Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Loose Change: 9/11 Conspiracy?  
User currently offlineLonghornmaniac From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 3355 posts, RR: 45
Posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2339 times:

Has anyone else seen this 2 hour documentary about 9/11? I've always scoffed at those who've said that 9/11 is some inside job, but this video certainly does make me want to ask some serious questions. There does seem to be a disproportionate amount of cover up done by the government, with little or no explanation for much of it. Not only that, but many strange coincidences, too...

Has anyone else seen it? For those that haven't, and would like to, it can be seen here.

A few points touched upon (in as much detail as I've ever seen for this type of video):

-lots of war games on 9/11 (hindered ability to respond?)

-collapse of Twin Towers, as well as WTC 7 unprecedented (towers designed to withstand the impact of a 707) as well as unusual (essential free fall, towers collapsed in on themselves, in conjunction with lots of explosions heard from ground level...possible controlled demolition?)

-lack of debris in Shanksville, PA

In addition to these, there were MANY more points raised, but that gives a bit of an idea on how the video was structured.

I'd be interested, as well, to hear what people think about 9/11 in general. Of course it was a very, very terrible tragedy for the United States, and I'm in no way attempting to downplay the massive loss of life. One could argue that more answers should be demanded to honor those who died. With that said, does anyone believe 9/11 was anything more than a terrible act of terror committed by Islamic fundamentalists? If so, what do you believe?

God Bless America.

Cheers,
Cameron

22 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineRJ111 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2318 times:

Congratulations on opening an enormous can of worms.

That video is riddled with innacuracies and should be given 0 credit.

And this thread should go no further.

PS: Do a search if you really are that interested.


User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 6054 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 2314 times:

God, not that piece of shit again.

I see it's the Final Cut, which was the least woo'ish of the lot, but I'd suggest you watch http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr/ to begin with, as that is basically your one-stop debunking of the most popular version (the previous one).

As for the Final Cut, it's basically the same with the most controversial bits taken out, meaning there's very little substance left to debunk. Either way, have a look around http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/ and follow some of the links

Quoting Longhornmaniac (Thread starter):
-lots of war games on 9/11 (hindered ability to respond?)

Which were called off as soon as the actual situation became known. http://www.911myths.com/index.php/War_Games is a good reading list

Quoting Longhornmaniac (Thread starter):
-collapse of Twin Towers, as well as WTC 7 unprecedented (towers designed to withstand the impact of a 707) as well as unusual (essential free fall, towers collapsed in on themselves, in conjunction with lots of explosions heard from ground level...possible controlled demolition?)

The WTC design was unique and the situation was unique, with the fires VERY high up, making it nigh impossible to actually fight them. As far as I know, only one or two firefighters actually made it to within a few floors of the fires. And once the first tower collapsed, it knocked out the water supply lines, making it impossible to fight the fires in WTC7. http://www.debunking911.com/towers.htm is a good read.

Quoting Longhornmaniac (Thread starter):
-lack of debris in Shanksville, PA

Bullhockey. The angle and speed of the impact, meant that the debris was scattered all over the place, most notably in the nearby woods http://www.911myths.com/html/flight_93_photos.html


User currently offlineMadameConcorde From San Marino, joined Feb 2007, 10930 posts, RR: 37
Reply 3, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2304 times:



Quoting Longhornmaniac (Thread starter):
There does seem to be a disproportionate amount of cover up done by the government, with little or no explanation for much of it.

There will always be things kept secret in every event of such scale. As to i9/11 being an "inside job" those who say it still have to bring formal proof of it, the same as "no plane hitting the Pentagon" and all that other stuff....  Wow!

All I will say to them is PROVE IT.

RIP all 9/11 victims.  candle   crying 



There was a better way to fly it was called Concorde
User currently offlineDtwclipper From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2274 times:



Quoting CPH-R (Reply 2):
God, not that piece of shit again.

 checkmark   checkmark   checkmark 

I guess it makes some folks feel smarter believing in such nonsense.

I would rather see ten threads on "can an airplane take off from a treadmill".


User currently offlineLTBEWR From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 13199 posts, RR: 15
Reply 5, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2264 times:

I work with people and know of a few others who were at work in the WTC when they were attacked on 9/11 and they knew people who died that day. None of them accept any wingnut conspiricies.

To me the real conspiricy as to 9/11 was how the Bush Administraion acted after 9/11. The spiriting out of Bin-Ladin family members out of the USA during the flight groundings in the days following 9/11. The whole series of actions that led to Gitmo, the torture of terror suspects, suspension of any rights of those suspects, the attempt to offer military tribunals and so on. What about the Anthrax crises which was never resolved and may have only come from a government contolled source and has never been resolved?

Further real 'conspirices' to me include the whole situation for many years of collasping regulation of financial servcies that led in part to the current economic recession among those companies and their corruption of our elected officials.


User currently offlineJFK69 From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 1420 posts, RR: 1
Reply 6, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 2228 times:

Wow.....why can't people just believe that what we all think happened....ACTUALLY HAPPENED!!!!!! Sometime the most obvious is the answer. Terrorists hijacked planes.....crashed into buildings...buildings collapsed.

Story over.

For the people that say that explosives were put into the building, I ask if they have ever seen a building demolition. It takes week of strategically placing TNT inside the beams of the structure. I find this hard to believe that this happened as 50k people were working during the course of a regular business day.

I look forward to this thread being closed very soon.


User currently offlineDavid L From United Kingdom, joined May 1999, 9545 posts, RR: 42
Reply 7, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 2 days ago) and read 2218 times:



Quoting CPH-R (Reply 2):
The WTC design was unique and the situation was unique, with the fires VERY high up, making it nigh impossible to actually fight them. As far as I know, only one or two firefighters actually made it to within a few floors of the fires. And once the first tower collapsed, it knocked out the water supply lines, making it impossible to fight the fires in WTC7. http://www.debunking911.com/towers.htm is a good read.

 checkmark  It wasn't the impact, it was the resulting fires that weakened the steel frame - yes "weakened". That whole baloney about the fires not being hot enough to "melt" the steel is nothing but a red herring. It was assumed that said 707 colliding with the towers would be far more likely to do so on approach after a full flight, i.e. with not much fuel on board.

Quoting Longhornmaniac (Thread starter):
as well as unusual (essential free fall, towers collapsed in on themselves

"Unusual" compared to what? Many, many structural engineers have explained why they collapsed the way they did. Are they part of the conspiracy, too?


Quoting Longhornmaniac (Thread starter):
in conjunction with lots of explosions heard from ground level...possible controlled demolition?)

What should a collapsing skyscraper sound like?

On top of pointing out the obvious nonsense there's the fact that so many people would need to have been involved. E.g. people at the airlines would have seen that something wasn't right. If the government is so good at covering up something so huge, why do they keep getting caught doing more trivial things?


User currently offlineIhadapheo From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 6027 posts, RR: 55
Reply 8, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2152 times:

In all honesty I though we were through with this discussion back in 2004. The facts presented try to prove the opinion by misrepresentation and omission. There is nothing presented that was not discussed here and disproved 5+ years ago.


Pray hard but pray with care For the tears that you are crying now Are just your answered prayers
User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3410 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2142 times:

The only question that I think needs to be raised about 9/11 is nothing to do with the event in question but had to to do with the fact that the US government knew of the attack and did nothing to stop it because they knew that the country would unite behind them and they could have free reign on doing what they did after wards.

That is the only even remote conspiracy in my eyes and even then its a stretch.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlinePhoenix9 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 2546 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 2133 times:



Quoting Longhornmaniac (Thread starter):

Why would you wanna open this can of worms??

No point discussing this now....one way or the other, a lot of people lost their lives and let those who perished RIP. No point opening up old wounds much to the dismay of friends and families.

You are not going to see the discussion you are hoping for as this thread will soon turn into a flame-war and being deleted



Life only makes sense when you look at it backwards.
User currently offlineLonghornmaniac From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 3355 posts, RR: 45
Reply 11, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2093 times:



Quoting JFK69 (Reply 6):
Sometime the most obvious is the answer.

I love Occam's Razor.  checkmark 

Quoting David L (Reply 7):
If the government is so good at covering up something so huge, why do they keep getting caught doing more trivial things?

That's precisely why I still can't believe it. Too much cover-up needed, and the government is completely inept at it.

Even still, I feel some questions need to be asked.

Cheers,
Cameron


User currently offlineFlymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7279 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2062 times:



Quoting Longhornmaniac (Thread starter):
-lack of debris in Shanksville, PA

What is supposed to be left of an airplane traveling over 500mph into the ground. Valu Jet 592 is a example of this too, not much debris was that a government conspiracy too?

That movie is garbage. Anyone who believes it has some "mental" problems.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 6054 posts, RR: 3
Reply 13, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2045 times:



Quoting Longhornmaniac (Reply 11):
Even still, I feel some questions need to be asked.

The whole point of movies like Loose Change and its ilk (and trust me, there's plenty of it) is to only show you whatever evidence they can pick out of context, distory, misrepresent etc to fit their agenda. So of course people are left with questions in their mind.


User currently offlineLonghornmaniac From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 3355 posts, RR: 45
Reply 14, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2035 times:



Quoting Flymia (Reply 12):
What is supposed to be left of an airplane traveling over 500mph into the ground.

That was my initial thought, as well. I didn't think it was their strongest argument, I was just giving an example for those that didn't know anything about the video. From the sound of it, I was in the minority!  Smile

Quoting CPH-R (Reply 13):
So of course people are left with questions in their mind.

LOL, true. I suppose one thing that is lingering in my mind is, if the EPA air quality tests said there were high levels of toxins in the air, why did Christine Todd Whitman say it was safe to go back?

Cheers,
Cameron


User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2026 times:

I don't buy the theories behind that, and I can debunk one personally.

In that video, they claim United 93 landed at CLE, was taxied behind NASA Glenn and the people deplaned and "disposed of".

I was at CLE at the time they say this happened. I was outside the terminal at the time. When driving by the airport on Brookpark Rd. I saw a DL 767 out there, that had landed minutes before, and the CPD was heading into the airport to encircle it till it could be cleared. DL had ordered the plane to land before the government even issued the order shutting down the airspace, because it was a BOS-SFO flight, I believe. I was in the area for over an hour-at the time that this documentary says UA 93 landed in CLE.

Nothing landed in that hour at CLE. Nothing. There were no sounds of thrust reversers; there was not plane that taxied off to the west towards NASA Glenn. It never happened. I was there.

Another thing that I questioned at one time was AA77 that hit the Pentagon. But I've gone back and watched a lot of the coverage of 9/11, and ABC's John McWethy actually interviewed 2 or 3 people who said they saw the AA plane go right over their head-one guy said he read the Tail # of the aircraft, so close was it. These were people who were out on the street. Plus, McWethy said that DC firefighters said they saw part of the A/C embedded in the Pentagon-very deep into the Pentagon. That's enough to convince me.


Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 9):
The only question that I think needs to be raised about 9/11 is nothing to do with the event in question but had to to do with the fact that the US government knew of the attack and did nothing to stop it because they knew that the country would unite behind them and they could have free reign on doing what they did after wards.

Like Pearl Harbor, the government before 9/11 had inklings that something big was up. There had been intel that al Qaeda was going to strike, but most of that seemed to indicate it would be overseas. I don't think anyone-George W. Bush included-who would have dreamed it would be what it turned out to be, just as I believe no one believed the Japanese would have the balls to do what they did in 1941.


User currently offlineStarAC17 From Canada, joined Aug 2003, 3410 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1976 times:



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 15):
Like Pearl Harbor, the government before 9/11 had inklings that something big was up. There had been intel that al Qaeda was going to strike, but most of that seemed to indicate it would be overseas. I don't think anyone-George W. Bush included-who would have dreamed it would be what it turned out to be, just as I believe no one believed the Japanese would have the balls to do what they did in 1941.

Well the August 6th memo was titled "Bin Laden determined to strike in the United States". I could believe that the government thought that it would have been a less devastating strike like what happened in London and Madrid. However I have also heard that there were people in the NSA or the FBI who said when 9/11 happened that they hoped that these guys in Midwestern flight schools that they were suspicious of weren't the perpetrators when they were. This could be a conspiracy as I said before but it could have very well have been a mis-communication between the agencies.

As for Pearl Harbour there is evidence that that may have been allowed to occur because as far as I know about it the FDR administration wanted to get involved in the war but no one was going to have it and an unprovoked strike which is what happened mustered up enough support to get the US involved in the war. Which is what the Japanese generals feared as they awoke the "Sleeping Giant"

Now I can't say I agree with the fact that either attack on the US was allowed to happen because I don't know, but I do know that both of these attacks were effective in getting the respective governments in power at the time basically free reign from the people to retaliate as they saw fit.



Engineers Rule The World!!!!!
User currently offlineFLY2HMO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 1968 times:

Oh for f's sake. Will the conspiracy theorists STFU already? We're coming up on 10 years since the event and they still have to come up with their BS.

All I care is that I saw the planes crash into the buildings, and then we unleashed hell (or tried to) on the terrorists (or the ones we think are the terrorists).

Never forget, but get over it already.  Yeah sure


User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 1948 times:



Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 16):
As for Pearl Harbour there is evidence that that may have been allowed to occur because as far as I know about it the FDR administration wanted to get involved in the war but no one was going to have it and an unprovoked strike which is what happened mustered up enough support to get the US involved in the war.

There has never been any credible evidence to this. Ever. Just conjecture on the part of some people wanting to stir up the pot. Most of the intel the U.S. had up til Dec 7 indicated a strike would be much closer to the home islands-Bornea, the Kra Peninsula, The Philippines. There is no proof anyone knew it would be Pearl Harbor.


User currently offlineGQfluffy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 19, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1919 times:



Quoting David L (Reply 7):
It was assumed that said 707 colliding with the towers would be far more likely to do so on approach after a full flight, i.e. with not much fuel on board.

And it's not like a 767 isn't bigger than a 707...not to mention the amount of fuel it can carry.  Yeah sure


User currently offlineTheRedBaron From Mexico, joined Mar 2005, 2329 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 1913 times:

There is a saying in english speaking countries that applies perfectly to this thread.

Let sleeping dogs Lie.

If they want to bury 9/11 and never ask questions and think a Guy living in caverns in Afganisthan brought the worlds superpower to their knees for a week, so be it.

Disclaimer> I dont believe in CT like Loose change but it cringes me to see that so many Americans really believe EVERYTHING they see on TV.



The best seat in a Plane is the Jumpseat.
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13253 posts, RR: 77
Reply 21, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 18 hours ago) and read 1803 times:

Not long ago, the BBC ran a series of programmes called The Conspiracy Files .
Each one examined the conspiracies around events, then calmly, rigorously examined the evidence and cut them to shreds.
The one on Loose Change was probably the best of the bunch.
We got to meet the film makers.

Ugh! A vile, rude, snotty kid was their public face, he was however given room to speak, which not surprisingly was more than enough to hang himself with.
When politely asked to explain some of the many huge gaping holes in the whole premise behind Loose Change , he spat insults and sulked.

There were some points which should be of note, since they are so elementary.
Such as the notion that the fate of UA93 was dubious because debris from the crash was found miles from the site, now such an impact would throw debris, but 6 miles? Of course the authorities were covering it up, weren't they?
The answer was simple, the filmmakers had measured the distances by using an Internet map which measured distance by the surrounding roads .
Including ones which snaked around the whole area.
The real distances, as the crow files, were just as reported by the authorities.

The above only illustrates a minor point, but I think it shows just how lazy and amateurish the makers of Loose Change are.

Mind you, I don't buy any of the JFK stuff either.
I note even Oliver Stone, who loudly claim that his movie JFK was basically accurate at the time, now refers to it as a re-imaging of the event.

Magic bullet? What magic bullet? Check out how the seats in the limo actually were, how JFK and Connolly were sitting neither directly behind each other, nor even on the same level.
One bullet could and did inflict those controversial wounds.
People just assume the limos seating was essentially the same as their station wagon.

9/11, JFK, 'Faked Moon landings', Diana, all fail what I call the Watergate Test .
How a US President, at the height of his powers, was brought down by a chain of events, starting with that tawdry break in, which very few people were party to.
As in a handful of individuals.
What about all the other 'conspircies' that would need a cast of thousands, or at least many hundreds?


User currently offlineRFields5421 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 7607 posts, RR: 32
Reply 22, posted (5 years 7 months 1 week 17 hours ago) and read 1767 times:



Quoting Longhornmaniac (Reply 11):
Too much cover-up needed, and the government is completely inept at it.

Exactly. The US government has proven to be extremely good at very few things over the past century or so. Keeping secrets when there might be a political advantage to blame the other party is not one of them.

Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 16):
As for Pearl Harbour there is evidence that that may have been allowed to occur because as far as I know about it the FDR administration wanted to get involved in the war

Intelligence is a very weird field. Being able to look at tens of thousands of documents and pick the right ones as important is near impossible. Once a person learns a bit about the details, they are more amazed at the ones which the intel folks get right than the clues they miss.

Most of the real 'smoking' gun messages about Pearl Harbor were not decoded until 1943 or 44. The US was intercepting close to 100 messages per day being forwarded to DC and a bit less in Pearl Harbor.

The folks in Pearl did not know that DC could read the diplomatic code, though DC knew the folks in Pearl could read the Navy codes.

Remember the messages were encoded - so the code had to be broken. Then the plain text was in Japanese, a language which the US had less than a dozen people trained to understand. Not just read and translate, but to understand.

To some extent the same issue exists with 9/11 and the various languages used by the terrists - not all were in Arabic.

Yes, the intel community was suspecting that something might be planned in the US. And they did know of the plan to blow up the airliners in the Far East.

They also knew that plan was almost unworkable because of the logistic coordination. What would have been the response in the US had they implemented Alert Level Red screenings and checks in August ?

You know as well as I do, the people and opposition party politicians would have blasted the administration for 'over reacting' - and do not think anyone on this forum would not have thought the measures were appropriate.

It takes an extremely good intelligence agent to find and realize what are the critical warnings and identify the target.

It only takes a moderately good historian, or a stupid politician to sift through documents later and say "This was the key. How could you ignore it?"


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
The Most Wacked-Out 9/11 Conspiracy I've Seen posted Sun Aug 19 2007 18:07:35 by Falcon84
I Think I Believe This 9/11 Conspiracy.....Uh Oh posted Fri May 25 2007 22:38:36 by NWA742
Charlie Sheen To Narrate 9/11 Conspiracy Film posted Sat Mar 24 2007 05:13:24 by JAL777
9/11 Conspiracy Film To Be Shown ToParliament..... posted Mon May 22 2006 04:25:27 by Alberchico
How To Confute 9/11 Conspiracy Theories posted Tue Dec 6 2005 16:23:40 by ManuCH
9/11 Conspiracy Theories posted Thu Nov 11 2004 01:42:44 by Ozzie
VS Showing Film Claiming 9/11 Was A Conspiracy posted Wed May 2 2007 19:26:43 by Windowplease
Was 9/11 A Part Of A Conspiracy? posted Sat Feb 4 2006 07:07:46 by Stirling
Vast Right Wing Conspiracy Venue Change posted Wed Oct 27 2004 04:36:02 by Techrep
Chrysler Unveils '11 Jeep Cherokee At NY Auto Show posted Sun Apr 26 2009 19:43:10 by StasisLAX