> It raises more questions than it answers (not in the "false flag!!!" sense, but in the "so who was actually behind this???" sense). Out of curiosity, what e

> It raises more questions than it answers (not in the "false flag!!!" sense, but in the "so who was actually behind this???" sense). Out of curiosity, what exactly would you need to believe that it was a false flag attack? Given the facts that: - On the morning of 9/11, the two folks the Bush administration chose to lead the investigation were watching the attacks over breakfast with the guy who ordered 100k to be wired to the lead hijacker to pay for the attacks. - Multiple top FBI officials have said they could have stopped the attacks but were prevented from doing so. - The secretary of transportation said he overheard what he interpreted as Cheney giving the order to shoot down one of the planes. - The Taliban offered to hand over Bin Laden if the U.S. presented evidence that he was involved in the attacks, and the Bush administration declined to do so. - The Bush administration prevented an independent investigation into the attacks for over a year, and when they finally allowed one they gave it almost no money and completely stonewalled it. - Members of the commission said they were lied to by people at every level of government but were prevented from doing anything about it. - Large portions of the report are still classified, and IIRC 2/3rds of the notes and transcripts of the commission are still classified. - The testimony of several whistleblowers was not included in the report, or they were not allowed to testify. Several whistleblowers were given gag orders. - The majority of the trial testimony of the gitmo detainees has been has been classified. And that's where the government didn't prevent them from testifying on certain subjects entirely in the first place. - One of the two main pieces of evidence linking Bin Laden to 9/11 was a video tape of someone confessing under torture, which was later destroyed. The second was a video of a short fat guy the government claimed was Bin Laden confessing to supporting the attacks, even though he looked nothing like Bin Laden, and Obama then refused to release pics of Bin Laden after his death to show the public whether or not his appearance really had actually been radically altered since his younger days. I mean short of jesus himself coming down and saying the government was involved in 9/11, I don't see what better evidence you could get. And those are only the most well verified facts, not including anything that is disputed or conspiracy-theorish, of which there are plenty more claims at varying levels of credibility. I'm not saying it's not possible that there wasn't a conspiracy, and I could see how other reasonable people could disagree, but I really don't see how anyone can look at the evidence and say that the 'conspiracy-theory' stuff is clearly nonsense.