How did you rule out that 911 was an inside job?

[Par]

How did you rule out that 911 was an inside job?[/B]

I have never ruled it out, per se. However, I have seen absolutely no compelling evidence whatsoever to support the idea and a myriad to suggest that it is merely a fantasy.

 

[stateofgrace]

"
How did you rule out that 911 was an inside job?


Max

Max I haven't, but I have read many independent books by independent researchers, who have not reached this conclusion. I have read the arguments for and against and always the arguments against it at far more sustainable.

To date I have seen nothing and I mean absolutely nothing to convince me that Islamic extremists did not hijack four planes and manage to slam three of them into land mark buildings within the US.

 

[jhunter1163]

I concur with most of the other posters; the inside-job hypothesis is not ruled out, but the evidence favoring the official story is quite compelling. The evidence for an inside job, such as it is, is much less so.

 

[alexg]

If a business's inventory goes up in flames, investigators will naturally suspect the owners.

No. But you would be a potential suspect. It's a terrible analogy anyway. Try this one: If the business is robbed at gunpoint now who do you suspect?

 

[Cuddles]

It's not a question of ruling it out, it's a question of ruling it in. In the same way that we don't have to rule out the question of whether there are teapots orbiting Pluto until someone presents some evidence that there might be, we don't have to rule out 11/9 being an inside job until someone presents evidence that it was. Six years on, still nothing.

 

[gumboot]

It's not a question of ruling it out, it's a question of ruling it in. In the same way that we don't have to rule out the question of whether there are teapots orbiting Pluto until someone presents some evidence that there might be, we don't have to rule out 11/9 being an inside job until someone presents evidence that it was. Six years on, still nothing.

Well said. This was my thought exactly.

And to echo the repeated comment, there's just no evidence. Simple as that.

-Gumboot

 

[Darat]

...snip...


A question to 19-Hijacker Conspiracy Hypothesists:

How did you rule out that 911 was an inside job?


...snip...

You seem to have this back to front; there is already an explanation for what happened that is consistent with the facts that most of us are aware of so for most of us there is no reason to doubt that explanation.

When there is reason to doubt that explanation, for instance if some evidence that contradicts that explanation or even cannot be addressed by that explanation comes to light, then I'm sure most people will be like me and seek a different explanation that explains all the currently known evidence and the new piece of evidence.

Currently most of us are not in fact "ruling out" that the terrorist attack on 9/11 was an "inside job", just as we are not "ruling out" that (for example) no attack happened and we are all in fact victims of an incredible hallucination.

Only if there is evidence that could only be explained by a theory that it was an inside job/mass hallucination (or there was not evidence that falsified an inside job/mass hallucination) would there be any requirement for anyone to "rule out" inside job/mass hallucination as being the correct explanation.

Now this of course does not mean that it was not an inside job or a mass hallucination, just that there is no rational reason to come to a conclusion that it was.

 

[Hokulele]

I ruled it out by enaging my brain before engaging my Caps Lock.

 

[332nd]

It's not a question of ruling it out, it's a question of ruling it in. In the same way that we don't have to rule out the question of whether there are teapots orbiting Pluto until someone presents some evidence that there might be, we don't have to rule out 11/9 being an inside job until someone presents evidence that it was. Six years on, still nothing.

Agreed. Also I know what a simile is.

 

[CptColumbo]

Consider the following:
Three guys are standing in the middle of a basketball court, during the halftime of an NBA game. They are part of the cleaning crew and are just dry mopping the court floor. One is wearing a hat with the basketball team’s logo on it, one is wearing a bandana, and the third is wearing a hat with the local baseball team’s logo on it. Suddenly, the guy with the baseball hat shoots the other guy with the hat in the head, using a 9mm he had hidden in his coveralls. Not all the spectators were paying attention, but some saw the first shot. Since it was halftime the feed from the cameras were not live and the cameras were not pointed at the location of the killing. Now however, everyone is now watching the middle of the court, and the technical director of the game instructs his camera crew to get shots of the action for the news division of the network. Before security has time to react, the gunman then shoots the guy with the bandana, in the chest. Almost all the spectators, numbering in the thousands, saw this. The shooter then turns the gun on himself, placing the gun in his mouth and pulls the trigger. The back of his head explodes in a shower of blood and brains.

In David Simon's book Homicide: a Year on the Killing Streets this would be regarded as a "dunker" (short for "slam dunk case"), an obvious suspect and plenty of witnesses. However, Will Peterson and his crew (CSI, for those who are unfamiliar with American TV) arrive, and map out what happened at the scene. The coroner does an autopsy, to determine a cause of death. Detectives look into the backgrounds of the victims and the shooter, to find a possible motive. Bullets are found in the two victims, along the track of the wounds. Unfortunately, the bullet that killed the suspected shooter can't be found. It traveled (according to witnesses and video playback) at an upward angle, most likely going into the rafters of the building, and may have struck one of the steel supports above it, been spent and fell to the ground. Thus, it was probably lost in the crowd as it left the building. According to the coroner, all three people died of gunshot wounds. According to the forensics team, the guy in the baseball hat was the shooter. He has GSR on his hands and his fingerprints are the only ones on the gun. According to the detectives, there was bad blood between the shooter and the victims. Apparently, the guy in the basketball hat was sleeping with the baseball hat wearer's wife, and the guy in the bandana knew this was going on for sometime and didn't tell baseball hat. Two days before there had been an altercation between the men in their locker room. The case is closed.

However, soon after all the findings are published in the newspaper a dentist finds some unanswered questions. Why did the bullet go through the shooter's head and not the first victim's head? Why the fact that the second victim had a pacemaker was never made public? Why the third bullet was never found? The explanation to him and others he enlists is obvious. There is a vast conspiracy, on the part of professional sports, to raise ticket prices.

The dentist, referred to as "Doctor" by his supporters, explains that only explosives placed within the logo of the hat of the first victim can explain the wound not being a through-and-through. He finds an explosive expert who tells him the "yeah an explosive could cause a wound like that..." Leaving out the rest of the statement, "but to propel the bullet into the skull would require an explosive package size that would be noticeable to the victim and the people around him." He also shows that an explosive could be placed in the pacemaker of the second victim, without doing research into when the victim's last operation was. "Isn't it obvious that the absence of the third bullet is proof that an explosive charged was placed in the man's head?" Also, some of the eyewitnesses (including off-duty cops, and soldiers on leave) described some of the "gunshots" as "sounding like small explosions." There is no other possible explanation.

Further, who benefited? Since the event all major league sports have raised their ticket prices, to pay for extra security.

Why hasn't the investigation been reopened? The sport teams have the city and state officials in their pocket.

Finally, isn't it suspicious that the suspect was identified so quickly?

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Max, I've enjoyed your wacky sense of humor for the most part, and I also liked the fact that you tried to go back and revise your theories based on what you learned here.

The therm*te theory has been put to bed; the laser ignition theory has been put to bed; the ammonium perchlorate theory has been put to bed. You need to work on a new theory...and frankly, I hope it's one not devoted to 9/11.

Seems that a person with your imagination could earn a good living writing science fiction or something...anything but wasting your talent on 9/11 CT nonsense.

 

[stateofgrace]

Exhibit A.

For me it was just so obvious that the collapse of WTC7 was a controlled demolition that I knew it couldn't be a conspiracy.

I mean how could the perps expect expect intelligent people to observe that collapse and not do a Dan Rather and say that looked like a controlled demolition?

There must have been explosives of something stored there by the CIA right?

I mean "too funny".

I mean what idiot would believe some debris damage and subsequent fires would result in a collapse like that?

The CIA must have badly stored some explosives and it's just a big coverup for their incompetence...right?

MM

Like I said max, I have seen nothing, absolutely nothing to convince me otherwise, only empty rhetoric.

 

[dudalb]

Sherlock Holmes Said it Best:'
"To come to any conclusions before all Data has been collected is a cardinal error".
And the truthers have commited that error,again,and again,and again.......

 

[Miragememories]

Sherlock Holmes Said it Best:'
"To come to any conclusions before all Data has been collected is a cardinal error".
And the truthers have commited that error,again,and again,and again.......

Sherlock Holmes was a fantasy...just like the Official Conspiracy Theory dudalb!

MM

 

[Par]

Sherlock Holmes was a fantasy...just like the Official Conspiracy Theory dudalb!

Do you have an argument?

 

[Miragememories]

Exhibit A.



Like I said max, I have seen nothing, absolutely nothing to convince me otherwise, only empty rhetoric.

Quite understandable stateofgrace.

I appreciate your position.

How does one change their mind without losing face after staunchly supporting a single point of view for years?

It's quite alright, you are expected to maintain your opinion even if those responsible for 9/11 confess to their crimes.

MM

 

[Par]

How does one change their mind without losing face after staunchly supporting a single point of view for years? It's quite alright, you are expected to maintain your opinion even if those responsible for 9/11 confess to their crimes.

Do you have an argument?

 

[HL7442]

How did I rule it out?


Being sane.

 

[stateofgrace]

Quite understandable stateofgrace.

I appreciate your position.

How does one change their mind without losing face after staunchly supporting a single point of view for years?

It's quite alright, you are expected to maintain your opinion even if those responsible for 9/11 confess to their crimes.

MM

Who would that be MM ?

 

[soylent]

Lets see now. There's the confession by the guilty suspects, there's the plausible motive, there's the consistency of the response on 9/11 with other events, there's good video of the collapse that doesn't show anything suspicious, there's the utter failure of 6 years of effort from a bunch of people who desperately want to believe it was an inside job to turn up anything suspicious or formulate a reasonable competing hypothesis, there's the silly number of people that would have to be involved... nope, can't think of anything.