We must have close to a hundred threads dealing with all the various aspects of 911, so, a question, has all this debate changed anyone's mind on even the smallest point?

I'm not trying to get at anyone, just curious.

I don't play cards, but 'see you, and raise you one'! I'll almost bet that a person's belief / view of 911 is related directly to how they see the ligitimacy of the society they are embedded in. Those who know that the system [however you define it] generally to nearly always lies, and uses this deceit for purposes of control will be on the skeptical side of the official version. Those who believe the powers-that-be are mere mortals as themsleves and trying the 'best they can' (not generally involved in lies, covert operations, assassinations, government overthrows, false-flag operations, media control, top-down cryptic control by the Oligarchy over the Demos will see the official explanation as ipso facto 'virginal' and believable.

I must admit, as I've stated before, at first, though a long-time JFK and other false-flag operations researcher NOT inclined to question the official version of 911 UNTIL I started to look at the details and facts. Then it very sadly [could well spell the end of humanity - and almost certainly the end of America!] had to face the horrible truths and consequences of the reality......an inside job - in part or completely, I don't yet know [IHOP/MYHOP]. I only KNOW as well as I know the sun rises in the East and sets in the West, the official version is NOT the full story - not even the basis for the real story. It is, as was Dallas and so many other 'investigations' of the Deep Government of its own operations, a BIG LIE.

Aha!, I forgot to state the 'raise'. I'll be that while people eventually and regularly move from believing the official fiction to questioning it - NO ONE moves in the other direction. The more one honestly looks at the facts [without 'rose-colored glasses'] the worse the official fiction/conspiracy looks!

You mean like Chomsky, Ward Churchill, Amy Goodman, Edward Said, Alexander Cockburn etc etc ?

So I take it the answer is no then?

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

No, Len more like the "good leftists" at Encounter Magazine, which was an entirely CIA funded left-gatekeeping operation. Government controlled "dissent" is history not speculation. Any proof that Chomsky, et al are of this ilk today? None, whatsoever. There is no "checks and balance " system in place that would ever offer the public this type of information. Does that mean that we should leave the historical fact of CIA left gatekeeping entirely out of consideration? To do so would be as irrational as to jacuse the Chomper.

Just what are our choices, at a time when there is no limit whatsover on centralized government power? Why do you NEVER think about this vital ingredient of the "conspiracy theory" recipe? By this I mean the total absence of checks and balances both on centralized government power and the centralized control over political information and forums available for its dissemination and discussion.(note that the myriad ways of marginalization of dissident opinion so that they can never have access to anything broad enough to be considered the public sphere, is here considered one means of centralized political control)