From: Ben (ben@machinegod.org)
Date: Tue Aug 06 2002 - 08:46:57 MDT
[Archibald]
It is quite obvious to me that you haven't reviewed even a small portion of
the evidence I have already sent but since you seem to think it is not
enough I will send another series of links to be superficially read. These
are only a few of the hundreds or possibly thousands of links I could send
if I thought that any of them would be followed.
[ben]
Instead of saturating the list with more articles and links, why don't you
concentrate on one item, one bit of knowlege you would like to see more
widespread, and focus on that for a while? The deluge of
questionable-at-first-glance material doesn't prompt a lot of people to dig
deeper. There will always be conspiracy theories, and there will always be
people quick to dismiss anything unlikely as 'merely' a nutter's theory.
Take the time to aim somewhere in the middle and I have a feeling you would
be more impressed with the results. Hermit suggested that you concentrate on
the allegation that Bush & co were involved in the planning of the attacks;
that sounds as good a place to start as any. Pick 2 or 3 supporting articles
and explain _why_ you find these sources credible.
-ben
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 25 2002 - 13:28:51 MDT