<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>gdp's Comments</title>
		<language>en-us</language>
		<link>https://www.intensedebate.com/users/311252</link>
		<description>Comments by dave741</description>
<item>
<title>Antiwar.com Original Articles : 9/11: Our Truth, and Theirs</title>
<link>http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/09/10/911-our-truth-and-theirs/#IDComment34031614</link>
<description>&amp;quot;With the &amp;quot;truthers&amp;quot; on the job, the truth has no chance. &amp;quot;  Nano-thermite in the dust and metal-microspheres that need nearly temps of 5,000 degrees to form.  But you called me a &amp;quot;truther&amp;quot;.  I guess you win. </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 19:43:33 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/09/10/911-our-truth-and-theirs/#IDComment34031614</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Antiwar.com Original Articles : 9/11: Our Truth, and Theirs</title>
<link>http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/09/10/911-our-truth-and-theirs/#IDComment33979989</link>
<description>The more I think about this article the more it baffles me. When people are writing publically under their own name, like Mr. Raimondo, I would understand why, even if they might question aspects of the official 9/11 story, they might not want to say anything publically for fear of what it might do to their career or their safety. I don&amp;#039;t think that public figures who know the truth should keep quiet, but I understand it. What I don&amp;#039;t understand is how someone can raise questions about Israeli involvement, which is an obvious issue to any open minded person, and do so when they are a public figure, but yet still be afraid to bring up the most obvious issue of them all - which is controlled demolition. It takes a little bit of reading to understand the Israeli issue, but it takes 10 seconds of watching a video, and maybe 5 minutes to read a couple articles written by architects, to realize that the controlled demolition issue is far more questionable. What is it? It can&amp;#039;t be about the facts. Is it that it is still slightly more acceptable to accuse the &amp;quot;other,&amp;quot; even if it is precious Israel, than to accuse your own group?   </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 14:35:46 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/09/10/911-our-truth-and-theirs/#IDComment33979989</guid>
</item><item>
<title>Antiwar.com Original Articles : 9/11: Our Truth, and Theirs</title>
<link>http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/09/10/911-our-truth-and-theirs/#IDComment33977087</link>
<description>&amp;quot;crackpots: they think some kind of &amp;quot;controlled demolition&amp;quot; took place&amp;quot;  Anyone who can watch WTC7 fall and not even consider controlled demolition is an imbecile:  youtube.com/watch?v=oQeQi5XXfz0&amp;amp;eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwhatreallyhappened%2Ecom%2Fnode%3Fpage%3D1&amp;amp;feature=player_embedded  Even the crackpots are getting press in some pretty mainstream outlets:  worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseaction=wanappln.commentview&amp;amp;comment_id=158 </description>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 13:49:27 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>http://original.antiwar.com/justin/2009/09/10/911-our-truth-and-theirs/#IDComment33977087</guid>
</item>	</channel>
</rss>