Reply #69: You have to be joking...

[Gordon25]

"Its true, we need absolute proof before we can credibly make a claim."

If that is the case may I humbly inquire what the court system and jury system are for? Cops arrest people on suspicion and hold them in jail all the time. People are convicted of crimes all the time on the basis of circumstantial evidence. People have been executed on the basis of such evidence.

New American Heritage Dictionary: "circumstantial evidence: Law. Evidence not bearing directly on the fact in dispute, but on various attendant circumstances from which the judge or jury might infer the occurance of the fact in dispute."

I don't hear anyone here claiming to have proof of LIHOP or MIHOP. What we have are various kinds and pieces of evidence which seriously challenge the credibility of this administration's explanation of what happened on 9/11. (Why, for example, after only three weeks, did Bush order all Justice Department personnel including the FBI to stop investigating the events and direct their attention instead to preventing a recurrance? And why has he stonewalled or slow marched the congressional commission and independent commission suposedly investigating it? )

It is not our responsibility to prove LIHOP or MIHOP. All we have to do is examine the evidence available to us and ask the questions the evidence raises.

It is this autocratic and corrupt administration's responsibility to prove to us what happened, not the other way around!

Gordon25