• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Inside Job Proof?

slugmancs

Scholar
Joined
Mar 23, 2007
Messages
85
I have never understood how people can jump from believing CD (which is fine, some people do) to Inside Job! When there has never been ANY proof put forth by the people claiming it is. Read this post referring to JREF from LCF:

I know I don't. I would describe myself as a sceptic, which is what JREFers are SUPPOSED to be.

I question things, and base my opinions on what I find. That is why I am an atheist. It is why I don't believe the world is run by lizards. It is why I know that 9/11 was an inside job.

JREFers form an opinion, and then manipulate the evidence to suit their predetermined outcome. When the evidence is not manipulatable they resort to tactics like yours.

That is not scepticism, it is propaganda peddling.

How can you jump from "I believe it is a CD" to INSIDE JOB?
 
"CD" stands for "Controlled Demolition" correct?

If so, I don't understand your question. It seems to be a pretty logical inference (albeit from a premise totally unsupported by facts or logic).
 
JREFers form an opinion, and then manipulate the evidence to suit their predetermined outcome.
Actually, I came here as a 911 denier, now look at me. debunker and everything (free of charge)
 
Inside Job Proof?

Why no, no there isn't?

That would be because the planes that did it came in from the outside rather than taking off in the (extremely) limited runway space in the buildings.
 
"CD" stands for "Controlled Demolition" correct?

If so, I don't understand your question. It seems to be a pretty logical inference (albeit from a premise totally unsupported by facts or logic).

Personally I think it is impossible but there aren't security camera tapes showing anyone NOT planting explosives so it is hard to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt to the "truthers" that there was no CD. But when they say they have examined the facts and it is an Inside Job, they never offer proof which bothers me.
 
I have never understood how people can jump from believing CD (which is fine, some people do) to Inside Job! When there has never been ANY proof put forth by the people claiming it is. Read this post referring to JREF from LCF:



How can you jump from "I believe it is a CD" to INSIDE JOB?


I don't think the 'serious' CTs are actually saying that proving the towers were CDed would 'prove' it was an inside job. But such a revelation would certainly be fatal to the offical story and would warrant a new investigation. It is hard to imagine how a terrorist group could pull off the massive effort to wire the towers for a cd without getting caught - some 'inside' help would certainly be a strong possibility.
 
Personally I think it is impossible but there aren't security camera tapes showing anyone NOT planting explosives so it is hard to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt to the "truthers" that there was no CD. But when they say they have examined the facts and it is an Inside Job, they never offer proof which bothers me.

What's impossible is flipping the burden of proof when it is convenient for you.

Prove to me that there is NOT an invisible leprechaun sitting on my shoulder...

The burden for proving that extraordinary claim is on the person claiming it- not on the opposition to "disprove" it. Although, it should be pointed out that wiring up a building like WTC and not having a single person notice is quite impossible.

That and, there's no evidence for it- but whatever.
 
Personally I think it is impossible but there aren't security camera tapes showing anyone NOT planting explosives so it is hard to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt to the "truthers" that there was no CD. But when they say they have examined the facts and it is an Inside Job, they never offer proof which bothers me.

Sorry, I had to reboot my brain after trying to parse that first sentence (is that a quadruple negative?).

I really don't know what your point is. Controlled demolition would almost certainly have been an inside job. The resources necessary to pull it off would be beyond the reach of a bunch of box-cutter wielding religious fanatics.

Disclaimer - I believe WTC was brought down by fire and structural damage initiated by the passenger jets that collided into them.
 
Where you sit on the issues of 9/11, for most people (there are lots of exceptions as the world and those in it are diverse in world perspective and view), it comes down to their view of how the world works.

Most of us in the civilized world believe that what we see, what we hear, what we are told, is likely true until proven false. Our justice system is built around it. We presume if someone says they are innocent, that they are until proven otherwise. We believe that if we watch a TV NEWS Broadcast, and see a plane hit a building, that it hit the building, unless proven otherwise. If we see a feminine looking person dressed in a bra and panties, we assume it is a woman until proven otherwise (I had to throw that one in...no not from personal experience...lol).

Now on the other hand, there are those that look at the world completely opposite. They assume someone, or some organization has been dishonest, and is lying, until proven to them that this isnt true. They believe the TV station is a pawn of corporate america, and has CGIed in the plane to manipulate the masses into fear. They will assume the person in the underwear is a man, or a lizard wanting to rule the world.

Most of us live in a relatively honest, "it is like we see it" world, and for the most part, when this is not the case, it is eventually proven different through logic, evidence, and facts..

The truthers, or many of them, live in a world where everyone is to be distrusted, where everyone, especially big brother is lying, and where it is each man for himself. Their world is ruled by opinion, hearsay, and speculation. It is the world of total paranoia and mistrust.

It is sad really. I pity, not envy, those who live in the latter.

TAM:)
 
Personally I think it is impossible but there aren't security camera tapes showing anyone NOT planting explosives so it is hard to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt to the "truthers" that there was no CD. But when they say they have examined the facts and it is an Inside Job, they never offer proof which bothers me.

What exactly would a security camera tape of someone not planting explosives look like?

*Man walks into building. Man goes into super-sekrit explosive planting area. Man produces explosives. Man looks at camera, points at the explosives, shakes his finger, and then walks out without planting them.*
 
It makes sense if you look at it from the CTer point of view. "Inside Job" is nothing more than a catchphrase designed to attract attention.

What CTers are really about is proving the "Official Version" wrong. You're quite right that CD does not immediately mean "inside job". It does mean all sorts of interesting things, and could likely lead to inside job, but it's not inherent.

But the important thing is CD proves the Official Version wrong and that's what they are about.

-Gumboot
 
Personally I think it is impossible but there aren't security camera tapes showing anyone NOT planting explosives so it is hard to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt to the "truthers" that there was no CD. But when they say they have examined the facts and it is an Inside Job, they never offer proof which bothers me.

Actually, if I am not mistaken, every single security tape ever produced from within the WTC (possible exception of the first bombing attempt) are tapes showing people NOT planting explosives. There are even documentary tapes of the construction of the building which show people NOT planting explosives.
 
JREFers form an opinion, and then manipulate the evidence to suit their predetermined outcome. When the evidence is not manipulatable they resort to tactics like yours.

"When the evidence is not manipulatable"... you mean they have evidence?
 

Back
Top Bottom