I'm coming late to this discussion, but today it has its benefits because a google search turned up a couple of interesting things.

Yesterday Captain Connie Rhodes -- one of the military personnel Orly Taitz has recruited and on whose behalf Taitz filed a lawsuit claiming that Barack Obama has no authority to deploy this military doctor because he isn't really Commander-in-Chief, being ineligible for the presidency because of the birthers' claim that he's wasn't born in the U.S. as required by the Constitution as a qualification for the presidency -- sent a letter to the judge chastizing Taitz for filing an appeal motion and saying she's fired Taitz for misrepesentation and acting without consultation with the client. Captain/Doctor Rhodes also said she intends to file a complaint with the California Bar Assn. It's all right there, in an easy search, folks. Check it out for yourself here: http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/breaking_news/story/844811.html.

Initially I began the search because I wanted to check out something that was lurking in the back of my brain. Just who is Calif. Mike? Could he be Orly's son, who is named Michael or Michaeladam, and who lives in California? Or, perhap, it's Orly herself writing under the moniker of her offspring? Just speculating, of course...

Finally, while Calif. Mike was challenging folks as to their educational background, level of knowledge with regard to Taitz' multi-state lawsuit activity, and commitment to the "birther" issue itself, I kept remembering that the original effort didn't involve any of these poor schmucks recruited by her. (By the way, that recruitment and donation-request website doesn't exist anymore--again, check it out yourself: www.orlytaitzesq.com/blog1.) Her initial client was Alan Keyes, a person who is definitely certifiable, and even further off the charts of DSM-IV mental illness interpretations than Taitz herself.

But what do I know since I'm not a dentist, a realtor or a lawyer---nor a kook. Just a curious old woman who likes to check things out for herself.

If any of the above comments are wrong, I'm certain Calif. Mike will be correcting them---after, of course, checking with... Oh, well, you get the idea.

Oops. Forgot to thank you, too, 23skidoo, for providing the information on GROUND TRUTH.

Thanks cabdriver and scorpio... for the info. on John Farmer's GROUND TRUTH. I went immediately to Amazon and ordered a copy. Would love to read what the senior legal counsel to the 9/11 Commission has to say. Maybe it will provide us with some answers. Being an oldster, I would hope to find some answers to be questions and doubts before I die, and put a halt to the Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire silliness that seems to consume some folks. Again, thanks.

...but, having been called a liar, I just have to ask:

Jamiso, why are you so hysterical? Why are you calling people names? Why are you opposed to a comprehensive investigation now that 9/11 is eight years behind us? When so much more information has come to light in the ensuing years? When some central unbiased entity - free from the pressure to keep secrets that was the nature of the previous administration - can be free to dig through the various conflicting arguments, pull them all together, analyze them, and produce a comprehensive report? What are you afraid of? Frankly, your level of emotion worries me. If I'm wrong in some of my beliefs, then why are you concerned that an investigation might prove me and the other doubters wrong?

As to why this posting comes so far away timewise from your original comments regarding my posts and your silly, childish name calling, it's because I've been busy all day doing other things. Normal things. That's what normal people do. Do you understand the concept?

Normal people like me want to know what happened on 9/11.

(P.S. To cab driver, thanks for trying to inject some degree of sanity into the dialog.)

Of course there is a good explanation for the demolition of WTC7. Silverstein said "pull it" and so someone tied ropes at various points and "pulled" or maybe they used chains---but definitely not explosives. They used invisible ropes/chains, and the pulling was done by invisible people (or maybe robots) so that's why the cameras filming it weren't able to see what actually happened. The fact that it fell into its own footprint was just an accident. Or maybe it pancaked downward unintentially having caught and trapped a whiff of the gasoline from the planes and exploded several hours later...at the precise time the owner of WTC7 (and WTC 1 and 2) ordered it "pulled." But then what do I know? I'm one of those sitting around waiting for the mothership to come and take me away to a land where things like this don't happen, and where no one tells lies or benefits from gruesome death and destruction.

Poor Silverstein only got a mere billion from the insurance on those buildings. He tried for TWO billion!

Hey, wouldn't it be a good idea if this administration launched an investigation into what really happened on 9/11? Maybe we could start a petition drive..........

...I meant to say "Isn't he the one..." Having won one against them, it's hard not to think of our side as a winner.

Isn't he the won the camera caught spontaneously starting to clap at one point in his speech and then, realizing what he was doing, brushed his hands together? Oops!!!

His daughters blurted out during a family interview that their dad doesn't like shopping for clothes. It could be that the tie is only one of a few he actually owns. Then again, it could be a lucky tie---and what's wrong with that?