Conspiracy

[FrankZappa]

dude i cant believe you just let the government and the media brainwash you with all that scientific mumbo jumbo.  EVERYONE knows science can\'t prove anything.

Kent: Mr. Simpson, how do you respond to the charges that petty
       vandalism such as graffiti is down eighty percent, while heavy
       sack-beatings are up a shocking nine hundred percent?
Homer: Aw, people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent.
       Forfty percent of all people know that.
Kent: I see.  Well, what do you say to the accusation that your group
       has been causing more crimes than it\'s been preventing?
Homer: [amused] Oh, Kent, I\'d be lying if I said my men weren\'t
       committing crimes.
Kent: [pause] Well, touche\'.

[Jim Cobb]

rotfl

[Powerslave]

"Loose Change" filmmakers debate editors of Popular Mechanics magazine

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/11/1345203

Haven\'t read the whole transcript but seems to be good source for seeing both sides of the argument.

[SkyePrizm]

Seriously. Watch Loose Change and then tell me someone put together a misleading movie.

My understanding is that Silverstein took out a fresh insurance policy on the buildings like 2 weeks before 9/11. And he did in fact try to make billions, I believe it was 9 billion per tower he was trying to get, but some court denied his insurance claim and he got less than he\'d hoped for.

Also the towers were losing money at the time. Many floors were unoccupied and the buidling was begging for modern upgrades that would have cost... billions

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7866929448192753501&q=Loose+Change&hl=en

There yo go, it\'s a hyperlink. I reckon y\'all will have watched this, or at least watched enough of it to give it a fair chance before more naysaying takes place...

wow.  i just finished watching the whole thing.  ten times better than the video i posted.  this went into real depth on the damage to the pentagon....how the "hijackers" are still alive and living abroad......and that part that totally baffles me.....how flight 93 was directed to ohio, the whole airport was evacuated, and a secret plane landed with 200 passengers.  and theres proof.  

 i really feel that our generation needs to ask questions and demand answers.

"Loose Change" filmmakers debate editors of Popular Mechanics magazine

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/11/1345203

Haven\'t read the whole transcript but seems to be good source for seeing both sides of the argument.

I thought it was very interesting that one of the men opposing the "loose change" filmmakers, ended the interview almost agreeing with what they are preaching:

JAMES MEIGS: But when you really dig down, every single one of these has a clear explanation. And if there\'s areas that don\'t, let\'s continue to dig. We should be skeptical. We should ask questions. By all means, we fully support the effort to get to the bottom of any remaining questions.


And in the end, thats what this movie is trying to do. ask questions.

[Powerslave]

This exchange was kinda funny

JAMES MEIGS: Yeah, well, that clip is interesting. It’s built largely around the testimony of a guy named Kevin Ryan from Underwriters Laboratories. In fact, it turns out his expertise was testing water. He wasn\'t involved in steel at all. This fact has been widely known, and yet for quite some time -- and even a lot of other conspiracy theorists have backed away from that, and yet it\'s in the film. And it looks so convincing when you see it, if you don\'t take the time to go back and do the background research. And if you notice, so many of the clips in that section come from the day of, the day after.

And it ends -- or along the way, don\'t they say something like, even the experts don\'t agree? In fact, the experts do agree. The collapse of the World Trade Center is the most intensively studied engineering failure in world history, and thousands of pages of reports, experts, some affiliated with various branches of government, major engineering schools, there\'s no indication in any of that work to support any of these ideas of demolition or anything like that. And the things that are cited tend to be the experts who on close investigation turn out to have no expertise or first impressions of people on the scene who, of course, heard all kinds of horrible noises and confusing, terrible things in the chaos of that day.

AMY GOODMAN: Jason Bermas.

DYLAN AVERY: Well, real quick, I just want to jump in and say, Kevin Ryan has been open about his statement. He has always been public about the fact that he worked for the -- I don’t remember the exact name, but it was a subdivision of Underwriters Laboratories, which did water testing. But it was the fact that he got the higher-up from -- he got the word from his higher-ups that they actually had certified the steel and, I mean, his science still adds up.

DAVID DUNBAR: In fact, Underwriter Laboratories does not certify structural steel.

DYLAN AVERY: Oh, okay.

haha, owned

All right, I find fault with this. Call me crazy, but in order for this picture to be accurate, Bigfoot would have to be huge! The wingspan on a 747 is 195 ft 8 in, so one wing is 97.5 ft 4in, and big foot is EASILY 2/3rd the size of the wings length in height, meaning he stands at least 32 ft tall, and that only accounts from the waste up. Given that Bigfoot is a primate mammal, his height is close to the same from head to waste as it is from waste to feet, so that makes him about 60 feet tall give or take. While no one disagrees that this would certainly lead to him having big feet (shoe sizes would be would be somewhere around size 90) not to mention a bmi of about 1,600 lbs IF he is in shape. Given that a 747 has a take off weight of 735,000 lb, and it is know that the planes were fully loaded and therefore close to this weight, the presence of Bigfoot would have put the plain over it\'s weight limit. After all, Bigfoot was not on the roster unless he was traveling under an alias. So, if he was not a passenger, (obvious, since he can\'t even fit inside the plane) his weight would not have been accounted for and the plane would have been overweighed. Add to that the amount of drag big foots body would be putting on the angle of attack as the plane tried to stay stable. Both of these factors would have caused a great stress on the fuel supply of the plane - in order to stay at the speeds it was going (verifiable by multiple films), the plane would have to burn through fuel at a much greater rate than was planned on and the plane never would have made it to los angles.

When you think about it, big foot could not have been on the plane because his sheer size would have caused so much drag and burnt so much fuel that the plane would not have caused nearly as big of an explosion as it did. However, if he was there, he was surely trying to save the plane and the buildings because he knew that his great size, in addition to making the plane very, very hard to steer, would cause so much fuel to be burnt that there would be hopefully none left when and if it had hit the target. God bless you Bigfoot, thank you for your sacrifice to help others in need.

Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

[bdfreetuna]

What\'s really interesting in Loose Change is the testimony from all the firefighters that were actually on the scene. These guys know the difference between a fire and a controlled demolition... and they all *knew* what was going on... blasts from floor to floor!

I think we owe it to the heroes of 9/11 and its victims not to etch a false history in stone.