Thread: 9/11 was an inside job

Originally Posted by terry57

Insurance companies use you're evidence to win the case in court.

You've already been told. The court hearings were held behind closed doors and without jury. Why?

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Terry, do you not think it might have looked a bit suspicious if they would of used demolitions explosives to destroy the buildings in the middle of a beautiful morning in downtown Manhatton?

Surely someone would have noticed

Originally Posted by terry57

Larry could of made his Insurance claim without going to the huge amount of work and risk arranging for the planes to hit the towers.

How?

Ask ENT,

He reckons Larry did not need the planes, he would of dropped the Towers anyway
then claim his Insurance by saying some naughty boys placed Thermite through them and offed the fuking things.


I mean ENT changes his story every other minute depending on which web page he is pasting up.

You're first part Albert.

The chances of actually pulling off that mission to the extent it was done was sweet fuk all.

Way to complicated.

The official line is well solid. Could not plan that shit.

You still ain't watched those 3 vids, have you Terry?

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Yes, unfortunately there was no evidence left after they had blown it all to shit. And let's face it - the amount of scum this whole event has uncovered, it's no large jump to conclude that there was some underhand corrupt legal collusion from within the system that helped larry win the money.

Urm, Actually you guys keep posting up untold photographic evidence that you reckon provides proof of the conspiracy but only you guys seem to see it.

Why is that ? If it was so clear everyone would see the same but they don't, you guys are still in the small minority whatever way you want to present you're numbers and pastes.

So you say that the court case was corrupt and larry had his mate in his pocket.

Ok, under US law there is avenue of appeal. Insurance company did not go there either.

Next part will be that you guys will say that the Insurance company was in on the game as well.

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

Originally Posted by terry57

Insurance companies use you're evidence to win the case in court.

You've already been told. The court hearings were held behind closed doors and without jury. Why?

Many major court cases are held without a jury, nothing unusual about that and behind closed doors.

You're just Pissed because you have no real case.

Go watch the vids Terry. All will become clear on viewing. I was a believer that 9/11 really happened until I watched them. I'm sure you will be swayed by their content, and deep down you know it. That's why you and LD, and a few others, won't watch them. You're scared of the truth.

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

You still ain't watched those 3 vids, have you Terry?

Actually I have not simply because trying to get a decent viewing on a computor screen is shit.

I've got a nice 50 inch flat screen at home, I want to view those vids on that.

I live in Bangkok, I'll go anywhere in Bangkok and pick them up if anyone can provide them to me on DVD.

Fair enough EH.

Lets see what happens.

I'm very keen to view them by the way.

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

Go watch the vids Terry. All will become clear on viewing. I was a believer that 9/11 really happened until I watched them. I'm sure you will be swayed by their content, and deep down you know it. That's why you and LD, and a few others, won't watch them. You're scared of the truth.

You know what mate,

I'm all for Truth and Justice, I love to see the little man triumph over the big man and I love to see bully boys get there comupence.

What I don't do is jump into bed with Xfiles stuff, ghosts, UFO's, aliens from out of space and conspiracy therories that are a load of bolliks.

You got them movies on DVD or can you get them for me ?

I'll even pay for the fuckers.

Fair that innit.

Originally Posted by terry57

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Terry, do you not think it might have looked a bit suspicious if they would of used demolitions explosives to destroy the buildings in the middle of a beautiful morning in downtown Manhatton?

Surely someone would have noticed

Originally Posted by terry57

Larry could of made his Insurance claim without going to the huge amount of work and risk arranging for the planes to hit the towers.

How?

Ask ENT,

He reckons Larry did not need the planes, he would of dropped the Towers anyway
then claim his Insurance by saying some naughty boys placed Thermite through them and offed the fuking things.


I mean ENT changes his story every other minute depending on which web page he is pasting up.

You're first part Albert.

The chances of actually pulling off that mission to the extent it was done was sweet fuk all.

Way to complicated.

The official line is well solid. Could not plan that shit.

Ya know Terry, ya spout some awful god damned lies about me continually.

You talk shit constantly.

You have a brain as big as a maggot's.

Nothing you say makes any sense.

So it's difficult to be polite to you.

Fuck off.

If I do meet up with you, you will not be a happy man.

Got it C*nt?

Now if you wanna discuss something realistically re. 9/11, do so.

If you wanna keep spouting more school boy sexually perverted crap instead of straight reality, Ocker, , especially towards me, expect to get even more sh*te off me.

Basically, what I'm saying you jumped up lying, wanna be fireman and in fact a union shill and government stooge, is FWk off and die.

Got it?

I did offer to meet you for a beer at the Gecko, Bkk, Ill be there next week.

But, fwk me around and I'll fwk you around. Got it?

Originally Posted by terry57

I'm all for Truth and Justice, I love to see the little man triumph over the big man and I love to see bully boys get there comupence.

Like Fwk ya do ya bleedin big shirt liftin Ocker liar!

Originally Posted by terry57

I live in Bangkok, I'll go anywhere in Bangkok and pick them up if anyone can provide them to me on DVD.

Fair enough EH.

Lets see what happens.

Gotcha ya cwnt!

Let's meet, shit-hed.

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Unless, of course, the NIST is actually a shadow government spook organisation now as well.

Jeeez - ya think?

National Institute of Standards and Technology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On the whole of the NIST wiki page there is ONE mention of Shyam Sunder. As I said - he has no page - his name is not clickable.

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2007/10/former-nist-employee-blows-...
A former NIST employee made the following statements regarding NIST's politicization and corruption (these emails were forwarded to me by a prominent 9/11 truth activist, I simply edited them to remove names so as to protect the anonymity of the whistleblower):
Communication dated October 1, 2007:
"NBS/NIST had become fully hijacked from the scientific into the political realm well before he became involved. That hijacking happened in the mid-90's, and has only grown stronger to the present. Prior to that time, the Director of NBS/NIST was appointed via the political process (Presidential nomination, Congressional confirmation), but with the firm understanding in the scientific community that the job was essentially a non-political one, as the leader of the government's premiere scientific research institution. Directors were carefully selected from a field of well-known senior scientists with management skills, typically from within the NBS staff, after gaining much credibility in their fields. Once appointed, Directors tended to stay on for several years, through different administrations in an essentially career mode, usually until they retired. That all changed under the Clinton administration.
I saw it happen. After retirement from the Army, in 1983 I joined then-NBS as a scientist on the staff. After 3 years, I decided to move on (engineering on the Star Wars project). Becoming sick of that charade in 1989, I succumbed to my former boss' entreaties and returned to now-NIST in a supervisory scientist position at the top civil service grade. I retired from there in 2001, and worked as a part-time contractor for them until last year. So I've had a chance to observe some of the higher-level NIST goings-on up close and personal for some time, and was personally involved in some of its politicization.
I don't know whether the NBS Director, Dr. John Lyons, was forced into retirement by the Clinton administration; I just remember the abruptness of the change after only 3 years on his job. He was replaced by a relatively unknown and also quite young scientist from DARPA. What I remember about her is her lack of credibility in representing NIST in scientific circles, her choice of senior staff with little regard for their scientific standing, and her keen emphasis on political sensitivities. She departed after a long four years, and the Director's office (and hence the whole Institute) has been in turmoil ever since. Four of her six successors to the present time have been "Acting", meaning in a practical sense that they may well not have had the personal credibility and scientific standing to survive the scrutiny of the confirmation process.
About the time of this major reduction in stature of the Director's office, some other major shifts took place at NIST, the echoes of which may have direct relevance to [9/11 truth]. Prior to that time, we were focused on scientific research and standards development that tended to be independent of what other government agencies were doing. All of a sudden, the senior levels of NIST were flooded with what I perhaps over-harshly termed "political commisars", whose job was principally to deal with what may be called "the political sensitivities" of our work and also making sure it supported big industry.
That support became an overtly-stated major mission for us. We lost a major share of our direct research funding, and from then on have been largely dependent upon receiving funds from other government agencies (the majority from Depts of Defense and Energy) for research and standards-making to support their own work. This "other agency" work amounted to about 40% of our total budget in my last several years there. In essence, we lost our scientific independence, and became little more than "hired guns".
When I first heard of [9/11 truth] and how the NIST "scientists" involved in 911 seemed to act in very un-scientific ways, it was not at all surprising to me. By 2001, everyone in NIST leadership had been trained to pay close heed to political pressures. There was no chance that NIST people "investigating" the 911 situation could have been acting in the true spirit of scientific independence, nor could they have operated at all without careful consideration of political impact. Everything that came from the hired guns was by then routinely filtered through the front office, and assessed for political implications before release.
Sorry this blurb became overly long, but I did want to make sure that an "insider's view" got onto the record."
Email dated October 2, 2007:
"A little more general insight into what I referred to as the NIST politicization, some of which may be of interest to you. In addition to the NIST "front office" looking closely over our shoulders, we had three major external oversight groups keeping close track of our little part of NIST, which admittedly dealt at times with some sensitive issues regarding technological security.
One was NSA (no surprises there!), another was the HQ staff of the Department of Commerce, which scrutinized our work very closely and frequently wouldn't permit us to release papers or give talks without changes to conform to their way of looking at things. A third was a bit of a surprise to some -- the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had a policy person specifically delegated to provide oversight on our work. Just as a reminder, the OMB is an arm of the Executive Office of the President.
One more tidbit - a gentleman named William A Jeffrey served as NIST Director from July 2005 until last month. Interestingly, Dr. Jeffrey's previous assignment was in the EOP's Office of Science and Technology Policy! Talk about high-level oversight!! So one can be certain that on so hot a topic as yours, Dr. Jeffrey (and his previous political handlers in the WH - if they still were "previous") would be very personally involved at every step.
I don't know what more I can add that might be relevant, as I have been once-removed from NIST for the past 6 years as a contractor via [a defense company]. However, I do have some good NIST friends who are rather highly placed, so if you have any other questions re NIST, I might be able to ferret out an answer. Would be worth a shot anyway."


A NIST Whistleblower

What a load of feeble minded, unattributed nonsense.

Originally Posted by ENT

Originally Posted by terry57

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Terry, do you not think it might have looked a bit suspicious if they would of used demolitions explosives to destroy the buildings in the middle of a beautiful morning in downtown Manhatton?

Surely someone would have noticed

Originally Posted by terry57

Larry could of made his Insurance claim without going to the huge amount of work and risk arranging for the planes to hit the towers.

How?

Ask ENT,

He reckons Larry did not need the planes, he would of dropped the Towers anyway
then claim his Insurance by saying some naughty boys placed Thermite through them and offed the fuking things.


I mean ENT changes his story every other minute depending on which web page he is pasting up.

You're first part Albert.

The chances of actually pulling off that mission to the extent it was done was sweet fuk all.

Way to complicated.

The official line is well solid. Could not plan that shit.

Ya know Terry, ya spout some awful god damned lies about me continually.

You talk shit constantly.

You have a brain as big as a maggot's.

Nothing you say makes any sense.

So it's difficult to be polite to you.

Fuck off.

If I do meet up with you, you will not be a happy man.

Got it C*nt?

Now if you wanna discuss something realistically re. 9/11, do so.

If you wanna keep spouting more school boy sexually perverted crap instead of straight reality, Ocker, , especially towards me, expect to get even more sh*te off me.

Basically, what I'm saying you jumped up lying, wanna be fireman and in fact a union shill and government stooge, is FWk off and die.

Got it?

I did offer to meet you for a beer at the Gecko, Bkk, Ill be there next week.

But, fwk me around and I'll fwk you around. Got it?

Go fwk yerself Halliburton Harry B shill.

You have as much intellectual,competence as a goat.

That's as a result of your queer leanings towards boys in uniform.

Like Terry, you'r a cross dressing arse licking shill working for BIG MONEY, ya b*st*rd.

People like you need to be shot.

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

Originally Posted by terry57

larry dropped WTC 7 and no planes hit that so why fuk around flying planes into the Towers in the first place.

The WTC 7 was a minnow amongst a crowd in that the towers were the easiest of the 3 targets. Strange that the only buildings to collapse that day were owned by Larry?

Not really since he owned the WTC buildings and that was the target.

Jesus you loonies see mystery in everything don't you? Even when the answer is staring you in the face.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I mean ENT changes his story every other minute depending on which web page he is pasting up.

Um....do you mean like THIS "photo" he posted ? :

Originally Posted by ENT

That line of breaks look as though they've been deliberately cut by charges, not by stress from overheated steel floor joists.

Originally Posted by ENT

Go fwk yerself Halliburton Harry B shill.

You have as much intellectual,competence as a got.

That's as a result of your queer leanings towards boys in uniform.

Like Terry, you'r a cross dressing arse licking shill working for BIG MONEY, ya b*st*rd.

People like you need to be shot.

Ah look little Ent is losing his temper, because he's being made to look ridiculous.

Originally Posted by Pragmatic

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

And another thing. Why would they bother blowing up the WTC anyway?

You haven't read the link in post#3685

Yes I have. So now it was the Joos wot done it, was it?

You lot need to find a fucking story and stick to it.

Getting a straight answer out of you lot is like herding cats.

Watch out Terry, someone sent me a pic of ENT and he's street.

Drop dead Harry.

Originally Posted by ENT

Originally Posted by terry57

Originally Posted by Albert Shagnastier

Terry, do you not think it might have looked a bit suspicious if they would of used demolitions explosives to destroy the buildings in the middle of a beautiful morning in downtown Manhatton?

Surely someone would have noticed

Originally Posted by terry57

Larry could of made his Insurance claim without going to the huge amount of work and risk arranging for the planes to hit the towers.

How?

Ask ENT,

He reckons Larry did not need the planes, he would of dropped the Towers anyway
then claim his Insurance by saying some naughty boys placed Thermite through them and offed the fuking things.


I mean ENT changes his story every other minute depending on which web page he is pasting up.

You're first part Albert.

The chances of actually pulling off that mission to the extent it was done was sweet fuk all.

Way to complicated.

The official line is well solid. Could not plan that shit.

Ya know Terry, ya spout some awful god damned lies about me continually.

You talk shit constantly.

You have a brain as big as a maggot's.

Nothing you say makes any sense.

So it's difficult to be polite to you.

Fuck off.

If I do meet up with you, you will not be a happy man.

Got it C*nt?

Now if you wanna discuss something realistically re. 9/11, do so.

If you wanna keep spouting more school boy sexually perverted crap instead of straight reality, Ocker, , especially towards me, expect to get even more sh*te off me.

Basically, what I'm saying you jumped up lying, wanna be fireman and in fact a union shill and government stooge, is FWk off and die.

Got it?

I did offer to meet you for a beer at the Gecko, Bkk, Ill be there next week.

But, fwk me around and I'll fwk you around. Got it?

Handbags at dawn...?

I offered to meet ENT once, but he was too wimpy.

Originally Posted by ENT

Nothing you say makes any sense.

On the contrary.....he is the very voice of reason....especially in the last 3 pages or so, about the insurance company and no real, factual evidence being able to be presented in court.
The whole thing does look suspicious, I know. That's why it is fascinating to us all.

Who was it who said something like : "When you eliminate what is impossible, whatever is left, however improbable it may seem, is the truth of the matter".....(or words to that effect).

Actually, I will be in Brisbane on Wednesday.

The last time you offered to meet, you wanted to offer me a fight, after I offered you a beer!

But then again, you're just an Ocker maggot who has no brain anyway.

Now where's that karaokey bar next to your last apartment ya rented in BKK?

I'd like to go around for a visit.

Eh look the poofter's backing down now. I think someone told him Terry really is a fireman.