Was 9-11 an inside job or not?

[LastChild]

Defense industries made profits from World War II. Was that a reason not to fight? Explain.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20030512/editors

During World War II Harry Truman referred to some forms of war profiteering as "treason." When he heard rumors of such profiteering, Truman got into his Dodge and, during a Congressional recess, drove 30,000 miles paying unannounced visits to corporate offices and worksites. The Senate committee he chaired launched aggressive investigations into shady wartime business practices and found "waste, inefficiency, mismanagement and profiteering," according to Truman, who argued that such behavior was unpatriotic. Urged on by Truman and others in Congress, President Roosevelt supported broad increases in the corporate income tax, raised the excess-profits tax to 90 percent and charged the Office of War Mobilization with the task of eliminating illegal profits. Truman, who became a national hero for his fight against the profiteers, was tapped to be FDR's running mate in 1944.

 

[pomeroo]

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20030512/editors

During World War II Harry Truman referred to some forms of war profiteering as "treason." When he heard rumors of such profiteering, Truman got into his Dodge and, during a Congressional recess, drove 30,000 miles paying unannounced visits to corporate offices and worksites. The Senate committee he chaired launched aggressive investigations into shady wartime business practices and found "waste, inefficiency, mismanagement and profiteering," according to Truman, who argued that such behavior was unpatriotic. Urged on by Truman and others in Congress, President Roosevelt supported broad increases in the corporate income tax, raised the excess-profits tax to 90 percent and charged the Office of War Mobilization with the task of eliminating illegal profits. Truman, who became a national hero for his fight against the profiteers, was tapped to be FDR's running mate in 1944.

Yes, most history books mention that Harry Truman fought against war industry practices that he regarded as wasteful and inefficient. Now, getting back to the question you didn't answer: Were the profits made by defense industries a reason for not fighting against Hitler's Germany or Tojo's Japan?

 

[CHF]

We would need an investigation that's not an inside job to find that out.

So after all your months of research and preaching the "truth" you can't answer such a simple yes-or-no question regarding what it is you believe.

Amazing.

 

[LastChild]

So after all your months of research and preaching the "truth" you can't answer such a simple yes-or-no question regarding what it is you believe.

Amazing.

No I can't answer yes or no until a real investigation that's not an inside job is conducted.

That's what makes me different from a debunker.

 

[Unsecured Coins]

well, Child, who would YOU want to investigate?

 

[Good Lt]

So, LastChild, I'll take that as a definite "Yes - 9-11 was an inside jorb."

Any other Troofers want to answer the $64,000 question with a yes or no?

 

[CHF]

No I can't answer yes or no until a real investigation that's not an inside job is conducted.

That's what makes me different from a debunker.

Who should conduct this "real" investigation?

Give me some names.

 

[twinstead]

Yes, most history books mention that Harry Truman fought against war industry practices that he regarded as wasteful and inefficient. Now, getting back to the question you didn't answer: Were the profits made by defense industries a reason for not fighting against Hitler's Germany or Tojo's Japan?

According to truther logic, both Hitler's Germany and Tojo's Japan were not actually threats against the US; the threats were manufactured so the military industrial complex could reap more profits.

We can look down at these truthers all we want, but can you imagine what anybody who, in 1942, had declared that Hitler and Tojo were imagined threats and the real enemy was the US government would have dealt with?

 

[pomeroo]

No I can't answer yes or no until a real investigation that's not an inside job is conducted.

That's what makes me different from a debunker.

As your "real" investigation would necessarily exclude all structural engineers, physicists, avionics techs, air traffic controllers, forensic examiners, police and fire departments, military personnel, etc., why would rationalists take it seriously?

 

[CHF]

According to truther logic, both Hitler's Germany and Tojo's Japan were not actually threats against the US; the threats were manufactured so the military industrial complex could reap more profits.

We can look down at these truthers all we want, but can you imagine what anybody who, in 1942, had declared that Hitler and Tojo were imagined threats and the real enemy was the US government would have dealt with?

For that matter, every building fire is started by the fire department.

After all, who benefits from building fires?

 

[pomeroo]

According to truther logic, both Hitler's Germany and Tojo's Japan were not actually threats against the US; the threats were manufactured so the military industrial complex could reap more profits.

We can look down at these truthers all we want, but can you imagine what anybody who, in 1942, had declared that Hitler and Tojo were imagined threats and the real enemy was the US government would have dealt with?

That's pretty much what the American Communist party was saying before der Fuhrer stabbed Uncle Joe in the back.

 

[Bell]

Who should conduct this "real" investigation?

Give me some names.

Chavez? Ahmadahmawhatshisface?

Bin Laden? He sure has a score to settle.

 

[Unsecured Coins]

For that matter, every building fire is started by the fire department.

After all, who benefits from building fires?

Marshmallow Companies.

 

[MetalliSociety]

A short and simple answer for a short and simple question:

No, it wasn't an inside job.

 

[beachnut]

ignorant people with no facts say 9/11 was an inside job

9/11 was not an inside job, the only inside job about 9/11 is 9/11 truth. Manufactured ideas about 9/11 that boil down to outright lies.

No one saw the actions of 9/11 coming. Yep, we knew they might hijacked aircraft, but no one had ever killed the pilots and flown the planes. Most people would think someone who spent the time to learn to fly would not be interested in killing themselves! Little did the terrorist know most people are able to do what they did on 9/11 with NO training. My kids easily flew large aircraft into buildings in a simulator with zero trainings. But then my daughters are American women, who can do anything better than idiot terrorist (yes you’re an idiot if you can figure out how to fight and win without killing yourself on purpose)

I would like to know what all the Monday morning quarter backs (hindsight) are doing to avoid their next accident or terrorist event. How will you break a small secret group planning to blow up your town with a nuke or just blow up a crowded mall. Explain why people are suppose to figure out a secret plan, something never done before with any information available before 9/11 without beating the living daylights out of the real dumb hijacker, even the terrorist left out of the game! I am amazed at how people make up how they would get the touchdown, or not drop the pass, or guess the right play on Monday Morning. This is the mentality of those who even think there is some cover up or plot by our own government. If you think your government can do this, you better get into your government and be sure it is not doing the very thing you are paranoid about. I was in the Air Force and there are some idiots who do dumb things, but they are about as numerous as 9/11 truther to the general population. The only people mentally capable of plotting stupid things like 9/11 truth propose, are 9/11 truthers.

The big story on the inside job are the nut jobs that make up lies about 9/11. Zero facts for 6 years to back up one of the insane ideas from 9/11 truth.

Ignorant people are the only ones who say inside job. (people who push ideas form 9/11 truth; the ideas that are insane about 9/11)

 

[CptColumbo]

It's a yes or no question, Troofers. This is similar to the "straight answer" thread, in that I want you to cut down on the nonsense, the distractions, your inability to see the forest through the trees, etc.

Just answer the question with a simple yes or no. Can you do it?

Was 9-11 an inside job or not?

[derail]I'm sorry, I don't want to nit-pick, but the question is not "a yes or no question" as it is worded in the title. It should ask either "Was 9-11 an inside job?" or "Was 9-11 not an inside job?" for it to be "a yes or no question."
[/derail]

 

[beachnut]

No I can't answer yes or no until a real investigation that's not an inside job is conducted.

That's what makes me different from a debunker.

What makes you different is your non answers. Zip. If you can not figure out 9/11 after 6 years you are not going to need more time.

What have you done to understand 9/11. Talk about Truman? Complain that someone will profit from war? What have you done to debunk the idiot truther ideas on CD? What have you done to show Jones's thermite ideas are BS? What have you done to prove we need another investigation?

6 years and no clue about 9/11, just you want an independent investigation into 9/11. So please explain point by point why all the previous work is wrong on 9/11.

 

[Max Photon]

That'd be oui.

* * *

Yes.


* * *

 

[twinstead]

What makes you different is your non answers. Zip. If you can not figure out 9/11 after 6 years you are not going to need more time.

What have you done to understand 9/11. Talk about Truman? Complain that someone will profit from war? What have you done to debunk the idiot truther ideas on CD? What have you done to show Jones's thermite ideas are BS? What have you done to prove we need another investigation?

6 years and no clue about 9/11, just you want an independent investigation into 9/11. So please explain point by point why all the previous work is wrong on 9/11.

What, and admit that the only reason why he isn't satisfied with the previous investigation is because he disagrees with it?

Not gunna happen.

 

[Bell]

* * *

Yes.


* * *

Now, THAT'S how it's done. Thanks, Max