j4ckos mate

Has anybody watched this ?
Loose Change (video - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

StickyMicky

nope, because its a blank wiki page ?

Nido

This sort of stuff is just stupid, how anybody (that has a brain) can think that the whole 9/11 thing was in fact a US "set up", and that the towers were set with explosives is beyond me.

The chances of the many hundreds of people that would have to be involved in such a set up all remaining quiet are nill, that sort of thing just can't be kept quiet. The 9/11 conspiricy theories mainly seem to be made up by people that can't believe the USA is actually vunerable to attack

j4ckos mate

yes thats my view but i think i will still watch it

PeteBrant

I've seen clips of it. And of course seen Dylan Avery presented with compelling evidence that he is talking out of his ****, yet still he insists he is right.

I don't think he actually beleives any of what his film says. I think its just a money making scheme for him and he puts on this front to back up his film.

It's the only explanation, because to actually beleive the contents of loose change, you would have to have the intelligence of a small lump of putty, and I think he is quite clever.

That said I am sure I will sit and watch the film at some point.

ScoTTyB

Pretext to World War 1 - Deliberately sending the Lucitania, an American ship, full of Americans, into waters controlled by the Germans, hence it being sunk and the Americans joining the war.

Pretext to World War 2 - Pearl Harbour. Alot of evidence points to the US knowing of the attack and letting it happen.

Pretext to Vietnam - High ranking officials admit the 2 American boats attacked by the Vietcong, leading to the invasion, never happened.

911 - If this was not a setup it would be the exception to the norm.

(plagurised from Zeitgeist)

PeteBrant

What is Zeitgeist? A club for special needs people?

j4ckos mate

sounds like a colonel for call of duty

OllyK

Yes, I've seen it. It's dire, all "sounds" convincing until you engage your brain and do all of 2 seconds research in to it.

I think they are on to loose change 3 now as the first 2 got ripped to shreds by the members of JREF, so they've had to go off and come up with even more convoluted explanations.

PeteBrant

Doesn't the "final" cut have almost completely different explanations for everything than the first 2 editions?

OllyK

Yup

Leslie

Link wont work!

Les

j4ckos mate

Loose Change (film) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Geezer

A ship full of Americans? Firstly, Lusitania was a British ship (RMS Lusitania is a bit of a giveaway really, but there you go), not American, and as it was under instruction to report a U boat sighting and ram if necessary, it was considered under the international rules of warfare as a legitimate target. Also, 139 americans on board harldy qualifies as "full of Americans".

There is evidence that an attack was not unexpected, but that is not the same as knowing it was coming. I think the US were naive, even stupid, but nothing new there then. The US was wholly unprepared for war in 1941, there is no reason why they would enter into a war like this. They would have known that they would get dragged into the Europen war too, and the high proprtion of German-Americans made this undesirable, as it had in WWI.

What on earth are you talking about? The US never invaded Vietnam! Have you actually looked at the history of what happened in Vitenam after the Japanese were pushed out at the end of WWII? Without going in to a long and convoluted history, the US simply had advisors there, and for a very long time too, before anything really kicked off. Of course, I freely admit that the US possibly saw Vietnam as a convenient way to see how their military performed against Russian and Chinese backed military, and they were paranoid about the spread of communism, but to suggest they manipulated it? Oh come on!

The norm being that they did not set up any of the stuff you allure to?

Geezer

Felix.

its a well made and well thought out video.

However, there is another video (equally as good) and discounts all of their theories

davyboy

What about finding the passports of the people who flew the planes.

That always sounded a bit suspect.

OllyK

Actually it's very poorly thought out which is why they keep having to issue new version due to what they have already filmed being wrong. If they'd thought it out before they started, they probably wouldn't have started it.

Gav

Does nobody see it strange how building 7 collapsed so perfectly as it would in a controlled demolition?

I think the conspirency theories are far fetched but building 7 seems suspect to me

OllyK

I don't know, how many years have you been working as a demolition contractor?

PeteBrant

They debunked all of the myths surrounding the collapse of tower 7 not so long ago in a BBC conspiracy theory espisode. In a objective way, they looked at the theories and presented both sides and left the viewer to make thier own conclusion.

When they presented evidence against anything suspect to the head of the "Architect for 911 truth" organisation, he suggested that explosives were built into the building during its construction in 1987


As a side issue, they interviewed various firemen and police involved at ground zero and to a man they had almost palpable hatred for anyone suggesting that 9/11 was anything other than it was.

PeteBrant

With regards to the controlled demolition theory.

Its takes months of preparation, all non load baring part of the structure are removed ,explosives are attatched to main beams, and experts have suggested that people walking in and out of the building on 9/11 may have noticed the fact that half the walls were missing and big bombs strapped to beams.

Gav

I'm not an expert and never claimed to be. All i see from an untrained eye is a building which collapsed just like many others i've seen on the internet, TV etc and i thought it strange. But as i said, i find the conspirency theories far fetched

TelBoy

You'll be glad to know i don't think 9/11 was a conspiracy at all.

Geezer

Oh come on Telboy, with all that compelling evidence?...........

Geezer

TelBoy

Nah, the motive sucks.

OllyK

That's kind of my point, you aren't an expert and neither are the CTers. If they knew what was involved in what they claim, they might just realise it's crackers.

OllyK

coolangatta

I like most conspiracy theories for comedy value
However; in the 911 case it's gone way beyond having any value at all.
Give it a rest

moff1888

Conspiracy theories, in general, are great. I like them as much as I like reading Dear Dedrie in The Sun both cheer me up. Most conspiracy theories are just complete madness but still we all love to "discuss" them.

Aren't we due a new one?

PeteBrant

We'll get one, when the next war/attack/death of a extremely famous person happens.

Conspiracy Theories are by thier nature attatched to Earth shattering events.