33 replies to this topic

[PinKkFloyDd]

Transparent, on Aug 24 2006, 11:59 PM, said:

It sounds like there's enough material floating around to form some conclusions, but there's the issue of motive. I can see faking the pentagon incident as reason to go to war, but why throw away countless civilian lives at the World Trade Center? That's far beyond the limits of human conscience.

As a side note, hardly anything sets me off more than when Bush mentions "evil," in his speeches.

If Bush has no problem letting people die over in Iraq, why would he have any problem having them die here.

That's one thing I don't get about the opposers of the conspiracies. "Aw, he wouldn't let all those people."

He's letting them die in Iraq, I'm sure he wouldn't care if it happened here, too.

[Sydnias_Wolff]

http://video.google....593973848835726

Sort of the same thing(Loose Change, 2nd Ed). I watched this last night at 4 in the morning and, truth be told, I was a little dumbfounded. It's an hour twenty minutes long, but definitely worth it.

PS Just read Endocrine's response - Yeah. Some of the claims were a little out of the box. The blue tarp thing was just a blind suspicion.

[EndocrineFlippa]

what I posted was a very limited sample of the things wrong in that movie, i'm sure if you went through it point by point you could disprove hundreds more facts, so please do some research before you get interested in some bull like this...

[NickC]

is there goin to be school on sept 11 2006? it falls on a monday..

[randomania3]

ofcourse theres school then.

[tycoonboy388]

Probably just a moment of silence.

Wow, it's been five years...

[EndocrineFlippa]

i know, it seems like just a year or two ago... and yea, schools normal on 9/11, they've never cancelled school for it or anything

[zaccariah2005]

EndocrineFlippa, on Aug 28 2006, 09:36 AM, said:

there are hundreds of there 9-11 theories out there and all of them have inaccurate information and huge holes in them...

Loose Change is no exception, heres some inaccuracies from Loose Change taken from wikipedia:
heres another for you:
http://www.loosechangeguide.com/lcg2.html#...hey%20made%20of?

this is from screwloosechange.blogspot.com
So please, next time do some research before you believe some BS conspiracy thoery

I didn't think this topic would be revived but since it has, I think I should comment on those debunkers Endocrine gave me.

Claim 3, 7,4 and 8 just discredits the credibility of certain people. It does not exactly mean that these people are wrong.
Claim 4 does not show that it is not a military plane. If it wasn't a military plane, how can it have that black thing in the bottom that the youtube video mentioned.
As for all these claims, with the exception of claim 10, I do not see how it relates to the youtube video.



Nevertheless, I respect your response. I am assuming that you have much more conspiracy debunkers, so I want you to debunk the following.
1. Why was there a spark before the plane crashed?
2. Why was there a black thing in the bottom of the plane resembling that of a military plane?
3. Why did the World trade center fall straight down without the use of explosives?
Here is a excerpt from wikipedia that supports this

"Steven E. Jones, a physics professor at Brigham Young University, and Judy Wood, a mechanical engineer at Clemson University, say that without the use of explosives to destroy the buildings' internal support structure, the fall of the towers violates conservation of momentum.[26] In addition, Dr. Jones says the angular momentum of the top of the South Tower as it began to collapse could not simply disappear, unless the center of mass of the top was somehow shattered and destroyed.[27] In addition, he says that the collapse of the towers at near free-fall speed indicates that the central core below the impact zone had lost its structural integrity and provided almost no resistance to the falling debris. The theory is also advocated by Jones's group, Scholars for 9/11 Truth."

4. Only five photographs concerning the pentagon was released from a surveilence camera near the pentagon. These photographs did not even show that it was a 757 that hit the pentagon. Also, Why was there a wrong date on the bottom left corner of the screen? And why was this the only surveillence camera available? This is the pentagon, the "nerve center for the United states military, supposedly the most secure building in the country." Where are the security cameras from the hallways? Afterall, every square inch of the pentagon is under video surveillence. We do not see any of these other videos. Why was the video camera from the gas station confiscated?

This was all on the video plus more. Except for claim 10, none of you debunker reasonably debunks this video. So, maybe you should analyze a "bs conspiracy theory" before calling it a "bs conspiracy Theory." And If any of you truly did watch the video, I do not know why you were impressed by his conspiracy debunkers.

[chitownquantumboy]

Wouldn't the cameras in the halls where the plane hit be destroyed allong with the tapes in them? What if the wires that connected the cameras were damaged by the fire, the plane, or the explosion?

[tycoonboy388]

I'd assume the camera's in the Pentago were well protected, for the reason that if anything like a bomb were to go off in the Pentago, they'd want to be able to quickly identify what exactly happened. Though that's just speculation of my own.

For the same reason that people criticize loose change, I would advise that you stop using Wikipedia, zaccariah. Annonymous users can alter the meaning of any article on the website (hackers on wikipedia once altered articles on the American Revolution to give inaccurate dates for well known events, like the signing of the Declaration of Independence and it went unnoticed for some time). So even though there are sources listed, wikipedia cannot be trusted to back up most things. The sources listed on wikipedia are better, most of the time, for they can also be the random rantings of a crazy lunatic.

I am not saying that I disagree with anything anyone here has said, I have many of my own questions about 9/11 that I have been thinking about for the past five years. Its just that if you want people to stop thinking you might be insane, you need something more substantial to back it up (this also goes for anything you might write for high school papers, don't use wikipedia).

[EndocrineFlippa]

ok, and how bout all the other debunkers given? really get over it, i'm really tired of this, loosechange was made by a bunch of idiot kids, they know very little about what they are talking about and have been proven wrong on multiple accounts... did you notice that loose change has no proof of many of their claims and a lot of what they say is distorted evidence

and also the pentagon RELEASED THE FOOTAGE of the plane hitting the pentagon cause idiots were talking about it getting hit by a missile or some retarted crap like that...

http://www.cnn.com/2...ideo/index.html


and finally there is conspiracy BS about EVERYTHING, are you going to believe all the crap that you get spoon fed? many say Martin Luther King was assasinated by the United States Government... are you going to believe that too?

[tycoonboy388]

EndocrineFlippa, on Sep 2 2006, 10:29 PM, said:

ok, and how bout all the other debunkers given? really get over it, i'm really tired of this,

Then stop posting if you're sick of this. I think you're points would be better stated if you weren't criticizing half the people that posted in this thread.

EndocrineFlippa, on Sep 2 2006, 10:29 PM, said:

and also the pentagon RELEASED THE FOOTAGE of the plane hitting the pentagon cause idiots were talking about it getting hit by a missile or some retarted crap like that...

http://www.cnn.com/2...ideo/index.html
and finally there is conspiracy BS about EVERYTHING, are you going to believe all the crap that you get spoon fed? many say Martin Luther King was assasinated by the United States Government... are you going to believe that too?

I'll admit, I found Loose Change provocative, and I did find a lot of what you so kindly posted interesting as well. Does that mean I'm convinced either way, no of course not. Uncovering and learning true history takes time, so I am still on the edge waiting for more information to come our way.

Even if everything is as it appeared on 9/11, the real thing that stuck with me at the end of Loose Change was that there was no real questioning of the government in our response to the attacks. Congress was near unanimous in approving the USA Patriot Act (a 300 page law that strongly limits rights to privacy that was approved by both chambers of congress with little debate in about two weeks). I think more that the movie was trying to show is that there are many who feel that the US Government has twisted the events of 9/11 to fill an agenda that certain people have wanted to fufill for some time. In all honesty, I don't think Loose Change did its job in proving someone else was behind 9/11 without a shadow of a doubt, I believe it showed that the event still has yet to be written into history, and we still have a chance to really understand what caused 9/11 and what came out of 9/11.

[Wenger]

zaccariah2005, on Aug 24 2006, 08:11 PM, said:

The above link is a link about many conspiracy theories involving september 11. I think that it is something intersting to discuss about. It is a 45 minute long video (the link is the first of six parts check the user's profile for the other parts.). I think it is sad that this video does not have a higher view count as he does make many valid points. Anyway, I think this would be an intresting topic to discuss.

I don't think it's a conspiracy. I have seen the film, "Zeitgeist" which may be of interest to others, regarding the myth of religion, 9/11 conspiracies, and capitalism, although I disagree with most of it. I can't really elaborate on my view, but I don't see why the President would dare plan such an attack - isn't he a religious fanatic, anyways?

[leo2car]

--locked--