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

not just logically its 'operationally' correct.

 

9/11 as an "inside job" insinuation is about 9/11 being a USA Executed operation:
https://www.google.com/search?q=ins...60&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#q=inside+job+9/11

It is clear by my OP what Exactly I was talking about by "inside Job", although even the over-license: mere foreknowledge would take far more than "3." Generals/Heads of CIA/FBI/Military would all have relied on alot of Staff to compile the info.

As are virtually ALL you and Bob06's strings starts and posts.
AGAIN: Even If we were to allow the broader definition You seek, 99% of YOUR string starts/posts would NOT be tenable, as I pointed out in my OP.
Bldg 7, Thermite, Falling Rates, all depend on USA execution, demolition, and then... the concomitant cast of thousands that you cannot rationally make a case for. Like Tens of thousands of YOUR posts too.. on many boards.
That's why this string laid dead for more than 2 days until a few people who agree bumped it up, forcing Your and Bob06's hands/deflections/perversions.
+

 

It would be nice to know how many people were in on it but our not knowing doesn't make the crushing proof that it was an inside job go away.
http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=456423&p=1066183060#post1066183060

 

How many is irrelevant, who were the people responsible for 9/11 is what's important. Who were the ones responsible for the cover-up is of secondary importance although some were obviously involved with both. We do know some of the ones who were complicit in the cover-up, these could be readily named. The ones at the highest pecking order were directly responsible for the cover-up so they are the ones most likely responsible for being directly involved in the planning (at the worst) or the stand down (at the very least), the latter being criminal complicity. The ONLY reason to cover up a crime is to protect the criminals.

 

How many people did it took to prop up the Riechstag (forgive spelling) or the entire nazi party?

 

It's not a conspiracy. There were witnesses and physical evidence. People called family members from the planes to say their goodbyes.

 

You can't get a signal on an airliner.

 

No matter what you believe about what happened on 9/11, the act was a conspiracy fact and the ensuing cover-up was also a conspiracy fact. All it takes for a conspiracy is a minimum of 2 people.

 

Yes you can.

- - - Updated - - -

No, crazy man. It wasn't.

 

Sorry you don't know what a conspiracy is and name calling is not going to help educate you.

conspiracy [kuh n-spir-uh-see]

noun, plural conspiracies.

1. the act of conspiring.
2. an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
3. a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose:
He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.
4. Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/conspiracy

Get a clue but first grow the **** up.

 

Some people are so deathly afraid to be associated with the boogieman term "conspiracy theory" for fear of being ridiculed that they will even go to the extent of rejecting the English language definition and denying that 9/11 was a conspiracy. It's the Stockholm Syndrome on steroids.

 

While you can get a signal you can only get one at the highest of 10,000 ft. Of all of the phone calls made only one was within 10,000 ft.

 

Here's some info on the cell phone issue.

September 11 -- The New Pearl Harbor (FULL)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M
(1:38:34 time mark)

 

For someone who whined to the mods to delete links to your other conspiracy activities, which are far far more marginal and loony than simple "conspiracy theorys", you don't have a leg to stand on.

 

Yep true, my bad. So back to the thread topic. Do you agree 3 would be the minimum?

 

sorry if I am budding in on a personal conversation but 3 would be the minimum for what? ...

 

You need help reading the thread title and following the posts?

 

no, but you certainly do ... all you do is dodge questions and try to show off your dictionary skills ... very dishonest debating on your part Bob ... I'm done with you until you are ready to answer direct questions ... your shucking and jiving is designed to cover the flaws in your wacky theories ... enjoy your day ...

 

So you're pi$$ed because I pointed out the answer to your question and because I also pointed out that all it takes is a minimum of 2 people to engage in a conspiracy according to the dictionary definition? And that's a "dodge", "showing off dictionary skills", "dishonest debating" and "shucking and jiving designed to cover the flaws in [my] wacky theories" to you? If comedy is your hobby, you need to stick to your day job, which is, oh yeah, "engineering". Unfortunately, your posts exhibit similar skill levels. Perhaps a change in career might be in order?

I'm so devastated Shiner. Anyway, aside from your silliness (and mine) I'm still working on my post, patience bro.

 

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/inside-job

LIHOP clearly falls under the definition of inside job.

 

It wouldn't be unreasonable to ask that the author of the thread be familiar with the definition of the subject he/she wants discussed. I know some here would rather not introduce dictionary definitions in order to keep universally accepted definitions out of the discussion, but that's another story.

 

So Danny says it would take a team of 30-40 men to take down WTC7 ... why didn't you just come out and say it Bob? ... also, what do you think of him also saying that WTC 1 and 2 were not CDs? ...

 

You 'short-quoted' me and Ignore the obvious and Unmistakable MIHOP my OP goes on to Describe/elaborates. (crash sites, demolition, actors, etc)
and to which NO Conspiracist Clown has an answer.
GAMEOVER
and which ruins 95% of THEIR Strings by pointing out the baggage that just focusing on a single stupid technical element necessitates.
(especially Bob0 and suddenly sparsely seen Kokomo)
So instead we get this attempt to twist the Clear intent of the OP.
STILL waiting for a ballpark/minimal number.
+

 

If that's what he said, he's the expert, not me.

Your question was "how many CONSPIRATORS ..." not how many men (or experts). There is a world of difference, try not to move the goalposts. In any case see above.

Perhaps because they weren't classic CDs? I have no idea. It certainly wasn't a global accelerating "collapse" by fire/planes or both, that's obvious.

I don't see a supporting link to any of your above "Danny" claims, do you have any?

 

obviously ...

the 30 to 40 men would have had to have been conspirators ... elementary reasoning Sherlock ...



P

sure thing ... notice he is watching Loose Change ... https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/...adc41264780bb58f590416db1ab7706b&action=click