Oh no, not another "I note Pericles has, yet again...", daggett.

When are you going to get over this fixation with everything I say? It's like being back in primary school, when Sharon Gretzky had this crush on me.

But, polite as always, I'll try not to ignore you.

>>It's one thing for Pericles to crawl out from beneath the rock under which he hides in order to snipe at others for offering an explanation for 9/11, but an entirely different matter when he is asked to provide his own explanation.<<

When have I ever suggested that I have my own "explanation" for 9/11?

As far as I am concerned, people far more competent than I (and, quite possibly, you), who were far closer to the action than I (and, quite possibly, you - although I can't vouch for that. Where exactly were you on the morning of 11th September 2001, daggett...?) have done everything necessary to "explain" what happened that day.

I don't spend my days in an orgy of cut'n'paste from their findings, nor do I have a personal view of whether Osama bin Laden was flying one of those planes or not.

What I do know for sure and certain, is that your "theories" of government conspiracies against their own people are nothing more than the product of an overactive imagination, fuelled by a toxic combination of Die Hard action movies and Oliver Stone mockumentaries.

The sad truth is that life is far more mundane and boring than you would like it to be. Some of us solve that problem by taking up competitive macramé, or extreme Morris Dancing (the staves have concealed razor blades at each end), or teaching our pet ferret to sing.

For you, it's conspiracy theories.

Hey, it's a hobby, I'm not knocking it.

But complaining that I am "shrilly demanding absolute proof", when all I am asking for is clarification of a key element of your theory, is stretching the friendship a little.

Incidentally...

>>So, instead of responding to my substantive point...<<

You made one? Sorry, I must have missed it

Pericles wrote, "When have I ever suggested that I have my own 'explanation' for 9/11?"

I consider this pedantry.

Clearly Pericles is in agreement with the Official account of 9/11, but doesn't have the intellectual courage to put that view here and defend it.

Pericles rants:

"As far as I am concerned, people far more competent than I ... have done everything necessary to 'explain' what happened that day."

Yes, they're so 'competent' that they have illegally detained and tortured hundreds of innocent people accused of the crime and yet haven't been able to prove that one of them was guilty of 9/11.

Ah well.

>>I consider this pedantry<<

One man's pedantry is another man's precision, daggett.

And I like to be precise, as you know.

It's even close to being an anagram of Pericles.

L precise. Has a Latin American ring to it, don't you think?

All you can manage with yours is get tag'd. BYO spraypaint?

>>Clearly Pericles is in agreement with the Official account of 9/11<<

At the risk of being, in your eyes, pedantic, let me re-state this more accurately.

I have found nothing in the official account of 9/11 that gives me reason to doubt it.

This is in stark contrast to the bits and pieces of theory that you provide - never the whole story, of course, or anywhere near it - that I find, literally, unbelievable.

Perhaps if you were able to provide even the slightest hint of credibility in your storytelling, I might think yes, daggett has opened my eyes, this is worth taking another look at.

But so far, nothing. Every single element of your theory fails to stack up, out here in the real world.

>>Yes, they're so 'competent' that they have illegally detained and tortured hundreds of innocent people accused of the crime and yet haven't been able to prove that one of them was guilty of 9/11.<<

Hmmm. I was aware that the 9/11 Commission interviewed over a thousand people for their report.

I wasn't aware they had tortured any of them.

Pericles wrote, "I have found nothing in the official account of 9/11 that gives me reason to doubt it."

Sure he doesn't.

The Truth is out there somewhere else, it would seem, but can't possibly be revealed, by Pericles, to this forum.

But I would have thought that the indisputable fact that not one person with a proven link to 9/11 has been captured in 8 years of occupation of Afghanistan, that supposed hot-bed of international terrorism, or, indeed, anywhere else, in spite of the fact that hundreds of 'suspects' have been illegally detained or tortured would have given any reasonable person one very good reason to doubt the official account of 9/11.

But, not, it would seem, Pericles.

---

Pericles wrote, "I was aware that the 9/11 Commission interviewed over a thousand people for their report.

"I wasn't aware they had tortured any of them."

No, Pericles, but the US Government, whose account of 9/11 the 9/11 Commission unquestioningly accepted, did.

In fact, the 9/11 Commission's account of the terrorist attack is based on confessions tortured out of Guantanamo Bay detainees.

Furthermore, the supposedly 'competent' 9/11 Commission did not interview one of the alleged suspects directly. Instead, they relied on second hand testimony obtained from the torturers.

If the account in the 9/11 Commission Report had any validity, then how does Pericles account for the fact that not one of those detainees since been put on trial for the crime of 9/11?

That's pretty sad.

A post from you, daggett, with so little substance to it, that there is almost no point in formulating a reply.

It simply confirms what we all know from the several minutes required to complete Basic Conspiracy Theory 101.

Look very closely for something that isn't there. In this case...

>>not one person with a proven link to 9/11 has been captured in 8 years of occupation of Afghanistan, that supposed hot-bed of international terrorism, or, indeed, anywhere else<<

Et voilà! La conspiration!

My friend Jimbo had the same problem once. He had been paying a dating agency hundreds of dollars a month to find his perfect partner, and they kept sending him duds. "It's a conspiracy" he said "they know if they actually send me one that's worth dating, I'll stop paying them" "Jimbo" I said, as kindly as I could, "Are you sure it's nothing to do with the fact that you have pustulent acne, killer halitosis, and you only have a shower once a year on your birthday? The agency does have a reputation to maintain, you know"

He didn't get it either.

But he did eventually find his soulmate.

A llama. And they're very happy.

Incidentally, I am staggered that you haven't referred to the confession that was built into the Commission's report itself:

"We have not interviewed every knowledgeable person or found every relevant piece of paper<<

How much clearer does it need to be, daggett? The Commisisoners themselves admit they left out the part about the elevator men, the security company's links to George Bush, the planting of the explosives and the source of the slush fund that paid for it all.

Could it be more obvious?

Nah. Just messin' wit' ye. It's Friday arvo and the long weekend beckons.

So will you be able to devote extra time to your quest this weekend, daggett?

Which one will you choose?

Marilyn, perhaps?

Was it JFK wot dunnit? Is that why he was assassinated?

And Bobby, obviously. He'd been there too.

This is too exciting.

I can hardly wait 'til Monday.

Pericles changes the subject by constructing and then demolishing a straw man:

"Look very closely for something that isn't there. In this case...

">>not one person with a proven link to 9/11 has been captured in 8 years of occupation of Afghanistan, that supposed hot-bed of international terrorism, or, indeed, anywhere else<<

"Et voil&#56319;&#57056;! La conspiration!"

Bravo!

Well done, Pericles!

Except, where did I ever argue that it automatically followed that there was a conspiracy by the the Bush Administration?

The reason Pericles changed the subject was to avoid having to explain why the fact that not one person with a proven link to 9/11 has been captured in Afghanistan after eight years of occupation was not good reason to doubt the official account of 9/11.

When Pericles made this sweeping assertion:

"I have found nothing in the official account of 9/11 that gives me reason to doubt it"

He expects others to trust his word, but given Pericles' resort to dishonest debating techniques as I have just demonstrated here and the fact that he has been caught out lying several times, I would suggest is very good reason to be highly suspicious of him not being willing to present, on this forum, the case he is are attempting to defend.