Will a gov't official plea bargain or be found guilty of participating in 9/11?

Good question but I would humbly suggest the word "negligence" be included with "participating" to increase the likelihood of the less probable outcome.

I'd wager on this question but the settlement time is too long. I've been learning the hard way that one can be right and still lose money (by way of opportunity cost/slow compounding) on long term wagers. I've suggested to Hubdub that this situation needs to be addressed somehow (the proper manner in which is beyond me) lest prolific users simply fade away from long term wagers or choose to bet on short term public sentiment rather than accuracy, which I fear is rapidly becoming the case.

Thanks, but what if they actively participated? Also, I agree about the long term, and I have quite a bit tied up in that, and it fluctuates quite a bit.... alas, the question is out there....Is the Truth?

On second reading, I see your point, and due to the fiduciary duties public officials have to us, I consider negligence the same as active participation... thanks for pointing that out.

Great question, I wish it were so, but alas, corrupt government equals no justice :-(

Hahahaha SUPENDS in 4 years :-P .... This must be a HubDub record for length of a question, hahahaha :-D ... Awesome man :-)

Are we talking about US government officials?

Well, I doubt Iran is going to prosecute anyone for 9/11..... yes, the US government...

TOCM:
You need professional help, my friend.
If I can be of any assistance in helping you find a good psychologist / psychiatrist, just let me know.

Another good idea for you might be a straitjacket.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straitjacket
"Straitjackets are used to restrain people who may otherwise cause harm to themselves and others."

I agree with Markov about the settlement time being so far out in the future. I made a small bet on this question, but refrain from making a larger bet, because the value of my account can be drained while waiting for a settlement, due to opposing public sentiment.

Isn't "before next president's term" & "Not during next president's term" an overlap?

I believe the outcomes for this question were edited as I was reading it!

I agree with a recent comment in another question, that the "edits" ought to time/date stamped in the "Action History" as they used to be. At the least, Category Editors ought to mention any/all edits in the comment thread as a Best Practice.

I can't understand why michael would think that if someone is guilty, it wouldn't come out until
there is a "next president."

@ TOCM
9/11 Conspiracy Theories 'Ridiculous,' Al Qaeda Says
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/9_11_conspiracy_theories

Yeah, if you look at who these "conspiracy theorists" are, they are pretty much all nut-cases.

Even congress, with much to gain if this were true, and with a fair amount of power and funding, still hasn't tried to advance these kinds of theories.

When I look at President Bush, I see a man who loves his country, and these irrational types of people who advance these theories are painting with the wrong end of the paint-brush.