It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

How do "non-believers " explain the passport?

page: 9
13
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 08:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Nutter
 



The whole idea is that you can't look at photos or go to weather reports to predict exactly how a piece of paper is going to behave when falling from an elevation of 1000, adajcent to a burning skyscraper, in lower Manhattan at a given moment in time.

Now compound that with the idea that nobody knows for sure exactly where the passport was found and you can comfortably eliminate the argument.




posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 08:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by Nutter
 



The whole idea is that you can't look at photos or go to weather reports to predict exactly how a piece of paper is going to behave when falling from an elevation of 1000, adajcent to a burning skyscraper, in lower Manhattan at a given moment in time.


No. But it does give your arguement more credibility.

[edit on 8-10-2009 by Nutter]



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 12:09 PM
link   

posted by Nutter

I just found something interesting in favor of your arguement hooper. According to weather underground, the wind in Manhattan, NY was 3 mph - NNW. I may have to rethink my stance on this particular arguement.





Wind:
Wind Speed 3 mph (NNW)
Max Wind Speed 9 mph
Max Gust Speed -
Visibility 10 miles

Source


Wind speed 3 mph North Northwest to a maximum wind speed of 9 mph means the wind was coming from the north of northwest on 9-11-2001; almost exactly as shown in the videos and other photographic evidence of that day.





The wind is NNW at 5mph?
does that mean it's coming from the NNW? or going NNW?

From the NNW. Wind is always FROM the listed direction.

In most cases, like in the world of meteorology, it is the direction the wind is blowing from.

Source


Mr hooper would have us believe that the force of the massive fireball as this miracle Satam al Suqami passport was allegedly blown out of the south side of the North Tower along with other almost 400 knot aircraft debris and building debris would not blow everything past the South Tower before the NNW wind took over sailing it around the South Tower and somehow 600 feet or more to the north towards Vesey Street.




posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


Actually, what do we have that actually says, officially, that the passport was found on Vessey Street? I am only aware of the Commission Report that states that is was found by an unknown person an handed over to a Detective in the NYPD. So it could have landed anywhere.



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


An unknown person?

What a ridiculous story...



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Jezus
 


Why? Why is it ridiculous?



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


Thanks for the meteorlogical lesson. I didn't know that it ment it was comming from the NNW direction.



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   

posted by hooper
reply to post by SPreston
 


Actually, what do we have that actually says, officially, that the passport was found on Vessey Street? I am only aware of the Commission Report that states that is was found by an unknown person an handed over to a Detective in the NYPD. So it could have landed anywhere.



What? The director of New York's FBI office Barry Mawn reporting directly to CNN is not official enough for you?



-- Police and the FBI completed a grid search of area streets near the site of the World Trade Center looking for clues, said Barry Mawn, director of New York's FBI office.

The searchers found several clues, he said, but would not elaborate. Last week, a passport belonging to one of the hijackers was found in the vicinity of Vesey Street, near the World Trade Center. "It was a significant piece of evidence for us," Mawn said.

CNN Source


And if there was a grid search by the FBI of the WTC area, why was an unknown person allowed to interfere in a FBI crime scene and allegedly pick up evidence? If this was truly a FBI grid search, why wasn't this unknown person arrested by the FBI or NYPD for interfering in a Federal criminal investigation?

This Satam al Suqami miracle passport is highly suspicious and unbelievable.



If you look further in the CNN article, you will see more official 9-11 lies included; such as hijacker backup plans, or no warning signs of an attack, or the cockpit voice and flight data recorders from United Airlines Flight 93 were found and information recovered.

Of course some information better forgotten was also mentioned such as five of the hijackers' names correlate with registration lists at U.S. military schools.




[edit on 10/8/09 by SPreston]



posted on Oct, 9 2009 @ 06:04 AM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


Please note that the grid search and the passport find were separated by a week. The unknown person was not in the grid search area. But you knew that.



posted on Oct, 10 2009 @ 10:55 PM
link   

posted by hooper
reply to post by SPreston
 


Please note that the grid search and the passport find were separated by a week. The unknown person was not in the grid search area. But you knew that.



No I do not know that. Are you claiming that the infamous FBI waited a whole week before conducting a grid search of the WTC area? That would have to be a new level of FBI incompetence. Hundreds of 1st responders and White House tourists and FBI thugs and press looking for a story tracking through the area and the FBI waits a whole week to conduct an investigation?

How do you know that the unknown person was not in the grid search area? Why would Vesey Street be left out of the grid search area? Vesey Street runs between WTC6 and WTC7 which is part of the WTC. So why would WTC7 and Vesey Street be excluded? Debris from Flight 175 was found north of Vesey Street. Why wouldn't the FBI grid search extend as far as or further than the alleged Flight 175 engine?



So maybe the alleged passport found in the vicinity of Vesey Street was on the north side of Vesey Street. We just do not know do we because the passport finding passerby is unknown; a phantom, a myth, anonymous, a non-person? Another 9-11 piece of BS masquerading as evidence.

How do you know that the FBI grid search was not run a week ago also? Maybe there was never a FBI grid search. Maybe they were too busy harrassing photographers and media persons and 1st responders to bother with a grid search. Maybe they just made up the grid search as an afterthought because it seemed like a good idea.



The CNN report was posted September 18. But no date was given for the FBI grid search. I say the passerby and the NYPD detective and the passport are all BS; planted disinformation just like the dozens of other planted disinformation dealing with all four alleged 9-11 aircraft.



Last week, a passport belonging to one of the hijackers was found in the vicinity of Vesey Street, near the World Trade Center. "It was a significant piece of evidence for us," Mawn said.

Source


I still don't see how that alleged paper passport in its passport cover flew north against the wind from the south side of the North Tower. Just BS and disinformation and propaganda.




posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 09:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

posted by hooper
reply to post by SPreston
 


Please note that the grid search and the passport find were separated by a week. The unknown person was not in the grid search area. But you knew that.



We just do not know do we because the passport finding passerby is unknown; a phantom, a myth, anonymous, a non-person? Another 9-11 piece of BS masquerading as evidence.


Indeed. The claimed passport finding person cannot possibly be identified and questioned by anybody. He/she could quite easily be one of those MOSSAD art students working the WTC or those following the claimed hijackers or those spying on the United States. There is no photo of the passerby, no description, not even the slightest clue to an identity.




posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
Originally posted by sumgai
reply to post by Redneck from Hell
 


At THIS POINT in time, the thing that we should take from 9/11 is that it divided the world into three groups of people:

1) Those who believe it was an "inside job".
2) Those who believe the "official story".
3) Those who have no opinion.


One should understand that the majority of people who believe "the official story" are blinded by faith in their government and/or the written obligations of the government. The rest of this group are just idiots who believe the mass media, mass opinion, or both who have no critical thinking and/or analytical skills that feed independent/investigative thought.

The "inside job" group, IMO, is equally divided into two sub-groups: Those who WANT to think it was an "inside job" because they are naturally rebellious and anti-authoritarian (which IS HEALTHY to a certain extent) and those who have the critical thinking AND analytical skills that feed independent, investigative thought.

The final group I have no care for, because these are the people who are too complacent and/or lazy to think for themselves, OR they're the most callus of individuals, OR they just haven't seen that much of a change in their day-to-day lives, and therefore just don't give a ****.
=========================

The only problem I have with this analysis is it wrongly implies that there is a "group" that thinks 9/11 was an inside job. There is no group. It is a small sub segment of a small sub culture that is deeply invested in conspiracies. You would have to go through the US population with a fine tooth comb to find enough people to fill a high school stadium, if that. Generally speaking, once you turn off your computer that "group" pretty much disappears.


why is anyone here even debating this perp payrollee shill anymore?

isn't it more than obvious he's either that or in total denial?

other than exposing him and making sure his disinfo campaign is put in check, is there any other reason to waste bandwidth arguing with such obvious perp defenders?



posted on Oct, 11 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by HennyPen
reply to post by SphinxMontreal
 


I believe that Satam al-Suqami passport official storyline is toast (pun intended) figuratively speaking. With the FBI shooting themselves in the foot again and again on 911 issues, I believe it has been sufficiently proven that the passport was planted.

But why would the FBI and government officials think they need to fake evidence if 911 happened as claimed? Wouldn't the simple facts which naturally occur during an event be sufficient?

So what other evidence did they decide needed to be faked and planted covertly? Other passports claimed to be recovered from alleged 911 crash sites? Drivers licenses? Fuselage pieces? DNA? Single steel aircraft wheels with nine missing and single aircraft tires? Engine rotors? Jet fuel? Downed light poles? Eyewitnesses who cannot be tracked down publicly or who changed their original testimonies? Passengers still strapped into aircraft seats?

If they will lie about one event; why wouldn't they lie about other events?


First, prove it was planted with something other than - "I don't believe it". Then prove who lied and waht exactly they lied about. Please note the differnece between being wrong and lying. Just because you can prove that something said is wrong is not the same as proving that they lied.


the first problem for you is that the story you would want us to believe about an unknown passer by finding the passport is itself unproven and suspect to begin with. So before you can say prove it was planted, the burden of proof is upon you and the fbi to show PROOF that STORY has evidence or logical story to support it. Until the FBI can show its normal protocol for such VITAL EVIDENCE to be handed over by an unknown person and that person have no trail of paperwork to prove that person exists, was there, or would even be allowed to GO ON THEIR WAY and not be interviewed and a record of that event occurring, is inofitself illogical and absurd.

so aside from needing to prove the passport could even land or be found in such pristine condition as it was, the BURDEN OF PROOF is in fact on YOU and the FBI perps to prove the passport wasn't planted or made up... that first happens by proving this unknown person existed and WHO THEY WERE which we all know will never happen because the passport was planted.

second, why have you evaded SO MANY issues pointed out surrounding the problems with the story? You focus on one or two areas and cherry pick what you answer so many times its pathetic.

third, I'm curious as to how odd it was for the weather forecast to be so beautiful a day and the winds only about 3 to 5 mph that day while a HURRICANE was just off the coast of NYC.... anyone???



www.drjudywood.com...



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 06:06 AM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


I believe that according to the testimony, the passport was handed over to an NYPD detective before the buildings collapsed. Do you think the FBI should have started a ground grid search and cutoof access to the site when they were still trying to evacuate people from the area? That makes sense to you?



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 06:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Orion7911
 


The facts are what they are. As I have said before you may deny them until you are blue in the face, that will not change them. Someone, after the planes had crashed, but before the buildings had collapsed, found a passport and handed it over to a NYPD detective, he in turn handed it over to the FBI. It was a passport belonging to one of the hijackers. It was and is that simple. You can sqawk about north of Vessey Street, south of Vessey street, windspeeds, weather, etc. all you want. You can choose to dismiss the whole thing if that is what is most satisfying to you. But that is all there is. Lower order of probability - yes. Impossible - no.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 06:22 AM
link   
reply to post by hooper
 


How can you honestly believe that? If you were on trial for a murder you did not commit and part of the evidence against you was something some stranger supposedly found and handed to the authorities - would you feel like you were getting a fair deal? Wouldn't you expect more sound evidence in a murder trial?

How is it that you can even believe that after that crash and all the destruction involved, this one passport happened to survive and fall upwind to the street??? That really makes sense to you?



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Lillydale
 


First, it wasn't the only thing. Second, it would be presented as it was discovered. The jury would have to decide. Maybe you would be on the jury. Again, you want to think that some mysterious agent within the US government orchestrated the events of 9/11. Hundereds of your fellow citizens conspiring to murder 1000's and 1000's of their fellow Americans for unspecified reasons. Playing magic tricks, planting explosives, remotely controlling planes, planting plane parts, all undetected in one of the most densely populated places in the world.

Which of these two scenarios is truly more difficult to believe. A passport is found after a plane crash or massive diabolic conspiracy of unprecedented proportions and complexity carried out in one of the most open societies in history?



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
massive diabolic conspiracy of unprecedented proportions and complexity carried out in one of the most open societies in history?


I'll let you answer your own question.


Originally posted by hooper
Lower order of probability - yes. Impossible - no.


BTW, you do know that your "diabolic conspiracy of unprecedented proportions and complexity carried out in one of the most open societies in history" also encompasses your Official Conspiracy Theory? Do you not?

You guys make me laugh.

"Yeah, um, the "terrorists" could do it, but, damn, not a covert part of a covert government." That logic is laughable at most, denial at the least.



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 11:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter

Originally posted by hooper
massive diabolic conspiracy of unprecedented proportions and complexity carried out in one of the most open societies in history?


I'll let you answer your own question.


Originally posted by hooper
Lower order of probability - yes. Impossible - no.


BTW, you do know that your "diabolic conspiracy of unprecedented proportions and complexity carried out in one of the most open societies in history" also encompasses your Official Conspiracy Theory? Do you not?

You guys make me laugh.

"Yeah, um, the "terrorists" could do it, but, damn, not a covert part of a covert government." That logic is laughable at most, denial at the least.


No it does pertain to what happened on 9/11. That was a relatively simple matter of hijacking planes (done hundreds of times to date) and then flying them into buildings. On the otherhand the conspiracy fantasies call for loading buildings with explosives, remotely controlling aircraft, planting plane parts, planting bodeis, morphing phone calls, etc, etc, etc.

Again - which is more likely - that some personal effects survive the crash of an airliner or the massive conspiracy fantasy?



posted on Oct, 12 2009 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
That was a relatively simple matter of hijacking planes (done hundreds of times to date) and then flying them into buildings.


Simple matter? To get by security on the ground and in the air for that long? I dare you to try and get back to us as to how "simple" it really is.



new topics

top topics



 
13
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join