Question for those who believe that 9/ 11 was an inside job

Hypothetical

December 2000, the Supreme Court decides in favor or Gore/Lieberman and they become President/ Vice President in January of 2001.

September of 2001, the 9/11 attacks happen the exact same way with the same official story.

Would you still believe the attacks to be an inside job?

If all the evidence was the same of course. It has nothing to do with who is in the white house, it has everything to do with physics and the impossibility of fires completely demolishing 3 buildings to their basements.

Let me ask the de-bunkers a question?

If it was Clinton in office instead of Bush would you still say it wasn't an inside job?

I know you're trying to turn this into a black and white cons and dems thing but for me anyway that ain't it mate and I hope for no others either. Government is government and the only thing that really changes is the name.

I agree with you on the government is government situation.

I am not trying to debunk I am just asking the question. More to see how politics plays into ones believe about the events of 9/11 than anything else.

[edit on 7/25/2007 by DarkStormCrow]

I hear ya. I've wondered the same thing myself, thus my question about Clinton. I know a lot of people believe the official story for political reasons only, and I bet if it had happened during Clintons reign they would be screaming 'inside job'.

Maybe some of the truthers would be de-bunkers in the same situation. I hope that isn't the case. People should look at 9-11 for what it is, and not be biased by their political beliefs. But some folks are so wrapped up in the left right paradigm that everything they believe is biased. The sooner we all realise that the same game is played by both sides and we're the ball, then the sooner the truth can come out and we can clean up the crap for the better of all of us.
If we continue allowing ourselves to be played then we deserve the future that's coming.

My disposition towards G. W. Bush did not lead me to believe 9/11 was an inside job.

Yes, I would still believe it was an inside job, no matter which puppet was in the White House.

I agree with Anok....

No matter who was in office it was going to happen. It didn't take only 8 months for OBL and the terrorists to orchestrate the attack.

Hmmm... well... now that I think about it... Would it have been different if there were a different Republican president? Or Gore had won? Would they have looked at the threats that were documented and reacted differently? We will never know.

Well, Gore did win... that did not seem to matter, though.

I would still believe it was an inside job but only after a period of years of being a sucker supporter of the criminal regime, as I was with the Bush administration.

But the real test of all this will be the advent of a Democratic administration after '08 (save your campaign money GOP supporters, it's going to be ugly in '08).

I personally do not believe American foreign policy will change appreciably under the Dems. I hope I am wrong, but I am coming to the belief that both parties are the sometimes unwitting tools of interests that keep a very low profile in the public awareness. I think Alex Jone's take on things is close to the mark. The Democrats can expect as much criticism from me as Bush got if they pursue similar policies and methods.

Exactly. It doesn't matter. Same with the 2004 election. If they keep you convinced that it's a close race, and push hard to keep the figures looking around 50/50 on TV, then they'll just put in whoever they actually want.

I've said it before but I'm not naive enough to believe that of all the people in this country, it should come down to a decision by so few, not only once but twice in a row for the same president (2000 and 2004). Do you guys realize how astronomically small the difference in votes were between the two candidates, compared to how many voted altogether? Do you know what the odds are of that happening? Very small. Do you know the odds of it happening two elections in a row? It's uncanny. Two of the closest elections in our history, in such circumstances.

You'd think all of the idiocy in his first four years would sway the balances just a little. Look up Diebold; look up the staged republican riots in Florida in 2000. Bush has not been legitimately elected a single time, but it doesn't look like that stops anybody.

The fact of the matter is that even if the elections were 100% staged, no one would do anything about it. No one really cares.

[edit on 25-7-2007 by bsbray11]

IMO I dont tink pres/vice pres would really make a big difference... CIA's are known to be involve in secret missions or planning.. sameting to other organizations... but hey just my opinion

Just as much as I believe it now. Remember though that I only believe it was let to happen and the people who performed it where the people we are told.

Why is that so hard to understand, especially considering the involvement of the FBI in the '93 bombing?

Good point. I'd bet that Gore would have at least taken the threats more seriously. That was very politically motivated. The admin (republicans) didn't listen to the previous admin (democrats). I bet a dem admin would have taken the threats more seriously. That's were politics comes into play here.

I don't think it would have mattered if Gore was president. The respose may have been different maybe, but not by much. The MIC needed something to kickstart a new wave of weapon developement and the Neocons needed to "rebuild Americas defences" and the WTC's needed to be demolished because of the asbestos problem.

Imagine a "Mission Impossible" type operation where actual terrorists were duped into believing they were acting independantly but were merely pawns. Led down the path by covert operatives and aided by private corperations with no allegence to any one country.

I know this is quite far fetched, just an idea floating in my head.

Infinityoreilly out

off topic just a tiny bit....dont want to be blamed for derailing.....

[edit on 25-7-2007 by wenfieldsecret]

So we could conclude that the Conspiracy was beyond Government, and that the Government whatever political affiliation could or would be out of the loop in such a Conspiracy?

Yes, I know plenty of people who work for the Government and there not in on it. Now this doesn't mean there aren't people in government that knew what was happening, just when you say "the government is behind it" it just doesn't ring true for me.

Well when it comes to the 9-11 I am an fence sitter I neither swallow official story whole or commit to the idea that were explosives in the tower. Since corruption and the corporate gravy train spans both sides of the political fence if Gore had won the oval office my opinion would be no differnt.

My question to you is would you still believe that it wasn't an inside job if you learned that Al Qaeda was used in the Clinton-Gore engineered Balkan's sectarian conflicts, and that they let Usama go when they could have had him?

Al Qaeda: "The CI-A Team"
Osama's Satellite phone: History Channel debunks the entire 911 Commission Report



That is part of the story. Can anyone guess why he would hand over the prseidency?

I actually have an open mind on the subject. My purpose with this thread is to see how ones politics affects what they believe happened not to debunk or confirm any theory.

Dig. Check my miniprofile there. It's all the same beast once you get over partisan politics and the emotional-moral-wedge-issues.