logically I would think this, but then at the same time I think... say people crazy enough to want to assassinate major political figures and celebrities seem unconsionably rare. There's dozens of random killings and shootings every day. Why aren't the daily slough of school shooters going after high schools, instead of setting their sights higher on going for senators or activists they disagree with, or CEOs.

I’ve done this for 25 years.

And I've been hearing people make up wacky conspiracy theories for 25 years.

There is enough details out there on the internet to convince anyone with a functioning brain that your theory is correct or mine

Not if you know anything about engineering and aren't looking to validate your own conspiracies.

the end, some one’s 9/11 opinion is just a reflection on whether they believe dark societal influences are capable of plotting, executing and looking the other way while others are plotting and executing.

There's such a thing as objectivity, there is plenty of actual evidence out there to disprove the vast majority of what people claim about 9/11.

The only logical thing to do due to the flooding of evidence is looking at the history

That's not logical..... That's just fallacy. Just because actual conspiracies exist, it does not mean all confusing events are conspiracy. What does that mean for the first attack on the world trade center in 93' what conspiracy was at the root of that event?

from the dropping of the bombs

I assume you mean the nuclear bombs? I don't really see the conspiracy angle? Sure there's deeper inteigue on the motivations of Truman.... But that hardly counts as conspiracy.

having a magic bullet with very sharp turns kill a US president

Again..... That's a theory, not actually what happened. The killing of JFK was most likely the result of gross incompetency, and the attempt by the secret service and the feds trying to cover up their incompetency.

the rise of the MIC (Eisenhouwer’s final words)

Eisenhower himself is a large reason why the MIC developed in the first place. People forget the rest of his speech where he calls out the need to grow America's weapons capability to win the Cold war. It wasn't a conspiracy, it was a cautious call to action.

decoupling of the dollar to gold by Nixon in 74

Because the gold standard was dumb, and it led to foreign nations buying up our reserves anytime gold became more valuable than the price set by Congress. It was bleeding us dry in the middle of a recession

hiding of the true money reserves

There is no such thing as real or fake money when you have a fiate currency. This is just a poor understanding of macro economics.

the way to the SC installing a president in 2000…

Again, political scandal and failure to rectify the court is not really a hidden conspiracy. The brooks brother riot and the sc actions afterwards is well documented and known by anyone who is current on modern American history.

You can zoom in like you do with the reason why the steel was shipped off or when the pentagon reinforcement started, but you only go there as long as it is comfortable to try and destabilise the person you’re arguing with.

You mean I can rationally think about a theory to tell if it is logically sound? Like the same thing anyone does for any basic problem solving?

A better question would be why are those questions significant? You beg questions but won't allude to their significants, mainly because that would require you to propose an actual theory that would be easily taken apart.

This is where your arguments are so clever: the steel one sidesteps that this was a crime scene, and the steel was evidence. By asking that question you put the onus on me, rather than having to admit that the crime scene and investigation was not done according to procedure.

You have this backwards..... There is an established theory of the events with plenty of evidence to back what led to the towers falling. You are questioning that theory of event, but you aren't proposing a reason why. I am not submitting an argument, you are. I am simply questioning the reason for your argument and why it's relevant. If you are questioning a theory established with evidence, then you have to submit a reason why and with evidence.

this was a crime scene, and the steel was evidence

There is a difference between a national disaster and simple murder investigation. How exactly are you proposing this "evidence" was supposed to help the investigation more than it already had? Where were we going to store thousands of tons of wrecked steel? Why would we want to do that?

was not done according to procedure.

According to who? What procedure are we talking about?

Yes, that’s why so many people did it. I basically retired on it

And what are you trying to claim......?

Again, sidestepping that this is a heavily surveilled area, all footage was instantly confiscated (like that was planned beforehand) and only half a dozen frames were released ever of the impact.

Heavily surveiled for 2001..... There were only 80 security cameras on/in the facility at the time. Which for 2001 was a lot, but not enough to get multiple angles of a plane flying at 500mph. Any investigation is going to start by "confiscating" aka gathering the evidence.

not at all proving beyond a reasonable doubt it was a plane.

What are you wanting....? They released pictures of parts of the plane scattered on site. They released the distribution of body parts found on site from pentagon employees, airline riders, and even the terrorists themselves. What level of evidence do you need?

Epstein Class behind the organisations can accomplish and how they can sidestep, control and manipulate almost any aspect of any government.

I'm not claiming people in the government can't be influenced, just that there is no evidence that 9/11 was some sort of massive conspiracy that required the government to step in and do it themselves. Capable terrorist going against incompetent government agencies often lead to terrible outcomes.

The covert groups and cults that planned and executed this had the motive, the opportunity and the ability to do so, and gave the US 2 forever wars for 2 decades and trillions in MIC spending.

I feel like people who do not have a reasonable grasp of history need to fill in the gaps in their knowledge about the world with some sort of overarching plot. The longest the US has been engaged in one conflict or another for nearly every year of its existence, estimates range from 12 to 30 years of peace depending on how you define conflict/war out of 240 years.

Forever war is the status quo, not the exception. There is an old saying coined by Winston Churchill "never let a good tragedy go to waste". Politicians will use any crisis as a means to achieve their political goals, but that doesn't mean they have to create the crisis.

did you know Boeing, the company that makes the planes you fly on has murdered multiple whistleblowers? Never found guilty of anything. They were just suicides.

You could say I believe Boeing has killed whitleblowers, and I would find that probable. You can't claim they've definitely done it in these specific scenarios with any sort of confidence.

"Highly publicized allegations of insider trading in advance of 9/11 generally rest on reports of unusual pre-9/11 trading activity in companies whose stock plummeted after the attacks. Some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation. For example, the volume of put options — investments that pay off only when a stock drops in price — surged in the parent companies of United Airlines on September 6 and American Airlines on September 10 — highly suspicious trading on its face. Yet, further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection with 9/11. A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades. These examples typify the evidence examined by the investigation. The SEC and the FBI, aided by other agencies and the securities industry, devoted enormous resources to investigating this issue, including securing the cooperation of many foreign governments. These investigators have found that the apparently suspicious consistently proved innocuous.[22]"

So it's not opinion or truther/conspiracy bullshit, documented and historical facts point to some people connected with and also within the intelligence apparatus had foreknowledge on several aspects of the upcoming attacks: dates, airlines involved and apparently also one of the targets (the WTC).

I will read through it properly later, but at first glance it seems they are stringing events together much like a conspiracy theorist.