So, Pericles now openly concedes that he has not even bothered to check any of the facts on of http://ae911truth.org yet wants us to accept his word that the content of that site is fallacious.

Yes daggett,he did not even know who Richard Gage was. He has assurred me in the past that he has viewed the site and it was all conjecture.

ae911tuth now has over 7000 memebers.They could in reality offer a bet well in excess of $ one million.This would be a average of $150.00 per person.Just put it with the betting agencies and the word would get out.They would not have to rely on the media.

That's a good suggestion, Arjay.

Has anyone put that to Richard Gage?

Perhaps they could get commitments from all their members to pay US$250 each (just to be sure) in the highly unlikely event that the bet was lost.

---

Arjay wrote "[Pericles] has assured me in the past that he has viewed the site and it was all conjecture."

(See my response at: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3330&page=24)

Anyway, I knew this was going to happen.

It always does, eventually.

Sooner or later, Pericles, or whoever, to finds him/herself cornered by logic and the evidence and have nowhere left to go.

He may yet come back, clutching yet another straw, but as long as others are able to argue their case and don't allow themselves to fall for debating tricks, the final outcome is assured.

I've only come to this thread late.

Looking at daggett's link, there are a lot of technical opinions there that look to have credibility, at least on the surface.

Assuming the twin towers and WTC Building 47 were actually brought down by explosives, who do people say is the culprit and what exactly would be a sufficiently good motive to do it? I cannot believe the US Government would have anything to gain from losing their capitalist flagship.

Could it be that Al Qaeda secreted explosives into the buildings and got a double bang for their buck? That is, the planes for visual effect and explosives detonated from the ground to make sure the things came down? But, then again, A Muslim extremist organisation wouldn't be too worried about making sure the building came down in its own footprint, would it. For them, the messier, the better.

If it wasn't Al Qaeda, then there would have had to be collusion between the attackers and someone in the US, or at least considerable foreknowledge of the attack.

So, what would be the motive? A modern-day appeasement to the Gods? Here is our token, ritual sacrifice?

I would, daggett, if there were any.

>>Pericles now openly concedes that he has not even bothered to check any of the facts on of http://ae911truth.org<<

The problem is finding a fact to check, as opposed to the farrago of circumstantial innuendo, wild imagination and self-fulfilling, circular arguments for a conspiracy that populate its pages.

But you obviously believe it, and your dogged defence of the impossible is necessary for you in order to maintain any kind of self-image.

(It is far too late, by the way, to be concerned about your public image, that is set in stone. Your most prominent label is now "conspiracy doob".)

And Arjay, you're just as bad.

>>Yes daggett,he did not even know who Richard Gage was.<<

You know that is pure invention on your part, I'm amazed you don't keep quiet about it. I'll repeat here what I said on another thread.

"I ask [Arjay] a simple question, "Was Richard Gage a fireman too", and he starts to crow "Pericles doesn't know who Richard Gage is, nerny ner ner"

All of which is to cover up the fact that Richard Gage is not a fireman, has never been a fireman, and is therefore unlikely to win an argument with a real New York Fire Chief on the topic of... fire.

It would actually be pathetic, if it wasn't so funny.

Conversely, it would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic.

On the topic of pathetic, what happened to that bet?

Where's the evidence that John Bursill is putting up $100,000? Surely you must have kept the email? And what about the referee? Any thoughts on who will be the person or body who can make an objective assessment?

Arjay, it is easy to pretend. It is also quite easy to believe the stuff you tell yourself. The important thing though is to recognize when you have overstepped the mark, and confess.

It might take a while to rebuild your credibility to where it was before, but you need to start somewhere.

Scratch that. It will take no time at all.

How hard would it be for Pericles to simply copy an example of what he tells us is "the farrago of circumstantial innuendo, wild imagination and self-fulfilling, circular arguments" on http://ae911truth.org and paste it here for all to see?

---

As for firefighters, Pericles, can you explain to us what is wrong with the reasoning of Erik Lawyer, a firefighter of 22 years experience and founder of Firefighters for 9/11 Truth (http://firefightersfor911truth.org), in his 9 minute speech at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uor8NhUr_90 ?