Loose Change - Part IV

[T.A.M.]

Ive got it....the 8/10 plot was actually created by CTers to throw the Debunkers of their 9/11 trail.

 

[60hzxtl]

Ive got it....the 8/10 plot was actually created by CTers to throw the Debunkers of their 9/11 trail.

No - it was created to make Dylan and Company have to make another version of the corrected and annotated, and recently updated, new and improved, like never before, extra strength, concentrated, version of Loose Change Airtight, the Final Cut until the next one.



I wonder is any of those arrested in this conspiracy are any of the still alive hijackers from 9/11?

Just asking questions. . .

 

[T.A.M.]

no, but you know what would be cool...someone should find people with the same names as the arrested, and then send it to the media...

"8/10 Terrorists not behind bars, but sipping on pena coladas"

 

[60hzxtl]

no, but you know what would be cool...someone should find people with the same names as the arrested, and then send it to the media...

"8/10 Terrorists not behind bars, but sipping on pena coladas"

And the real bad guys can count on Dylan to be their character witness.

 

[Johnny Pixels]

Gravy
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 63

Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:18 am Post subject:
Do me next! Do me next!

------------------------------

Good luck with that, Gravy.

YAY! IronSnot! Welcome to the world of evidence. You'll love it.

Seriously though, welcome to the forums!

 

[Dog Town]

Whats going on at Unh uuuuhh central over this attempted bombing?

 

[rikzilla]

Gravy
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 63

Posted: Thu Aug 10, 2006 3:18 am Post subject:
Do me next! Do me next!

------------------------------

Good luck with that, Gravy.

IS!!
good to see you!

guys...this is IronSnot the CTer. He wins hand's down for most reasonable fellow on the Brit Truth board.

welcome! really! while you're here look around. JREF is a great deal more than just a debunk site for CT's.

Regards...damned glad to see you.
-z

 

[IronSnot]

Thanks Johnny, Rik.

It can be a bit nutty over there. But it's lightyears ahead of Loose Change.

Anyway late here, catch up another time.

 

[Joytown]

Activism doesn't have to be a full-time job. A little can go a long way. Well done.

Thanks! I was moderately amazed myself.

<sarcasm> Actually I gave up my fiance', my job, and my non-skeptic friends so that I could pursue 9/11 myths across the Internet </sarcasm>

-Joytown

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Thanks! I was moderately amazed myself.

<sarcasm> Actually I gave up my fiance', my job, and my non-skeptic friends so that I could pursue 9/11 myths across the Internet </sarcasm>

-Joytown

It would help if NPR would get the @#$%ing podcast/mp3/realaudio/whatever posted so I could listen to it. I had to walk in to my office before I could catch it yesterday morning.

 

[chipmunk stew]

It would help if NPR would get the @#$%ing podcast/mp3/realaudio/whatever posted so I could listen to it. I had to walk in to my office before I could catch it yesterday morning.

It should be there, AW. You went here, right?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5629332
There's a "Listen" button there. Works for me....

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

It should be there, AW. You went here, right?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5629332
There's a "Listen" button there. Works for me....

Page Not Found

We're sorry, the page you requested is unavailable.

Please visit the NPR Help Center to report this error or use the links or search box below to find the correct page.

* All Programs A-Z
* NPR Help Center
* About NPR
* Contact NPR

Lemme check, maybe I am be overzealous with my cookie-blocking.

ETA: Yeah, I was blocking scripts on npr.org

 

[negativ]

Cter;
It is the plastic bag makers doing this!!!! Have you seen all the plastic bags they're giving out at the airports? Bet Marvin was running the company!

Nitey Nite!

And what is plastic? A petrolium product.

Bingo.

All roads lead to Haliburton.

This is a good year for The Truth<tm>.

 

[Dog Town]

Just want to confirm this in case anyone asks..

The tapes of Flight 77. Does the owners of those tapes need to authorize release or is the FBI holding them?

Oye Vay..Says...................... yes! FBI holds, people must release once they get them! Only owner can release.See Zapruder!(sp)
Your next on The Cters Feud!

 

[Johnny Pixels]

I was just looking at this thread over at LC:

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2275

Are they still claiming that black smoke comes from oxygen starved fires? Because all these plane crashes appear to be out in the open. Don't they know how to connect dots?

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I was just looking at this thread over at LC:

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=2275

Are they still claiming that black smoke comes from oxygen starved fires? Because all these plane crashes appear to be out in the open. Don't they know how to connect dots?

So, Rox is still ignoring my pic I posted showing the raging tire fire with black smoke (relevant since both tires and many office products are petroleum distallates(sp?))

 

[JohnM307]

Well, if someone asked me if I thought that it was possible for a pilot like me to spiral down in high speed from 7000 feet, return to level flight a few meters above the ground and hit a ground target, I would also have to say I highly doubt that.

This is one reason I view the Pentagon attack as the self-injury to make the criminal look like a victim. I think we have three strikes in a "one strike and you're out" situation:

1: The alleged hijackers attempted the attack in this mode (with a high risk of mission failure if they hit the ground instead) instead of diving into the building (possibly at an angle, 30 degrees perhaps) -- the straightforward attack.

2: They succeeded, despite being poor pilots, without even touching the ground.

3: They hit the Pentagon from the horizontal, right where it would do by far the least damage -- a spot under construction, nearly empty.

I watched one of the videos at the Screw Loose Change video site, (I was not allowed to mention the URL -- the system responded with that error -- here's my attempt to sneak it by: www DOT lolloosechange DOT co DOT nr), the computer animation of the AA 77 hitting the Pentagon. One question they didn't consider is whether a real terrorist would attack this way.

The video had other problems as well. For example, where they fit the CGI AA 77 with the actual security video capture of the silhouetted plane behind the security structure, the back of the rudder shifts position -- it's just a tiny flicker, but the real rudder looks steeper than the AA 77 CGI.

 

[tacodaemon]

Does anyone know the website of the nutball who does the super-enlargment of blemishes in WTC photos to prove there are alien space ships with reptilian pilots?

My flatmate simply refuses to believe anyone proposes such an explanation. She thinks I made it up.

Sorry for the late response, but that's one of the many pages of stark raving insanity on http://www.wiolawapress.com you're referring to. The whole page is crazy stuff with photoshop filters like that; that's her whole shtick. Here's two WTC-specific pages:

http://www.wiolawapress.com/signature.htm
http://www.wiolawapress.com/wtc.htm

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

More Firmage critiqueing. Work is busy today, only got through two points:

5 Similarity between PNAC agenda and 9/11 aftermath
The degree of forethought that may have gone into the events of 9/11 is suggested by the similarity of its aftermath to the geopolitical agenda set forth by the neoconservative think tank, Project for a New
American Century, in its 2000 manifesto: “Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategies, Forces and Resources for a New Century”. This document was written for George W. Bush’s team before the 2000 Presidential election. It was commissioned by future Vice President Cheney, future Defense Secretary
Rumsfeld, future Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Florida Governor Jeb Bush (Bush’s brother), and future Vice President Cheney’s Chief of Staff Lewis Libby.
Journal of 9/11 Studies 23 August 2006/Volume 2
The explicit statements concerning the utility of a “new Pearl Harbor” and the central roles played by Afghanistan and Iraq in configuring a new world order in which American supremacy is unchallengeable, are strikingly prescient of what was fortuitously made feasible by 9/11. Few would argue that we would be in Afghanistan and Iraq today had the attacks of 9/11 never occurred.
It is therefore reasonable to be suspicious of the spectacularly convenient conformance between the PNAC manifesto, the rise to power of those who wrote the document and 9/11’s absolutely essential role in facilitating its implementation.

The section to which Firmage is referring says, “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.” In context, it is seen that this is an observation of how change will occur, not a clarion call for how to achieve a desired change. Again, we also see the misuse of his chart as Firmage marks this point as “Suspicious” under the ‘hijackers’ column. This point does not counter any part of the government’s reports on the attacks.
See:
http://cooperativeresearch.org/sear...&entities=on&articles=on&topics=on&timelines=
on&projects=on&titles=on&descriptions=on&dosearch=on&search=Go
Diana Ralph’s Islamaphobia and the “War on Terror”, in Paul Zarembka, editor, The Hidden History of 9-11-2001, Amsterdam:
Elsevier, 2006, Research in Political Economy, Vol.23: 261 - 300.

6 Bill Clinton's failure to neutralize bin Laden
Some commentators have assigned much of the blame for 9/11 on the Clinton administration, for failing
to deal with the bin Laden threat more effectively. It is empirically true that Clinton’s team did not
neutralize bin Laden. As references demonstrate, the reasons for that failure remain unclear, thus this
failure can reasonably be assessed as compatible with any of the three theories proposed.
As with point 2, Firmage marks this as “Sensible” for the idea that the government is responsible. The only way he can make this claim is if he is also implicating former President Clinton into his conspiracy. Only if former President Clinton was involved, and took actions in such a way as to fail to neutralize bin Laden (thus setting up President Bush for using bin Laden as a scapegoat), could this be considered “Sensib[ly]” supporting the “government did it” hypothesis.
See:
http://cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?entity=clinton_administration

 

[gumboot]

1: The alleged hijackers attempted the attack in this mode (with a high risk of mission failure if they hit the ground instead) instead of diving into the building (possibly at an angle, 30 degrees perhaps) -- the straightforward attack.

It is postulated that the hijackers overflew the target - having underestimated the speed of the aircraft.

2: They succeeded, despite being poor pilots, without even touching the ground.

There is no evidence they were "poor" pilots, and flying an airliner is incredibly simple. You also forget their objective WAS to touch the ground.

I don't see how anyone can see great amazement in someone CRASHING an airliner.

Consider this...

The Mitsubishi A6M Zero is significantly harder to fly than a modern airliner, yet throughout the latter days of World War 2 the Japanese managed to train hundreds of pilots in a very short space of time.

These Kamakaze pilots, if they were not shot down, were usually successful in hitting their targets - the largest ships; Essex class Carriers and Iowa class Battleships, are both significantly smaller than the Pentagon.

3: They hit the Pentagon from the horizontal, right where it would do by far the least damage -- a spot under construction, nearly empty.

This is a myth. The renovations to the Naval Annex were complete. It was fully staffed at the time it was hit. The majority of those killed were military personnel.

The reason, of course, that this particular section had been renovated was it was the most exposed, and therefore the most likely to be attacked.

One question they didn't consider is whether a real terrorist would attack this way.

Why would they NOT attack that way? Are you intimately familiar with the methodology by which terrorists usually ram hijacked airliners into buildings?

where they fit the CGI AA 77 with the actual security video capture of the silhouetted plane behind the security structure, the back of the rudder shifts position -- it's just a tiny flicker, but the real rudder looks steeper than the AA 77 CGI.

At that resolution, and that frame rate, variations of this degree are irrelevant. I think the pertinent point is the scale of approximate aircraft size is correct (i.e. it's not a cruise missile).

-Andrew