How the Bush Administration Covered Up the Saudi Connection to 9/11

[jollyreaper2112]

97. yes

But there's a difference in plausibility between being guilty of a crime and being an accessory. For example, I would find it very unlikely that a prominent lawyer or politician would be involved in murder versus being an accessory, i.e. cleaning up after the mess their son made.

It would seem like the blowback risk would be too big in actively making a 9-11 happen. What I could see happening is thinking a lesser attack was going to happen, maybe one that could be conveniently foiled and getting all surprised when it completely went out of hand. Kind of like the Fargo scenario: you plan the abduction and ransoming of your wife to get money from her dad who hates you, then she's released and all is fine. You never planned on her being murdered by your incompetent accomplices. You're still guilty, though.

Powerful people have done stupid things but i put more stock in covering up a crime you discovered an ally committed rather than being in on the planning itself.

That being said, it's not impossible for Bush and Cheney to have had a hand in planning the attacks, just improbable.

I don't think it makes you a truther. By my definition, a truther is not arguing for something plausible or improbable but something flat out impossible or just stupid. The buildings were knocked down with controlled demo but planes were flown into them to cover that up? It doesn't even make any kind of sense. It's stupid raised to the power of 10. It's like arguing Bush flew the plant that went into Tower 1.

Not trusting the official report just makes sense, especially given how much weird shit went on around it. I just don't know what the truth is.