The problem of course is that interviewers frame 9/11 as a conspiracy and want to know who. what, where and so forth. Virtually all 9/11 Truthers have discovered evidence which lies outside the conventional explanation and vary in their demands from: wanting answers and a new investigation to explain those facts and discover more such as who else was involved and see where it goes... to others who allege specific individuals as culprits and assume their agenda of dominance and control. For the latter, the present government and established is just doing its thing and claiming a legitimate role in "protecting" the people - ir fighting terrorism. For the former... those who want answers... they always get back to the same questions... who could have placed the explosives, how and why.

One has to be very skilled to deflect and answer the typical MSM questions. They don't care to discuss arcane facts such as falling through the path of most resistance... and the interviewers will admit to not having enough science or engineering to understand or counter any arguments.

The interviewee needs to establish some facts - broad facts about history whenever answering interviews about false flags or even crimes. All those who commit crimes and false flags ESPECIALLY plan to have scapegoats, patsies or someone else appear to have committed the crime so that they escape suspicion. This is part of planning a crime - leave evidence which points away from you and toward someone else.

In the case of False Flags these are state actions done for political objectives... such as create the environment to get support for war... Gulf of Tonkin, sinking of the Maine, and so forth. False flags ARE a international political fact... they are not the creation of conspiracy nut jobs. Even with the JFK assassination there were claims that Oswald was a fall guy, and others actually carried out the crime.

Terrorists often CLAIM credit for their acts because they are done "in secret" and they need the PR .. that THEY were successful in their action... which is why Islamic suicide bombers prepare videos in advance with their political motives and their acts are scene as martydom. Didn't happen with the 19 Hijackers... not a one made a video or wrote a treatise and this is completely out of character for terrorists.

The alleged leader OBL claimed he was NOT behind it, though as someone with a beef against the USA and its financial and military dominance of the ME it would make sense for him to support what happened to the USA on 9/11. So we have rather murky statements which lead anyone to this event. We have the convicted 93 bomber who supposedly promised to finish the job... a statement conveyed by another prisoner, IIRC and not under oath. Again, people with a beef at the USA would make such boasts and this is not evidence that it would happen or that they could possible carry out such a threat.

Then of course is the fact that 9/11 was a very complex event and pulling it off would be impossible for those supposedly behind it... or they were so lucky and hundreds of coincidences happened on 9/11 - like magic. This defies logic. We need not go into all the coincidence which allowed 9/11 to happen. Islamic terrorists don't use sophisticated plots and there is no evidence that they have in the past.

We certainly know and expect that our intel is monitoring terrorists and those who want to harm the USA and her people, property, and interests. We taxpayers pay billions for this information... and we also know that intel would infiltrate and even entrap terrorists in criminal activity to catch them and neutralize them. The 93 WTC bombing seems to have been done with the knowledge and help of the FBI and intel and it seems that they faiuled to stop it in time... but they were able to convict the participants... that is aside from the agents who had helped them at various times. They got a pass.

So it is entirely possible that intel services were and are aware of the activities of terrorists and those who claim to want to harm the USA. They are being watched and monitored and this is a fact. We listen to their "chatter" and so forth. So it is entirely possible that intel was "in on" the staging of 9/11 and were even facilitating it... much the way they did in 93. This explains all the foreknowledge of the intel communities as in the PDB: OBL intends to use planes to strike in the US.

So it is at this point that the narrative.... and the answers to the interviewers questions need to introduce the notion of false flags and 9/11 has all the fingerprints of a false flag. The key of course is a dupe to pin the event on. Whether these guys were on any planes or not... matters little for the false flag... intel has shown how they were all planning to do exactly what happened... flight training and so forth. The fact that none of the hijackers remains have been identified is just an inconvenient fact... or that there is no actual video of them getting on the hijacked flights is an odd coincidence, or that several of them appear to be alive and living in the ME.... and inconvenient fact.

And of course most of the evidence of 9/11 was hastily disposed of so a proper investigation never took place - the political response... the goal of the "terror" (regardless of who was behind if) took hold on 9/11. We were focused only on finding survivors and immediately on retribution and response to those who we were told did it. In the shock and awe there was an obvious rush to judgment which is how False Flags are engineered to work. And in the case of 9/11 it wasn't even a crime! It was declared an act of war and there is no evidence gathering in an act of war. And that basically shut down any investigations for over a year.

And we DID get some investigations which only now HAD to support the policies already in place. How could our own government who had bought the idea that there were terrorists out to get us.. and actually hit us now turn around and "discover".... ooops we made a mistake... this was all a false flag op by intel which gamed the ENTIRE US national security system... the DOD... you name it. This revelation would be so frightening that the coverup which allowed the US response to go forward was put forth. Our leaders were probably aware that this was not what we were told... but that terrorism IS a real problem and so we simply need to get on with the GWOT.

Who told us that terrorism is a threat to us? Why the intel services tell us that... the same people who probably were involved in pulling 9/11 off. How would it be possible that our sophisticated intel would NOT know about such things coming? The answer is, of course they did! And then they tried to BS about compartments and walls in the system which prevented information from being traded. That was all code language for the fact that some in intel knew exactly what was about to happen and horror of horrors, could actually have facilitated it.

If one looks at 9/11 as a possible false flags much of it begins to make sense and demands we look differently at what happened.

And as far as the evidence that this took place... Gage only has to explain one simple principle and do it clearly for anyone to understand... and the explanations are different for WTC 7 and the Twin towers though they share common fingerprints of foul play.

In the case of WTC 7 for the building to descend at close to free fall acceleration... the entire top 20 plus stories moving through a 100 foot drop... what had been holding this up... scores of columns and steel beams for 100 feet of height were made to loose all their ability to support in an instant... and become "structurally invisible". This is not possible from fire and especially from the fires observed... it would mean that the heat (assuming it was from offices fires as claimed) worked over the entire 8 stories and reached the same heat and weakening of the steel in an instant and not only that, but did not deform the steel... but destroyed all the joints. This is simply NOT possible. Something supplied enormous energy to destroy all that structure.

IN the case of the twin towers, it is simply not possible for the top sections in each case... even it it DID collapse to the zone of the plane strikes to have enough energy to destroy the entire building below it. The videos show the top sections being destroy as they collapse on to the crash zones and so there was hardly enough kinetic energy in this disorganized pile of rubble at the top.. much of it fell away to completely crush the 80 or more stories which has no plane or fire damage. Free fall acceleration was observed in the top section as it descended to the crash zone in the case of the north tower for 1 second. This must be interpreted as it was in WTC 7... complete destruction of the structural support for at least 3 or so stories. Had the damage to the building been from fire the top's descent would be LESS than free fall and most likely stopped when it came to the in tact and stronger sections below.

All you need to show there was foul play is the time motion studies of WTC 7 and the north tower... in the public record. Office fires cannot weaken the amount of structure that would be required for free fall.

So what were the planes for? They were for the illusion - the false flag... that was the cover story... planes would be flown into buildings. And so since they were part of the illusion... the false flag... hijackers were not even necessary... any plane could do as long as they could get them to hit the towers and be seen headed for the pentagon.

We have all learned that data... RADES, black boxes, even calls from planes and so forth can be faked. We are left not with evidence, but with planted evidence to incriminate.

9/11 was a false flag and has the finger prints of intel services all over it. Who they were working for is yet to be determined.