Quote:
|
Originally Posted by samcol
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.
|
First off, that's ludicrous. The United States government has provided ample proof that the attacks were perpetrated by means of commercial airliners and that the collapse of the builings in the World Trade Centre was a result of these airliners. I have none of the evidence used to prove that the Al Qaeda perpetrated the attack handy, but I do seem to recall that they did initially claim responsibility for it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by samcol
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.
|
Care to back up any of those allegations? I've seen no proof of any of it, a fair amount of evidence contrary to some and a few others are things I hadn't heard before today.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by samcol
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.
|
This has nothing to do with what I would or wouldn't do. It's more to do with what seems reasonable. The United States government is (ideally) an embodiment of it's people. I realize that the real world isn't nearly so clear-cut as that, but it seems a bit far-fetched that a democratic government founded by a nation who apparently holds peace and freedom as core values would perpetrate an attack on it's own people for
any reason, let alone some of the spurious motives that have been put forward. I'm of the belief that if one wants to make such a claim, one must have unassailable evidence of the veracity of that claim if one expects to be taken seriously. I've seen no such evidence; the fact that there's even debate tells me that it likely doesn't exist.