This is a video about 9-11.

If you are comfortable with your opinion on 9-11, don't watch this video because it will change your mind.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change

It's good, but there's a lot that can be debunked. The parts which
concerned me where there apparent controlled explosions - but I figure
they can relate to the nature of the collapse (you need to read the
explanations behind the collapse - everything was being pulled inward,
forcing matter out) and also the FBI confiscating the Pentagon footage.

BTW for those who don't know, it's an hour and 20 minutes long.

He makes some interesting points about the cellphone calls too - very stunted.

I strongly suspect after clicking the link that this is not a 56k friendly video.

I'll have to pass. :sad:

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

Someone on another forum was pointing out the eagerness with which
Cheney et al embrace the PATRIOT Act and their links to past admins who
concoted plans based on terrorism.

Also - I guess, the more unfeasible the conspiracy, the more likely it is to be believed as true.

edit: Doc, have a look at this -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loose_Change_%28video%29

An friggin hour long. Sorry but i too will pass on this one.

---

http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/8521/windows981dk.jpg

Nickelplate is my dad

I saw it, that's amazing.

The thing with steel's melting point is that it doesn't have to be
reached to break steel, it just has to heat it up to the point of
slight maleability, in which case it will bend and/or break more easily.

As for the Pentagon's lawn, I think that is a very very very very good point.

I was already suspicious.

---

Also change the texture of the dock. Docks are rarely tile. -Facepunch
As I Lay Dying

You're not watching it because it's an hour long?

I give up all hope for humanity, I really do...

There was another video I remember, that showed which cameras would
have captured the "plane" crash into the Pentagon, and one was a gas
station. A few hours after the crash the tape was confiscated and
they still won't show it.

But yeah... there's somethin fishy.

i'm going to have to pass as well due to another bout of 56k woes
from what you have said concerning the video though i have a similar video concerning the Oklahomah City Bombing
i would post it but my connections to slow and it's 2.5 hrs long

French Toast said:
There was another video I remember, that showed which cameras would have captured the "plane" crash into the Pentagon, and one was a gas station. A few hours after the crash the tape was confiscated and they still won't show it.

But yeah... there's somethin fishy.

f**k all to do with fishy.....

and aye, it mentions those tapes in the vid, which claims minutes instead of hours. tapes from the sheraton hotel, too.

i was already leaning towards believing this sort of stuff, and watching this has made me lean more.

---

i eat paint

I saw that a while ago, I had already seen other things on the topic and done some research, so a lot of it wasn't new to me, but yes it's a very good video. Cheney was in charge of NORAD (North American Aerospace Defense Command) that day IIRC, and ordered the fighter jets to maintain very slow speeds, which made it so they could not possibly reach the hijacked planes. I'm a little rusty on the facts, but Larry Silverstein (the leasee of the WTC buildings) took out a huge insurance policy a few months before 9/11/2001 that specifically covered acts of terrorism. He made billions from the attacks.

Also, some info I've found out from various sources: there were no "pods" and probably no "seperate flashes." Those were shadows of the landing gear compartments, and the noses of the aircraft hitting the buildings, respectively. And the video floating around on the internet that shows a missile hitting the pentagon has been proven to be fake. Just FYI, because a lot of people try to skew the facts or make up new ones.

Here's the video section of Alex Jones' Prison Planet site, it's mostly clips from other sources: http://www.prisonplanet.com/video.html
I recommend Alex Jones' documentaries to anyone who wants to question what they've been told.

Two last things:
Mass murderers agree, gun control works.
Tyranny will come to your door in a uniform.

---

o

thanks for sharing, docrock.

there are some truly intriguing indications and info here. especially: cellphone possibilties that high werent possible, footage around the pentagon not released, financial transactions made as if people knew 9-11 was going to happen, explosions on the lower WTC floors, half of the supposed hijackers still alive, and a lot of loose info.

Some things are contradictory, misused, or simply wrong though, for the list of comments, see here: http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/12/1787340.php

The thing that's on my mind with the whole "flight 93 landed in cleveland" theory though, is if the passengers are alive, it would be known, no ?

---

These words are my diaries screaming out loud

I have mentioned before, in this very forum, that I would'nt put it past Bush and his cronies to have instigated this type of thing in the hopes of re-election, personal gain and various other assorted motives. I was quickly chastised though, and shrugged it off as a bad attempt at humor. I believe someone said it made them sick to hear such nonsense. While this documentary creates more questions than it answers, it does raise some interesting points. I still remain doubtful as to Bushes actual level of involvement, but I am convinced that his presidency is truly one of the most corrupt in history.

I also find it interesting that in a post note at the end of this video, the author eludes to a hint that this might have been nothing more than an elaborate bank heist, with close to 160 billion in gold missing.

A well crafted and seemingly well researched video to be sure. Definitely thought provoking.

I've seen this long ago. On most part it confirmed my own doubts, but
some of it is a bit far fetched. The Pentagon part didn't seen right
when they shoved it on TV after 9/11(or 11th of the 9th month, which
ever pleases you more).

---

''Everyone wades in s**t until they're competent enough to walk on it. Jesus style.''
Dystopia - Empires

/Me pets Juim. :kitty:

Bud, if thats why you have been pouting for so long.. Jeez..

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

Before everyone blindly believes every part of this video... please
take a look at the link BlisTer posted. Here it is again: http://www.indybay.org/news/2005/12/1787340.php

I'm trying to be skeptical of both sides here. I don't know for
certain what happened, aside from the fact that thousands of people
died.

You're not watching it because it's an hour long?

I give up all hope for humanity, I really do...

I'd be more interested in the file size. I have a 4Gb/month flatrate.

They didn't die... they went to a better place.

---

''Everyone wades in s**t until they're competent enough to walk on it. Jesus style.''
Dystopia - Empires

Watch the movie, then make sure to read the website posted.

Brings some interesting thoughts about what happened.

---

Dark_Kilauea
DVS Administration
http://www.dvstudio-production.com/

Empirical imperialism produces ugly results. Unfortunately for the US,
their golden age of domination exists under lights, cameras, action!

Gwil said:
Empirical imperialism produces ugly results. Unfortunately for the US, their golden age of domination exists under lights, cameras, action!

Unlike British atrocities that happen via wooden ships and took months to be heard about?

/giggles

You're funny Gwil.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

The funny thing there is you're bang on the money! :wink:

Governments - if 9/11 conspiracies are true, even disregarding that,
have always been a bunch of self serving underhand c*nts. Just a shame
for the US they did it in the age of mass knowledge..

I know that it will never happen but, I wish that wars, both foreign and domestic were fought by the people who cause them.

My fear is that someday the US will go to war with a country that I have dear friends in.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

Is this the right time to make a "War - HUH! What is it good for? ABSOLUTELY NUTTHIN'" post?

I guess not :razz:

War is a horrible, horrible thing. At least in modern times, the
technological superiority saves lives and forces surrender. I would
never want to live in a time (although I guess we do, looking at
African conflicts) when "total war" is still an accepted norm.

You know whats funny when you think about it? Almost all the world is into gun control except the states. I am betting that no other country has taken that into account when they contemplate invading US soil.

If you ever get the chance, watch the old movie "Southern Comfort"

It will open your eyes about defending ones home turf.

[edit] Link edited for movie.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

The gun control for/against arguments are always essentially flawed.
They never take into account relative crime, or indeed crime with
weapons. US "gun culture" exists/existed because there was a society
which demonstrated extremes of rich/poor in a modern context, before
anyone else.

Most of the personal weapons posessed by US citizens would be worth
piss all in a real war. The need to bear arms was created out of
European liberal thought, and perpetuated by the "civil codes" that
consumerism and capitalism created (along with racial segregation, too,
but thats another issue)

Also bear in mind the United States, bar Civil War, Mexico, Pearl
Harbour and 9/11 has never been attacked directly, let alone invaded. I
for one support the U.S. citizens' right to bear arms, but not a basis
of homeland protection - merely one of common sense. As long as you can
police the issues which relate to misuse of firearms, you can police
the potential crimes that arise from them.

Gwil said:
.
Most of the personal weapons posessed by US citizens would be worth piss all in a real war.

Gwil, uhhh, do you wanna rephrase this? If you have some image of a bunch of straw chewing blokes with a shotgun you're sadly mistaken. Many of the hunting weapons far outstrip the normal issue military weapons. Think about this, many weapons are designed to bring down big game, not people.

I am not willing to argue because you would have to see what I mean but... You're wrong.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

They wouldn't, simple as. If you can quote me statistics how many
people posess mortars, RPG's, grenades, rifle-mounted grenade
launchers, deployable machine guns, aircrafts, armoured assault
vehicles, short range tactical missiles, I would be happy to believe
you.

Citizens with an M-16 and a safe full of ammunition a war do not make.

Adding onto the fact I could add so many more weapons that make modern
warfare, I am fairly certain that most of the US gun nuts will not
posess, or could not easily access funds or sellers for the most potent
of weapons in infantry based warfare.

If an invasion of the United States was to take place by say, the UAE
or China, a bunch of NRA members with souped up assault rifles and
years of rifle range practice would never, ever be able to take on
professional soldiers in volume or experience. The main reason the U.S.
and coalition forces struggle with the war in Iraq (or at least it is a
major factor) is that a lot of them are but teens, or have never been
in a war where they have been at so much risk. Peackeeping in Kosovo or
the earlier Gulf Wars are nothing compared to mujahadeen who have been
attacking Mi-17s with RPGs when a lot of these coalition soldiers were
but a twinkle in their fathers eye.

Really?

No, I will not quote you stats. But, I live here and all the heavy artillery in the world will not win you a battle on your home turf. lest we forget Vietnam or Korea. :rolleyes:

You have your image of what makes/wins wars. I have training in war. I would not bet that the private citizen here in the States couldn't give any country a run for their money.

[edit] remember, private citizens have only one rule.. To win. Militaries have orders to follow.

Anyway, its moot because I hope to never live long enough to find out.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

I'm certain.

A bunch of NRA gun nuts would never defeat a well planned and
coordinated military assault. Again, to relate back to Iraq - the US is
being kept on the "look over the shoulder" (as with Vietnam) they go in
with a hell of a lot of firepower and no real experience of warfare on
the home continent. The laws on gun control in the USA are so much more
restrictive to theatres such as SE Asia (free flowing Communist
corruption) or the Arabian Peninsula (too much war to mention).

War training counts for something - not to belittle it, but, war
experience as a fact of life counts for a lot more. There's a lot more
to shooting a man dead and having the inclination to carry out cold
blooded attacks on say, a convoy, than a training exercise. Bearing in
mind a lot of the countries the US has intervened in the past half
century have experienced war on home turf in living memory, i'd say the
US would not be prepared at all.

Gwil said:
I'm certain.

shrugs

Well, OK then.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

I edited that post to back up my point.

I could also add that the supremacicist policies of the US Military
would dictate they would never organise an "insurgency" (exactly as
Ho-Chi, Hussein et al did) on the basis they believed they could win
with their "expertise" alone.

In turn it all relates to analysis of empires of the world - to note the most powerful:

Rome - Civilizing Superpower

Britain - Enlightening Superpower

USA - Economic Superpower

China - Volume Superpower

i.e. the U.S. and it's strength comes from it benefitting from the
problems befouling the 20th Century, and making a shedload of cash. It,
in turn, got the roots of it's society from the British colonisation of
the USA. Britain, got it's infrastructure and basis from Rome - now we
see China turn towards democracy, and slowly, if corruptly, move
towards overtaking the US on the sheer size of its working base.

In defence of the insane amount of military grade hardware owned by private citizens in the US, I offer my favorite home weapon shopping site as evidence of their ability to wage a defensive war, at least :smile: .

Behold the Urban Armory: http://www.urban-armory.com

---

Ham and Jam Contributor
http://www.hamandjam.org

'Get your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty ape!'

Again, it's all "lolz been on the gun range" or reservist stuff. I can
only cite Vietnam and Korea (bar WWII, I rule out WWI on age grounds)
as times when the US has been directly involved in real war. It's not a
direct dig at the US, moreso that the countries who could easily, over
the United States or other Western powers defend their homelands have
either been in states of perpetual "war" or are so lawless (ie ready
access to weapons: eg; Yemen has 10 guns? (i think) to every one
person) that
it is extremely feasible they could defend themselves to a reasonable
degree.

Bearing in mind as I said before, a large proportion of the population
of the US would be too far gone to peaceful commercialism to take up
arms (again it relates to experience of war - you have to be desperate
enough) and i'm pretty sure a lot of the arms owned privately by
American citizens will be small arms, probably handguns.

I'm basing a lot of this on assumption, but i'm fairly sure my points
are fairly close to the mark. Of course, we can't account for how
people react in situations of defending the homeland, but, I don't
think the freedom of access to arms (albeit restricted) in the U.S.
would be any advantage to them whatsoever.

I am feeling the irresistible urge to be a "Cheeky Git" again... But, I'll pass this time.

It truly does no good to debate when the lines are so clearly drawn. Since there is no real way to prove either side, I will be the humble one this time.

/me bows out.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

I suppose it wouldn't make a difference in Australia if we had guns, 75% of the country couldn't give a f**k about anything. Dirty bastards.

---

Ham and Jam Contributor
http://www.hamandjam.org

'Get your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty ape!'

Sorry, double post.

---

Ham and Jam Contributor
http://www.hamandjam.org

'Get your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty ape!'

P.S.

That website is f**king nuts, Agent Smith.

Demonstrates to me that the NRA types are ones who masturbate over
guns, the stamped out minority in Sri Lanka, Iraq, Sierra Leone are the
ones who kill people with guns every day.

A gun is not just firing at a paper target - a gun is a tool to kill
people. It is used everyday by hundreds of thousands, worldwide, just
for this purpose

I believe Americans (and all people) should have the undeniable right as a whole to own firearms, not in defense of outside invasions, but to protect civil liberty. The EU, while being unable to bear arms legally, is under a far more benevolent dictatorship than the US. The police and military are trained and conditioned to ignore people citing their constitutional rights (and arrest them in certain circumstances, when the authorities are violating said rights). This scares me. The media also portrays activist civil libertarians as A) hippy liberals B) uneducated country hicks or C) anarchists. This pisses me off. The world's government is far more corrupt than most people care to imagine. Most people are too busy frowning at what's across the fence to see the condition of their own back yard IMO (the whole damn neighborhood for that matter).

Plus, even if you don't buy into the whole corruption thing, or not that far at least, outlawing guns just means that only outlaws will have guns. Outlaws won't have too much trouble getting those guns either. Especially when our borders are as wide open as they are.

I could go on for a while about this kind of stuff, but I'd probably just be jumping from topic to topic ranting.

---

o

You realise of course many countries in the EU don't really have a
constitution anyway? :razz: I think you make a point about corrupt
government, but some of the EU points are a little misguided :smile:

Hell, the problem with Europe is we have too many libertarians being listened to!

You're not watching it because it's an hour long?

I give up all hope for humanity, I really do...

I was very busy, i thought it might be a quick 2 minute long video.

---

http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/8521/windows981dk.jpg

Nickelplate is my dad

Where the hell is Doc Brassballs? I am still feeling a bit cheeky today and would like another ex-military person to give his opinion on the private sector and its ability to wage a decent battle/war.

That brings up an interesting question. Are Doc Brasso and I the only military trained members currently active in this forum?

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

The problem with EU is that the ones who do all the decision don't have a f**king
clue on how their decisions will actually affect the everyday living.
For example this new directive that forces ISPs to keep logs on
internet traffic for 6 months. They say it's against terrorism... Bulls**t.
Terrorism is almost non-exsistant within European borders(I do remember
Madrid bombings and IRA and the London bombing). Only thing it does is
bringing the 1984 more closer to reality and increase the internet
connection costs. I hate how goverments go less and less democratic
each day, claiming to do the complete opposite. I used to be for EU,
but since then my eyes have opened. Large govermental entities do go
into extremes, thus I wouldn't go ruling out all of the points this
document brings up... Scythes Privates are out.

[edit] I'm military trained also Orph, just not in your military.

---

''Everyone wades in s**t until they're competent enough to walk on it. Jesus style.''
Dystopia - Empires

Pvt.Scythe said:
[edit] I'm military trained also Orph, just not in your military.

Thats a good thing, right?

I suspect that all militaries share some commonalities bud. Perhaps some day we can compare notes. :smile:

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

i watched this mutha a couple days ago, and was pretty much befuddled....1) some of this guys information is iffy at best....but i must admit, some of it is possible....2) his "color of truth", and im not saying hes full of s**t, is somewhat grayed....

ok...one i found to be as easy to pick up as a college 101 soccer ball....i give you "the detonation patterns in the buildings"....windows, especially tempered or armored, will flex a bit under stress.....thus the "reflections", and not all in simultaneous or concurrent order....random, yet in the field of top edge stress...boom, the window pops as the interior pressure blows them out....and, the det patterns....jon you know this....popping where they did would theoretically cause a shift in the balance, visa vi, that sucker would not have dropped as straight down as it did.....i submit, the "pancake load stress", which has been calculated roughly at velocity versus increased weight ratios at an additional 200,000 pounds per 1/4 second, was a demonstration of what mother nature would call, "the best show of gravitational force to date..."

wheres gollum....velocity of mass increases in stability when backed up by weight....whats the formula mikey? at a certain point that mass becomes as a runaway train.....as was correctly stated, steel does not have to be molten to be maleable...this is just one....and this is my humble opinion....

anyway.....maybe not so...101.. :smile:

.............as for the military end.....ive got s**t laying around between here and the shop that will poop the ass out of a tank.... :wink: if the spirit moves em, bring it on.... :wink:

Dr Brasso... :dodgy:

no-one wants to invade the US, they only want to liberate it.

---

i eat paint

<DIV class=quote>
<DIV class=quotetitle>? quoting fishy</DIV>
<DIV class=quotetext>no-one wants to invade the US, they only want to liberate it. </DIV></DIV>

You know that I am dumb on such things so please clarify something for me.

Whats the difference between "Liberals" and "Liberation"?

and, why is it that every liberal idea seems to take us farther away from anything liberating?

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

I think he's implying the U.S. needs liberating from fascism.

Liberating is nothing at all to do with liberal politics :smile:

I had to look that word up Gwil. I admit that fascism is vaguely similar to the American governmental system, its hardly definitive. I realize that politics is my shortcoming and I am basically ignorant but I can read/comprehend and fascism doesn't quite fit.

If it did, it would describe nearly every politically active government on the globe and somehow I doubt thats even possible and have the globe mostly not in a state of War.

---

The best things in life, aren't things.

Fascism is pretty much every government of the world? You're bang on the money there Orph :smile:

The thing is, we are lucky enough to live in countries that get it "right" to an extent... how depressing!