| Welcome! You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Loose Change: Final Cut; Full Film - 2hr 9min | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Feb 6 2008, 12:36 AM (2,733 Views) | |
| Gideon524 | Feb 6 2008, 12:36 AM Post #1 |
Oh, you didn't know?
|
|
 |
 
|
| NoGovTnaMe | Mar 24 2008, 06:03 PM Post #2 |
|
I am a Troll
|
I have to say that although you give a lot of facts and you do indeed give light to a conspiracy, what answers have you given? I have no more answers now than before I watched this. For this reason, as the purpose of a documentary, you have failed in my opinion. You have not shed light to any real facts that the general public is not aware of. Things such as if 9/11 cost about $500,000, where did the actual bulk of the funding come from? Secondly, you put doubt in the suspicions of the list of terrorists, but you give no alternative suspects? All you have done here is created a fear-mongering tool. This will serve to incite disdain towards the government more than it will educate. That isn't the right message by any means. I personally frown upon this, and choose not to endorse it or the people who made this organization happen. |
|
|
| JFK | Mar 24 2008, 06:13 PM Post #3 |
|
That is your choice. The fact of the matter is that we do not know who the true perps are and that is why we members of the truth movement are calling for a new independent investigation... Perhaps if we get that request it can be done it right this time... Of course that will cost more than a cum stain on a dress cost pre-Bush jr.... Which was much more expensive than the first investigation. So are you with us, or with the terrorists ? |
|
|
|
| NoGovTnaMe | Mar 24 2008, 07:23 PM Post #4 |
|
I am a Troll
|
Do you imply that if I am not with you specifically that I am with the terrorists? I know of only one other group who follows that line of thinking, although they word it a bit differently. "If you are not one of us, you are nothing, and therefore lawful prey." As to your claims that we do not know who the real culprits of this are, you are either greatly mistaken, or you are simply a liar. The information and all necessary evidence as to who orchestrated, funded and carried out these attacks indicates that it was the same people it has been throughout history, just as it is the same people pulling our strings today. An independent investigation IS in fact being done by MANY independent people throughout the world and singularly this country who are all coming to the same conclusions. I find it odd that we all have a very different synopsis of what happens than you do. I also find it odd that the only source that can really back up your theory of what happened is the mainstream media. This 10 minute article has more relevant facts in it than your entire movie, none of which are present anywhere in your documentary. http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/162321/ Edited by NoGovTnaMe, Mar 24 2008, 07:29 PM.
|
|
|
|
| JFK | Mar 24 2008, 10:43 PM Post #5 |
|
< Said like Sgt. Hulka in the movie Stripes > Lighten up Francis.... I was using the exact same words our fearless leader used on us Americans days after the attack. And yes he IS a terrorist. Ask any surviving family member of any innocent Afghan or Iraqi who was brutally tortured and/or murdered upon his orders. Unless of course you do indeed support his attrocities.
OK, Name them.
First of all you have no clue as to my personal theory of who is behind all this, and I suspect you would be extremely disturbed if I simply blurted out who and why I believe they are behind it. Second of all, there is no official independent investigation going on.... yet. That is the primary purpose for this and the 100's of forums like this one... To awaken the masses to what is going on and once we have the numbers then a real investigation can begin. Third, I have been researching the events of 9/11 for nearly 4 years now... How many weeks have you spent thus far ? Fourth, The above movie is not mine, and it was created to put an end to the debunkable material by presenting only the facts. I find it rather dry myself, If it instills fear within you I truly feel sorry for you for you obviously can not handle reality. If you choose to dismiss what I say, Please remember one thing.... 9/11 was merely a focal point. Now go hide under your sheets. |
|
|
|
| NoGovTnaMe | Mar 25 2008, 09:06 AM Post #6 |
|
I am a Troll
|
Well, here. Let's list a few names for you. We can even use an establishment source here, as they are sometimes useful with their half truths... In 1937 a lumbering, leftish ex-newspaperman named Ferdinand Lundberg decided to give form to his favorite gripe: big, fat capitalists and their de facto control of our de jure Government. Under his microscope went 60 of the fattest with their families, their incomes, their politics, their philanthropies. He wrote an erudite bombshell of questionable accuracy titled America's 60 Families, watched his subjects squirm while Secretary Ickes and then Assistant Attorney General Jackson quoted it with gusto. Within less than a year the families were sprawled under more powerful microscopes as the Temporary National Economic Committee made a study of corporate practices and controls. Last week the Securities and Exchange Commission published its report to null a 121-page study of "The Distribution of Ownership in the 200 Largest Non-Financial* Corporations." Based on 1937 figures, it whittled the Lundberg roster to 13 families, was considerably less personal than his census of Du Pont bathrooms, considerably more dogged in tracking down actual shareholdings (Lundberg had estimated fortunes by 1924 tax returns). It found: » Of an estimated 8,500,000 U. S. stockholders, less than 75,000 (.06% of the population) own fully one-half of all corporate stock held by individuals. The majority of the voting power in the average large corporation is in the hands of not much over 1% of the shareholders. But some of the biggest and best-known corporations are exceptions (i.e., widely held, without visible centralized control): A. T. & T., Anaconda, Bethlehem Steel, Eastman Kodak, General Electric, Goodyear, R. C. A., U. S. Steel, Pennsylvania Railroad, etc. » More than 80% of individual stockholders had a dividend income of less than $500, probably received not much over 10% of the total dividend income of individuals. » Foreigners owned 3 to 4% of the total stock outstanding in all domestic corporations. Of the 200 corporations surveyed, 17 paid over 10% of their dividends to persons living outside the U. S. Examples: Shell Union Oil, 80%; Singer Manufacturing, 18.8%; Anaconda Copper, 17.5%; Western Union, 17.1%. » The 13 most potent family groups' holdings were worth $2,700,000,000, comprised over 8% of the stock of the 200 corporations: Fords, $624,975,000; Du Fonts, $573,690,000; Rockefellers, $396,583,000; Mellons, $390,943,000; McCormicks (International Harvester), $111,102,000; Hartfords (A. & P.), $105,702,000; Harknesses (Standard Oil), $104,891,000; Dukes (tobacco, power), $89,459,000; Pews (Sun Oil), $75,628,000; Pitcairns (Pittsburgh Plate Glass), $65,576,000; Clarks (Singer), $57,215,000; Reynolds (tobacco), $54,766,000; Kresses (S. H. Kress), $50,044,000. » Three groups—Du Fonts, Mellons, Rockefellers—have shareholdings valued at nearly $1,400,000,000, control, directly or indirectly, 15 of the 200 corporations. Fortnight before the official release, when details of the report leaked out, New York's Communist Daily Worker scooped its rivals, printed a front-page cartoon and editorial headed "Three Families Drive America to War." Promptly Michigan's Representative Roy Orchard Woodruff (Republican) lashed out in Congress at "this sort of propaganda played up at a time like this for purposes of political demagoguery." To Representative Woodruff SECommissioner Sumner Pike, retired oilman and onetime vice president of Wall Street's Case. Pomeroy & Co., explained: "In some way unknown to the commission, a copy of the report or the summary was obtained by a newspaper correspondent. . . . When the report had reached its final stages it was supervised by me. As I am a Republican, that ought to set at rest any notion that it was designed as an aid to the Democratic campaign." *Excluded: banks, trust companies, insurance companies, investment houses. (^Note this fact here, as a very large bulk of a lot of these peoples' earnings in fact came from banks and trusts at that time, just as they do today.) Here's a link to that source: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,764913,00.html This movie does not scare me. I stated that it is a fear-mongering tool, meaning it will instill disdain more than it will educate (as I stated) which is true in my opinion. I understand it isn't your video, and if it isn't, why are you defending it so much? I don't agree with the message. The research given is not bringing me to what I see to be reality. I see that it is going right along with what everyone else is saying, rather than offering any new evidence or any new solution. Indeed, no solution is given at all. Don't assume either, that I feel that our government is not at fault. I merely think they don't hold the bulk of the blame, as you would not throw rotten food at a puppet if the puppeteer does not put on a good enough show - you throw them at the puppeteer. What the creators of this video have succeeded in doing is putting a bigger spotlight on the puppet - nothing more. As to an official investigation, I never said there was any 'official' investigation. I said there is an independent investigation that has been taking place since this whole thing started. There are people who have a very good case as to who caused this, and why. They even state a very solid case. Interestingly enough, this website doesn't talk about that aspect or idea, and even has mechanisms in place to deter a lot of that discussion. Let me close by telling you this: I am not a sheep. I don't make mindless arguments. I make sure I at least have a slight idea of what I'm talking about before I speak. Nice assumption that I haven't been doing much research. Fortunately for me, you are mistaken and underestimating me. Edited by NoGovTnaMe, Mar 25 2008, 09:11 AM.
|
|
|
|
| JFK | Mar 25 2008, 10:26 AM Post #7 |
|
Your above is a very good post.... I AM impressed. I suggest that you go back further a few years in your research to 1913 and Jekyll Island.  Actually you could follow it back to ancient Egypt if you follow the blood lines, but take small steps.  As for the movie, You do realize that the current version is in it's 4 incarnation do you not ? The previous 3 were designed not as a factual representation, but as a tool to make the "sheep" as you put it begin asking the hard questions. Unfortunately there are those "sheep" who blindly follow the office of the presidency so vehimently that they are willing to distort the truth and ridicule those searching for that truth. That was the primary reason for the movie n the opening post... To make it as factual and bulletproof as possible with the knowledge which we possess. As far as defending the movie, I have been doing just that since the first incarnation was merely a twinkle in Dylan's eye. As I said, The series primary objective is raising awareness that something is amiss with the powers that be... In that respect it is a huge success. Forgive me for my first impression of your original post in this thread, This medium is really not ideal for conveying thoughts, and I have apparently mistaken yours. |
|
|
|
| NoGovTnaMe | Mar 25 2008, 11:01 AM Post #8 |
|
I am a Troll
|
Yes you can take the bloodlines back to Egypt if you look further back. And even further back from that is Mystery Babylon. I'm becoming well versed in this history. The main threat I'm seeing right now is coming from Kazaria. If you know where that is and who comes from there then you know that quite a few of the names I've listed are directly linked to that. I do my homework. In my original post I did credit that the movie does give a lot of facts. I merely stated that they are not looking in the right direction. I am here to give new insight (or so it would seem) . It would appear that it is new insight to the people here, because I see an extreme lack of relevant information on the board. If it is in fact truth that you all seek, you should not limit your focus to government. That is only a local problem. But in order to honestly be able to take an objective view of world involvement, things such as the Jewish holocaust come under speculation, and it is the express view of this forum that you do not delve into that issue whatsoever. I merely state the fact that the amount of Zionist involvement in 9/11 and every other revolution or dictator driven war throughout history is too profound for it to not come under more scrutinized speculation by seekers of truth such as yourselves. Edited by NoGovTnaMe, Mar 25 2008, 11:09 AM.
|
|
|
|
| JFK | Mar 25 2008, 11:54 AM Post #9 |
|
What you say is very true, Unfortunately too many people who are ignorant of the difference freely interchange the words Zionist and Jew... It is that misunderstanding which leads to too much infighting which is the primary reason why discussion of that aspect is strongly discouraged here. The same is true with most discussion of basically any religion here.... It simply causes too much heated debate even if the roots of the problem are deeply embedded within some religions. As I said, the primary objective is to get an unbiased and independent investigation going, once that happens all the ugly facts will come out. In order to get that investigation going, awareness needs to be raised to the point of "critical mass". That is the why of why we are at this stage today... In the past 4 years we HAVE come a long way.
|
|
|
|
| NoGovTnaMe | Mar 25 2008, 11:56 AM Post #10 |
|
I am a Troll
|
Zionism isn't a religion. Just wanna make that clear.
Edited by NoGovTnaMe, Mar 25 2008, 11:56 AM.
|
|
|
|
| JFK | Mar 25 2008, 11:57 AM Post #11 |
|
I know that and you know that, unfortunately many who come here do not.
|
|
|
|
| NoGovTnaMe | Mar 25 2008, 11:59 AM Post #12 |
|
I am a Troll
|
I still don't see how completely avoiding the issue is solving anything, when it's the very issue you are avoiding that is progressively proving to be the most vital. Unless you allow it to be brought up, and educate people on it, and provoke them to look into it themselves, they will only remain ignorant.
Edited by NoGovTnaMe, Mar 25 2008, 12:00 PM.
|
|
|
|
| JFK | Mar 25 2008, 12:14 PM Post #13 |
|
Well, like I said a few posts ago, 9/11 is merely a "focal point". That is where we ( this forum ) need to START enlightening the masses which are ignorant as to the true plans of the real perps. What you have in mind is akin to trying to have a preschooler earn a college degree, if you know what I mean. Obviously you are way past that stage and to be honest, I feel this forum is beneath you. ( No offence Admins ) Might I suggest the following areas on a different forum to you ? http://letsrollforums.com/new-world-order-novus-f17.html http://letsrollforums.com/new-world-order-vatican-f36.html |
|
|
|
| NoGovTnaMe | Mar 25 2008, 12:45 PM Post #14 |
|
I am a Troll
|
I see your point, but I still don't agree that the overall message you put out should be anti government, which is what I get from that movie. I don't see how anyone could argue that you could get anything different than that feeling coming from it, given the amount of doubt in the government it does in fact propose to instill. There are two types of activism going on in America today. There is informative activism, which serves to educate people (not teach), and point them in the right direction so they might find their path for themselves. Then there is Inciteful activism, which serves more to agitate and incite the public. In my humble opinion, this is the description that best fits the Loose Change video, and unfortunately for your cause, this type of activism is the least effective type. That being said, although I may be further along than most of the people who peruse this forum, I am not above it by any means. If people are not as well informed as I am, it is my goal to help them to get there. I don't see that leaving them to their devices helps me or them at all in the long run. Edited by NoGovTnaMe, Mar 25 2008, 12:47 PM.
|
|
|
|
| JFK | Mar 25 2008, 12:58 PM Post #15 |
|
Well, there are certain factions within our government which are beyond being complicit as far as where we are today... Have you per chance watched this ? - http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/bushswar/ |
|
|
|
| NoGovTnaMe | Mar 25 2008, 01:21 PM Post #16 |
|
I am a Troll
|
This comes from an establishment source, so no I haven't. I don't focus on things that come from mainstream. Although they do give some truths, the meat of matters tend to be left out. This is the pattern that I am seeing here. I'm bringing it to all of your attention in hopes that one of two things may happen: 1. The founders of this specific movement will change their focus and start shedding light to real issues that are more important and directly affect us or; 2. The people viewing this will have sense enough to take a step back and take a more objective view than is being allowed here. I will give this footage a look, but as I said, I know to look at who is providing the information rather than just absorbing it blindly, as those here should do. The bottom line is, if what you're doing is getting you mainstream notice, it isn't effective. You aren't doing anything worthy enough for the people running the show to try to suppress you. The only time in which this would not be accurate is if there was a public uprising that warranted its mainstream notice. Although many would like to believe that this movement has achieved such an effect, it ultimately has not, as it is still in existence without any resistance from the opposing force. |
|
|
|
| NoGovTnaMe | Mar 25 2008, 01:38 PM Post #17 |
|
I am a Troll
|
Not to mention the fact that you're promoting the very message they want to put out: hate your government. It's their fault. Which is exactly why you receive no opposition. You're in essence doing their dirty work for them by confusing more people than you enlighten. |
|
|
|
| JFK | Mar 25 2008, 02:09 PM Post #18 |
|
Well, to be honest I am seeing a change in MSM as far as what they are choosing to report and how they are reporting it, albeit subtle. If we had made that frontline piece I referenced 4 years ago, it would have been ridiculed just as Loose Change 1 was. Chapter 1 initially put me off, knowing what I know.... I would suggest watching all 13 chapters and then watch chapter 1 again to put what is being said into its proper context. Perhaps part 2 will touch upon the subject which is your main interest, but it would not surprise me if it doesn't. LOL, Opposition ? Have you browsed the threads in this forum ? How about the JREF forums ? There is plenty of opposition, mostly administered with ad homiens... But not nearly as much as there was 2 years ago. You can rest assured that the truth will prevail, eventually. We are merely a catalyst. |
|
|
|
| Lin Kuei | Mar 26 2008, 07:17 AM Post #19 |
|
This documentary's aim is to highlight the inconsistencies with the official 9/11 story - which it does extremely well. Judging by some of your other posts here, I suspect what you are getting at. If you are here purely to start trouble, you don't have to be here. |
|
|
|
| NoGovTnaMe | Mar 26 2008, 10:27 AM Post #20 |
|
I am a Troll
|
If I were here to merely start trouble, I would have done it by now. What would you consider starting trouble exactly? Would mentioning the fact that two of the three people responsible of the making of this movie are apparently Kazarian-Jewish? I don't see that as starting trouble personally, but I'd be very interested to hear the two of them or even one of them comment on that.
Edited by NoGovTnaMe, Mar 26 2008, 02:31 PM.
|
|
|
|
| NoGovTnaMe | Mar 26 2008, 08:25 PM Post #21 |
|
I am a Troll
|
I'd like to know where the money you guys make from this movie is going. I'd like to know what Dilan Avery and crew have to say about the fact that their initial funding came from a known Zionist family that goes by the name of Simon who are known billionaires. Tell me about opposition. Like I said, I do my research, and I do it well. All I see coming out of Loose Change is profiteers trying to cash in on America's suffering, just like the mainstream media charging $40 for you to visit a concert "in honor of 9/11 victims". Well where's your money going Mr. Avery? What do you have to say about having Zionist backing from day one? Did you assume that just because you claim to be part of the truth movement that you are above scrutiny? If so you are sadly mistaken. What do you have to say for yourself? Edited by NoGovTnaMe, Mar 26 2008, 08:27 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Headspin | Mar 26 2008, 10:11 PM Post #22 |
|
Are you sure Grima isn't more suited to you luvvy? Gandalf needs to be a bit more...well...taller? yes that's it - taller! |
|
|
|
| JFK | Mar 27 2008, 10:13 AM Post #23 |
|
I guess I have misjudged you yet again... A character fault of mine, I should always stick with my first impression for it is usually correct. First, His name is Dylan. Second, his initial funding came from Phil Jayhan ( A christian ) in the form of a $2000 loan which is well documented. Third, your "research" in this area, for lack of a better word, sucks. Fourth, you may want to ask the John Fealgood foundation for his donor list. That is but one of many. Fifth, Dylan's worst scrutinizers are his supporters.... Myself being one. Sixth, Dylan doesn't waste his time with a$$holes like yourself. I can forsee you time on these forums being very short. Have a nice life. |
|
|
|
| NoGovTnaMe | Mar 27 2008, 10:53 AM Post #24 |
|
I am a Troll
|
Funny his goons step up to speak for him. If he has nothing but good intentions, why can't he speak for himself and be directly involved? One thing I notice is that typically the ones who have ulterior motives tend to like to stay behind the scenes. If what I'm saying isn't correct, why can't he step up and speak on his own behalf and set me straight? I'm not afraid of being proven wrong, but I don't see him stepping up at all. |
|
|
|
| JFK | Mar 27 2008, 11:16 AM Post #25 |
|
Funny how you never addressed any of the points in my reply to you. Goon ? ... LOL, in this case I will take that as a compliment. Yeah, you probably won't see him stepping up either, He spends very little of his time here. Had it not been for myself and a bunch of other admins stepping up in the original LC forums to keep the forums alive they would probably not exist today. Frankly all I have seen from your last 3 posts is parroting the ignorants and shills rants of the past, and like I said had you actually had the capability for true research you would recognize that in yourself... Or perhaps you already have researched that aspect. In any event, I now retract the invitation I offered you in post # 13. You are no longer welcome there and I will personally ban you on site there. @ Lin Kuei, Kudo's on your intiution skills.
|
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Loose Change 9/11: An American Coup · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
11:35 PM Nov 8
