Yes,
"No End in Sight" was a very very good movie...saw it last year. BEst wwas first half.

"Zeitgeist" will have to wait. Am I SUPPOSED to be seeing something other than occasional gray blobs and an audio track (that sounds like John Houseman...but he died 20 years ago!)

Okay,
Got video and some good minimalist score at minute 4.
Definitely looks like its worth my time. Beautiful imagery. Reminiscent of HEARTS AND MINDS.
After 20 minutes, I realize that freedom was right...it IS an incredibly profound (and informative movie.)

Thank you...

Saw "No End In Sight." I agree totally. It's a fairly even-handed look at the first days of the invasion, and how we could have prevented some of the problems we're having there now.

Quote:

whether or not the US government was capable of wiring the WTC for an implosion, conspiracy theories, whatever you want to consider, regardless of all of that, one cannot overlook the fact that the US government has never hesitated to sacrifice lives, thousands of lives, innocent lives very often, in order to better themselves economically. 3,000+ of our own citizens on 9/11............?..........who knows.

the East Timor massacres are a prime example. completely covered up by the media, an event (i don't want to call it a war....slaughter would be more appropriate), that most Americans are completely unaware of even today, but it was their own US government that practically independently planned what resulted in nothing short of a genocide. an estimated 200,000 Timorese were slaughtered. why? so that the US and England could sell weapons/planes, and of course, OIL. Also worth noting, the United States single-handedly forced the UN out of the picture, eliminating their involvement to prevent the invasion.

hmmmm......America not cooperating with the UN.....doing whatever they want...........allowing tens of thousands of people to die in wars overseas for their economic betterment.....OIL.......selling arms............government cover-ups.......

whether the US government was fully responsible for 9/11, partially responsible, not responsible at all.........the end result has been all too familiar. I'm not talking about conspiracy, I'm talking about history.

recently watched a documentary on the Iraq War, concentrated mostly on the initial invasion and the events immediately following. It's called 'No End in Sight.'

worth checking out.

It's called Cottage Industry. Make something bigger than it actually is. JFK, Roswell, Bermuda Triangle, etc. A person can actually make an entire career out of something like this, theorizing conspiracies etc. Even Pitbulls......

I find it hard to believe the government could carry out an extremely complicated conspiracy that would involve hundred if not thousands of workers without any proof leaking beyond debates on the burning point of jet fuel.

A politician has an affair or soldiers torture detainees and pictures and details flood the news weeks later. Yet the same government that couldn't get proper aid out to Katrina victims in a timely manner managed to keep something this large under wraps? Possible, I suppose, but likely? Not very.

The controlled demolition theory is the stupidest of all the many stupid conspiracy theories I have ever heard.

Freedom (don't bullshit me with this "hey, I thought this was interesting..." because I'm not as stupid as you are and you are *clearly* a shill for this flick) is making the following assumptions:

1- The government wanted to kill all those people and destroy the WTC. (why? Cui Bono is not a valid argument, dickmo).

2- The government is supercompetent

It carried out an incredibly complex and lengthy explosive rigging operation, one that would involve multiple crews of dozens of people, on the sly, running explosives all throughout one of the busiest areas in the busiest city in the world, and no one saw a thing. (perhaps they used the super secret invisible ninja costumes developed at the ZOG labs, hmmmmm?)

3- these thoroughly evil consiprators are, apparently, models of selfless loyalty, as are all of their minions.

Of the 100 or so people that, at minimum, would have to wire the building, murder/abduct all the people on those planes and stash the bodies, steal the planes, install the remote control devices (I assume the conspirators weren't going to kill themselves, so exactly how did those planes... oh wait, I forgot, they were holograms, or was it just that millions of people were fooled by the mind drugs they put in the flouridated water) not a single one of them talked. Right.

Complete Horseshit.

Don't flop around with your moaning little "I just found it interesting" or "I'm just keeping an open mind" or other vacillating BS. Man up and own your argument or slink off stage left, you cowardly little merdatuer.

And here's the real rub. Why would the government do this when it could achieve the same nefarious ends in a much simpler fashion? If they are so smart and competent, they would know well enough that such an "operation" couldn't be pulled off.

Quote:
That movie looks terrible.

Trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqUrYvZY1-g

I just watched a show on discovery about the implosion of a relatively small bridge (about as big as the Bayonne Bridge... nothing even close to the GWB). The setup took about 8 months. During that time, the bridge was extremely dangerous to be near given that any little spark or lightning strike could accidentally trigger a premature explosion. Does anyone really think that the towers were rigged to implode and not one single person noticed? Not one janitor? Not any building engineers? If the buildings were vacant, and you had several fully staffed explosive demolition companies working in coordination, the setup would probably take about a year. This concept that the buildings were imploded is beyond ludicrous. And I'm not someone who refuses to believe the notion that our govt could have helped facilitate the attack (even though I think that's a million to one shot), but the jets are without question the sole reason those towers dropped. Such a ridiculous conspiracy theory. .

I have my doubts regarding 9/11 myself, but what I valued the most from that movie was the beginning where it exposed various truths regarding religion, more specifically, christianity.

No offense, but judging from that letter, your friend doesn't sound like the brightest bulb.

OK, I think most of the 9/11 conspiracy people are nuts too -- but my friends made a film that is at Two Boots - Pioneer through Friday, July 18th -- those interested should check it out -- it is very well crafted.



It is reviewed in the Village Voice and the New York Times

http://www.villagevoice.com/2008-07-0 ... sc-s-the-reflecting-pool/

http://movies.nytimes.com/2008/07/11/movies/11refl.html

=====================
Jarek Kupsc responds to his critics:
=====================

An open letter to Nathan Lee, the NY Times movie critic of ?The Reflecting Pool.?

By Jarek Kupsc

There is a scene in my movie, ?The Reflecting Pool,? in which a right-leaning TV program reacts to a 9/11 news article written by the protagonist. In the scene, a professional conspiracy debunker is brought in to offer his two cents. To quote directly from the film, ?This is really an example of irresponsible journalism at its worst. This is right up there with the Holocaust denials and the Moon Landing conspiracy theories.?

I wrote this scene into the film in anticipation of such ?hit pieces? as the recent NY Times review by Nathan Lee.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/11/movies/11refl.html?ref=movies

In his review of ?The Reflecting Pool,? Mr. Lee states that the movie promotes ?a complicit, propaganda-foisting media/industrial complex in the pocket of the Bush administration and the Jews and the oil industry!? I?m not sure which movie Mr. Lee watched, but there is not a single mention of Jews or Oil Industry in ?The Reflecting Pool.? In fact, the movie doesn?t even mention Mr. Bush by name at any point. I am particularly disturbed by Mr. Lee?s injection of the Jews as culprits in the 9/11 tragedy. Which Jews is he referring to? The Ashkenazi? The Sephardic ones? The Orthodox? Perhaps the Chasidic? Such deliberate generalization is nothing but a cheap shot at discrediting my script as anti-Semitic. Had Mr. Lee paid any reasonable attention to the plot, he surely would have picked up a nice tidbit of information, which incidentally came from a Fox News source, that Israel?s Mossad issued a specific warning to the Bush Administration about the planned terrorist attacks on American soil prior to 9/11.

But Mr. Lee doesn?t stop there. To quote from his review once again, ?Written and directed by Jarek Kupsc, the movie has the tone, rhythm and structure of a set of numbered, handwritten notes derived from 9/11 conspiracy Web sites, photocopied at Kinko?s and distributed at an anarchist bookshop.?

Mr. Lee, let me quickly offer you a short list of the sources that I used in researching and writing the script of ?The Reflecting Pool.?
NY Times
LA Times
Washington Post
BBC
MSNBC
FOX News
PBS
The White House
The FBI
C-SPAN
USA Today
Newsday
Daily News

Now, if these sources sound like ?handwritten notes derived from 9/11 conspiracy Web sites,? then please, go on and discredit yourself and other mainstream media as anarchist bookstore material.

To remind you, Mr. Lee, it was your own NY Times which actively sought to release the 9/11 Oral Histories of firefighters, first-responders, and others, whose testimonies had not been included in the 9/11 Report Commission. The NY Times had to go to court to get the tapes released, won the case, transcribed the materials and posted it on their website.

It was the NY Times that reported about the U.S. planting propaganda articles in Iraq newspapers.

It was the NY Times that reported that ??FEMA was not allowed to enter ground zero to collect other potentially critical evidence in the weeks after the attack, and it did not get a copy of the World Trade Center blueprints until early January, a delay House members found infuriating.?

It was the NY Times that reported on the government agencies which had occupied WTC 7, stating, ?The CIA?s clandestine New York station (?) was behind the false front of another federal organization, which intelligence officials requested that The Times not identify.?

It was the NY Times that said, ?The Victim Compensation Fund was not really created to help the 9/11 families (?) They were an afterthought to a bill designed to save the airlines.?

It was the NY Times that described the alleged ace pilot of Flight 77, which hit the Pentagon, as ?incompetent,? relating how his flight instructors ?questioned whether his pilot?s license was genuine,? were concerned ?that ?you really shouldn?t be in the air.??

It was the NY Times which, reporting on FBI whistleblowers, argued that the 9/11 attacks could have been averted, had the agents not been deliberately prevented from investigating their terrorist suspects.

It was the NY Times that contradicted the statements by President Bush and Condoleezza Rice, who claimed that nobody prior to 9/11 had considered using planes as weapons:

?In the months before the Sept. 11 attacks, federal aviation officials reviewed dozens of intelligence reports that warned about Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda, some which specifically discussed airline hijackings and suicide operations, according the a previously undisclosed report from the 9/11 commission.? (Emphasis added).

Again, if these article sources, all from your newspaper, Mr. Lee, seem to belong on an anarchist bookshelf, then perhaps you should work for another publication. It is really dangerous to be an anarchist these days, with FISA and all the domestic surveillance.

Back in 1977, Carl Bernstein, of the Watergate fame, wrote an article for The Rolling Stone magazine, titled ?The CIA and the Media.? He bemoaned the ultimately tragic infiltration of our ?free? media by government agents posing as journalists and editors. Thirty years later, I am prone to believe the situation has not improved. Now, Mr. Lee, you are too na?ve and ignorant of the 9/11 issues to be a CIA operative (they don?t hire fools), but, like so many of your colleagues, you have succumbed to the pressure of protecting the official story of what happened on September 11, 2001. Your piece on ?The Reflecting Pool? has all the markings of a deliberate job of discrediting a well-researched story. In your ignorance on the subject matter, you unwittingly attempted to discredit the very publication you work for, which has done a terrific job of reporting on a lot of issues that ?The Reflecting Pool? dramatizes.

The last thing I would like this rebuttal to sound like is a cry of a filmmaker disappointed with a bad movie review. I am fully aware that ?The Reflecting Pool? is not ?Citizen Kane? or ?Lawrence of Arabia.? It is not even close to ?All the President?s Men.? It is a small, ultra-low budget movie made with a lot of heart by somebody who cares about the state of this nation, and the world, and simply wants honest answers to questions that still linger in the air. Whether you like it or nor, Mr. Lee, September 11 is shaping our daily lives by illegal wiretaps, over 4000 dead American soldiers, hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqi civilians, and the precipitous state of our economy.

It is not about me being a good or bad director. It is not even about you being a good or bad critic. It is about issues that are so much larger and impending. Don?t be afraid to look into the facts, even if they hurt. Because they will hurt a lot. We can?t improve anything without healing the gaping wound of 9/11.

Sincerely,

Jarek Kupsc

Writer/Director

The Reflecting Pool

nugnfutz wrote:

"Webmaster

Can you go to the sites linked by Freedom and read the postings on Activism and how to get involved. They use "innocent questions" on sites and blogs like JCLIST, accept no answers but their own, and use it to peddle their highly organised and activist propaganda.

Then can you ban this dick if he continues to use this forum to peddle his conspiracy theories. The only conspiracy I see is the one funded by these "Truth about 9/11" nutters. And I'm sure the Patriot act will take care of their funding very soon."

totally out of line, buddy.

If you can\'t participate on this subject without getting personal and calling names, then maybe the webmaster
should ban you? --- naa, your entitled to your oppinion,
just like i\'m entitled to mine. Flame on numbnuts.

I am not an activist. this movie was sent to me by a friend
who is also not an activist. I thought it was interesting
enuogh to share it on JC list, so i did. The website i posted
came from googling Larry Silverstein.


Here are a couple of quotes from the website you posted.

G\'Day Russ.

I worked for many years in \"Fire Assay\"...that is melting stuff in 1300c firnaces to see what was in them.

I also transfered into Shotfiring where I got to blow things up on a regular basis including packing plastic type explosive - \"Power Gel\" - around objects to blast them apart and make the way clear for large vehicles.

You soon learn the power of explosives as you can make them cut like a knife through objects of any sought.

Anyway...i watched that building fall. What cant be explained to me is it\'s symmetrical collapse. How could metal POSSIBLY fail in such a symmetrical fashion? I note that the central core went first as is evident by the video and the \"penthous\" failing first.

I know what heat does Russ. I know that a few fires, which were only just visible, whether fueled by a bit of deisel or not, are EXTREMELY unlikely to \"weaken\" support core structures to that extent in THAT short a time.

Large metal beams can dissapait heat easily. If it was that easy to \"melt\" or \"weaken\" metal to such a point then I guess we can dispense with the well insulated metal furnaces i used to use and the high pressure natural gas feed and just chuck some deisel on top of the samples I used to melt.

Please keep your arrogant and paternalistic tone to yourself.

You find the fact that finding out how such a large metal structure collapsed...is somehow a waste of time and bothersome?

I guess you must work at NASA as they seem to have the same attitude when it comes to probing into the causes of things.

I am interested in hearing from people involved in the metal trade, particularly those involved in fatuige testing metal materials...if they come here.

I appreciate your input Russ but can you please bottle the paternalistic tone.

I want to know how that building collapsed. We saw other buildings TRASHED by WTC debris which were kind enough to remain standing and indeed retain there structural integrity enough to be rebuilt.

I know what the heat requirements are to weaken metal and join points.

And as for your claim that the reports mentioned 5-6 floors had CRITICAL structural members which were on fire, this in NO way explains the symetrical and catastrophic collapse of WTC 7. In NO WAY does this explain it.

In fact they cant explain it Russ. Thats the point. All your arguments are null and void as in the end the reports DO NOT claim to know the cause.

\"They\" cannot help. Can anyone else here?



Building 7 & Firefighter reports.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Russ,

This is off point but it is one you have made with some certainty.

You claim fire fighters in Building 7 reported that the fires were such that the building was in danger of collapsing.

Fine.

You seem to trust the opinion of firefighters.

In that case we seem to have a problem of sorts with your logic.

It is WELL reported and ON THE RECORD that firefighters in the towers reported small fires that would be easily contained and extinguished. It is also ON THE RECORD that not ONE firefighter believed there was ANY chance of those buildings collapsing. Minutes later the first of the Towers suffered a catastrophic collapse.

Which will it be?

Or will you simply be picking and choosing your line of thought to suit yourself?

And by the way...i do not appreciate being accused of being a \"whacky conspiricy theorist\" because I WANT TO KNOW how those buildings collapsed. ESPECIALLY BUILDING 7.

And why we\'re on the subject of fire fighters opinions, you are aware of the fact the the premiere firefighting magazine called the report...\"a half baked farce\".

I demand answers. Thats why I\'m here.

And here I edit again...to question your logic...what exactly was burning in those buildings to make large steel girders buckle? To make bolts the size of my fist and weld joints split and crack? Carpet? Wooden furniture? Deisel?

Diesel is a relatively LOW volatility fuel but if it were feeding those fires we would have seen a fire ball in short order...agreed? Or is there some other laws of the Universe you wish to postulate?

As for Building 7 being PELTED by debris...please direct me to the photographs and video showing large scale structural damage to Building 7?

I dont know what you rqualifacations are Russ but mine are pretty good. Especially the qualifacation as a free thinking human with an expansive frontal lobe able to spot \"over intellectualized bulldust\" when I see it.

Ok Freedom.

Go to the website below and read up on the responses given by people who actually know what they're talking about. If you can read, and understand the physics involved. Then good. If not, follow the advice of those physicists to the idiot that continued to peddle his trash.


http://physicsforums.com/archive/index.php/t-82026.html

Then go google causes of the trade center collapses, and read the official reports.

Webmaster

Can you go to the sites linked by Freedom and read the postings on Activism and how to get involved. They use "innocent questions" on sites and blogs like JCLIST, accept no answers but their own, and use it to peddle their highly organised and activist propaganda.

Then can you ban this dick if he continues to use this forum to peddle his conspiracy theories. The only conspiracy I see is the one funded by these "Truth about 9/11" nutters. And I'm sure the Patriot act will take care of their funding very soon.

"Truthers" I love it.

Gosh, of all the things one might ask--The towers were fairly large objects, correct? "Wiring them for demolition" would have been no small project, I think we can safely assume. Probably require a sizable team of demolition planters working for a long time in areas accessible to non-government-stooge workers (engineering crews, etc.) Yet nothing of the sort was observed and, more astonishingly, not a single one of those dozens or hundreds involved has spilled the beans. Not a one! But these guys can blithely toss off a phrase liked "wired for controlled demolition" without bothering to get into the details of exactly how that would have taken place, who would have done the wiring, when and how they would have done so, how all the explosives would have remained undetected by building and insurance inspectors for so many years, etc.

Unless.....oh my god! Every single employee at the WTC was part of the conspiracy!!!

Yeesh.

Every large-scale event generates conspiracy theories. So will the next one.

I haven't seen the movie, but I do know that conspiracy theories make for very entertaining films. The reality of conspiracy theories though, is that they give the conspirators way too much credit. This is particularly the case with conspiracies involving the government. Not to disparage our dedicated public servants, but it's been a long time since the government attracted the "best and the brightest" to its ranks. Picture your local postman trying to pull off a complex operation masterminded by someone at the DMV and that's closer to what you would get than the all-knowing and all-doing conspirators of the movies.

I'm not saying they can't pull it off, after all, the 9/11 hijackers were a bunch of average guys. But on the other hand, their plan was pretty straightforward: hijack some planes and crash them into buildings, no escape plan necessary. Now imagine this conspiracy: wire the WTC with enough explosives to take them both down and look like an accident, time it exactly to coincide with the planes crashing into the building (the explosives and triggering mechanism were designed to withstand the planes crashing into the buildings), recruit (dupe?) some guys for a suicide mission to make it look like a terrorist act, and then never get caught. You've got to be pretty damn good to pull that one off.

How about a review on this book from the website you posted, and this is just one of them.



Tired, Debunked Garbage., 15 May 2007
By JezSmitty - See all my reviews

Are we still on the subject of PM's failed debunking attempt? Apparently defenders of the official conspiracy theory don't read the material written by the 9/11 Truth Movement. If they did, they'd realise that this book (which is essentially an expansion of their original article from 2005) has been thoroughly eviscerated by Jim Hoffman, David Ray Griffin, Steven E. Jones and many others within the 9/11 researcher community.

Focusing on theories that even the majority of the 9/11 "Truthers" don't accept, this book is a fine example of using straw-man tactics to discredit an otherwise solid argument. It is cover-to-cover circular reasoning and throughout we are presented with an almost zealot-like mentality against anyone who dares question the official fable.

Appealing to the emotions of the reader is rampant in this book, namely evoking the guilt of researchers by assuring us that questioning 9/11 is a direct insult to those who have lost loved ones.

The free-fall speed of the WTC collapses are glossed over here, as they were in NIST's report of the collapses. Apparently it's no big shake to have steel and concrete crashing through steel and concrete at the same speed as it would fall through thin air - in a vacuum! i.e. with no resistance even from the air itself. This is perfectly plausible when explosive demolition is considered, and this is the only plausible explanation. PM apparently believe that Al Qaeda are capable of suspending the laws of nature, such as the Conservation of Momentum, and Galileo's Law of Falling Bodies. Picture the scene: a huge truck is parked at the traffic lights, and a small sports car comes speeding up behind it, and crashes directly into the back of it. Will the sports car continue moving forward at the same speed? According to PM, YES!

The free-fall speed of the collapses, the molten steel observed in the basements of all three buildings (the Towers and WTC7 - which you've probably never heard of), the squibs, the horizontal ejections of steel girders for hundreds of feet, the pulverization of most of the buildings' non-metallic content...all of these things are subjected to PM's "begging the question" time and time again, with no real answer offered.

All of the anomalies of the collapses can be explained in one fell swoop if you consider the controlled demolition hypothesis. But according to PM, the obvious and most testable explanation can't be correct, because it doesn't fit into their pre-determined conclusions, the conclusions that were no doubt enforced by those who performed what one employee of PM described as a "hostile takeover".

All of the staff were replaced immediately before the original 2005 article was written, and have apparently remained in place for this new book. The head of this new team is Benjamin Chertoff, the cousin of Michael Chertoff, the current head of Homeland Security in the U.S - an institution that could never have existed without 9/11. The conflict of interest is quite staggering.

Popular Mechanics is owned by Hearst Publishing. Hearst Publishing are the originators of the term "Yellow Journalism". Need I say more?

Read this book, by all means. It will at least give you some insight into how baseless and absurd the official conspiracy theory is. When you're done reading it, check out a few of the direct responses to this book by people like David Ray Griffin and Jim Hoffman. I highly recommend Griffin's "Debunking 9/11 Debunking: An Answer to Popular Mechanics and Other Defenders of the Official Conspiracy Theory". This book directly challenges "Debunking 9/11 Myths" plus many other publications/reports on the attack.

"Debunking 9/11 Myths" in a word: shameful.

Quote:


I hate to confuse your mental derangement with facts but invest some time into reading this book.


Debunking the 9-11 Myths

I'm a fan of Bill Maher, and evidently for years he's been besieged by 9/11 conspiracy wanks who think his anti-Bush riffs would make him sympathetic to their drivel. A few months ago he'd finally had enough:

Crazy people who still think the government brought down the Twin Towers in a controlled explosion have to stop pretending that I'm the one that's being na?ve. How big a lunatic do you have to be to watch two giant airliners packed with jet fuel slam into buildings on live TV igniting a massive inferno that burned for two hours and then think, "Well, if you believe that was the cause?" Stop asking me to raise this ridiculous topic on this show and start asking your doctor if Paxil is right for you.

The funniest part was that he was livid to be cast in the role of having to defend GWB.

zeitgeist is a good movie that points out questions that have been left unanswered...is it flawless, by no means...but it brings up points about religion, 9/11 and our gov't that have been swept under the rug.( i think partly because we're afraid of finding out the truth, but that's a whole other topic!)

some people on this thread are a little naive and took the point of the post a little too personal.

why is it when you simply ASK questions about 9/11, you're labeled a conspiracy nut?

if anyone thinks that this administration had nothing to do with 9/11, is simply uninformed of the history of the US. fdr/pearl harbor, gulf of tonkin, etc...NOT TO MENTION THAT THE NEO CONS STATED THEY NEEDED ANOTHER PEARL HARBOR IN THE PNAC! read it for yourself.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf search pearl harbor.

"Further, the process of transformation,
even if it brings revolutionary change, is
likely to be a long one, absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event ? like a
new Pearl Harbor"

one last FACT to leave you with, which this movie points out, HOW COME GEORGIE AND DICKIE DID NOT WANT THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT TO BEGIN WITH AND HOW COME THEY TESTIFIED WITH CONDITIONS LIKE, THEY BOTH HAD TO BE TOGETHER AND THEY TESTIFIED NOT UNDER OATH...CAN YOU BELIEVE SUCH A THING, NOT UNDER OATH!!! that alone, should be the flag-raiser for everyone!

trp3...right on.

it's not a perfect movie by any means.....but one thing that is inarguable is the FACT, not theory, but FACT, that jet fuel is incapable of burning at a hot enough temperature to melt those steel beams.

with that said, how the hell did the buildings fall at basically the speed of gravity? like a perfect demolition job?

what about the thermalite deposits?

what about the picture of the beam with a perfect 45 degree angle cut into it?

how about no traces of an airplane at the pentagon, or the one that crashed in the woods?

how about the refusal by the Fed's to release the camera footage that displayed exactly what crashed into the Pentagon?

how about building 7, collapsing to the ground like a perfect demo job, and it wasn't even hit?????

conspiracy theory or not, these FACTS just don't add up.

because of that, i don't think it's justified to jump on freedom's back about this movie or his posts.

and the fact that there are those of you that lost friends/family, it's irrelevant to this discussion. you think questioning the US government and their intentions is offensive?

what do you think about the Iraq war? you agree with that? what's that.......?........ was that a "no" i heard? because I have already lost a close friend to that war, and i'll be the first person to say that the war in Iraq is a totally bull$hit war the US government never should have started.

does THAT offend you?

No need to get personal and call names. I posted this movie
because i thought it was interesting, not to focus on 911.

We all saw the same thing that horrible day. the dispute
over how/why it hapened is not something i made up, but
has been debated by building and demo professionals,
scientist and on and on, and the conclusion is not so cut
and dry, with many questions unanswered.

WTC and building 7 are the only steel structures in history
to fail from a fire.

scientist or the government can still not explain how huge
steel jet engins that cannot be vaporized by jet fuel are
nowhere to be found, in the pentagon and in PA.

It is documented history that in the past the government has manufactured a disaster in order to get public approval to go to war.

I know it sounds insane to think our government had anything to do with this, but do you relly believe everything
President Bush is telling you.

Until there is solid answers, I will keep an open mind.

Profound? Yes.

Profoundly stupid in thinking anyone could believe these tortured lines of reasoning
Profoundly offensive to those of us who lost friends/family/co-workers during 9/11
Profoundly boring to believe that we care about you linking some of these ancient links on conspiracy
Profoundly idiotic to miss the point that the US public cares more now about the US reaction to 9/11 and not the original act itself.
And overall profoundly insulting to our intelligence.

I have no ties to the US Government. I am not a Jew. I am not involved in any kind of conspiracy. I saw what happened first-hand during 9/11. I lost friends and co-workers.

And you, Freedom, are either demented, a dick or have your own agenda. Personally, I hope you're just a dick.

Quote:


"Wtf was in those offices that would explode like that?"

Err...how about the almost full fuel tank from the airplane, the fires creeping through the building, the build-up of explosive gases, posibility of backdrafts.... duh! Why is that a less reasonable explanation that the government rigged the building and detonated it minutes after the planes hit?

And the Silverdude article? "This puff of smoke", the phrase "pull it" and the statement from some dude in the fire dept all add up to a grand conspiracy to blow up an empty building???? Soooo...how does that relate to the other grand conspiracy to blow up WTCs 1&2 with people in it...why not just detonate it at the same time as the others for maximum impact?

I believe that the fire dept didnt have a clue where all their people were at that time ...half the fire department were killed by that time buried under a mountain of rubble and the other half were blinded and suffocating in the clouds of debris, plus they were working with makeshift communications. And some fire dept guy can say with conviction that noone from the fire dept were in WTC-7?

Go have a look at the hollow shell of Deutche bank building which was at a similar distance to the South Tower as WTC-7 was to the North tower. If WTC-7 hadn't fallen, that's what it might have looked like, and they still might be finding human remains from the site as they do from the Deutche building.

Frankly I find your posts extremely offensive and insulting to those of us who lost co-workers and friends in the 9/11 attacks. Go peddle your propaganda and distorted lies elsewhere please.

(quote)nugnfutz

\"There were no explosions after the planes hit.\"


I started filming from the waterfront after the planes hit
using a broadcast quality camara zoomed in on the towers.
When i got home and watched it on my big screen tv, i
was shocked to see people jumping /falling from the building
and at one point there is a huge explosion inside that blows out windows, a big fireball comes out , and then a body comes flying out from the force. this is long after both
planes hit. I remember thinking to myself wtf was in those
offices that would explode like that.

And for the record its Larry Silverstein not Silverman.
Check out what Silverstein has to say about building #7


http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/ ... 106silversteinanswers.htm

Quote:

As someone who actually saw both planes hit the towers on 9/11, and I mean I was on Vesey St under the first plane when it hit the North Tower, and I was watching the South Tower from a Ferry to NJ when the second plane hit, I find these "truth about 9/11" intellectualists at best demented and seriously insulting the memory of those that died at the site, and at worst serving the agenda of those who attacked the towers.

When they start looking for holes in what happened on 9/11...yes there was total mayhem and confusion at the time, even at a government level. To then go back in hindsight and point to inconsistencies, and invent the crazy conspiracy theories just makes me sick. I can empathize with negative sentiments about the US's reaction to 9/11, but no - 9/11 was not any kind of US/Israel conspiracy despite the insinuations and crazy theories of the so-called 9/11 "truth" distortionists.

Their distortions are all about "why did this building fall the way?". "Our experts say it should have fallen that way". And why did Silverman say "pull it" referring to WTC-7? The distortionists say this meant "blow it up". On WTC-7, the rational explanation is given the mayhem at the time was to get people the eff outta there, cause the building was likely to fall, given the number of fire/police and other deaths that had already occured.

And the "why did the buildings fall this way" argument? There were no explosions after the planes hit. There was nothing to suggest the trade center was exploded from below...in fact my clear memory and TV coverage shows both WTC towers crumbled top-down, not base-up. So the US/Israeli planned an extremely complex and coordinated series of events that would involve hitting 2 towers at the same time with planes, and near-simultaneously detonating pre-prepared explosives at the top of both WTCs and at the bottom of WTC-7???

Honestly, if you accept the theories if the 9/11 truth distortionists you would have to accept a sequence of events and actions that noone would have been capable of coordinating, not even the US government.

Quote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States

What about the part that says there is no law allowing the
fedral government to collect income tax? has anyone ever
heard of this?

Most profound movie of all time?? Not so much....

Fist 3 minutes, thought i was supposed to be stoned in order to "get it". Turns out the director or whatever just has a flair for overly trippy music...

Part 1 - about how Christianity is just based on the same foundations as ancient egyptian religions & pagan religions. Am not a theologian so i have no idea if any of this is true.

Part 2 - about how 9/11 was masterminded by the US government and other assorted 9/11 conspiracies.

Part 3 - about how central banks are causing a death spiral of debt, etc etc. Margin Loans are evil, etc. Then moves into a somewhat muddled critique of mass media.

And then to top it all off, the documentarian suggests the end-goal of the "monied interests" is to eventually combine all sovereign nations into one world government and have all money on an implanted chip in your body. If you get out of line, the government will shut of all access to money (and i assume by extension, your very identity). Seems to be implied that the chip will also be equipped w/ GPS and there will be this huge human "grid"

Don't waste your time unless you're a big fan of 9/11 conspiracy films or just conspiracy in general. The movie doesn't really add anything to the discussion.

Final analysis: 1h55m of my life that i want back, luckily i was playing on-line poker at the same time, so it wasn't a total waste...