Dear Louis,
It really angers me how you assess the character of the conspiracy revealers like a lawyer with no case [
“Page Two,” June 29], not touching any of the facts (in how many columns on the subject?).
Is the unexplained collapse of a third World Trade Center building "circumstantial evidence"? Please tell us! Yes, in talking about conspiracy theorists you "did a lot of generalizing about individuals" – a lot of generalizing about a lot of individuals. Check out this poll of New Yorkers (
www.zogby.com/search/ReadNews.dbm?ID=855) showing that half of them believe the U.S. had foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks and consciously failed to act. The numbers rise in the "under 30" category. And less than two in five believe that all the important questions were answered by the 9/11 Commission. And this was back in 2004, what could it be now after the Democrats gained the House and the criminals still run the show? Are all these people crazy? I am very insulted by your stereotyping, but I'm sure you have a pretty good assessment of me in your head and that I don't matter to you. But let me ask you, based on this poll, who is the nut? Who provides no evidence, and whose ideas are set in concrete? I think it's too important a subject to let go down the memory hole. I'm done reading your opinion pieces, Louis. You are out of touch. We need a progressive newspaper in this city.