Belz...
Fiend God
The issue is-
1. Prove that a new PH was deemed by the neo cons as propitious to policy (done)
Done ? You're the only one that agrees with that claim. The fact that we've conceded it for the sake of argument once or twice doesn't mean squat.
2. Prove that the neo cons were criminally negligent in failing to prevent said new PH
And you can't do this.
If this can be done, then the case for a new investigation into connivance, cannot be refuted.
Criminal negligence STILL doesn't mean 9/11 was an inside job.