1. a secret agreement between two or more people to perform an unlawful act
2. a plot to carry out some harmful or illegal act (especially a political plot)
3. a group of conspirators banded together to achieve some harmful or illegal purpose

Applying the above definition, ask yourself the following question:
Was the attack on the World Trade Center, in 2001, a conspiracy?
Because it was an illegal act and carried out in secrecy by some group of people, I’d say it fits the definition of a conspiracy and we should all agree that we are all thinking that it was a conspiracy

Now, the only question is, Who did it?
Did our government do it or did some guy in a cave do it?
The evidence is clear, but all that evidence was removed swiftly by government
Why would they do that?

There are only two suspects, right? Government or a group of suspicious Muslim extremists

Are there any other possibilities, other than the attack was either carried out by our own government or the buildings were wired with explosives and thalomite, including building #7 and NORAD stood down for a guy in a cave? No, there are no other conspiracies theorized to date

Look at definition #2…………especially a political plot
It seems that the dictionary is advising us to suspect government
Maybe we should heed the advice

We have a new president now and we need to open up this case and do a real investigation on it

You should demand it and all of us should be talking about it, because we still don’t know how building #7 came down
All we know is,
1. No planes flew into Building #7
2. Building #7 was loaded with incriminating documents about Enron and investigations of links between government and business
3. It came down in the classic demolition style
4. Larry Silverstein said he was advised to ‘pull it’, (demolish it with explosives)

If it was a conspiracy, it was the sloppiest one since the JFK, broad daylight assassination and cover up by the FBI and CIA
Where are all those videos, shot by people in the crowd and why did the FBI collect them and never release them to the public?

Why did the FBI collect all the videos of the Pentagon attack on 9/11 and never release them to the public?

Are we finally going to demand the release of this evidence?
If some guy in a cave did it, why not release the evidence and let us see what the evidence tells us?
Maybe the conspirators don’t want us to know the facts of this very important case

Maybe it’s time to secede from the union and release the federal government, the FBI, the CIA and the IRS…………all in one fell swoop………because each one is another conspiracy to commit illegal acts

Yes, we are all conspiracy theorists……..because there is clearly a conspiracy!

Larry Wingo
California, USA
Phone + 1 760 843-9540

You filthy presstitutes are going to pay for your crimes, make no mistake.

First, BBC said it’s wasn’t a live feed, and the reporter was infront of a screen.

Well, that was easily debunked

Then they said they “lost the tapes” and had no backups
Then they said they “misplaced” the tapes
Now they say it was Reuters fault.

See the pattern? Reminds me of another pattern:

Saddam did 9/11
Ok, no he didn’t, but he supported them
Ok, no he didn’t, but he’s got nukes
Ok, no he doesn’t but he has bio and chemical weapons
Ok, no he doesn’t but he’s got small drones that can attack the US
Ok, no he doesn’t, we’re there to liberate the people

Same shit, different pile. This is how these liars work, just pile more lies on top of more lies, making them bigger and more exaggerated as they grow. Retractions? Never, doesn’t matter if it’s true or false, as long as it’s on the main stream news at least once, it’s job is done.

BBC was complicit in the attacks, and played an active role doling out tidbits of the fairytale. They learned their lesson before 7/7, didn’t report that before it happened.

So, we’re all crazy, but do me this 1 favor BBC. Please point me towards the clairvoyant working at Reuters that is able to accurately predict future events such as the first steel frame building in history to collapse due to fire, let alone collapse at recorded free fall speeds, into it’s own footprint.

Here’s some simple logic about building 7. We know it was hit with debris, and small fires were present on a few floors. office fires can MAYBE get hot enough to degrade the steel, but it would take hours, leaving building 7 as the only building that “burned” long enough for this to actually happen.

The problem is, it’s a perfectly symmetrical collapse, it kinks in the middle, falls straight down ignoring the laws of physics and conservation of momentum, and folds in on itself, barely damaging anything around it.

Well folks, fires do NOT burn evenly. This means, wt7, if fire was the cause, should have buckled and collapsed unevenly, as fire burns and moves to a new location to consume more fuel. Fire simply couldn’t cause the collapse we all witnessed, even if you ignore the basic laws of physics and gravity, the fire simply can’t cause a symmetrical collapse like WTC7.

but you won’t hear the BBC discussing THAT theory. No no, they reserve their airtime for the bogus theories none of us actually believe, but that’s the trick. It’s the same reason we’re being called anti-semites and neo-nazis. Ignore the discussion, assassinate the character of the speaker.

As for the videos being removed from youtube, well, according to the note i got when i attempted to view one, it was taken down due to a dmca request by the copyright holder.

that can only be the BBC. So if the bbc “lost the tapes” and was frantically trying to get source copies from other sources, why go on the offensive and try to make that video disappear? Are you that stupid to think you can “erase” it from the internet, and history?