911 TV program

[Ruffy]

Originally Posted by arc123

A cynic would wonder why the need for Loose Change 2? And perhaps suggest it was to lose/amend some of the arguements that were 'debunked'

As far as I'm concerned adapting to new information is a good thing. It suggests an open mind. Should give the Loose Change producers even greater credibility amongst genuine seekers of the truth.

Although, as I have stated in a previous post, I don't really get carried away by the events of Sept 11 (I resist calling it 9/11 - it's 11/9 in the UK!) I may now go and seek out Loose Change (2) in the interests of personal balance. At the moment my view is that it was a terrorist act that had unknown, and very catastrophic, effects. Yes, I think the official explanation is not fully robust but I don't buy into the deliberate conspiracy just yet because I do know that forensic investigation isn't quite as cut and dried as the likes of CSI would have you believe. But who knows, it may change my mind.

I have to admit that yes, that was my initial reaction before I saw a lot of the news stories on it and they said it was a plane. I saw the news and thought " My god the pentagon has been hit by a missile" it was later revealed it was a plane. I'm still not sure, the initial footage showed a pretty small hole and thats what confused me.

[arc123]

but personally I think its the best feasible explanation I've seen anywhere.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100

An alternative view. Larry Silverstein decided to 'pull' it (the building?). Of course, he meant 'pull' the firefighters out of the building. But used terminology that is frequently used for a controlled demolition. A FEMA report (which incidentally is no longer available on their website) stated that there was no firefighting operations going on in WTC7 at the time.

Also - as I stated in my previous post. The BBC reported the building had collapsed 20 minutes before it had. This alone means that people had prior knowledge of it coming down.

[Ruffy]

Originally Posted by arc123

...
The BBC reported the building had collapsed 20 minutes before it had. This alone means that people had prior knowledge of it coming down.

Or it means the BBC made a mistake (is that so unbelievable?) Yes, it turned out to be a hell of a coincidence but the innocent view of the day is that things were happening very fast and were very chaotic at the time.

Trolling slightly, sorry. But just trying to illustrate the point that it is so difficult to remain open minded.

So he decided to pull the men out and then the whole thing fell down? Obviously the yanks then go on to claim he meant demolish it blah blah blah. But it is interesting that he pulled the men then it fell down.

[arc123]

Or it means the BBC made a mistake (is that so unbelievable?) Yes, it turned out to be a hell of a coincidence but the innocent view of the day is that things were happening very fast and were very chaotic at the time.

Trolling slightly, sorry. But just trying to illustrate the point that it is so difficult to remain open minded.

I see your point, and believe me I am open-minded about it. You will see that I have based points from the opposite prespective, questioning the validity of 'truth' movies such as Loose Change.

Although that is a hell of a mistake isn't it?? A mistake might be reporting a building as standing when it had actually collapsed. But reporting it collapsed when it was still standing?? with it in the background as the report went out?? And then claiming the loss of all footage of 9/11 for years (which they then claimed was found in the year 2000 files instead of 2001 - and it took them about 4 years to realise this?). Yeah, i'll go along with a mistake at a time of panic. i'm trolling of course.

[Spiderman]

Originally Posted by flymo

If anybody is bored enough, take a good long read through this part of the report that discusses the possible failure sequence of WTC7. Some out there will simply say "pah, government sponsored crap!" but personally I think its the best feasible explanation I've seen anywhere. No conspiracy theories, just plain old laws of physics on a complex structure only 350 ft away from one of the biggest building collapses that has ever occured.

http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_.../appendixl.pdf

I'll happily have a read mate. Like i say i;m not full of answers and will always keep an open mind to new stuff i may not have read before.

Originally Posted by arc123

Yes I have watched them. Quite some time ago. It's fine for a starting point, to see that there are alternative view points to the official story. But the likes of Dylan Avery/Alex Jones don't do the 'truth movement' any favours sometimes. And that;s the main problem - people like this are too easy to pass-off as nuts. Which is why I try and steer well clear of 'conspiracy theory'. Out of interest, what other 'truth' (conspiracy) vids have you viewed? And are they based soley around 9/11, or other issues?

Unfortunatley, reverse that and the same can be said about 'truthers' or whatever you may call them. See here for an example:

I watch and read a lot of things. Some of it can be dismissed as mindless racist rubbish within minutes if not seconds or even words as i;m sure you'll agree. However for those who have no idea of the "questions" of 9/11 i always suggest Loose Change as a good start point cos its easy to digest and well put together.

Originally Posted by Jackie_Black

So he decided to pull the men out and then the whole thing fell down? Obviously the yanks then go on to claim he meant demolish it blah blah blah. But it is interesting that he pulled the men then it fell down.

BTW..another interesting fact that the Govts dont shout too loudly baout is how at least 9 of those accused of having been on the planes and hijacked them turned out to be alive and well in their own countries and had never even been booked ot be on the planes, let alone taking over them and flying them into buildings.

Hmm, having watched the loose change vid, I am still not sure that the US Govt was responsible for the WTC 1 and 2. Number 7 seems like they found a good excuse to get rid of things they wanted to.

The docu goes on about other explosions in the north and sout buildings just before the collapse but as far as I could see, they didn't actually seem out of the ordinary for a building collapsing. I also think that even if there were explosions, then if the terrorists had the savvy to pull off learning to fly and hi-jacking planes before changing course and directing them towards NYC, then why is it so unfeasable for them to have planted bombs in the WTC buildings?

As for the Pentagon and Pittsburg, I do remember at the time thinking a bit strange. The theory that vid gives up about the Flight 93 having an emergency landing and evacuating all the passengers? Pants. How do you silence 200 odd people about such a major event? You don't.

[QUOTE BTW..another interesting fact that the Govts dont shout too loudly baout is how at least 9 of those accused of having been on the planes and hijacked them turned out to be alive and well in their own countries and had never even been booked ot be on the planes, let alone taking over them and flying them into buildings.[/QUOTE]

I found that one of the most amazing things about the movie. 9 people from the original list are alive and well and some have never even been into the US.

[Spiderman]

Originally Posted by Milky Bar Kid

Hmm, having watched the loose change vid, I am still not sure that the US Govt was responsible for the WTC 1 and 2.

Glad you found the time to watch it MBK. I dont think anyone thinks it was solely the US Govt....just goes a long way to help with the doubts of it being those who have been accused either. After all the dead cant speak up for themselves yet the Govts can speread all kinds of lies and disinformation to keep the sheeples happy/quiet/patriotic/confused etc.

Originally Posted by Jackie_Black

[QUOTE BTW..another interesting fact that the Govts dont shout too loudly baout is how at least 9 of those accused of having been on the planes and hijacked them turned out to be alive and well in their own countries and had never even been booked ot be on the planes, let alone taking over them and flying them into buildings.

I found that one of the most amazing things about the movie. 9 people from the original list are alive and well and some have never even been into the US.[/QUOTE]

Yeh, interesting eh? Yet how many people worldwide still believe the original "facts" given by the media on the day as being the whole truth.

Heres another one...the images we have been shown of Mohammed Atta and a pal going they airport security are not from the 11th. They are in fact from days earlier when they took another flight at another airport.