How Many people, at a Minimum, would it take to carry 9/11 Inside job?

none of the truthers have schooled anyone here with their cherry picked information and ridiculous theories ... lack of evidence is not evidence ... unless you live in Bob's world ...

but please feel free to pat each other on the back ...

 

You can't even get that right. Lack of evidence in the case of 9/11 is HARD EVIDENCE of a coverup, but it's a "dodge" in your world.

US Government Intentionally Destroys 9/11 Evidence

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-04/us-government-intentionally-destroys-911-evidence

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-saudi-usa-congress-idUSKCN0ZV1W0

"There is approximately 570 cubic feet of textual records. A large percentage of the Commission's records are national security classified files."

https://www.archives.gov/research/9-11

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...-000-secret-files-on-the-saudis-and-9-11.html

http://cryptome.org/nist070709.pdf

... or the real world.

 

Okay, just tell us how many people it took to stage the traffic light poles and the cab that was hit by the poles for the sake of what you call “theatrics”…. 4, 5, 6, a dozen or whatever….how many?

I would ask you why they bothered to include light poles and their staging, and why they would include the cab driver and however many actors you name but we both know you’d never go anywhere near answering that. And you probably won’t take a guess at backing up your “theatrics” claim either. Hell, it’s worth a shot.

 

As predicted.

 

When one is desperate enough to actually defend the official story all these years later, "a shot" is about all you have.

I was not involved in the planning or execution of the attacks at the pentagon, so I have not a clue as to how it might have been staged. If you're really curious about that bit of trivia, ask Dick Cheney or someone else involved.

My own personal and unprovable theory is that some sort of aircraft did hit the pentagon, but it wasn't AA77, was not an airliner. If that turned out to be true, it is possible that a smaller aircraft could have taken down the light poles. Either way, it is trivial indeed, and fairly well irrelevant how the light poles were involved.

The main point is that AA77 did not strike the building, explosives were planted there to take out the auditors and their records. Mission Accomplished.

 

and how did you arrive that wacky theory? ...

 

Because nobody was able to spy that airplane there. Because for the first 15 minutes or so it looked like the building had been hit by a broom or something. Because the flight data recorder provided by THE GOVERNMENT was bogus. Because the maneuver performed according to the story was absurdly impossible. Because the actual mission was to destroy the records and the auditors regarding the missing pentagon funds, mission accomplished. Because the parking lot video provided BY THE GOVERNMENT showed an airplane OTHER THAN an airliner.

Over, how copy?

 

I don't know how many threads here have that info. I think I've posted it more than five times over the years.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=482175&page=2&p=1066780302#post1066780302
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=482175&page=2&p=1066782729#post1066782729
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=482175&p=1066780070#post1066780070
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=482175&p=1066780237#post1066780237
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=477904&page=13&p=1066776319#post1066776319

 

sounds like a nutjob conspiracy theory to me ... over ... you are discounting way too much evidence ...

- - - Updated - - -

more of the same debunked copy/pasta ...

 

If it is it's absolutely harmless. The difference is the OCT is a conspiracy theory made for ignorant fools but it is a dangerous and lethal one. So we have our significantly different perspectives.

That's exactly what the OCT does. The difference is what a poster allegedly discounts is irrelevant but what the government discounts is not only extremely crucial but amounts to criminal fraud.

Yeah stick to pasta ("debunked" or not) as opposed to posting irrelevant nonsense. That's more to your taste.

 

So AA77 was hijacked for no reason at all in your ‘theory’?

The unintended humor of your thought processes is something to behold.

- - - Updated - - -

So instead of deleting a bunch of files; they blow up a building…

 

I've never seen it debunked. Link to where it's been debunked and we can talk about whether it's really been debunked in detail. You seem to be trying to sway those viewers who don't take the time to look at the info with rhetoric.

 

Lie.

Flight controllers tracked it into Pentagon Airspace but not out of it.

You’re lying. Just stop it.

Lie.
The first inkling that something was amiss was an explosion and fireball almost exactly of the same size as the ones we saw in New York when a Boeing hit those targets.

You’re lying. Just stop it.

Lie

Zero evidence reflects that AA77’s behavior was impossible. It was incredibly unsafe and, therefore, unprecedented. But impossible? No.

You’re lying. Just stop it.

Lie.

NO funds were missing in the first place.

You’re lying. Just stop it.

 

nutshell ... just speculation and opinion ... the troofers cling to biased sources and only trust those who confirm confirmation bias ... impossibility ends there ...

theatrics ffs .. everything was staged ...

I am amused ...

 

You mean like those who cling to the OCT and self admitted "debunking" sites whose only purpose is to attack/ridicule all those who haven't bought or contradict the OCT and question none of it? Biased sources such as those?

Maybe you're amusing yourself with your hypocritical nonsense that usually includes juvenile name calling such as "troofers".

 

I've posted this video I don't know how many times on this forum so I'm pretty sure you knew about it.

Pilot Who Flew The Airplanes That Crashed on 9/11 Speaks Out!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXA-enq65ng


You're using the tactic of misleading the viewers who haven't seen the proof with false info. We truthers have to continually post the same stuff over and over to thwart that tactic. We should take shifts.

 

the debunking sites are there for a reason ... to contradict the nonsense being spewed for many years by the troofer movement which ignores physical evidence (which the troofer movement has none) for an objective which is quite obvious ...

I retain my right to ridicule people who live in fantasy land ...

let me know when you are ready to answer hard ass questions rather than the "It's not about me" cop out which I am sick of hearing ... I'll start a thread if you are willing to partake ...

 

one pilot Scott ... you won the internet ... congrats ...

 

For you, that's what they're there for, the terrifying "troofers" you have nightmares about. For me, they are shill sites designed to suck in the ignorant and gullible. As usual, we have our significantly different perspectives.

I presume you do this in front of a mirror.

As soon as you ask a legitimate "hard ass" question about the OCT, I'll try to partake. I'm not interested in any of your irrelevant questions that have nothing to do with the OCT other than groveling to it. Neither 9/11 or the OCT is about me, I have to keep repeating that fact to you because it's obvious you still don't get it. If you're sick of hearing it, don't ask me any questions that have nothing to do with questioning/scrutinizing/exposing the OCT.

 

Has anyone ever watched one of your videos?

- - - Updated - - -

Translation:

As soon as you assume the same viewpoint I have, I will engage. When you question my views, I call you names.

Pretty much it; right?

 

now, now, now, I assume you have a car. So that makes you an expert on everything a car can do; it’s limitations, what would happen if you crash into a wall at 20 mph vs the amount of damage at 40 mph, what the wreckage of your car would look like, etc… Anyone who ever drove a car should have the same expertise this “pilot” had.

BTW…did anyone vet his credentials? Did anyone check to see if this guy was actually a pilot with the experience he touts? Did anyone get sworn statements from him (we are told that we can’t believe videos showing planes hitting buildings so why should we believe they didn’t edit the interview)? No? Hmmm. Seems like when the government says something, they are ripped to shreds for not having all of the above…. When a conspiracy retard puts out something, its’ gold baby!!!

 

Not even close.

I engage many posters, including the one I responded to and you as I see fit. Whether their viewpoints are the same or not is irrelevant.

That would be those such as the poster I responded to and YOU ("twoofer" or "troofer" or whatever childish variation, "nutjob", "conspiracy retard", etc.).

 

Your own words:

“As soon as you ask a legitimate “hard ass" question about the OCT, I'll try to partake"

Pretty much sums it up.

 

It certainly should Einstein. And your own words:

Confirms what I posted.

 

No, in my opinion AA77 and all the rest were not hijacked at all. What happened to "the passengers"? Beats hell out of me, given the relatively low numbers of "passengers", and that so many of them had employment in the defense industry, there is a chance they were players in the scam. That theory is a little bit supported by the activities at the Cleveland airport that morning.

Deleting a bunch of files? What are you rambling on about?