"Loose Change"

[sahtt]

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501&q=Loose+change

Do your best to ignore the politics..that's not why I posted this. In fact, it hasn't convinced me of anything, but has got me thinking. I do NOT believe the gov't had a role in it any more than I believe it did.
-------------------------
Billionaire remains determined to bring Loose Change to big screen in face of threats

March 29, 2007

Despite several attempts on behalf Neo-Con and thugs and their mindless cheerleaders to threaten billionaire Mark Cuban into backing away from a project to mass distribute Loose Change, Cuban has remained resolute in his determination to bring the film to the big screen.[continue to ignore political jargon]

During a radio interview last Friday , Fox bully Bill O'Reilly warned Cuban as well as Charlie Sheen who is set to narrate the movie, that he would be "looking out" for them and that Sheen's career would be "finished" if he went ahead with the project.

In an interview with the Dallas Morning News , Cuban restates his intention to distribute the film and fends off the intimidation of the attack dogs who wish to see the entire venture deep sixed.

Dallas Mavericks owner Cuban quotes JFK in citing the necessity of giving an open forum to controversial subjects.

"We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people."

"I happen to think we live in a city of smart and educated people who don't need anyone to censor for them," he said. "They can make up their own minds," states Cuban.

"I do believe that lies in the shadows are far more dangerous than lies you can confront and refute."
-------------------

I have not heard enough evidence to be convinced of either side's argument; I'm more concerned with a few points in the video that some of our professionals here at Prime may be able to help me better understand.

Again, try to leave politics OUT OF THIS, it's strictly analyzing evidence to come to a logical conclusion. If you don't have time to watch the entire video [I didn't but ended up doing so regardless], you may still be able to help.

a) Is it true, and if it is, how would one explain the stock market activity [put options] related to expecting the steep decline in value of several airline stocks within a week of 911? Boeing's/AA were near 11 times higher than normal the day before on 9/10/01; some international activity? Expectedly grim quarterly statements?
b) What is the cause of the 'bomb-like' explosions heard, taped, and verified in the buildings by employees, firefighters, etc.?
c) What caused the lobby floor to look like it had been blown up by a bomb when there is no logical explanation for this?
d) Are buildings such as the towers expected to collapse so similarly to a demolition sequence? Is that just 'how' they collapse?
e) What caused lower floors to randomly blow out their windows, have 'crackling light producing events', before that specific area was subject to collapsing [specific footage in the video displayed over and over again]?
f) Is there any real evidence that a plane went into the Pentagon? Did the FBI indeed confiscate all the surrounding area's tapes, hence why we still have 0 video recordings of what actually happened at the Pentagon?
g) Were 3 of 4 black boxes actually found, yet nothing given to the public?
h) What's the deal with the phone calls...?

 

[flaminio]

Screw Loose Change -- a rebuttal to the allegations made in the Loose Change video.

 

[95ttht]

All your answers are here:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html

PS - Elvis is alive, Aliens landed in Roswell, etc. etc.

 

[sahtt]

I was hoping their would be, more or less, a quick explanation. I'll give them a look..

 

[jalnjr]

I was hoping their would be, more or less, a quick explanation. I'll give them a look..

yeah, i need a quick explanation too...

Because things are the way they are, things will not stay the way they are... b. brecht

 

[syam]

i work in our gallery and hall at school and we hosted a 'loose change' event once. it was quite an event with a crazy amount of people who were trying to 'spread teh truth' and inform the public...but in the end, i'd say that character of individuals at the event reallly REALLY spoke louder to me then any words they could say...we had equipment damaged from their group, i had some of my things stolen, and the organizer for the event (loose change member) was the biggest S.O.B. i have ever met. and i've met my share.

in the end, my supervisor had to make me continue to manage the show because i was fed up enough to just stop doing all audio lighting and visual things for them.

 

[steveny]

Impossible to keep secrets with so many people involved. If money was the root of the attacks then anyone who knew the secert cover up would be enticed by money to come out with the truth.

However I find it "funny" that the movie was made. Movies are easily watched by persons who can be led easily, but the rebuttal posted by flaminio was almost totally text and I would bet 99% of the people who would watch the movie would not bother to read the rebuttal article, in fact I watched the movie and probably won't read the article.

 

[sahtt]

Impossible to keep secrets with so many people involved. If money was the root of the attacks then anyone who knew the secert cover up would be enticed by money to come out with the truth.

However I find it "funny" that the movie was made. Movies are easily watched by persons who can be led easily, but the rebuttal posted by flaminio was almost totally text and I would bet 99% of the people who would watch the movie would not bother to read the rebuttal article, in fact I watched the movie and probably won't read the article.

I watched the 3 hour version with text rebuttals. They [mostly one guy though] completely annihilated the "loose change" argument.

You touched on an excellent point. The average person is going to be much more persuaded by the "loose change" video than the more tedious to watch 'screw loose change' video. It took a lot more patience to watch the second one.

For the record, here's the answers to my own questions:

a) Is it true, and if it is, how would one explain the stock market activity [put options] related to expecting the steep decline in value of several airline stocks within a week of 911? Boeing's/AA were near 11 times higher than normal the day before on 9/10/01; some international activity? Expectedly grim quarterly statements?
More or less coincidence. I guessed right that 3rd quarter predictions were grim and that volatility was common in that market.
b) What is the cause of the 'bomb-like' explosions heard, taped, and verified in the buildings by employees, firefighters, etc.?
Other explosions are unavoidable in an event of this magnitude. Generators were a main element that when on fire produced a large explosion. It's systematically impossible to layer the towers with decent firepower in the time alloted immediately after dogs searched after a phone threat the previous day, much less past all the 'normal' security, employees, residents, etc.
c) What caused the lobby floor to look like it had been blown up by a bomb when there is no logical explanation for this?
Can't remember specifically, party due to sulfur reactions from the drywall and other makeup of the building as well as the pressure escaping from the collapsing upper floors.
d) Are buildings such as the towers expected to collapse so similarly to a demolition sequence? Is that just 'how' they collapse?
Without getting into detail, there is no structural engineer or struct. eng. firm that believes this had any chance of being a 'controlled' demolition.
e) What caused lower floors to randomly blow out their windows, have 'crackling light producing events', before that specific area was subject to collapsing [specific footage in the video displayed over and over again]?
Pressure being released from the falling floors, and again it does not match controlled demolition characteristics at all.
f) Is there any real evidence that a plane went into the Pentagon? Did the FBI indeed confiscate all the surrounding area's tapes, hence why we still have 0 video recordings of what actually happened at the Pentagon?
You can't release private tapes to the public w/o permission. The evidence surrounding the crash, specifically the generator that was conveniently ignored completely by the "loose change" video [not documentary] removes all doubt. Several supporting evidences displayed other plane crashes in to structures as fortified as the pentagon with similar conclusions.
g) Were 3 of 4 black boxes actually found, yet nothing given to the public?
Can't remember, but 2 of them were found but [as intuitively thought] didn't show anything unusual because the planes were flying without technical problems, i.e. the fuel pressure, temp readings, etc. were all normal. I believe the two lost in the towers may not have been found.. not a shocker if that was the case.
h) What's the deal with the phone calls...?
The way "Loose Change" structured it made it seem as if there was foul play when there is no real reason to believe so. It's despicable that "loose change" said they were on air phones, then cell phones, then show a study cell phones don't work well at a given altitude when the calls were on air phones to begin with..

 

[jalnjr]

watch loose change here

 

[95ttht]

Watch the better version here:

http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr/

 

[steveny]

Watching the rebuttal now, one question...they state 12/1/ 1984 the 727 remotely operated "flew for 16 hours and 22 minutes including 10 take offs 69 approaches and 13 landings"

How does a plane make 10 take off but land 13 times?

 

[jalnjr]

Watching the rebuttal now, one question...they state 12/1/ 1984 the 727 remotely operated "flew for 16 hours and 22 minutes including 10 take offs 69 approaches and 13 landings"

How does a plane make 10 take off but land 13 times?

"touch & go" landings...:wink:
a take off is a takeoff
still believe 911 conspirators?

 

[S2G-Unit]

It's funny how a lot of people outside of the US believe the government knew what was going on that day and didn't try to stop it.

Only, the American's seem to believe in their faithful government and how they tried everything in their power to stop the Terrorists.

PS. I don't hate American's. I have tons of family in the states and just came back from Danbury, Connecticut.

In Canada, we get such different news and facts about what goes on in the US. Just like what Rosie O'Donnell said on the View.

I don't really believe all the stuff said in "Loose Change". Alot of the information seems loose and far fetched.
For a long time I didn't believe a plane hit the Pentagon. After a lot of reading and re search. I no believe a plane DID hit the pentagon. I don't see how they could have faked a plane hitting the pentagon early in the morning with tons of people driving to work. The light poles hit etc.....

What I do believe is, that obviously they knew a plane was coming towards the pentagon. They did nothing to prevent it from hitting. Also, the fact that there was no defense to protect one of the most important buildings in te US. ahahahah the miltary command post. So if Saddam Hussein actually had WMD ( which the gov't obviously lied) and he wanted to drop a bomb on the Pentagon. There would have been nothing that the gov't could have done to prevent it right?

 

[sahtt]

It's funny how a lot of people outside of the US believe the government knew what was going on that day and didn't try to stop it.

Only, the American's seem to believe in their faithful government and how they tried everything in their power to stop the Terrorists.

PS. I don't hate American's. I have tons of family in the states and just came back from Danbury, Connecticut.

In Canada, we get such different news and facts about what goes on in the US. Just like what Rosie O'Donnell said on the View.

It's quite difficult to speak for 300,000,000+ americans all by yourself. Apparently you need to spend a little more time here, as I'd say it's fairly obvious that the 'average american' whoever that may be does NOT believe the gov't did everything they could to stop the acts. Then again, what does 'everything in their power' mean? It's extremely vague as no one can do anything 'all' they can.



I get most of my news from international sources, I very rarely watch the 'news' presented by most american media outlets.

 

[nsxtcy85]

I would post what I believe but I would be referred to as an idiot once again!:biggrin:

 

[Viper Driver]

It's funny how a lot of people outside of the US believe the government knew what was going on that day and didn't try to stop it.

And so many of you people outside of the U.S. bought into this stuff without paying attention to the many subject matter experts who DON'T buy into this stuff.

Only, the American's seem to believe in their faithful government and how they tried everything in their power to stop the Terrorists.

Got a better, more plausible explanation that is actually backed up by actual facts and endorsed by structural engineers, airline/USAF pilots, and air traffic controllers?

In Canada, we get such different news and facts about what goes on in the US. Just like what Rosie O'Donnell said on the View.

You sure what you are being fed are facts vs. what us gullible Yanks are getting?

I don't really believe all the stuff said in "Loose Change". Alot of the information seems loose and far fetched.

For a long time I didn't believe a plane hit the Pentagon. After a lot of reading and re search. I no believe a plane DID hit the pentagon. I don't see how they could have faked a plane hitting the pentagon early in the morning with tons of people driving to work. The light poles hit etc.....

I appreciate your ability to separate some of the wheat from the chaff, however........

What I do believe is, that obviously they knew a plane was coming towards the pentagon. They did nothing to prevent it from hitting.

Who are THEY? My fellow fighter pilots, who did all they could on that morning to stop the planes? My fellow Air Defense brethren, who were notified way too late by the FAA to mount a credible defense? Our Air Traffic Controllers, who had to weed through hundreds of blips on their radar screens after the hijackers turned off their transponders to find the right planes? How about the airline pilots....did they know they were going to die and just let the terrorists slit their throats? Clearly, you haven't thought this out, or your "THEY" would quickly number into the thousands in order for this plan to have worked. This is the Achilles' hell for the conspiro-kooks out there........who is THEY?

Also, the fact that there was no defense to protect one of the most important buildings in te US. ahahahah the miltary command post. So if Saddam Hussein actually had WMD ( which the gov't obviously lied) and he wanted to drop a bomb on the Pentagon. There would have been nothing that the gov't could have done to prevent it right?

If Saddam flew a plane from overseas with a bomb on it, we would have scrambled jets and shot him down. NEADS and all of our other Air Defense Sectors were set up to protect us from the Cold War invasion from across the ocean, not the hijacked airliner from Logan or Dulles or JFK. Hell, I would venture to say that there is still not a lot we can do if a jet takes off from Reagan International and turns right towards the Capitol Building. There just isn't time to react, other than to use Patriot missiles to target it immediately.

So, in a way, you're right. Before 9/11, we clearly were not prepared for a threat from "within". We have learned our lesson, though, and this is no longer a problem.