The 100% Impossible 9/11 Inside Job

[Grizzly Bear]

Flight PSA 1771, the suicide note written by the hijacker survived
In the same flight the gun used to shoot the pilots was recovered with a sample of the person's tissue on the trigger.

Infinitely small chance? Things like this happen in just about every plane crash,

 

[TruthersLie]

Parts of the cockpit would have continued on through the building but there was no hole in the building. That cockpit became some kind of a shot gun load of thousands of high speed pieces BUT these pieces were not fast enough to escape the fire along the trajectory.
You can see it best in the videos of UA175. Even the huge engine that went through the office space did not escape the fire.
[qimg]http://img515.imageshack.us/img515/3024/pic00310.png[/qimg][qimg]http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/6831/pic00311.png[/qimg][qimg]http://img820.imageshack.us/img820/4985/pic00312.png[/qimg]

Same for AA11
[qimg]http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/28/pic00318.png[/qimg]
Sorry. It looks like ImageShack do not link the Wolfgang Staehle photographs but you can find it here:
http://www.911conspiracy.tv/Naudet_plane_crash_slideshow_v2.html

That's why the debris looks this way:
[qimg]http://img810.imageshack.us/img810/6407/wtcdebrisseatcushionaa1.jpg[/qimg]

So even if that passport had a chance to went through the building, it had no chance to land at Vesey St. It had a infinit small chance to escape the fire and it had no chance to escape without scratches. It's insane.
In the same way one could state that you can shoot at a passport without leaving any trace. And that passport made it against the wind back to the other side of the building. NO WAY!

You talk about all the fluttering paper? Printer paper and documents from the offices? Well, the fuel explosion caused a lot of pressure abel to blow the windows out. Sure, there was a lot of paper but certainly not from the cockpit with a high speed crushed airplane coming behind it followed by 10000gal of vaporized fuel exploding and overcoming every piece of metal.

"You assume that every immigration worker..." No. I assume that it makes no sense to use correction fluid for any kind of fraud. I assume that possibly one immigration worker or visa guy or who ever is enough to notice it if looking at it BUT he probably wouldn't notice that stamp among stamps without correction fluid. That "fraud" is like putting a huge exclamation mark behind that stamp. Once noticed it is nevertheless NO PROBLEM to still read what the stamp is saying.
I furthermore assume that these hijackers allegedly had additional passports for Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan if there ever went there. At least the FBI is stating that the absence of these stamps is a clear sign of a fraud as well. Yet, the FBI is stateing that there are some/many fraudulent stamps they don't show to the public for whatever reason. Tell me one plausible reason to use an original passport - a clean one - or later with saveral stamps from Malaysia, Turky... - and put a lot of fraudulet stamps in it. Does it help anything. Something like "Hey, looks like a student who travels all the time. He's OK."
If there is no entry stamp for Pakistan then they even do not need a fraudulent exit, right? So what for?
The only plausible explanation I can imagine is a fraudulent pass given by some unknown man in buisness suit to the authorities. THEY wanted some obvious frauds in it. No one else would have any profit of correction fluid and additional fraudulent stamps. It's nonsense.
Any hijacker or terrorist dont want to be noticed at any cost. They don't need to buy beer by amateurish painting WHITE over a stamp. And it wasn't a fraudulent paper so that some stamps would look like a little more original.

...and in the end it's not the only passport story in such a nonsensical way.

I've missed most of this discussion and frankly I don't feel like going back and trying to dig through this pile of personal incredulity.

Just two simple questions.

1. you do realize that in airline crashes there are often very random things which survive the crashes right?

2. Based on question #1 above, what do you think about PSA 1771 and the fact that it appeared to look like United flight 93's debris... the fact that they found a handwritten suicide note from the person who killed the pilots and crashed the plane.

Wouldn't your own argument mean that it wasn't possible that the handwritten suicide note by the hijacker would ever be found? does that mean it is "fake?"

 

[ImANiceGuy]

No evidence. Just incredulity and circular reasoning.


No evidence. How that must burn in a truther's craw.

Depends on the type of Truther.

There is mountains of circumstantial evidence supporting the fact that the american intelligence services, and therefore the whitehouse, had advanced knowledge of the attacks as well as covered up and impeded investigations before and after 911.

At some point it all becomes corroborating evidence of criminal negligence, and treason.

Greed, plain and simple, disguised as ideological wars.

How many active members of AQ are there in the world? 2,000, maybe?

How much has been spent in the last 10 years to defend against them?

Where does all that taxpayer money go? Offshore is obviously the short answer to that question.

Can't you see the blaring conflict of interest? Look at the lateral movement in the US between public and private sectors.

Christ allmighty....wtf are you doing here arguing about a silly passport? Like this matters; to whoever the truther is, posting in this thread I say: move on man, don't waste your time talking passports here. Try researching something interesting like the Pan-Am Flight 103, and see how its connected to BP; or PTECH and BCCI; or Hunter S Thompson and the bohemian grove. Get off the truther websites that parade bs and lies to no apparent end. Read, and be skeptical.

When it comes to the passport, who knows wether they planted it, or it flew from the explosion......both are possibilities. Can you see an end in site to this topic here? Hint: No.

In short, and to keep this on topic; It is absolutely absurd, naive, and ignorant to take the blanket position that a 9/11 inside job is 100% impossible, and not only for the obviously absent knowledge of probability theory.

 

[LightningTeg]

The problem is, for it to be an inside job, so many things had to have happened that didn't.

And you also have to remember this is the US government pulling this off. Let that sink in...

 

[Regnad Kcin]

...In short, and to keep this on topic; It is absolutely absurd, naive, and ignorant to take the blanket position that a 9/11 inside job is 100% impossible, and not only for the obviously absent knowledge of probability theory.

Is it 100% possible for there to exist a red Vespa scooter sitting outside a Starbucks located on the far side of the Moon right now? Yes or no.

 

[beachnut]

...
In short, and to keep this on topic; It is absolutely absurd, naive, and ignorant to take the blanket position that a 9/11 inside job is 100% impossible, and not only for the obviously absent knowledge of probability theory.

It is 100 percent impossible. 911 is an event, it is complete, it was not an inside job, it was 19 terrorists. Probability theory is useless for an event in the past - the super-bowl, 100 percent impossible for Pittsburgh to win the super-bowl they lost. Go ahead, make your day, spew nonsense and claim it is possible.

The only case for ignorance on this topic are those who ignore evidence and make the failed claim it is possible for 911 to be an inside job. Do you have some evidence to back your absurd claim? no

Is it 100% possible for there to exist a red Vespa scooter sitting outside a Starbucks located on the far side of the Moon right now? Yes or no.

Don't ask John Lear. When will IANG figure out 911 truth is nonsense?

 

[GlennB]

It had a infinit small chance to escape the fire and it had no chance to escape without scratches. It's insane.
In the same way one could state that you can shoot at a passport without leaving any trace. And that passport made it against the wind back to the other side of the building. NO WAY!

Pan Am 103 (Lockerbie) was brought down by a high explosives packed into a radio-cassette player. Part of the instruction manual for that machine, together with clothes packed into the bomb suitcase, were later recovered despite being inches from HE at the moment of detonation. Meanwhile bear in mind that a lot of people keep their passports in protective wallets to prevent them becoming dirty and dog-eared.

Once again your argument suffers from bare assertion fallacy. Unlikely-seeming things do sometimes survive violent explosions.

Meanwhile I can find no definitive reference to where the passport was actually found. I'm certainly not claiming this as true but perhaps it was found S of WTC1 and merely handed over in Vesey St? Or perhaps it was left flying around within the the N side of the building when the plane was shredded at impact and blown backwards by the fuel explosion?

 

[ImANiceGuy]

Is it 100% possible for there to exist a red Vespa scooter sitting outside a Starbucks located on the far side of the Moon right now? Yes or no.

Interesting question for which I am not sure of the point.

The answer is yes. It is possible. Now if you were to ask if it was 100% impossible, I would say no. Why are you asking this stupid question?

This is so simple. Maybe its deceptively too simple for the nitwit delusional duh-bunkers....who possess very little critical thinking abilities.

Beachnut - you're basically on my ignore list; 15k posts of failed delusion and lies.

 

[ImANiceGuy]

Is it 100% possible for there to exist a red Vespa scooter sitting outside a Starbucks located on the far side of the Moon right now? Yes or no.

Wait, I've figured this retarded question out....

The answer is death and taxes right?



Regnard Kin - Can you provide an example of something that is only 50% possible?

 

[Dave Rogers]

In short, and to keep this on topic; It is absolutely absurd, naive, and ignorant to take the blanket position that a 9/11 inside job is 100% impossible, and not only for the obviously absent knowledge of probability theory.

I shall remember that, and confine myself to the position that a 9/11 inside job is vanishingly improbably in the light of the convergence of evidence indicating that it was in fact carried out by al-Qaeda. Not that that will mean any change...

Dave

 

[twinstead]

Well, something certainly doesn't always need to be 100% impossible for me to reject it.

 

[ImANiceGuy]

I shall remember that, and confine myself to the position that a 9/11 inside job is vanishingly improbably in the light of the convergence of evidence indicating that it was in fact carried out by al-Qaeda. Not that that will mean any change...

Dave

Dave - your position is reasonable. How come you won't call out your idiot skeptic colleagues for proclaiming that it is 100% impossible.

How about this little brain-buster: Can you name something that is only 50% possible? Regnad asked me if some farfetched scenario was 100% possible.

How come you guys don't attack the idiot skeptics? Only the idiot truthers earn criticism?

 

[ImANiceGuy]

Well, something certainly doesn't always need to be 100% impossible for me to reject it.

But if a skeptic creates a ridiculous thread to procliam that an inside job is 100% impossible, all the debunkers are conveniently absent in telling him how stupid and unreasonable his proclaimation really is.

Never mind that he doesn't qualify what an "inside job" actually is, other than that it has to meet his predetermined criteria and that it is 100% impossible...

christallmighty....

 

[Dave Rogers]

Dave - your position is reasonable. How come you won't call out your idiot skeptic colleagues for proclaiming that it is 100% impossible.

I see no colleagues. I see people with points of view, some of which more or less agree with mine. I think the OP was very slightly exaggerated, but the difference between vanishingly improbably and impossible is negligible. It's equivalent to living my life as an atheist despite the fact that I can't prove conclusively that there is no God; the uncertainty level is too small to cause the slightest concern, and I won't dispute the difference with someone who feels it's a certainty.

How come you guys don't attack the idiot skeptics?

Because they aren't accusing thousands of innocent people of mass murder.

Dave

 

[tsig]

Dave - your position is reasonable. How come you won't call out your idiot skeptic colleagues for proclaiming that it is 100% impossible.

How about this little brain-buster: Can you name something that is only 50% possible? Regnad asked me if some farfetched scenario was 100% possible.

How come you guys don't attack the idiot skeptics? Only the idiot truthers earn criticism?

A coin coming up heads when flipped.

 

[twinstead]

because they aren't accusing thousands of innocent people of mass murder.

bingo

 

[chipmunk stew]

But if a skeptic creates a ridiculous thread to procliam that an inside job is 100% impossible, all the debunkers are conveniently absent in telling him how stupid and unreasonable his proclaimation really is.

Never mind that he doesn't qualify what an "inside job" actually is, other than that it has to meet his predetermined criteria and that it is 100% impossible...

christallmighty....

The OP doesn't claim that an Inside Job with some resemblance to the attacks that happened on 9/11/2001 would be theoretically impossible, it claims that the actual event that actually happened on 9/11/2001 having been an Inside Job is impossible, given what we know about that event.

I agreed, given a similar asterisk of qualification as the following, which you can find upthread:

I see no colleagues. I see people with points of view, some of which more or less agree with mine. I think the OP was very slightly exaggerated, but the difference between vanishingly improbably and impossible is negligible. It's equivalent to living my life as an atheist despite the fact that I can't prove conclusively that there is no God; the uncertainty level is too small to cause the slightest concern, and I won't dispute the difference with someone who feels it's a certainty.
Because they aren't accusing thousands of innocent people of mass murder.

Dave

 

[ImANiceGuy]

A coin coming up heads when flipped.

Good try though....Its 100% possible, not 50% possible.

A coinflip has 2 possibilities, each with a 50% probability.

Words are important.

 

[twinstead]

Good try though....Its 100% possible, not 50% possible.

A coinflip has 2 possibilities, each with a 50% probability.

Words are important.

What is the possibility of a coin being flipped and coming up heads?
what is the probability of a coin being flipped and coming up heads?

 

[ImANiceGuy]

The OP doesn't claim that an Inside Job with some resemblance to the attacks that happened on 9/11/2001 would be theoretically impossible, it claims that the actual event that actually happened on 9/11/2001 having been an Inside Job is impossible, given what we know about that event.

I agreed, given a similar asterisk of qualification as the following, which you can find upthread:

Oh....I get it!

Because it is so highly improbable, then it is as good as impossible. So why don't we just do away with those pesky words and that ultra pesky probability theory?

Would 9/11, before 9/11 occured, have been 100% impossible?

I guess to answer that question you would need to qualify '100% impossible' as either impossible, or improbable.

What is wrong with you guys?