Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Martian
I have yet to be convinced that there was anything untoward being perpetrated by the US government on that day. I am a natural skeptic, but it goes both ways. If you're going to cry foul, especially if you're going to suggest something that seems contrary to common sense, you'll need irrefutable evidence before I'll buy it. Suggesting that the United States government would intentionally allow or even perpetrate an attack on it's own people is, to me, contrary to common sense.
|
The burden of proof is on the United States government not the conspiracy theorists. Remember the 9/11 investigations goal was to find what went wrong and not who was to blame. It's their job to prove to us who did it and they haven't yet. We went to 2 wars and destroyed many civil rights without enough evidence against al qaida to even beat them in court.
Things like the 4 military drills depicting the same event on 9/11, insider CIA put options on airline companies, a mayor being called by the whitehouse and being told not to fly to New York, NORAD and the FAA disregarding all standing operating procedure, Bush's brother Marvin running security on the WTC complex during 9/11, and the declassified official government plan to carry out terror attacks on it's civilian population and blame it on it's enemies are just a few red flags that you should seriously question. Why doesn't the 9/11 commission or pop mech. answer some of those key questions instead of focusing on the things that can't really be proven one way or the other.
Just because YOU wouldn't do this to the civilian population doesn't mean they wouldn't. You have to look at the evidence. If you were on the jury during a murder trial just saying I don't think the person would do it really means nothing.