They're not quips. My quips are a lot wittier.

Your quips may excuse you from doing the research, my friend, but I don't.

Google is good at it's job.

The news articles also contain information that is verifiable by observation of multiple people, who would all have to be silenced for the conspiracy to go through.

You've got a link for everything, have't you? Tell me: have you ever turned a critical eye on how handily those links drop into your lap?

So this article from 2009 that says Cheney requested more protection is a lie? http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-5...

And how could their be a suit against his secret service detail in 2006 if he refused to have any? http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/201...

Right, they got caught.

I doubt Ayn Rand would have been a Truther. In some ways the most brilliant are the least able to see through the smoke and mirrors of an arguably well-executed 9/11 operation and enduring cover-up. However, whether one is Ayn Rand or a street sweeper, there is no excusing unthinking acceptance of the State's 9/11 conspiracy theory.

Consider this, JGISSD: did you know that Richard Bruce Cheney refused Secret Service protection while in office, and continued refusal to this day? Instead he uses a private praetorian guard, KBR/Halliburton. (Now, some "Randians," as you call us, will knee-jerkingly say, "Good, Cheney's not mooching my nickel for his security." I, on the other hand, see Cheney's skulking behavior as mighty suspicious).

Once again, the government can't hide scandals like Clinton's or Nixon's, but it can hide the intent to commit mass murderer against is own citizens for over 30 years?

No it didn't. The story of Bill Ayers & The Weather Underground projecting that 25 Million Americans who could not be re-educated would need to be slaughtered broke years ago.

Fathers rights trumps Republican partisanship. Just because you disagree witht he ideals of Cuba, Dad still has a right to his son back. Or should we kidnap all children under communist parents and bring them to Disney World.

I'm comparing governmental power to cover up wrong-doing to governmental power to cover up wrong-doing.

They were allowed to succeed by all the airport security workers and all the US government employees in the intelligence industries?

The fact is that any 9/11 conspiracy involves too many people either being involved and silenced or the actions of too many people being predicted and accounted for.

And those Islamic terrorists could in no way have been acting on behalf of anyone? Or 'allowed' to succeed in the way they did, by either omission of fact or mere intentional oversight? I doubt it takes much to persuade Islamic terrorists to kill Americans, especially if you allow them to call it "Jihad" and pay their families large amounts of money. And again, I feel you're missing the point altogether.

Let me explain the logic to you. The family members of Flight 93 passengers received phone calls from the passengers that corroborated the stories of Islamic terrorists and brought about the crashing of Flight 93. This event shows what actually happened on 9/11...unless the family members are all co-conspirators or major dupes.

you are comparing apples to oranges..

That ignores the concussive force of a plane flying into a building...

See http://ur1.ca/aaqk7 for an example of scientific thinking.

I don't think you're at all grasping anything I've said. I, in no way, said any US citizen that perished on that horrific day, or their families, had any knowledge or any part in anything. If that's what you think I'm saying, then this conversation was a bit above your head I'm afraid. I mean that in the least condescending way as possible, I truly mean no offense, but you're lacking any understanding of the basics of what WesleyMooch and I were talking about (and it's far too much for me to type, I've got my hands full).
Edit: I want to also remind you of the fact that I answered 'yes, it's possible" .. I am not claiming that either thought process is right or wrong, I am just engaging in a reciprocating discussion about mere possibilities and thoughts on a subject.

So all the people on Flight 93 and their family members are co-conspirators (paid off) or dupes?

I've read the conspiracy arguments. They are evasions of reality to indulge paranoid fantasies. Scientifically, the towers fell because PLANES FLEW INTO THEM. Logically, it'd be impossible to execute a conspiracy of that magnitude. Flight 93 alone refutes all conspiracy theories.

what people?
the ones that died in the process?
the ones killed for silence?
the ones demonized, made into a patsy and imprisoned?
the ones made to benefit?
I don't see much coming out of any of them and if anything did, it wouldn't be seen as creditable because the ones made to benefit would surely have their character assassinated immediately (if not their person).

What about Nixon? Did he not go to extreme lengths either?

yes, it is possible. i doubt Clinton went to the extreme lengths to ensure his cover up.