negligence

One more lie: "liberal media'

Zero-tolerance on altering articles is a good policy; however, that just stopped me from taking the @ out of the author's email to reduce his spam, which i think i've done before; exception warranted?

U.S. intelligence learned in 1998 of a plot to attack the World Trade Center with hijacked airliners and in 1999 of a plot to attack the Pentagon in the same manner. On Aug. 6, five weeks before 9/11, Bush was warned of an imminent attack on the United States. But Bush didn’t bother to put the nation’s defenses on alert, not even when he was told an airliner had hit the World Trade Center.

Nor did he order national defense to action when he was told the nation was under attack. Instead, he lied that there had been no warning and no one imagined airliners being used as bombs, lies he repeated until 2004.

No reporter asked why the mightiest nation the world has known was unable to defend itself from 19 hijackers for an hour and a half.

Oh, the shades and degrees between the OCT and "inside job"

A Proposal for Proving Controlled Demolition in a Civil Negligence Suit Against the Security Groups Responsible for the WTC

A 9-11 truth buddy of mine here in LA came up with the following proposal about a strategic legal pathway to pursue justice for 9-11. I think it is a great idea, in that it limits the severity of the charges being made (negligence), while advancing the most damning evidence of purposeful mass murder and treason, the controlled demolitions. The case should be against those security groups responsible for the WTC (i.e. Port Authority, Kroll, Stratasec). And it should be a civil case put forth by family members of victims with testimony from eyewitnesses and experts. At the same time that I think we must pursue the larger picture of justice (i.e. treason charges for the overall attack and the subsequent cover-up) through cornering the Congress and Media with the overwhelming evidence in David Ray Griffin's newest book, "9-11 Contradictions," that shows the government's story to be internally contradicted in some places with shifting and inconclusive narratives in many others, this very precise angle of proving controlled demolition in a civil case against the groups responsible for WTC security is a powerful possibility.