Forrest I've appreciated your comments on this thread. My mind baulks at the idea that Bush and or others would knowingly do this to their own people and at the scale of the coverup required if it happened.

If nothing else an ongoing willingness to review the official line, to question the findings of official enquiries might keep those with a mind to a big scam on the back foot.

Smaller less structured deceipts have been gotten away with for a period of time, anybody remember "children overboard" and the claimed impact on a federal election.

R0bert

Polycarp,

I am not sure what you were intending to prove with points 1, 2 or 4.

Regarding your point 3, I would suggest that the thread "Winning the War In Iraq" is a more appropriate place to argue that. In fact, GrahamY has already put that argument and it has been responded to at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2052#42987

The biggest hole in the U.S. government's case would appear to be the spectacular sudden collapses of Towers 1 and 2 and 7. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 truth (http://ae911truth.org) have shown that there in no plausible explanation for this other than controlled demolition A lot of eye-witness accounts back this up.

All the steel from Tower 7 was quickly carted away as scrap and put into blast furnaces before it could be examined. No explanation for the collapse of Tower 7 was proved in the 9/11 Comission report.

A very useful largely graphical presentation of this can be found at http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/index.html It is entitled The "World Trade Center Demolition - Exposing the fraud of the government's story"

BTW, have any of those unquestioning believers in the official U.S. Government version of 9/11 listened to the debate between Shermer and Gage at http://noliesradio.org ?

Ok, just one link then.

http://wtc.nist.gov/

Now I'll leave you inquiring minds to it then.

Ae911truth responded to the NISTC report referred to by Bugsy in "Architects, Engineers, and Scientists Analyze Failings of NIST's WTC 7 Final Report" at http://www.ae911truth.org/info/37

Here are some excerpts:

For the first time in history, normal office fires have created a total progressive collapse if the report from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) can be believed, said Richard Gage, AIA. Office fires can not melt steel, Gage claims, and NIST has neither explained the mystery of molten iron at the World Trade Center site nor considered other evidence that also suggests the use of thermate incendiary charges to cut the steel framework of 47-story Building 7.

NIST's vaguely worded presentation was "absurd on its face," contended Kevin Ryan, and differed completely from the story they had previously told Popular Mechanics. Though NIST claimed to hold scientific attitudes about alternative theories, they never responded to multiple invitations to discuss them, Ryan complained. NIST's disregard for chemical evidence of explosive nanothermate must be considered in the light of Ryan's findings that NIST has been studying these materials for almost ten years, and several of NIST's WTC investigators are experts in them.

NIST's only discussion of incendiaries was to dimiss them, observed Tony Szamboti, and they ignored tiny iron-rich microspheres found in the WTC dust by the USGS and by Dr. Steven Jones. These can only have been generated from molten metal, Szamboti argues. British fire resistance tests show steel framing to be far more enduring than NIST's collapse theories maintain, Szamboti adds, and while steel samples from the British Cardington test were preserved, the WTC steel was destroyed. We should ask "severe questions," Szamboti said.

...

... Many columns must be cut simultaneously to drop a building straight down, he pointed out. FEMA report 403, Appendix C, recommended further study of evidence of liquid steel that could be related to the cause of the collapse, Donly comented, but NIST ignores this information.

Gage asked that NIST release to independent researchers the thousands of photos and videos in its WTC archives.

Polycarp wrote:
"1/ I hear a lot about 'Many of the hijackers were found alive in their own countries.
"COMMENT But I've yet to see a live interview with any of them. If anyone knows of one.. please supply a reference."

To get a seat on an airline a photo ID is required. The passenger manifests of the four aircraft involved contained none of the names of the alleged hijackers. So what was the source of these names?

and:
"4/ The Caspian basin is said to be the 2nd largest oil/gas reserves, and that the US needed an excuse to gain control of Afghanistan to ensure it could 'get' this.
But
On May 13, the BBC announced that: `Afghanistan hopes to strike a deal later this month to build a $2bn pipeline through the country to take gas from energy-rich Turkmenistan to Pakistan and India. Afghan interim ruler Hamid Karzai is to hold talks with his Pakistani and Turkmenistan counterparts later this month on Afghanistan's biggest foreign investment project.
"India and Pakistan"...... how does the USA benefit from this? Will they make it a 'toll' pipeline?"

The construction firm Halliburton which was to build the pipeline had reached an impasse in negotiations with the Taliban prior to 9/11. That impediment has now been removed.

So Symp....ur saying that it's all about Haliburton making a pipeline which will benefit no one but Haliburton in the USA ?

Kinda stretches the cred a tad you know. There are so many other factors to consider.

WTC 7.... can someone just mention the "concluslion" of that technical briefing?

It strikes me as most odd that such speculation surrounds this. I would think 2 building the size of WTC1 and 2 could easily undermind the foundations of adjacent buildings and the weakest one went down?

"Controlled demolition" for WTC 7 again stretches Cred.. there was no plane involved so.. if that's the case why use planes at all for the others if you are going to expose your true method in building 7.

It is a separate building..so there was no plane allocated to targe that structure.. it just sounds too.. wayyyyy too fantastic that this could be a controlled demolition thing.. how in the world could they guarantee that the evidence would be removed withOUT a HOST of people able to testify to all that?