PDA

View Full Version : Loose Change - The truth about the WTC?



Monrose
January 20th, 2007, 01:01 PM
Dylan Avery, Korey Rowe, and Jason Bermas bring you the most powerful 9/11 Documentary yet.

I've found this Video in the web and it's very interesting...I don't know if this thinks are true...

Please look it and tell me what you think about it??

Loose Change it the greatest documentary on 911 watch and you will see what all the buzz is about.


http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=-7218920724339766288&q=loose+change

Radiohead
January 20th, 2007, 01:33 PM
In my opinion, this is more conspiracy theory hocus pocus. I've seen them all, and they're all the same.

I am not pleased with how the current war on terrorism is being waged, with Iraq being a major distraction. However, I have little tolerance for those who attempt to divert the blame for the 3000+ dead on 9/11 from those who planned and did the deed. The truth is, 19 middle eastern men did hijack the planes, and did run them into the towers and the Pentagon. Planned demolitions? C'mon, even the most hardened Bush critics have called these theories ludicrous.

The internet is a breeding ground for conspiracy theories and unfounded urban legends. Mix ignorance, gullibility and political extremism, and these theories find a wide, accepting audience. Hell, I'm sure there are some people who still believe the earth is flat. Or that Paris Hilton has talent.

Monrose
January 20th, 2007, 01:42 PM
Or that Paris Hilton has talent.


Paris Hilton has talent and is damn hot :D

Radiohead
January 20th, 2007, 01:56 PM
I didn't say she wasn't hot. But you're right, she does have a talent...for blowing her grandfather Conrad's money. As he rolls over in his grave:)

Thomas Jefferson
April 8th, 2007, 06:03 PM
Dylan Avery, Korey Rowe, and Jason Bermas bring you the most powerful 9/11 Documentary yet.

I've found this Video in the web and it's very interesting...I don't know if this thinks are true...

Please look it and tell me what you think about it??

Loose Change it the greatest documentary on 911 watch and you will see what all the buzz is about.


http://video.google.de/videoplay?docid=-7218920724339766288&q=loose+change



If "Loose Change" isn't convincing enough, read PhD Emeritus Professor of Logic David Ray Griffin's "The New Pearl Harbor." Sec'y of Trans. Norman Mineta witnessed Cheney's stand-down order and testified of it (http://video.google.com/url?docid=7797944525480443766&esrc=sr1&ev=v&q=norman+mineta&vidurl=http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DbDfdOwt2v3Y&usg=AL29H20YLyq_r4tkNH7SJhyMWaZ8Qr027w) at the second 9-11 Commission hearing. The "war games" being played that morning were cover for PNAC Cheney's plan to profit Halliburton and Roman Catholic BIG OIL. Bushes have fronted for Vatican-banker Rockefellers for four generations...since Standard Oil was built on unredressed "murder and arson." If "good guy" gay Bush, the draft-dodger, seems too pathetic to pull off such a scam, that is so easily proven, consider his "lineage:" his father "can't recall" his whereabouts upon hearing of JFK's assassination; and his Knight of Malta-grandfather was the money behind the author of "I Paid Hitler," papal baron and fellow Knight of Malta, Fritz "The Rockefeller of Germany" Thyssen. He got the nickname because everyone knew the money Prescott Bush was funnelling to him to construct the Auschwitz Steel Works and death camp was coming from Rockefeller...the Vatican's correspondent banker...Sunday morning collection plate...Chase Manhattan Bank...Prescott Bush. Now the closet-queen draft-dodger is selected for POTUS by the Roman Catholics on the Supreme Court.

Let us use our brains, America.

Death for Treason.

ZippyTheChimp
April 8th, 2007, 06:10 PM
The New Pearl Harbor

LOL.

No one proved anything about the Old Pearl Harbor.

MidtownGuy
April 8th, 2007, 06:21 PM
Prove is a loaded word. Different levels of that I guess. Lots of historians now say they had warning of Pearl Harbor. You don't have to believe it, but what's the point in being that dismissive?
Not going near 9/11 with you at this point...but about Pearl Harbor, are you openminded enough to consider this, or is the force of too many years of
accepted truth simply too powerful?

By the way, I once heard Noam Chomsky say that conspiracy theory is just another term for institutional analysis.

ZippyTheChimp
April 8th, 2007, 06:32 PM
It is accepted fact that there were warnings about Pearl Harbor, but no evidence of a conspiracy. You could say the same about 09/11.

What is overlooked by many when considering if Pearl Harbor was a conspiracy is that the U.S. did not consider Japan as the major threat. In fact, only 10% of resources were used in the Pacific.

FDR realized that the U.S. had to enter the war against Germany, but if Germany didn't stupidly declare war on the U.S., that war would not have resulted from Pearl Harbor.

Although it was used in the Pacific, the B-29 was built to bomb Germany from across the Atlantic, in the event that Britain was defeated.

Thomas Jefferson
April 8th, 2007, 06:46 PM
Prove is a loaded word. Different levels of that I guess. Lots of historians now say they had warning of Pearl Harbor. You don't have to believe it, but what's the point in being that dismissive?
Not going near 9/11 with you at this point...but about Pearl Harbor, are you openminded enough to consider this, or is the force of too many years of
accepted truth simply too powerful?

By the way, I once heard Noam Chomsky say that conspiracy theory is just another term for institutional analysis.

Is fear of addressing Bush's easily proven 9-11 treason a corollary of NYC fear of Mob or institutionally corrupt Police retaliation against those in receipt of America's "Sovereign Individual" social contract? Cowed by Rome's Church and Mafia is not the way for those who wish to be Americans. Bush is part of the Rockefeller Roman Catholic Fed BIG OIL Mafia CIA Fifth Column but the People must reassert its sovereign rule and bring to justice those who clearly commiitted 9-11 to send us to false war in Iraq and Afghanistan; killed Kennedy and King to shore up the pope's interests in Indochina; funded Hitler as a bulwark against a Jefferson-influenced Europe that wished to be free of Tsar and Pope: clearly America's Founder was correct when he identified Rome as "The Real Anti-Christ." Rome's Rockefeller/Nixon/Bush/BIG OIL/CIA/CFR/Fed/Mafia Fifth Column must be destroyed that America prosper anew. Rome's Fifth Column is a cancer on America and must be extirpated. The Whig Founders were correct.

Death for Treason.

Justice for Kennedy, King, Our Dead of Vietnam/9-11 and Iraq.

ZippyTheChimp
April 8th, 2007, 06:49 PM
You've really let yourself go since your presidency.

Thomas Jefferson
April 8th, 2007, 06:52 PM
Prove is a loaded word. Different levels of that I guess. Lots of historians now say they had warning of Pearl Harbor. You don't have to believe it, but what's the point in being that dismissive?
Not going near 9/11 with you at this point...but about Pearl Harbor, are you openminded enough to consider this, or is the force of too many years of
accepted truth simply too powerful?

By the way, I once heard Noam Chomsky say that conspiracy theory is just another term for institutional analysis.


You've really let yourself go since your presidency.

Civilization Pivots on Urban Culture - Take the Challenge New Yorkers...for if you do not take a key role in bringing to justice the overt treason of the Bush/Roman Catholic Fifth Column another great American city shall rise up and eclipse your faded greatness.

Bojangleman
April 8th, 2007, 06:55 PM
http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=af07

ZippyTheChimp
April 8th, 2007, 09:54 PM
Rockefeller Roman Catholic Fed BIG OIL Mafia CIA Fifth Column What? No Jews?


Take the Challenge New Yorkers...for if you do not take a key role in bringing to justice the overt treason of the Bush/Roman Catholic Fifth Column another great American city shall rise up and eclipse your faded greatness.Mobile, Alabama?

clubBR
April 8th, 2007, 10:12 PM
I believe the Bush administration knew of the attacks before hand and let it slide. They had plans of their own. However, I dont think they actually supported it or helped the terrorists attack (demolition, funding, etc). Still, that is F'd up. 9/11 commission reports, Condoleeza Rice wasting time during her trial, the numerous experts who brought these charges to light, and how lax the Bush administration was immidiately after the attacks all point to something fishy

Bob
April 9th, 2007, 10:24 PM
A person has posted on this thread something that could easily be taken as a threat against a sitting President of the United States. Such activity is illegal.

lofter1
April 10th, 2007, 10:11 AM
A person has posted on this thread something that could easily be taken as a threat against a sitting President of the United States. Such activity is illegal.

It seems the activity which would be considered "illegal" would be the treasonous acts as postulated -- rather than any generally implied threat to a sitting POTUS.

The law of the land allows the execution of an individual following a conviction for acts of treason.

No man is above the law.

OmegaNYC
April 10th, 2007, 02:49 PM
Maybe this will clear things up. (http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=911_morons)

Ninjahedge
April 10th, 2007, 03:07 PM
VERY nice one.

And the artistry!!!!!!

(BTW, worked at a place that did the analysis of the WTC collapse. Softening of the steel due to the fire combined with a major portion being destroyed caused buckling failure of the remaining steel. That release of force acted like releasing springs with hundreds of thousands of pounds of pressure stored in them. That traveled down the steel to the base, sending up the shock clouds.

No explosives, no conspiracy other than the one that tried to cover up the idiocy of the current administration and its ignoring of the warnings that were coming in...)

Fabrizio
April 10th, 2007, 03:19 PM
From the Popular Mechanics debunking site:

"Steel melts at about 2,750 degrees Fahrenheit—but it loses strength at temperatures as low as 400 F. When temperatures break 1000 degrees F, steel loses nearly 50 percent of its strength."

My home oven (and probably yours too) can be set up to 500 degrees F.

So, should I be worried when I set the thing to "broil"?

ZippyTheChimp
April 10th, 2007, 05:49 PM
Ninjahedge and Fabrizio are in on it.

ZippyTheChimp
April 10th, 2007, 05:50 PM
I just realized I banned a Founding Father.

clubBR
April 10th, 2007, 06:30 PM
VERY nice one.

And the artistry!!!!!!

(BTW, worked at a place that did the analysis of the WTC collapse. Softening of the steel due to the fire combined with a major portion being destroyed caused buckling failure of the remaining steel. That release of force acted like releasing springs with hundreds of thousands of pounds of pressure stored in them. That traveled down the steel to the base, sending up the shock clouds.

No explosives, no conspiracy other than the one that tried to cover up the idiocy of the current administration and its ignoring of the warnings that were coming in...)
Yea, but Why would the administration ignore those warnings?
Did you know Dick Cheney was informed every few minutes since the first plane was hijacked? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO-9LQDFE2Y and every time he was informed, he let it go! Why?? Ok, im sure they didnt actually have a hand in the terrorist acts itself but to ignore these BLATANT warnings?? Something is SO wrong with that
I watched Faranheit 9/11 last night.

Ninjahedge
April 11th, 2007, 09:46 AM
Yea, but Why would the administration ignore those warnings?

Do you really want an answer?

I have one. You can start with the fact that they did not like the previous administration. I do not think a SINGLE THING was picked up from the change of office.

You can then go further to see that there were many other threats that were given to us, some even more specifically, and none ammounted to the death and destruction, on the homeland, that this did. The threat, and its ambiguity, were weighed with the success/failure and scope of previous attempts and ruled as insignificant by the policymakers of the time.

They were focusing on how to martial the troops for the takover in Iraq. They were not paying attension to a ranting rich man in another country shaking his fist at the US.


Did you know Dick Cheney was informed every few minutes since the first plane was hijacked? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO-9LQDFE2Y and every time he was informed, he let it go!

What was he informed? What should he have done? There is already the theory that they scrambled jet figters to persue/engage and another that one of the planes was actually shot down. But that would not be the case if they did nothing. So which conspiracy do you support?

Also, sometimes the Pres and VP are NOT teh ultimate decision makers on issues of immediate national security. Ever think that Dick was being informed of what was going on and that others were at teh wheel?

Jeez man! If all you an do is link to crap, not respond to the individual denouncements that were solidly made on the site provided by Lofter, and continue YouTube trolling I suggest you give it up now.


Why?? Ok, im sure they didnt actually have a hand in the terrorist acts itself but to ignore these BLATANT warnings?? Something is SO wrong with that
I watched Faranheit 9/11 last night.

Like I said, he was the VP. He was being kept abreast of the situation. I really do not believe it was under his perview to give any direct order to the military in how to handle an immediate situation.

Also, think about it. What did the people on those planes do? Most did nothing. Why? All previous hijackings usually ended up with the hijackers demanding to be taken somewhere or other demands. If you gave them what they wanted, chances are most would not be hurt.

This was a trump card. Nobody was really expecting this, that is why it worked! If the threat was direct, saying how and where it would happen, I am sure nobody would have questioned what to do when the planes were hijacked.

But it wasn't. So your choice is to kill a hundred or so innocent people on the possibility (unconfirmed) that they will kill 3000.


As for F-9-11. This is Michel Moore we are talking about. I like the guy, but he is annoying as hell. He starts off with a good proposition or point, but then stretches it to almost Howard Stern levels of exaggerated hyperbole to try to argue his opinions over all others.

Taking his word about explosives or whatever else over the people I worked with and their analysis.... Well........

Nope.