JM: The "truth is out there" I suppose. Nothing I have read of any of the 9/11 conspiracy narratives shows any regard for the very notion of evidence. It is not that they don't present evidence, it is that they don't seem to have a notion of what evidence is.
To say that the so called "9/11 truth movement" is "trying to find out what actually happened" is to ignore what these people actually write and how they ignore the very basic notions of what is possible to know. For instance, in all of their writings on the collapse of the WTC towers, there is no conception, no mention, that in practically all cases where buildings fall down we don't know exactly why they fall down, but can only speculate about the various reasons and causes. The writings on these issues are so ridiculous because they take one case and make it the singular example of one, without even conceiving that in all cases of building failure one can come up with similarly outlandish stories. It would be almost laughable, if this kind of thinking wasn't found over and over again in our society, not only in politics but also about such issues as climate change, evolutionary biology, race, etc., etc.
Joe, you should wake up to this kind of thinking.
>
>
> To be sure, in that process some have arrived at conclusions or developed hypotheses that many on the esablishment left find improbable. But it is simply wrong to say that 'neither side can see a reason to make an effort to find out what actually happened' - what has in fact happened is that those who do try to find out what happened are labelled 'conspiracists' by those who accept unquestiongly the official version despite the proven mendacity of this administration.
>
> Joe W.
JM: What is it that you actually think you know. I have asked you this before, but you prefer not to answer. You can answer me off list if you wish.
Jerry Monaco