I left a comment after the Globe article. Its a months old article, but Kay and his co-worker will get to read it some day.

I may have to start posting all over the MSM to keep this thread on track.
____________

I've found accounts of 9/11 like the book 'Crossing the Rubicon' make a stronger case than the official story. I have much in common with 'truthers' (one of the labels du jour, as the corporate media likes to label segregate).

Its been a mystery to me how the less-educated in materials science, engineering and such, are most active trading and talking of the disinfo around the event rather than the solid evidence that directly links the false-flag to real people and organizations. And even many educated well in the sciences and politics, may still not understand how police and prosecutors would best make a case of conspiracy. Crossing the Rubicon was written by an ex-Cop.

And both you and Kay (I've not read the book) should be up front that you are not neutral parties to this. Its easy to make a case those of your position are more responsible for promoting the official report than any government or its agency is.

And what is conspiracy? Basically any crime commited [by] more than one person. Perhaps this could be further limited as white collar crime (by more than one person acting alone).
con·spir·a·cy   
1.the act of conspiring.
2.an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.

From the article: "Kay makes the case for it, arguing for an anti-conspiracist curriculum to be taught in schools"

I was quite surprised at the Chutzpah, your recommendations the state teach all the children that white collar crime does not exist in the same paragraph that mentions The Protocols.

What the kids really need to be taught more of is critical thinking. Then perhaps eventually we would not have to search so hard for truth.