Good stuff -- from one of our own I believe...

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_2818.shtml

---snip---

A united front

That's why attacking, discrediting and ultimately disproving the 9/11 myth is so critical to the continued survival of the republic. Even Ms. Nancy might find grounds to allow impeachment back on that infamous table once the 9/11 armor rusts away.

Ironically, instead of presenting a unified front to expose this preposterous lie and condemn the complicit US mass media echo chamber that has hard-wired it into the American psyche, the left/liberal end of the political spectrum is predictably fragmented on this issue and includes some of the more steadfast and adamant defenders of the official coincidence theory.

So when we see otherwise intelligent and perceptive people doing the administration's PR work for them, defending the official story with the tenacity of the religious zealot, we have to wonder at the level of internal conflict these people must experience in accepting this ridiculous official story at face value.

But fear is a powerful thing and shilling for the official 9/11 cover story -- while staunchly ignoring the most basic unanswered questions and obvious inconsistencies -- provides insulation against the cognitive dissonance and bottomless cynicism that would result from admitting that this administration is so utterly malevolent that it would plan and execute mass murder against its own citizens for purely political reasons. . . .

[SDuderstadt]

1. Umm, the CT version ("truth") makes far less sense...

than what you refer to as the OCT. You just can't see it because of your lack of reasoning sills and total disregard for sound science and engineering. Calling those of us who disagree with you "sheeple", "Octabots", traitors and questioning our progressive credentials doesn't help advance your credibility (I'm talking about in general, not necessarily this post)

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

2. Perhaps you can produce a link to where I used

...the term "Octobots?" Or made sweeping claims about "those who disagree with me" being traitors?

Produce some substance for once. Listening to you babble on about anyone else's credibility is just too much.

Or God forbid, how 'bout actually reading the OP and producing specific counter arguments to whatever parts of it you disagree with. That's what a discussion forum is for.

[SDuderstadt]

3. Try reading what I actually wrote

"Calling those of us who disagree with you "sheeple", "Octabots", traitors and questioning our progressive credentials doesn't help advance your credibility (I'm talking about in general, not necessarily this post)"

Who do you suppose "your" refers to? Just you alone? Or, could I possibly be talking about the problems with the overall "truth" movement??

What you cited doesn't even get all that specific but does EXACTLY what I'm complaining about, referring to those of us who persist in believing in sound science and actual evidence of outlandish claims as "shilling" and doing the Bush admin's "PR work". And you wonder why we don't take "you guys" seriously. And, if you didn't distance yourself from your source's attempt to paint us adherents to Logic and science thusly, you really shouldn't wonder why we "lump" you in with them.

[wildbilln864]

10. so much bullshit!

[SDuderstadt]

12. Then point to the "bullshit"

that shouldn't be hard

[wildbilln864]

14. I did!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[SDuderstadt]

16. Just as I thought...

you think crying "bullshit" makes it so. Pathetic.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

15. You like to bandy empty phrases about...

...like "sound science" and "science and engineering" and then produce nothing. Cite whatever it is you believe is so sound and packed with solid science and engineering that supports the OCT. State your personal position regarding the OCT. Cite valid arguments or develop your own that challenge the OP.

Explain some of these coincidences:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=163495&mesg_id=163495

If you're something more than just another nuisance/distraction artist you should be at least attempting to do these things.

[SDuderstadt]

17. Umm, I asked you first...

then you resort to the typical CTer tactic of responding with a question and trying to shift the burden of proof. No dice. frankly, I doubt you can answer the question.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

19. If not to dispute by way of reasoned argumentation...

...an OP with which you disagree, then why are you here?

[SDuderstadt]

20. Ummm, I'd be glad to dispute your alternate hypothesis, but...

of course, that would require you to actually put one forth, instead of playing rhetorical games.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

23. I think I've given you more than fair opportunity...

...to demonstrate that your here with some purpose other than nuisance/distraction and you have chose to forgo it.

Business as usual in the 9-11 forum.

[SDuderstadt]

25. Amazing...

You keep demanding, "Refute my argument, refute my argument!", yet you won't provide one to refute. In other words, you're doing a version of the logical fallacy known as "trying to shift the burden of proof". If you want something refuted, you need to provide it first. I'll ask one more time. What do you claim happened on 9/11? In your own words, please.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

22. You're the one visiting my thread...

... presumably to make a reasoned, intelligent response to the OP -- we're still waiting.

[SDuderstadt]

24. More rhetotrical games...

I already replied, but now you're asking me to refute the "alternate hypothesis", except you can't seem to produce one. Pathetic.

[LARED]

4. Same old crap

Shilling, pop psychology, intelligent people in denial, fear, dissonance, zealots. The irony is fabulous.

This guy is a paranoid, woo seller that just happens to write well.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

5. Great counter arguments there, Lared...

...you're a true master of debate.

[LARED]

6. Was there something worthy of debate? - nt

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

8. If you don't think so, then why are you here?...

...Why devote so much time to such extensive nuisance/distraction spamming, and only for the 9-11 forum.

Are you afraid of something? Do you feel threatened in some way by the truth movement? I've asked you and other OCTers these questions before and just never can seem to get a straight answer.

[wildbilln864]

11. Spot on Mr Jefferson!

Thanks for the thread, you rock. :hi:
Keep up the good fight.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

34. Thanks -- you too -- I'll try to hang in there. nt.

[LARED]

30. I was referring to the OP

and frankly I think you are the one spamming up the board with nonsense

Also the troother movement is an largely an intellectual amusement. Why would I be afraid?

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

35. I'm the one spamming up the board?

...Go through the first 100 threads from the top of page one and see how many of them I've posted in, and then run that same test for yourself -- I'm not the one spamming the board, you are, and you know it.

Here for amusement? I've gotten that BS response to that question from other OCTers and like virtually all your rhetoric, it is simply not believable.

[CJCRANE]

7. Many people have a mental block about 9/11.

I've seen it with my friends.

One is a born-again christian who believes that the war on terror is part of a new "crusade" (which he supports) against Islam.

Another served in Iraq and gets angry when I criticize B*sh because he can't accept that someone in authority would make decisions purely for selfish gain.

And another isn't interested in politics - when I showed him the WTC7 collapse footage he was dumbfounded...but just laughed it off - "aliens did it", because he didn't want to deal with it.

In each case I've told them known facts about the B*sh family and Cheney administration which they refused to believe. The ones who are against 9/11 truth have also refused to read anything that goes against their views (even though I've told them that I'll read anything they provide).


Even my own father initially shouted various insults when I tried to talk about 9/11 theories. I lent him David Ray Griffin's "New Pearl Harbor" - which he read and then apologized to me because it had opened his eyes.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

9. I believe the "eye opening" process your...

...talking about is what frightens the disingenuous OCTers who frequent this forum to litter virtually every thread with nuisance/distraction spam.

It's the equivalent of somebody continually messing with your father's reading light, or calling him away to answer the door or phone, or continually making loud noise, while he was trying to read Griffin's book.

Good for him, and good for you for not fighting with him, but rather just sharing good information and letting him make his own decision.

Many very powerful, wealthy people want this "eye opening" process stopped if possible. MSM, Dem leadership, and Left Media Gatekeepers (LMG), are ALL in lockstep with the utterly ridiculous official story (won't question it at all), and its been over six years since 9-11. Even members of the Commission are claiming now that they were seriously obstructed, and still no interest from media.

Pretty amazing.

[SDuderstadt]

13. Please point out...

what is "utterly ridiculous" about the "official story". Be specific.

P.S. Just for the record, I'm not expecting that you will provide anything that hasn't already been roundly debunked over and over and over.

P.P.S. Since, in your own words, "its been over six years since 9-11", don't you find it odd that the "9/11 Truth Movement" has been unable to develop a coherent alternative hypothesis that sufficiently explains what happened?

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

18. Alright explain some of these coincidences...

...they render the OCT DOA to anyone who is honest, half way analytical, and not still in deep denial.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=163495&mesg_id=163495

If you're something more than just another nuisance/distraction artist you should be at least attempting to do these things.

[SDuderstadt]

21. The link doesn't appear to work.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

26. Should work now. nt.

Here it is again:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=163495&mesg_id=163495

[SDuderstadt]

29. Okay...

Let's start with the 9/11 "Co-incidences" Pt. 1.

Right off the bat, there are some serious factual errors.

How exactly, did WTC's 1, 2 and 7 "collapse in exactly the same way"? Answer: they didn't, which is clear from watching the freaking video. One could legitimately say that towers 1 & 2 collapsed similarly, but how are they similar to WTC 7? They aren't. The collapse of Towers 1 & 2 initiated at or near the points of impact and were essentially top down collapses. WTC 7 obviously failed much lower and, of the collapses that day, actually looked like a controlled demolition (notice I said "looked".....lots of things LOOK like something else, but aren't). I find it troubling that the video of WTC 7 begins AFTER the penthouse has already collapsed. Why was the video clipped?

As to the "co-incidence" implied by "never before in history", it's also true that no other buildings were subjected to the exact same causes, so it's absurd to expect other buildings (different construction) suffering different causes to collapse similarly. If you want to make a side-by-side comparison of collapses, fine. With respect to WTC 7, do the following:

1) Find a steel frame building at least 40 stories high

2) Which takes up a whole city block

3) And is a "Tube in a tube" design

4) Which came off its core columns at the bottom floors (Earthquake, fire, whatever - WTC 7)

5) Which was struck by another building or airliner and had structural damage as a result.

6) And weakened by fire for over 6 hours

7) And had trusses that were bolted on with two 5/8" bolts.

Beyond that, why is it at all unusual that one or more of the building there were leased by the same man? Is it unusual in large urban areas for entities to lease adjoining buildings? Please.

[Bolo Boffin]

27. Well, then, explain THAT coincidence!

That highly embarrassing thread with unmistakably accurate facts has been scrubbed! Explain that, wouldja?

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

28. OK, your wrong, as usual -- it's still there. nt.

[Bolo Boffin]

31. Of course it's still there. Look up "sarcasm" when you get a chance. n/t

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

33. If that was actually an attempt at sarcasm...

...which, like most all of your claims, is highly doubtful, then you are the one that ought to look the word up.

[SDuderstadt]

32. Well, you're right that Warren Pease is "one of our own" but...

I wouldn't pile on the accolades quite yet. It's NOT good stuff, as you can read his (assuming it's a he) first couple of claims and EASILY debunk his errors. Let's just take a couple:

"They got the entire world to believe that four hijackers who couldn't fly single-engine Cessnas well enough to graduate from flight school suddenly became the Blue Angels when at the controls of large, twin-engine Boeing jetliners, and this during the most stressful moments of their short lives."

Answer: Totally wrong. See: http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_school_dropouts.html

"They got the entire world to believe that the crime of the century was pulled off by 19 guys with box-cutters whose names (or any other Arabic names) don't appear on any passenger manifests and at least four of whom have been seen alive and well in the Middle East since 9/11/01, (this one even interviewed by the BBC)."

Answer: Totally wrong AGAIN. See: http://www.911myths.com/html/still_alive.html and http://www.911myths.com/html/no_hijackers_on_the_manifests.html

"Better yet, they got the entire world to believe their evidence linking these 19 guys to the hijackings, using for proof a few cell phone calls that couldn't have happened with 2001 technology. Then there's the famous carry-on bag supposedly left behind by alleged ringleader Mohammed Atta containing, among other things, a copy of the Koran, a Boeing flight manual and his will (and that's surely something you'd take with you on a flight you knew was going to be vaporized). And then the kicker, a passport allegedly belonging to Atta that miraculously survived a massive explosion and temperatures we're told were high enough to soften steel and fluttered unsullied to the ground, where it was eventually found among the debris a couple of blocks away from what used to be the World Trade Center."

Answer: Totally wrong AGAIN. Let's just take part of it, the allegation that Atta's passport was the one that was found and that's impossible. First of all, it belonged to one of the other hijackers. Why can't Warren even get basic details correct? Secondly, it's really stupid to imply it's impossible for things such as passports, etc. to survive catastrophic tragedies. See: http://www.911myths.com/html/passport_recovered.html and http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2006/08/your-documents-please.html

I don't know about the rest of you, but it doesn't appear "Warren's" claims are even remotely reliable. I'm sure some of you "truthers" will demand I debunk EVERY claim he makes but, frankly, after such an atrocious start on his part, I really don't see the point.

[BeachBaby]

36. I was never big on conspiracy theories....

until September 11, 2001.

That very day - not the days and months after, but THAT VERY SAME DAY.

I'm not an engineer, nor am I a scientist; but I am very familiar with military response. I also live in a heavy militarized area.

There were fighters repeatedly flying over my house in south Jersey, moments after the first plane hit WTC. My boyfriend, who lived in Chicago at the time, witnessed the same in his area.

So why is it, that a small town in south Jersey, and a Chicago suburb, felt a heavy military presence, while Manhattan was left to fend for itself? And as for Washington, DC.....all you have to do is look at a map of AFBs in the mid-Atlantic region to know how quickly fighters can be securing the airspace of the nation's security epicenter.

The official story is bullshit - it's not rocket science, people; good old-fashioned common sense does the trick every time. The only reason so many people buy into the "official story" is because it's been fed to them, ad nauseum, since the day it happened. Kinda in the same way that people like my Mom and Dad believe that Jonah was swallowed by a whale and got puked back up. Ask people like them why they believe the Bible in its entirety, and they will answer "because it's the word of God". In other words, folks, it's the official story. Don't question the official story. Don't question authority.

I think Joseph Goebbels said it best:

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

“The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over."

“Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play.”

How prophetic.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

37. Thanks for posting and welcome to DU...

...I might just mention, and you may already know this if you've been reading DU for a while, the 9-11 forum isn't always the friendliest place. So when OCTers come out of the woodwork with...well, the kind of stuff we've come to expect from them, and you happen to be the target of it, just let it roll off (you don't have to respond) and keep posting if you're of mind to. Don't let them run you off.

Again, welcome.

:hi:

[BeachBaby]

39. Thank you, Mr.J!!!

:hi:

And thank you for the heads-up on how my future posts may be received.

I've handled my parents for 38 years - and if you knew me and you knew them, you'd know that I'll do just fine here. Nothing like a couple of parents telling you you're going to hell (because I'm not a "believer"), that you're a babykiller (because I didn't vote for a Prez who would be instrumental in getting Roe v Wade overturned), that you're a whore (because I live with my boyfriend and haven't married), that you're misguided (because I refuse to believe that the Middle East is filled with people who were born evil), to toughen a girl up. Hell - they didn't talk to me for 4 months when I volunteered on the Kerry/Edwards campaign.

After dealing with that my whole life, the occasional retort from the peanut gallery will be cake. I'll be okay. :)

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

40. I've no doubt now that you're much tougher than I'll ever be...

...best to you, and have fun at DU.

[Bolo Boffin]

38. Joseph Goebbels, what a tool. n/t

[Twist_U_Up]

42. Tool as in..... resource ? n/t

[Bolo Boffin]

43. Tool as in

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tool&r=f

someone who is a complete idiot/ one who is used by other people, and usually doesn't even realize it/ someone who can't think for themselves/ an asshat.

[BeachBaby]

44. Are you saying that Goebbels was an idiot?

Wow.

With all due respect, bolo....Goebbels was anything but.

Insanely brilliant? Mastermind of propaganda? Brainwasher to the masses? Yes, yes and yes.

He was no "tool".

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

45. I agree, and speaking of Goebbels...

...here's a thread I started a couple years ago -- his final Happy Birthday speech to Hitler, with a few of my substitutions:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x173328

[Bolo Boffin]

46. He was quite willingly a tool for Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party.

He was an idiot through and through.

[SDuderstadt]

41. Try these...

http://www.911myths.com/html/67_intercepts.html
http://www.911myths.com/html/intercepts__norad_and_the_faa.html
http://www.911myths.com/html/otis_scramble_time.html
http://www.911myths.com/html/intercept_time.html
http://www.911myths.com/html/primary_radar.html


And, despite what "Mr. J" claims, none of us will try to "run you off". He just has trouble debating.

One of your friendly neighborhood "OCT's"

[BeachBaby]

48. Thanks, SD....

I glanced through the links you provided, but I have to be honest here - I've read so many of these links in the last 5 or so years, that they've become rather obsolete at this point, in my opinion.

I'm sure you are familiar with the concept of "the six degrees of separation". The problem I have with almost all the links, articles, books, and documentaries that support the official story, is that they are in some way connected with the government. I'm not saying that the links you provided above will bring me to that same conclusion, but if past research is any indicator.....

Listen....I'm not on board with any one particular theory per se; but I don't think it's wrong of me, or anyone else, to demand in INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION - conducted by only the best that the engineering, physics, and legal fields have to offer. Conducted by experts who can be objective, ie., NO connections to ANY government foreign or domestic.

The best analogy I have for that is the Enron scandal. Would you be able to accept the final report of the Enron investigation if it was conducted by Enron shareholders and their constituents? I couldn't.

[SDuderstadt]

49. Try the ASCE, for starters...

the reality is there are many sources of information and even investigation of 9/11 which are not governmental. The American Society of Civil Engineers is 150,000 members strong and has contributed much to the investigations.

For the record, I despise the Bush administration and have told anyone who'll listen that I think W deserves a fair trial when he leaves office in 2009, unless we can impeach his ass first. And it is certainly clear that his penchant for secrecy and lying, not to mention interfering with the independence of scientists in his own administration, makes it difficult for people to trust FEMA or NIST. The problem is, with reasonable exceptions (for example, any agency can be prone to cover-up mistakes) it doesn't make sense that an agency that could be trusted during Clinton's administrations (FEMA, for example, performed admirably) and is staffed by thousands of career civil servants somehow became totally untrustworthy simply because of Bush. In cases like that, one should look to multiple sources and confirm things instead of simply accepting them at face value.

It's tempting to accept the controlled demolition theories and even MIHOP or LIHOP. The problem is the evidence just does not bear it out.

[Grateful for Hope]

50. Welcome JerseyGirlDem

It sounds like you have really done your research. I hope that you will find this forum helpful. BTW, I whole-heartedly agree that a completely independent investigation needs to be conducted. Short of that, as far as I am concerned, we will never know what really happened on 9/11.

[BeachBaby]

51. Thanks, Hope, for the welcome!

Yeah, I've done quite a bit of research over the last several years; but from what I'm seeing here at DU, it seems that I am one of the few who isn't researching the engineering and physics aspects of the event.

My focus has been more on connections/relationships that the US has with the rest of the world, or more specifically, that the current administration has with the Middle East. Along with that, I have researched every key player in the White House, DoD, FEMA, and NYC Emergency Mgmt. I've looked into the financial interests of all these people as well.

The other thorn in my side is the issue of secret societies. So many people scoff at this issue, but I'm not sure why. If anybody took the time to read up on some of these groups - such as Freemasons (OMG, just read the oath they take) and Skull & Bones - I can't see that anybody would be able to simply ignore its reality.

Tie all of that together with the PNAC, and from where I sit, I see a MIHOP situation of epic proportions.

[Grateful for Hope]

52. It is true that there is a lot of arguing back-and-forth about the engineering

and physics aspects of the events. Personally, since most of the "evidence" was disposed of so quickly after 9/11, a lot of the arguing going on in the forum is conjecture, and I think efforts could be better spent elsewhere. You also made a good point in another post that our government should not be investigating itself.

I agree that taking a look at secret societies such as Skull and Bones is a worthwhile endeavor.

In my opinion, the event was at least LIHOP, and, may well have been MIHOP.

[SDuderstadt]

53. Except the evidence was NOT "disposed of quickly"...

this is yet another 9/11 myth. As you can see from the link provided, structural steel was still being removed from the site as late as April 29th, 2002.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9902E0DC113BF93AA15756C0A9649C8B63

[Bolo Boffin]

54. Our government is NOT investigating itself when it comes to these buildings.

Your personal incredulity and that of the entire collection of people that propose any OP hypothesis about these events, none of it is enough to cause anyone else to question this.

The government is conducting an investigation into why the buildings fell. Anyone who believes the government had a hand in it has yet to present any worthwhile evidence that this is the case. I understand that most CD advocates operate under a "guilty until proven innocent" standard of evidence when it comes to the government, but there is no evidence I have seen presented that would lead me to posit government participation in these collapses.

The evidence thus far presented doesn't even amount to indictment standards by a grand jury.

[Grateful for Hope]

56. Oh Myyyy...

[Grateful for Hope]

57. Wish I were you, bolo

Just knowing that our gov is what it is supposed to be when I go to sleep at night. Must be wonderful to be the gullible you.

[Bolo Boffin]

58. Do all CT advocates have this false dichotomy switch when it comes to subjects like this?

Our government is either 100% nefarious and untrustworthy, or it's 100% lollypops and sweet dreams.

Remarkable.

[Grateful for Hope]

59. Funny thing

but, unlike what I see our Petgoat do (who questions information regardless if it might strengthen his POV or not), in all the posts you have made over all these years, as far as I can see, you have NEVER questi0oned the OCT. Never.

What am I to think?

On edit: Wanted to expand on how Petgoat investigates.

[AZCat]

61. Funny thing...

That's not what I've seen petgoat do. But maybe we're both filtering based on our biases. Or maybe that's just you.

[Grateful for Hope]

64. You haven't been reading very well, it seems. n/t

[AZCat]

69. That's your perception.

I, of course, disagree.

[Grateful for Hope]

55. I am noticing that "knats" have zeroed in on my response to you

See what I mean?

[BeachBaby]

60. LOL, Hope.....

Too funny.

No biggie, right? Like someone said earlier - the reason we're here discussing this is because many of us have a huge problem with the official report.

I've come across many people like bolo, and others. They get downright irate with me when I so much as suggest that the govt had an ounce of involvement in the attacks. And yet, these same people will tell me that BushCo is evil, greedy, dictatorial, blah blah blah. They'll say that they lied about Iraq....that they immediately started trouble by using the "axis of evil" illustration....that their bullying has resulted in the US losing any credibility it used to have with the rest of the world.Ummm, okaaaayyyy.....and yet it's absolutely impossible that this same evil, rogue govt is incapable of pulling off such a feat? That's there is no way that they're so evil as to harm their own people?

It reminds me of those people I see on the news - their neighbor is found murdered in her home, and when they are asked by a news reporter if they ever knew of a problem between the woman and her spouse, they mention that they've heard the couple yelling at each other. They mention that they've seen bruises on her face. They mention that police have had to come to the home many times for domestic disturbance. But then when they're asked if they think it's possible that the husband killed her, they emphatically say "Oh no! No way. It was a turbulent relationship, but he wouldn't do that."

<insert your favorite "rolling eyes" emoticon here>

[AZCat]

62. We don't care if you suggest...

the government was involved, we'd just like to see some evidence.




P.S. - Grainy YouTube videos do not count as evidence.

[SDuderstadt]

63. I'm with AzCat....

if the evidence actually showed what the "truthers" claim, I'd jump on board. But they don't have it and it's obvious to everyone but them.

[BeachBaby]

66. Not trying to be sarcastic here, but.....

I think "evidence" is a relative term in this situation.

When the govt has absolutely no qualms withholding evidence during an investigation, that fact - in and of itself - is evidence. That's why I have a big problem with the govt conducting this investigation - they get to call all the shots. Do you really think that they would incriminate themselves? Of course not. Refusing subpoenas for document production ensures that they don't. And this refusal to cooperate - at least to me - is evidence.

When I look at the amounts of money spent on one single murder investigation, ie. Laci Peterson or Megan Kanka - and then look at the amount of money allotted by the feds to conduct an investigation of what is considered to be the largest single attack on American soil - that startling fact is evidence to me.

When I read the names of everybody in the Bush regime....and then read the names of everyone involved in the 9/11 chain of command....and then read the names of everyone in the PNAC, Skull & Bones, and Freemason societies (and garner an understanding of what these societies represent)....and then remember the Bush/Bandar/Bin Laden connection....the old saying "Oh what a tangled web we weave, when we practice to deceive" comes to mind.

Could this all be considered to be circumstantial? I suppose; but for me, at least, it's more than enough to demand an independent investigation. If it looks like a rat, and it smells like a rat....

http://tvnewslies.org/blog/?p=181

Edited to add link.

[Bolo Boffin]

67. When you define every smell as "smelling like a rat", then everything does indeed

smell like a rat.

Welcome.

[noise]

72. One might actually

smell a rat after researching in good faith only to find the government's account implausible.

One is allowed to question both the 9/11 Commission and the likes of David Ray Griffin.

[noise]

75. Obstruction of justice?

Refusal to declassify evidence?

I don't believe 'trust us' is an acceptable standard of proof, especially when the circumstantial evidence suggests dereliction of duty at best.

[Grateful for Hope]

65. I have often wondered

why there is such a vehement reaction when it is suggested that our government may have been involved in 9/11.

It doesn't make any sense to me, particularly when one considers the fact that this same government was fully capable of killing thousands and thousands of Iraqis as a result of a lie. Human life doesn't seem to be a high priority with the current administration.

[Bolo Boffin]

68. Have you? Would you like a walk down the reasons again?

It's not like I haven't said why I combat this nonsense over and over again.

Conspiracism spreads political cynicism and defeatism, crippling people who would organize and affect government, from the local to the national and international level. It's used as an excuse to not do anything, because why bother? Big Brother won't let anything happen anyway. That makes it poison to a political organization.

It gives political opponents an easy target. Most 9/11 conspiracy thinking is so idiotic that any group that allows it unquestioningly is rightfully pointed to as marginal and dismissable. That will NOT happen to any political discussion board I'm allowed to be a part of.

Those are the two main reasons. I'm sorry that these reasons don't make any sense to you.

But who the hell made you the impartial judge of all things in the dungeon, anyway?

[Grateful for Hope]

70. Nice, Bolo

Continue to tell people how to post in this forum. It becomes you.

[noise]

73. Cynicism?

Griffin and Jones are not withholding evidence from the public, using fearmongering to stifle criticism, labeling people conspiracy nuts for daring to question absurd government accounts and suggesting police state tactics are required to prevent terror attacks.

[Bolo Boffin]

76. But then again

Griffin and Jones are selectively presenting the evidence they do to promote their factually incorrect conclusions.

Griffin and Jones are actually using fearmongering (fear of the government and demonic forces) to promote their factually incorrect conclusions.

Griffin and Jones are labeling innocent people conspirators or worse to promote their factually incorrect conclusions.

And Griffin and Jones are working to exonerate the actual perpetrators of this crime, thus getting people distracted from a real and deadly problem.

Griffin and Jones are not the inspirational leaders you think they are.

[noise]

78. I didn't champion Griffin and Jones

I suggested their conduct is not as offensive as that of government officials.

It seems (admittedly I don't know) that you are more offended by 9/11 truther speculation than government deception and coverup. I am more offended by the latter...ie...'To whom much is entrusted, much is expected.' I expect more from the likes of Tenet who was DIRECTLY INVOLVED in the lead up to 9/11 than I do from Griffin and Jones who are theorizing without firsthand knowledge.

[Bolo Boffin]

79. So you agree that Griffin and Jones are liars and scoundrels? n/t

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

74. They tried ignoring the Truth movement and that didn't work...

...now it's intimidation, ridicule, and marginalization -- and these too are not working. 9-11 Truth continues to grow. Very few people believe the government's account of 9-11, and many now strongly suspect that it was an inside job.

Imagine what the people who actually planned and executed 9-11 must be feeling as this movement grows.

Imagine the lengths they would be prepared to go to in order to derail 9-11 Truth.

[Bolo Boffin]

77. Your post is fearmongering at its finest. n/t

[Sweet Pea]

47. Is This Guy For Real??

Tis another write up that has an impressive list of horseshit crap in it. "Blue Angels"? This guy doesn't know shit but obviously likes writing it.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

71. Another slam dunk, air tight, thoroughly solid, meticulous, complete...

... and totally irrefutable debunking from Sweet Pea -- Thank God, we can all go home. OCTers were right all along. Thanks, Sweet Pea.