| 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 (2,736 Views) | |
| NoGovTnaMe | Mar 27 2008, 11:25 AM Post #26 |
|
I am a Troll
|
lol. Notice I haven't registered there buddy. That site doesn't have much hard fact on it either. Notwithstanding, I stand by my original synopsis of the hierarchy of this particular group. They put this out here to distract you all, and nothing more. The evidence for that is rampant throughout the video. Their methods are ineffective. They give no answers, they only serve to cause confusion. This is my opinion. I care not if anyone dislikes me for having it. Ban me if you wish. All that will do is prove my point even more, for you will have banned me on the premise of my opinion being different than yours. As a personal note to JFK, your statement of not welcome also applies to the above stated. You show in your declaration ignorance, and a direct attack on free speech. I do not have to agree with you to have much extensive knowledge in comparison on any topic. The reality of the matter is that I do not address your statements because regardless of whether you are correct or not, there is much to come under scrutiny here, and my suspicion is more than warranted, as are my conclusions. |
 |
 
|
| Lin Kuei | Mar 28 2008, 07:36 AM Post #27 |
|
Dude... seriously... bye. |
|
|
|
| caribou | Apr 15 2008, 02:39 PM Post #28 |
|
I have recently seen the final cut and i can see that the focus is not on any controlled demolition of WTC. Does anyone know why they decided to leave that out? |
|
|
|
| Kate Blanchett | Jul 2 2008, 01:28 PM Post #29 |
|
Quick question..... What happened to the passengers that were supposedly removed from flight 93 at Cleveland? Why hasn't anybody tracked down even one of these people? Surely, testimony from any one of them would be enough to expose the rest of 9/11 as a fraud....so why was this not done? Another question.... What quantity of expl;osives are necessary to bring down, in theory, a building the size of the Trade Center? Where would these explosives be placed to ensure a practical "freefall" speed of implosion? Why do the Towers drop from the top DOWN?.....if explosives were used in demolition fashion, the entire building would be seen to move, and from the bottom...not the top.... Why do sound recordings from every 9/11 footage film have a distant "rumble" when the buildings collapse, rather than a series of explosions.... Semtex gives off a distinct odour....so do other types of explosives when used....why are there no record whatsoever of any official reporting such a smell? The very amount needed would give off A DEFINITIVE SMELL... You guys seem to be the experts....so do tell.... Borderline skeptic here....no mud slinging involved....just answers! Thanks Kate 
Edited by Kate Blanchett, Jul 2 2008, 01:41 PM.
|
|
|
|
| Kate Blanchett | Jul 2 2008, 01:37 PM Post #30 |
|
Just one more thing.... Why would a documentary like "Loose Change" appear at around the same time as the pre-election media "jazz" was just getting started for the run-up to this years Fed Election? It should be noted that anybody, on the morning after September 11, that voted DEMOCRAT would be throwing their vote down the toilet bowl....The wave of support for the Republican Administration had to be countered in some way. With the most important election in American history in the offing, the only way to prevent a Republican landslide was to discredit the very event that brought the confrontation alive. It seems to me that Democrats have succeeded in their campaign....Barack Obama is now practically a "shoe-in" for the White House... Comments?.....this election is worth BIG DOLLARS, reason enough of itself for Democrats to try anything to counter a Republican Oval Office YET AGAIN... Makes sense....MY OWN PERSONAL THEORY...Copyright......Kate Blanchett Thanks Kate
Edited by Kate Blanchett, Jul 2 2008, 01:40 PM.
|
|
|
|
| JFK | Jul 2 2008, 01:56 PM Post #31 |
|
Welcome Kate. It is good that you are asking questions. At this point we can only offer theories to answer those. That is why we demand a new investigation, so we may also have answers to those questions. As far as the Loose Change series, are you aware that the latest one is the 4th incarnation ? It has to be that way so that earlier theories which have been proven wrong are omitted and the newer released information can be added. It would be great if our government just answered the questions in the first place, but they refuse.... An example can be found in this thread - http://s1.zetaboards.com/LooseChangeForums/topic/52299/1/ I also see that you are still caught in the left vs. right paradigm.... look at the big picture and you will gradually begin to see there is very little difference between them.
|
|
|
| look-up | Jul 2 2008, 02:26 PM Post #32 |
|
Welcome Kate, I'll attempt to answer some of these. Keep in mind that you may be making many assumptions about 9/11 truthers based on talking points you've been handed by mainstream sources, who attempt to discredit and insult us.
Because they are very likely dead. If not killed by plane crashes (and no one really knows for sure) then killed after the fact in another fashion. I don't know anyone who really thinks they are alive. It would be kind of difficult to track down someone who no longer exists.
Good question. Again you are assuming we should know something we cannot possibly know. All we are saying is that the building could not have come down in the manner it did, without assistance. A search is underway to identify the devices which were used, however, it is not necessary to identify them for us to know that something was in fact used.
Probably many locations. The molten metal in the basement levels of the structures (all three of them) indicates that the steel in the base of the cores was melted by something. Removing the core from the bedrock is probably the biggest thing that needed to be done before the rest would fall.
Because it was a psychological attack against us, not a classical controlled demolition. If they wanted to make it go top-down, that is certainly feasible to do, it's just not common or "normal". Yet 9/11 was very far from normal. What we ask is that people start with the supposition that they were intended to believe it was not a C.D., and therefore the demolition needed to look like it was not a demolition. But as you'll see if you research it, it ended up giving some clues that it was assisted anyhow. Also, I'd like to point out the logical fallacy which people often emply. They believe that because the collapse did not perfectly resemble other demolitions, that it could not possible be one. Yet, most of the similarities are there, except for the top-down part and the ejection of debris. Explosives can do many different things. They can very neatly break the base of a tower and them bring them down nicely, or they can be set up in a fashion which would make them explode outward from top-down.
Because there was a rumble, and the cameras were at a distance. If you slow-mo some of the collapse videos, you'll see wave after wave of explosions top-down. Those from a distance would seem like a rumble especially with debris collapsing around as it happened. Many explosive-like noises were heard by people in and around the tower long before collapse. Could those have been in preparation for the final demo sequence?
Because most of the people who might have been able to tell this story were probably blown to bits by the devices. I know, this is a very morbid thing to discuss. I wish we didn't need to, but we do. Tiny bone fragments were found years later ontop of the neighboring buildings. How could a building which collapsed from fire and gravity alone shatter human remains into tiny fragments and send them hundreds of yards latterally?
Hey we enjoy newcomers who are respectful. We actually don't get very many who are. Remember, most of your questions can be answered in the short-term with "well I would really like to know that too, that's why we are here." |
|
|
|
| look-up | Jul 2 2008, 02:30 PM Post #33 |
|
no one here wants Obama to win, if that's what you think. We are mostly non-partisan or if we had to pick a set of issues we agree with, libertarian... Basically, we want is the constitution back. The release of loose change is not partisan. It is anti-establishment. If there is a political motive, it is to expose that the two-party system is a fraud, meaning they are more the same than different, and we need a new party alignment. |
|
|
|
| Headspin | Jul 2 2008, 05:00 PM Post #34 |
|
The official account states the building fell from fire and damage, so if you believe the official account then the amount of explosives required is zero, if explosives were used to bring the towers down then the amount would be any amount above zero, right? in other words, massive amounts of explosives would make demolition unrealistic so therefore the official account (using zero explosives) is validated, is not a logical argument. It is therefore only necessary to identitfy the presence of explosives, not the quantity. to make it look like the plane damage caused the collapse. For the towers, if explosives detonated in sequence from the top down then that would not be the case. WTC7 did fall from the bottom. depends on the footage, but most collapse footage was filmed from very far away, individual explosions would not necessarily be distinguishable on those distant shots. maybe smelly explosives were not used. Professor Jones has found reacted thermite residue and unreacted nanothermite compound, there would be no identifiable smell. some of your questions are addressed here: http://www.explosive911analysis.com/ Edited by Headspin, Jul 3 2008, 04:31 AM.
|
|
|
|
| Headspin | Jul 3 2008, 03:04 AM Post #35 |
|
an example of top-down demolition: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZ1E2NPl-s8 |
|
|
|
| Headspin | Jul 3 2008, 04:28 AM Post #36 |
|
nano-thermite explosives (nanoenergetics): "certain key MIC (Metastable Intermolecular Composites) characteristics are very attractive and quite promising for practical applications. These include energy output that is 2x that of typical high explosives, the ability to tune the reactive power (10 KW/cc to 10 GW/cc), tunable reaction front velocities of 0.1-1500 meters/sec, and reaction zone temperature exceeding 3000K (equivalent to 2700 Celcius or 5000 Fahrenheit)" http://ammtiac.alionscience.com/pdf/AMPQ6_1ART06.pdf in summary, what you have here is a substance whose destructive properties can be tailored, it is something in between an explosive and an incendary which can deflagrate or detonate or be tailored to somewhere in between, it produces enough heat to melt instantly through steel and powderize concrete and other water bearing materials would shatter as water is instantly expands to a gas. audible detonations are therefore ill-founded assumptions. Edited by Headspin, Jul 3 2008, 04:30 AM.
|
|
|
|
| look-up | Jul 3 2008, 09:02 AM Post #37 |
|
nice. I had never seen that before. some will ask, "Why didn't we see flashes in the towers then" Answer: Look how exposed the insides of the building was in that video Headspin posted. Then, think of how deep into the towers the explosives MIGHT have been placed. Bright sunny day with flashes going off inside the core, might not be fully visible to cameras hundreds and hundreds of yards away. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Loose Change 9/11: An American Coup · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
11:03 PM Nov 9
