Yeah, those articles are full of BS. First off, he tries to prove that government officials are lying and changing cover up stories by quoting contradictory news articles that were written a day after the attack. Yeah, and some people on the ground in NY thought they were being bombed. So I guess that was a government cover up, too.

Then he tries to prove that Bush had prior knowledge of the attacks because:

a) he didn't respond when someone whispered in his ear.

b) he didn't fear for his life in the school building.

As for point-a, that guy could have been saying, "hey check out that reporter's rack" for all we know. Very weak.

As for point-b, I'm pretty sure there's a no-fly zone over the president no matter where he is and is accompanied by fighter jets no matter where he is in the country. So that pretty much rules out his already weak argument that Bush should have been afraid of a plane hitting the school. Then he mentions Bush should also have feared a ground attack on the school. Now it would have to be one HELL of highly trained ground force to take on an army of SS agents and police officers. So his argument that already made little to no sense now makes even less sense. He is basically blaming the President for not doing what the author would've done- run like a pussy.

Ask that guy if he was ever abducted by aliens. I bet he'll tell you they 'probed' him a few too many times.