divineson05 (July 26, 2008 at 2:17 am)

No kidding. I just cannot get it through my head how people look past the facts right to the false claims... although some of the claims when first heard appear to be interesting and with loose change and zeitgeist and what not - they present their claims very well with the scary music in the background and the narratives - but they get debunked by experts and lose credibility... yet people ignore that?? If you get an answer to question I'd like to hear it too

JustinR81 (July 26, 2008 at 2:10 am)

Of course we can debate this, beside about a dozen anomalies you've got the biggest impossibility which is building 7 free-falling at gravity speed due to fire? This is bogus. You nor Chomsky have no answer. Even if it was pulled/demolished on purpose to avoid a catastrophe containing the fire inside it would take minimum 2 weeks to set up demolition charges. Chomsky isn't placating anyone with this but rather keeping his sheeple confused and pissing off everyone who can see beyond.

KingMucktoad (July 25, 2008 at 11:55 pm)

Chomsky just explained why it couldn't be an inside job (you should pay attention). In rational thinking the simplest solution is probably the correct one, and CTs are anything but simple. Also I would ask you this simple question, "What evidence would it take to convince you that 9/11 it was NOT and inside job?" And of course you will refuse to answer the question as any evidence that would convince you otherwise I can produce If you wish to debate this further feel free to message me.

KingMucktoad (July 25, 2008 at 11:45 pm)

Exactally, I am supporter of Noam Chomsky myself and I agree with a number of things he has to say. People get so blinded by there desire to point the finger at the government they refuse to answer this simple question: "What would it take to prove to you 9/11 was NOT an inside job?" They consistantly refuse to answer or result to name calling. If you havn't seen it already I would advise you to take a look at youtube user "slimebuster". peace out

papasitoman (July 25, 2008 at 9:57 pm)

Well said. Was 9/11 weird? Yes. Was it unprecedented? Yes. It is 100% explainable? Yes. It looks weird because people keep fanning the flames of these conspiracy nuts. People should really check out the BBC program on Al Qaeda; it answers a lot of questions on the origins of the terrorists with actual proof.

schmoonzer1 (July 25, 2008 at 5:11 am)

Ron Paul for Preisdent! Bill Maher for VP. Noam Chomsky for Secretary of State. Yeah baby. To me it's not about who commited 9/11, but how those few power hungry pricks took advantage of it. Sick!

JustinR81 (July 25, 2008 at 4:56 am)

Why couldn't it be an inside job? Is this the part where you tell so called conspiracy theorists like me that the Government backed by the Military Industrial Complex would never kill it's own people because that would be unamerican. Chomsky has an agenda which is either to keep himself nestled in the mainstream by disregarding the inside job theory or shoring up the narrative of his original story to make it still seem valid. The 9/11 party line version will always be a lie.

KingMucktoad (July 25, 2008 at 1:38 am)

you just answered your own question "a guy of his intellectual stature" because anyone with the ability to think criticlly about 9/11 will knowit was NOT an inside job.

r2dxhate (July 22, 2008 at 8:38 am)

i often get so drunk that i pee myself this guy reminds me of my grandma. i think he's going to die soon if he's still alive. hopefully if what all of you said is true he will release all his secrets upon death. i really think all old people should write about their entire life so that everyone in their family and everyone who's interested can read about them. imagine hearing everything your grandparents never told you. imagine telling your children everythng you could never say likeiloveu?

WeAreChallenged (July 22, 2008 at 8:03 am)

The twin towers weren't the only controlled demolitions the government tried to pass off as structural failure of fires. Check out my 'case for controlled demolition' video.