Jump to content

9/11 Film "loose Change"


Recommended Posts

If this film's been discussed at this forum already I apologize. I found this film online today talking about, for lack of a less eye-rolling term, a conspiracy our government played a role in staging the 9/11 attack. I know the subject has become taboo, almost sacred to many. After 5 years I watched this film and all the same old feelings stirred up again. But all those feelings quickly turned to curiousity and agreement to the questions the film asked. If you are strong enough of a person to handle uneasy questions about what really happened around 9/11, then this film might be for you. Please if you feel compelled, share the video with anyone you feel can help raise the same questions as the filmaker did to our government leaders. Through questions, our life styles, and our votes I truely feel we can change this world for the better.Loose Change Film

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fcking noob with 2 posts just joined the forum to share with us the "wisdom" of fcking loose change?!? I'd like to curb that guy.
It never fails to entertain me when people who obviously spend a lot of time on the internet- and in this forum in particular- rely on alternate spellings to bypass the swear filter, and use phrases like "noob" in order to ostracize somebody.Now I am thinking about ostriches.Wang
Link to post
Share on other sites
It never fails to entertain me when people who obviously spend a lot of time on the internet- and in this forum in particular- rely on alternate spellings to bypass the swear filter, and use phrases like "noob" in order to ostracize somebody.Now I am thinking about ostriches.Wang
glad something in this thread could be entertaining
Link to post
Share on other sites
If this film's been discussed at this forum already I apologize. I found this film online today talking about, for lack of a less eye-rolling term, a conspiracy our government played a role in staging the 9/11 attack. I know the subject has become taboo, almost sacred to many. After 5 years I watched this film and all the same old feelings stirred up again. But all those feelings quickly turned to curiousity and agreement to the questions the film asked. If you are strong enough of a person to handle uneasy questions about what really happened around 9/11, then this film might be for you. Please if you feel compelled, share the video with anyone you feel can help raise the same questions as the filmaker did to our government leaders. Through questions, our life styles, and our votes I truely feel we can change this world for the better.Loose Change Film
If you would take the ten seconds to utilize the search function, then you would find numerous threads related to this subject.Since you're new, and most likely not very bright, read over these links, and please post your response.Thanks,Everyone elseLoose Change Fact Sheethttp://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.htmlNational Institute of Standards and Technology's Fact Sheethttp://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htmPopular Mechanics Articlehttp://www.popularmechanics.com/technology...aw/1227842.html
Link to post
Share on other sites

POPULAR MECHANICS COOL! wasn't that hot montreal chick from 24 on that show a long time ago, she's hot.I don't feel like rading those links but if you gave brief outline of which facts are interesting I then might follow your links, or else I'm too scared to end up reading something by rancid kool aid guy again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
POPULAR MECHANICS COOL! wasn't that hot montreal chick from 24 on that show a long time ago, she's hot.I don't feel like rading those links but if you gave brief outline of which facts are interesting I then might follow your links, or else I'm too scared to end up reading something by rancid kool aid guy again.
Your signature is so big that I would have to scroll to the right to read the last few words in your post.That's a liiiiittle too much work for this guy.I had to scroll over to click reply, god damnit.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Your signature is so big that I would have to scroll to the right to read the last few words in your post.That's a liiiiittle too much work for this guy.I had to scroll over to click reply, god damnit.
Joey Jo Jo....bringing apathy to a new level since August 29th, 2006.........
Link to post
Share on other sites
Your signature is so big that I would have to scroll to the right to read the last few words in your post.That's a liiiiittle too much work for this guy.I had to scroll over to click reply, god damnit.
really???is it cuz your screen is smaller or resolution diffrent.its all centered on mine :(boo you booooedit: how's that
Link to post
Share on other sites
POPULAR MECHANICS COOL! wasn't that hot montreal chick from 24 on that show a long time ago, she's hot.I don't feel like rading those links but if you gave brief outline of which facts are interesting I then might follow your links, or else I'm too scared to end up reading something by rancid kool aid guy again.
Surely. The only reason that I quote from RK is because I feel the same way he does regarding immigration, and democrats.The Popular Mechanics article basically debunks most of the conspiracy theories. It's an easy read, not too long. I'll post some quotes.The collapse of both World Trade Center towers--and the smaller WTC 7 a few hours later--initially surprised even some experts. But subsequent studies have shown that the WTC's structural integrity was destroyed by intense fire as well as the severe damage inflicted by the planes. That explanation hasn't swayed conspiracy theorists, who contend that all three buildings were wired with explosives in advance and razed in a series of controlled demolitions.Widespread DamageCLAIM: The first hijacked plane crashed through the 94th to the 98th floors of the World Trade Center's 110-story North Tower; the second jet slammed into the 78th to the 84th floors of the 110-story South Tower. The impact and ensuing fires disrupted elevator service in both buildings. Plus, the lobbies of both buildings were visibly damaged before the towers collapsed. "There is NO WAY the impact of the jet caused such widespread damage 80 stories below," claims a posting on the San Diego Independent Media Center Web site (sandiego.indymedia.org). "It is OBVIOUS and irrefutable that OTHER EXPLOSIVES (... such as concussion bombs) HAD ALREADY BEEN DETONATED in the lower levels of tower one at the same time as the plane crash."FACT: Following up on a May 2002 preliminary report by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), a major study will be released in spring 2005 by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a branch of the U.S. Department of Commerce. NIST shared its initial findings with PM and made its lead researcher available to our team of reporters.The NIST investigation revealed that plane debris sliced through the utility shafts at the North Tower's core, creating a conduit for burning jet fuel--and fiery destruction throughout the building. "It's very hard to document where the fuel went," says Forman Williams, a NIST adviser and a combustion expert, "but if it's atomized and combustible and gets to an ignition source, it'll go off."Burning fuel traveling down the elevator shafts would have disrupted the elevator systems and caused extensive damage to the lobbies. NIST heard first-person testimony that "some elevators slammed right down" to the ground floor. "The doors cracked open on the lobby floor and flames came out and people died," says James Quintiere, an engineering professor at the University of Maryland and a NIST adviser. A similar observation was made in the French documentary "9/11," by Jules and Gedeon Naudet. As Jules Naudet entered the North Tower lobby, minutes after the first aircraft struck, he saw victims on fire, a scene he found too horrific to film."Melted" SteelCLAIM: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks.""Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F."The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down." As for the other links, one goes through Loose Change, step by step, addressing the inconsistencies.The other link, NIST's fact sheet, addresses some questions that PM didn't specifically address. Like I said, easy reads, not too long.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I still believe there's more to 911 than the media was allowed to portray.But it's for a reason: most of U.S. citizens are incredibly stupid, and would go nuts if they found out the truth..02.I still believe it wasn't a plane that hit the pentagon either... show me some indisputable evidence that it was, please. Oh wait, the gov hasn't released those videos. How convenient. (this post's intent is not to stir up YET ANOTHER debate... just seems like this idea is very one sided... and someone has to represent the dissenting opinion)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I still believe there's more to 911 than the media was allowed to portray.But it's for a reason: most of U.S. citizens are incredibly stupid, and would go nuts if they found out the truth..02.I still believe it wasn't a plane that hit the pentagon either... show me some indisputable evidence that it was, please. Oh wait, the gov hasn't released those videos. How convenient. (this post's intent is not to stir up YET ANOTHER debate... just seems like this idea is very one sided... and someone has to represent the dissenting opinion)
I imagined your avatar speaking this post to the local news camera... and then it made sense.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...