`  Very clever, Creutzfeldt, though to first hold forth with strong opinions on something you quite evidently knew absolutely nothing about, and then, after a cursory skim, to blather your opinions for a lot longer, seems out of character for a supposed expert in ``mathematical logic`` (a claim of yours I find very dubious), not to mention someone trained by ``the Jesuits`` (I hope you're seeing a counselor). Moreover, you can't even apply your ``logic`` consistently  Apparently, it seems quite reasonable for a 9/11 Conspiracies encyclopedia page to discuss, at length, claims about a remote-controlled rocket having hit the Pentagon, and other unlikely scenarios for which there is a complete ``absence of evidence,`` than for this espionage puzzle, for which there is some evidence, and an interesting flurry of mainstream media attention, but not yet enough evidence for a firm judgement. It would be good someday to have a proper explanation about the ``Israeli art students`` mystery, and not just your peremptory and prejudiced dismissal of it as ``fucking bollocks`` (I guess the Jesuits trained you in that particular science). In short, as I have said elsewhere, get over yourself. This overweening weenie-ness of yours is unseemly, as well as wilfully stupid. Practice your multiplication tables, keep up with your super-duper-secret-crypto code-book, work hard, and someday you will grow to be a man. Perhaps the hardware store will have a job for you. Anyway, I don't really care what you think, and I'm not even a zealous or crazed proponent of the ``art students`` theories. I just thought that it was something interesting to consider in the 9/11 context, something requiring clarification, something that merits, at the least, a bit of consideration. It pisses me off, though, when know-it-all knuckleheads like you arrogate to themselves the right to decide the difference between heresy and blasphemy. Maybe you should go back to the Jesuits for further training.  `