If you have an alternative view of origins of the Moscow terror attack, then state your proposition and advance your evidence in comparison to my presentation. That is how courts and reasoned discussion work. The side with the best evidence and most persuasive logic prevails. Adamant disbelief against the facts fails.
None of us possess enough knowledge to accurately conclude what occurred in Moscow. It is speculation on all sides.
My argument with you was in regards to critical thinking/logic.
It doesn’t matter how many items point towards “A” being true, it doesn’t make “B” false. It requires just one correct negation.
You could have a bunch of circumstantial evidence pointing to Bob as being the murderer. Financial incentive, scorned lover, previous acts of violence…
But a video of him across town at the time of the murder negates everything circumstantial.
It’s quite possible that multiple theories about the Moscow attack are partially true. It could involve ISIS, and it could involve the CIA. Just run the truth tables.
Either way, innocents have been murdered and there will be payback.
How many Iraqis flew planes into buildings on 9/11?
How many Saudis?
Which country was destroyed?