Loose Change - 9/11 conspiracy truth

[hedwig]

Why did the footage also show no sign of a missile? And, by the way, which is it?  Some of you guys have "proven" that it was a missile, and some have "proven" that it was a plane, but a different plane than the one that was hijacked.  The footage doesn't show that different plane either. 

Remember, the "footage" consisted of only five selected frames; why would they include a clear view of the missile/different plane if the point was to make people think it was the commercial airplane?

i think their aim was merely to show that there are quite a few holes in the official story and that it doesn't seem to have happened the way the government says it did, not to prove exactly how it did happen.

Exactly. The bullshit factor and the possibility of government involvement go hand-in-hand. Why would the government be so secretive (blocking investiations, etc.) unless they had something to hide?

Like I said before, the point is not to make a bunch of allegations, but to demand answers for these many, many unanswered questions. And I see nothing wrong with that.

[shinwa]

You have to be really gullible to buy into this. I mean come on. The government can hide evidence of a missile hitting a building in a major american city, but they can't hide the fact that the NSA has been spying on it's own citizens?  They can't even  coordinate damage control to cover the Cheney incident. I understand how romantic conspiracy theories are, but get real.

[squints]

I think the movie points out that they really didn't do a good job of covering this up just like everything else. Did you watch it?

[shinwa]

Yes I've watched it.  And if the majority of the world believes that the towers were taken down by terrorists, than it means the administration did a hell of  good job of covering it up.  In fact they did such a good job, that we all watched them in action on live TV  without realizing it. Not only that, but they got Osama Bin laden to take the wrap for it. Unless of course that wasn't Osama, but a lookalike. haha come on. Our government, it's being run by assholes. It is not being run by Lex Luthor. This "documentary" isn't even accepted by the 9/11 truth Movement.

[pete]

that documentary was as fun as reading richard belzer's book "JFK, UFO, and Elvis" or whatever that I purchased all those years ago.  I could not really challenge the documentary 'cause I don't know enough about structural engineering and explosives to understand the behavior of planes and buildings and bombs and missles, but I also could not challenge the counter-theorists' claims in the popular mechanics and that MIT guy that I talked to yesterday who claimed that planes and buildings and bombs and missles would behave entirely differently under the same circumstances.  I had the same reaction when I read an article by this guy who denied the link between HIV and AIDS and made a very convincing argument against the big pharmaceuticals that were making billions for linking HIV to AIDS.
Do you need this documentary to believe that the White House is evilly incompetent and greedy?  Do you need to deny the link between HIV and AIDS to recognize that pharaceuticals are doing evil things in Africa in the name of science?  I do not see how a missle that hit the Pentagon can really make the White House that much more evil.  All the video did was trying to one-dimensionalize my anger.  The government is unjust in a variety of ways through a variety of issues, bombing its own military complex is amongst the least of my concerns.  Americans have been aggressively and passive-aggressively brutalizing people around the world for decades, I don't see how it needs a republican missle to galvanize the troops to go out there to spread the evil.  Whether or not these greedy assholes are incompetent or evil or both, the result is the same.  Whatever face they put on, whoever they are, the people have always been suffering.  I hope you who have watched and passionately debated the contents of the video, are going out right now and fighting against injustice one human at a time.

[Jeremy Blackman]

I do not see how a missle that hit the Pentagon can really make the White House that much more evil.

What about the... umm... twin towers?

[pete]

oh I forgot, you believe in that too.

[shinwa]

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

[Jeremy Blackman]

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

One big flaw in that interpretation. The jet fuel burned off immediately upon impact, as we can see from the huge explosion that shot out the other side. The article for some reason assumes that the jet fuel stayed there, in the tower, undepleted from the initial explosion, to continuosly fuel the fire:

the WTC fire was fuel rich—hardly surprising with 90,000 L of jet fuel available.

That's absurd.

There's also a more basic problem with the article. It presupposes that the official story of the fire causing the building to collapse is true and looks for evidence to support it, speculating here and there about what exactly the conditions might have been to cause it to happen in that way.

Also, why are people still bringing up the Popular Mechanics article? It's a straw man argument. And most of their "evidence" comes directly from official sources like the Pentagon. And they didn't even do their own work... they borrowed the theories (and even the images) from popular anti-skeptic websites. It's like they say the missile/pod theory (which I still have some doubts about) might not be true, therefore everything the skeptics tell you is a lie.

[Jeremy Blackman]

Speaking of the missile/tower theory, I read a pretty convincing refutation of it, but looking at the video of the impact it seems once again credible. Doesn't it look like a missile is being fired from this airplane? They say it was simply a flash or a reflection of light, but how can that happen from every angle? (The site I linked to a whle ago no longer has those images, which were better, so I looked elsewhere for these.)



And in the first image, isn't that the missile pod that was apparently debunked?? (Again with the straw man, because they called into doubt a different image, which is blurry.)

Also, little clip was put together by Dylan Avery (who made Loose Change).

[shinwa]

I'm sorry, but it would be completely ridiculous for them to strap a missile to a plane and fly it into the building for all to see. That's just not intelligent. Why would they use a missile? Why not explosives? At least then people wouldn't be able to bear witness to the missiles firing with their flashy animated gifs. 0_o Any body in charge of anything has to KNOW that something like this will undoubtedly be videotaped and played over and over and over  again week after week after week. We saw the second tower hit on live TV for crying out loud. I have a hard time believing that anyone in charge of an attack like this can be that  dumb. We're suppossed to believe that modern day strategist overlooked the idea of slow motion video? Come on. To me, that doesn't look like a missile being fired from the airplane. If I wanted it to look like one, it would. Only because there's activity there. If that were a missle, wouldn't the blast have travelled  towards the plane? Wouldn't there be a very obvious sound? Wouldn't it have went straight through that building and come out the other side?  Wouldn't there be remnants?

There's also a more basic problem with the article. It presupposes that the official story of the fire causing the building to collapse is true and looks for evidence to support it, speculating here and there about what exactly the conditions might have been to cause it to happen in that way.

Yeah, it would be more than a little irresponsible if they didn't. If for no other reason to see if the claim stands the test of reason.  Avery believes that the official story was false and looks for evidence and all sorts of off the wall suggestions to support that.


Clearly there's a whole lot of wrong with the 9/11 situation, but I don't believe anything, other than this documentary, suggests missiles and so on and so forth.  If we had a government where every branch was cooperative and worked together for the same goals, then maybe I'd believe something similar to this. As of now? No way. It just doesn't add up. It's very dramatic, but it's  not consistent with the politics of the world we live in. Healthy skepticism is a good thing, being conned is not.

[RegularKarate]

Sorry, JB, but that's not a misile.  That's not how they look when they're fired and it would really do no difference to fire a misile 1/100th of a second before the plane hit the building.


The documentary raises some points that have been covered before, but all it does is help discredit it's own theory.  The whole "Therefore it's SCIENTIFICALLY IMPOSSIBLE" shit is pretty damn silly, they just took some numbers they found on the periodic table and decided with a few taps of the calculator that they were right... nuff said.  

It's too bad that they have to approach it like this because there are some really interesting facts, but they're not all solid facts and the way theyr'e presented makes the more solid information seem less solid.

Do I believe the government's told us the truth about 9/11? No fucking way
Do I believe it's possible they did the whole thing themselves?  Very unlikely, but I admit it's possible.  

There just needs to be a better presentation of facts and opinions without jumping in with fingers already pointed and conclusions already made.

[Ghostboy]

I think the documentary is valuable simply because it raises questions - it offers no empirical evidence, but it has enough credibility to make one reconsider.

I was already aware and supportive of the planned detonation theory. However, the missiles-on-the-plane thing is just dumb, especially when those videos are used as evidence. As RK says, they pretty much disprove the theory all by themselves.

[kotte]

Oh...I thought we were talking abou this...loose change.

[JG]

 The whole "Therefore it's SCIENTIFICALLY IMPOSSIBLE" shit is pretty damn silly, they just took some numbers they found on the periodic table and decided with a few taps of the calculator that they were right... nuff said.  

Exactly.  Don't you think it woulda been a lot more effective to have some scientist explain all the science stuff?