I just saw that Loose change film...all I can say is damn....the evidence is all there :stunned: :disappointed:

^ well, it is....at most times.

 

For all I like Loose Change 2nd Edition and it does make some great points but it also makes some claims which they later have edited in their "recut" of that edition. It was a couple of parts that dealt with The Pentagon but the main issues all remain clear.

 

I think the Final Cut - due out on Sept. 11th 2006 - is shaping up to be a whole new version with better clarity of information and lots more interviews with key people.

 

I hope it achieves great things and there's even inside talk of a US theatre release......if they can only hold complete control of it's content, I hear.

This other 9/11 conspiracy nut doesnt seem to think much about it.

 

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/green/loose_change.html

 

If the truth movement wants to be taken more seriously then you guys need to agree on what actually happened.

 

To be fair Gareth you've been very consistent in your beliefs but you (I dont mean you Gareth when i say this) guys never get your stories straight. It seems like your more intrested in personal fame and notieraty and the money that brings then the truth.

 

We've heard there was a misslie in the pentagon when theres clearly aircraft wreckage in the photos, weve heard that people who were on the planes were taken of an locked up somewhere - some said they were killed. Weve heard stories about remote controlled planes and someone even claimed there were no planes involved at all!!!

 

Its like your moving from one piece of the evidence to another when that gets debunked. The WTC 7 is a new one to me and i'll look into that in the future - it does seem odd i must admit

 

Oh and someone teach me how to spell.

Well, I was going to post this link you have above ^. It's actually useful at times.

 

The 911 Research piece on Loose Change is more often a guide to what actually should be done with the information and evidence they/we have. Sometimes in Loose Change they don't show the implications of the Info and evidence they present...and I personally (as do alot of the truth movement) think that some of the Pentagon stuff should be carefully handled as I think we are being set-up here. With the release of video's that are supposed to prove a Boeing plane hit the Pentagon - when infact they do more to fuel the debate to what really happened and the media is always happy to focus on this. I think this is a set up as the government will try to quash all the evidence that has been shown about that day by simply releasing a video (real or fake) that shows a plane did hit The Pentagon, thus hurting the real truth movement a lot - despite all the other more obvious evidence which most of us talk about. A classic honey pot trap by the government maybe.

 

The thing is....there have been so many "other" groups set up who make some claims which really hurt the "real" truth movement. I only really stick to info which is considered to be useful to exposing the truth, rarther than go along with some people who even believe that no planes hit the WTC. Which of course is madness.......I often think who would think of such a silly idea?? (hmmmm)

 

SO LOOK...

 

There are people out there who do hurt the movement by creating really ridiculous claims but most of us are pretty much on the same page......you'll notice that people who try to debunk 9/11 claims always go after that ones which the REAL truth seekers never thought of in the first place.

There's nothing that I believe which has been 'de-bunked'....

 

Certainly there are people who abuse the truth movement for their own gain but these people are really in the minority......as all the people I have talked to, met and have been following surely are in this because they believe it to be so important to everyones life and plow what little money they get back into the cause. I mean the guys from loose change as well as alex jones do give their DVD's away for free and 10,000 free copies of Loose Change Final Cut will be given free to people on september 11th 2006 in New York City at a huge rally.

I mean it cost Alex Jones about $100,000 of his own money to make his lastest film yet it is up on torrent sites, google video and other places for FREE. And he allows the vids and his one book to be freely copied.

 

So when you read about the 'No Plane Theory' just remember that I (as well as the REAL truthers) do not believe that rubbish.

Things like remote controlled planes are up for clear debate as they actually are possible, due to government documents in the past citing such plans. (i.e Northwoods document)

 

WTC 7 is a one of the real keys. Everything written by the government about how and why it fell is a joke.

I am a smart, decent human being and will not be played for fool in such an obvious way. I'm not going to insult my whole upbringing and own intelligence by ignoring the obvious.

 

 

 

PS, I've just stumbled on this interview with Davin Coburn from Popular Mechanics and Charles Goyette burns him on numerous topics...

 

MP3 of Interview

 

Is this why Popular Mechanics canceled some appearances?Listen to this MP3 file of Popular Mechanics on the Charles Goyette show in Phoenix. Charles has him backpedaling big time. And this is like so many interviews I've heard recently.

I wonder whatever happened to the search for Bin Laden.... suddenly he isn't so important anymore or what?> lol

 

we cant even catch some joe smoe's IN america....how are we going to catch a man in his home where he knows the land and has lots of money and allies?

 

just because its not on the news every night does not mean we are not going after him....the world is focused on iraq, thus people seem to ignorantly think we arent going after ossama...

 

NIST To Probe Whether WTC 7 Downed By Blasts

Forced to issue response to 9/11 truth movement questions on official website

 

Paul Joseph Watson | August 31 2006

 

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is set to conclude its investigation of the World Trade Center complex by analyzing if bombs brought down WTC 7, the 47 story skyscraper that was not hit by a plane yet collapsed in a controlled demolition style in under seven seconds.

 

NIST today released a page on its website that is intended to answer skeptic's questions about why the towers and WTC 7 were the first and only three buildings to collapse from fire damage alone.

 

Though the vast majority of the NIST rebuttal seeks to reinforce the notion that the twin towers were brought down from nothing other than jetliner impacts and heavy fires, NIST makes the admission that investigation into WTC 7 has been insufficient and that they are now, "considering whether hypothetical blast events could have played a role in initiating the collapse."

 

The report continues by saying that, "NIST would like to determine the magnitude of hypothetical blast scenarios that could have led to the structural failure of one or more critical elements."

 

While it would be a brave prediction to foresee NIST's investigation contradicting the official explanation for 7's collapse, this at least shows the growing power of the 9/11 truth movement in eliciting answers to longstanding questions.

 

In Popular Mechanics' infamous 9/11 hit piece, they quote a FEMA building performance study as saying there were no firefighting actions undertaken in Building 7 and yet WTC complex owner Larry Silverstein's explanation of his "pull it" quote was clarified to mean removing firefighters from the building. The two statements contradict each other so they both cannot be true.

 

NIST's discussion of the twin towers' collapse largely repeats its initial assertions that faulty fire proofing and weakened steel caused a sagging effect on the floors, causing them to pull their support columns inward. NIST seeks to distance itself however from the 'pancake theory' that was espoused in the months after the attack and has since been discredited.

 

Will NIST seek to conduct an empirical investigation of WTC 7 or are they simply going through the motions to placate an increasingly vocal chorus raising doubts about what really happened on September 11, 2001?

So what happens if they investigate it properly and extensivly and come back with the same answers?

 

Would you be happy? No, you'd just move onto something else or just this statement to support your theories -

"Will NIST seek to conduct an empirical investigation of WTC 7 or are they simply going through the motions to placate an increasingly vocal chorus raising doubts about what really happened on September 11, 2001?"

Hey, I'll not move onto something else....because all these thing are connected. Come on man, saying that I'd simply move onto something else is weak, very weak. After all I've said about my stance and my serious research into all these governmental reports before I could see their lies - you still choose to say that I'd just give up and move onto another point.....that's just not true with me or anyone I know within the movement.

 

 

 

This is just one of the many smoking guns that are obvious from that day.

 

If they come up with any other story, other than one which clearly states that the building was brought down with demolition charges then I will still have the same opinion as I do now - that they are still being made to lie.

 

Simple.

 

These reports just ignore information and lie.......even ignoring info from the company that certified the steel used the the WTC buildings.

If they come up with any other story, other than one which clearly states that the building was brought down with demolition charges then I will still have the same opinion as I do now - that they are still being made to lie.

 

Its statements like that prove you are hellbent on this theory and will never rest. We could have acres and acres of evidence proving you wrong but you'd never listen.

 

If they've investigated fully and find no evidence then why would you persist? Are you an expert in the field of Architecture or Demoltion? Have you engineering experiance? Have you conducted your own experiments?

These reports just ignore information and lie.......even ignoring info from the company that certified the steel used the the WTC buildings.

 

I am NOT hellbent on ANY claim I and the real truth movement make.........It's just beacuse that it is impossible that these buildings fell in the way they did and lots of people think so....I'm not going to change my opinion unless I see decent proof. Which I most certainly haven't because we have caught them lying at every point. Why do you think that there is never a big TV debate on these VERY important issues?? it's becuase the official line is SO easy to destroy.

 

It's the people who believe the official story and go around saying that WTC building 7 fell from the top down who need to really take a hard look at what they are saying....it's as if they are being paid off to just ignore the actuall footage and evidence. I've heard them on TV/Radio say that it doesn't show a demolition and that it fell from the top down......I mean these people are either slightly stupid or are corrupt. It's one of the two.

yes you are hellebent youve just said that you'll never believe anything that proves you wrong. You wont even consider the possibility that your wrong!

No, I said that I WILL NOT change my mind unless they step up and show us decent proof. Which of course they haven't.

 

Remember the footage that was meant to "finally show a plane hitting the pentagon" which I myself waited around for hours to see a few months ago.....but when it came to airing the footage it was almost the same and probably even worse than the so-called 'leaked' pentagon footage from 2001 and showed nothing new.

Well ive just watched some videos from a pro conspiracy site

 

http://www.wtc7.net/videos.html

 

1) yes they do at first glance look like a controlled demolition

but

2) compared to demolitions ive seen on the discovery channel, its looks like a crap effort

3) I just see a building collasping - if there were explosives - where were the explosions?

4) The only thing i see coming out of the building is smoke from broken windows.

Heres a picture of WTC7

 

As you can see its right in the middle of the action.

Ok.

 

I know where it was.

 

 

Buildings closer....right at the base of buildings 1 and 2 didn't even collapse when the twin towers were blown. It's because it just doesn't happen like that.

 

It's never going to look as 'good' as a one on the discovery channel....since they set it up to be dramatic.

 

Actually it's a perfect demolition job. It falls within almost within it's own footprint, perfect. That's according to demolition experts.

 

Everything about the way it fell shows the classic technique. No building like that one would EVER fall like that from some small pockets of fire.

Yes but as you can see from the picture its right in the middle of the action.

 

Also it wouldve taken tonnes of explosives - people wouldve noticed, there wouldve been people there working 24/7 someone wouldve realised. Americans may not be the smartest, but they're not stupid. Considering the time it wouldve taken and all the holes in the building.

 

 

And also if it was planned then why make it look a proper demolition thats spotted easily by the experts?

Found this phrase from a website

 

A few skeptics make a responsible effort to sift through the mountain of available information,

but a vast majority ignore all but a few stray details they think support their theories.

In fact, many conspiracy advocates demonstrate a double standard. They distrust the mainstream media coverage and government sponsored investigations of 9/11,

yet they cherry-pick from those same sources to promote their extreme notions: that the hijacked planes weren’t commercial jets, but military aircraft, cruise missiles, or remote-control drones; that the World Trade Center buildings were professionally demolished; that American air defenses were deliberately shut down; and more.

 

Which is rather funny cause you've done the Gareth.

 

You slagged off Reuters, Fox news (i'll give you one), bbc, etc when they prove you wrong, and yet when they show something that supports your theories you proudly post it and show off that these people agree with you!

The amount of explosives isn't an issue to the government.

 

It was a government run building. Building 7 housed documents relating to numerous SEC investigations. The files for approximately three to four thousand cases were destroyed, according to the Los Angeles Times. Among the destroyed documents were ones that may have demonstrated the relationship between Citigroup and the WorldCom bankruptcy.

 

Hey, I have to get some sleep now....I can hardly type......More tomorrow I guess,

the point is that someone wouldve noticed, there wouldve been holes throughout the building, lots of strange coming and goings and it wouldve taken a long time to do. And also if it was planned then why make it look a proper demolition thats spotted easily by the experts?

Found this phrase from a website

 

A few skeptics make a responsible effort to sift through the mountain of available information,

but a vast majority ignore all but a few stray details they think support their theories.

In fact, many conspiracy advocates demonstrate a double standard. They distrust the mainstream media coverage and government sponsored investigations of 9/11,

yet they cherry-pick from those same sources to promote their extreme notions: that the hijacked planes weren’t commercial jets, but military aircraft, cruise missiles, or remote-control drones; that the World Trade Center buildings were professionally demolished; that American air defenses were deliberately shut down; and more.

 

Which is rather funny cause you've done the Gareth.

 

You slagged off Reuters, Fox news (i'll give you one), bbc, etc when they prove you wrong, and yet when they show something that supports your theories you proudly post it and show off that these people agree with you!

 

Yes because there's a massive growing change which amazingly allows news which we have been shouting about for ages to eventually reach the mainstream sometimes.

 

You see, it's all things which were talked about by us in the truth movement first. But it's very rare that these mainstream articles are fair.....sometimes they are but most times they are having a giggle at the subject. But when they get it right we have to use it to help wake people up to the truth. It's normally some decent producer/reporter who manages to get the story through.

 

Still not enough Americans act on it even when it becomes so obvious that the mainstream news have to talk about it because NOT talking about it gives an impression of hiding something.

You havent answered my points in relation to WTC7. Answer them

 

Well ive just watched some videos from a pro conspiracy site

 

http://www.wtc7.net/videos.html

 

1) yes they do at first glance look like a controlled demolition

but

2) compared to demolitions ive seen on the discovery channel, its looks like a crap effort

3) I just see a building collasping - if there were explosives - where were the explosions?

4) The only thing i see coming out of the building is smoke from broken windows.

 

 

Also it wouldve taken tonnes of explosives - people wouldve noticed, there wouldve been people there working 24/7 someone wouldve realised. Americans may not be the smartest, but they're not stupid. Considering the time it wouldve taken and all the holes in the building.

 

 

And also if it was planned then why make it look a proper demolition thats spotted easily by the experts?

You havent answered my points in relation to WTC7. Answer them

 

Well ive just watched some videos from a pro conspiracy site

 

http://www.wtc7.net/videos.html

 

1) yes they do at first glance look like a controlled demolition

but

2) compared to demolitions ive seen on the discovery channel, its looks like a crap effort

3) I just see a building collasping - if there were explosives - where were the explosions?

4) The only thing i see coming out of the building is smoke from broken windows.

 

 

Also it wouldve taken tonnes of explosives - people wouldve noticed, there wouldve been people there working 24/7 someone wouldve realised. Americans may not be the smartest, but they're not stupid. Considering the time it wouldve taken and all the holes in the building.

 

And also if it was planned then why make it look a proper demolition thats spotted easily by the experts?

 

ok, first, I have an engineering background, so I know what I'm talking about.

 

Why would it need to be a perfect demolition like those seen on the discovery channel? Those take weeks to prepare. But they wouldn't need a perfect implosion. And I'm fairly certain Gareth has posted an article saying building 7 was closed a day or two before sept. 11th.

 

You don't need tons of explosives to take down a building. Most demolitions only use a small amout of tnt or nitroclycerin on selected columns, with primer cord being used for everything else. Plus, the nature of a demolition is an implosion. You wouldn't see an explosion.

 

and the whole 'experts said such and such' doesn't hold up, because there are experts saying it didn't collapse due to fires. Experts are biased.

And all that wouldve been done in 2 days?

And they wouldve made it so obvious?

No matter how planned an explosion was, how could they take into account planes crashing into the building? It seems too much of a random variable. What if the planes didn't crash into the building for some reason, but missed and crashed into the rest of New York.

 

Aye planning a demolition is a fine art, but how can you include crashing planes into stuff as part of the plan?

Those planes were never going to miss. They can be programmed to hit a target with accuracy to within a few meters using GPS.

It was a military planned operation.

 

And I think if all had gone wrong then the building wouldn't have been imploded.