Utopia Temple Forums

Utopia Temple Forums (https://forums.utopiatemple.com/index.php)
-   Respectable General Discussions (https://forums.utopiatemple.com/forumdisplay.php?f=57)
-   -   9/11 Documentary (https://forums.utopiatemple.com/showthread.php?t=68864)

Armitage 03-Apr-2006 09:36

9/11 Documentary
 
This is a link to a documentary which is really worth seeing. Its 1'21 minutes long. Its really really great.

http://www.loosechange911.com/

Watch on Google Video

RoWizzies 03-Apr-2006 09:52

Don't have the time to watch that one but I`ll recommend this one:

http://www.911inplanesite.com/

It's really disturbing as it shows plain facts and not hypothesis. You'll probably end up agreeing with them if you watch the full movie.

Hawkeyekid 03-Apr-2006 09:52

I've only seen bits and pieces of the video, I didn't really care to watch the whole thing, but it was the topic of a huge debate on anotehr forum I'm on.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...e/1227842.html

There's a good article by popular mechanics that'll debunk a lot of these supposed conspiracy theories.

Bernel 03-Apr-2006 10:00

Re: 9/11 Documentary
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RoWizzies
It's really disturbing as it shows plain facts and not hypothesis. You'll probably end up agreeing with them if you watch the full movie.

Or maybe not. Most of this stuff has about the same credibility as the stories about how the moon landings were a fake. It's easy to come up with "evidence" that seems convincing to anyone not an expert in the field so you have to locate some experts who can point out the holes in the arguments. Do you personally have the knowldege to determine the difference between a building collapsing from fire or from explosives, for example?

belili 03-Apr-2006 10:07

Interesting debate (I wish the news would facilitate it more, without tossing the phrase conspiracy theorists around).

But hawk, the article you posted doesn't answer much of the questions posted on these "conspiracy theorist" tapes...

It's probably hogwash... the tapes mostly just show how dumb newscasters are =0

But anything is possible....

Hawkeyekid 03-Apr-2006 10:14

Re: 9/11 Documentary
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Belili
Interesting debate (I wish the news would facilitate it more, without tossing the phrase conspiracy theorists around).

But hawk, the article you posted doesn't answer much of the questions posted on these "conspiracy theorist" tapes...

It's probably hogwash... the tapes mostly just show how dumb newscasters are =0

But anything is possible....

I don';t have an hour and 20 minutes to devote to this kind of stuff. If someone would like to start pointing things out I'll do what I can, but I'm not about to force myself to sit through all that.

Armitage 03-Apr-2006 10:35

Re: 9/11 Documentary
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bernel
Or maybe not. Most of this stuff has about the same credibility as the stories about how the moon landings were a fake. It's easy to come up with "evidence" that seems convincing to anyone not an expert in the field so you have to locate some experts who can point out the holes in the arguments. Do you personally have the knowldege to determine the difference between a building collapsing from fire or from explosives, for example?

A firefighter do has experience of what hears like a building crumbling down because of fire and in which steps that happens and can probably differientate it from multiple explosions of other kind may they be bombs or something else, what matters is that a firefighter is a credible source, experts of their metier. If one of them tells me there were bombs in the building im going to believe him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawkeeyekid
I've only seen bits and pieces of the video, I didn't really care to watch the whole thing, but it was the topic of a huge debate on anotehr forum I'm on.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/scie...e/1227842.html

There's a good article by popular mechanics that'll debunk a lot of these supposed conspiracy theories.

Ill read that. I dont think it will change my mind. What would change my mind would be a real investigation and answers on questions like why the WTC rubble wasnt scientifically examined if there is nothing to hide?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawkeeyekid
I don';t have an hour and 20 minutes to devote to this kind of stuff. If someone would like to start pointing things out I'll do what I can, but I'm not about to force myself to sit through all that.

You watch movies dont you? You go to cinema right? Why cant you spend time watching this docu next time you are with your friends? You arent willed to hear the other side of the story, having no time is just your excuse.

RoWizzies 03-Apr-2006 10:47

Re: 9/11 Documentary
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bernel
Do you personally have the knowldege to determine the difference between a building collapsing from fire or from explosives, for example?

Well I don't but the pictures they are showing and footage + the fact that a lot of the footage from random cameras has been taken from the persons around the sites is a little bit confusing.

You should check the movie then we`ll talk...

Alexstrasza 03-Apr-2006 10:54

Re: 9/11 Documentary
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Falis4
Ill read that. I dont think it will change my mind. What would change my mind would be a real investigation and answers on questions like why the WTC rubble wasnt scientifically examined if there is nothing to hide?

May I ask, what is there to hide about the WTC disaster? 2 planes, terrorist attacks, al-Qaeda. What else is there that the Bush Administration won't reveal?

Gus Mackay 03-Apr-2006 10:55

I don't put much stock in Bush purposely destroying the towers. He may or may not have had advance warning, but a conspiracy... too many mouths.

Bernel 03-Apr-2006 10:58

Re: 9/11 Documentary
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Falis4
If one of them tells me there were bombs in the building im going to believe him.

Why not believe one of the other firefighters instead? Given how many were involved in WTC it's not surprising if some of them have come up with some strange ideas. It's no more strange than that you will find some people believing the house they live in is haunted. In burning and collapsing buildings I'm sure you can hear all kind of strange noises. This was an exceptional event that even most firefighters had no experience with.
Quote:

Ill read that. I dont think it will change my mind. What would change my mind would be a real investigation and answers on questions like why the WTC rubble wasnt scientifically examined if there is nothing to hide?
There were thousands of tons of rubble containing lots of hazardous materials. Maybe no one was interested in further clogging up southern Manhattan trying to analyze all of it in detail when it seemed so clear what had happened. After all, there is no doubt the buildings were hit by airplanes, which was a sufficient reason for them to collapse.

RoWizzies:
Quote:

You should check the movie then we`ll talk...
I looked at some of that stuff the year after the event and found all of it unconvincing. If you want people to watch that movie you need to come up with a good teaser. What is the best argument for why things can't have happened according to the official version? Conspiracy theories as to who knew about the event in advance are one thing, but the physical events aren't much in doubt.

RoWizzies 03-Apr-2006 11:01

Re: 9/11 Documentary
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bernel
RoWizzies:

I looked at some of that stuff the year after the event and found all of it unconvincing. If you want people to watch that movie you need to come up with a good teaser. What is the best argument for why things can't have happened according to the official version? Conspiracy theories as to who knew about the event in advance are one thing, but the physical events aren't much in doubt.

The most obvious facts are the crash 'marks' of the Pentagon. They compare the size of a 747 with the damage it has done where it penetrated. Also there is footage of papers and a monitor that are intact. How do you explain that when a plane with a full tank crashes into a building?

Also the authorities that kept the fire under control (firemen) were not permitted to join any live shows to discuss their efforts and their impressions of the site and damage.

Armitage 03-Apr-2006 11:27

Here is the TEASER of the documentary

Bernel the teaser just states your question that its not a sufficient reason for a buiding to collaps when being hit by a plane. Also i will believe what people have said during 11th september and not what afterwards people have been saying. If you know a source where someone rejects (news footage, audio file,..) that bombs were not exploding during the catastrophic incident please let me know it.

RoWizzies whats also unconvincing is that there were no airplane parts found at Pentagon.

Kazac 03-Apr-2006 11:42

Re: 9/11 Documentary
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by RoWizzies
The most obvious facts are the crash 'marks' of the Pentagon. They compare the size of a 747 with the damage it has done where it penetrated. Also there is footage of papers and a monitor that are intact. How do you explain that when a plane with a full tank crashes into a building?

Also the authorities that kept the fire under control (firemen) were not permitted to join any live shows to discuss their efforts and their impressions of the site and damage.

And what happened to the people who died on the plane? Are they in on the conspiracy? What about all the people who work in Washington who saw the plane crash into the building? Did they truck what was left of the plane, in broad daylight, and spread it over the pentagon lawn?

This kind of stuff is fringe conspiracy nonsense.

RoWizzies 03-Apr-2006 11:49

Re: 9/11 Documentary
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kazac
And what happened to the people who died on the plane? Are they in on the conspiracy?

That is what they are questioning themselves also. The documentary is not suggesting anything is just providing 'facts'.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Kazac
This kind of stuff is fringe conspiracy nonsense.

Probably but once you will see it you will have some unanswered questions that will puzzle you.

Hawkeyekid 03-Apr-2006 11:50

Re: 9/11 Documentary
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Falis4
RoWizzies whats also unconvincing is that there were no airplane parts found at Pentagon.

Of course not. this is not a piece of a plane.
Nor is this.
This is not a picture of light poles clipped by the plane on its way into the pentagon.

If, of course, it wasn't a plane, what was it? A missle? 0]

Snopes also thinks that this theory is crazy, and talks about about how and why you don't see a plane outline on the pentagon. Believe it or not, this isn't Looney Toons where a perfect outline of the coyote is left behind.


edited to fix links.

Largoi 03-Apr-2006 12:21

Re: 9/11 Documentary
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Hawkeyekid
Of course not. this is not a piece of a plane.
Nor is this.
This is not a picture of light poles clipped by the plane on its way into the pentagon.

If, of course, it wasn't a plane, what was it? A missle? 0]

Snopes also thinks that this theory is crazy, and talks about about how and why you don't see a plane outline on the pentagon. Believe it or not, this isn't Looney Toons where a perfect outline of the coyote is left behind.


edited to fix links.

The links aren't really fixed for me... but the light poles link works, but that's been taken up in the documentarie(sp?)

But I agree with Gus Mackay, I can't see this as a true conspiracy because that's alot of people to keep quite.

But the movie does make one thing that's for sure.

Bernel 03-Apr-2006 14:07

Re: 9/11 Documentary
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Falis4
Here is the TEASER of the documentary

Not very convincing. For the crash at the Pentagon see the snopes link Hawkeyekid gave. His other links seems to have been on the "banned by BG" list. As for the fact that many of the supposed hijackers turned up alive, yes, it was stupid of FBI not to realize that terrorists would use fake passports travelling under assumed names, but all that proves is a bit of incompetence.
Quote:

Bernel the teaser just states your question that its not a sufficient reason for a buiding to collaps when being hit by a plane.
It might possibly be an argument the WTC wasn't built up to standards and that the insurance company and victims should have a few words with the constructor. No buildings are indestructable and just because Empire State Building survived a hit of a much smaller plane doesn't mean that WTC had to survove.
Quote:

Also i will believe what people have said during 11th september and not what afterwards people have been saying. If you know a source where someone rejects (news footage, audio file,..) that bombs were not exploding during the catastrophic incident please let me know it.
Why would people say that? There are any number of things that didn't happen that no one ever bothers to mention.

belili 03-Apr-2006 14:20

Quote:

also thinks that this theory is crazy, and talks about about how and why you don't see a plane outline on the pentagon. Believe it or not, this isn't Looney Toons where a perfect outline of the coyote is left behind.
This isn't hollywood either, explosions aren't exagerated to sell crowds.

Armitage 03-Apr-2006 15:20

Bernel: No way a building like WTC was not built on high standards. The explanation for the destruction of the towers is that the fire melt the steel yet towers have been burning before and one in South America burnt 24 hours long yet didnt crumbled and im sure the standards in South America arent as good as in NY. Normally you are very open for science but that the fire on WTC couldnt have melt high quality steel doesnt irritates you at all?

Quote:

Why would people say that? There are any number of things that didn't happen that no one ever bothers to mention.
Quote:

Why not believe one of the other firefighters instead?
You said there might have been other firefighters with another opinion that there were bombs as explanation for the explosions, i was you for further information. There are many saying bombs were exploding and the others .. which others?

About the rubble, it would have been a responsibilty for for history and the future generations to investigate the rubble for evidence, it could have been done within months, people were already there to investigate the matter.


All times are GMT+1. The time now is 13:19.

Powered by vBulletin (modified)
Copyright © Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.