Does that not seem like a reasonable request or demand, when the future of "Democracy" is at stake?
Indeed you should be inquisitive, skeptical and doubt aspects presented mainstream'ishly if you will, however, one shouldn't make crap up or throw wild speculations around like candy (like Alex Jones does all too often).
Naturally the US Government, from a variety of intelligence sources, reports etc, recieve threats and information about possible terrorist activity and plans every day throughout the year. But... was the information concerning 9/11 enough for an interception?
Did the Government simply drop the ball on obvious enough information, or was it too inconclusive and too late? Or did they purposely turn a blind-eye to very specific information that could have caused and interception of the hijackers?
This is what I ment with it leading to wild speculation.
To establish a link between Mossad, CIA, FBI and prior knowledge of the actual hijackers and the actual plans is prone to cause such short-handed speculations, chasing after rainbows and theories that are virtually impossible to establish from any bits of known information, satisfyingly that is.
To establish such a link, we would first have to see that the Mossad, CIA and or FBI had enough information on the specific terrorists and their plans, to intercept the actual hijackers before they could have acted on their plans. We must know that they did have it, not just assume or guess.
This is exactly where the unfalsifiable pitch comes calling;"Well the Feds must have buried the evidence" or what have you. It sounds cute and it could be true but so "could" a lot of things. It is not coherent nor advisable to use such an excuse as a way of maintaining an already handicapped thesis.
If they (the US Government) didn't have enough information to intercept them (the perps), then the issue is a non-sequitor. Because, if the US Government were to close down airlines over the country or parts of it, airports due to every threat as so, me thinks that they would more or less have to be shut down for most parts of the year. I doubt there's a shortage on threats and warnings about terrorist activity, nor plans thereof.
A further comparison necessary for people eager to connect Mossad or the US Government with the "prior knowledge" issue as so, would be to find some sort of comparison between the plethora of different threats, warnings etc during the months before 9/11. Studying the nature of each and every element of threat, evaluating the necessities for investigating a particular threat more closely, evaluating the possible ways to circumvent the threat before hand through gathering up enough information to pin-point the dates, targets, suspects etc without causing too much social chaos or disturbance (
shutting down airports, grounding planes and so forth due to suspicions based on too inconclusive reports or rumours is generally shunned, this is something I do know about law enforcement and intelligence work)
The main point is that, if it is to be called an "inside job" by any stretch of ones imagination, there had to have been enough incriminating information and viable leads for the US Government to do an interception on the given hijackers prior to 9/11.
If there wasn't enough leads/information leading up through the terrorist-string to these specific muslims and their specific plans prior to 9/11 then not any branch of the Government can be considered a co-conspirator as so.
