Should Bush be tried for treason for orchestrating 9/11?

Question

Yes, I know I have asked this question before. You religious fundies just be aware that I voted for him twice. It was a horrible mistake, one in which I am sure some of you feel the same about.
Should it even be investigated more? I think so. After researching in depth, the events of 9/11, I am convinced that Bush new about it in the very least, and let it happen. But I, as well as many others, think he actually orchestrated it to get us into this "Global war on terrorism" ( more like errorism), to implement the start of a New World Order, which will eventually lead to all of our freedoms being taken away, and a prison planet.
Please, this is a serious question, keep your attacks to yourself. I just want to know what people are thinking out there.

Answer 1

There's no way on earth that Bush (could have) orchestrated (masterminded) the False Flag attack/inside job known as 9/11.

He is complicit on some level -but if make him the fall guy for it all, you are letting major culprits off the hook to strike again and again.

Answer 2

Which one ? Bush Sr. was involved more than his brat of a son. Bush Sr. was also in Dallas when JFK was shot. Bush Sr. was recruited and trained by the CIA in the mid 1950s to recruit and train terrorists to invade another sovereign country (Cuba). Bush Sr. has the family relationship with the Bin-Laden family as well as the financial relationship. Bush Sr. is a frustrated loser. If the Warren Commission Report wasn't so easy to cover up the facts the way the 9/11 Commission Report tried too. 9/11 never would have been planned. Bush Sr. had made to many promises to more powerful people than the Bush family and to much money had been spent prewriting legislation and customizing the aircraft that hit the towers and planting the explosives that they needed George W Bush in the White House to ensure things would go their way. That's where the Coup of the 2000 presidential election came into play. Having George W Bush lose was unacceptable and thus the Bush Sr. leaned on some of the Judges that should have, and were really required to, recuse themselves but they did not. The final 5-4 vote included a Judge that had been appointed by Bush Sr when he was President and another who Bush Sr. made sure was well rewarded afterward. The US Supreme Court gave the Bush crime family the US government and the power that went with it and they have been the real extremists terrorists trying to force "Globalization" of the world as their agenda. The US Constitution and Bill Of Rights have been eroded and taken away by these war criminals. assassins, terrorists, liars and killers. The Miller Center of Public Affairs of the University of Virginia has a web page called "American President: An online Reference Resource". It divides the US 200+ year history into 8 categories, listing the US Presidents who were in office during those periods. Although you will only see 6 categories when you scroll down the page from the link below, you will find the fourth and eighth category by moving the bar at the bottom of the page to the left. The 8th Category is labeled "Globalization (1989- )". The Presidents listed are "George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush". Hitler wanted to rule the world. Are these presidents any different ?

Answer 3

If he is indeed found to have done so, absolutely. However, as someone who does not buy the official myth about 9/11, I would say that in my opinion Bush did not orchestrate it. Did he know about it? Maybe, even likely. Did people in his administration know about it? Highly likely. However, while it may have been orchestrated under the protection of elements of US government and intelligence, the Pakistani ISI seems to be at the heart of the plot. The fact that the ISI has an extremely close relationship with the CIA, and that ISI general Mahmood Ahmed - who personally ordered the wiring of $100,000 to Atta by ISI associate and confessed Daniel Pearl murderer Omar Sheikh Sayed - was in Washington meeting with high level officials the week of 9/11, are certainly suspicious, it does not necessarily point to Bush himself. The official story is a myth. That is beyond doubt. However, to automatically assume that "Bush did it" is overly simplistic and undermines the work of people taking a logical, academic approach to finding out what happened. BTW, many of the machinations that cast suspicion on elements of the US government were taking place while Clinton was still in office. See Able Danger.

Kelvin B - read a book or something sometime and maybe you won't be such a tool. BTW, the chief engineer of the WTC construction, Frank DeMartini, said that the buildings would easily withstand multiple airplane strikes, like "pencils in a mosquito net." 56 minutes of limited fires (even raging infernos for that matter - it's only 56 minutes) are not enough to weaken every structual steel beam in the building to the point of providing no resistance whatsoever. You can keep on babbling pseudo science, but it doesn't make you right.

Answer 4

N O, 9/11 was orchestrated in 1993 when Clinton was in office and was NOT PRESIDENT George W. Bush's fault. He DID NOT know that these terrorists were going to do this attack. These
B******* were planning this way before PRESIDENT Bush took office. The only person that should be tried for treason would be Clinton
and Sandy Berger for selling Military Secrets to the RED CHINESE and for failure to catch Osama bin Laden when Sudan offered to turn OBL over to the US Government!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BTW, I am NOT a so-called religious fundie or whatever that is.
US ARMY(RETIRED) 1958 - 1979

Answer 5

No, he should be tried for it because it was done by Al Qaeda.

Some points in support of this:

THE TOWERS WERE NOT MADE TO WITHSTAND "MULTIPLE PLANE STRIKES"

Leslie Robertson, one of the chief designers of the twin towers, said that the towers were designed to handle the impact of a Boeing 707, but not a 767. He said they did NOT take into account the burning fuel, either. These 2 factors made all the difference. (Popular Mechanics, “Debunking 9/11 Myths” page 31)

Robertson was “racked with grief after 9/11,” meaning he was angry that he hadn't considered the effect of burning fuel

THE TOWERS DID NOT COLLAPSE FROM THE FIRE ALONE

The twin towers did not collapse from fire alone, therefore whether or not any steel-frame building ever collapsed from fire alone is irrelevant.

The towers mainly collapsed due to the large number of supports being knocked out by the jets.

As NIST (National Institute of Science & Technology) says:
"About 60% of the 60 columns of the impacted face of framed-tube were severed, and many more were significantly deflected. “

The remaining supports had to hold up about 200,000 tons and were near the failure point. Meanwhile, the raging fire started weakening these remaining supports. (Steel loses half its strength at 600 deg C. Melting is not necessary nor did it occur)

THere is not an expert on record who says that "all the steel" weakened at once. That's a made-up "fact"

For an expert explanation of the collapse, see
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/
(Click on “Impact to collapse” )

Answer 6

1.) He can't orchestrate a lie (WMDs <> Iraq), let alone what would have been the biggest lie in all history;

2.) In all the intervening years, despite what would have required a massive number of co-conspirators, NOT ONE has come forth to tell the tale. This is simply impossible, given human nature;

3.) Saudi pig murderers flew the planes into the buildings and into the ground.

Edit: Some people have scary looking avatars around here, and I'll just BET they "know something!" >wink!<

Answer 7

Sure, try him. YOu get the congress together, they are the only ones that can do it. You get the Attorney general to bring the charges. You get the credible witnesses. You find a venue, you seat a jury, you find a fair and impartial judge. Until you can do any ONE of these things you are simply blowing hot air. Researching, in depth, that really cracks me up. UTUBE have you? Gosh this should have been in the jokes department.
You want to know what we are thinking then say keep your attacks to ourselves, cant have both boy.

Answer 8

Like FDR knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor?

Was he a Dem or a Rep

Answer 9

Bush just isn't smart enough to even think of this and even if he was I don't believe for a minute that he knew about it or let it happen.

Answer 10

How about instead of trying him for something he didn't do we try him for the things he has done such as illegal wiretaps, circumventing both the statutory law and the Constitution, etc?

I am not sure what research you have done but those folks who claim we never landed on the moon think they have researched the issue also.