Oh, yeah, taunt all of us outside of the NYC area with this post why don't you. If there's one thing that might make me be willing to reenter the Five Boroughs of Hell it'd be watching a Troofer Smackdown.

Knock 'em dead, good luck.

You gave money to that guy?

I wouldn't worry, Marco. Winter is coming. That book is good kindling.

Hope this ends up on YouTube.

Youtube? Hell, I hope it ends on on Fox News!

Make sure you brush up on Daniel Pipes, Conspiracy:How the Paranoid Style Flourishes and Where It Comes From, and also The Hidden Hand. Excellent analysis of conspiracy theories and why they occur.

PLEASE ask your opponent this: why, instead of searching for a smoking gun hidden in the bowels of the US government that he hopes will be revealed to a coffee shop owner (himself), why does he not examine another 'official' story--that Islamic-supremacists, who vow each and every day to kill us all, might just be telling the truth about the religious reasons behind their terrorism? Is that subject too hard to tackle? Would it involve a greater knowledge of history, foreign languages, and political movements? What gives? Hicks makes virtually no mention of Islamo-facism, seems to have a very poor grasp on Islamic movements like the Muslim Brotherhood and al-qaeda, its just astounding. He has delusions of grandeur that he will ferret out 'the truth.' He must have computer access, has he not seen television in the Arab world, or read their newspapers, or listened to their leaders? Or is all the hatred of the west just part of the conspiracy?

So I started reading the book and the Forward is just awesome. Apparently, the conspiracy theorists that don't believe in this particular conspiracy theory are likely part of the conspiracy.

You'll find it hard to figure out just what it is that Sander believes in from the book. One consistent problem with Hicks is that he falls for con-men, from Hatfill to Vreeland to the ridiculous Leo Wanta.

9/11 has to many coincidences to all be coincidences. Review the evidence, it was an inside job:

250+ 9/11 'Smoking Guns' Found in the Mainstream Media

Why do we know more about sports than we know about the hundreds of dead and the tens of thousands of dying 9/11 First Responders?

Why do we know more about celebrity than we know about the 70% of victims family members questions that were never answered during the 9/11 ‘ommission’ hearings?

Why do we know more about wall street profit than we know about the Physics of 9/11?

Why do we know more about the simpsons than we know about our own Constitution? And why are we ok with that? Why are we not enraged yet?

Being there is a tremendous lack of critical thinking on this weak and subjective blog, I'm sure there is not one person that will ever be able to answer this question:

What Happened to Building 7, the Salomon Brothers Building, on 09/11/01?

In its recent reply to family members Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, scientists Steven Jones and Kevin Ryan, architect Richard Gage and the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, the National Institute for Standards and Technology states:

"We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."

It is not surprising that NIST cannot explain a scenario that blatantly violates the basic laws of physics.

Either people are going to accept what first hand eyewitnesses said, or they will atempt to deny thier experience.

Either people are going to remember basic sixth grade physics, or they will deny what they already learned.

Either peple will understand the history of false flag terrorism, or they will defend a criminal administration that has lied to us about most everything ever since they came to power.

The Truth about 9/11 is not a left/right, democrat/republican, liberal/conservative issue. The Truth about 9/11 is not even about opinion or belief. The Truth of 9/11 is simply an acknowledgement and an understanding of the facts of the day.

Once we read and listen to first-hand eyewitness accounts and independent expert testimony, once we learn about the physics and historical precedent of that day, we will all come to conclusions very different from what we have been told. Please research on your own to arrive where all the observable and verifiable evidence leads.

www.pilotsfor911truth.org

www.ae911truth.org

www.stj911.org

www.patriotsquestion911.com

www.physics911.net

www.911proof.com

www.thetruthseeker.co.uk

www.911citizenswatch.org

www.911research.com

www.911inquiry.org

www.globaloutlook.ca

www.reopen911.org

www.thepentacon.com

www.hugequestions.com

www.infowars.com

www.theultimateconspiracy.com

www.stoplying.ca

www.letsroll911.org

www.911review.com

www.americanfreepress.net

www.serendipity.li

www.whatreallyhappened.com

www.wtc7.net

For the sake of those who died on 9/11, their families, the American people, and for the sake of peace in the world, please continue to seek the truth about 9/11. Demand a thorough and impartial reinvestigation of 9/11.

Why do we know more about sports than we know about the hundreds of dead and the tens of thousands of dying 9/11 First Responders?

Probably because most fans spend their lives following their favorite sports. Now, if knowing their names was really important to you then why didn't you post their names instead of the list of whack-job web sites?

Why do we know more about celebrity than we know about the 70% of victims family members questions that were never answered during the 9/11 ‘ommission’ hearings?

See previous answer except exchange the word "sports" with the word "celebrities". Now, if knowing their unanswered questions was really important to you then why didn't you post their unanswered questions instead of the list of whack-job web sites?

Why do we know more about wall street profit than we know about the Physics of 9/11?

Who's we? I know a good bit about both. When I watched the Towers fall, I knew exactly why they fell and the investigations came to the same conclusion.

Why do we know more about the simpsons than we know about our own Constitution? And why are we ok with that? Why are we not enraged yet?

Again, who is this we? I gave up on The Simpsons years ago. Had you said Family Guy instead you might have cornered me, but probably not. I know a good bit about both actually.

Being there is a tremendous lack of critical thinking on this weak and subjective blog, I'm sure there is not one person that will ever be able to answer this question:
What Happened to Building 7, the Salomon Brothers Building, on 09/11/01?

Easy. It was a command post and had huge generators in the building to keep power up during disasters. These generators were fueled by huge diesel tanks that were also in the building. When the planes hit the Towers burning debris was thrown around the site. Some of it hit building 7 and it caught fire. I remember seeing it burning on television long before it collapsed. Once the fires reached the diesel tanks the destruction led to the weakening of the building's support structure which lead to its collapse.

Dispense with the usual Lolita debate chumminess and take him down!

www.forgotten-ny.com

Good luck Karol. You're going to need it. ;)

I'm sorry, Mr. Troofer (A1A Architect), but I'm afraid that you've tripped my "this guy is an idiot" circuit in three ways:

1.) What control system would you, as an evil government, trust to maneuver aircraft through crowded Manhattan airspace into the side of the building? Answer carefully, as I'm pretty sure that if you choose the wrong one, you and _everyone_ involved is getting the chair.

2.) What method of mind control are you using to keep, oh, roughly the 200+ people you would've needed to pull this off quiet? Or did you use cyborgs from the future?

3.) Where did you get your degree in physics from? Oh, wait, I'm sorry--do you _have_ a degree in physics? Because I'm seeing you make a lot of "physics" comments when just about every...single...one of them has been disproven. Repeatedly. Irrefutably.

4.) Have you handled explosives? Been around building demolition or people who do it for a living? If so, when did you receive your traumatic brain injury? If not (as I suspect), why do you persist in presenting an argument that multiple people who do these things for a living have not only laughed at, but say would be almost impossible to conduct?

5.) Finally, as someone who claims to have read the Constitution, what do you believe your obligations as a citizen are? Because having read it a few times myself, _I_ am of the opinion that if you truly believed our government murdered over 3,000 people that you shouldn't be handing out pamphlets, you should be handing out guns.

Now, given that I think you're someone who gets off on being "anti-establishment" or "too cool for school," I realize that course of action #5 may be a bit, shall we say, _difficult_ for you. At which point, my friend, we reach the real crux of the problem--that it's hard to take seriously your claim that an all-knowing, all-seeing government was able to pull off mass murder when they can't even permanently shut up a few hundred loudmouthed, weak-kneed wannabe patriots. Then again, idiots are like weeds...and maybe the government's just out of Round Up.

I'm sorry, Mr. Troofer (A1A Architect), but I'm afraid that you've tripped my "this guy is an idiot" circuit in several ways:

1.) What control system would you, as an evil government, trust to maneuver aircraft through crowded Manhattan airspace into the side of the building? Answer carefully, as I'm pretty sure that if you choose the wrong one, you and _everyone_ involved is getting the chair.

2.) What method of mind control are you using to keep, oh, roughly the 200+ people you would've needed to pull this off quiet? Or did you use cyborgs from the future?

3.) Where did you get your degree in physics from? Oh, wait, I'm sorry--do you _have_ a degree in physics? Because I'm seeing you make a lot of "physics" comments when just about every...single...one of them has been disproven. Repeatedly. Irrefutably.

4.) Have you handled explosives? Been around building demolition or people who do it for a living? If so, when did you receive your traumatic brain injury? If not (as I suspect), why do you persist in presenting an argument that multiple people who do these things for a living have not only laughed at, but say would be almost impossible to conduct?

5.) Finally, as someone who claims to have read the Constitution, what do you believe your obligations as a citizen are? Because having read it a few times myself, _I_ am of the opinion that if you truly believed our government murdered over 3,000 people that you shouldn't be handing out pamphlets, you should be handing out guns.

Now, given that I think you're someone who gets off on being "anti-establishment" or "too cool for school," I realize that course of action #5 may be a bit, shall we say, _difficult_ for you. At which point, my friend, we reach the real crux of the problem--that it's hard to take seriously your claim that an all-knowing, all-seeing government was able to pull off mass murder when they can't even permanently shut up a few hundred loudmouthed, weak-kneed wannabe patriots. Then again, idiots are like weeds...and maybe the government's just out of Round Up.

Hoo boy! It looks like a sidewalk after a good rainstorm.

The terrible acts of 9/11 and the events leading up to them deserve a thorough, independent, unimpeachable, and complete investigation.

Read what Survivors, Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials, Family Members, Professors, other Engineers and Architects, Pilots and Aviation Professionals have to say about 9/11 here:

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/

Just one month ago, seven CIA veterans denounced the official account of 9/11 as: "a joke", "a coverup", "a monstrous series of lies", "a pretext for war", "not a serious piece of analysis", riddled with "serious shortcomings," "omissions," and "major flaws."

Critical Thinking is obviously lacking in this little sphere of callousness masquerading as a blog.

Th Laws of Physics do not lie. What doesn't one understand when the agency tasked with explaining the demolition of the towers says:

"We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."

Here are more facts the 9/11 omission report never touched upon:

1) The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center Building 7

It is commonly known that the Twin Towers fell on 9/11, but did you know that a third World Trade Center high-rise building also fell that day?

WTC Building 7, a 47-story steel-framed skyscraper located one block from the Twin Towers was not hit by any plane, but collapsed at 5:20 that evening, imploding in the exact manner of a professionally engineered demolition.

It fell suddenly, straight down, at near freefall speed, and landed in a compact pile of rubble, barely damaging any of the surrounding buildings.

These are but a few of eleven characteristics of Building 7's collapse that are consistent only with controlled demolitions.

Further, the leaseholder of the three buildings, Larry Silverstein, said in 2002 on PBS that on the afternoon of 9/11 he suggested to the NYC fire department commander that they "pull" WTC 7.

"Pull" is an industry term that means "demolish," but it normally takes a team of skilled people many weeks to design and implement large demolitions.

Astonishingly, there is no mention of WTC Building 7's remarkable collapse in the 571-page 9/11 Commission Report.

2) Fire has never — prior to or after 9/11 — caused any steel frame building to collapse. The sudden, vertical, explosive, and total collapse of the Twin Towers at near freefall speed can only be explained by controlled demolition.

3) The WTC steel, which if fully examined could have relvealed the effects of explosives, was quickly shipped overseas and melted down. This was an unprecedented violation of federal crime scene laws.

4) Whenever contact is lost with any airplane, fighter jets routinely take to the air to investigate. This commonly occurs about 100 times per year in well under 20 minutes. But on 9/11 nearly two hours passed without any interception.

5) The Secret Service broke established protocols by allowing President Bush to remain in a well-publicized classroom "photo op" long after it was known that the U.S. was under attack and he might well have been a target.

6) Unidentified insiders made millions on the stocks of American and United Airlines and those of other corporations that were likewise impacted by the attacks. These "put option" bets were made just prior to 9/11.

7) There were warnings of the impending attacks from at least eleven other countries. Also prior to 9/11, insiders such as John Ashcroft, top military officers, and San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown were warned not to fly.

8) In September of 2000, a group of neocon hawks, many of whom would become key officials in the Bush administration, wrote that their proposed massive military buildup would proceed slowly "absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor."

9) Some of the alleged 9/11 "suicide hijackers" are still alive and well, according to the BBC and The Guardian. At least five of the alleged hijackers may have trained at U.S. military bases, as reported in Newsweek and other sources.

10) The Bush administration resisted the formation of the 9/11 Commission for 441 days. Similar investigations, such as those for Pearl Harbor, the JFK assassination, and the space shuttle disasters, all started in about one week.

11) "The Jersey Girls" — four courageous 9/11 widows — finally forced the 9/11 Commission into existence and presented many questions, most of which were ignored. Under the leadership of Bush administration insider Philip Zelikow, the final report failed to address any of the evidence pointing to official complicity.

The three stages of truth was originally penned by the German philosopher, Arthur Schopenhauer (1788-1860), who said:

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident."

So, if it gets held up at the first stage, I guess it's not a truth then.

Another book to read thats awesome in its own right, but also sheds lots of light on why certain people NEED a 'truth' cause is Eric Hoffer's "The True Believer". One of the best books of the 20th century IMO.

FWIW, I couldnt do this debate myself. I'd go straight to "I'm sorry but you are @#$#(*@ idiot and need to get a life"

I think the debate needs to be done because these idiots are dangerous. Remember, it wasn't the Bolsheviks that got the Russian Revolution started--and they started really, really early.

Ideas have a momentum of their own and when you start letting people speak this poison unchallenged in the public square, it starts to lead to bad things. See the growing number of people who are starting to agree at least in part with this line of trash and you'll understand why someone has to go into the idiots' den.

It's not the fools people should be worried about--it's the potential fellow travelers that empower the fools.

That's it, keep ridiculing the likes of Navy ‘Top Gun’ Commander Ralph Kolstad, Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford, Lt. Col. Guy S. Razer, Capt. Omar Pradhan, Col. Michael Harley, Col. George Nelson, Commander Ted Muga, and many other heroes who defend our freedoms.

Go ahead you callous bunch, keep ridiculing fellow Americans who patriotically question the events. Ridicule those who happened to have read about, understand, acknowledge, and accept the basic observable and verifiable facts of 9/11.

Here are some answers to frequently asked questions about 9/11: http://911proof.com/FactSheet.html

And here is the latest Zogby Poll on 9/11 released September 06, 2007:

Zogby Poll: 51% of Americans Want Congress to Probe Bush/Cheney Regarding 9/11 Attacks; Over 30% Seek Immediate Impeachment

67% also fault 9/11 Commission for not investigating anomalous collapse of World Trade Center 7

Kansas City, MO (Zogby International) September 6, 2007 - As America nears the sixth anniversary of the world-churning events of September 11, 2001, a new Zogby International poll finds a majority of Americans still await a Congressional investigation of President Bush' and Vice President Cheney's actions before, during and after the 9/11 attacks. Over 30% also believe Bush and/or Cheney should be immediately impeached by the House of Representatives.

The 911truth.org–sponsored poll also found that over two-thirds of Americans say the 9/11 Commission should have investigated the still unexplained collapse of the 47-story World Trade Center Building 7 at 5:20 p.m. on September 11, 2001.

WTC 7 housed the mayor's emergency bunker and offices of the SEC, IRS, CIA and Secret Service and was not hit by any planes but still completely collapsed into its own footprint nearly eight hours after the Twin Tower attacks. FEMA did not explain this collapse, the 911 Commission ignored it, and the promised official study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is now 2 years overdue.

Janice Matthews, executive director of poll sponsor 911truth.org, observes: "The supermajority response to the WTC Building 7 question signals an increasing public concern about this remarkable event -- up from 38% last year. We can perhaps credit this rising awareness to the millions who have recently witnessed videos or Youtube clips of this skyscraper's descent and the outspoken demands for a new WTC inquiry from over 150 architects and engineering professionals, including NIST's own former Fire Science Division Chief, Dr. James Quintiere. Another contributory factor is the increased questioning among Hispanics, Blacks and Asians whose responses appear significantly more critical of the 9/11 Commission than Whites, sometimes twice as critical."

Strategy aide W. David Kubiak adds, "While only 32% seek immediate Bush and/or Cheney impeachment based on their current personal knowledge, a clear majority of citizens still seems hungry for a full exposure of the facts. The results suggest widespread public support for legislators like Rep. Dennis Kucinich who pledge to investigate unanswered 9/11 questions in the relevant congressional committees this fall. We hope more of our representatives find the spine to respond to this escalating dissatisfaction with the dubious accounting we have received thus far."

9/11 family member and 911truth.org advisor Donna Marsh O'Connor notes, "I’m not sure this poll is at all surprising. Over half of those polled want more answers from Congress, from those they hired to represent them. One quarter of the country knows enough to want to impeach both. Doesn't it just mean people need figures they consider credible to tell them whether key details add up or not? Truth advocates need to press their case in Congress, on college campuses, in church groups with reason and absolute discipline regarding what can and cannot be proven. The strongest evidence needs to reach the people—including people who hate computers. We must present it calmly. Like whispering so that people reach in to hear."

"Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country." – Teddy Roosevelt

Sorry, but when for every official you trot out there are 10 who tell the actual truth. You know, that a bunch of Islamic terrorists, using a combination of skill, luck, and American complacency pulled off a stunning attack.

Call me callous, but I say again: If you _truly_ believe what you're saying, then your choices are clear. That you continue to bleat this line of BS yet refuse to accept when people present, you know, _FACTS_ to refute your line of argument says all about your character that I need to hear. All your polls indicate is that, yes, people need to start shouting you down as often as possible in the public square.

When you answer these simple questions irrefutably I'll start to think you're even worth wasting time on.

1.) What control system was used for these allegedly "dummy" aircrart on 9/11? (Please, oh please, don't start the BS about "it was a cruise missile"--you _will_ be embarrassed.)

2.) If you believe this is some vast conspiracy, how has the government kept it quiet if it involves more than three people (i.e., how do you beat the Benjamin Franklin rule)?

3.) How do the "conspirators" ensure that more of the hijackers aren't stopped without falling afoul of #2?

4.) Finally, how do you explain the obvious shortfall in "risk versus reward" inherent in this scenario?

5.) Would you believe this line of tripe if the sitting President was, say, FDR?

So far I haven't heard a Troofer answer those four questions in a simple, intelligent, and coherent manner. Oh, I've heard lots of foot stomping and whining reminiscent of a toddler's best efforts, but nothing that indicates clear, rational assessment or a willingness to listen.

Free speech has consequences, and I think the poll demonstrates them.

The 911truth.org–sponsored poll also found that over two-thirds of Americans say the 9/11 Commission should have investigated the still unexplained collapse of the 47-story World Trade Center Building 7 at 5:20 p.m. on September 11, 2001.

Tee hee, haw haw, ho ho.

BTW, I like these troofers trying to bury us in a ton of information in the hopes that we'll just give up.

Or how something that's been "explained" several times is still "unexplained." Maybe I need to put this in language the Troofers can understand:

Okay kiddies, when big airplane goes SWOOOOOOSSSSSHHHH, BANG! into really big building, it scatters pieces everywhere. These pieces are hot, like the stove you probably kept touching as a child. They fall for a really, really long time. When they hit the building, they're going really, really fast, like you did when you were on your tricycle and skinned your knee.

Now, if you had demonstrated you understood physics, I'd call this kinetic energy, but that's using big person words--and you have shown you're not ready to leave the kiddie table yet. This energy lets the big pieces punch through the roof, like when you get hit by your big brother but many, many times harder. Now, these pieces, hot like the stove, find things to burn, like the paper in your coloring book.

Remember what you're supposed to do when there's a fire? Yes, you get out of the building until the firemen come. Well, the people in this building were smart, they got out. Unfortunately, all the firemen were up in the tall towers where the bad men had crashed the airplanes. That means the fire got to burn a while. Well, a long time ago someone thought it would be a good idea to have an emergency command post next to the number one target for the bad men. Wait, I lost you at emergency command post, didn't I?

Okay, fine, some people who thought they were being smart decided to put some diesel fuel in the building that caught fire. You know, diesel, makes the big trucks go Vroom, Vroom!? Yes, well, that diesel caught fire and, since the firefighters were busy being heroes in the tall buildings, that only made a bad situation worse. Then the tall buildings came down and made things about as bad as they could be. Eventually, the building just couldn't take anymore and, so, it fell down. Fire does that sometimes, especially when the diesel starts to burn.

So, there, you guys can officially no longer say WT7 is unexplained. That is, unless I need to do an interpretive dance and bring demonstrations because you can't understand simple, 5th grade level English.

Feeble minds make stuff up.

The 9/11 myth believers, while trying to defend the lies our govt. told us, tell a story about building 7 that the govt. hasn't even come up with yet.

The NIST said: "We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."

Now why isn't the reality deniers on this blog sending their explanations of the demolition of building 7 to the NIST?

It is OK to question and think critically. It is OK to listen to what the people WHO WERE THERE experienced.

The name and rank of the following witness to history on 9/11: CAPTAIN KARIN DESHORE OF BATTALION 46

This eyewitness, which the closed-minded keyboardists will most likely try to deny, was there on 9/11:

CAPTAIN KARIN DESHORE OF BATTALION 46 QUOTE:

“SOMEWHERE AROUND THE MIDDLE OF THE WORLD TRADE CENTER, THERE WAS THIS ORANGE AND RED FLASH COMING OUT.

“INITIALLY IT WAS JUST ONE FLASH. THEN THIS FLASH JUST KEPT POPPING ALL THE WAY AROUND THE BUILDING AND THAT BUILDING HAD STARTED TO EXPLODE. THE POPPING SOUND, AND WITH EACH POPPING SOUND IT WAS INITIALLY AN ORANGE AND THEN RED FLASH CAME OUT OF THE BUILDING AND THEN IT WOULD JUST GO ALL AROUND THE BUILDING ON BOTH SIDES AS FAR AS I COULD SEE.

“THESE POPPING SOUNDS AND THE EXPLOSIONS WERE GETTING BIGGER, GOING BOTH UP AND DOWN AND THEN ALL AROUND THE BUILDING. I WENT INSIDE AND TOLD EVERYBODY THAT THE OTHER BUILDING OR THERE WAS AN EXPLOSION OCCURRING UP THERE AND SAID THINK WE HAVE ANOTHER MAJOR EXPLOSION. I DONT KNOW IF WE ARE ALL GOING TO BE SAFE HERE.”

http://rinf.com/alt-news/911-truth/demolition-detonations-confirmed-in-official-statement/1621/

You know, there were eyewitnesses at Pearl Harbor who swore that the Vals were Stukas and that they saw Caucasian pilots at the sticks of the Kates. The phenomenon of stress and shock making people fill in the lines are well documented whether you consider 9/11 a combat situation, aviation accident, or delusional fantasy that the rest of us are apparently living in.

You can put all the all-caps eyewitness accounts up you want, but some of us got to see things live on TV. There's also audio from _inside_ the building that has sounds consistent with collapse but _not_ consistent with demolition. Sorry geniuses, but if most of us saw it live on TV, it's going to be a bit hard to convince us to trust your beliefs rather than our own eyes.

Screaming something at the top of your lungs repeatedly doesn't make it true--it just eventually makes you hoarse. Unfortunately that doesn't seem to work with typing. Pity.

Still notice none of you Troofers can answer my simple questions. Cat got your tongues, you just stuck on stupid, or hoping that if you continue to make our ears bleed with constant bombardments of quote and cherry-picked accounts we'll eventually submit?

As to your NIST report, it's due out at the end of the year, which makes it maybe 6-8 months overdue. Not to mention, if you've ever done an investigation or report in your life, you'd recognize that phrase for what it is. Here, let me put it in a different way for you using a context that's appropriate given the likelihood of _your_ claims: "We cannot fully explain how those presents got there, but we're fairly certain that Mom and Dad put them together after the kids went to bed without the help of some overweight guy in a red suit."

Feeble minds make stuff up.

So what you're telling me is that George Lucas, Edgar Allan Poe, Michelangelo, F. Scott Fitzgerald, David Lynch, Mozart, Jon Schaffer and Vincent Gallo, just to name a few, are all feeble-minded?

'The hijackers were patsies and Osama bin Laden was set up'

Bobby McIlvaine, 26, worked for Merrill Lynch and was on the 103rd floor of the south tower when the plane struck. His father, Bob, lives in Oreland, near Philadelphia

Three months ago, Bob McIlvaine was pulled over in his home town of Oreland, near Philadelphia, for driving through a red light. Instead of apologising to the police officer, he went nuts. "I totally blew up, I threw al my papers in his face and called him Mickey Mouse and an asshole."

Bob, a former school teacher, recognises he has anger problems and also knows where they come from. On 9/11, he lost his son, 26- year-old Bobby, who had just begun working for the media department of Merrill Lynch and who was heading to a seminar on the 103rd floor of the south tower when the planes struck. And he is certain that criminals within the US government were responsible, not Osama bin Laden.

For the first few years, after the terror attack, Bob, 61, dedicated himself to anti-war groups that sprung up in its wake. He joined protesters pushing a massive stone dedicated to world peace down the highways of New England to New York and, last year, from Nagasaki to Hiroshima.

Today, he has withdrawn from those groups, however, to concentrate on a project he expects to take up the rest of his life: documenting and writing about the conspiracy that he believes was really responsible for the felling of the twin towers.

"I spend al my time researching 9/11," he admits. "Today, there are no ifs or buts in my mind that this was an inside job. The US government orchestrated it with the help of MI6 and Pakistan and Mossad. What they are telling us is bullshit. The hijackers were patsies and Osama bin Laden was set up."

He has no choice to continue with his quest for what he believes is the truth, he explains. " I feel empowered, now that I have some better understanding of what happened. My son was murdered and there is no plausibility to what they say."

But for al his focus on research, Bob is still far away from coming to terms with what happened. Losing his temper quickly is one symptom. "I will never be at peace. The pain never, never goes away, but the suffering isn't as bad."

But at least there is some perspective these days around the grief. "My wife, Helen, and I do more things nowadays and there are other problems to attend to. And we talk and laugh about Bobby now. That is something."

The family also organised a get-together for his grandmother, the first time that al her grandchildren had ever been together in one place.

Rob, an active Christian, plans to go to Coventry Cathedral on the anniversary. However, he has not been able to follow al the church's teachings. "The biggest thing for me is that God says you have to pray for your enemies and forgive them. That's not something that I can do. I've tried to understand what these people did and why, but I haven't been able to totally forgive them. But part of me wants to get there.

"I don't want to live with bitterness. It's that kind of thing that causes tragedies like 9/11."

Bobby McIlvaine, 26, worked for Merrill Lynch and was on the 103rd floor of the south tower when the plane struck. His father, Bob, lives in Oreland, near Philadelphia

Three months ago, Bob McIlvaine was pulled over in his home town of Oreland, near Philadelphia, for driving through a red light. Instead of apologising to the police officer, he went nuts. "I totally blew up, I threw al my papers in his face and called him Mickey Mouse and an asshole."

Bob, a former school teacher, recognises he has anger problems and also knows where they come from. On 9/11, he lost his son, 26- year-old Bobby, who had just begun working for the media department of Merrill Lynch and who was heading to a seminar on the 103rd floor of the south tower when the planes struck. And he is certain that criminals within the US government were responsible, not Osama bin Laden.

For the first few years, after the terror attack, Bob, 61, dedicated himself to anti-war groups that sprung up in its wake. He joined protesters pushing a massive stone dedicated to world peace down the highways of New England to New York and, last year, from Nagasaki to Hiroshima.

Today, he has withdrawn from those groups, however, to concentrate on a project he expects to take up the rest of his life: documenting and writing about the conspiracy that he believes was really responsible for the felling of the twin towers.

"I spend al my time researching 9/11," he admits. "Today, there are no ifs or buts in my mind that this was an inside job. The US government orchestrated it with the help of MI6 and Pakistan and Mossad. What they are telling us is bullshit. The hijackers were patsies and Osama bin Laden was set up."

He has no choice to continue with his quest for what he believes is the truth, he explains. " I feel empowered, now that I have some better understanding of what happened. My son was murdered and there is no plausibility to what they say."

But for al his focus on research, Bob is still far away from coming to terms with what happened. Losing his temper quickly is one symptom. "I will never be at peace. The pain never, never goes away, but the suffering isn't as bad."

But at least there is some perspective these days around the grief. "My wife, Helen, and I do more things nowadays and there are other problems to attend to. And we talk and laugh about Bobby now. That is something."

Copyright 2006 Independent Newspapers UK Limited
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved.

They're called hyperlinks. You use hyperlinks to, you guessed it, link to a particular article. This way, you don't embarrass yourself by posting the article twice in the same comment.