Comment: I'm not claiming they were clearly involved

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: They clearly had nothing to (see in situ)

I'm not claiming they were clearly involved

What I feel is clear are my points A & B.

Outside of that I'm not making any definitive claims of what I believe happened. At this moment however I do suspect the authorities had prior knowledge. This is based on the first-hand credible witness accounts of unprecedented levels of security, bomb sniffing dogs, spotters on the roof, loudspeaker "this is only a drill" announcements before the blasts, and the FBI ignoring questions about it etc.

I do disagree with your statement "They clearly had nothing to do with it". What the photos show is that they had their backpacks on before and after the bomb blast. That doesn't prove they "had nothing to do with it" in some manner, with or without backpacks (or even bombs for that matter) in their possession.

Do I think those two particular men or any authorities were involved? Not at this point. Do I think they could be involved? ABSOLUTELY!

Recent history has several examples just like this, of "drills" coinciding with an actual attack. The London subway bombing is one such event. It could also be a patsy situation, also with numerous examples such as the underwear bomber who was allowed passage after initially being denied. This also of course proves nothing but there's enough examples/evidence out there, that if those were murder trials they would've gone to prison.

If men are good, you don't need government; if men are evil or ambivalent, you don't dare have one.