Very droll, Forrest.

I thought I was being nice, in inviting James to exercise further his lively imagination.

Polycarp wrote:
"It was not that the Babylonians (or Saudis in the planes) were more righteous than the Americans.. but that America simply needed judgement."

Babylon is not in Saudi Arabia, it is in Iraq, and the idea that Iraq had something to do with 9/11 has been exposed as just another one of the Bush/Cheney lies designed to advance the PNAC agenda by panicking the people into supporting the illegal invasion of Iraq.

I am still puzzled as to how 19 Islamist terrorists managed to board the four aircraft without any of their names appearing on the passenger manifests. Don't they have to show a photo ID at check-in?

Dickie,

Thanks for the link to http://www.freewebs.com/911truthseeker/911andbuilding7.htm

I ask the supporters of the official conspiracy theory on this forum: How else can these words by Sliverstein, be explained other than than with knowledge that WTC7 had been prepared for demolition?

"I remember getting a call from the fire department commander telling me that they weren't sure they were going to be able to contain the fire. And I said, 'You know, we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And then they made that decision to pull -- and then we watched the building collapse."

The facts that Larry Silverstein owned WTC7 and that only a "mere two months before 9/11, he bought the entire complex; all seven of the buildings. Then he immediately took out a record insurance policy on them for over $3.5 billion, which he has since been paid" are yet more of the phenomenal number of coincidences related to the 9/11 attacks.

A good, but very long video presentation on the coincidence theory necessary for the official conspiracy official theory to stand up versus the alternative conspiracy theories can be found in the broadcast at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5236492071990669218

In that you will learn that all kinds of very well credentialed people of most kinds of political persuasions reject the official explanation of the 9/11 attacks (See also http://us-amnesia.blogspot.com/2007/05/excerpt-debunking-911-debunking-experts.html mentioned above by Sympneology). These include William Christisen who worked as a CIA analyst for 28 years and Colonel Robert Bowman USAF. His details are:

Colonel Robert Bowman, PhD, U.S. Air Force [ret] - Director of Advanced Space Programs Development under Presidents Ford and Carter. U.S. Air Force fighter pilot with over 100 combat missions. (PhD in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering, Cal Tech)

(tobecontinued)

(continuedfromabove)

Colonel Robert Bowman said:

"A lot of these pieces of information, taken together, prove that the official story, the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is a bunch of hogwash. It's impossible. ...

"I think the very kindest thing that we can say about George W. Bush and all the people in the U.S. Government that have been involved in this massive cover-up, is that they were aware of impending attacks and let them happen. ... that is high treason and conspiracy to commit murder."

---

Another very satisfying broadcast is about the phony 9/11 hero and U.S. Republican Presidential aspirant Rudy Giuliani running from firefighters in Des Moines at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZTova85IFQ&NR=1

---

I note that CJ Moron has yet to demonstrate any comprehension whatsoever of the case against the official explanation for the 9/11 attacks.

James Sinnamon et al: << CJ Moron >>

Now James, nowhere in our fascinating conversation in this thread have I called you names, although many have come to mind. I have no intention to respond in kind to your attempt to rekindle the flame war that got us both suspended for a week, but I do want to reiterate my opinion that I think that your 9/11 conspiracy fantasy is rubbish.

Of course, that's why I mentioned categorically similar conspiracy theories in my last post. As a former anthropologist, I've long been fascinated by conspiracy theories and urban myths, of which the "9/11 Truth" is shaping up to be something of a classic.

I have absolutely no objection to you raising the topic for discussion in this forum, however silly at may be. Indeed, I find the sheer elaboration of the paranoia quite fascinating. There's quite a corpus of academic literature about these kinds of conspracy theories and the kinds of people who subscribe to them.

That doesn't mean, however, that it's worth playing tedious evidential games where tendentious rants from aggrieved nobodies are accorded equivalent weight with the bulk of the credible evidence. As we all know, the Internet is replete with spurious "evidence" to support anything - and it seems that lots of people who know no better are prepared to accept it as authoritative.

I don't know why you feel the need to use sock puppets, and I don't really care. However, I think that by trotting out the "cacofonix" sock puppet identity and calling me a moron, you're trying to pick a fight again.

I'm not going to play, but I still think your premise is rubbish.

CJ Moron wrote: "That doesn't mean, however, that it's worth playing tedious evidential games ..."

I ask again: So, why are you here?

CJ Moron wrote: "I don't know why you feel the need to use sock puppets, and I don't really care. ..."

So, why are you here?

CJ Moron wrote, "... However, I think that by trotting out the "cacofonix" sock puppet identity and calling me a moron, you're trying to pick a fight again."

But it takes two to make a fight, doesn't it?

All you needed to do was to have walked quietly away from this forum, which you still insist is a complete waste of time, or better still, not have bothered to post that first comment accusing me without any substantiation, of being "a tad obsessive", and there could not possibly have possibly been a fight.

The reason I choose to address you as "CJ Moron" and not as "CJ Morgan", is, as I put it to you earlier, either you are a moron or you are pretending to be a moron. As I can't be completely sure that the former is not the case, I feel that I am entitled to assume the former until such time as you can demonstrate to me that you were only pretending to be a moron.

A good way to convince me that you were only pretending to be a moron would be to demonstrate a comprehension of the evidence presented in this forum against the official U.S. Government explanation of the 9/11 attacks and show me why you think it is wrong.