911 Conspiracy

Thats Loose Change. It hit number 1 on google video a few months back, the guys who produced it are now working on 'Loose Change 3' with a sizable budget and plans for a general cinema release much like the other feature length documentaries around recently.

There is some compelling evidence in Loose Change 2, but there are a few theories which haven't stood up to scrutiny and new information which isn't included. If you aren't familiar with 'Scholars for 9/11 Truth' get acquainted with them, and check out this lecture by Prof Steven Jones who co-chairs the Scholars for truth.

Please see this page for further information

On Sunday, C-SPAN aired a panel talk that was extremely skeptical of the official narrative: September 11th Terrorist Attacks. Some of it was a over the top, but some very good questions were raised as well. I don't know if it will be shown again or not.

Quote:

Original post by Ksero Please see this page for further information

If you trust maddox to inform your world view... Yikes.

So, got any counter arguments / links to go against points raised in the movies that have been posted?

Quote:

Original post by DogCity Quote: Original post by Ksero Please see this page for further information If you trust maddox to inform your world view... Yikes. So, got any counter arguments / links to go against points raised in the movies that have been posted?

The funny thing is most kids will believe the conspiracy, and then only realize that it probably isn't real after reading Maddox.

I love how you guys can flip flop the president depending on the current conspiracy. First he is an idiot, then he masterminds an precise military attack fooling billions of people! Then he is a dumbass twat that no one likes, but suddenly changes to an evil genius that can manipulate thousands of government workers into keeping a secret of enormous proportions, then he turns back into a twat right after it happens.

We are talking about a presidency that can't keep a detention center, CIA agent, Prison abuse, financial tracking, phone records, and european prisons a secret. And now suddenly in a plan that would take hundreds if not thousands of people MURDERING our own civilians, no one is speaking up?

I offer one counter suggestion to your theory...........it's pretty crazy I know.................

MAYBE SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE WILLING TO DIE FOR THEIR CAUSE MASTERMINDED A PLAN TO KILL THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS AND ACTUALLY PULLED IT OFF.

*GASP!!!* OMG that was crazy I'm sorry I don't even know why I even insinuated such a thing could happen.

I'm not sure if it is the exact same video, but there's this thread with a vivid discussion of it.

The problem with these conspiracies is that whenever I believe in them, it makes me feel stupid.

Quote:

Original post by LessBread On Sunday, C-SPAN aired a panel talk that was extremely skeptical of the official narrative: September 11th Terrorist Attacks. Some of it was a over the top, but some very good questions were raised as well. I don't know if it will be shown again or not.

C-SPAN 1 will replay it tonight at 6:10 PM EST/3:10 PM PST.

Quote:

Original post by ChurchSkiz MAYBE SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE WILLING TO DIE FOR THEIR CAUSE MASTERMINDED A PLAN TO KILL THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS AND ACTUALLY PULLED IT OFF. *GASP!!!* OMG that was crazy I'm sorry I don't even know why I even insinuated such a thing could happen.

Especially when religous zeolots are involved.

Quote:

Original post by ChurchSkiz Quote: Original post by DogCity Quote: Original post by Ksero Please see this page for further information If you trust maddox to inform your world view... Yikes. So, got any counter arguments / links to go against points raised in the movies that have been posted? I love how you guys can flip flop the president depending on the current conspiracy. First he is an idiot, then he masterminds an precise military attack fooling billions of people! Then he is a dumbass twat that no one likes, but suddenly changes to an evil genius that can manipulate thousands of government workers into keeping a secret of enormous proportions, then he turns back into a twat right after it happens.

Yup, and it's clear you haven't watched the movies or made any effort to research to opposing arguments. No one has made any kind of claim that bush is the mastermind, this sounds like Fox news spin - it simply doesn't come up. The most likely perps are members of a neo-con organization known as "The Project for the New American Century". This group was made up of core administration members, Cheney, Jeb Bush, Rumsfeld and more. I'll paraphrase their mission statement "To strengthen Americas defenses, to create a transformation in society to take control of all forms of communications etc" They go on to say, "This transformation is likely to be a slow one, unless there is some catastrophic and catalyzing event like a new Pearl Harbour".

Additionally, Paul O neal's who was secretary of the treasury when the Bush administration came to power, gave a testimony which was published in "The price of loyalty". He talks about how the first topic of discussion at the first meeting of the national security council was, how to get into Iraq. He explains how they were trying to formulate a reason for taking control of Iraq.

Quote:

We are talking about a presidency that can't keep a detention center, CIA agent, Prison abuse, financial tracking, phone records, and european prisons a secret. And now suddenly in a plan that would take hundreds if not thousands of people MURDERING our own civilians, no one is speaking up?

Wrong. The military chain of command does not require subordinates to understand the reason for their orders, they simply carry them out. There would have been no requirement for staffing outside the military to carry out 9/11. In addition, there really was very little personal involvement required, the hijackers certainly did capture planes and fly them into the WTC's but the only order required from a single military leader would be: "do not intercept".

Quote:

MAYBE SOME PEOPLE THAT ARE WILLING TO DIE FOR THEIR CAUSE MASTERMINDED A PLAN TO KILL THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS AND ACTUALLY PULLED IT OFF.

Regardless of the numerous accounts of intelligence agents pulled from their investigation into many of the hijackers before 9/11. America has an extremely effective response to aircraft going off their flight path. In the year before 9/11 there were 67 cases of commercial jets going off course, and 67 military responses of fighter jet's being launched to intercept these aircraft and escort them back on course or to a landing strip. The typical response time - from the aircraft off rout to escort jets in the air is roughly 10 minutes. Yet on 9/11 multiple commercial jets were off course for between 30 minutes and nearly an hour without a single military jet scrambled.

Governments attacking their people, or targeting their own military to generate political capital is not a new concept, it's been used throughout history, and many times by the American government.

I've presented just a few of many strong motives various parties had to commit these attacks. Perhaps now you'll take 40 minutes to watch the movie and provide a more informed counter-argument rather than regurgitating FOX spin?

Let it be known that this thread has come up at least 3 times in the past, and thoroughly debunked every time.

Quote:

Original post by capn_midnight Let it be known that this thread has come up at least 3 times in the past, and thoroughly debunked every time.

It's come up 3 times in the past, but thoroughly debunked? How so?

I too am a little fizzy on the thoroughly debunked bit. Do tell!

Quote:

Please see this page for further information

If the government were to kill people who pointed out their plan (lets assume 9/11 was a government job here, just for the sake of argument) it would eventually come out somehow and people would have their head. On the other hand, letting people point out how it could be an inside job would get them labeled as "crazy" and "conspiracy nuts" by the MSM and general public. Even if they had real, hard evidence nobody would believe them.

Much smarter to let people point it out and then label them as crazy than to stop them from releasing that information.

Quote:

Original post by DogCity Regardless of the numerous accounts of intelligence agents pulled from their investigation into many of the hijackers before 9/11. America has an extremely effective response to aircraft going off their flight path. In the year before 9/11 there were 67 cases of commercial jets going off course, and 67 military responses of fighter jet's being launched to intercept these aircraft and escort them back on course or to a landing strip. The typical response time - from the aircraft off rout to escort jets in the air is roughly 10 minutes. Yet on 9/11 multiple commercial jets were off course for between 30 minutes and nearly an hour without a single military jet scrambled.

Source?

I recall seeing a documentary of about accidents due to flight leaders. They inteviewed flight leaders controling the airspace over New York who told them how insanely hard it was to control the airspace due to alot of flights not identifying themselves. IIRC this documentary was before 9/11.

Quote:

Original post by DogCity It's come up 3 times in the past, but thoroughly debunked? How so?

Quote:

Original post by smart_idiot I too am a little fizzy on the thoroughly debunked bit. Do tell!

I don't know if it thoroughly debunks anything. But the maddox page links on to something alittle more interesting:

9-11 Loose Change Second Edition Viewer Guide

Quote:

Original post by DogCity Regardless of the numerous accounts of intelligence agents pulled from their investigation into many of the hijackers before 9/11. America has an extremely effective response to aircraft going off their flight path. In the year before 9/11 there were 67 cases of commercial jets going off course, and 67 military responses of fighter jet's being launched to intercept these aircraft and escort them back on course or to a landing strip. The typical response time - from the aircraft off rout to escort jets in the air is roughly 10 minutes. Yet on 9/11 multiple commercial jets were off course for between 30 minutes and nearly an hour without a single military jet scrambled. Governments attacking their people, or targeting their own military to generate political capital is not a new concept, it's been used throughout history, and many times by the American government.

Do you have sources for either of these?

I remember hearing shit from the Air national Guard about how there were only 2 planes covering the entire eastern seaboard at any given time (pre 9/11). Hearing an average response time of 10 minutes is highly unlikely to me.

And maybe I'm being uneducated but when has the american government targetted their own people and military purposely?

Quote:

Original post by Coward 9-11 Loose Change Second Edition Viewer Guide

Now that's a counter argument. It tends to spend a lot of time trying to debunk the various expert interviews featured in the movie and commenting on the how the movie fails to give proper reference to time and place for quote and events. These are definitely valid arguments, but i'm more interested in his take on the facts presented and generally agree with him that the movie makes to much use of unrelated trivia.

I tend to ignore both pro and con info related to the pentagon attack, I don't think there is enough evidence to present a solid argument for or against it. However, his section on WTC 7 is interesting, the eye-witness reports from fire fighters are excellent and show that there was clearly some serous doubt about the buildings structural integrity. It would be great if he would take the time to recognize that B7 was the first ever skyscraper to fall from only fire damage, even though it was built to be even tougher than the WTC's. Unfortunately the time and nature of the actual collapse of B7 isn't examined satisfactorily. To me, it's still clear that it was a controlled demolition and there is nothing presented to counter that viewpoint.

I'd be interested to read this guys response to some of the papers 'Scholars for 9/11 Truth' have released. Certainly, the molten metal under all towers, immediate illegal removal of the steel columns from all sites, and the discovery of thermate residue in recovered steel is worth a debunking.

NORAD response data as requested.

Quote:

Original post by DogCity NORAD response data as requested.

That is radicaly different information then what Popular Mechanic recieved when doing their research. You have linked a 9-11 conspiracy theory site, got a non-biased site that supports those numbers?

Quote:

9/11: Debunking The Myths Intercepts Not Routine CLAIM: "It has been standard operating procedures for decades to immediately intercept off-course planes that do not respond to communications from air traffic controllers," says the Web site oilempire.us. "When the Air Force 'scrambles' a fighter plane to intercept, they usually reach the plane in question in minutes." FACT: In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America: golfer Payne Stewart's Learjet, in October 1999. With passengers and crew unconscious from cabin decompression, the plane lost radio contact but remained in transponder contact until it crashed. Even so, it took an F-16 1 hour and 22 minutes to reach the stricken jet. Rules in effect back then, and on 9/11, prohibited supersonic flight on intercepts. Prior to 9/11, all other NORAD interceptions were limited to offshore Air Defense Identification Zones (ADIZ). "Until 9/11 there was no domestic ADIZ," FAA spokesman Bill Schumann tells PM. After 9/11, NORAD and the FAA increased cooperation, setting up hotlines between ATCs and NORAD command centers, according to officials from both agencies. NORAD has also increased its fighter coverage and has installed radar to monitor airspace over the continent.