Thanks for providing more substantial support of the high-fiving Israelis. Your first one was completely support-free, seeming no more valid than your standard "Angelina disses Jen" claim. At least the ABC news article digs deeper and offers some quotes from the FBI.

However, I don't see these 5 Israelis as a smoking gun that indicates the Bush Admin (note I didn't say Bush specifically) scripted 9/11.

These men were arrested. Two of them we KNOW were Mossad, the company did close up and leave within days. Draw your own conclusions, I am sure that you will.

That's just it. There isn't enough here for a reasonable mind to draw any firm conclusions. Sure, one can entertain hypotheses, and suppose which ones are more likely than others. But it's all complete supposition, which is crucial to remember.

And if you read his article, it's pretty plain, that everyone "suffers" from this and the knife cuts both ways Paul, if I am biased, then so are you. The trick is to be aware of our biases and act accordingly.

Exactly. And what I'm saying is that, if you consider your pieces of evidence to be definitive proof of anything, then you've got some biases that you clearly aren't aware of.

My bias on 911 was shock and disgust, and yes I was pissed at Bin Laden. The difference between you and I is that the mountain of evidence shifted my position.

Let me clarify this difference a bit. My bias on 9/11 was that this was definitely an inside job. That was my first, immediate reaction when I saw the attacks. Since then, having discussed 9/11 ad infinitum, as I'm sure you have, I have determined that my own judgment had been clouded by deep contempt for US foreign policy and the Bush Administration, which enabled me to believe in things that are very likely untrue.

I am getting tired of the "incompetance" argument. How could Bush lower taxes, he's too stoopid, how could Bush fight a war in Iraq, he's too stoopid, how could Bush fly a plane, he is too stoopid. The attack on America that day was a supra-national attack, not purely a domestic one. Bush is a bit player, an actor, a dupe, a patsy.

Are you suggesting that it's no more difficult to script a false-flag attack on your own country in front of millions of witnesses and have everyone keep the secret, than it is to lower taxes? Than it is to completely botch a futile war? Than it is to fly a plane? Try and see, the tenuous connections you hold up as definitive proof undermine your own argument.

I'm not talking about Bush personally, who in all likelihood did not know in advance about the 9/11 attacks, regardless of the involvement in our government. I'm talking about his administration, which has fucked up every single thing they've taken a hand to over the past 7+ years. If those people scripted 9/11, it would stand as their only success (and a pretty awesome one at that) amidst a track record of pure failure. The fact that you can't seriously consider this question is indicative of your bias.

Do you think that I believe that Bush did it? Personally?

No. And I never suggested you did. Put down the straw.

All they needed was a "new Pearl harbor" and they got that. LIHOP or MIHOP, for me that is about the sole remaining question.

Absolutely agreed. I'm pretty much in the LIHOP camp, simply because I don't believe those imbeciles could make anything happen according to plan. However, if a proper investigation were to show that all the irregularities were caused by good old fashioned fuckupery, combined with an attempt to cover up said fuckups, I wouldn't be all that surprised.

I mean, let's look at Bush's "success stories," as you listed them.

Subvert the Constitution? They've had a great run, but they've been thwarted by the Constitution on many occasions, and it looks like it's happening again with telecom immunity. If they'd really done a proper job, this would not be happening.

Wage war in the Middle East? Sure, they got to invade Afghanistan and Iraq, but the plan was to use those "successes" to regime-change the entire Middle East. Not only did that not pan out, but now the limitations of the US military are visible for all to see. And by breaking the military, they've probably removed the military option for future administrations just as occurred after Vietnam.

I totally agree that a real investigation is required. The thing is, in calling for that investigation, the "truthers" need to appear reasonable, not loony. There are very reasonable reasons why a new investigation should occur, but it's not because of high-fiving Israelis, missiles shooting from 757s, jumbo jets on remote control, or any other pure conjecture. I've had innumerable discussions with "truthers" who believe in these things the way Catholics believe in the virgin birth. These people will not get far in convincing reasonable people over to their way of viewing things.

To get a new investigation, we need the request to highlight the obvious deficiencies of the official report, to fully disclose that the real truth is currently unknown due to decisions in government, and to assert that knowing the real truth is vital to national security.

Once again, I don't know what these guys were doing that day, but Jeebus, they were up to something.

Ironically, my brother (a hardcore Republican) uses this exact excuse in defense of invading Iraq.