In news:g4bs92d2sdv7u4n33ncj2bovj4m8udobkb@4ax.com,
Widdershins <sinistre@liripipe.com> typed:

Keep in mind; the best evidence for a conspiracy is the absolute
lack of evidence to support it.

Well actually no...
In a murder trial you need both a motive, and evidence (i.e. a body) You can
have all the evidence in the World, but if this doesn't support a sensible
and plausible motive it is worth absolutely Jack Shit.

I think that is the fundamental problem with the official story of 9/11. Why
would a Al Queda want to attack the US, knowing full well what the
consequences are likely to be and the fact that they could not possibly win
against a Superpower? Problem is there doesn't appear to be any logical
explanation. or Motive for an Al Queda attack. What did they expect to
Achieve?

OTOH you can come up with logical reasons why the US might want to invade
Afghanistan and Iraq. You can arrive at logical reasons why the Israelies
might want to manipulate the US into a war against Islam.

There are a variety of possible motives, but none of them appear to point to
Al Queda. Unless they were hoping the US would blame Mossad and attack
Israel.

So whilst there appears to be evidence, it doesn't count for much without a
realistic and plausible motive.

-- 
Amanda