If 911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB THEN DOES ANYBODY THINK ?

Question

They would hesitate for one second about detonating a nuclear weapon in the US if that is what it took to achieve thier goals .

Please approach this as a hypothetical question and not an assertion that i am saying it was an inside job.

Answer 1

I think everybody should question everything. I don't understand why people are so naive enough to say it was not with out really looking into it. Why wouldn't our government cause a disaster in our country if it benefited what they where trying to do. Think about what has happened sense 9/11. Our government has been allowed to do what ever they want, and our bill of rights has been folded up nicely and put away somewhere in Washington. I don't really think the the general American public has realized that the only rights we still have. Are the rights to bare arms, rights of religion, and the right to not house British solders. Our government can now tap your phones lines. Enter your house and take you away. Then torture you for as long as they want. For what ever reason they want to, and you never get a trial to find out if your guilty or not... I am not saying that 9/11 was or was not an inside job. All I am saying is ask the question... Think for yourself. Don't just believe what you are told to believe. If you take the time to do a little research you will find out that there is a lot of evidence to suggest that what we where told what happened is probably "NOT" what really happened...

Answer 2

Okay, let me set up the logic. IF 911 was an inside job AND IF detonating a nuclear weapon in the US was the ONLY way to achieve their goals THEN would they not hesitate?

{(I ^ D) <=> A
A --> ~H

In that case I would have to say no, it would be bombs away. But I don't think the premises are true. I don't think 911 was an inside job (~I), and I don't think there are any goals that could only be met by detonating a nucelar bomb (~A) inside the US. I've forgotten the rules for validating an argument based on truth tables, but simple syllogistic logic based on ~I and ~A leads to ~D (Modus Tolens).

Think about it for half a second. A nuclear attack, blamed on somebody else, would require a nuclear retaliation. Against who? Terrorists aren't states, and nuclear strikes imply massive collateral damage that the citizenry wouldn't support if the state itself weren't attacking us. I suppose if they could blame a country they might think about it, but to what purpose? Oil? Tough to get oil out of a radioactive zone. Foreign relations? We'd be a pariah on the world stage unless the other country flat admitted to doing it, which I doubt would happen since it was an inside job. Then you have the damage that you've done to yourself. Katrina practically broke down society in 3 states, can you imagine a nuclear detonation? I honestly don't think there's any payoff that would be worth the price, not to mention the risk. So I conclude that H, ~A, ~D, and ~I

Answer 3

Definitely possible...cause if 9/11 was an inside job they went to extremes that required a lot of planning, and certain people would have benefited well from it. I think it's just a matter of time before something else happens. Sad that it would most likely be our own higher ups. A lot pointed to 9/11 being an inside job...weird that a week or two before it happened that an insurance policy was takin out on the building for terrorism for an obscene amount of money and if you watch the footage ,stories below the planes on each building, it sure looked like explosions helping them come down in exact locations. Almost like a demolition job...But when you have scared , hurt and angry people, they can easily be lead to believe that someone else did it. If it's true it just shows you what some people will do to get what they want done... greed is a bad thing, and I agree question everything. If you ever get the opportunity watch 'Spare Change'

Answer 4

IF 9/11 was an inside job, "they" would live here and would not detonate a nuclear weapon in the US.
IF it was an inside job, "their goal" would've been more economic than political.

Answer 5

the evidence is overwhelming this is exchange into an interior interest. i could checklist it even though it too lots, as properly the morons who doubt the evidence will in no way have confidence it, so why waste my time. Our gov. did no longer do 9/11, Bush and his team did. this is a actuality. what bothers me extra is the reality that the yank human beings won't even entertain the reality. they only pass alongside with each and every thing the gov tells them on the 6 o'clock information and don't something. in ordinary terms one element i'm specific of is, this is no longer my fathers usa. by employing the way the hollow contained in the Pentagon exchange into in ordinary terms sixteen ft. did see an engine rotor, it exchange into approximately 2 ft for the period of, no longer the 9 ft required for a 757 engine. additionally in between the 1st information clips I observed approximately 8 men ending up what seemed to be a pair of 10ft x 3ft tube lined in a white sheet, it exchange into contained in the history of somebody being interviewed. observed those issues with my very own eyes no longer a conspiracy.

Answer 6

That is an impossibility in all angles. Nobody in the Government, specially Bush, is that smart.
Nuclear weapons are a "Political Deterrent" or an "Excuse" to keep the world in "check".
Anybody with half a brain would know that if there's no "Carcase" there's no feeding the "parasites".

Answer 7

Ya know, if they did, and they would the second they had the chance, (and we all know who "They" are) It would give us, the U.S the final excuse we need to liquidate these savages and ALL countries who support them directly or indirectly.
Except for the handfull of breeding pairs that would make world zoo tours, like the Pandas.
So go ahead. Light us up. It won't be the end of the world. Just a brand new one.

Answer 8

The answer is no.


And that is not an assertion that I'm saying it was inside job either. I do have suspicions with regards to the official story and such, but thats all.

Answer 9

No. That'd probably be easier to pull off secretly than 9/11. It would involve fewer conspirators, for instance.

Of course, were that the case, I'd also expect 9/11 'truthers' to disapear with such alacrity that thier message would never get out...

Answer 10

No, because it would destroy too much ( i.e. police order, economy, etc.) for the government to function. Maybe something more similiar to 9/11. Where just enough people would die and people would be afraid and, they, in turn would trust their government to the extreme.

"When the government fears the people there is liberty, when the people fear the government there is tyranny" - Thomas Jefferson