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

I'm guessing I don't owe you anything.

It does for me. Now what? Time for more insults since that doesn't work?

 

Oh it worked. You proved my point for me; the point being... Give a truther the stage and they have nothing to offer. I should call you Exhibit A from now on.

 

You can call me anything you like, it's your constitutionally protected right to do so. I predicted you would resort to insults no matter what I post or don't and of course, I'm always right about posters such as yourself. "Exhibit A" or Bob still owes you nothing, but you can try another insulting tactic if you think it makes you feel important.

 

It's nice to be important. But it's more important to be nice. In my case; it's great being both. Feel free to point out any lies in the 9/11 Commission Text. Oh yeah. You can't. Poor baby. Too bad, so sad.

 

That depends on perspective, for example Hitler and Stalin were important.

True but you are neither.

Sorry but it's a waste of time since none of the report is reliable because the heart of it is based on 3rd party information taken from detainees who were mercilessly renditioned and tortured. Some of the key information was taken from a confession by a detainee who was not allowed to read what he signed. Then there is a huge volume of omissions, such as testimony that was not included in the report, tainted testimony via government interference (minders), failure to investigate in any legitimate manner, as well as admissions by the Commission members that they were lied to but those lies are a part of the report. Bottom line is that it would be akin to taking Bible text and pointing out all the lies.

 

So to summarize, you can’t point out one lie in the text of the 9/11 Commission Report though you swear the government is lying.

<Rule 3>

 

So to summarize, I pointed out (and have pointed out in numerous posts) that the entire report is a crock of **** from cover to cover and is worth less than the toilet paper I flushed. In other words, it's a known lie to a majority of people (according to most polls) and an admitted lie by the authors. It's also a lie as claimed by the 9/11 families, who have a much bigger stake in attempting to resolve the massacre of their loved ones than you or I.

http://img.911truth.org/911advocates.pdf

<Rule 3>

<Reply to Deleted>

 

yup ...

 

<Rule 3>

Pal, if it&#8217;s such a &#8220;crock&#8221;..surely you can quote the text of the 9/11 Commission Report and show us where it is lying.

<Mod Edit>

 

<Reply to Deleted>

<Rule 3> Let's start from the beginning at page 1, the title:

"THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT"

https://9-11commission.gov/report/911Report.pdf

That's obviously a bald faced lie. it should have been called the Philip Zelikow Report. He wrote the outline before the 9/11 Commission got started and had complete editorial control, except I'm sure with a bit of help from several of those within the Bush administration. A very minor conflict of interest, eh? Given 9/11 happened on their watch. But what kind of idiot would question that? Oh yeah, anyone who has a brain and actually uses it. Therefore, it was Zelikow's report, the Commissioners were mostly his tools. The next lie starts at page 2 and ends at the back cover.

 

Still no quotes from the text.
Surely you could find one &#8220;lie&#8221; in the text of the 9/11 Commission Report, quote it and show where it is wrong&#8230;can&#8217;t you?

 

I wrote a lot more but it was censored and it changed the context of my post, too bad. I am considering starting a thread exposing the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Commission Report (it goes hand in hand with the NIST scam thread I started), thank you. It will be in accordance with my agenda of course, not yours or other trolls.

 

I&#8217;m sure it will be an abject failure judging from the 1000% success rate you have at failing.

As for trolling; if you&#8217;re stating the government version of events is a &#8220;lie&#8221;, quote the version of events&#8212;the 9/11 Commission Report and prove it. Put up or shut up

 

I'm not interested in what you're sure about or not, it's not my concern.

See the last "I don't owe you anything" post for reference. I will post what I want to post and as I see fit, I don't take kindly to dictate, especially not from the likes of posters such as yourself. You only serve my agenda as a tool (as explained but censored), nothing more. Having said that, it doesn't matter what I post, you will always respond with some negative criticism, that is your agenda, it's part of the reason why I characterize you as a troll.

 

looking forward to it Bobby ... and of course it will be according to your agenda (at least you admit you have one) ... but then of course, you will zip it when asked tough questions but you have never liked answering questions to begin with ...

 

Good catch Sherlock.

Everyone has one, you for example, your "hobby", remember?

Yeah that's it Shiner, the 9/11 Commission and the 9/11 Commission Report are all about me. What else is new in your world? Nothing here is about 9/11 for you.

The Shinerisms are just so spot on.

 

The Report is available online. If you were really interested in informing yourself about what it says, you would take the initiative and do the research. You choose not to. It's obvious why.

 

I have read it.

I&#8217;m just waiting for one of you guys to QUOTE THE ALLEGED LIES in the text of the report.

- - - Updated - - -

 

I'm just waiting for you and others who have read it to explain how it is an accurate, true and complete accounting of the events of the day. But I'm not holding my breath. LOL

All the report did was protect the guilty parties and mislead the public. After he read it back in August 2004, Senator Mark Dayton said that NORAD lied in much of its testimony, after he compared time lines NORAD had provided.

 

You should really seek help for your paranoia!

 

Evidence is required for your CLAIMS AND YOU HAVE NONE.

It stands on it's own ad presents evidence.
You do not.

the burden is on you to quote part of it and demonstrate it is false but you CANNOT

 

FFS noob, you comment on a 6 month old post, and don't even say anything relevant to what you are quoting. As if asking the dude where he had seen Bob before has anything to do with paranoia. Learn to forum.

 

Evidence is required for yours and the government's claims, and there is none. What evidence there is contradicts the government story. The burden is on the government to prove its story, and it has failed that obligation. So have you.

That's why Hamilton and Kean noted they had been set up to fail.

 

So many falsehoods…

The government said AA11 hit the North Tower. DNA was found in the North Tower debris matching the passengers. Plane wreckage was found matching the plane designated as AA11. Phone calls from the plane placed it in NYC. Radar tracking put it in NYC at Ground Zero. We have video of it hitting the building.

Ditto for UAL 175
Ditto for Flight 77 except for the location needs to be changed
Ditto for 93 except for the video and the location.

The evidence is monumental and 100% of it supports the 9/11 Commission Report.

Feel free to quote any major inaccuracies in the repot.

Oh yeah.


You’ve admitted you cannot.

 

There's no evidence of any physical match of ANY of the debris to ANY of those alleged planes. Such a match (via serial numbers to logs) is standard protocol and even more crucial for an event such as 9/11. There is a documented claim on video by an NTSB official that the serial number on a recovered part at the Pentagon site would be used to identify the aircraft. That apparently was never done.

There is no record in the 9/11 Commission Report that a forensic physical match of the debris was conducted or that any forensic examination was conducted for that matter or of any details from the FBI's PENTTBOM "investigation" which took control from the NTSB, along with the results (among many other failures), so the above is 100% false. There is not one thing that PHYSICALLY connects the debris to the officially designated planes so all 9/11 Commission claims about the alleged planes are UNSUPPORTED by any physical evidence. There is nothing legitimate about the 9/11 Commission "investigation" or the resulting report.