You might learn something.

Of information that points in that direction I'm sure. However, I prefer the phrase, "elements of our Government were complicit" as opposed to "9/11 was an inside job."

com·plic·it  adj.
Associated with or participating in a questionable act or a crime; having complicity: newspapers complicit with the propaganda arm of a dictatorship.

#1 You're the one that's confused.
#2 It has been 5 years, and SO MUCH information has been revealed/obtained that indicates elements of our Goverment were complicit in the attacks.

In regards to your lack of ability to process that information, I refer you to #1.

I've collected a few things I think will shed A LOT of light on the subject for a lot of people, and are a "debunkers" worst nightmare...

S. King said...
Notice from Jon Gold:

"Saturday evening, 12/23/2006 at 7pm EST, I will be on Kevin Barrett's RBN Live show called, "The Truth Jihad."

http://911blogger.com/node/5216

That should be entertaining.

(jesus man, they are obsessed with you over at that pisshole. funny to see ShillKing is still watching us.)

Hahahahahaha, those jokers can keep on dancing for us it's great entertainment.

shut the hell up, you mossad/cia/isi/mi6 pieces of shi*! get a meaningful direction in life while you're at it, you f%^&in programmed lemming robot losers! karma is gonna get you very soon.

That list\of\sites to end all questions about 9/11... really has me running. I've got scare\shit all over my legs.

"The truth shall make you free." Why not make the truth free? We live on a priceless blue pearl, awash in a universe of fire and ice. Cut the crap.

checked all those links and finally the "bat cave" — http://perrylogan.org/ — Response, simply put: "Angle is next."

Nothing at any of those sites addresses the heart of the coup: Air Force One on the runway and airborne for over an hour with zero fighter cover (i.e. not one single fighter positioned in the air to protect it) while the nation was "under attack." And nothing at all discussing the "Angel is next" threat or the hot-line linkup with Putin.

Your co-operatives may spin the stuff on the fringes, pull quotes from any dubious source (FBI, 911 Commission, MSM, et al) and generate copious smoke for the benefit of their plethora of mirrors, but they can produce nothing to contradict the documented activities at the heart of the coup. It can't be covered up. 911 was a coup d'etat by a rogue network in service to a warmongering faction of the global olicarcy...probably your own handlers; that is unless your version of agitprop is designed to elicit even stronger arguments in support of 911Truth — in this climate, could be anything...maybe just your idea of "a good time," as in, "For a good time, email perryloganclone@yahoo.com!"

As for the bat cave: Threaten you?\!\?\!\who\d bother? You, if that's really you Perry-san, or whoever you really are, already have to live with yourself — what could be worse? And don't say, "living with you" — debunked by default: my wife loves it...and yours? Oh yeah, that would be genuinely incredible\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\for a good time, one more stroke and that Brittany Spears cheesecake gets you through the night.

Anonymous said:

"Your beliefs, suggested anomalies, assertions, claims, and misrepresentation of factual evidence, and lies about evidence do not qualify in any way as objective standards."

You must be talking about the government's story.

Objectivity goes both ways. It is not objective to assume a priori that our government would never kill its own citizens, and to assume that the government's story is a truth that has to be rebutted.

Of course, if the government's story made any sense, I would be less suspicious. That it does not make sense, and that there has been no investigation at all, raises my suspicions greatly.

Anonymous said:
"Given Barrett\'s track record and your confusion, I am confident that neither of you will yet produce any evidence for your claims. After all, it has been 5 years and nothing remotely suggesting complicity has ever been presented."

Hey you-that-can't-come-up-with-a-name....

It's been five years and nothing remotely near a "full and complete accounting" of the official theories has been forthcoming.

You would think that the event that has been at the core of virtually everything that the current residents of the white house have done would be fully explained by now....

Oh.... I know they are TRIED to provide evidence but when we find out about all the ommissions of the 911 commission and find out that the the commissioners KNEW the pentagon was lying to them about the events of 911, it tends to give me pause....

Do YOU really believe the official story?

If you have evidence that proves the official conspiracy theories, then lets see it!

-----------------------------------------

All aspects of the truth are consistent

We've even got a period of time named after it...

"The Post-9/11 World."

And we're not supposed to question that world changing event, and those that lied to us about it?

GIVE ME A _______ BREAK!

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ no hiding \\\\\\\\\\ Angel is next \\\\\\\\\\\ keep stroking \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

Since this is all baseless garbage, why are you wasting your time and energy posting here? We are all just a bunch of nutty conspiracy theorists...right? Possibly you are threatened by what is being discussed here. It seems to concern you.

P.S. Say hi to the guys at the "office".......traitor.

......or you are being paid to post here. You don't even attempt to debate the issues, you only hurl chilldish insults. That is all you can do?

So perhaps YOU can answer my question anonymous-person- I -do-not-know:

Where in the NIST report does it explain the mechanism for simultaneous, systematic, total structural failure that resulted in the near free fall collapse of WTC1, 2 & 3? Please include the exact page numbers in your response and a link.

I eagerly await my awakening to the "real world of truth".