The 100% Impossible 9/11 Inside Job

You mean other than the entire Northeast air corridor being left undefended and Washington DC airspace left wide open for over an hour after the first plane hit the World Trade Center? No, not a whole lot.

Who would have defended the NE corridor & DC? How would they have done so? How long should it have taken them to do so?

You have made a claim & given nothing to back it up.

Come on. We have proven AQ was involved. Can you not prove the USG was involved? If you can't, why do you think they were?
 
Last edited:
And where were these guys getting their funding and training? Were they a front and/or patsy for a different group of people? Were they unwittingly set up to be the fallguys? How can we be certain?



The same goes for you. The burden of proof is equally on you to prove Al-Qaeda was the only responsible entity for the 9/11 attacks.



We are also not aware of evidence that supports the claim that Al-Qaeda acted alone, so where is it?
Nope, dismissed,
The burden of proof is ALWAYS on the one who has the most extraordinary claim, what you are committing is the Burden of proof shift logical fallacy.

So lets try the opening post that you hand waved away without responding to. shall we?

Take note of the highlighted text
This is the conspiracy:
  • The plan is to create and carry out, in secret, an attack on multiple targets in the US, made to appear to be the work of religious extremists from the Middle East (Difficulty Rating: high)
  • The plan (here defined by what ended up taking place, although it would likely start as something broader and be refined along the way) must be conceived and shared with at least one person, both of whom must carry the secret forever, risking careers, family, probably the death penalty, as well as the same for co-conspirators who would be implicated in short order (DR: high)
  • The plan must be conceived and outlined, creating some kind of paper and/or electronic trail
  • Subsets of the plan must each be delegated to lieutenants, recruited (see above re: risks) and charged with its execution (DR: high)
Here on things get a little difficult to outline. The reason being whatever your method du jour, be it no planes, or remote controlled planes, or planted plane parts , or voice morphing technology, or live video animation overlay, or space beams, or mini nukes, or the Twin Towers being constructed with explosives to be detonated three decades later, or Pentagon fly-overs with roadway light poles and other debris and body parts strewn around IE faked?outside to make it look like a jetliner crashed into the building, to faked craters in the field in Pennsylvania, to whatever Tom-Clancy-lite stews the conspiracy-minded have cooked up over the years, would each require some different elements of conception, planning, procurement, staffing, and execution, as to make it way too difficult to describe here. So for the sake of simplicity, not that it in reality begins to approach that ideal, let’s just stick to “controlled demolition” of the Twin Towers and WTC 7, including the presence of four passenger airliners.
  • Subsets include but not limited to: air strike on WTC 1, secret demolition of WTC 1, air strike on WTC 2, secret demolition of WTC 2, secret demolition of WTC 7, air strike on the Pentagon, secret explosion at the Pentagon, crash in Pennsylvania (presumably designed into the plan, as any preparation for a false hit by the 4th airliner (generally considered after-the-fact to be either the White House or the capital building) would be untenably risky)
Shall I continue? Okay.
  • Each subset of the plan requires a budget
  • Each subset must be funded, creating a paper and/or electronic trail (DR: medium-high)
  • Each conspirator must be provided a fee, sufficient to offset the extraordinary risks involved, and this added to the budget (DR: difficult to speculate)
  • An account or accounts must be created for the purposes of funding the plan, each one active (with numerous and high-dollar expenditures most every step), creating a paper and/or electronic trail (DR: medium)
  • The plan must be initiated at some point and work towards its execution, presumably determined along the way. In any event, the plan cannot be overly long in its gestation lest it either be discovered or given away, either accidentally or intentionally
Let’s briefly look at just one subset, demolition of WTC 1, as an example of the complexity involved in such an undertaking.

Assuming the building would need to be wired for “controlled demolition” (a much-abused term, but adequate for this discussion), we have to: 1) gather a crew of sufficient numbers and expertise (I cannot speculate how large the number would be, but let’s go wildly conservative and say ten); 2) pay for their cooperation as well as take whatever steps necessary to ensure their lifelong secrecy, the same as the project lieutenants; 3) develop a plan; 4) procure materials, including untold spools of wiring, detonators, remote devices, installation tools (drills, saws, crimpers, ladders, lighting, breathing masks, etc.) transportation, false IDs, and various & sundry; 4) make numerous trips transporting materials from an origin warehouse to the site or a staging area nearby (which would have to be found and rented ahead of time); 5) provide some scripted preparation to the crew for the purpose of impromptu interaction with building personnel, security, or the general public; 6) set to work; 7) proceed in such a way as to not call attention to the tasks, knowing that, after the fact, many witnesses would recall anything unusual, including the exposure of numerous portions of support structure of the tower, one of the two largest building in Manhattan; 8) continue and maintain the secret work, including final patch, painting, carpeting and trim repair, and cleanup, for however many long days the task would require.

Again, all this and much more would be necessary for even a modest-size team to secretly plan, devise, and install the numerous elements of only one of the multiple components of the events of Sept. 11, 2001.

But is it possible?

Is it possible to find a few much less dozens of people, presumably American, to wage war on their fellow unarmed citizens?

Is it possible that not one of these dozens of treasonous, murdering cowards would, over the course of the many months leading up to the attacks, not accidentally or on purpose divulge even some small detail to a drinking buddy? A wife or girlfriend? A mother or father?
Is it possible that not one of these cold-blooded conspirators, likely in fear of their safety (as well as that of their loved ones), not put in place testimony and evidence so as to reveal the plan to the FBI, the media, their congressman, senator and others should anything happen to them once the deed was done?
Is it possible that the architects of the plan would expect that the team members could keep quiet for the rest of their lives, never to give in to conscience and guilt?

Is it possible that no amount of what would be an astounding amount of physical evidence at the scene would ever turn up?

Is it possible that no emails, text messages, hard-drives, letters, receipts or other supporting communications evidence ever turn up?

Is it possible that the mastermind(s) of what would be the largest and most complex conspiracy in history not have at some point said, “Y’know, there’s way too much that can go wrong here. Why don’t we just plant some bombs on a few high-visibility targets, plant a couple bodies as evidence, and do some follow-up messages to the world’s media? It would take only a half-dozen guys, tops.”

Is it possible that the mastermind(s), having gone to all the months of planning and execution of this massive plot, all to play the American public, not have followed up with several easy-to-manage attacks like that described in the paragraph above so as to keep the apparent terror threat high and palpable?

Is it possible that the mastermind(s), so adept at plotting and executing a wildly intricate plan in the middle of the most populous city in the US so as to apparently justify war on Iraq under the guise of the pre-emptive removal of weapons of mass-destruction, not toss a couple WMD out the back of a cargo plane to the Iraqi desert below so as to provide justification for the war? Y’know, instead of suffering the rebuke of most of the civilized world as well as diminished stature when they, in fact, never turned up?

The answer can only be no. For some of this, much less all of it, to take place successfully is not possible. Not even a little. And there’s a word for when something is not possible.

Impossible.

Have at it champ. What you are tasked with is to prove any of the "inside job conspiracy" points highlighted in yellow above, Failing that, point out what evidence Mark Roberts gets wrong via the link to his site in my sig.

Good luck Champ, and a reminder. The burden of proof is ALWAYS on the one who has the most extraordinary claim. That being YOU!
 
What, you mean other than it being nonsense?

It doesn't prove anything. I was waiting to find out why 9/11 couldn't have been an inside job. Instead, all it was was rambling.
I'll concede it's not my best work, but you might make an effort to be specific. "Nonsense" why? "Rambling" how?

I expect another snarky, content-free retort. But I've been surpised before. Which will it be this time?
 
Uh oh.

Looks like I stirred up a nest of government truthers here!

"The government didn't do it! The government wasn't involved! I know this because they said so! All the evidence the government provided me implicates somebody else! If you question my government truth I'll call you a truther! Ha, ha, I'm so clever! "

That about sums it up.
Oh, please.
 
The fact that no evidence was found, and not a single soul found anything unusual in the weeks / months leading up to 9/11 is what proves it wasn't rigged for implosion.


You people act as if it was the easiest thing in the world to do.

WTC 7 was TWICE THE SIZE of the world record.

TWICE.

And it was populated 24/7 in the biggest city in the world.

THAT is what makes it impossible.
Pretty much.
 
In other words, you don't really claim to know whether or not the U.S. government was involved in the attacks, you just believe and hope they weren't. I'm glad we got that ironed out.

Either way, the burden of proof is no more on me than it is on you. You believe without conclusive evidence that Al-Qaeda acted alone. I don't.
No.

The above is the last reply you will receive from me. I'm very sorry that you still don't understand the concept of burden of proof, but willful ignorance is your problem to own. Not my concern; I'm pretty relaxed about it.

I wish you the best of luck in trolling the JREF, but if you can't even be bothered to research 9/11 before posting in a 9/11 discussion, you certainly won't be receiving further replies from me. All the best.
 
Nope, dismissed,
The burden of proof is ALWAYS on the one who has the most extraordinary claim

Good, because the most extraordinary claim is the one you are making, that 19 clowns directed from a cave in Afghanistan pulled off the greatest crime in U.S. history while bamboozling the U.S. government and all of its policing and intelligence agencies.

The burden of proof is clearly on you, so where is your proof? That's right. You don't have any.
 
No.

The above is the last reply you will receive from me. I'm very sorry that you still don't understand the concept of burden of proof, but willful ignorance is your problem to own. Not my concern; I'm pretty relaxed about it.

I wish you the best of luck in trolling the JREF, but if you can't even be bothered to research 9/11 before posting in a 9/11 discussion, you certainly won't be receiving further replies from me. All the best.

Ditto. I'm very sorry that you still don't understand the concept of burden of proof. You clearly want to have your cake and eat it to. You want to be able to demand evidence without providing any of your own.

Good luck in your future government truther efforts.
 
Last edited:
Good, because the most extraordinary claim is the one you are making, that 19 clowns directed from a cave in Afghanistan pulled off the greatest crime in U.S. history while bamboozling the U.S. government and all of its policing and intelligence agencies.

The burden of proof is clearly on you, so where is your proof? That's right. You don't have any.
Proof has been provided that AQ was involved in the 9/11 attacks. Members of AQ have been convicted for the crime

What is lacking is your proof that the USG was also involved.

Why are you so afraid of presenting proof that the USG was involved? You've already made a claim so you can drop the pretense of just questioning. Granted you can't back that claim up.
 
Come on. We have proven AQ was involved.

That doesn't do you any good if you can't prove that Al-Qaeda was working independently on 9/11. After all, the official conspiracy theory you've swallowed hinges on that point.

For all you know, Al-Qaeda might represent the tip of a much larger criminal conspiracy involving the CIA, members of the Bush administration, and other agencies of the state. You don't know, you only think you do. The government and their lapdogs in the media tell you what you want to hear and you eat it up without nary a question.
 
Proof has been provided that AQ was involved in the 9/11 attacks.

Great. Now where's the proof that Al-Qaeda acted alone and without state sponsorship?

Members of AQ have been convicted for the crime.

This does not in and of itself constitute evidence that they are or were the only truly guilty party.

What is lacking is your proof that the USG was also involved.

What is also lacking is your proof that Al-Qaeda acted alone.

Why are you so afraid of presenting proof that the USG was involved? You've already made a claim so you can drop the pretense of just questioning. Granted you can't back that claim up.

Why are you so afraid of presenting proof that Al-Qaeda acted alone? You've already made a claim so you can drop the pretense of just questioning. Granted you can't back that claim up.

(See how easy this is for me? It's so easy a government truther could do it.)
 
Last edited:
That doesn't do you any good if you can't prove that Al-Qaeda was working independently on 9/11. After all, the official conspiracy theory you've swallowed hinges on that point.
No.

I've stated several times that I haven't seen any proof that shows the USG was involved. Neither you (nor anyone else) has provided any, so there is no reason for me to think that they were involved. Sorry, but that's why truthers are pretty much regulated to the internet & have done nothingof substance in the real world since the movement began.

For all you know, Al-Qaeda might represent the tip of a much larger criminal conspiracy involving the CIA, members of the Bush administration, and other agencies of the state. You don't know, you only think you do. The government and their lapdogs in the media tell you what you want to hear and you eat it up without nary a question.

Yet I can easily prove AQ was involved yet you're just chasing your tail on proving that the USG was...

Does it sting to know that after all the websites & YouTube bids you can't prove the USG was involved? Is that why you're trying so hard to shift the burden of proof... & failing?
 
What is that proof of? Do you have any proof it could have been any different?

Who really knows? Maybe it's proof that our government let the attacks occur on purpose. Of course, they'll never admit to such a thing and the controlled media won't do any real investigating.

The point is, over an hour after the beginning of the attacks, Washington D.C. was still without any effective air cover. A passenger airliner was able to enter Washington airspace and dive right into the Pentagon unopposed. How convenient that the fighters assigned to protect Washington were nowhere in the general vicinity.
 
That doesn't do you any good if you can't prove that Al-Qaeda was working independently on 9/11. After all, the official conspiracy theory you've swallowed hinges on that point.
No.

I've stated several times that I haven't seen any proof that shows the USG was involved. Neither you (nor anyone else) has provided any, so there is no reason for me to think that they were involved. Sorry, but that's why truthers are pretty much regulated to the internet & have done nothing of substance in the real world since the movement began.

For all you know, Al-Qaeda might represent the tip of a much larger criminal conspiracy involving the CIA, members of the Bush administration, and other agencies of the state. You don't know, you only think you do. The government and their lapdogs in the media tell you what you want to hear and you eat it up without nary a question.

Yet I can easily prove AQ was involved while you're just chasing your tail on proving that the USG was...

Does it sting to know that after all the websites & YouTube bids you can't prove the USG was involved? Is that why you're trying so hard to shift the burden of proof... & failing?
 
Who really knows? Maybe it's proof that our government let the attacks occur on purpose. Of course, they'll never admit to such a thing and the controlled media won't do any real investigating.

The point is, over an hour after the beginning of the attacks, Washington D.C. was still without any effective air cover. A passenger airliner was able to enter Washington airspace and dive right into the Pentagon unopposed. How convenient that the fighters assigned to protect Washington were nowhere in the general vicinity.
What fighters were assigned to protect DC? What was their armament? Would they have shot the plane down over DC? What was the protocol for dealing with kamikaze type attacks over American soil in 2001?
 
Last edited:
No.

I've stated several times that I haven't seen any proof that shows the USG was involved. Neither you (nor anyone else) has provided any, so there is no reason for me to think that they were involved.

Just the same, I've stated several times that I haven't seen any proof that shows Al-Qaeda acting alone. Neither you (nor anyone else) has provided any, so there is no reason for me to think Al-Qaeda acted alone on 9/11.

Yet I can easily prove AQ was involved yet you're just chasing your tail on proving that the USG was...

I don't need to prove the U.S. government was involved. All I need to prove is your inability to back up your belief that Al-Qaeda was solely responsible. To that I say, MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

Does it sting to know that after all the websites & YouTube bids you can't prove the USG was involved? Is that why you're trying so hard to shift the burden of proof... & failing?

Again, I don't need to prove the U.S. government was involved. If they were involved, then my proving it is irrelevant. Reality is what it is. What's done is done. I'm only here to confirm for myself and reveal for others that you true believers in the government truther movement have no more evidence for what you believe than those you admonish and mock.

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
 
Just the same, I've stated several times that I haven't seen any proof that shows Al-Qaeda acting alone. Neither you (nor anyone else) has provided any, so there is no reason for me to think Al-Qaeda acted alone on 9/11.

Do you think that hyper-intelligent space aliens from another dimension were helping Al-Qaeda on 9/11? If not, I demand that you prove it to me beyond all doubt. Note, my concept of proof and doubt may be changed at any point so you'll always be wrong.
 

Back
Top Bottom