> however, you can't in any
> fairness accuse anyone of being a psyops agent without some evidence that is
> more significant than a few posts that you personally disagree with.
He was making highly illogical and contradictory points like saying that
everyone knew there was prior knowledge of 911 but that there was no coverup,
and then claiming that most everyone knew that.
Uh, Steve, do you read what you write? Do you read what anyone else writes? How is any point I've made on this subject "illogical"? Either the information was and is readily available for anyone who looks for it (no cover-up), or there is no available information (the *potential* for a cover-up). Those are the only two alternatives.
If there's any conspiracy here, such is implied only by the "ruling elites' " reliance on the endless capacity of us peons not to pay attention.
I guess maybe he is just
having a bad brain day,
I guess you are one of the many peons not paying attention :-)
but I am suspicious because I have seen this type of
reasoning being used again and again to distract and diffuse serious inquiry.
What inquiry? Where's the evidence that George Bush or his administration specifically had prior knowledge of the 9-11 attacks? If you, Laura or that wombat Cynthia McKinney have such evidence, let's see it.
Excuse me if I am too suspicious, but I have good reason to be suspicious,
don't we all?!!
It's those mind control rays bouncing around inside your head, isn't it Steve? Maybe it's those chemtrails:-)
Edward ><+>
"I'm not paranoid. I just wear this foil hat to keep the
government mind control rays from penetrating my skull."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
