I would have thought that Oliver Stone's "single plane" theory would have made perfect sense to a "magic bullet" believer such as CJM.

dickie: << a dunny-truck load of unprovoked, hate-based invectives, passed off as factual >>

Actually, that's a pretty good description of most of James' posts to this silly thread, not to mention what one reads on the various "9/11 Truth" frootloop sites. You should check some of them out - they're quite scary.

On the other hand, you might feel right at home there too.

It's hard to know what to make of Christopher Ketcham's article about Mossad agents at http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17260.htm

It implicitly the huge mountains of evidence pointing to prior knowledge of the impending attacks by the US Government, but makes a big deal of evidence pointing to Mossad's prior knowledge of the attacks.

The article appeared originally (http://www.counterpunch.org/ketcham03072007.html) on the site of ostensible leftist Alexander Cockburn, who, together with Noam Chomsky, disgracefully smeared Oliver Stone in 1992 (see "Alexander Cockburn and Noam Chomsky vs. JFK: A Study in Misinformation" at http://192.220.64.45/media/cockburn.htm) and who continues to smear the 9/11 Truth Movement (see "Debunking the Myths of 9/11" at http://www.counterpunch.org/ninelevenconsp11252006.html "How They Let the Guilty Parties of 9/11 Slip Off the Hook -The 9/11 Conspiracy Nuts" at http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn09252006.html)

One possible explanation for the article is that it may be a fall back position for 'left' 9/11 deniers who may feel a need to erect a facade of critical-mindedness towards of the US Government in order to revive their dwindling credibility.

The sentence in the second paragraph should have been:

"It implicitly [denies] the huge mountains of evidence pointing to prior knowledge of the impending attacks by the US Government, but makes a big deal of evidence pointing to Mossad's prior knowledge of the attacks."

An excellent rebuttal to Alexander Cockburn's abovementioned smear of 9/11 Truth activists is

"Into the Ring with Counterpunch on 9/11: How Alexander Cockburn, Otherwise So Bright, Blanks Out on 9/11 Evidence"

of 16 Dec 2006 at http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20061206104001101

This article includes a quote from the abovementioned Colonel Robert Bowman. I will include a part of it here:

"As a combat veteran, I will not stand idly by and watch our
security destroyed by a president who went AWOL rather than
serve in Vietnam. As one who's devoted his life to the security
of this country, I will not stand by and watch an appointed
president send our sons and daughters around the world to kill
Arabs for the oil companies. [".] I joined the air force a long
time ago to protect our borders and our people, not the
financial interests of Folgers, Chiquita Banana, Exxon,
and Halliburton. We've had enough corporate wars! No more Iraqs,
no more Kosovos, no more El Salvadors, no more Colombias! These
are not isolated incidents of stupidity; they're part of a long,
bloody history of foreign policy being conducted for the financial
interests of the wealthy few. [".]

"As a pilot who flew a hundred and one combat missions in Vietnam,
I swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States against
all enemies, foreign and domestic—and that includes a renegade
president! It's time for George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald
Rumsfeld, Condoleezza Rice, and the whole oil mafia to be removed
from office and indicted for treason."

I think the quote above from Bowman is a good example of a "tendentious rant from an aggrieved nobody". So he's a former combat pilot who's belatedly realised that he was little more than a hired gun for the world's most powerful thugs - how does this prove anything other than that he has an axe to grind?