ZEITGEIST, The Movie

[Arus808]

warlex, there's a sticky section on this forum that you should check out first,; formoest the Gravy website thread is a good place to get hte information from

also, read hte NIST report and the 911 commission report. I know that is asking alot, but what you are asking here, are the same questions that have asked before. by reading the links in the threads in the stick section and the reports, you'll have a better understanding of what happened.

please take this time to do so. its quite alot of reading; come back if you have specific questions.

 

[Gravy]

Thank you for showing some interest in my inquiries. I looked through the links you provided. I wasnt aware that so much damage was done to building 7. However I still dont think it was enough to bring the building down.

According to NIST's working hypothesis, the building was brought down by fire affecting crucial columns and transfer trusses on the lower floors, near the center of the building. No doubt the damage didn't help, but it is not considered to be the primary cause of collapse.

First of all I dont believe fire can melt steal.

Fire can of course melt steel, but no one is saying that's what happened here. Please take the time to familiarize yourself with what the engineering explanations are, before you attempt to critique them.

Two, even though there was a large chunk missing in the South part of the tower I dont think that would have been sufficient enough to bring it down. I use to build erector sets when I was a kid and I could make some pretty weird **** stand without it falling and this buidling was very very well reinforced.

Covered above.

Even if the hole in the South end did make the tower fall, why didnt it collapse at an angle? If you knock the side of something out it usually falls in that direction. The building came down completely straight. Lets be honest, there isnt any real evidence either way.

You are wrong. The collapse is believed to have initiated in the area circled in red below. I'm sure you've seen videos of the east mechanical penthouse, above that area, collapsing about 8-9 seconds before the rest of the building visibly collapses. Remember, massive collapses are happening internally at that time.

Since the collapse initiated in center of the building, how should it have fallen? In your analysis you must address how this building was constructed and damaged. It was a unique building and it suffered unique damage and fires.

But just by looking at it, the FEMA and 9/11 commision explanations just dont make sense.

You have to read and study engineering reports, not just look at them. Since you aren't aware of NIST's study, you have some reading to do. And had you read the 9/11 Commission report, you would know that it does not address engineering matters and does not give an "explanation" for building 7's collapse. NIST's interim report is linked in my document above. Their final report on building 7 will surely contain much more information than the public has seen so far.

 

[Slayhamlet]

Also, this is just one part of the whole 9/11 conspiracy theory. What about no evidence of a plane at the Pentagon and in Penn.? What about NORAD flying 2 practice missions that involved the World Trade Center on the day of 9/11? There is so much conflicting stuff that happened that day. And then you look at the fall out of it all...illegal war in Iraq, erosion of our civil liberties, the news channels putting fear into us, talks of going into Iran, RIFC chips, the North American Union. It just doest all add up.

There is ample evidence, both physical and documentary, of planes having crashed into the Pentagon and the empty field in Shanksville, PA on 9/11. There were no "practice missions" carried out by NORAD involving the WTC, on 9/11 or at any other time. The "fall out" of the attacks is not pertinent to the question of whether there was an "inside job".

There is not going to be an invasion of Iran anytime in the near future, unless Iran strikes us or one of our allies first (which it won't). A tactical strike against Iranian nuclear assets is a bit more likely, but I'd bet against it. The North American Union is nothing but a conspiracist delusion/wet dream. I have no idea what RIFC chips are, but I'm guessing they're the same.

Hopefully I have allayed your fears.

 

[Gravy]

Also, this is just one part of the whole 9/11 conspiracy theory. What about no evidence of a plane at the Pentagon and in Penn.?

What the hell are you talking about?

Flight 77 / Pentagon Summary of Evidence, many links

Flight 93 / Shanksville Summary of Evidence, many links

What about NORAD flying 2 practice missions that involved the World Trade Center on the day of 9/11?

NORAD did no such thing. You have swallowed lies without thinking.

NORAD, FAA, NTSB, Aircraft capabilities, Piloting issues, War games
​

There is so much conflicting stuff that happened that day.

No, there isn't. As I said, this is good place to get informed. In the past few hours you've been given enough reading material for several months of full-time study. Please come back when you've made a serious effort to digest at least the basics. And if you spew "no-plane" nonsense again, you will be ignored by intelligent people.

RIFC chips

At least try to get your acronyms right. And do not get your information from Alex Jones. In the year that I've been aware of him, he hasn't gotten a single thing right.

This is a great place to learn to think critically and to recognize when you are being lied to. But you must want to do that and be willing to work at it.

 

[Shrinker]

I sure have heard a lot of differing opinions. It seems at least the government should do another investigation. Why wont they?

There aren't that many differing opinions. There are a set of people who are mostly happy with the government's investigation, and there are a set who refuse to believe a single word of it because they are suspicious of the government.

The first group don't need a new investigation, and the second, wouldn't believe a word of it anyway.

The only people the second group will listen to are themselves, but they seem happy spending $22 million dollars making and hyping a movie, rather than spending it on an investigation.

Did you get that? Not a single truther complained about spending $22 million making and publicising Loose Change:Final Cut. Given the choice, the Truth movement will spend all their resources telling other people what to believe, rather than risk discovering a truth which conflicts with their own beliefs.

And welcome to the forum.

 

[Gravy]

Shrinker, Korey Rowe's fantasies aside, Loose Change's budget would be in the thousands, not millions. Do you really think those morons are capable of raising millions of dollars? They just had to hit their fans up for more money.

 

[Shrinker]

Shrinker, Korey Rowe's fantasies aside, Loose Change's budget would be in the thousands, not millions. Do you really think those morons are capable of raising millions of dollars? They just had to hit their fans up for more money.

It's okay Gravy, it's perfectly obvious the $22M never existed, but the point still stands. The fans thought it existed, and saw no problem in spending it this way.

 

[T.A.M.]

Were we not warned of arrivals on their best behaviour to the forum in the next few days...

TAM

 

[Gravy]

It's okay Gravy, it's perfectly obvious the $22M never existed, but the point still stands. The fans thought it existed, and saw no problem in spending it this way.

Yes, it's a very good point. There's far more eager anticipation over this video than there is expectation that any actual investigating will be accomplished. Bermas recently said that the only person in the government he thinks could be held accountable for 9/11 is Dick Cheney – and that's based entirely on the Mineta nonsense! That's the sum total of all their "investigating."

Jimmy Walter is another good example. He did spend millions (so he says) calling for a new investigation, all of which could have gone towards a new investigation.

 

[sts60]

warlexz53: What about no evidence of a plane at the Pentagon and in Penn.?

Aircraft remains, as well as the remains of passengers, were recovered at both sites. I ride with firefighters who were at the Pentagon that day and recovered both types of evidence.

And then you look at the fall out of it all...illegal war in Iraq, erosion of our civil liberties, the news channels putting fear into us, talks of going into Iran, RIFC chips, the North American Union.

The first few items are legitimate concerns and topics for debate even given the "mainstream" accounts of the 9/11/2001 attacks . RFID chips have been around for a while and are used in inventory control and freight tracking, and so has hysterical and unfounded talk of implanting them in the population at large, but that means nothing. As for "North American Union", I don't know anything about that.

It just doest all add up.

I agree that it doesn't add up to claims that the government somehow staged the crashes.

 

[sts60]

The other thing I meant to say was: as long as you're looking at the "fallout", be sure to look at all of it: no pipeline across Afghanistan. Oil production from Iraq very low. Extraordinarily low approval ratings for the Administration, daily ridicule and scorn for the architects of post-9/11 policy, loss of control of both chambers by the Administration's party. Oh, and public knowledge that no active WMD program existed in Iraq, and that there was basically no link between Iraq and global terrorism. Anyone wishing to claim that the gov't could stage 9/11 and fool people into thinking an airliner crashed into the Pentagon in broad daylight needs to explain why they couldn't plant a few shiny cannisters of VX or induce some guys to be the pre-invasion al-Qaeda in Iraq, as opposed to the ones that moved or joined there after the invasion.

 

[dudalb]

The other thing I meant to say was: as long as you're looking at the "fallout", be sure to look at all of it: no pipeline across Afghanistan. Oil production from Iraq very low. Extraordinarily low approval ratings for the Administration, daily ridicule and scorn for the architects of post-9/11 policy, loss of control of both chambers by the Administration's party. Oh, and public knowledge that no active WMD program existed in Iraq, and that there was basically no link between Iraq and global terrorism. Anyone wishing to claim that the gov't could stage 9/11 and fool people into thinking an airliner crashed into the Pentagon in broad daylight needs to explain why they couldn't plant a few shiny cannisters of VX or induce some guys to be the pre-invasion al-Qaeda in Iraq, as opposed to the ones that moved or joined there after the invasion.

Excellent Point. Sneaking in a few Chemical or Biological weapons..or even a Nuke,for Heaven's sake..into Iraq during Iraqi Freedom would have been easy. The Bush Adminsitration is incapable of doing that,but capable of pulling off a conspiracy mind boggling in the complexity required.
Yeah,Right.

 

[SpaceMonkeyZero]

If this is considered a personal attack I apologize immensely.

Reading the past page and a half was like watching a guy armed with a knife try to rob a gun store full of off duty police officers.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Maybe they spent the money on film.

 

[Corsair 115]

...the North American Union...

This so-called North American Union is about nothing more than harmonizing certain rules and regulations between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. There are entirely valid reasons for wanting to do so given the amount of cross-border trade that the U.S. does with its northern and southern neighbours. Take a look at the dollar value of the goods the U.S. exports and imports from Canada and Mexico each year - it's substantial. Indeed, the U.S. does considerably more total trade with Canada each year than it does China.

Besides, the U.S. is by far the most powerful country economically of the three, so if anything it's Canada and Mexico which will be adapting their rules and regulations to American ones than it is the U.S. would be adopting its rules and regulations to Canadian or Mexican ones.

 

[beachnut]

The tax thing is a whole other argument that should probably be talked about in another thread. If you want to make a thread about it I will participate.

9/11 truth and this movie are total BS. Your dad should pay his taxes, they can take your assets when you do not pay your taxes. Like tax fraud, 9/11 truth is fraud.

 

[Viper Daimao]

yes, the tax thing is easier to debunk too. because well, I can just show you the law, even show you the vote totals.

 

[Drudgewire]

I'll give warlex his due. Despite some clear personal leanings, I get more of a feeling he's here looking for answers than I do from the bulk of twoofers who just come here to be adversarial... or have become so deluded (due to the only dissent to this nonsense they've seen is on pro-"truth" forums where comments containing evil denier tactics like as "logic" and "evidence" result in being shouted down and bannings) they've grown confident they can debunk any debunking. Really, it's sort of like reading a book on basketball and talking about it in sports forums and then thinking you can take Shaq in a game of one-on-one.

Keep digging dude. As a reformed CT nut (I'm not saying you are, only that I was), I can tell you there's nothing wrong with being suspicious of "official accounts" of anything. However there's a monstrous difference between that, and being so sure a conspiracy has taken place that every bit of scientific evidence to the contrary becomes part of said conspiracy.

What makes 9/11 theories so much more interesting than the rest of them is it was the first major earth-changing event to happen in an age where the majority of Americans had the Internet. It's not that it has any more legs than others before them that we all know are ridiculous, it simply has a medium that allows it to fester and infect more people than previous ones.

We're called "close-minded" by truthers for refusing to accept the possibility. I urge you to not take any side going in, and keep a truly open mind as you research. If you go in wanting to find a conspiracy, you'll find one every time. If you go in looking for proof of one, that's when you'll see which side relies on tangible evidence and which side pulls evidence out of their posteriors.

 

[warlexz53]

I'll give warlex his due. Despite some clear personal leanings, I get more of a feeling he's here looking for answers than I do from the bulk of twoofers who just come here to be adversarial... or have become so deluded (due to the only dissent to this nonsense they've seen is on pro-"truth" forums where comments containing evil denier tactics like as "logic" and "evidence" result in being shouted down and bannings) they've grown confident they can debunk any debunking. Really, it's sort of like reading a book on basketball and talking about it in sports forums and then thinking you can take Shaq in a game of one-on-one.

Keep digging dude. As a reformed CT nut (I'm not saying you are, only that I was), I can tell you there's nothing wrong with being suspicious of "official accounts" of anything. However there's a monstrous difference between that, and being so sure a conspiracy has taken place that every bit of scientific evidence to the contrary becomes part of said conspiracy.

What makes 9/11 theories so much more interesting than the rest of them is it was the first major earth-changing event to happen in an age where the majority of Americans had the Internet. It's not that it has any more legs than others before them that we all know are ridiculous, it simply has a medium that allows it to fester and infect more people than previous ones.

We're called "close-minded" by truthers for refusing to accept the possibility. I urge you to not take any side going in, and keep a truly open mind as you research. If you go in wanting to find a conspiracy, you'll find one every time. If you go in looking for proof of one, that's when you'll see which side relies on tangible evidence and which side pulls evidence out of their posteriors.

Yes I have a lot to look into, and you guys have already pointed me in some good directions and I appreciate that. I am open to both sides and I really want to make an informed decision for myself, so I will study up. For me it is hard to trust the government. I'm not saying the government was behind 9/11, but they did lie to us about the Gulf of Tonkin and then kill 3 million people. The CIA doesnt exactly have the greatest track record either. I think ourgovernment is too big and I truly believe what the founding father's taught and what our constitution stands for. I am only 22, but it seems our government is just out of control. I also believe there are powerful men in this world with too much power and that absolute power corrupts absolutely. You put the two together and you get history repeating itself. I wish I could trust the government, but I just cant. As such I take everything the government says about 9/11 with a grain of salt.

 

[Viper Daimao]

A lot of us share your views warlexz, (though I'm not as cavelier in saying "killed 3 million people", it's rather glib), but we're not trusting what the govt says about 9/11, we're trusting our eyes, our minds, and scientific experts say about 9/11.