How do "non-believers " explain the passport?

reply to post by waypastvne


Speaking of lies and half truths and mythmaking, might I suggest you do some research on the illustrious Chairman of the 9/11 Commission and the one who oversaw the vetting process for the final publication of the official narrative (it can hardly be called an official investigation) or story known as the 9/11 Commission Report, that is, after Kissenger was roundly rejected because of ourcries from the 9/11 victims families, and if not for those families protests there might not have even been a 9/11 Commission to begin with, created 411 days AFTER the tragic events.

You speak from a position of ignorance, never having done any research, and for that I suppose you can be excused, but there are many who know damn well there is something severely WRONG with the official story, but who nevertheless volunteer extensive time and energy in it's defence.

There's much insanity surrounding this event, and it may not be on the part of the majority of the so-called 9/11 truthers either.

You don't seem to know much about it, so please don't interpret this as an attack on you, but there are others who do, and who have done the research, but who persist in defending the indefensible, and that is a disgrace.

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
reply to post by hooper

 

Near impossible, yes.

On a side note, but perhaps related to the notion of 9/11 being "scripted", have you seen the video of a "passerby/witness" who we in the truth movement have come to fondly refer to as "Harley guy" because of his shirt and hat..?

But the evidence for explosives in the twin towers, that is what sinks the OS, and this passport issue simply reinforces everything.

Is it possible, or even probable, that you are dead wrong about this? About all of it? Is it possible that the 9/11 truth movement is mostly right?

What does the evidence say?

Me I try to look at it like Sherlock Holms, without any prejudice or bias, and in the final analysis, there is really only one conclusion that can be drawn, no matter how barbaric or heinous are the implications of that deduction.

As to the "Harley Guy" I have heard of it, but not seen it. I believe that the problem there is the Guy predicts the collapse of the buildings and some think he is a plant. Well, than I must be a plant also, because that is exactly what I thought after seeing the first plane strike the building. I knew from my studies that the buildings were not particularly substantial. Their claim to fame, as it were, was their lightweight construction which allowed for both their height and their famous open floor plan. These buildings were not the Empire State building.

I have seen no evidence at all to support any form of explosive demolition of the towers, with the exception of the massive explosion that resulted from the plane impacts. None.

Since the "movement" cannot seem to agree on anything it is very difficult to consider them even remotely possible. No, there is no chance they are right.

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
[ might I suggest you do some research on the illustrious Chairman of the 9/11 Commission and the one who oversaw the vetting process for the final publication of the official narrative

Do you mean 9/11 Commissioner John Farmer ?

reply to post by hooper

Take a close look at this



And the 9/11 Commission Chairman I was referring to was Philip Zelikow, more on him soon..

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
reply to post by hooper

 

Take a close look at this

And the 9/11 Commission Chairman I was referring to was Philip Zelikow, more on him soon..

The official story about this historical event, is absurd. In fact, it's so far out to lunch, that the only thing preventing it from being discovered and realized en mass, is the sheer magnitude, of both the evil, and the lie. That's all that upholds the official story about this, it is the only thing that we are permitted to believe, because the alternative is "unthinkable", but what the Engineer from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth has pointed out, very clearly in that video, is a simple, obvervable, fact, which surely cannot be denied, regardless of the implications of what actually occured. NIST did not even address this, opting instead to BEGIN with only one assumption, and even then, dealing only in a collapse initiation hypothesis, leading up to the actual destruction of the buildings, which NIST described as very simply an "automatic and inevitable" consequence, of collapse initation. And so NIST did not make ANY effort, in all of it's 10,000 pages, 20 million dollars later, to even begin to describe the very destruction of the buildings themselves, or to be more specific, the actual occurance of the phenomenon of destruction.

In other words, it's nothing more than an assumption, not based in observation, except to assume that the plane strikes and fires must have been the cause, since the very notion of a self inflicted false flag attack CANNOT be permitted to enter the picture, or the entire historical myth falls to ashes at very nearly the rate of absolute free fall.

Building a Better Mirage
NIST's 3-Year $20,000,000 Cover-Up

of the

Crime of the Century

by Jim Hoffman
Dec 8, 2005
911research.wtc7.net...


[edit on 25-9-2009 by OmegaPoint]

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by Redneck from Hell
You know the one that was found in the rubble, that flew out of the terrorist dude's pocket from inside the plane.

Without much of a scratch........

Actually, the passport was not found in the rubble, it was found by an unidentified person and turned over to a NYPD detective a block or so from the WTC before the towers collapsed. Its in the 9/11 Commision Report.

It, like a lot of things, survived the crash and was found. You may not want to believe it, but that is strictly a matter of personal choice. There is no scientific basis to declare the matter impossible.

I have thought about scientific possibilities for most of my life, I started with experiments in grammar school.
So hopper, you would agree that the possibility of a space laser to help facilitate the controlled demolition of the twins and building seven was used-----And you can type fairly well with two railroad spikes driven deep into your skull. Medical possibilities are under the umbrella of science.
Prove me wrong.

reply to post by hooper


Harley Guy






-------------------------------

Originally posted by SPreston
The Satam al-Suqami paper passport was allegedly found by a stranger and handed to a NYPD detective who of course neglected to get the stranger's name and address.

But of course there is no chance it was a 9-11 perp handing over the unblemished paper passport is there?

But the duhbunkers and government loyalists and shills all believe this is a perfectly normal way to gather criminal evidence from complete strangers, and would never suspect an unsinged unburned not even smudged paper passport which just survived an explosive fireball supposedly inside the pocket of an alleged hijacker inside the fuselage of a burning aircraft.

Isn't FAITH just grand? Aren't 9-11 MIRACLES just wonderful?

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/429f56b0257d.jpg[/atsimg]

Larger version

Passport exterior cover

It is reported that the passport of hijacker Satam Al Suqami has been found a few blocks from the World Trade Center. [ABC News, 9/12/2001; Associated Press, 9/16/2001; ABC News, 9/16/2001] Barry Mawn, the director of the FBI’s New York office, says police and FBI found it during a “grid search” of the area. [CNN, 9/18/2001] However a senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission later claims it was actually discovered by a passerby and given to an NYPD detective, “shortly before the World Trade Center towers collapsed.”

source

[edit on 25-9-2009 by OmegaPoint]

Originally posted by Donny 4 million

Originally posted by hooper

Originally posted by Redneck from Hell
You know the one that was found in the rubble, that flew out of the terrorist dude's pocket from inside the plane.

Without much of a scratch........

Actually, the passport was not found in the rubble, it was found by an unidentified person and turned over to a NYPD detective a block or so from the WTC before the towers collapsed. Its in the 9/11 Commision Report.

It, like a lot of things, survived the crash and was found. You may not want to believe it, but that is strictly a matter of personal choice. There is no scientific basis to declare the matter impossible.

I have thought about scientific possibilities for most of my life, I started with experiments in grammar school.
So hopper, you would agree that the possibility of a space laser to help facilitate the controlled demolition of the twins and building seven was used-----And you can type fairly well with two railroad spikes driven deep into your skull. Medical possibilities are under the umbrella of science.
Prove me wrong.

Prove what wrong? I really don't understand the statement. Are you threatening to drive railroad spikes into my head?

Originally posted by OmegaPoint

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
reply to post by hooper

 

Take a close look at this

And the 9/11 Commission Chairman I was referring to was Philip Zelikow, more on him soon..

The official story about this historical event, is absurd. In fact, it's so far out to lunch, that the only thing preventing it from being discovered and realized en mass, is the sheer magnitude, of both the evil, and the lie. That's all that upholds the official story about this, it is the only thing that we are permitted to believe, because the alternative is "unthinkable", but what the Engineer from Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth has pointed out, very clearly in that video, is a simple, obvervable, fact, which surely cannot be denied, regardless of the implications of what actually occured. NIST did not even address this, opting instead to BEGIN with only one assumption, and even then, dealing only in a collapse initiation hypothesis, leading up to the actual destruction of the buildings, which NIST described as very simply an "automatic and inevitable" consequence, of collapse initation. And so NIST did not make ANY effort, in all of it's 10,000 pages, 20 million dollars later, to even begin to describe the very destruction of the buildings themselves, or to be more specific, the actual occurance of the phenomenon of destruction.

In other words, it's nothing more than an assumption, not based in observation, except to assume that the plane strikes and fires must have been the cause, since the very notion of a self inflicted false flag attack CANNOT be permitted to enter the picture, or the entire historical myth falls to ashes at very nearly the rate of absolute free fall.

Building a Better Mirage
NIST's 3-Year $20,000,000 Cover-Up

of the

Crime of the Century

by Jim Hoffman
Dec 8, 2005
911research.wtc7.net...


[edit on 25-9-2009 by OmegaPoint]

I think the only absurd thing is to watch a video and make declarative statements to the contrary of what is observable.

reply to post by hooper


Then watch the video again and take a look in the mirror.

I have eyes to see, and a redimentary understanding of basic physics.

It's obvious. TOO obvious.

Originally posted by JPhish
sorry, but the delay between the initial shock-wave and the actual "fire" is negligible. The air is also hot enough to melt your face off.

Top argument there... I can see Mr. Laws of Physics saying afterwards, "You know, normally I'm pretty reliable but, f*ck me, it all just happened so fast..."

Alright, then... explain this video to me:

www.youtube.com...

How did all of those pieces of paper survive the initial fireball? I mean, according to you it was impossible for the passport to have survived, and they're made a lot more durable than ordinary office photocopy paper.

And I get the fact that the passport was inside the plane, and the paper wasn't but the passport wasn't inside the part of the plane which held the fuel. Secondly, the plane's fuselage was broken up by the impact and the initial explosion, therefore there's no reason to assume that everything inside was kept within, whilst everything outside the fuselage was somehow protected. Thirdly, the fireball itself certainly wasn't contained within the fuselage, as you can see it rupturing out three sides of the building.

So... are you a 'No Paperer'? Was this fluttering paper added by CGI after the event?

Let's face facts - the only way the paper could be outside the building was by escaping through a hole in the side of the building. If the only holes in the sides of the building were caused by the plane going in, and the fireballs coming out, how did these hundreds of sheets of ordinary office paper survive?

How does that change the statistical odds of the passport surviving?

Rewey

PS. Don't get me wrong - I think it's HIGHLY skeptical that the passport was simply found somewhere amidst the rubble, and the 'stranger' recognised it was important enough to hand in to the Feds... but you can't simply say that it breaks the laws of physics that it survived the initial fireball...

Originally posted by JPhish

this is a random picture with no time stamp that could have been taken at any time any where. Not to mention that everything you are saying is pure conjecture.

And no offence, but that really is the stupidest argument...

Virtually none of the photos or videos that people have used for years on ATS and other sites have time stamps or date stamps. Does this mean we can't use ANY film or photos of the event? Of course not.

I'll tell you what. If you have a theory in which you SERIOUSLY doubt that this photo is a legitimate photo of the aftermath of the 9/11 events, please track down the original image and extract the exif data, and demonstrate the robustness of your theory.

Otherwise I, and 99% of the rest of the people on ATS, will accept it and work with it. Generally, the other 1% are the 'No Planers'...

Rewey

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 ****.

9/11 was an event that exposed people and classified them into these groups. We should take that fact, and act accordingly.

How? I'm not quite sure anymore, but I will leave you with what Michael Ruppert once said, "There's no point in trying to save those that do not want to be saved, all you should do is save yourself." - or something to that effect.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by sumgai]

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 ****.

9/11 was an event that exposed people and classified them into these groups. We should take that fact, and act accordingly.

How? I'm not quite sure anymore, but I will leave you with what Michael Ruppert once said, "There's no point in trying to save those that do not want to be saved, all you should do is save yourself." - or something to that effect.

[edit on 29-9-2009 by sumgai]

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.

posted by hooper

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.

Oh really? Perhaps you are lacking in critical thinking skills?

In a Google search of 911 was an inside job I got 2,410,000 hits. If that resulted in one person out of a hundred, that 24,100 persons would really fill a high school stadium wouldn't it.

In a Google search of 911 groups I got 23,300,000 hits. If that also resulted in one person out of a hundred, 233,000 oughta fill something shouldn't it?

And here is an interesting Google search.

Poll 911 Inside Job

National Poll: 36% of Americans Believe 9/11 Was an Inside Job

"One out of three sounds high, but that may very well be right," said Lee Hamilton, former vice chairman of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also called the 9/11 Commission). His congressionally appointed investigation concluded that federal officials bungled their attempts to prevent, but did not participate in, the attacks by al-Qaida five years ago.

"A lot of people I've encountered believe the U.S. government was involved," Hamilton said.

source

Originally posted by SPreston

posted by hooper

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.

Oh really? Perhaps you are lacking in critical thinking skills?

In a Google search of 911 was an inside job I got 2,410,000 hits. If that resulted in one person out of a hundred, that 24,100 persons would really fill a high school stadium wouldn't it.

In a Google search of 911 groups I got 23,300,000 hits. If that also resulted in one person out of a hundred, 233,000 oughta fill something shouldn't it?

And here is an interesting Google search.

Poll 911 Inside Job

National Poll: 36% of Americans Believe 9/11 Was an Inside Job

"One out of three sounds high, but that may very well be right," said Lee Hamilton, former vice chairman of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also called the 9/11 Commission). His congressionally appointed investigation concluded that federal officials bungled their attempts to prevent, but did not participate in, the attacks by al-Qaida five years ago.

"A lot of people I've encountered believe the U.S. government was involved," Hamilton said.

source

You're assertions based on google word association searches is probably one of the best examples of a lack of critical thinking skills I think I have ever seen outside of professional politics.

Originally posted by waypastvne

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
[ might I suggest you do some research on the illustrious Chairman of the 9/11 Commission and the one who oversaw the vetting process for the final publication of the official narrative

Do you mean 9/11 Commissioner John Farmer ?

Neutral readers please note that waypastvne has completely abandoned and failed to support any of his previous claims and challenges that were put to him.

Iow, another admission of being debunked by default... his silence is deafening.

typical.

please see my sig for an example of waypastvnes absurdity, lack of logic and critical thinking skills.

[edit on 30-9-2009 by Orion7911]

Originally posted by SPreston

There is only one person who needs to be accused of duplicity and that is the stranger (passer-by) who allegedly found the unblemished paper passport and allegedly handed it to a NYPD detective. Correct?

Can you guarantee that this person was not planting evidence?

Have you identified this passerby? No?

Neither has anybody else have they? So according to US legal jurisprudence; the trail of evidence and the trail of custody of this paper passport is suspect isn't it and disqualified as evidence in a US courtroom?

Can you prove differently?

There is good evidence that some of the alleged hijackers had stolen identities and therefore fake passports. Some have claimed to be alive. Not one hijacker from Flights 11 and 175 has been officially identified by DNA.

Therefore we have good reason to suspect the paper passport of Satam al-Suqami was planted, especially sence it was not damaged by the fireball it was allegedly inside, and especially since it was supposedly inside the pocket of a supposedly crushed man allegedly trapped inside the burning fuselage of an aircraft inside the fireball 96 floors above the street.

I do not accept such nonsense as this discovered passport. Why do you?

I agree that this Satam Al Suqami paper passport is not legitimate evidence that the 911 hijackers actually existed.

No. Nobody can guarantee that this unknown passerby was not planting evidence.

There is no good reason to believe that the unknown person with the passport on the street below was not a plant. It is unrealistic that a person would be picking up papers off the ground when there were visibly millions of pieces of paper floating through the air and fires burning in the towers above.

In fact, many people if they realized the significance of the passport, would have kept it as a souvenir; not handed it over to an indescript police detective. Human nature.

Many people would have gone hunting for an important mediaperson or government official to show it to. Human nature.

Originally posted by SPreston

Larger version

Passport exterior cover

It is reported that the passport of hijacker Satam Al Suqami has been found a few blocks from the World Trade Center. [ABC News, 9/12/2001; Associated Press, 9/16/2001; ABC News, 9/16/2001] Barry Mawn, the director of the FBI’s New York office, says police and FBI found it during a “grid search” of the area. [CNN, 9/18/2001] However a senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission later claims it was actually discovered by a passerby and given to an NYPD detective, “shortly before the World Trade Center towers collapsed.”

source

There is also another version which I've come across on the net. It was written by the father of one of the 9/11 Victims that was on one of the planes that hit the tower. Apparently a passport is able to slip from a passengers pocket then survive an extreme amount of heat probably get crushed in the collapse and come out without a single scratch. He wrote about it after receiving his son's passport a few weeks later in an envelop from Washington.

I'll link it when i manage to find it again.

reply to post by hooper


patriotsquestion911.com...

Nuff said.