In over two words, please explain why this logical fallacy applies.

Then please give a plausible explanation on how 9-11 went down since you seem to believe that it took fewer people than what the OP claims.

where the conclusion is based on the absence of evidence, rather than the existence of evidence

the OP also employs a shifting burden of proof as well

extremely common, and a telltale sign of a truly weak position

Common sense should tell anyone that such a massive operation would be exposed. It would be way too complex (actually the conspiracy couldn't be pulled off - exposed or not) to not be exposed.

The burden of proof is on the one making the positive claim. That's why I asked the second question: "please give a plausible explanation on how 9-11 went down since you seem to believe that it took fewer people than what the OP claims."

Bummer

Kind of surprising, I guess?

...on a forum. Not a good idea.

speech and one hour later was still talking. Hmmm!

how come none of the 100,000s or millions of people involved with it since its inception over 200 years ago ever came forward to admit it was a scam?

consumers who "think" it is a scam because it may not have worked for them.

I'm talking about people who own and worked at the homeopathic remedy companies, the faculty at the schools who teach it, the doctors trained in it, etc. The people who would know if it was a scam, or not.

the people making the medicine believe it. So they are not going to say it does not work because they think it works.

That is like me saying ask any working 'psychic' to admit that they really have no powers. They believe they do.

The people who worked on the Manhattan project even leaked secrets. The atomic bomb was leaked to many. You cannot get a large group and keep it quiet for long.

Why has no 9/11 participant came forward to sell his story?

And 9/11 is a much bigger deal than selling herbs at GNC.

How many of them whistleblowed since homeopathy's inception over 200 years ago?

Homeopathy is out in the open. There are weak laws against their operations. Many people that practice homeopathy actually believe it works, and the rest find it a way to make a quick buck.

Practitioners of homeopathy are a self selected group of people that can easily find other practitioners since they operate in the open.

There is no conceivable way for such a large group of people to get together to commit 9-11. The laws are strong against mass-murder of American citizens. Any attempt would fail, and their cover would be blown.

If I wanted to conspire to commit a 9-11 type attack as truthers claim: Where would I go? Who would I meet? What organization can I find that conducts these types of operations? Do they have a link?

If it was done as a government operation, how would the government find all of the conspirators without their cover being blown? Most people would refuse to take part.

Why hasn't any been? That would be a big victory to the anti-homeopathy crowd.

Homeopaths claim that their treatments are tailored to individual patients and conditions. Homeopathy is unfalsifiable (which is not a good thing). Presumably one could prove that a particular homeopath didn't believe in the efficacy of his or her own treatments, but that would no more rebut homeopathy than exposing a doctor as a quack rebuts mainstream medicine.

I think homeopathy is a scam in the sense that it has no medical merit, but I don't know that it is a scam in the sense that it depends upon conscious scammers. I suspect that most of its practitioners believe in it. Regardless, no conspiracy is required.

That said, unless someone specifies a particular 9/11 conspiracy scenario, there is no way to know how many people would have to be involved. The general premise that "the Official Story is untrue" is, in fact, unfalsifiable -- and perhaps trivially true, depending on what is meant by "the Official Story."

The people who are involved with it, or actually most of them anyways, actually believe that it works.

On the other hand, a plot to blow something up is obvious. There's no doubt about it.

Excellent point

There are clues and leads that haven't been followed up on that would seem to indicate additional people involved in the funding and coordinating. Who might those people be? Could one or more of them be operatives of our government's covert services? I don't see why not.

There is no reason that having one single US government operative or a small cell of US government operatives involved somehow then means that hundreds or thousands have to be involved. There's no logic to that leap. There certainly could have been a small number of US personnel involved just as easily as a large number.

If I understand what you're driving at, you're arguing that there was no inside job. So you think the job could have been pulled of with zero people inside our government involved in it.

If you're right then isn't it also feasible for the job to have been pulled off with all the same people whom you believe did it, plus one single operative inside one of our covert services? Or, alternatively, all the same people whom you believe did it, plus some small tight-knit cadre of people from inside our government. For example, Dick Cheney together with two or three CIA operatives?

That latter example would still be an inside job. Why is that theory not viable? It seems to me you're building up this cast of thousands just so you can knock it down. In other words, you seem to be battling a straw man, no?

had to hide passengers (or kill them). Or remote control planes or plant explosives in multiple buildings then there are 100s involved.

No one has said "I was part of the plan".

And you think those scenarios therefore are unlikely because with hundreds involved you think something would have leaked out.

I'm with you on some of that. I also think that scenarios involving a large number of people being in on the whole plot are unlikely because something would have leaked out.

But I think there are lots of scenarios that involve either a smaller total number of people involved or else a small number of people who knew the true plot combined with a larger number of people who played unwitting roles - who did some part but didn't know why they did it.

For example, creating a diversionary apparatus in the form of training exercises would have involved a large number of people but very few of them would have needed to know the true reason for it. A small number of people at the top could have manipulated the timing and synchronicity of the exercises while all the rest of the actors carried them out unwittingly, thinking they were routine operations.

There are lots of variations on this theme and I think lots of them could have been accomplished with only a small cadre of people who knew the true plan.

according to your logic, Mr. Logical.

That got paid to do the job, and go back home before it all went down. You know Nutinyahoo said "9/11 was good for Israel" could have been some of their guys who have no American connection, and who doesn't like America. And who would believe them? I take it you don't believe it was an inside job, so if someone did come forward, you and the rest would probably call him a nut. If you think about all the things our government didn't do on 9/11 it should make you wonder what did happen.

Why do we spend so much on defense, but yet our biggest defense building gets hit. The Pentagon was hit at about 9:35 am. The second plane hit the second tower at 8:55. So 40 minutes goes by, and the Pentagon doesn't even close down the highway near the Pentagon. If it were a true attack, how did they know that no trucks with explosives was on it's way? Why didn't they set up SAMS on the roof of the Pentagon? How come they didn't protect D.C.? They are after all, a DEFENSE building.

This is why there has been no trial. How does our government explain all the fails that day. How do they explain DNA that was ID'd when they couldn't even reconstruct any of the planes. So human remains are tougher than a Titanium engine or plane debris. Is that what we are suppose to believe?

However, the post i was supposed to judge was thrown into an infinite loop since the post to be judged was deleted by the poster (a very nasty loop, apparently logging out does not cure it!)

So this will be my first post in Creative speculation (the name alone, I have to admire!)

My imagination leads to all things, I am an avid fan of science fiction...however with that i cannot ignore my educational background since before the first page of a SciFi book, I already know it is fiction.

I dearly would love to believe a lot of things that would make the universe a bit more spectacular! (for now the LHC is keeping me more then interested)

In the absence of the broken jury system *infinite loop again*, if asked directly how would those who believe that 9/11 was MIHOP/LIHOP after a decade answer the questions of why there is yet no proof?

To me it really comes down to the difference between a David Weber book (a person whose knowledge of physics is terrible at best!)
and why those who believe the 9/11 was not as it appears is true?

First, there are crimes every day for which there is never "proof". Because I take it you're looking for some single or compact finding that solves the case and eliminates all doubt - a Perry Mason moment as it were. That happens all the time in fiction but not so much in real life.

So there isn't proof of that type but what there is is evidence. Especially for LIHOP there is a lot of evidence that makes a pretty convincing case. It has been established that the Bush cabal had realized that a massive attack on the U.S. would enable them to do some things they really wanted to do. It has been established that they had ample warning. And it has been established that they were determined, stubbornly, to not respond to the warnings. And, finally, they clearly lied afterward about many of the facts including the warnings and their inaction. All these add up to a very strong case of at least LIHOP.

Regarding MIHOP, to some extent the reason there isn't more to go on is because they didn't like where the evidence was leading. When indications were found that funding came from Pakistan and Saudi Arabia they refused to follow those leads and gave us the explanation that it really wasn't necessary to follow the money. That, of course, is an obvious and outrageous lie. Following the money was an essential thread of the investigation, especially the investigation of who the high-level sponsors of the attack were. So if we don't have "proof" of who the sponsors were, it's at least partly because they didn't like who it was pointing to. We have no way of knowing, to date, whether that was just because it was pointing toward allies of the Bush cabal or, even more, was going to implicate the Bush cabal itself, directly, if followed.

I think it's almost certain that more people were involved than have been revealed so far and that therefore there definitely are parts of this story that are true even though "proof" for them hasn't yet been found. Those leads in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia simply have to have involved more than one person in each and those additional people have not yet been found. And there's no "proof" for anyone beyond the 19 perps, yet there obviously would have been more people than that involved in the instigation and planning of the attack.

Clearly there were more people involved than we have found out about. And the Bush cabal seem the most likely suspects to me based on motive, opportunity, circumstantial evidence, and lying about so many things afterward. If I were a juror I would find the sum of the evidence enough to convict G.W. Bush and Dick Cheney in a way similar to the guilty verdict of Scott Peterson, for which there was no "proof", but merely evidence.

Rumsfailed announced that the Pentagon "misplaced" 2.3 Trillion dollars on 09/10/01. And the next day 9/11, no questions ever again about the 2.3 Trillion dollars.

As for the physics arguments that the twin towers must have been taken down by CD, I suppose if I believed those arguments, I would construe that they had already been proven, at least by a preponderance of the evidence.

Different allegations entail different implications. As eomer points out, we wouldn't expect to have conclusive proof for (or against) all such implications, even if such proof is obtainable in principle.

is that steel is malleable a long time before it reaches melting, and by that time both towers were the center of attention.

One of the things brought up on the old DU2 board was why there no explosions heard?

Since it was a "cage" design, any explosives strong enough to blow a support, would have certainly propelled debri much further then anything in the videos taken suggest.

That and i am sure it would be loud enough to blow the mic's on the ground at the very least.

As to the question why no explosions were heard, you may get the response that explosions were indeed heard, and besides, thermite can be silent. I don't see many attempts to piece such assertions into a plausible explanation of what happened.

The falling debris isn't enough? How do squibs happen 30 stories below if what they say floors dropping caused it. How did those floors cause squibs 30 stories below? Or how come the lobby had all it's windows blown out, but windows above and near the crash site were intact? And a lot of people heard explosions. I think some people got blown out of the building and they didn't jump as thought. When the towers are collapsing, you can see huge beams flying away from the building. If the pancake theory were true, there should have been 50 stories of debris with the center columns still standing. Even their quack demo video shows the center columns standing, but we saw what was really left. The official story is junk science.

when it is self-deleted it really puts everything out of whack!

Was going to make a joke and after thinking about it thought it better to withdraw it. Didn't realize it would cause any problems I do see bringing others to this group to be a good thing though. Welcome to the new dungeon...

As reported by AP less than a week after the towers fell. Found recently on CNN site also.

He only admitted to the crime after he thought he was safe.

why would anyone for that matter ever come forward to admit they helped murdered 3000 Americans? are they fans of dying?

thats exactly the reason why no one in the govt will ever come forward to admit their role in 9/11. they aren't fans of dying either.

OBL: "I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children, and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children, and other people."

OBL's statement and reputation for truthfulness were corroborated by Hamid Gul, former ISI head and OBL colleague, later in September in an interview that can be found on the Washington Times web site.


Incidentally, I am not intending to come to this group and be a pest. I discovered the group accidentally while exploring the new DU3 look and saw a post that I thought needed a comment, though stale.

and have to spend the rest of their life in jail or on death row?

is it normal for murderers to voluntarily come to the police station and say they did it?
especially when they aren't even a suspect? I don't think so.

did something and come forward.

Does it really matter? It is obvious 9/11 was not carried out by anyone but the 16 hijackers.

even if they were to come forward, the govt and the media would simply ignore them.

ever heard of Sibel Edmunds? Edmunds was an FBI employee at the time of the attacks.
she revealed, among other bombshells, that the US govt had been working closely with OBL up to the day of 9/11. the 9/11 commission simply ignored her as did the MSM. she was never called to testify even though she was considered extremely credible and endorsed by prominent members of the house and senate.

edmunds is a member of a whistleblowers group:

http://www.justacitizen.com/

Are living in a world where facts do not matter. Building 7 colkasped from fires! That is all!
People love conspiricys! They are more fun than the truth!
JFK, moon landing, 911, 2012, etc. all the same!

they have about as much evidence of their beliefs as so-called "truthers" do.

so much easier then dealing with reality isn't it?

ignorance is bliss isn't it?

Even common sense should tell anyone that the massive fire in building 7 could cause it to collapse. Perhaps you've come up with some new physics that only applies to 9-11 which protects buildings from large fires.

So we're to believe that 16 "terrorist" who live in a cave fooled our military for hours, flew over military bases, when all they had to do was book a flight out of NY's JFK were the towers were visible. They were supposedly pilots, and mingled with the crew, so it would have been easy for them. And waited till the plane got speed and altitude, took over the plane, and crashed into the towers? Why risk getting shot down over military bases. If this was a well planned operation, they knew the risks. Why not take the easy one?

You might want to learn the most basic of facts before tackling the ones you really don't know about.

Is there an internet page somewhere about it, with links to their death notices, and witness accounts of their statements?

managed access where it was supposed to be secure. And bragged about it.

They would be laughed at. Just look at us. Some of us don't believe the governments story, and we get laughed at. Who would believe them, when people believe that fire can take down steel and concrete at 10 stories a second. Never happened before, and has never happened again. And WTC 7 never got hit by anything other than debris, if that is even true. They would be talking to a WALL. And I would say welcome to DU.

Did anyone ever come forward to "confess" to the Iran-Contra scheme? Do members of organized crime ever spontaneously admit they've broken the law? Any conspiracy on this scale wouldn't have sprung into being overnight, it would be an operation put forward, handled, and kept quiet by people who do that sort of thing every day. Is it a coincidence that GHW Bush was once head of the CIA?

Iran Contra project was discovered.

Your examples are horrible!

Another opinion, well informed, from Russ Baker: "Someone Would Have Talked? Someone Would Be Crazy."

WhoWhatWhy

There are mechanisms in place to intimidate or neutralize whistle-blowers. Believing otherwise simply ignores the depths to which human nature can sink, as well as the way expediency can become ingrained in bureaucracy.

Also, reflexively assuming that conspiracies never happen is just as narrow-minded as assuming they always do.

and risk a life in prison?

Hint: it doesn't. There was no wider conspiracy on 9/11, no MIHOP or LIHOP or any of that jazz. We know who committed the crime(s) that day, and why. Case closed.

It's a simple, legitimate question. Why can't you answer a simple question?

Because you know it destroys your ridiculous fairy tale.

only wishful thinking.

real life doesn't work like it does in the movies.

so you are right - real life doesn't work like it does in the movies.

their wife? good luck with that. a confession is meaningless unless it is conducted in front of a judge in a court of law. but the case has long been closed anyway, so that will never happen. the word of the wife means nothing, if she even decides to tell anyone what her husband just confessed to her. her second-hand information is worth even less than her dying husband's word. who would believe her? why would the dying perp even want to confess in the first place and have his family's name and reputation forever tarnished and associated with those who planned and carried out 9/11?? this deathbed confession nonsense is really quite laughable. which is why it only happens in the movies.

and wishful thinking.

the government and mainstream media have completely ignored the testimony of people such as Sibel Edmunds, Barry Jennings, and a host of others. if a deathbed confession were to ever take place do you think there would be any chance of them bothering to report it? keep dreaming. it only happens in the movies.

Are you really so unaware of the irony of your posts?

people who take part in mass murders always eventually 'fess up to it, for no apparent reason. even when they are under no pressure to do so and the perps have already been decided on. now that it is truly hilarious.

when someone makes an assertion about what would be the biggest conspiracy in the history of the world, they at least try to back them up with facts.
Get back to us when you get some, eh?

Sibel Edmunds is not a Truther - she says the FBI ignored credible evidence that Bin Laden was planing a massive terrorist attack in America.

There is evidence that Barry Jennings got his times mixed up and the "explosions" were due to the collapse of the towers. The man that was with him tells a different story for one thing.

By now someone would have been guilt ridden, on their death bed, have found religion or wanted to turn a buck. Washington is a sieve for secrets, they can't keep the little things secret much less something this big, supposed to be known by so many for so long.

you have a very vivid imagination.

You haven't heard of this happening? Greed and Guilt brings many skeletons out of the closet.

But, do I believe the "Loose Change" answers. NO!

But, in additions to the 1000's of people being involved, for their answers to fit would take such execution the chances of the plan working seem unlikely.

Am I saying, Bush isn't responsible for being arrogant for thinking it could never happen to us, for completely ignoring the dangers which were present, or for that matter discarding a plan which Clinton had in place which Gore is likely to have continued which may have stopped the attack? NO!

If I am understanding you and you do believe the "Loose Change" theories. Maybe it is you who watches too many movies and you are the one with the vivid imagination.

but its really just your desperation talking.

or unaccounted for? Start with even a simple list of the eye witnesses. If 90% of them are dead, does that change your theory? If not, then how can you say NO ONE has come forward, not knowing if one of the dead ones would have/did?

First off, let's start with the Franklin Conspiracy: it is absolutely obvious that there are elements outside of our normal acceptance of the big U.S.A. we learn in elementary school.

Here

http://www.apfn.net/Messageboard/04-30-05/discussion.cgi.7.html

Last edited Thu Aug 16, 2012, 03:30 PM - Edit history (1)

I would suggest that this assumption is absolutely false.

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has." - Margaret Mead.

but on the other hand.......

""Planning the attacks was a master deed, in technical and organizational terms. To hijack four big airliners within a few minutes and fly them into targets within a single hour and doing so on complicated flight routes! That is unthinkable, without backing from the secret apparatuses of state and industry." - Andreas von Bulow, former FRG minister.

....so maybe 19 middle-easterners is not enough after all....

That's why it may be best to do your own thinking.

..that by throwing out two opposites that someone might realize that they can, this case, both be true. Any effort has a core of dedicated individuals but that does not negate their far-reaching machinations. I definitely am of Bulow's viewpoint, too many things worked in favor of the hijackers for coincidence. But how many needed to know the full picture? Outside of the core I would argue, few. Many individuals/agencies unknowingly abetted while some individuals at agencies knowingly abetted.

[QUOTE]too many things worked in favor of the hijackers for coincidence[/QUOTE]

F_N_L, please go into this further. What are some examples?

1. Significant air exercises, not necessarily linked to each other, are scheduled for 11 Sep.
2. The alleged hijackers just happen to pick that day to execute.
3. Warnings of attacks using planes come in from several other countries' intel agencies - bureaucratic ineptitude prevents any response
4. Warnings of attacks using planes come in from the Pentagon's 'Able Danger' task force - again - bureaucratic ineptitude prevents any response
5. The same airport security company handled security for Dulles, Newark & Logan
6. No hijacking signals were sent from any of the four planes
7. The 'Unseen Hand' - Even though the planes (I believe all four) took off late and there was no way for the alleged hijackers to communicate once off the ground, the first three planes all execute a sequential attack, i.e. the second plane doesn't deviate from its course until the first one is on its final approach, the third plane doesn't deviate from course until the second plane is on its final approach.

not just for 9-11, but for the vast bulk of latent operatives from a multitude of schema set up both inside and outside the US. You task a group (Able Danger in this case) with a supposed objective, then use the data they obtain for the true, secondary purpose, without their knowledge. The CIA, NSA, etc, have a vast, global network of both artificially created and organic actors for thousands of different contingencies at their fingertips.

The only true 'conspiracy theory' (oh how I hate those words, they are a true refuge of a feeble, sheep-like mind) is the official story.

'Collusion Analysis' ?

We the People, in order to secure better understanding of the criminal conspiracies we face, do hereby accept conspiracy as a common fact of local, regional, national and international criminal machinations. Therefore, let us identify and analyze the criminal collusion of common interests and punish those persons who have caused harm.

And THAT'S the real problem.

Go for it.

1. Most of the account of "Collateral Damage: U.S. Covert Operations and the Terrorist Attacks on
September 11, 2001" is true. Destroying the trail of evidence and crashing the US financial system until the Fed resets it. This is the motive and helps to explain why the Office of Naval Intelligence in the Pentagon was hit and not the White House (which surely should have been the target of whichever plane reached Washington first).

2. A cover operation of Arab hijackers was developed (strung-along patsies) and the planes were remote-controlled in (Flt 93 took off 25 min. late and lost it's operational window and was put down on purpose).

3. Some destructive mechanism was used inside the towers that melted cars 5 blocks away, created particles far smaller than can be explained through pulverization, caused two separate 'tubular cages' to burrow down some 70+ stories through their larger and more stable bottoms and burned in the rubble for 3 months.

4. We're back in Eurasia and War's On!

In view all we know about the CIA via drug running, arms smuggling, their wall street origins, sure, it's plausible. What's 3,000 lives in a world of 6 billion with Eurasia at stake?

and provide little evidence or details on how 9-11 went down.

Your operation would take thousands of people to pull off and could never be accomplished. It would be exposed very easily and quickly, before it ever got off the ground. No sane person would ever take part - let alone thousands.

The simple hijacking and crashing of airliners into the towers and Pentagon could be accomplished with very few people. And that is what all of the evidence supports.

....a conspiracy that was planned and executed over almost a year and a half, involved dozens & dozens of persons, if not several hundred, in a half-dozen countries. NOBODY said anything about this conspiracy until Eugen Hasenfuss was shot down.

Your assertion that people, and lots of them, can't keep a secret, doesn't hold.

and Iran-Contra was many orders of magnitude less complex and, from an American perspective, many orders of magnitude less evil.

The negative consequences for the Iran-Contra conspirators were small. Oliver North was actually made a hero by the dumb fucks on the right. What do you think would happen if a 9-11 conspirator was exposed - made a hero?

It's impossible to assembly all of the necessary experts to pull off a 9-11 inside job. Most people would go to the police if asked to take part in mass murder against their own citizens. The politicians themselves don't have such expertise. In fact, no one has the expertise to pull off a 9-11 type inside job.

wasn't it? Nobody was talking.

My old scoutmaster was the McDonnell Douglas International Sales Manager for the F4 at that time. I later asked him if Mac was supplying the parts and he said no, Israel was counterfeiting them. This fellow was once a navy test pilot and John Glenn's roomate at one time. Very patriotic. And he never spoke up although he knew something was amiss. He didn't know the full picture at the time. But still, he didn't open his mouth about the piece he had.

Two old friends of mine are pastors and they abhor conspiracy theory (I prefer to call it Collusion Analysis), always saying, 'Nobody would be so evil.' Hah! I find that a strange response coming from a pastor but whatever. Individuals and groups follow their self-interests. When it gets extreme, we call it evil. But it is certainly there.

Operation Northwoods contemplated killing Americans. We now know of US government medical experimentation on unsuspecting Americans. There are plenty of people in the right circles available for something like 9-11. As we slowly and painfully learn over decades, such individuals have always been in or around our government.

Would not require near as many people as MIHOP. Another thing to consider is that to get
into a position with real pull in almost any large organization these days,
corporate or government, you have to be a sociopath or one real brainwashed
fucking sheep.

Just common sense. How did our government react after 9/11. When the Pentagon shows us the ONLY proof of the attack in a blurry video and we all accept it, why would we believe someone who knows what really happen. People like you would just say they are just "truthers". People like you are the ones who believe steel and concrete collapse due to fire at 10 stories a second. How can we help you believe that it can't? Why WTC7? No plane hit it. There was also the other WTC's that didn't collapse that were closer to towers 1 and 2. And a shit load of debris fell on those.

But if I were ever convicted of a crime, and the video they showed me was blurry and it wasn't even me, should I accept their "evidence"? Or should fight it? Why aren't we fighting to find the truth. Those that fight, get called names, and aren't taken seriously. Why are we taking their word? These are the same assholes that brought us into war over lies. I don't accept the Pentagon video as evidence. It shows us NOTHING.

A massive conspiracy to cheat and cover up. The game was on for over 15 years. Hundreds of people were involved, many bribed or threathened. The people who came forward on foul play were ridiculed, blacklisted, humiliated and outcast.

Why? Not for the act of cheating in itself, but for massive gains. If there's enough money to be made, people will turmn a blind eye to anything.

And here comes the parallel.
Suggestions, accusations and suspicions ran wild. Outers were prosecuted. Everybody took dope, except for Lance Armstrong, the great hero.
In the end, it turned out he bribed officials, blackmailed team mates and cheated from the beginning.

I never believed Armstrong was clean. The official story never convinced me. Too many gaps, too many loose ends, too many people involved.
Same goes for the 9/11 official report. Too many unanswered questions, too little evidence to support the government stance.