issuevoter wrote on Aug 2
nd, 2016 at 12:38pm:
A problem with all your posts, is your love of hyperbole and sensationalism. Here we have another example. “911 Bush inside job.” There is a lot there by implication. It reads as if the so called 28 pages show that Bush was an accomplice of the highjackers, or had prior knowledge of the plans for the Muzlim Stunt we call 911.
George W Bush made decisions that protected the Sauds from the righteous American, if not World, anger. But to say he was part of 911 is not credible. For a start, the secrecy of the operation was achieved by a fanatical allegiance to the teachings of Koran. It was a religious operation. Bush's contribution, if you can call it that, was his phenomenal gullibility in allowing himself to be manipulated by beard stroking Arabs. And of course there was oil too, and the Bush family's rake-off.
But Bush's gullibility has been standard in American diplomacy, for at least 150 years. 911 was an inside job of international Islam. It is part of Islam's policy of death by a thousand cuts, and to counter it the West will have to develop some talents no statesman of diplomat is demonstrating at this time. And when our own media report that the 28 pages exonerate the Sauds, they neglect the blacked out sections, and you can bet that encourages more Muzlims to mass murder.
Al Qaeda had never mastered building demolition technology such as that used on WTC 1 and 2 and especially WTC 7 which was not hit by any aircraft.
US officials never published the names of entities associated with the short selling of airline options ahead of 9/11. Furthermore, they then required all the evidence of the transactions to be destroyed.
FAA destroyed evidence of flight records immediately after 9/11.
There is no evidence that a civil aircraft hit the Pentagon.
There is no way Bin Laden could have planned and controlled this operation from a cave in Afghanistan.
There is no way 4 simultaneous aircraft hijackings could have occurred unless the authorities are totally incompetent.