david f,

I don't believe the official account of 9/11 has explained how the most heavily defended building in the world was able to be hit by Flight 77 or, indeed, anything.

In regard to Flight 93 the evidence points to it having been shot down with a Sidewinder missile, whether or not the passengers first succeeded in overpowering the hijackers.

This also contradicts the official accounts.

---

Anyway, as I have been saying to Pericles, I don't believe that claiming that our arguments have been "dealt with" by logic or by 'humour' is a substitute for actually arguing your case.

As far as I can tell, our arguments have not been dealt with, but if, as you say, they have, then why not allow others to form their own judgement? (And, of course, by 'others', I don't mean people like Yabby, who, long ago, showed his mind to be completely closed on this issue.)

---

Pericles wrote, "Logically, it is perfectly possible to oppose the invasion of Afghanistan for a million different reasons. ..."

So, are you saying that you oppose the invasion of Afghanistan whilst still accepting the Official Conspiracy theory that 9/11, the London Tube bombings, the Madrid train bombings, the Bali bombings, etc. were launched from Afghanistan?

daggett: << As far as I can tell, our arguments have not been dealt with, but if, as you say, they have, then why not allow others to form their own judgement? (And, of course, by 'others', I don't mean people like Yabby, who, long ago, showed his mind to be completely closed on this issue.) >>

OK all you "others" who remain susceptible to Arjay and daggett's shared madness, it's time to speak up. daggett doesn't want to hear from us "others" who think that daggett and Arjay's conspiracy fantasies are a total crock.

No logic or humour allowed.

Arjay, you started this string with the question, "Does Israel Control the USA?" and painted a picture of 5,000,000 Jews supporting AIPAC and together with Israel controlling the US.

You are not alone in this insanity. A number of us have been exterminated as a result of many sharing in the fantasy of the all-powerful Jew. The truth is we are not all-powerful, but those with such paranoid fantasies may feel compelled to destroy us. Maybe you will get enough people to share your fantasy, and this time our extermination will be complete.

You and those like you will keep on. Hopefully most people will have enough sense not to buy your sickness, but there is a chance that they will.

I don't think there is a cure for your kind of paranoia, and it is infectious.

I am deeply afraid of you.

You are becoming increasingly delusional, daggett.

Which, given the point from which you started, is a substantial achievement.

>>I don't believe the official account of 9/11 has explained how the most heavily defended building in the world was able to be hit by Flight 77 or, indeed, anything.<<

Delusion no.1 is, of course, that the Pentagon is "heavily defended", let alone "the most heavily defended building in the world". It is on American soil, and has no out-of-the-ordinary defences whatsoever. It might be difficult for a civilian to get in there without a pass, but otherwise it is just another office building.

Which does guided tours.

http://pentagon.afis.osd.mil/security.html

Delusion no.2, that Flight 77 did not hit the building, requires you to ignore the existence of physical evidence - trivial stuff, like the bodies of the passengers, the black boxes recovered, eyewitness testimony, that sort of thing.

>>In regard to Flight 93 the evidence points to it having been shot down with a Sidewinder missile, whether or not the passengers first succeeded in overpowering the hijackers.<<

There is no evidence that supports this theory. None. Just another red herring dragged across the trail.

>>So, are you saying that you oppose the invasion of Afghanistan whilst still accepting the Official Conspiracy theory that 9/11, the London Tube bombings, the Madrid train bombings, the Bali bombings, etc. were launched from Afghanistan?<<

Once again (how many times does this need to be said, I wonder) there are a million reasons why one might oppose the invasion of Afghanistan.

At the same time, there are absolutely no reasons to subscribe to your wild-eyed, paranoid conspiracy theories.

There are on the other hand many reasons why you should not continue to support a movement that can only bring prolonged misery to the survivors, the victims' relatives, and the many brave souls who attended the scene.

By encouraging them to believe that their government orchestrated the cold-blooded murder of innocent Americans, you are helping to blight the rest of their lives.

I guess it's a good job you have no conscience.

CJ Morgan, you seem to have misunderstood my point.

Of course I don't mind people like yourself, Yabby, Pericles, david f, et al, arguing their case.

What I was saying, is that merely restating that they reject the case of the 9/11 Truth movement adds nothing to anyone's understanding of the issue.

In your own case, as I have said before, it would help move the argument forward if, for once, after more than a year and a half, you could show the rest of us where you even once demonstrated any comprehension of the case of the 9/11 Truth movement.

If you haven't done so before, you are still welcome to do so here.

I will have to attend to Pericles' sophistry in regard to Flight 77 and to cite some of the large body of evidence which blows to pieces the official account of what happened to Flight 93 on another occasion.

In the meantime ...

---

I note that Pericles has avoided answering my straightforward question of whether or not he supports the invasion of Afghanistan and why.

----

And he has again damned daggett as having no conscience for "continu[ing] to support a movement that can only bring prolonged misery to the survivors, the victims' relatives, and the many brave souls who attended the scene. ... blah, blah, rave, rant, etc."

In fact, I already answered almost precisely this same hysterical venom on the forum "JFK.E Howard Hunt Ex CIA, Accuses LBJ" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3330&page=44 :

"Somehow this is disrespectful of the heroes, both living and dead and the victims, whilst seizing upon their tragedy to launch wars to seize oil and gas and to profiteer at both the expense of US taxpayers and the conquered peoples and killing well over a million in the process, is not.

"As for Pericles' professed concern for the victims of 9/11, note how he attempted to deny the well understood facts of catastrophic health effects that the toxic WTC dust had upon the health of the first responders. (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3330&page=24 5 March 2010 12:21:34 PM)"

Pericles has yet to respond.