You do realize that demolition is not the only issue here, don't you?

[Bonobo]

Black Ops can get pretty convoluted and the relationships between agents, double agents, handlers and all those networks must be rather entangled.

It is possible that the buildings when down as a result of just the planes and the fires. And it is also possible that these things happened as a result of blowback from a covert black operation involving agents that were supposed to destabilize some country or another and then we got double-crossed. THAT would be a good motivation for covering things up you know. It is also entirely consistent with how the Bush and Cheney regime worked.

Is THAT too much of a conspiracy theory to justify a further and more full investigation?

[Bolo Boffin]

1. I'd be happier if demolition was excluded from the issues here.

Eliminate that and a few other of the crazy ones out there, and DU might close the dungeon.

You never know.

[hack89]

2. Don't you think a few real facts to present to the US people might be necessary? nt

[Realityhack]

3. No.

First off you need to understand that I think you are a lot closer to questions that do need to be addressed once you admit that the basic rather indisputable facts are true.
'Issues' like the planes being faked do not need to be addressed as they are quite goofy and held despite the evidence not because of it so no investigation could ever satisfy their proponents anyway.

So you are a lot closer to asking questions that might warrant further investigation once you have agreed to the well established facts.

The reason I say 'No' to wither your proposed conspiracy justifies further investigation is simple. You have nothing but conjecture. Your post does not present even the most basic of reasons why we might suspect such a scenario took place.

I do not think every 'possible' scenario needs to be investigated just because someone can think it up. There are an infinite number of such scenarios. We could just keep up the conjecture forever.

[Bonobo]

4. OK, if you read more you would see it is more than possible, it is likely.

But some people don't like to look into the dark.

No offense. It is just the truth.

Yes, I could post links that would point you in the direction, but no proof. Of course not. THAT is the very nature of black ops. Deniability. Always deniability.

But if you don't already know, we have CIA agents who have been used to impersonate Saudi agents. Some of these agents were used to interrogate 9/11-involved and when I say interrogate, I mean torture.

Just because the threads connecting these things have been hidden from us does not mean they don't exist.

Again, that is the nature of these things. But who is being naive here? It's not me. It's the people like you who deny anything that is not plain in front of their face.

Hint: If you smell something rotten when you open the refrigerator door, you can be certain SOMETHING is in there even if you don't immediately see it. OK?

[anigbrowl]

6. Well, with that logic you can claim just about anything

"Hint: If you smell something rotten when you open the refrigerator door, you can be certain SOMETHING is in there even if you don't immediately see it. OK?"

But smelling something rotten is positive evidence - a chemical by-product of an organic reaction is present, therefore we can theorize that that reaction is taking place, and systematically examine the food to see what is rotting.

On the other hand...

"Yes, I could post links that would point you in the direction, but no proof. Of course not. THAT is the very nature of black ops. Deniability. Always deniability."

is equivalent to saying 'evidence is not present, so it must have been hidden. If we apply this to your refrigerator, this is like saying 'your refrigerator smells OK since you cleaned it out, but this just proves you are using flavor-masking to obscure the fact that there is still rotting food inside it.


I mean really, why stop at Bush or MIHOP or LIHOP? Go all the way and face the REAL truth - aliens did it, from invisible flying saucers. Just because you can't see the evidence for this doesn't mean it isn't there.

...actually, I doubt you would buy into such a theory. My point is that positive evidence is the only thing you have to go on. Once you start saying 'there's no evidence of X, but that's how they work', then you've got to be open to every crazy possibility. The essence of the scientici method is that you limit your hypotheses to the things for which you can find evidence. There may be other possibilities, but if you can't find evidence for them then too bad, those are the limitations of the method.

[Bryan Sacks]

5. You're a little lost, realityhack

Bonobo's is not some wild conjecture without any basis in fact. US intelligence regularly consorts with its supposed enemies. It's history is a history of employing murderers as proxies. It tries to overthrow foreign governments and then lies about it. In the case of 9/11, US intelligence was intimately aware of the identity and movements of several of the 9/11 hijackers well in advance of the attacks. None of this is remotely in dispute.

If you're interested in the specifics, look them up. With respect to 9/11, you might start with Khaled Almihdhar and Nawaf Alhazmi. Here's a recent issue raised by the researchers at historycommons.org concerning them:

http://hcgroups.wordpress.com/2009/08/22/fbi-document-shows-cole-bombers-called-yemen-hub/#more-962

You also wrote:

Issues' like the planes being faked do not need to be addressed

Of course they don't. They're idiotic. And yet, whenever someone starts a thread about them, you can bank on countless posts from the debunker crew going through the motions of trying to "satisfy their proponents anyway."

Why? Like you said, they don't need do be addressed. and yet they're addressed, alright. Ad infinitum. Why?