Discussion in '9/11' started by Bob0627, Feb 11, 2017.
You missed this post Bob.
Of course that’s not true at all as already explained. And here I thought I was being the hypocrite when I posted what I believed you really thought.
I posted it as one of 29 facts, there are 28 more but you insist on arguing about just one as if it’s the only one that supports the fact that it’s a scam. Always twisting and taking things out of context to try to confuse. Furthermore those 29 facts are not the entirety of the scam they are just a list of highlights.
Maybe he is just ignoring the umpteenth vacuous post offered by you?
He’d rather question me than acknowledge that the 9/11 Commission and their report was a massive criminal scam on the American people given the volume of evidence. Trying to be an apologist by reducing it to merely CYA tactics.
you keep on spamming your so called facts that are essentially useless concerning the overall picture you are trying to present ...
let's start with "fact" number 1 ...
show me the evidence that Bush was willfully responsible for the destruction of 9/11 evidence ...
1. It's not spam.
2. They're not MY facts nor are they "so-called" facts, they are historical documented facts.
3. They are far from "useless" except to denying trolls such as yourself, they are wholly material to the topic of this thread, that the 9/11 Commission and their report is a gross scam.
To be accurate, I said:
At least quote it accurately.
I shouldn't have to show you, you should be fully aware yourself. The history is the evidence and it shows that the Bush administration did nothing to prevent the 9/11 evidence from being destroyed. As the highest authority in the US in charge at the time, they are fully responsible for its wholesale destruction by their failure to do anything to prevent it or even say one word about it. The Executive branch had full authority to order that the deliberate destruction be stopped as 9/11 was a federal crime.
I know you like to give the US government a pass on every single failure with regard to 9/11, but not everyone is like you, thankfully. Destruction of evidence in a massive crime such as 9/11 is far from a "useless" FACT as is the failure to prevent such destruction of evidence.
in other words ... you have no evidence ... thanks for playing bob ...
The historical facts are the evidence fake one and it’s not MY evidence it speaks for itself.
I don’t “play” that’s your game. Please stay out of this thread if you have nothing adult or intelligent to post.
oh the irony ...
That doesn’t qualify as adult or intelligent either. Do you have anything adult AND intelligent to post with respect to this thread topic? To remind you this topic is about the 9/11 Commission, their report and any related issue. Please remain on topic or you will be reported for trolling. If you can’t do that stay the **** out of my thread.
Anyway, back on topic (my sympathies Shiner)
Since there seems to be quite a bit of fear on the part of some trolls that the 29 FACTS I listed are being exposed on a regular basis (and they should be ... often) and some feeble attempts are being made to dispute one or two them, I feel it's appropriate to go over each and every one of them in more detail. This time one at a time.
#1 has already been gone over and stands as FACT via the historical record, there is no valid dispute. The 9/11 evidence was destroyed despite all attempts to stop the destruction and the Bush administration is fully responsible for its destruction for their failure to stop it. What hasn't been ascertained is exactly who ordered the destruction, what the Bush administration knew about the destruction, were they directly involved, did they even order it (perhaps not directly but via back channels) and much more. And this is just one small example proving there was no legitimate investigation into 9/11, otherwise that would have been part of the investigation.
So I'll move on to #2. Anyone care to dispute #2? (I'm not sure why anyone would want to other than trolls)
Here's the video evidence (at 3:30):
I'm not ready to move on to #2 yet ... can you offer anything as to who may have been attempting to stop the destruction of "evidence"? ...
Too late I guess, already moved on.
This article might help identify the culprits directly responsible and those who criticized it.
ok ... so you used a blog as evidence, which I'll accept ... so now, the City of New York workers are in on the scam under Giuliani's direction ... I thought is was the Bush admin? ... the plot thickens ...
It's not "evidence" and I never said it was, re-read what I posted for comprehension, or better yet, skip it and ASSume what you want. I don't care. Nothing you post about 9/11 is genuine, intelligent or adult.
That's YOUR invented conspiracy theory, I'm not interested in your red herrings.
Nothing alleviates the full responsibility of the Bush administration from failing to insure the 9/11 evidence was not destroyed.
I'm a very intelligent adult bob ... I was able to retire at the age of 50 but got bored so I work as an engineering consultant when I feel like taking on a project ... I am also a troller ... I have a mid sized cabin cruiser that we (kids, grandkids and my wonderful wife) take out at least evry other week and cruise the keys with lines in the water on the way to wherever we end up ... mahi, snapper, char, the occasionally wahoo (tastiest fish on the planet) ...
nope ... that's a troofer CT ...
what evidence bob? ... didn't another troofer gather some paint flakes and tried to spin them as thermite residue? ..
Yeah Donald Trump keeps making that claim too. Anyone who prolifically uses the childish term "troofer" (and many other things you post) to try to bolster their arguments has no claim to any reasonable level of maturity or intelligence. The rest of your post is the evidence. Please remain on topic, I don't give a rat's ass about you, your non-credible "engineering" background, your boat, your family or "troofers". You want to continue the discussion on the first of 29 points I posted about the 9/11 Commission and their report (and related issues), fine, anything else I'm not interested.
ah bullshit bob ... you're not interested in anything but troofer nonsense ... anyone that doesn't agree with your cockamamie theories "has bought and defends the OCT" or whatever other troofer terms you like to use ... yes, you're a troofer bob ... get used to it ...
Separate names with a comma.