– “That ‘middle eatern’ looking teddy-bear ‘terrorist’ is a complete new one on me, and I have been avidly researching the issue since 2004”
Well this is the trouble. Demolition theory and the like have all but completely drowned out other matters. For instance, have you heard of Richard Blee? Do you know of the series of articles (Sunday Times I think) about Sibel Edmonds’ account of Gladio B operations that were cancelled due to pressure from the CIA?
What seems to happen is that people see a story, see that it doesn’t support or isn’t concerned with demolition, and so they ignore or discount it. Whether by accident or design, demolition theory has to be one of the most effective red herrings around. As soon as I’d disentangled Chandler’s error my attitude to 9/11 changed. Without wanting to get too conspiralogical about it, healthy scepticism is always warranted; demolition theory could be a second line of defence after the “official story”, and I’m nearly certain it was used that way against Susan Lindauer.
– – – – – –
I texted Iain yesterday but I haven’t heard back from him yet. You should have my e-mail address somewhere because he copied both of us in on some of his e-mails, but my ISP deleted all my e-mails about six months ago so I’ve probably lost my copy of yours.