He is best at he part about the waste of energy and focus -- much more than an usable excuse for Iraq, 9/11 have proven to be the perfect surrogate for a much worse conspiracy that did in fact include thousands of people that were actually in the know; the 2004 election. Alex Jones "work" have penetration in mainstream press in placed like Scandinavia, while the Conyers report still doesn't exist even in the intellectual papers here.

There are little logic to his strawman 9/11 conspiracy counter argument -- there is no basis to the idea that a conspiracy to take down the towers would have to include tens of thousands of people, something that is underlined by the fact that his theory is that what was needed was zero people from government assisting the hijackers.

It generally isn't such a problem with leaks from the intelligence ("") community -- can you think of a lot of them? Compared with the amount of shady business going on, on a wide scale. Could it be that there are whistleblowers that end uå with not such a great amount of success? And what about consequences for conspiracies that are more or less uncovered down the road? Was a lot of people really burned by the Contras scandal? Where are those people now?

And what would happen to a person saying today that yes, I was part of it and this is what happened in the little part of it that I saw? how would you identify him as genuine? Would he get lumped together with "pod"?

Likewise, he doesn't go into the need for all demolition of buildings to be so controlled that it takes weeks to set up -- while it is common knowledge that a hick almost managed with a single bomb in the cellar. Clearly no one is arguing that the towers went completely clear of adjacent buildings, the type of demand to noraml controlled demolition projects that makes them rocket science. It makes my brain hurt to hear people present this particular sieve of a fact as the genius occams razor -- their own theory being that zero explosives where needed.

While it is debatable, it is not self evident that the planes alone would take down the buildings. NISTs modelling of the fires as an example goes to illustrate this pretty well; many of the scenarios (temperature values etc) put into their model didn't give the correct result of the towers falling down. For wtc 7 it is even more complicated, then there is no need for the twin towers to have been rigged or for someone to take the independent decision to add to both the insurance claim and the newly gained piece of real estate in one blow, wtc7 made zero difference before its conspiracist fame. The whole connection with a larger conspiracy hinges again on the idea, now from the other side of the fence, that it is impossible to bring down buildings in relatively but far from orderly fashion without long planning and weeks of rigging, both sides of the debate in reality arguing against this ludacris concept.

On the other hand, the more likely they did it and the more likely someone could actually prove it, the weaker a hammer the whole story is. It would obviously trigger more or less of a revolution, said concept having the effect of threatening any position anyone have in societey. This mean that in order to hit the people responsible for 9/11 with their 9/11 crimes, you would also be hitting the sane people in government, the people of the country relaying on its stability and so on.

You proved it, what then? The whole process to 9/11 truth victory goes through the natural resistance of the largest bureacracy in the world, either pushing the whole mountain manual labour or blowing it up, both avenues likely accomplishing mostly collateral damage and serving the agendas of both the perpetrators and the real enemies of the US, pushing the western world at large towards tyranny.

Hurting these people and their interests effectively boils down to a single issue no matter how you flip it -- the US election system. This is their line of supply, this is where they make their ballsiest and riskiest scams, and this is where there are effective countermeasures to dirty tactics, where the silent crowds matter.

2004 elections is were they still are at their most vulnerable -- thats where they have the leaks from the thousands of people, and thats where they can't stand a continual pressure and investigations from the international press. Instead we got the mormon cold fusion professor with thermite. It up to grown up people to correct the situation.