Suppose we have evidence, then what?

It's all too apparent there is a substantial amount of questionable events/happenings that went on prior and during 911 to constitute a conspiracy. Otherwise a lot of cases of mystery wouldn't be brought up - you all know this.

But suppose as investigators of the conspiracy get further, more defining evidence comes to light in the hint at a conspiracy ---> then what? How can a case be mounted against those who originally plotted it out, these are obviously powerful people going at great lengths from keeping themselves known and to hide information and supress evidence.

I, from a person standpoint, find difficult though because MOST, more than 75% probably of Americans are so strong hearted that it was indeed terrorist that brought down the towers, it's too farfetched for them to believe it was anything different when the news/government has done so much/said so much otherwise. I mean we've gone to war already with "Fighting terrorism" because of this, so we're in deep, to the point where they're trying to bury the hatchet with 911, in a sort of way, with that it was definately terrorists - the government's made that clear enough.
Most Americans as well, as smart as some may be too aren't conspiracy followers.

What I'm getting at is just it seems to be hard to mount a case once we have good evidence. I know thus far from what all I've seen and the events that happen that there's ENOUGH right there to say its a conspiracy (that's my personal opinion). However hard evidence will be hard to get to help support it, i.e. (would be nice to have the pentagon tapes).

This post is merely to get YOUR opinions on how things would go provided any hard evidence is brought into light to show good probability of a conspiracy that goes against the government's "Report". Making a case of it - I believe Charlie Sheen's trying to do something of the sort.

My personal opinion:

I do not believe the U.S. government was initially behind the attacks, I believe key members were however. I believe the main members were indeed Bush and Cheiney, and anyone else that had dealings with the companies reaping oil profits and -->Halliburton

Sorry, but I really have a problem when you say: " we have evidence. ". You don't have evidence, 95% of what is being said in documentaries is simply not true, or taken out of context, or doesn't even have anthing to do with 9/11. ( like talking about the madrid fire). So please point out that exact evidence.

Originally posted by Masisoar


But suppose as investigators of the conspiracy get further, more defining evidence comes to light in the hint at a conspiracy ---> then what?

Well I pretty much outlined what I was getting at in my post, but for some reason I can't find the edit button for my title because I can see it as being a bit misleading. Lemme see if I can do something.

Originally posted by Louis255
Sorry, but I really have a problem when you say: " we have evidence. ". You don't have evidence, 95% of what is being said in documentaries is simply not true, or taken out of context, or doesn't even have anthing to do with 9/11.

Why don't you give us enough information to back up this 95% figure of yours?

www.abovetopsecret.com...'

i want people to see this, hardly anyone seems to be checking it out, yet the ones who to are giving me WATS lol.

Masisoar you know how i feel about this, regardless of if the information is fully correct we deserve to hear it out. Not have it ridiculed and put down before it gets a chance. Thats what makes it all the more fishy.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Louis255
Sorry, but I really have a problem when you say: " we have evidence. ". You don't have evidence, 95% of what is being said in documentaries is simply not true, or taken out of context, or doesn't even have anthing to do with 9/11.

Why don't you give us enough information to back up this 95% figure of yours?

in here 911myths.com they explain it pretty good.

Originally posted by Louis255
in here 911myths.com they explain it pretty good.

Well I think 911research.wtc7.net... does a better job. And www.scholarsfor911truth.org... and www.physics911.net... to name a couple more. If you want to actually discuss anything, feel free.

My mother passed away in Feb at the age of 77. For years I tried to show her how the government KNEW about the attack on Peal Harbor before it happened. She adamantly denied that the government had any prior knowledge. I could never convince her.

Any emotionally charged contoversy is just too difficult to PROVE for either side. You could have the actual plans for 9/11 with everyone's signature's on them and people still wouldn't believe.

As far as evidence goes, this site is a great place. People post what they consider to be evidence and the other side does their best to tear it down. But if the evidence is viable, then it will withstand the attacks. Keep looking and posting, it is the only way the TRUTH will ever come out.

[edit on 4/15/2006 by darkelf]

Yes, it's very hard to convince people. Especially when they're so dead set on believe what the government says because they have no other reason to believe otherwise.

You just have to explain it out to them the best you can and show them, just overwhelming evidence.. but don't overwhelm them with it or they'll just be put in denial for believing what they believed for so long.

I hope more people find interest int he 9/11 conspiracy subject and start taking more action with spreading their views in an informative and certain manner.

Media.

The masses refuse to believe anything contrary to what is on TV because its TV.
It has a stranglehold over the US population. I personally feel its a direct link to their lack of general knowlege of the world.

If you want to get people to pay attention, you have to go through the media.

Either the media works with us, or if the government has close tabs on them, we would have to hijack at broadcast signal. That can be done in each local region, or if there are any willing hackers out there who want to mess around with broadcasting via sattelite... it would help.

Oh, and Louis, I do believe there is a forum open specifically for your type of posts...

You don't have evidence, 95% of what is being said in documentaries is simply not true, or taken out of context, or doesn't even have anthing to do with 9/11.

threadkillers anonymous.

People can believe what they want. They can believe it was a coincidence that fire destroyed 3 steel buildings on 9/11, even though it had never happened before.

They can believe NIST, who is now trying to pay another group of engineers to explain why WTC 7 collapse because they can't seem to figure it out.

You can believe the 9/11 Commission report which states the Towers did NOT have 47 core columsn running up the centre of them.

You can believe George Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz who said Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

Or you can use your common sense? Who stands to gain? Who has the motive? Who has planned similar things like this before?