The NIST 9/11 Scam Exposed in All Its Glory

Discussion in '9/11' started by Bob0627, May 30, 2016.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There’s no way to know who knew what. Certainly IF 9/11 was an inside job some people knew the real deal and warned others of an imminent attack by an outside party.
     
  2. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why would they do that?
     
  3. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    To protect their loved ones obviously. Some people did not board the 9/11 planes or go to the World Trade Center when they should have. Larry Silverstein for example.
     
    chris155au likes this.
  4. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So when you say that you think that Bush knew about the attacks, what are you basing that on?
     
  5. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Articles I've read and research conducted by the Jersey Girls, supported by Bush's behavior on and following 9/11, not to mention the 12 war games deliberately scheduled for the morning of 9/11.
     
  6. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Do the Jersey girls claim that he knew about an inside job?
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2019
  7. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
  8. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
  9. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    1. It doesn't matter if he knew it was an inside or not or what I personally think, he stood down, that's documented history and that says all there is to know.

    2. IF it was or wasn't an inside job in the sense that elements of the US government orchestrated 9/11, the overwhelming circumstantial evidence strongly suggests an orchestrated inside job. In the sense that complicity is equal to an inside job, a stand down is complicity, foreknowledge without taking any action is complicity, incompetence is complicity, dereliction of duty is complicity, the end result is no different than an inside job. The number of convenient coincidences and 9/11 "miracles" that made 9/11 a near perfect success is staggering. It boggles the mind how anyone with any reasonable intelligence who had studied these convenient "miracles" cannot conclude that it was most likely an inside job or at the very least that it requires a legitimate investigation.

    3. Only a legitimate investigation that never took place can try to determine the exact nature of an inside job or absolve it. That such an investigation never took place and there was a concerted effort by the Bush administration to obstruct/prevent any investigation into 9/11 is complicity. And that happened in multiple ways.

    4. If Bush himself didn't act properly, he's either incompetent or derelict of duty (or both) and therefore fully complicit.

    The bottom line is 9/11 absolutely requires a legitimate scientific AND criminal investigation.
     
    chris155au likes this.
  10. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What do you mean Bush "stood down?"

    These are all things which can be reasonably used to say that the government was responsible for 9/11, but to use them to say that it was an inside job is ridiculous. "Inside job" implies intent. Just because someone was incompetent on that day or in the investigation does not mean that they had intent to contribute to the attacks.

    Was the Bush administration questioned at the time as to why they were obstructing/preventing any investigation?
     
  11. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Just as an example, one of the debunking arguments is that the steel wouldn't have been required to melt in order for the buildings to collapse - it just needed to be weakened enough to the point of failure.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2019
  12. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Doing nothing is a stand down, especially when being warned in advance multiple times.

    You can describe it any way you want but for me failing responsibility is complicity and the same as an inside job.

    Scheduling 12 war games on the morning of 9/11 that effectively took away the air defense system for the entire northeast corridor of the US was deliberate and intentional, not incompetence. Doing nothing was deliberate and intentional, not incompetence. There is an overwhelming amount of evidence indicating that the 3 WTC towers were destroyed via controlled demolition and not one legitimate scientific study that supports the phony theory that they were globally destroyed at free fall and near free fall due to planes, damage, fire or a combination. One would have to be incredibly gullible to believe this was all incompetence or a coincidence.

    The 9/11 Commission "questioned" Bush and Cheney together, unrecorded, unsworn and notes were not allowed. What kind of scam would you call that?

    That has nothing to do with science, it's just plain denial of the FACTS. There were multiple documented corroborating eyewitness claims of seeing pools of molten steel or metal on 9/11, supported by the fact that firefighters were unable to put out underground fires due to intense heat for 3 months. One FEMA investigator claims he saw the melting of girders on 9/11, which are of course made of steel. It doesn't matter any "debunking arguments", what matters are the facts, the facts don't change because some claim melting steel wasn't required.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2019
    chris155au likes this.
  13. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    What did they ask them?
     
  14. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There is NO record of anything that was asked of these 2 criminals. Any claim(s) made by the 9/11 Commission, Bush and Cheney with respect to the interview would have to be accepted strictly on faith.
     
  15. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Didn't Bob do anything about it?
     
  16. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Well was there such a claim by the commission?
     
  17. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    So do these anomolies make you in any way suspicious of the official story?
     
  18. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    chris155au likes this.
  19. Adam Fitzgerald

    Adam Fitzgerald Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2018
    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    The official story is that 4 planes were hijacked and crashed into the WTC, Pentagon and Shanksville which is all true. My suspicions are laid towards the CIA, NSA for not sharing data with the State Dept. or FBI in regards to the hijackers identities and also being inside the United States. Also the incomplete findings involving the 9/11 Commission and also information which went complete ignored by not only the 91/1 Commission but also the Joint House Inquiry.
     
  20. Bob0627

    Bob0627 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2015
    Messages:
    8,576
    Likes Received:
    2,337
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And here you see how it works. The official story is all true despite the "incomplete findings" and "information which went completely ignored". So this poster contradicts himself and can't even see that he contradicts himself. He believes the OCT peddled by the storytellers is "all true" despite that he also believes it's incomplete and information was ignored by the same storytellers. In other words, the official story is grossly flawed. But he's going to go along with it because it comes from authority and they said so. The mentality is amazing, to put it kindly.
     
  21. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    @Adam Fitzgerald, is this assessment accurate?
     
  22. Adam Fitzgerald

    Adam Fitzgerald Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2018
    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    The problem with that poster is that he is a no planer, what i mean by that is he believes none of the planes were hijacked and that none of the planes that crashed into the WTC were the actual hijacked planes. he also doesnt believe Flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon or that Flight 93 crashed into Shanksville. Even thou the basics of the 4 flights being hijacked and crashing at these locations are fact, yes the two congressional inquires had certain instances where it wasnt properly investigated. Thus i do not debate with no planers and why i have this person blocked. Do not bother posting his information with you acting as a "messenger" of sorts because i wont answer anything from him, save this time around. Just because there was some inaccuracies about some information regarding 9/11 wasnt investigated properly doesnt mean the planes werent hijacked and didnt crash into the WTC, Pentagon and Shanksville. The evidence is overwhelming.
     
    Ddyad and chris155au like this.
  23. Adam Fitzgerald

    Adam Fitzgerald Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2018
    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    There is no "official narrative". There are certain facts regarding the event. The fact is this: 9/11 isnt just about these hijackings, it was much more.

    American Airlines Flight 11 was hijacked, and crashed into the North Tower of the WTC
    United Airlines Flight 175 was hijacked, and crashed into the South Tower of the WTC.
    American Airlines Flight 77 was hijacked, and crashed into the Pentagon.
    United Airlines Flight 93 was hijacked, and crashed into a field in Shanksville.
     
    Ddyad likes this.
  24. chris155au

    chris155au Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2017
    Messages:
    41,176
    Likes Received:
    4,365
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    To be fair to @Bob0627, I don't think that he is a 'no planer.' He is more of a 'can't say for sure that it was a planer.' However, while I think that you have understood his position wrong, I think that he has understood your position wrong, because he thinks that your position is that the official story is "all true." However, that surely can't be the case, considering that you acknowledge "incomplete findings" as well as "information which went complete ignored by not only the 91/1 Commission but also the Joint House Inquiry."
     
  25. Adam Fitzgerald

    Adam Fitzgerald Active Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2018
    Messages:
    101
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Gender:
    Male
    He is a contrarian. Someone who argues for the sake of arguing. He posits that no plane crashed at the Pentagon or Shanksville. These are the basics and he cannot even get that right. Nevertheless, i wont address anything from him. I made myself quite clear even from the start and he called me into question from the jump. I dont play combative games. Im online with my actual name and use my actual photo to anything i say regarding this event, i even have a YouTube series regarding the history of 9/11 which can be found called "Roads to 9/11 Series". I dont pay no mind to trolls. None-whatsoever. If this person cannot say for sure that a plane impacted anywhere on 9/11 then he is pretty much someone i wont have anything to do with.
     
    Ddyad likes this.

Share This Page