Is it possible...

...that the official story is true, AND it was an inside job?

Like, maybe it WAS a calculated attack by Muslim Terrorists, who unbeknownst to them, were working under the orders of the American government. The Bush family's ties to the Saudi's is no big secret... maybe they just said "hey, have YOUR sheep smash up our trade centers, we need it for political gain and to help control OUR sheep".

This way, very few people need to be in on it, AND they wouldn't have to be too concerned over there being holes in the story, knowing that technically the official story was true.

Not only does this theory curb the feelings many get about something not seeming right regarding the events of 9/11, but it also doesn't require the easily debunkable faulty logic used by many "truthers".

reply to post by Jack Squat


It's as possible as any other conspiracy out there.
Crazier things have happened by coincidence.

Maybe just maybe it was supposed Muslim's that were working for the government to take these planes and crash them into the towers?

Maybe this was done with a hand of our government..

Maybe Bin Laden stated a few times he had nothing to do with 9/11..

Maybe Bun Laden has been officially charged with the events of 9/11..

Maybe just maybe our government lied to us before?

And maybe just maybe this is another one of them cases where a New Pearl Harbor happened..

And maybe just maybe Our military got a new unlimited spending budget due to 9/11..

And maybe just maybe there are WMD's in Iraq..

And maybe just maybe we are spreading decrapocy in a peaceful manner..

And maybe just maybe there wasn't plans to goto Iraq on Bush's desk on 9/10..

And maybe just maybe there wasn't an oil pipeline planned through Afghanistan.

And maybe just maybe the Taliban killed the opium fields in Afghanistan..

I donno.. Maybe just maybe this is all made up...

Isnt it funny how maybe works?

===============
::EDIT::

So you know i can do maybe all day.. wanna play?

Originally posted by Jack Squat
...that the official story is true, AND it was an inside job?

Like, maybe it WAS a calculated attack by Muslim Terrorists, who unbeknownst to them, were working under the orders of the American government. The Bush family's ties to the Saudi's is no big secret... maybe they just said "hey, have YOUR sheep smash up our trade centers, we need it for political gain and to help control OUR sheep".

This way, very few people need to be in on it, AND they wouldn't have to be too concerned over there being holes in the story, knowing that technically the official story was true.

Not only does this theory curb the feelings many get about something not seeming right regarding the events of 9/11, but it also doesn't require the easily debunkable faulty logic used by many "truthers".

This is a kissing cousin to the "let it happen on purpose" where it really was a genuine terrorist attack but the gov't allowed it to happen to use as a pretext for further plans. You don't hear about this scenario too often simply for the reason that it's too boring- it doesn't have sinister secret agents murdering peopel for no reason nor does it have world wide conspiracies, and it certainly doesn't have complex schemes involving secret controlled demolitions or laser weapons from outer space.

My own viewpoint that there is a conspiracy, namely, that the gov't is concealing just how badly they [censorted] up in preventing the attack and dealing with the attack, and noone wants to come forward to admit their incompetence allowed 3000 people to get killed. This is being ignored for exactly the same reason, despite the fact I can come up with WAY more documented examples of gov't incompetence than they can documented examples where a skyscraper was demolished by secret controlled demolitions.

The truth is of lesser importance than how outrageously convoluted they can make it.

the "hijackers" are no doubt patsies, people who were either drugged up or encouraged to do something illegal, and so there is no reason why they would need to know the plan. In some ways I agree with your theory, but this doesn't mean the official story is right, because that would mean Bush was telling the truth, when according to your own logic bush would be friends with the saudis.

This is possible yet would not explain how the 757's flew into their targets given that none of them could even pilot a single engine cessna successfully.
Nor would it explain the collapse of 3 skyscrapers, unless you put faith into NIST's computer modeling.
Your theory would explain the following:
Why NORAD failed to intercept any of the 4 hijacked airliners
Why Washington air defenses stood down and allowed the Pentagon to be attacked

Your theory has merit but I think a plan b would have had to have been in place in case anyone changed their minds. This is why I believe the aircraft were remotely piloted, to ensure their success in hitting their targets. A large number of people associated with remote piloting were supposedly on board flight 77, who were leaving Washington after a conference. Extremely odd, like so many things about 9/11.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


Hate to say it, but it would be against our governments track record if they werent at least complicit. Face it - our foreign policy is and has been for at least the last two hundred years, equivalent to poking a caged dog with a stick till it snaps at us, because then we have an excuse to shoot it.