed   Mar-18-07 11:55 AM   #133 
        - I second what Bryan said.  CJCRANE   Mar-15-07 12:36 PM   #53 
  - As an aside  jberryhill   Mar-15-07 11:49 AM   #42 
  - Hey fainter, if I may ask...  JackRiddler   Mar-15-07 12:08 AM   #19 
  - LOL! Dude, No I'm Not. Perhaps We Could Double With Sibel and Indira :>)! n/t  Fainter   Mar-15-07 05:31 PM   #81 
     - That's too bad... and Sibel is married you know...  JackRiddler   Mar-15-07 09:39 PM   #89 
  - And  jberryhill   Mar-15-07 11:51 AM   #43 
     - That's Very Gracious...  Fainter   Mar-15-07 12:47 PM   #54 
     - Internet arguments intensify that beast  jberryhill   Mar-15-07 02:10 PM   #66 
     - Hah! How did you know? When did you jump the snark? n/t :>)  Fainter   Mar-25-07 10:41 PM   #172 
  - Well said, JackRiddler  naboo   Mar-15-07 11:59 AM   #45 
  - Here's my take as an AIJ (Anti-Inside Jobber) you asked for it.  vincent_vega_lives   Mar-15-07 12:34 PM   #51 
  - You ought to do a lil more research  naboo   Mar-15-07 01:55 PM   #64 
  - Thanks did some. (n/t)  vincent_vega_lives   Mar-15-07 02:08 PM   #65 
  - You didn't know Zelikow and you haven't read The 9/11 Commission Report?  JackRiddler   Mar-15-07 08:37 PM   #82 
     - Do these observations support any particular hypothesis?  MervinFerd   Mar-15-07 10:16 PM   #92 
     - henceforth, since you repeat yourself ad infinitum  JackRiddler   Mar-15-07 10:21 PM   #93 
        - That's a grocery list, not an thesis. And your observations don't prove it.  MervinFerd   Mar-16-07 10:05 AM   #100 
        - The whole point is that the investigation of 9-11 should handle it as a crime, according to law,  LeftishBrit   Mar-26-07 04:54 AM   #173 
     - As I have said before  vincent_vega_lives   Mar-16-07 07:04 AM   #98 
        - Exactly.  JackRiddler   Mar-16-07 02:54 PM   #104 
           - I don't disagree with any of that  vincent_vega_lives   Mar-17-07 08:33 AM   #122 
  - ZERO ANSWERS  JackRiddler   Mar-15-07 04:50 PM   #77 
  - Do you have Vega on Ignore, or is post #57 invisible to you?  jberryhill   Mar-15-07 04:56 PM   #78 
  - You're right, I missed Vega and will return to it. Sorry. As for Al-Fe... off-topic here. nt  JackRiddler   Mar-15-07 05:01 PM   #79 
     - Aw shucks  jberryhill   Mar-15-07 05:05 PM   #80 
        - dude...  JackRiddler   Mar-15-07 08:41 PM   #83 
           - Asking Questions And Demanding Answers  jberryhill   Mar-16-07 03:25 PM   #106 
              - I've understood perfectly well  JackRiddler   Mar-16-07 04:00 PM   #108 
                 - And I understand perfectly well  jberryhill   Mar-16-07 06:41 PM   #110 
                    - By all means...  JackRiddler   Mar-16-07 06:58 PM   #111 
                       - I don't know how to argue with a question  jberryhill   Mar-16-07 07:35 PM   #113 
  - Why is it so important that we respond to this?  AZCat   Mar-15-07 08:55 PM   #84 
     - who is "we"???  Hope2006   Mar-15-07 09:21 PM   #87 
     - That'd be the "we" referenced in the title of the OP...  AZCat   Mar-15-07 09:33 PM   #88 
     - So you say  Hope2006   Mar-15-07 10:07 PM   #91 
        - Ashamed? Of what?  AZCat   Mar-15-07 10:27 PM   #95 
        - I am ashamed  vincent_vega_lives   Sep-20-07 02:48 PM   #177 
     - If you haven't noticed  vincent_vega_lives   Mar-16-07 07:09 AM   #99 
     - So don't...  JackRiddler   Mar-15-07 10:22 PM   #94 
        - Your attitude is perplexing.  AZCat   Mar-15-07 10:28 PM   #96 
           - Kicking for a response from JackRiddler. n/t  AZCat   Mar-16-07 03:02 PM   #105 
              - Still waiting... n/t  AZCat   Mar-17-07 01:21 PM   #124 
  - Off the top of my head...  boloboffin   Mar-16-07 07:30 PM   #112 
  - Bolo Finally Shows Himself to Be Logically Inconsistent  jberryhill   Mar-16-07 08:14 PM   #114 
  - What. The F*ck. Ever.  boloboffin   Mar-16-07 08:28 PM   #115 
     - I think he might have been  greyl   Mar-16-07 10:05 PM   #116 
        - Yes, that's true.  boloboffin   Mar-16-07 10:18 PM   #117 
        - Better than letting someone else misinterpret you first? /nt  jberryhill   Mar-16-07 11:19 PM   #119 
        - Point for greyl  jberryhill   Mar-16-07 11:16 PM   #118 
           - Hope they're paying you guys in silver bars.  Bryan Sacks   Mar-16-07 11:39 PM   #120 
              - Thats just nutty sounding  vincent_vega_lives   Sep-21-07 12:17 PM   #179 
                 - I understand nobody pays you, Vince  Bryan Sacks   Sep-22-07 03:53 PM   #189 
  - Good.  JackRiddler   Mar-17-07 02:22 PM   #128 
  - kick for freshness...  JackRiddler   Mar-19-07 11:44 PM   #135 
  - Replies to Boloboffin's replies...  JackRiddler   Mar-21-07 01:12 PM   #136 
  - So much text. .... And still no hypothesis.  MervinFerd   Mar-21-07 01:54 PM   #137 
  - I thought this was going to be like  jberryhill   Mar-21-07 03:27 PM   #138 
     - Can't you just acknowledge excellent work instead of making dumb fun?  Bryan Sacks   Mar-23-07 12:38 PM   #142 
  - Tech problem fixed, Able Danger articles are back...  JackRiddler   Mar-21-07 04:13 PM   #139 
  - Indira Singh On EPA...  Fainter   Mar-24-07 05:28 PM   #168 
  - .  BrokenBeyondRepair   Mar-24-07 07:47 PM   #169 
  - The LIHOP show had a good run but now it's time to move on.  dailykoff   Mar-17-07 01:35 PM   #125 
  - Hypothesis: Some people are in avoidance of relevant facts and questions n/t  JackRiddler   Mar-22-07 10:25 AM   #140 
  - A few responses  LeftishBrit   Mar-24-07 04:56 AM   #144 
  - Thanks for your responses.  JackRiddler   Mar-24-07 12:15 PM   #145 
     - I am sceptical about ALL conspiracy theories, until proven  LeftishBrit   Mar-25-07 07:52 AM   #170 
        - FROM HERE IT'S THE OTHER THREAD...  JackRiddler   Mar-25-07 02:51 PM   #171 
  - Questions for Skeptics of 9/11 Skepticism  JackRiddler   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #146 
  - Of course there are questions about 9/11  mr blur   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #147 
  - Okay.  JackRiddler   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #148 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #149 
  - The answers to those questions  realisticphish   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #150 
  - Those aren't felonies.  JackRiddler   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #151 
     - doesn't skepticism require evidence  realisticphish   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #152 
        - No.  JackRiddler   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #155 
  - OK, some answers  muriel_volestrangler   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #153 
  - Thank you.  JackRiddler   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #156 
  - So, then  IAmJacksSmirkingRevenge   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #154 
  - To your question - no.  JackRiddler   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #157 
  - yOu have made no assertions. Asking questions does not support the 9/11 "Truth" movement  Caution   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #158 
  - End of discussion, I'd say.  mr blur   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #159 
  - extraordinary claims require evidence  petgoat   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #163 
  - Extraordinary claims require extraordinary investigation n/t  Ferry Fey   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #165 
  - There is already evidence  CJCRANE   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #167 
  - Dungeonized...  JackRiddler   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #160 
  - It's a DU Group, not a forum.  greyl   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #161 
     - Don't put words in my mouth.  JackRiddler   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #162 
     - It's a comedy club, a mutual admiration society, and quite juvenile. nt  petgoat   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #164 
  - kicking...  JackRiddler   Mar-24-07 04:48 PM   #166 
     - ditto, still owed...  JackRiddler   Apr-04-07 09:12 AM   #174 
  - kick  JackRiddler   Sep-20-07 11:14 AM   #175 
  - Hey Riddler  jberryhill   Sep-21-07 01:41 PM   #180 
     - If you're not going to bother with returns  JackRiddler   Sep-22-07 10:40 AM   #186 
        - You think it didn't take time and thought  jberryhill   Sep-22-07 04:46 PM   #191 
  - Here is what strongly refute from this list...  vincent_vega_lives   Sep-20-07 02:45 PM   #176 
  - Riddler doesn't even read the site he puts in his sig....  jberryhill   Sep-21-07 07:57 PM   #181 
  - Oy! I wish the Truthers would make their homework assignments smaller.  Perry Logan   Sep-22-07 06:36 AM   #184 
  - I am not a "Truther"  JackRiddler   Sep-22-07 10:37 AM   #185 
     - since you mention it  OnTheOtherHand   Sep-22-07 01:54 PM   #188 
     - "...but I do promote Steven Jones' stuff in my signature" /nt  jberryhill   Sep-22-07 04:48 PM   #192 
        - You have no shame, do you?  JackRiddler   Sep-22-07 11:07 PM   #196 
           - You're the one that links uncritically to that website.  boloboffin   Sep-22-07 11:25 PM   #197 
           - I write too much as it is...  JackRiddler   Sep-23-07 12:05 AM   #198 
           - He won't do it...  jberryhill   Sep-23-07 10:29 AM   #212 
           - "Every statement I disagree with"  jberryhill   Sep-23-07 10:26 AM   #211 
  - those are some good questions  leftofthedial   Sep-22-07 12:12 PM   #187 
  - Why does the seismology clearly indicate no explosions on 9/11?  Perry Logan   Sep-23-07 06:01 AM   #199 
  - This is not a topic of the OP - why do you distract?  JackRiddler   Sep-23-07 12:07 PM   #214 
  - Why have virtually none of the world's structural engineers figured this out?  Perry Logan   Sep-23-07 06:03 AM   #200 
  - This is not a topic of the OP - why do you distract?  JackRiddler   Sep-23-07 12:08 PM   #215 
  - How did the bad guys place the charges in the towers exactly where the planes were to hit?  Perry Logan   Sep-23-07 06:03 AM   #201 
  - This is not a topic of the op - why do you distract?  JackRiddler   Sep-23-07 12:06 PM   #213 
  - Why did the President go into brainlock on 9/11?  Perry Logan   Sep-23-07 06:04 AM   #202 
  - Why do you provide excuses for him? What about the secret service?  JackRiddler   Sep-23-07 12:09 PM   #216 
  - If they wanted to invade Iraq, why did they frame Osama bin Laden?  Perry Logan   Sep-23-07 06:05 AM   #203 
  - Who are "they"? Who says ObL isn't one of them?  JackRiddler   Sep-23-07 12:10 PM   #217 
  - Would international bankers really fund a plan to bring down Wall Street?  Perry Logan   Sep-23-07 06:05 AM   #204 
  - Did Wall Street come down? At any rate, not a topic of the OP - why are you distracting?  JackRiddler   Sep-23-07 12:11 PM   #218 
  - Why haven't they staged any big domestic follow-up attacks--as most of the Truthers predicted?  Perry Logan   Sep-23-07 06:06 AM   #205 
  - I didn't. Go ask elsewhere.  JackRiddler   Sep-23-07 12:11 PM   #219 
  - Why do Truthers fight constantly? Why can't they get agree on their story?  Perry Logan   Sep-23-07 06:08 AM   #206 
  - Why do Democrats fight constantly? Why can't they agree on a strategy?  JackRiddler   Sep-23-07 12:12 PM   #220 
  - Why do Truthers spend half their time saying the news is rigged, & half their time quoting the news?  Perry Logan   Sep-23-07 06:09 AM   #207 
  - If you can find anyone who self-identifies as a "Truther," ask them.  JackRiddler   Sep-23-07 12:13 PM   #221 
  - Why do Truthers ignore the manifold debunkings of everything they have ever said?  Perry Logan   Sep-23-07 06:10 AM   #208 
  - Why haven't you stopped beating your dog?  JackRiddler   Sep-23-07 12:14 PM   #222 
  - Why do Truthers call anyone who disagrees with them an agent--always without a shred of proof?  Perry Logan   Sep-23-07 06:11 AM   #209 
  - You should ask that of someone who has actually done this - more false insinuations/associations.  JackRiddler   Sep-23-07 12:15 PM   #223 
  - When will the Truthers realize that making false accusations of mass murder is bad for your karma?  Perry Logan   Sep-23-07 06:11 AM   #210 
  - Creating phantom categories to act as the target of prejudice and hatred can't be good for it either  JackRiddler   Sep-23-07 12:17 PM   #224 
  - next-year kick  JackRiddler   Feb-04-08 11:10 AM   #225 
  - Kick. n/t  Fainter   Feb-04-08 03:16 PM   #226 
     - Thank you.  JackRiddler   Jan-18-09 01:25 PM   #227 
  - So digging up this thread again...  JackRiddler   May-29-10 09:54 AM   #228 
  - Paul Bremer knew he had work in Iraq post 9/11  deconstruct911   May-29-10 11:55 AM   #229 
  - kick  JackRiddler   Jan-01-12 09:32 PM   #230 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC