I don't need to provide proof that 9/11 happened.  But thanks for asking.

I realize that however the information provided by people in the intelligence community is vital to understanding what was actually covered up.

There are plenty of videos about Michael Scheuer. He headed the Bin Laden desk at the CIA.  Look around for his interviews and you will see plenty of good info about what was covered up in the 911 Commission Report

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYSN3exS9Tc

Smoothseas, could you list the URL or the title just because it’s much clearer to view on YouTube. Michael Scheuer is an old salt and I have viewed many of his clips (got to love YT), haven’t seen that one though. Whistleblowers have to be squeaky clean if they are to refute charges of ‘retribution’ not that it’s fair, just the first attack to be expected (sexual innuendos are probable next). I try to take everything into consideration … if possible. Most of my comments are in response to specific stimuli hahaha questions and normally not intended for a full explanation … is that possible hahaha. Anyway we are on the same page here … just different paragraphs. Is it your opinion then that 911 was a multitude of errors and inadequacies from fifteen separate federal agencies under the auspices of the CIA (Tenet - DCI from July 1997 to July 2004)? I can only see this in two ways, legit or not … there is no middle ground here. I understand coincidence, but I cannot believe that only our inadequacies could have been so capitalized on just by happenstance (right place – right time) alone?

U.S. Intelligence 9/11 and Iraq: A Whistleblower's Story   http://youtu.be/aiVKwCiw6Ko

Since we don't exactly know what was covered up (if anything) ... it is difficult to say how many people needed to have been directly involved. Maybe it was just a few people in authority who could clear NORAD out of the area or a few others who ensured the agencies lacked intercommunications. I don’t think it would necessitate a lot of people as most underlings just follow orders with little thought on why. As far as leaks go … how many whistle blowers are there now … they are for the most part sidelined with the theorists so what’s the point. There are countless ways the USG could have paved the way to 911 with gold bricks and beacons … they are the best at covert ops after all. Just look at Stant123 and his refusal to comprehend that the USG is not filled with saints and we had no imperialistic goals besides the spread of ‘democracy’. Coincidence is one thing, but too much warns of red flags.

Well, I think history will bear me out ... eventually. But for now  ... there’s no rest for the weary hahaha.

There is actually quite a bit of information known to be covered up. Compare what some FBI and CIA agents have openly stated vs. the content in the 911 Commission Report.
Above is just two examples but there are many more easily found on the web. It is obvious that poor decision making was covered up. As far as whether one deems "poor" decision making to be more like negligence is strictly opinion.

Most "underlings" in government know exactly what they are doing and exactly what they are involved in.

Intelligence agents know exactly what they are involved in. Michael Scheuer is probably one of the best sources of information because he was not some underling sychophant. He was the head of the Bin Laden Unit and had his hands on quite a bit of intelligence. Look at as many of his videos as you can. You may not agree with his views on foreign policy however it should be quite obvious he is no fan of the politicians who presided above him while he was working at the CIA. These people are not theorist. They know exactly what some of the intelligence was, exactly where investigations were hindered, and know exactly how the raw intelligence that passed through their hands was manipulated by superiors and politicians.

If you look at other cases involving whistle-blowers you will see that they are not underling sycophants as well.

That word is used that many times purposely.  We are talking about career agents in the intelligence services who had extensive access to raw intelligence. Some of the whistle-blowers I have seen accounts from were people whose job was to prepare the reports for the higher ups. Richard Clark who worked for the Sate Dept. in various positions through several administrations is another good example you might want to follow up on. We are not talking about underlings. We are talking about people who had direct access to people very high up in government. We are not talking about the military.

Watch the videos and listen to what these people are saying. It isn't about what I may think I know it is about what these people have stated on the record. Believe what they say or not, but understand I am going by what they actually state and not what I think they might think.

Because he's a pilot. It is people within the intelligence services that know what happened.

Springmann is simply making assumptions. He has no definitive reason as to why the visas were recommended.

Saudi Arabia is a problem for sure but until we are no longer reliant on their oil then we are in between a rock and a hard spot. This is all about oil. If there was no oil in the middle east we would probably simply sell all of them weapons and let them kill each other.

He was head of the Bin Laden group. I think his information is more based on intelligence and less based on speculation than someone whose job was to issue visas. If I were you I would read books by both Scheuer and Richard Clark. They both give really good histories going back to the oil embargo back in the 70's and follow the history right up to to the 911 Commission Report.

I have only seen her talk about others covering up their failure to further investigate issues. I haven't seen her make the above mentioned claim.

Noam Chomsky on 9/11 Conspiracy Theories:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_fFkLcRrBE

Smoothseas; This is as close as I have found to my ideas and I think we all agree that a lack of applied intelligence was evident before, throughout and after 911. I just find more culpability in the intelligence agencies bosses bosses (the USG) for mismanaging what they did know and what their subordinates knew. I think we are on the same side here ... right???

Well, now that all the BS is all out of the way ... Anyone want to go back to the original question and point out where Moore was unfactual in his documentary. We are well aware of what most people think of him personally ... now is your chance to prove him wrong factually ... I dare you and you and also you, hahaha. I am sure smaller clips are available on YouTube to make it easier for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQv_M_WQAxU&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PLAB5AAF3AE4FA570D

PS: Don't really want to discuss the election though.

myfist0, nice to hear from you again! I think the fight here is about over here though. Just thought I would throw out a contentious bone or two before I go away, but I don't expect any real takers about Moore because there isn't much to bitch about ... after the fact (personality aside). This thing would have fizzled out much earlier had I used someone actually competent like Noam in the beginning, but who can figure people out, hahaha? Happy gamming and ‘headhunting’ hahaha … Michelle

I would have to disagree with that. Can I see your book list? http://www.chomsky.info/books.htm

Probably the best versed on the subjects of foreign policy and terrorism because unlike people in Government, he reads.

Also he probably doesn't hang out in public forums, Noam hangs with some of the best minds on the planet.

PS: You don't need any help from me hahaha ... your intelligence shines out for all to see without my guidance, hehehe.

Your personal attacks don't trouble me, Boobz.  They just clarify who you are.