Sir Knight:
Welcome. Whether you are a CTer, Debunker, or somewhere in between, you are welcome here, and your opinions, as different as they maybe from most, will be allowed, if not neccesarily accepted.
Quote #1:
"I viewed LOOSE CHANGE not just one but a couple of times now, and I was super impressed with how it was done. They didn't tell you want to believe, they just showed you the news clips, facts and testimony from those that were there and they asked the questions and let you come to the conclusions, which for the most part were foregone conclusions."
I have viewed LC at least 6 times, in its entirety, and find it less factual and convincing each and every time. What they did was take isolated comments, news snippets, and testimony, completely out of context, then wove it onto the screen in a way to falsely connect unrelated "dots". Since you say that most of the conclusions they allowed you to come to were foregone anyway, I can safely assume, you were much closer to being a CTer wrt to 9/11 anyway.
Quote #2:
"I never believed in the conspiracy being touted by the Government that it was foreigners doing it. See the government wanted us to believe in a conspiracy but the one they were selling didn't include them."
The above statement clearly indicates my former comment, that your stance is far from neutral on the matter.
Quote #3:
I am angry at many people because of the film which only confirmed what I suspected had gone on, but it did things in a more detailed and factual manner instead of just a gut feeling. But I am more angry with the NAY SAYERS on LOOSE CHANGE which I have found on this thread. I can't believe people can be so stupid with regarding simple straight forward facts.
Most people who started out on these threads, likely had their own view on things, but it was likely more open than yours based on the above. It was through HARD RESEARCH of the facts. FACTS NOT TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT, facts taken from legitimate sources including multiple eyewitness testimony, expert testimony, TRUELY PEER REVIEWED journal papers on the topics written by EXPERTS in the field, Multiple accounts from legitimate news sources, that allowed most here to come to the conclusion that while there are some descrepancies in the govt story, for the most part, it is true.
Quote #4:
"And they wonder how the government thought they could get away with this? Well we have less rights now than we had BEFORE 9/11, we are not living in a FREE society anymore But people like Luke T. is why the government thought they would get away with things."
Freedom must be tempered with lawfulness or anarchy will rule, and I for one do not want to live in an anarchist state.
Quote #5:
Here is the quote: "And does this look like a 16 foot hole to anyone? That's what Loose Changes says is all that was created in the Pentagon by the attack." Well the picture posted by Luke shows a fallen portion of the Pentagon AFTER it had burned for a while and had collapsed long after the video taken by the news media.
I can tell your research on the topic is limited to "9/11 truth" videos, as if you did any of your own real research you would have quickly found the numerous pictures of the pentagon, before the collapse, that show a large 8-10 feet tall x 80-90 feet wide hole on bottom, and then atop it, but part of the same hole, the 16-20 feet wide hole you speak of. You will notice in the "Loose Change" video that water spray covers all aspects of the building below the hole they tell you is "all of the hole". Do some real research on it.
QUote #6:
"The video showed the smaller HOLE in the Pentagon right AFTER the missle hit. And what about the government saying the plane crashed in front of the Pentagon and skidded into it when there was NO evidence of that happening and this was all NEWS footage right after it happened. The hole shown by LOOSE CHANGE was NEWS FOOTAGE, how can you argue with that? It was NOT big enough to have been created by the airline which the Government said CRASHED INTO THE PENTAGON. Forgetting for a moment that someone else in the government said it was a MISSLE. LOL I saw the windows just beside the SMALL hole intact except from broken glass and I guarantee you that if a BIG AIRLINER had hit that building there would BE NO WINDOWS are all there. How can logical people believe the BS handed out by the government? But a lot do, and that is why they thought they could get away with it, and even if everyone believed in the REAL conspiracy what would they do about it? Oh maybe we could get our own government to do an investigation which they might release to the public in about 50 years from now."
Well...Do your own research. (1) Pentagon was Reinforced Concrete, (2) the windows were blast windows, (3) at some point, the windows had to be in tact.
The misquote that was obviously so to be "as" a missile, instead of "and a missile" by D. Rumsfeld, requires no further discussion.
The hole was not news footage, it was a photo.
Quote #7:
"I think everyone should review the movie several times and TAKE NOTES. Do research and THINK. I find it incredible that any person after looking at the simple facts could ever believe that the story being peddled by our government is even close to being the truth.
There is a lot more than what I have posted here I would love to say but I guess I have used up my 5 cents worth on this note.
Let me know what you think or feel, but do it AFTER really reviewing the movie, not by going on what other people have said or what you think you know."
You obviously had no idea where you were going when you came here. 95% of the posters on this thread have watched, critiqued, and Debunked that movie many, many times. I don't think it would be any exaggeration to say that 95% of the posters here have watched it and studied more, and in more detail, than you.
That is what I tihnk, and I am but a neophyte in the Debunking realm. Beware the heavies here, and have your evidence i's dotted and t's crossed if you want to seriously debate the issues.
T.A.M.
