BAZZ, fine, you are welcome to your opinion but it does not bode well for you or your assertions if you deflect by discrediting anyone who does not follow your beliefs. Just remember, the phrase; Freedom of Speech.

The whole passenger list has been researched and the persons who hijacked the planes were trained in flight simulators. They were Muslim and chose intended targets of the twin towers because it represented American trade and democracy.

All theories have been debunked. This guy is obsessed with fiction. Not worth discussion.

Of course Altrav, you can say it as much as you like.
That indeed is what freedom of speech is all about.
You just cannot expect anyone to take you seriously.

You expect us to believe that the Arab hijackers gave up their
lives for the Great Satan the USA.

Oh why am I wasting my time ?

Josephus, I don't have to prove anything. Just because you and your followers believe EVERYTHING you read, does not make it true. All the FACTS have NOT been debunked! How many more examples do I have to give before the penny starts to drop. Just because you (and others) don't want to believe that there is such evil in high places, does not mean there isn't. If one incident is dis-proven then it brings into question all the incidents. Another FACT. None of you have challenged me on the fact that what hit the Pentagon was not a plane, but experts have agreed it was most likely a 'Bunker Buster' missile. Oh and yeah there was some mention of a lack of any aircraft parts? Of course there had to be Muslims, it would not have been hard to find guys who were willing to commit suicide if it meant they would get to be martyrs for their cause. Josephus, this was a very well planned event and it definitely had bi-partisan approval. This kind of evil comes from many types of people but this one in particular needed money, and connections, the two things which are the domain of the 'ELITE'.

Yes, really, ALTRAV.

<<Popular Mechanics? Really?>>

Why? What’s wrong with Popular Mechanics? It’s a reputable source of information. Attacking the source of information, without addressing the arguments, is fallacious.

<<I suggest stop thinking that Govt's are angels and actually concerned about us.>>

One does not need to assume that governments are angels to reject ridiculous conspiracy theories. This sort of emotive language does you no favours. I’m surprised you haven’t called us all “sheeple” yet. That seems to be a popular one.

Speaking of emotive language, Josephus didn’t demand that you prove anything, nor does he have “followers”. However, the burden of proof does in fact lie with you because you are the one making the claim. Perhaps some sources might help there? Or are we just expected to take your word for it?

It is condescending of you to assert that the rest of us simply believe everything we read, or that we want to believe a particular way. How do you know that? How do you know that none of us did an honest and unbiased assessment of the evidence? The fact that we don’t agree with you is not evidence of gullibility.

As for your so-called “facts”, no one is challenging you on them because they are only convincing to those who have already decided that a conspiracy exists. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Dear ALTRAV,

I've found another link that may be of interest:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

Personally, I feel that the more you research a
subject, the more you'll hopefully learn.

I guess, my "ignorance" is to my advantage in a way - meaning
that hopefully I can learn from listening to all
sides of an argument.