Print

[FreewayX327]

I'm not sure if this has been posted but anyways I got this video from my cousin today. I watched it. Looks interesting.  Do you believe it?

9/11 Conspiracy Video

[CattyKid]

QUOTE(FreewayX327 @ Feb 18 2006, 11:05 PM)

I'm not sure if this has been posted but anyways I got this video from my cousin today. I watched it. Looks interesting.  Do you believe it?

9/11 Conspiracy Video

I didn't watch it, (sorry, it's 1:30 here and time for bed), but I don't think that we've gotten the whole story on 9/11.  

EDIT:
NVM, I said something stupid about how a plane didn't really hit the Pentagon and that it was probably something else.  Then I did some reading and discovered that all the stuff I had previously read on the subject was biased, false, and/or twisted to make the government look bad.
I still don't think that we're getting the WHOLE 9/11 story, though.

[soupy_31]

Hmm... that was pretty interesting. Personally I don't have an opinion on the matter, but that really made a strong arguement.

[Modderxtrordanare]

Did anyone watch the full hour of that?

I did.
And, he made a damn strong argument about it.

This post has been edited by Modderxtrordanare: Feb 19 2006, 10:47 AM

[slightly_damp]

Now I'm not much of a conspiricy theorist, and I have no idea why someone would go to all this trouble to demolish the wtc  and a wall in the pentagon (murdering hundreds of people in the process), but one thing is clear:- it was certianly not caused by the impact of a couple of planes alone!

The theories shown in the film are far more credible, and backed up with much more evidence than any of the "official" reports are.

I dont know why or who did it, but I truely believe that the wtc was demolished with contolled explosives and the pentagon wall with a missile. The theory that the U.S. government carried out this horrific exercise I cant/dont want to believe, but the fact that they seem to be covering up a vast amount of evidence chills me to the bone.

[lordvader129]

QUOTE(soupy_31 @ Feb 19 2006, 12:55 AM)

Hmm... that was pretty interesting. Personally I don't have an opinion on the matter, but that really made a strong arguement.

QUOTE(Modderxtrordanare @ Feb 19 2006, 03:46 AM)

Did anyone watch the full hour of that?

I did.
And, he made a damn strong argument about it.

im going to watch this later, but you can look at alot of other "theories" and see very strong and credible arguments, which doesnt really lend any value to the theory, look for someone talking about how the moon landing was a hoax and youll see what i mean

[Modderxtrordanare]

QUOTE

you can look at alot of other "theories" and see very strong and credible arguments, which doesnt really lend any value to the theory, look for someone talking about how the moon landing was a hoax and youll see what i mean

True, but using your example, the moon landing.  Theorists were using arguments such as how the flag was waving in space when theirs no oxygen.  And all their theorys were disproven.'

But in this case, the government is covering up alot and wont answer questions due to "national security".

[lordvader129]

QUOTE(Modderxtrordanare @ Feb 19 2006, 02:07 PM)

True, but using your example, the moon landing.  Theorists were using arguments such as how the flag was waving in space when theirs no oxygen.  And all their theorys were disproven.'

But in this case, the government is covering up alot and wont answer questions due to "national security".

well my point is many of the arguments such as the flag waving in a vaccuum and no exhaust plume on the lander taking off seem very plausible, but when people take the time to look at them closely they are disproven, much the same with many of the 911 theories, i just see less people trying to disprove them because more poeple are willing to accept the government lying about 911 than the moon landing

i watched the video, his theories on the pentagon make alot of sense, although i havent seen much research on those (perhaps for those very reasons) but hes totally wrong on the towers, the impact, the fire, the collapse, all could have easily been done by the planes

[xboxbox451]

Omg, how many of these friggin conspiracy 9/11 threads must we endure. It seems everyone with some amateur video editing software has now become experts in scenario analysis. Being a resident of NJ and living about 15 mins outside of Manhattan, I personally can attest to the destruction of these towers. I did not personally see the planes fly into the towers, but I did see them go up in smoke.

I didn't watch this guys entire vid simply because I couldn't retain my laughter from his opening observations, which are absolutely ridiculous. Plus the fact that he's banking his theories on out of focus, blurry images.

I posted a screenie below of part of his vid. In that particular picture he claims a missile was fired from the fuselage of the 767 seconds upon impact. HOW FUCKING STUPID. WHY, why would someone, even the government,  strap a missile onto a plane, which would need a deployment system installed. It would be ten times easier and more concealed to just add extra explosives into the plain and detonate them on impact.

Then he goes onto to claiming you could see the flash from the missile explosion prior to the plane colliding into the building. More bullshit. Look at my screen shot, that white blur, which he claims is a missile is still in full view, while you could already see a flash starting from where the nose is colliding. I also wonder if that white blur was fudged in by some moron trying to raise controversy.

Who comes up with these theories??? Hey, I'm always open to listening to some alternative possibilities, but c'mon these people are just reaching, and simply looking for attention or trying to cause more controversy for their own amusement.

(IMG:http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v662/ighyighy/bullshit.jpg)

[compton]

that movie is amazing and makes a very strong case.

but the point it makes is clear, don't take everything for face value. and this movie should also be held to the same flame. eitherway, this flick will scare the piss out of you.

BTW for the guy bitching about the quality of the shots, you are a fool for watching the google video version. there is a full version of a dvd quality rip on the internet that is completely clear. The footage it uses is all from cable and Network coverage, with the clearity that is associated with it.

you are obviously coming at this with preconceived notions, so to get the full scope just watch it like a movie. You don't have to beleive in killer robots for the terminator to be interesting.

This post has been edited by compton: Feb 20 2006, 02:14 AM

[lordvader129]

QUOTE(xboxbox451 @ Feb 19 2006, 06:50 PM)

Omg, how many of these friggin conspiracy 9/11 threads must we endure. It seems everyone with some amateur video editing software has now become experts in scenario analysis. Being a resident of NJ and living about 15 mins outside of Manhattan, I personally can attest to the destruction of these towers. I did not personally see the planes fly into the towers, but I did see them go up in smoke.

I didn't watch this guys entire vid simply because I couldn't retain my laughter from his opening observations, which are absolutely ridiculous. Plus the fact that he's banking his theories on out of focus, blurry images.

I posted a screenie below of part of his vid. In that particular picture he claims a missile was fired from the fuselage of the 767 seconds upon impact. HOW FUCKING STUPID. WHY, why would someone, even the government,  strap a missile onto a plane, which would need a deployment system installed. It would be ten times easier and more concealed to just add extra explosives into the plain and detonate them on impact.

Then he goes onto to claiming you could see the flash from the missile explosion prior to the plane colliding into the building. More bullshit. Look at my screen shot, that white blur, which he claims is a missile is still in full view, while you could already see a flash starting from where the nose is colliding. I also wonder if that white blur was fudged in by some moron trying to raise controversy.

Who comes up with these theories??? Hey, I'm always open to listening to some alternative possibilities, but c'mon these people are just reaching, and simply looking for attention or trying to cause more controversy for their own amusement.

yeah i was thinking about that, what would even be the point of putting a missile on it? a missile that size, compared to the impact of a fully fueled 757, would be like shooting a pellet gun at a car, then firing a bazooka at it, then saying the bazooka wasnt enough, the car must have been destroyed because of the pellet shot

as for the video quality on google, it has nothing to do with the google video, it has to do with the fact that hes taking the tv caps, which are already fully zoomed on the video camera, then further zooming with his video editing software, resulting in massive pixellation and an inability to identify anything at all

i liek the first tower impact, with the white glare on the plane, did he ever say what he though it was? or just pointing it out for no reason?

[xboxbox451]

QUOTE(compton @ Feb 19 2006, 08:06 PM)

BTW for the guy bitching about the quality of the shots, you are a fool for watching the google video version. there is a full version of a dvd quality rip on the internet that is completely clear. The footage it uses is all from cable and Network coverage, with the clearity that is associated with it.

you are obviously coming at this with preconceived notions, so to get the full scope just watch it like a movie. You don't have to believe in killer robots for the terminator to be interesting.

   , watch it like a movie, sure let me grab some   an waste an hour of my time. All I did was thumb through it looking for some unique or new evidence. All I saw was the same ol' stuff you can find anywhere with an internet connection.

These conspiracy vids are pure and total bullshit. Their all talking about their theories that are based on clips and scenes collected via the internet, and maybe a pointless interview or two. Do you have any idea how ridiculous it is to even consider such a theory based on such a limited gathering of information. If I'm even gonna consider such a thought I want some hard core investigation, not someone that collected a bunch of third party accounts and compiled it all into an amateur video without ever leaving their bedroom     .

If there is a conspiracy involved, the only way we'll know is if the actual perpetrators of events come forth, and personally I think trying to keep something like 9/11 a secret is nearly impossible. If Clinton couldn't keep a dim witted slut from spilling her guts, then how could any government conceal something like 9/11.

[FreewayX327]

QUOTE(xboxbox451 @ Feb 19 2006, 11:13 PM)

If there is a conspiracy involved, the only way we'll know is if the actual perpetrators of events come forth, and personally I think trying to keep something like 9/11 a secret is nearly impossible. If Clinton couldn't keep a dim witted slut from spilling her guts, then how could any government conceal something like 9/11.

You got a point.  I think its just really up to the person to believe that the government did this or not.  Its sort of like how some people think the Holocaust didnt really happen.

Somethings makes sense and somethings sound like they can be made up.  Like the cell phone call from the plane to someone on the ground.  I would think it would be really difficult for someone to do that. And the hole in the pentagon.  Didnt look like a plane crashed into it. Wasnt that big of a crash.  There were somethings done to that side of the pentagon before hand. Sound like it was all made up and planned out. Maybe just a conincidence?

On the other hand if the government was really behind this why would things seem so obvious.  Like would they really strap on a missle to a plane knowing that every news station is watching and covering every second of the attack? I dont think so.  

Lets face it.  Not everybody likes bush. and theyre out to attack him and make him look worse than he is right now by doing anything.  This may be just antoher movie to make him look bad.  Or it could be really true.  Everybody has a right to their own opinion.  you decide to believe if its true or not.

[xboxbox451]

QUOTE(lordvader129 @ Feb 19 2006, 10:50 PM)

yeah i was thinking about that, what would even be the point of putting a missile on it? a missile that size, compared to the impact of a fully fueled 757, would be like shooting a pellet gun at a car, then firing a bazooka at it, then saying the bazooka wasnt enough, the car must have been destroyed because of the pellet shot

True, true. Also, those Towers would most likely survive a missile blast so it would be pointless for anyone to consider their usage. The main proponent in their collapse was the fuel spillage, which was the terrorists main reason for hijacking planes nearby their destination so they could crash them with full tanks allowing 10,000 gallons of jet fuel to spill down igniting the tower in order to heat up and weaken its steel structure. Once that portion of steel weakened from the intense heat, the portion it was supporting came crashing down causing a chain reaction of destruction.

Damn, all this talk about the towers has left me depressed. From the people that died to the conflicts that's have ensued.

May they rest in peace (except for the terrorists. I hope all their virgins look like a cross between Rosie O-Donnell and Roseanne Barr).

[Modderxtrordanare]

Wheres metaldevil when you need him to make a smart alec photoshop of that image of rosie o donnel and rosanne you just burned into the back of my retinas.  

I guess freewayx327 is right, everyone is allowed their own opinion, but it's up to you to believe it or not.