• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Loose Change - Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
MikeW said:
Maybe so with 175. Many of the 93 passengers were shifted onto it from other flights, though, and they're included. So it's people who bought tickets themselves, and people who were transferred onto the flight at the airport, with only Bingham missing.
Click to expand...

True, although transferred pax would be revenue standbys and flying on tickets which would be confirmed. Their fare category wouldnt change on the printout. Is there anything to suggest that Bingham was flying on buddy pass?
There were only 37 people, so its not like there wouldve been more than 1-2 nonrevs. besides him.

Also I compared the fare categories of all UA 93 pax and there is no additional one other than ET, BF, BM, B, M, O, S, which all appear on UA 175.
So, I dont think there were any nonrevs on the list.
 
I've had to exercise some self-discipline (for once in my life) and ban myself from the LC forums. It gets my blood pressure up too high.

I understand the feeling of wanting to go all Ike Turner on Dylan & Pals, but the short-term satisfaction wouldn't be worth anything once the "OMG MEN IN BLACK" crap started.

I would get a supreme sense of satisfaction if each and every one of them had a sudden profound epiphany and realized how wrong, stupid, and hurtful their little LC religion is.

But I really don't think that's ever going to happen. I know I certainly do not have in my head a vast and comprehensive Gravy-style library of facts I can bring to a debate and maybe change some CT minds. Even if I did, I'd feel like I was trying to convince water to stop being wet.

Then, things like the recent Scripps Howard poll finding that 1 in 3 people polled believe the US Gov't had a LIHOP or MIHOP role in 9/11 make me even more morose than usual. And yeah, I know how useless poll data can be, but still... Bleh.:mad:
 
Mike, a couple of things, actually three.
Mark Bigham was seated in row 4 which wouldve been First Class, also his aunt was apparently a UA flight attendant. To me, that signals a buddy pass.
Also, he almost missed the flight so he didnt beat the 5 minutes paperwork deadline.
Thats 2 very good reasons he wouldnt be on the list.
 
here is what tickles me...

The are over at LC forums now, pounding on someone over the absence of the "Mark Bingham" from their supposed official manifest....Yet...Yet...their same manifest, which they are using to "prove" Mark Bingham wasnt there, lists the godamn hijackers, who they also say didnt exist.

The paradox is just mind boggling.

they remind me of a bunch of smurfs going around looking for all the little mis-knits in papa smurfs grand blanket.

I don't care if there are a 1000 mis-knits, the blanket is still a blanket, and the truth, as a whole, is still the truth, no matter how much they nit pick.
 
T.A.M. said:
here is what tickles me...

The are over at LC forums now, pounding on someone over the absence of the "Mark Bingham" from their supposed official manifest....Yet...Yet...their same manifest, which they are using to "prove" Mark Bingham wasnt there, lists the godamn hijackers, who they also say didnt exist.

The paradox is just mind boggling.

they remind me of a bunch of smurfs going around looking for all the little mis-knits in papa smurfs grand blanket.

I don't care if there are a 1000 mis-knits, the blanket is still a blanket, and the truth, as a whole, is still the truth, no matter how much they nit pick.
Click to expand...
Yep, they arent too keen on logical explanations over there. If something isnt quite right(as they perceive it) it can only mean one thing : conspiracy!!
 
T.A.M. said:
here is what tickles me...

The are over at LC forums now, pounding on someone over the absence of the "Mark Bingham" from their supposed official manifest....Yet...Yet...their same manifest, which they are using to "prove" Mark Bingham wasnt there, lists the godamn hijackers, who they also say didnt exist.
Click to expand...
This is a classic example that shows CTers are simply another form of "woo" believer. That is the propensity to see the hits but ignore the misses. Really no different then the believer who follows astrology, psychics or the John Edward type.
 
Truther Poll Question:

Your government went to war in Iraq based on a pretext of lies. There were no WMDs, there was no 9/11 connection. Do you think your government could have allowed 9/11 to happen as a pretext for war?


Proper Question:
Do you think the U.S. Government allowed the attacks of 9/11 to occur so they could go to war in iraq?
 
Entered into evidence, and as best I can tell, that means it had to have been accepted, factually, by the judge and both defense and prosecution (last I checked they don't allow fake evidence into court):

Passenger lists, including Mark Bingham and all 19 hijackers.

So I guess the courts are wrong, as was Moussaoui's defense, and the procecution, but not the CTers and "Their" list.

But wait, "their" list lists the hijackers, so at least we have the CTers admitting the hijakcers existed...right...wrong...apparently that part of their list is faked, but the absence of Mark Bingham...now that is real...interesting a list that is partly faked, partly real...very interesting...pretty majikal list
 
chucksheen said:
New 9/11 films and revisions of current ones should coincide with the anniversary but I can't wait for LC:FC to crush MarkyX, Gravy, Screw Loose Change, etc.
Click to expand...

LOL. Final Cut contains the same debunked crap already...

Fetzer? The Jones brothers? Using old CNN footage to prove hijackers were alive?

WHen it comes to facts, they're already gone. The problem is the Denial Movement doesn't care for such things, otherwise they wouldn't exist.
 
LC:FC is going to be the biggest joke ever. i actually can't wait for it, they're becoming the biggest internet trainwreck, you just gotta stop and watch the ********.

they call us sheep, but if it werent for internet movies like loose change, or eyewitness 9/11 some of them would never even know of the alternate theories. whos the real sheep.
 
I await his video with great anticipation. I somehow doubt he will do much to any of those he listed, because unlike he, AJ, and JF, none of the Debunkers have actually mocked the dead.
 
Johnny C. said:
Hey you guys I need help real quick...

Has thermite ever been used to demolish a building?
Click to expand...

It has never been used for a conventional building demolition. Truthers often state that it is used in military demolition, I've never seen any examples though.
 
MarkyX said:
LOL. Final Cut contains the same debunked crap already...

Fetzer? The Jones brothers? Using old CNN footage to prove hijackers were alive?

WHen it comes to facts, they're already gone. The problem is the Denial Movement doesn't care for such things, otherwise they wouldn't exist.
Click to expand...

Nah, LCFC is going to be perfect! Eighty minutes of listening to the clock lady!
 
im surprised none of the loosers have claimed that it was the dust that made the building explode, like those old grain elevators that used to blow up. it would leave no chemical trace and its as easy as dumping a couple of sacks of flour down the elevator shafts and adding fire!! i think i may need to visit their message board and spice things up a little bit. its not any crazier a theory than any of the others on that board.
 
Here is something hillarious...Google Scholar is a place where you can look up professional articles published in journals etc...

try doing a search with the words "Thermate" and "Demolition" together...I got one hit...total...and guess what topic it was on...
 
Mancman said:
It has never been used for a conventional building demolition. Truthers often state that it is used in military demolition, I've never seen any examples though.
Click to expand...

Well, in a pinch, you could cut, say, bridge supports with it. And if you call destroying a vehicle "demolition" then yeah. And, of course, in military literature incendiaries are often included under the "demolitions" heading.

Also, as an improvised measure, some incendiaries can be turned into explosives with the right addatives, such as flour (any fine, flammable particulate for the most part). But this is an improvised solution that is sub-optimal compared to pretty much any conventional explosive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom