Nobody likes being called a nutbag, especially when you are.

Hey, being a "first responder" gives ones views no more legitimacy than say, being a failed political candidate or online ranter. All sorts of people can get angry, and everyone is legitimately angry. However some are not legitimately angry at the right people for the right things. It is one thing to be angry at the Bush administration for being politically opportunist in invading Iraq, it is quite another to accuse them of engineering the original attack to do so.

I will call you a nutbag, because denying the truth in favour of some fantasyland pipedream makes me angry at the complete disrespect you show for the victims, the agencies and agents charged with obtaining the truth and protecting us. CJ Morgan is quite correct in thinking that you are in total denial of reality and recruiting the words of other nutters that happened to be on the scene does nothing for the credibility of your argument.

I suggest you take your own advice James.

(Firstly, whoever it was who posted under the account 'cacofonix' recently was neither daggett posting as 'cacofonix' nor cacofonix himself. I will come back to those posts later.)

Bugsy,

Actually, I consider it a complement to be labelled a 'nutbag' by the likes of yourself and CJM. All the same, personal attacks are no substitute for discussing the evidence.

Obviously, being a 9/11 first responder, even if one is dying as a result, does not give one unchallenged authority, but I would at least suggest to you that if you had any streak of decency or compassion within you, you would at least make the effort to demonstrate comprehension of the case David Miller is trying to put before implicitly pronouncing him a 'nutter'.

Do you also hold that Colonel Robert Bowman or William Christisen, mentioned above, are nutters? Or all those others referred to in the article linked to by Sympneology at http://us-amnesia.blogspot.com/2007/05/excerpt-debunking-911-debunking-experts.html?

Do you happen to also label all the people listed in that article as 'nutbags'? And the 503 qualified architects and engineers who endorse http://ae911truth.org ? Do you also consider the 51% of the US public who want congress to question Cheney and Bush over the 9/11 attacks to be 'nubags'? or perhaps just the 30% who want Bush and Cheney to be immediately impeached (http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20070906103632686)?

So, have you yet listened to the debate between Michael Gage and 'skeptical' proponent of the US government Conspiracy theory Michael Shermer at http://www.noliesradio.org ?

If you had listened you would have noticed that Shermer managed to avoid discussing much of Gage's evidence by claiming that Osama bin Laden's supposed confession made such discussion unnecessary.

Funny how the 9/11 attacks are not listed amongst the crimes of which bin Laden has been accused. Why don't you check it out for yourself, Bugsy, at http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm ?

Now, why do you think that is, Bugsy?

If you listen to the presentation on 9/11 coincidences at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5236492071990669218 you will learn that the FBI doesn't consider that it it has enough evidence to charge Osama bin Laden with this crime.

Yes, James, insults are complements, black is white, up is down, and the American Government is responsible for 9/11.

That bit about you not being able to control your own sockpuppets was spooky though. Multiple personality disorder is a very scary situation.

I think I had better stop now, as I will probably end up being accused of mocking someone with a mental illness. I think a media student from QUT tried that recently, not a good look.

Indeed, Bugsy. Truly bizarre - pathological MPD does seem to fit.

Best treat the poor chap/s gently, I think.

OK, I will take being called a 'nutbag' as an insult, if it makes you feel better, Bugsy.

Thanks for having responded to all of my all arguments.

Congratulations Mad Dog. You've manipulated yet another thread into a vaudeville show with reams of stupefying swill - totally irrelevant to the topic - bravo Morgan!

From 23 September to 11 October you've constantly dribbled your way through a bucket load of invective! If you believe you are divinely guided in all matters known to man, why not at least debate analogically or deductively?

Or at least keep both hands on the keyboard, in consideration of other posters - please!