9/11 Loose Change vs Pop. Mechanics - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

arsenal · 10-13-2006, 12:27 PM

For those that are interested, youtube.com has a debate up with 2 people who created Loose Change, and 2 people from Popular Mechanics Debunking 9/11 Myths.

Link

I have only watched the first 2 parts, not sure how many there are, i think about 5 or so.

Seems pretty interesting, and good have the 2 opposing views debate against each other in the same room.

Lanny_MacDonald · 10-13-2006, 12:59 PM

Junk conspiracy theorists versus junk science. Let's get ready to ruuuuuuuuuuumble!!!

Looger · 10-13-2006, 01:08 PM

saw this debate awhile ago, never brought it up because of the framed debate, the ridiculousness of amy goodman in her steadfast belief in the government's 9/11 story.

amy goodman, noam chomsky, ward churchill, they NEED this muslim attack as much as the neo-cons. it embodies their blowback thesis and every book they've written.

pentagon - cell phones - yawn. nothing concrete at all, they are endless debates.

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?doc...2F11+mysteries

9/11 mysteries, interesting new film, focuses on the evidence of demolition and little else.

if amy goodman really wanted an honest debate she would invite the scholars for 9/11 truth or other heavyweights of the hardcore info like alex jones or jim marrs (who wrote the book 'JFK' was based on').

not to slam the makers of loose change, who are nice guys that have done a lot to raise the issue, but they're young / inexperienced in filmmaking and the film just doesn't go far enough. it meanders on their pet theories and presents some evidence that i consider perimeter or even false.

it does have a slick soundtrack and an interesting interview with hunter s. thompson though.

governments have always done this kind of thing, 'terrorstorm' in my signature gives a good rundown of some specific 20th century examples.

White Doors · 10-13-2006, 01:14 PM

Quote:

jim marrs (who wrote the book 'JFK' was based on').

ahh.. so he has a history of being a nutcase?

Looger · 10-13-2006, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by White Doors

ahh.. so he has a history of being a nutcase?

so... do you have a history of positively contributing to threads?

seriously, what's your take on the issue at hand?

have you checked out any of the evidence raised or just let <unnamed poster> blast the loose change debunking link like always (even when loose change wasn't ****ing mentioned!!!)?

seriously, what have you to say of the debate in the link?

Flash Walken · 10-13-2006, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Looger

so... do you have a history of positively contributing to threads?

seriously, what's your take on the issue at hand?

have you checked out any of the evidence raised or just let <unnamed poster> blast the loose change debunking link like always (even when loose change wasn't ****ing mentioned!!!)?

seriously, what have you to say of the debate in the link?

Wasting your time. He's only here to ruin potentially good discussion.

RougeUnderoos · 10-13-2006, 02:01 PM

The derisive laughter, sniffing, snorting, interrupting and dodginess of those guys doesn't help their cause.

I haven't seen their movie but in the clips they showed in that show it's obvious there are some pretty big holes in their own story. The only evidence the presented (in the parts that I saw) that didn't seem to be their own opinion was pretty easily debunked. The expert they cited wasn't even an expert in the field.

Are those guys experts in anything? What is their background? It's funny that at the start the one guy is just incredulous that the coroner from Pennsylvania isn't interested in talking to them.

fanforever1986 · 10-13-2006, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Looger

seriously, what have you to say of the debate in the link?

Is this debate not completely dead now that the Pentagon released the video of the plane going into the video?

Looger · 10-13-2006, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

The derisive laughter, sniffing, snorting, interrupting and dodginess of those guys doesn't help their cause.

absolutely. they're young kids. they've been a huge lightning rod for this very reason, vanity fair, etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I haven't seen their movie but in the clips they showed in that show it's obvious there are some pretty big holes in their own story. The only evidence the presented (in the parts that I saw) that didn't seem to be their own opinion was pretty easily debunked. The expert they cited wasn't even an expert in the field.

it's one of the weakest movies. simple as that. they're easy targets.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Are those guys experts in anything? What is their background? It's funny that at the start the one guy is just incredulous that the coroner from Pennsylvania isn't interested in talking to them.

they're not experts in anything but they don't claim to be.

amy goodman would NEVER have experts on her show on this subject, and for very good reason.

popular mechanics picks weak issues to nitpick over. it is quite sad.

RougeUnderoos · 10-13-2006, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fanforever1986

Is this debate not completely dead now that the Pentagon released the video of the plane going into the video?

I haven't seen any video of what is clearly an airplane flying into the building.

I don't buy these conspiracy theories, but I do wonder why they don't just release the footage from the Pentagon. Why not?

Looger · 10-13-2006, 02:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fanforever1986

Is this debate not completely dead now that the Pentagon released the video of the plane going into the video?

the pentagon is continually focused on by 'conspiracy debunkers'.

why anyone even bothers to discuss something with so little evidence for any theory is beyond me.

yes, it's ambiguous. yes, it's intriguing.

mainstream media has focused on the pentagon tapes as 'proof' but honestly the video is pretty weak.

Looger · 10-13-2006, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I haven't seen any video of what is clearly an airplane flying into the building.

and you won't. not until this issue gets so huge that it cannot be ignored any longer. then the video will be dusted off and shown to 'end the debate'.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I don't buy these conspiracy theories, but I do wonder why they don't just release the footage from the Pentagon. Why not?

not to apologize for the government but it IS a matter of national security.

an independent commission looking into the matter with subpenoa power is the place for evidence like this to emerge.

Frank the Tank · 10-13-2006, 02:22 PM

Do you guys mean the video that was from something like a parking lot security camera or something? Was that the Pentagon? Just trying to clarify, as I can't remember exactly....

Looger · 10-13-2006, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frank the Tank

Do you guys mean the video that was from something like a parking lot security camera or something? Was that the Pentagon? Just trying to clarify, as I can't remember exactly....

i believe these two judicial watch videos are the ones in discussion:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L75Gga92WO8&eurl=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAaP4...related&search=

i... don't see much in those videos at all.

Frank the Tank · 10-13-2006, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Looger

i believe these two judicial watch videos are the ones in discussion:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L75Gga92WO8&eurl=

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAaP4...related&search=

i... don't see much in those videos at all.

Ah thanks, that was the one I was thinking of.

RougeUnderoos · 10-13-2006, 02:37 PM

I don't see much in those videos either, but I looked up this Judicial Watch and I found this:

Farrell conceded that his organization could be the water carriers for a honey pot operation, in which the government attracts overwhelming attention to the Pentagon issue, making it the cornerstone of the 9/11 truth movement, and then blowing it out of the water by releasing clear footage of Flight 77.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...6moretapes.htm

They accuse the government of flim-flam, but what do you call that? That is a problem I have with all this. They demand to see those Pentagon tapes, and if they are released and prove the official story, then that just means they have something else to hide. Where can it end?

photon · 10-13-2006, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Are those guys experts in anything? What is their background? It's funny that at the start the one guy is just incredulous that the coroner from Pennsylvania isn't interested in talking to them.

They're experts in marketing I guess. The closest term I can think of after watching those videos and watching those two is "Religious Zealot". 45 seconds of watching those two was enough to know any reasonable discourse is impossible.

Lanny_MacDonald · 10-13-2006, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fanforever1986

Is this debate not completely dead now that the Pentagon released the video of the plane going into the video?

Where is this video? I haven't seen anything that you speak of and I follow this subject matter very closely. The Pentagon hasn't released ****! The grainy pixelated garbage that they did attempt to pass off as "footage" was NOT from any system in use by the federal government and showed NOTHING conclusive to eithert side of the argument. The Pentagon is sitting on at worst 4 ultra high resolution real time angles that show exactly what happened. They release those images, and the whole Pentagon conspiracy comes crashing down. They refuse to release it because if what it does show, and it ain't a 757/767.

Looger · 10-13-2006, 02:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

They demand to see those Pentagon tapes, and if they are released and prove the official story, then that just means they have something else to hide. Where can it end?

let's be clear here.

the article you cited is not judicial watch, who solicits the government for this info.

the radio interview was conducted by alex jones, who for better or worse is a bulldog on his issues / questions and will frame a debate slanted to his point of view. not that he claims otherwise, he doesn't.

but ferrell / judicial watch and prisonplanet are not even close to the same organization.

jerome corsi is another example of a recurring guest on the radio show, he's involved with judicial watch, mostly with the border issue and the north american union - but alex jones always ends up confronting him on his iran views by the end of the interview.

prisonplanet.com is a site i frequent but it is important to remember where that organization stands on the US government. they don't 'demand' anything from the government. they investigate and report, but you won't find them in the white house press club.

FurnaceFace · 10-13-2006, 02:57 PM

http://www.911eyewitness.com/truth/d...pirefinish.wmv

This 23 seconds is pretty interesting, looks like the "center column" of steel falling at a different rate and breaking apart. Don't think if it was a controlled demo that would happen.

Also if it was a controlled demo, it would have taken a huge amount of explosives and some serious planning. Not to mention all controlled explosions start from the ground, just like the 911 mysteries video shows, not 80 stories in the air right about a hole made from a plane. Having watched some of these demolition shows the demo companies seem obsessed with the wires and are always rechecking the connections. It would be tough for them to guarantee to Bush the buildings would fall as perfectly as they did when their lines could be cut from the planes they had no control over even if they did know exactly how and where the planes would hit the building.