Fair enough.
They QUESTION THEIR GOVERNMENT!
When there's a reason to, yes. But not automatically 100% of the time just to raise hell.
They DONT BELIEVE EVERYTHING AN AMERICAN OFFICIAL SAYS!
No, but they sure believe what an American official says over what the leader of a terrorist-harboring Islamist authoritarian state says, unless there's overwhelming evidence presented with the claim. There is none presented in this case. There's also the niggling little fact to consider that in Mubarak's own words, his intelligence officials had no indication what the target would be and had no idea of the magnitude of the coming attack. So the information would have been largely useless in any case. "Oh, Osama's up to something again? Well, no sh*t, Sherlock."
they also AREN'T AFRAID TO ACCUSE LEADERS OF CRIMES, INCLUDING TREASON!
Again, only when there's reason to believe treason might have been committed. There is not the slightest reason to believe any treason has occurred with respect to this "information," whether Mubarak is lying or telling the truth. Accusing without evidence doesn't make you a "true citizen," it just makes you a kook.
I guess me and Alex Jones are just kooks then. And infowars.com is all full of lies about it right?
Tell me Timesink, what does the term "New World Order" mean to you? After you explore that road, you come back and tell me, based on your conclusions, that it doesn't exist, and that the Bushes, Kennedys, Daschles, Clintons are not all part of it and then yes, you can call me a kook if you like.
But right now, you're just hoping you're right and its a lot easier to just call me a kook, right?