Was 9/11 an inside job with no planes?

Post Reply New Topic

Yep.

No planes? What about "Jet fuel can't melt steel beams."

The rabbit hole is deeper, as both the Saudi Ruling family, and The Bin Laudin family, were personal friends of Bush Senior, from his time as head of the CIA. One of Osama's brothers died in an auto crash while visiting in Texas.

The same from earlier, the Saudi's were behind the overthrow of Iran's elected government, and having a Shah placed over them, to rule as a King. Their dispute with Iran goes back about 900 years.

The Saudi's have mellowed, it is not like the old days, they hardly chop off a hundred heads a year. Now it is foreigners with drugs, it used to be a regular thing to behead one of their wives for speaking or something, to keep the rest in their place.

The Saudi's are famous for slavery. They are known buyers of three year old beautiful white girls. It was mentioned when Madeline the British girl vanished. Part of the oil agreement is to not ask questions.

It is hard to speak about what your crime partners do, when the oil is still flowing.

The Saudi's wanted to get rid of Saddam, and had been working on it for a while. He was supposed to lose the war with Iran, then the USA would attack Iran for being the aggressor. When the war finished as a tie, both the Marsh Arabs in the south and the Kurds in the north were enticed to kill him. Saddam killed both.

Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11, but it was used to start a war that killed well over a 100,000 in Iraq.

Assad showed supplies sent to the Islamic State from Saudi Arabia. Chemical weapons.

The USA claims they did not fund and arm the Islamic State, a Saudi Religion group.

The Saudi's would pull off 9/11 while being house guests of the Bush Family. They would be shocked at what Allah did, but see it as a gift to get rid of Saddam.

When all planes were grounded, one flew to Saudi Arabia, carrying the Bin Laudin Family.

I am sure it was Aliens!

I am not saying Bin Ladins crew did not do it. I believe they did. I just think the ignoring of the said warnings was not dereliction, but intentional because they wanted the Iraq War and other things. How is it implausible that the Bin Ladin family knew what the "black sheep" of the family was up to and informed their long time business partners? The Bin Ladin group was in construction. War is profitable for that industry. And the Saudis did feel threatened by Saddam. Iraq was profitable to the interests connected to Bush's and Cheney. So while the popular view is that these people were bumbling idiots that got us into a losing Iraq War they might have a different view. You also had the neo conservatives a powerful ideological force in the republican party and in that administration that was and is convinced that WWIII between the Judeo-Christian and Islam World is underway and thus would have been keen on “waking up” the American public.

Last edited by ASPartOfMe on 16 Jun 2015, 8:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Except for the Pentagon, I don't doubt planes were involved.

As far as it being an "inside job," I say it was 100%. Who exactly was involved (I believe VP Cheney was one) we may never know. You don't need an army to pull off 9/11...just a few people in key places to give out instructions. Watch the military in action. Whole battalions can be involved in an operation and have no clue what their part contributes to the larger whole.

We've seen lots of people "suicided" in the last 20 years (died from self-inflicted multiple gunshots to the back of the head kind of autopsies). It's not hard to believe that many who might have been involved in 9/11 (and knew their role) didn't live long afterward to tell their story.

The clincher for me is this. NORAD admitted in the mainstream media that why they didn't respond right away to four planes disappearing off the radar that day was because they were running a simulation THAT MIRRORED EXACTLY WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN REAL LIFE. They didn't know it was for real until they saw the news feed after the first plane flew into the WTC.

Now, these NORAD exercises are classified before they are done...they aren't public knowledge.

The odds of some terrorists getting lucking and picking the day, time and modality of attack to take advantage of a classified training exercise that would leave NORAD unable to react appropriately to stop the attack are so long that the more logical conclusion is someone gave information to the terrorists.

This means EITHER someone with access to the information leaked it to the terrorist OR someone with enough power ordered the exercise to cover for the terrorists. Conversely, someone with enough power knew the terrorist plot and ordered the exercise to ensure it wouldn't be stopped because they had something to gain from it succeeding.

Do the math. Without 9/11, the whole "War on Terror" (a multi-TRILLION dollar boondoggle) would never have happened. Whole slates of political agendas would never have come to pass, vast expansions of government power and intrusion into personal liberties would never have been passed (the PATRIOT Act was hundreds of pages long and written long before 9/11 happened). Two wars (one of which...Afghanistan...had invasion orders already on G.W. Bush's desk before the attack...they just needed a way to sell it to the American people) would never have happened.

Who came out on top from this attack?

How much investigation was put into the possibility of someone within the government/military giving intelligence to the terrorists? I can tell you....NONE.

Powerful people wanted the USA in a war....they found a way to make it happen.

How is it that the people who think the government is too incompetent to run social welfare programs are the same folks who believe it's capable of pulling off such a massive conspiracy as 9/11 while covering it up nearly perfectly?

How irrationally convenient...

Treason is punishable by death. If MIHOP or LIHOP is what happened then treason is exactly what it would have been. Your punishment idea is probably not legal but it would be justice.

It's too easy to lump everything & everyone together into one huge general-sweeping label and is actually a kind of a logical-fallacy due to the fact that what is called "government" is so "compartmentalised" in the sense that the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing & vice-versa.

Similarly, within "humanity" are people who are destructive, and do in fact, engage in what would be called criminal-activities. Claiming that how can "government" be doing this whilst that same "government" is doing that (because goevrnment is incompetent) is no different than saying how can "humans" be doing this whilst those same "humans" are doing that (because humans are actually incompetent). I most-certainly hope that you can "see" how lumping all "compartments" together into a general-sweeping label is a logical-fallacy.

Anyway... I agree that "aliens" were the real terrorists...

There are so many holes in this conspiracy theory, that it will take me a while to get throught them all.

1. 'Except for the Pentagon, I don't doubt that planes were used.'
Well, it's good to know that you at least accept the fact - yes, fact - that the towers in N.Y. were hit by real aircraft. That, at least, is something that no one can deny, there being far too many witnesses to the event, but even so this has not prevented some on YouTube from claiming that the aircraft that hit the towers were later added into the footage. Maybe those people are just attention-seekers, or maybe they are insane, it's often hard to tell the difference.

2. 'As far as it being an "inside job," I say it was 100%.'
Since you are so certain that this was an 'inside job' (100% certain, no less), you no doubt have irrefutable evidence to back up this claim. Well, where is it? I don't see it here.

3. 'Who exactly was involved (I believe VP Cheney was one) we may never know.'
You claim we may never know the names of all who were involved in this, but you believe that Dick Cheney definitely was. Why Dick Cheney, of all people? Surely you must have a reason (or reasons) for this belief of yours, and yet you don't expand on this here.

4. 'Watch the military in action. Whole battalions can be involved in an operation and have no clue what their part contributes to the larger whole.'
Exremely implausible. How could one manage a large and sophisticated military operation if those who had to actually carry it out had no idea what it was actually for? When the Germans initiated 'Operation Barbarossa' against the U.S.S.R. in 1941, every single soldier knew why they were there and what their role would be in the days preceding the invasion. You can't keep people in the dark and expect things to actually work the way they are meant to.

5. 'We've seen lots of people "suicided" in the last 20 years (died from self-inflicted multiple gunshots to the back of the head kind of autopsies). It's not hard to believe that many who might have been involved in 9/11 (and knew their role) didn't live long afterward to tell their story.'
Really? "Lot's" (how many?) have suicided? Could you at least name one? If so many people were involved in this conspiracy, don't you think that, after 20 years, some of them would have died anyway? I would be far more suspicious if none of them, or only a few, had died after such a long time. People die all the time, it's a perfectly natural phenomenon.

6. 'The clincher for me is this. NORAD admitted in the mainstream media that why they didn't respond right away to four planes disappearing off the radar that day was because they were running a simulation THAT MIRRORED EXACTLY WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN REAL LIFE. They didn't know it was for real until they saw the news feed after the first plane flew into the WTC.'
Now why should anyone just take your word for this? Where is the evidence, the link to... something, anything really... that would substantiate this claim of yours? Even if this story checks out, there is such a thing as co-incidence you know.

7. 'The odds of some terrorists getting lucking and picking the day, time and modality of attack to take advantage of a classified training exercise that would leave NORAD unable to react appropriately to stop the attack are so long that the more logical conclusion is someone gave information to the terrorists.'
This is pure speculation on your part. Again - where is the evidence? Why should anyone believe you?

8. 'This means EITHER someone with access to the information leaked it to the terrorist OR someone with enough power ordered the exercise to cover for the terrorists. Conversely, someone with enough power knew the terrorist plot and ordered the exercise to ensure it wouldn't be stopped because they had something to gain from it succeeding.'
That's assuming what you write immediately prior to this is true, but we have no reason to believe it is, now do we. All we have here is your word for it. You are basing a conclusion upon a mere assumption.

9. 'Do the maths. Without 9/11, the whole "War on Terror" (a multi-TRILLION dollar boondoggle) would never have happened. Whole slates of political agendas would never have come to pass, vast expansions of government power and intrusion into personal liberties would never have been passed (the PATRIOT Act was hundreds of pages long and written long before 9/11 happened). Two wars (one of which...Afghanistan...had invasion orders already on G.W. Bush's desk before the attack...they just needed a way to sell it to the American people) would never have happened.'
As I understand it, the 'Patriot Act' has recently expired, and is being replaced by legislation that is far less intrusive, overbearing and actually takes power away from certain governmental departments (ex. N.S.A., F.B.I.). But, of course, you would no doubt argue that they (whoever 'they' are) just want us to believe they are doing this. Am I right? So, I've done the maths, and your story just doesn't add up. 2+2 does not equal 5.

10. 'Powerful people wanted the USA in a war....they found a way to make it happen.'
Well, you've listed one powerful person - Dick Cheney. Shall we add Rumsfeld to the list? Bush himself? You have NO evidence for any of this! What would be the purpose behind bankrupting the U.S. economy via endless war and destabilisation? Wouldn't all of this actually weaken the United States rather than strengthen it? Can you at least answer that for me?

There are so many holes in this conspiracy theory, that it will take me a while to get throught them all.

1. 'Except for the Pentagon, I don't doubt that planes were used.'
Well, it's good to know that you at least accept the fact - yes, fact - that the towers in N.Y. were hit by real aircraft. That, at least, is something that no one can deny, there being far too many witnesses to the event, but even so this has not prevented some on YouTube from claiming that the aircraft that hit the towers were later added into the footage. Maybe those people are just attention-seekers, or maybe they are insane, it's often hard to tell the difference.

2. 'As far as it being an "inside job," I say it was 100%.'
Since you are so certain that this was an 'inside job' (100% certain, no less), you no doubt have irrefutable evidence to back up this claim. Well, where is it? I don't see it here.

3. 'Who exactly was involved (I believe VP Cheney was one) we may never know.'
You claim we may never know the names of all who were involved in this, but you believe that Dick Cheney definitely was. Why Dick Cheney, of all people? Surely you must have a reason (or reasons) for this belief of yours, and yet you don't expand on this here.

4. 'Watch the military in action. Whole battalions can be involved in an operation and have no clue what their part contributes to the larger whole.'
Exremely implausible. How could one manage a large and sophisticated military operation if those who had to actually carry it out had no idea what it was actually for? When the Germans initiated 'Operation Barbarossa' against the U.S.S.R. in 1941, every single soldier knew why they were there and what their role would be in the days preceding the invasion. You can't keep people in the dark and expect things to actually work the way they are meant to.

5. 'We've seen lots of people "suicided" in the last 20 years (died from self-inflicted multiple gunshots to the back of the head kind of autopsies). It's not hard to believe that many who might have been involved in 9/11 (and knew their role) didn't live long afterward to tell their story.'
Really? "Lot's" (how many?) have suicided? Could you at least name one? If so many people were involved in this conspiracy, don't you think that, after 20 years, some of them would have died anyway? I would be far more suspicious if none of them, or only a few, had died after such a long time. People die all the time, it's a perfectly natural phenomenon.

6. 'The clincher for me is this. NORAD admitted in the mainstream media that why they didn't respond right away to four planes disappearing off the radar that day was because they were running a simulation THAT MIRRORED EXACTLY WHAT WAS HAPPENING IN REAL LIFE. They didn't know it was for real until they saw the news feed after the first plane flew into the WTC.'
Now why should anyone just take your word for this? Where is the evidence, the link to... something, anything really... that would substantiate this claim of yours? Even if this story checks out, there is such a thing as co-incidence you know.

7. 'The odds of some terrorists getting lucking and picking the day, time and modality of attack to take advantage of a classified training exercise that would leave NORAD unable to react appropriately to stop the attack are so long that the more logical conclusion is someone gave information to the terrorists.'
This is pure speculation on your part. Again - where is the evidence? Why should anyone believe you?

8. 'This means EITHER someone with access to the information leaked it to the terrorist OR someone with enough power ordered the exercise to cover for the terrorists. Conversely, someone with enough power knew the terrorist plot and ordered the exercise to ensure it wouldn't be stopped because they had something to gain from it succeeding.'
That's assuming what you write immediately prior to this is true, but we have no reason to believe it is, now do we. All we have here is your word for it. You are basing a conclusion upon a mere assumption.

9. 'Do the maths. Without 9/11, the whole "War on Terror" (a multi-TRILLION dollar boondoggle) would never have happened. Whole slates of political agendas would never have come to pass, vast expansions of government power and intrusion into personal liberties would never have been passed (the PATRIOT Act was hundreds of pages long and written long before 9/11 happened). Two wars (one of which...Afghanistan...had invasion orders already on G.W. Bush's desk before the attack...they just needed a way to sell it to the American people) would never have happened.'
As I understand it, the 'Patriot Act' has recently expired, and is being replaced by legislation that is far less intrusive, overbearing and actually takes power away from certain governmental departments (ex. N.S.A., F.B.I.). But, of course, you would no doubt argue that they (whoever 'they' are) just want us to believe they are doing this. Am I right? So, I've done the maths, and your story just doesn't add up. 2+2 does not equal 5.

10. 'Powerful people wanted the USA in a war....they found a way to make it happen.'
Well, you've listed one powerful person - Dick Cheney. Shall we add Rumsfeld to the list? Bush himself? You have NO evidence for any of this! What would be the purpose behind bankrupting the U.S. economy via endless war and destabilisation? Wouldn't all of this actually weaken the United States rather than strengthen it? Can you at least answer that for me?

Instead of some vast conspiracy to get us into Iraq, I think Bush, Cheney, and company had taken advantage of a tragedy for the sake of their own adventurism. They had been blinded by their own neo-con, pie-in-the-sky fantasy that everyone wants western style freedom, especially if we shove it down their throats at gun point, and they were able to ride in on the rage and patriotic furor that had overtaken the country just after 9/11. Unfortunately for us, the rest of the world didn't see things through the neo-con rose lens glasses, and we as a country have been paying for that ideological idiocy ever since.

This is pretty damning.

Except, of course, it's not accurate.

On 11/9/2001, NORAD was simulating a US nuclear attack on another country, and a conventional Russian bombing on US soil.

Because of these drills, they had more people in than usual and could respond quickly. It took 30 seconds to switch between the exercises.

There was a similar situation at New York's Office Of Emergency Management, where they were preparing to simulate a bioterrorism attack on the city the next day and so had lots of the necessary stuff set up already (including an office they could move to after being evacuated from theirs).

I believe you are thinking of the NRO, which does space reconnaissance and was "simulating" a light aircraft crashing into their office by blocking off the stairway. They didn't have any responding to do, and so they evacuated when the attacks began.

Neither of those are false flag attacks.

The Liberty was not covered up. Israel maintains it was an accident after mistaking it for an Egyptian ship, which most of the US military government seems to accept despite a few dissenting officers who think it was a deliberate attack on the US.

The Second Gulf of Tonkin incident involved US Destroyers firing upon "hostile radar targets" that turned out to be freak weather events. LBJ responded by bombing Vietnam. Amazed this didn't cost McNamara his job and force a massive apology, but it's not a false flag.

The Jewish supremacists (The 1% of the Jews) caused 9/11 and here is my evidence to prove they did:



Did Israel's Mossad Do 9/11?



Watch this on YouTube and the author's channel is Brother Nathanael, who is a Jew (The 99% of the Jews) who converted from Judaism to Orthodox Christianity.

Why do you Stormfront types even bother to show up here? You do know this is a forum for people with Asperger's, don't you? Quite a few of our brothers and sisters on this site are Jewish. On top of that, the SS were going to put Dr. Hans Asperger's "little professors" to sleep, had he not intervened on their behalf. Think about that as you go back to your white nationalist site.

Western-Style Freedoms, man, that stuff be Over-Powered...

Freedoms, man, because there's no such thing as both spouses of a house-hold needing to both work full-time-jobs just to be able to earn ends-meet in America ! One man of a house-hold can easily provide for the whole entire family, including sending all of their kids to college, and still have plenty left-over for that American-Dream™ !

Plenty of documentaries related to The Federal Reserve already answer this question quite thoroughly. How is it that we're supposed to be a forums of supposèdly & allegèdly a bunch of higher-than-average-intelligence people and still there seems to be plenty of evidence that a bunch of you don't bother to do any homework ? Geez...

P.S.: Just in case you don't know how "getting rich" works in an Anarcho-Capitalist system, the process is very easy, but The Masses cannot fathom how to do it themselves. Basically, when you "eye" some "resources" that you want, but the current owners are selling at a price that is higher than you're willing to pay, what you do is hire a few mercenaries here & there to completely collapse the economy, then when the value of everything drops down to near-nothing, investment-sharks (similar to loan-sharks) will swoop in & buy all of that property for literally pennies on the dollar (but then again most of you who've never been involved with entrepreneurship/investing have probably never been exposed to the use of this kind of tactic of simply sitting on a pile of money for a while in order to wait for the next "disaster" for purposes of getting a "bargain" from those "desperate suckers" who can't find any buyers due to everyone else being broke [but if you're a bank or own a bank or own several banks that make offers to give these people "loans" in exchange for taking their possessions then you basically "own" them in the literal sense of ownership]).