Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
very interesting: Loose change 2!
mister_GuS
Member Posts: 811
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848&q=loose+change+2
watch it , it trully is an eye openor
WATCH IT!
watch it , it trully is an eye openor
WATCH IT!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Riggy for shissy:
Pent 4 2.66
1 GIG ram
Radeon X850XT Platinum Edition
120 gigs of HD
REMEMBER: He who hates the beaner, Will loose his WIENER!
Comments
For convenience
Woot, another one. This guy does a good job on these videos. I am glad to see more and more of this stuff is commonly available and that the guy who makes these videos doesn't CHARGE MONEY for people to get their hands on it. Top notch stuff.
Edit: Just finished watching the whole movie. While it wasn't eye-opening it did back up more of the ideas I already have on what's going on here with new evidence.
There's no reason to believe his lies over the governments. He just appeals to peoples dislike and distrust of government.
Look up "how the holocaust was faked." There are some good arguments against it. Of course it's complete crap just like this.
There was a show on Discovery about the plane where the people fought back. They passangers called their families with their cellphones and some left messages. They played the messages on the show and they interviewed some of the family members. Are you telling me that they are all planted or paid?
Also I love the part where a few windows are blowing out on the towers and they claim it's from planted explosives. I'd have to believe if it really was a demolition there would be more obvious explosions and more than a few windows randomly blowing out.
If you believe that both the conspirators and the mass media/gov't is lying- then you should at least recognize that there is a veil pulled over our eyes- that our current window to the outside world is covered in webs of lies.
If you do know what the truth is, then tell me, what is it? If you can't answe my question then you need to recognize that this is a problem, and people making movies like Loose Change are not simply woring for alterior motives, they are trying to find out what is behind the veil- and doing a dang good job of it.
loose change is awesome, why? because the guy backs EVERYTHING up with pure fact.
people say, oh he's lying, how can you know he's telling the truth about all this 'evidence'? well.. take a look at the end credits, the guy gives the names of video's he used to take extracts from in his documentary. not only this, but if you visit his official website, (www.loosechange911.com), you'll find a section called 'evidence'. here it states
"We have done nothing extraordinary in terms of research. We also do not take credit for these people's hard work.
Also, take nothing we say at face value.
We highly encourage you to research this information yourselves and come to your own conclusions"
further down this page they list each peice of evidence they used in the documentary. they KNEW people would start saying "well how do we know they didnt just make this shit up?". go check it out for yourself, this should write off any claims of them making up bull shit.
don't get me wrong, i've never been a hugely anti government type person.... quite the opposite infact, i think governments if anything should be far harsher their people, bring back the execution penalty (in britain) etc etc. however, being a relatively open minded guy i CANNOT just let a documentary like this wander past and complete ignore it. the sheer amount of evidence is absolutely astonishing, forget all of the snippets from websites and leaked documents, look at the VIDEO evidence!
the fact that not a single black box flight recorder was found for ANY of the downed flights, even the one that crashed in pensylvania (sp), this is the first time in history a black box has been completed demolished by a crash. also, how the world trade center 3 (the smaller building near the trade centers) ALSO collapses, even though nothing hit it, and all the other buildings surrounding it (some closer to the trade centers) all stayed standing. the explanation for the building collapsing? falling debree from the trade centers set it on fire and it collapsed. as the guy says in the documentary, this is the third building in the history of man kind to have collapsed from a fire...... the first two being the twin towers.
the entire thing is so riddled with inconsistency i fail to beleive ANYONE, no matter how much they love their government, could write it off as nonsense. sure, maybe you don't beleive the US government staged the entire thing, but you CANNOT tell me that everything we've been told about 9/11 is truth.
why did osama bin laden state, literally 48 hours after the trade centers had collapsed that 'al quieda (sp) had NOTHING to do with it', then, like a week later change his mind entirely and take credit for the entire thing? surely he'd have been the first to brag about his well pulled off masterminded plan?
the funny thing I found is, that when i watched 9/11 unfold on television back in 2001, i remember thinking some of what the press were reporting simply made no sense. i remember them talking about a helicopter being sighted just before the pentagon exploded, i remember them talking about a plane circling above the twin towers just after the first had been hit... and i remember thinking to myself how odd it all seemed.
funny that hundreds of eye witnesses told cameras they heard a series of sharp cracks just before the trade centers fell? what would explain that? also the highly observed 'second' explosion from tower one, apparently comming from the basement?
did you even watch the documentary?
You believe everything ever printed, filmed, or stated in an interview is "pure fact?" Or do you just believe what suits the theory?
BTW, this is the 3rd or 4th time in 3 months we have had this exact same discussion about the 9/11 "facts." Sadly, many of you still fail to recognize that believing one "side" or the other so blindly just leads to the mass injustice of the whole tragedy. As I have said before, I recommend you study "Loose Change" and any of the other conspiracy theories with just as much suspicion as you do the government's.
Hohbein, I know you said to check out their "evidence" list, but have you researched outside the framework given to you? The problem with the list there is that it is like a lawyer "leading a witness." They give you the information they want you to have, no different than what the government has done.
i don't really wanna get bogged down in an argument about this, as you said it's been done many times on these forums and its pointless really.
your quite right that alot of hte written evidence could indeed be presented in such a way, however there are some things you cannot ignore. the black boxes 'vapourising' from the flights, the fact that the plane that collided with the pentagon, and flight 93 that crashed in pensilvania both completely vapourised on impact. the fact that the two 6 tonne alluminium engines from each plane vanished. the fact that eye witnesses said the 'plane' that hit the pentagon was a small, white, non-commercial plane with no markings on it what-so-ever. the fact that the owner of the twin towers signed a 3 billion dollar insurance policy 2 weeks before 9/11 took place, actively insuring the buildings against acts of terrorism. these aren't rumours, these are facts.
there are just too many innaccuracies to just ignore.... sure, it's fair enough if you don't beleive the government would do such a thing, however i think its healthy to ask the right questions.... and documentaries like this simply open peoples minds a little and get people asking these questions!
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
This is not a theory
"Abstract reasoning; speculation."
This is a possibility
"The fact or state of being possible."
911 in Plane Site This guy has a great introduction (that talks about what I said above) and a great documentary that covers things not in Loose Change. The actual documentary starts at 1:41...so you can skip the musical introduction.
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
Could you elaborate a bit more?
Film: 1
You: 0
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
Since I have discussed some of my reasoning before about why I think there is a 3rd explaination for 9/11, and don't feel like arguing again, I am going to pose a few tidbits:
Could you elaborate a bit more?
Film: 1
You: 0
What could I possibly tell you that could change your point of view? Probably nothing short of recovering a second by second video account of the actual proceedings from all planes and from the interior of the building. And even then, you would probably say, these videos were made in the same studio the Moon Landing was done in.
These 'docu-fantasies' pander to a certain crowd. Those that wish to believe will take any straw, no matter how frail and presumptuous, and use it to pat themselves on the back. It is a strange phenomenon to say the least as mostly Bush detractors love to pin something on a man and administration, who by their own admission are the most inept in history.
Furthermore, I would like to point out the references and sources cited by these conspiracy theory pipedreams. In all citings, there is never any empirical evidence, no hard facts, only suspicion and theorys. Needless to say, they may have 1 or 2 credible people on the giant lists, but strangely, those people are never cited on the record for anything substantial.
Shall I elaborate further, or can I put a trivial "1" next to my name, and strike the score from the film's column as I have summarily dispatched you and the theory you seem to think is the truth?
Even if the terrorists did carry out the bombings, it would only mean the government were extremely incompetent if not criminally negligent. As far as I know, nobody has been fired.
Anyways, the terrorists have infiltrated our government at the highest level...*Cough*Bush*Cough*. I'm not joking. A terrorist of the USA is someone who wants to destroy it...right? Do some research on Patriot Act 1 and and Patriot Act 2. You really need to learn about that because 9/11 is the reason they exist. If 9/11 never happened then Patriot Act probably wouldn't. Most Congressmen who voted for it didn’t even have a chance to read it. wikipedia.com explains both patriot acts pretty well.
What they do is destroy our basic liberties. So 9/11 happens, everyone is scared and goes running for the government for answers and the government tells us we need to give up some of our liberties to be safe. Thats exactly what happened.
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither Liberty nor safety.”
-- Benjamin Franklin
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
Could you elaborate a bit more?
Film: 1
You: 0
What could I possibly tell you that could change your point of view? Probably nothing short of recovering a second by second video account of the actual proceedings from all planes and from the interior of the building. And even then, you would probably say, these videos were made in the same studio the Moon Landing was done in.
These 'docu-fantasies' pander to a certain crowd. Those that wish to believe will take any straw, no matter how frail and presumptuous, and use it to pat themselves on the back. It is a strange phenomenon to say the least as mostly Bush detractors love to pin something on a man and administration, who by their own admission are the most inept in history.
Furthermore, I would like to point out the references and sources cited by these conspiracy theory pipedreams. In all citings, there is never any empirical evidence, no hard facts, only suspicion and theorys. Needless to say, they may have 1 or 2 credible people on the giant lists, but strangely, those people are never cited on the record for anything substantial.
Shall I elaborate further, or can I put a trivial "1" next to my name, and strike the score from the film's column as I have summarily dispatched you and the theory you seem to think is the truth?
If you think there is no empirical in those documentaries then there is certainly no evidence Osama Bin Laden was the head honcho of the operations either if at all involved.
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
I disagree. The USA PATRIOT Act is a legislative miscarriage, but I fail to see the original intent of Congress and the Bush Administration as being to "destroy our basic liberties." Our "basic liberties" are still intact, the USA PATRIOT Acts just fail the common sense test as a means of combating terrorism. Americans got exactly the bill that they were screaming for immediately after the attacks. I think what you mean to say is that it destroyed many of the checks and balances set forth by our forefathers. I also don't expect those sections of the USA PATRIOT Act that circumvent checks and balances surviving review and challenge by the court system. The Judicial Branch does not like to be left out of the loop in law, and in due time they will bring the act into line.
He makes you think and his theory is kinda plausable, but he doesn't really back it up more than anyone else's theories. Alot of the theory would be insanely difficult to prove one way or another though...
Like I said, makes you think, but if you consider that solid evidence then I feel for ya. There are holes in the official story but there are also alot of holes in his story. Whenever a story becomes as political as 9-11 the various sides of the3 issue ALL become so politicalized that they all are not completely trustworthy. They all twist "facts" and "truths" to back their side.
Well, unless you discount the various and sundry videotape confessions where he specifically states that he and his cadre are responsible. Or were those just clever digital manipulations? The burden of proof is on the you the conspiracy theorist, not the status quo. That is something a lot of people who push this nonsense seem to forget.
I didn't watch the video again but I saw it some weeks ago. Doesn't he make some weak argument about how the terrorists couldn't fly the plane? It was already in flight, they would only have to steer with the stick and maybe slow down. They didn't have to deal with any of the other controls. I think all of us could have steered the plane once it was in flight.
You can make just as strong counter points to all his. He just selects the quotes and "facts" that work best for the conspiracy. You could easily find ones that show it was a terrorist plot. Hating the government is like hating Microsoft, it's just the cool thing to do even though they aren't THAT bad.
Even if the terrorists did carry out the bombings, it would only
That's a very good point AlexAmore, if you were to take a look at it from the standpoint that it was masterminded by Terrorists, you'd need to take this point into consideration. Just how far would they have climbed the gov't ladder in order to execute this operation? Are they still seeded there? These are questions for those that may believe that terrorists were responsible for the attacks.mean the government were extremely incompetent if not criminally
negligent. As far as I know, nobody has been fired.
That last sentence I'm not so sure of, because we can't assume that "they" are not not already in the Judicial Branch.
He actually backed up some things I thought were ridiculous from his first video... an example being, he kept throwing out the whole "fires don't melt steel, therefore don't make buildings fall, therefore this was a demolition" theory. However, he never incorporates the speed and force with which the planes hit the building. In fact, he also tried to prove that not only were the buildings hit by airplanes, but also hit with missles on the planes. Sort of contradictory... his one bogus theory explains the other. This isn't the only "mistake" he made. Keep your eyes (and your minds) open.
The biggest thing I really have against this video, though, is that he relies SO heavily on eye-witness reports. If you've taken ANY basic criminal justice classes, you'd know how unreliable and utterly useless eye-witness accounts are.
_____________________________________
"Io rido, e rider mio non passa dentro;
Io ardo, e l'arsion mia non par di fore."
-Machiavelli
I've come back to post one more thing. Deandor is right that just
because those airplanes were not commercial- just because they could have been
remote controlled, that doesn't mean we can assume that they were controlled by the government. Anybody could have been controlling those planes by remote, and
this is a prime example of how we look at a lot of the evidence that is
brought before our eyes from a prejudiced
standpoint. We subconsciously make assumptions about everything we see to back up our own biases. It's like a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Anyways, good post Deandor, you got me thinking.
Edit: That's the great thing about video evidence, cameras have no objection and no judgement. The only problem is people tend to have selective vision.