[ninty]

Ah yes, the famous PM article.

As you might have guessed, there are MANY rebuttles to the PM article, as i'm sure there are probably rebuttles to the rebuttles.

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/pop_mech/ ... hanics.htm
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pm/
http://911review.com/pm/markup/

Listen, there are A LOT of theories out there from the "pod people" to lizzards and such. There isn't one theory that everyone conforms to. What these people all have in common is that they realize something is not right about 911. How far that is taken is up to the individual.

I posted this in another topic and I believe it is extremly relevant:

"David Ray Griffin breaks down the way people think about the attacks into four categories which I think are very appropriate. You just have to figure out where you are:
1) The US was totally blindsighted by the attack and had no prior knowledge.
2) The US did not know of the attack, but are now using it to their advantage in foreign policy and in the US itself.
3) The US knew the attacks were coming and allowed them to happen, much like pearl harbour, in order to garner the support of the citizens to carry out certain goals.
4) The US was complicit in organizing and carrying out the attacks. "

When you look at that and decide where you fall, ask yourself why you fall into that category. Then, with an open mind, research.