Did the government have prior intelligence of/cause/allow 9/11?

Answer 1

That's actually a three-part question but never mind :) All parts are related to one theme and it's well structured.

The non-biased answer to your question goes like this (and BTW I am not an American and will therefore not be voting shortly, so I am looking in from outside with nothing to gain or lose, so to speak):

IF they had intelligence prior to the event -- and that IF is the key to the whole thing -- it does not appear it was sufficiently specific to be acted upon, UNLESS that intelligence was:

of a type that related to their own direct or indirect involvement (for reasons that are not yet abundantly clear and unequivocal) and therefore no 'action' was necessary to prevent those events, OR:

this intelligence was NOT related to them (as stated above), but for reasons that are unclear they still allowed the events to occur.

That's the neutral answer. It neither supports nor denies the assumptions or suppositions of your question.

However, there are several million pages at least on the WWW that relate to these types of questions. The fact is that some people strongly hold to the opinion that the US govt was either directly involved or allowed the events to happen.

This all comes under the general heading of 'conspiracy theory'; there are also many who strongly hold to the opinion that all such theories vis a vis '9/11' are hogwash.

My personal answer, then? I am not privy to the secrets of the US government and I suspect most of us are in the same boat. In other words, we can propose any theories that we like (which in the US and in my own country is I think an inalienable right -- at least I hope it is), but we DON'T know! For this reason, rather than making a judgement I prefer to abide by the reasonable maxim of 'innocent until proven guilty.' In other words, I have yet to be convinced of a conspiracy, but I will remain open to any reasonable hypotheses and documented facts. Notice I say reasonable and documented. I believe that is the standard by which matters of conspiracy are normally judged.

Now to get technical:

I know for certain that planes were crashed into buildings and we have been told they were hijacked. It seems reasonable that they were, but as for the proof -- I have no access to the cockpit voice recorders' information and even if I had, I have no way to be certain it was not doctored. This does NOT mean I doubt the veracity of these things, just that they can be questioned if we choose to question them. I know that there are people who are willing to die for a cause. I do not know if all those who are alleged to have been hijackers were or were not involved. I do not have the resources to make such a judgement. Neither have most of us. I do not know if the attacks were planned or carried out by people allied to 'Al Qaeda', but that is the assertion of the US government. I have no way to know if they are telling the truth. Neither have most of us.

Such is where we actually stand.

I shall leave it to other respondents to present what they may consider to be the truth -- on either side.

Answer 2

Absolutely! There are many government and media publications to demonstrate this. See the 9/11 Commission Report. See Steve Coll's book 'Ghost War'. The latter was written prior to 9/11 but publish shortly after.

Answer 3

YES!

Watch Loose Change. Its a 9-11 documentary that asks alot of good questions that we the people deserve answers to.

Answer 4

Yes, they knew about it at least three months before it happened.

Answer 5

you bet your bippy the did

Answer 6

no