Whether it was a conspiracy or not, as far as the aims of PNAC were concerned, it was certainly the right thing happening at just the right time.

The situation was also made much worse by a peculiar series of coincidences.

Most major items can seemingly be explained away but there are still many smaller unresolved but significant items still outstanding.

Like the Gulf of Tonkin incident, the sinking of the Lusitania and more recent revelations about Pearl Harbour, things will eventually reveal themselves.

No, I won't be apologising, Paul.L for reasons I will explain below and if the allegations were true I would certainly not confess to them in these circumstances for reasons which should be understandable to anyone capable of reason.

Obviously it is beyond my own control whether or not this inquistion is to persist, but if it does, it will clearly be difficult for much progress to be made in discussing the topic at hand, which I believe is clearly the intention of a number of people here.

If you had read the posts you would have understood the point (which CJ Morgan is pretending not to understand), that is, if I had intended to pull the wool over everyone's eyes, then why would I have done it in a forum in which CJ Morgan was contributing, given that he has already blown the whistle on me a number of times before?

I would suggest that a possible motive may have been to test whether or not CJ Morgan was still as apparently as malevolent as he has been on past occasions.

That question has obviously been answered.

I point out again that CJ Morgan has yet to make single substantive contribution to this forum. His first contribution was an attack upon myself. I asked him to substantiate his claim against me even before cacofonix contributed and he failed to do so.

Paul L. has listed a few "debunking 9/11" sites.

David Ray Griffin has written a comprehensive debunking of the 9/11 debunkers. Here is a sample:

http://us-amnesia.blogspot.com/2007/05/excerpt-debunking-911-debunking-experts.html

Far from being "comprehensively debunked" the 9/11 Truth Movement has been the debunker of the official conspiracy theory and its in-house 'experts'.

My point, James Sinnamon/daggett/cacofonix/et al, is that by recalcitrantly lying about your habitual use of multiple sock puppet identities, you 'demolish' any credibility you might otherwise have had.

This plays into the hands of wingnuts like Paul.l, particularly when you do it to promote crackpot ideas like the 9/11 conspiracy crap.

You really don't do your cause any favours, and this annoys me when you're spouting forth about real issues that actually matter - unlike this topic.

CJ,

As much as I am offended by dagget's deliberate deception, and by his BLIND acceptance of this particularly distasteful conspiracy theory, I think HE at least has a reason to be here.

I can think of NO reason whatsoever why you should be allowed to continue to post. It is clear from your posting history that your NUMBER ONE goal on OLO is to abuse and denigrate, without any discussion of the topic. You add NOTHING of any value to any discussion. So why don't you go away you sad little man.

Humpty Dumpty: << It is clear from your posting history that your NUMBER ONE goal on OLO is to abuse and denigrate, without any discussion of the topic. You add NOTHING of any value to any discussion. >>

Good to see I'm still getting up your wingnut nose. However, as you well know, I often contribute substantive comments in discussions that are being conducted by rational and reasonable people - in which case, you're a liar too. You and James are flip-sides of the same coin.

<< So why don't you go away you sad little man. >>

I'm neither sad nor little, and one reason I don't go away is that I derive much amusement in pointing out bullsh!t, hypocrisy and hate-speak that comes from nasty little wingnuts like you.

Why don't you go away, you sad little engineering student?