I now have time to answer Daniel, thus, see my "--".
> In general, though, what is the point of an independent investigation?
Nobbling an independent investigation is just about the easiest thing an
intelligence agency ever does.
-- Then it wouldn't be independent, would it? I guess you are saying that
an independent investigation will never happen. If so, I just hope that
your proposition does not function as not a cover for encouraging public
avoidance of seeking the truth about 9-11.
Fyi, I recently directly asked Ralph Nader to support an independent
investigation and he said he would.
> The conspiracy community really needs to face facts here - while there
are considerable anomalies in a number of official statements, we simply
don't have any kind of evidence about what "really" happened.
Furthermore, we have no real prospect of getting any.
-- This remains to be seen. If we don't agitate (quoting Frederick
Douglas), you'll be correct.
> The conspiracy buffs do good work and occasionally strike really
important historical information (and IMO they deserve to be taken a *lot*
more seriously and laughed at a *lot* less), but we need to be realistic
here; they aren't going to discover the Rosetta Stone here.
-- Maybe, maybe not.
> Therefore there is a limit to how much one should make any important
political point depend on a particular version of what "really" happened
on 9/11. I disagree with Paul's view that this is the key to Middle East
policy; even if every word in "Loose Change" is true and comes to be
accepted as true, the Middle East will still have a lot of oil and will
still be the location of the State of Israel, and so the US will still
have roughly the same foreign policy interests there.
-- Of course oil and the Middle East would still have been there, just as
Vietnam would have been there with or without the 'Gulf of Tonkin' alleged
incident -- which only two Senators saw through and opposed (none in the
House, other than one abstention). The issue, rather, is the political/
ideological function which 9-11 plays in MOTIVATING the establishment's
war plans. Any observation that 9-11 drives not only U.S., but also
world politics, since 9-11-2001 should be most obvious to all.
Thanks for your comments, Daniel.
This thread started with Jim's claiming that Mohammed's confession is a
piece of evidence for the Bush administration's position. It has now been
noted that his confession included attacking the "Plaza Bank" building in
Seattle which did not even EXIST as such before his captivity. Others
have noted its resemblance to confessions under Stalin and that its broad
sweep, if accurately reported by military, may have been intentional on
Mohammend's part, that is, to claim so much that none becomes believable.
As I said, I don't think it is important, compared to many other issues.
Paul Z.
************************************************************************
(Vol.23) THE HIDDEN HISTORY OF 9-11-2001 "a benchmark in 9/11 research"
(Vol.24) TRANSITIONS IN LATIN AMERICA AND IN POLAND & SYRIA, forthcoming
Research in Political Economy, P.Zarembka,ed, Elsevier hardback
********************* http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/PZarembka
