haha well i told you everything i knew about planes when i said 'bi-plane' just a laymans interpretation of what i see.
yeah man a fuckin boing will practicly fly itself. Plus wet lawn+giant fucking concesion force in a hole=vacume. Or maybe it was astroturf. has anyone considered that?
a 757 is a jumbo jet, if that was to hit the pentagon it would have torn it apart, unlike the small hole that was left, with no wing debris... i think it was a missle, but who knows... and in loose change they say that flight 93 landed at cleaveland airport... and that the crash site in PA has no human remains, they say" it looks like someone dug a trench and threw a bunch of garbage in it"
A 757 definitly did NOT hit the pentagon. I belive it was a tomahawk cruise missile. Watch the film Loose Change 2. Its 1hr and 30+ min. of straight facts. There is too many things that dont add up. Over goverment is lying t o us bottom line.
Sometimes, I don't even think it really matters if it was our own gov't or terrorists. The end results the same: A bunch of people died and we've paved a path toward retracting civil liberties. Of course, if it was the gov't that's rediculously scary, but here's why I don't think it is: No one has come forward with proof. As in, it took a lot of poeple to orchestrate something like this if it was a gov't op and NO ONE has let a single thing slip, it was somehow executed perfectly, and that I have a hard time believing. I mean look what our gov't gets caught doing all the time? Way smaller things than this. Maybe they're decoys, I dunno, but I just don't find it plausable that the gov't could pull this kind of hoax. I mean, what about the people who were around DC? Don't jets make really loud noises? Wouldn't people be able to tell the difference between a giant low flying plane and a much smaller missle? I haven't seen any of the films on the topic so maybe these questions have been answered, I'm just thinking critically here. //edit I find it plausable that 93 would be shot down, after all, 3 other jets had or were going to crash, and I recall a panic during the time when there were still a lot of planes in the air and people didn't know what was going to get hit next. So yeah, I can see them taking down a plane to save a building full of people (assuming they knew it was hijacked and not just random). Although I don't understand the whole "no bodies" thing, do missles disintigrate planes? I mean I know they blow them up but I though there was still something that remains, even if it's blown across the sky.
No one should talk in this thread unless you've seen this video in it's entirety otherwise it'll just end up being one big pissing contest: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8260059923762628848&q=loose+change&pl=true
In that film Loose Change 2 a woman saw what happened. Then when she was in the hospital, men in black suits came in with money. Hush money. They kept insisting that a plane hit the Pentagon. She said no it didnt. And they kept insisting. Also, FBI showed up to the gas station across the street and seized the security tape. Told the people working not to say anything. Last, there were also cameras on the Hotel across the street too along with the highway cameras. None have been released except for five frames of one which shows no plane. Just an explosion.
http://www.flight93crash.com/ A lot of facts there. It seems that it's very likely that it was shot down, between the air traffic controllers seeing th F16s and Bush's order to shoot down any rogue jets headed for DC. My only hope is that it's the only thing they lied about, and that they only did it because the last thing we needed at that time was to hear that our Gov't had to shoot down a commercial jet. It doesn't make it right though.
Really? Very strange. I can understand siezing them initially just because that's how the gov't rolls with it's investigations, but it seems weird that they'd never release them (do they normally release evidence in crimes like this?). Also, I sort of don't believe the hush money story. I mean no offense, but it's obsurd to be to believe that the fate of our nation (in covering this massive thing up) would hang in the balance of some random woman being paid off. No doubt in my mind they would have just killed her because it's asinine to think that they'd let something like this fly, when a quick needle in the arm would have silenced her forever.
In that film Loose Change 2 a woman saw what happened. Then when she was in the hospital, men in black suits came in with money. Hush money. They kept insisting that a plane hit the Pentagon. She said no it didnt. And they kept insisting. Also, FBI showed up to the gas station across the street and seized the security tape. Told the people working not to say anything. Last, there were also cameras on the Hotel across the street too along with the highway cameras. None have been released except for five frames of one which shows no plane. Just an explosion. I wondered the same thing. So last week we were on the subject of the moon in Physics class. My teacher said that there is a mirror on the moon and if you shine a laser on it, it will reflect back to Earth. So I asked, do you think we really landed on the moon. He said yes, and you can see the vehicles they used becasue they left them on there.
yea after watching the whole video it really opened my mind to what really happened on 9/11. i just think it was a hoax to get people to vote for bush again or sumthing..
I could go with the sticking a needle in the arm and that hushes it up. But, maybe they had done this with more than just her. She might have been the only one to talk about it. I mean if men in suits kept insisting something happened when it didnt, it would bug me out. Especially if they give you money. Something has to be up. So they might not have come forward becuse they were scared. Speaking of releasing evidence though, on flight 93 they had those black boxes recovered. They still have only to release one of the flight attendents 20 min conversation. Betty Ong I think her name was. Thats it. Then it took them forever to let the families of the people hear the tape. These are the only people that got to hear it. They werent allowed to take any notes or talk about it afterwards either. Not to mention that the last 5 min of the tape were unaccounted for. Somethings up with that. I love talking about this stuff. Its so interesting. I could probably type a 5 page paper about it.
Yeah, I read about the black boxes, and how they aren't releasing the one with all the flight data, like altitude, speed, orientation, etc etc, which would prove one way or another what actually happened, but since they're not releasing it (and have no reason to withhold it, since they release every other airline crash box info) it seems to indicate foul play. //edit Also, if the gov't did do this, then they already killed thousands of people. Why would they care if they have to kill a few more? Her story doesn't add up.
O. You know what pissed me off too is that they have that movie coming out about it. Its total bs. I mean if they dont even know what happend.(although they say they do)I mean I know its a tribute to the people that are gone that were on the plane, but give me a break.
I'm still in the middle of the video, I'll edit this to give you my reaction. One quick observation: 4 minutes and 20 seconds into the movie (4:20), they are discussing specific dates, and he says "april 2000" and the date 4/-/2000 appears. No specific day. Haha a conspiracy maybe? most likley not, just a ridiculiously convient coincidence MORE! the man they talk with on the phone at the very begining is Hunter S. Thompson, the notorious creator of Gonzo journalism and a well-known drug enthusiast... well was... RIP.
Okay. I just watched Loose Change. and get ready for my 2 cents (HAHA PUN!). I will pay no attention to any responses to this. This is soley my opinion. Attack it if you want, but it's not going anywhere. This video has certainly changed my perspective on some of the 'evidence'. First off, consider the fact that much of this is witness accounts and the human memory is extremley unreliable and strongly influenced by bias and preconceptions. Secondly, this is entirley an independant production. There is absolutley no fact-checking or footnotes provided. In the same thought, consider Stephen Glass; he wrotes dozens of articles that were fact-checked by numerous professionals, and printed in a national and highly reputable magazine and thought to be fact. Only upon his confession was most of these story found to be partially and entirley fabricated. That just goes to show how unrealiable information can be in media and how easily we take what is *represented* as fact, as actual fact. Thirldy, much of this is based on assumptions and not on any scientific or academic reference; i.e. the 'explosions' on the collapsing towers, the wreckage at the site of the pentagon, and the ""scientific"" interpretation of the 'cordite' explosions; this is not actual science, this is grade school chemistry book level stuff that this guy thinks he knows what he is talking about, etc. Again, this is my common sense suspension of belief. Nothing is ever absolute to me, i will always question things. I am *not* saying this is un-true or fabricated. This brought up several points that people were talking about earlier, and reinforced several theories. I really liked this because i actually got to see alot of 9/11 footage i had not previously seen. Which is just kind of a cool little sidenote. Not to mention how well put together this video was, absolutley magnificent, using dozens of well-executed tools which can be seen presented to convey 'truth' within mass media. for 90% of this film, the 'evidence' is used as tool for wild speculation, it provides no solid theories, just allowing the audiences mind to jump to conclusions and make assumptions based on only half-facts. This leads into the 'required viewing' nature of this film. This film represents a polar opposite of the state-run mass media that us North Americans are so custom to. I think everybody with any kind of opinion should watch this out of a nessecity of an attempt to adequatley counter-act all the state-run brainwashing media tools that we see day in and day out. This movies proves absolutley nothing definitvley. It does raise some very very very intruiging ideas, concepts and arguments. I think i might very well do some more reading and research in this, but i will reach the same conclusion i did, the very first time these 9/11 conspiracy ideas began to surface: We won't likely know the entire truth of 9/11 in our lifetimes. It is obvious that the American Government is keeping *something* from the citizens of the US. I'm not suggesting a cover-up, but there are too many unasnwered questions and too many coincidences. This is the same for videos like Loose Change; they are just the polar opposite of what the government tries to force down your throat and can be trust no more. I think the narrator said it best that we need to be asking questions of what we percieve. And as for the on-going debate within this thread; I hate to say it, but the last people that will come up with any kind of plausible explanation for 9/11 is a bunch of potheads on an online drug forum. Watch and judge for yourself.
I'm honestly not interested enough in these conspiracy theories to read them past the first flaw or two I see in their theory. #1 thing I thought of right away reading that thing about Flight 93: There's no date or time on a single picture or video. They could have been taken weeks after the crash, except for one of them: the one with the smoke. #2 thing I noticed: They keep saying "there's no burning jet fuel, there's no burning jet fuel" blah blah blah. There's a picture with a shitload of smoke rising from the ground, though, and it doesn't look like it's from a fog machine to me. Maybe I'm the only one that knows this, but jet fuel is relatively combustible. It burns quickly. Just because you show a bunch of pictures of a place with no fire doesn't mean that there was never a fire there.
I think they meant that there was a fire initially, but the jet feul burned off quickly. It would not have lasted as long as they claim it did.