Both internet conspiracy theories AND anti-conspiracy theories from the traditional left have been doing a favour to whoever was responsible for 911. Chomsky, like Pilger is someone who has built an impeccable reputation as a severe critic of the imperialism and duplicity of the Western governments particularly UK and US.
And they have to be extra careful because there are many editors out there who will home in on ANYTHING smelling of a suggestion that Bush did it and seek to attack ad hominem and destroy their credibility.
They have it hard enough from the mainstream media as it is. They cannot afford, indeed do not need to, get bogged down in the circular arguments about conspiracy surrounding 911.
There is enough evidence of US/UK duplicity in many other military campaigns. Went to the Barbican's showing of the Pilger film on the carnage in East Timor, where Alan Clark former Tory cunt, blatantly admitted that the fighter jets sold by the UK to Indonesia under the guise of "training aircraft" were nothing of the sort.
When Pilger pointed out to Clark that his documented love of animals should naturally extend to caring about humanity as well, and thus the plight of the East Timorese, Clark just shrugged and said it didn't. "Strange that" he said with a wry smile.
So Pilger and Chomsky have to avoid on a grand scale, with the mainstream media, the same thing that anyone on these boards has to face when discussing this most divisive of issues.
And yes, holograms, lizards etc are part of the misinformation. But was it misinformation that said a passport had been found of one of the hijackers at ground zero? Is it misinformation to quote, in precis on one of my posts (and subsequently cut by a moderator or editor himself) the scholars for 911 truth's well documented holes in the 911 commission's report, including the fact that vital evidence at the crash site was removed contravening the basic legal framework of the FAA?
So Pilger and Chomsky can't afford to be called fruitloops. But, hey, we the people can, and we do, and it's ok, because we KNOW something serious is amiss, because it can be pieced together without need for holograms or lizards or illuminati or secret cabals of dastardly jews. All of those are part of the smokescreen as is the avalanche of "proof" from "experts" and "independent scientists" which literally tries to blind you with "facts" when your eyes, ears and your nose for bullshit tells you something different. No I can't be arsed to read agenda-driven "facts". Apologies for that but I have a life to lead.
And I'll leave it at that. Of course, feel free to post the usual FAQ-busting insults. It's ok if the right people do it, right Ed?
Oh no, like, lots of people like them so they MUST be crap 
And you defy your own logic by dealing in absolutes just to try and win a measly argument on a message board.
