Tom Usher wrote or added | This is pretty good throughout, but it gets very interesting at 1:09 into the video. Former Wall Street investment banker Karl Schwartz does an excellent job of following the money, which truly is the best rule in investigating when so much money is at stake. Sometimes raw passion gets the better of money, but it still always pays to consider the money aspect before thinking something is as it's been portrayed – such as anti-terrorism or pro-democracy and "freedom," etc.
Among other reasons, the fact that there was so much conflict of interest in the 9/11 Commission begs out for a new, independent, no-holds-barred, follow-every-lead, criminal investigation.
Both articles ducked questions of whether US officials planned or facilitated or allowed 9/11. They just assumed that al Qaeda was as presented in the mainstream and did the whole thing (9/11) by itself, two things I find preposterous given everything else that is even publicly known.
I don't know how deep or wide the conspiracy is/was, but there was some insider involvement.
Anyway, there was useful info in each article. Thanks Earl.
Thanks to you too, Chris 'Pyrate' McCabe. [She "liked" the post.]
Not too many are willing to go there with what they know. Why, they might be labelled conspiracy theorists.
Right, so they buy and echo the "official" conspiracy theory.