im about to head out

4/28/2006 3:08:20 PM

Same questions....16 pages later...

No, bin Laden didn't have any motive to carry out the 9/11 attacks.

Its not like he issued a fatwah or anything urging muslims to kill americans.

Keep ignoring evidence, little buddy.

Quote :

"Text of Fatwah Urging Jihad Against Americans Published in Al-Quds al-'Arabi on Febuary 23, 1998 Statement signed by Sheikh Usamah Bin-Muhammad Bin-Ladin; Ayman al-Zawahiri, leader of the Jihad Group in Egypt; Abu- Yasir Rifa'i Ahmad Taha, a leader of the Islamic Group; Sheikh Mir Hamzah, secretary of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Pakistan; and Fazlul Rahman, leader of the Jihad Movement in Bangladesh ... All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on God, his messenger, and Muslims. And ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries. This was revealed by Imam Bin-Qadamah in "Al- Mughni," Imam al-Kisa'i in "Al- Bada'i," al-Qurtubi in his interpretation, and the shaykh of al-Islam in his books, where he said "As for the militant struggle, it is aimed at defending sanctity and religion, and it is a duty as agreed. Nothing is more sacred than belief except repulsing an enemy who is attacking religion and life." On that basis, and in compliance with God's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies--civilians and military--is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God." This is in addition to the words of Almighty God "And why should ye not fight in the cause of God and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated and oppressed--women and children, whose cry is 'Our Lord, rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will help!'" We -- with God's help -- call on every Muslim who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded to comply with God's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson."

http://www.ict.org.il/articles/fatwah.htm

Could you please address these questions? I'm not trying to redirect or distract here. I'm genuinely curious. You made statements regarding all of these questions in this very thread, I would just like you to explain them before moving on. I questioned these claims when they were originally made, but you ignored me. Why won't you answer them?

Why didn't they build a pipeline in 1998? Why did they blow up their own african embassies and then launch a missile attack on Afghanistan? They were set to build a natural gas pipeline with the Taliban then. Why mess that up for no reason?

You don't believe that Afghanistan was invaded for the sake of a pipeline? Then why are you defending that theory so stubbornly?

You just said that Afghanistan was invaded so that a pipeline could be built. Now you're saying that the zionists wanted to prevent the building of a pipeline - just like how Iraq was invaded to secure the oil supply even though the zionists don't care about the oil supply. How do you reconcile all of the conflicting information that you spout off on here?

By the way, how did the zionists cause the US Civil War and the Revolutionary War?

I would also like to see some proof that Pearl Harbor was caused by the evil edomite zionists.

You have provided absolutely no evidence at all that the Rothschilds are the zionists at the top running world events. They were a prominent family that supported the creation of a jewish state, that is all. Please provide some evidence other than "Here are some rich jews!"

So why should anyone believe your rantings anyway You have admitted that you hate jews. As such, you are far from an impartial source when you blame jews for every problem in the world.

So when was the Israeli false flag terrorist attack in Washington state?

Why is it spamming if I repeat unanswered questions, but it's ok for you to repost the same article in the same thread five times?

4/28/2006 3:08:42 PM

hey matt what city do you live in

4/28/2006 3:12:40 PM

Dammit guth. Everyone knows that this isn't a thread for asking questions.

4/28/2006 3:23:13 PM

THERMITE EXPLOSIVES USED TO BRING DOWN TWC TOWERS?; VIDEO SHOWS MOLTEN IRON DRIPPING FROM AROUND 81st FLOOR OF SOUTH TOWER JUST BEFORE COLLAPSE

Quote :

"THERMITE AT THE WTC - The Censored Evidence *PIC* Posted By: ChristopherBollyn <Send E-Mail> Date: Thursday, 27 April 2006, 9:21 p.m ...Photo: The amount of molten metal, presumed to be iron, pouring from the 81st floor of the South Tower immediately before it collapsed suggests that tons of Thermite had been placed around the core columns on that floor and used to sever the columns in order to precipitate the collapse. If this is molten iron, which is appears to be, then the amount which is seen falling here is about one cubic meter. One cubic meter of molten iron weighs more than 8.5 tons! Thermite was evidently used to initiate the collapses in both towers plus the 47-story WTC 7, which collapsed for no apparent reason at 5:25 p.m. I ask, at what point is it clear that the offical 9-11 report is nothing but a pack of lies and that the controlled media is conspiring to hide the evidence from the public? http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?noframes;read=88135"

Video showing yellow molten substance dripping from the South Tower just before collapse
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2991254740145858863&q=cameraplanet%2B9/11

Quote :

"...video showed a yellow, molten substance splashing off the side of the south Trade Tower about 50 minutes after an airplane hit it and a few minutes before it collapsed. Government investigators ruled out the possibility of melting steel being the source of the material because of the unlikelihood of steel melting. The investigators said the molten material must have been aluminum from the plane. But, said Jones, molten aluminum is silvery. It never turns yellow. The substance observed in the videos "just isn't aluminum," he said. But, he said, thermite can cause steel to melt and become yellowish. http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635198488,00.html"

4/28/2006 3:24:59 PM

Quote :

"The amount of molten metal, presumed to be iron, pouring from the 81st floor of the South Tower immediately before it collapsed suggests that tons of Thermite had been placed around the core columns on that floor and used to sever the columns in order to precipitate the collapse"

Yet no one noticed that the core columns were festooned with tons of thermite, as well as detonator cord? Wouldn't the initial impact and the accompanying thousands of gallons of burning aviation fuel pouring throughout the structure ignite the thermite?

4/28/2006 3:34:37 PM

^ see this is what i'm confused about. to bring down a building of that size in a controlled demolition would require a shit load of time planning and implementing the explosive charges. in addition, the size of the buildings would require miles upon miles of det cord..and that's times 2 for 2 towers! how is it that not 1 single person ever noticed the miles of det cord or the actual explosives themselves?

4/28/2006 3:36:40 PM

Quote :

"see this is what i'm confused about. to bring down a building of that size in a controlled demolition would require a shit load of time planning and implementing the explosive charges."

Look. You've got the same issue with WTC Building 7. And we know damn well that building 7 was brought down in a controlled demolition.

4/28/2006 3:39:00 PM

Why didn't burning jet fuel set off any of the explosives? It was burning at around 1800 degrees, yet the charges didn't go off for almost an hour?

Usually when you leave a shit load of explosives in a burning building that has been drenched with jet fuel they go boom pretty quickly.

^ Yeah, you missed the question in his post too:

how is it that not 1 single person ever noticed the miles of det cord or the actual explosives themselves?

[Edited on April 28, 2006 at 3:40 PM. Reason : 666]

4/28/2006 3:39:48 PM

^

Perhaps everyone in the building who died was in on the conspiracy, so they didn't point out the massive amounts of explosives, wires, etc.</sarcasm>

[Edited on April 28, 2006 at 3:51 PM. Reason : realized some people might think I was being serious...]

4/28/2006 3:40:25 PM

Wii ARE YOUR A.U.T.H.O.R.I.T.I.E.S.

4/28/2006 3:41:24 PM

Quote :

"Perhaps everyone in the building who died was in on the conspiracy, so they didn't point out the massive amounts of explosives, wires, etc."

yea that must be it.

4/28/2006 3:43:25 PM

WHO'S SERIOUSLY DENYING THAT WTC BUILDING 7 WAS BROUGHT DOWN IN A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION?

YOU'VE GOT THE SAME "ISSUES" WITH PLACING THE EXPLOSIVES IN THE CASE OF BUILDING 7, BUT THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT BUILDING 7 WAS NOT WIRED FOR A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION. IT WAS.

4/28/2006 3:44:04 PM

Quote :

"But, said Jones, molten aluminum is silvery. It never turns yellow."

i found lots of pictures of yellow molten aluminum just with google

4/28/2006 3:44:07 PM

theres no reason why they would lie about demolishing wtc7. if they wanted to bring it down with explosives they could have just told everyone

4/28/2006 3:45:27 PM

Oh, so WTC Building 7 wasn't demolished in a controlled demolition?


100% CONCLUSIVE: WTC BUILDING 7 WAS BROUGHT DOWN IN A CONTROLLED DEMOLTION


WTC Complex Leaseholder Larry Silverstein admitted in PBS documentary that WTC 7 was brought down in controlled demolition:
1 minute video clip: http://infowars.com/Video/911/wtc7_pbs.WMV

Quote :

""I remember getting a call from the Fire Department Commander telling me that they were not sure they were going to be able to contain the fire. I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is 'pull it.' And they made that decision to pull, and then we watched the building collapse." --Larry Silverstein (WTC leaseholder)"

"Pull" and "pull it" are industry terms for triggering a controlled demolition. To make this perfectly clear, here is another video clip from the same PBS documentary where the term "pull" is used to describe beginning a controlled demolition on WTC Building 6.

video: http://thewebfairy.com/911/pullit/pull-it2_lo.wmv


WTC 7 Collapse footage. Watch the demolition charges going off at the top right of WTC 7 in the following video clip. Also notice how the center of building collapses first:
http://www.infowars.com/Video/911/WTC7COLLAPSE2.WMV


Here are some still pictures from the video of the collapse of WTC 7:



Notice the clear demolition squibs at upper right of building.


Excellent websites on WTC Building 7:
http://www.wtc7.net/
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc7.html


[Edited on April 28, 2006 at 3:52 PM. Reason : ```````]

4/28/2006 3:51:56 PM

hey i have an idea!

what if you post the same shit over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again!

people will really start to belive your shit then!

4/28/2006 3:54:55 PM

If something doesn't convince anyone do you really think that reposting it verbatim is going to do the trick?

Creative interpretation of a quote and a blurry picture. That's your 100% CONCLUSIVE proof?

4/28/2006 3:57:20 PM

If after looking at the evidence, you still deny that WTC Building 7 was brought down in a controlled demolition, and you say that it collapsed "due to fire" like the government claims, you might want to think about joining the Flat Earth Society as well.

4/28/2006 4:02:19 PM

Quote :

"Notice the clear demolition squibs at upper right of building."

haha yea that's real clear. maybe post a blurrier picture next time or post one that cant easily be photoshopped.

4/28/2006 4:03:00 PM

for all i know those are giant stadium-style bratwursts.






with SAUERKRAUT!

4/28/2006 4:05:16 PM

Quote :

"you might want to think about joining the Flat Earth Society as well."

Maybe I'll go be a creationist too.

Lets try this again. I am interested in your theory, thus I am asking questions about it. These questions are all based on statements that you have made. It is not a rational discussion if you refuse to discuss your ideas. This is what discussion boards like this one are for.

No, bin Laden didn't have any motive to carry out the 9/11 attacks.

Its not like he issued a fatwah or anything urging muslims to kill americans.

Quote :

"Text of Fatwah Urging Jihad Against Americans Published in Al-Quds al-'Arabi on Febuary 23, 1998 Statement signed by Sheikh Usamah Bin-Muhammad Bin-Ladin; Ayman al-Zawahiri, leader of the Jihad Group in Egypt; Abu- Yasir Rifa'i Ahmad Taha, a leader of the Islamic Group; Sheikh Mir Hamzah, secretary of the Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Pakistan; and Fazlul Rahman, leader of the Jihad Movement in Bangladesh ... All these crimes and sins committed by the Americans are a clear declaration of war on God, his messenger, and Muslims. And ulema have throughout Islamic history unanimously agreed that the jihad is an individual duty if the enemy destroys the Muslim countries. This was revealed by Imam Bin-Qadamah in "Al- Mughni," Imam al-Kisa'i in "Al- Bada'i," al-Qurtubi in his interpretation, and the shaykh of al-Islam in his books, where he said "As for the militant struggle, it is aimed at defending sanctity and religion, and it is a duty as agreed. Nothing is more sacred than belief except repulsing an enemy who is attacking religion and life." On that basis, and in compliance with God's order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies--civilians and military--is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God." This is in addition to the words of Almighty God "And why should ye not fight in the cause of God and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated and oppressed--women and children, whose cry is 'Our Lord, rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will help!'" We -- with God's help -- call on every Muslim who believes in God and wishes to be rewarded to comply with God's order to kill the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find it. We also call on Muslim ulema, leaders, youths, and soldiers to launch the raid on Satan's U.S. troops and the devil's supporters allying with them, and to displace those who are behind them so that they may learn a lesson."

http://www.ict.org.il/articles/fatwah.htm

Could you please address these questions? I'm not trying to redirect or distract here. I'm genuinely curious. You made statements regarding all of these questions in this very thread, I would just like you to explain them before moving on. I questioned these claims when they were originally made, but you ignored me. Why won't you answer them?

Why didn't they build a pipeline in 1998? Why did they blow up their own african embassies and then launch a missile attack on Afghanistan? They were set to build a natural gas pipeline with the Taliban then. Why mess that up for no reason?

You don't believe that Afghanistan was invaded for the sake of a pipeline? Then why are you defending that theory so stubbornly?

You just said that Afghanistan was invaded so that a pipeline could be built. Now you're saying that the zionists wanted to prevent the building of a pipeline - just like how Iraq was invaded to secure the oil supply even though the zionists don't care about the oil supply. How do you reconcile all of the conflicting information that you spout off on here?

By the way, how did the zionists cause the US Civil War and the Revolutionary War?

I would also like to see some proof that Pearl Harbor was caused by the evil edomite zionists.

You have provided absolutely no evidence at all that the Rothschilds are the zionists at the top running world events. They were a prominent family that supported the creation of a jewish state, that is all. Please provide some evidence other than "Here are some rich jews!"

So why should anyone believe your rantings anyway You have admitted that you hate jews. As such, you are far from an impartial source when you blame jews for every problem in the world.

So when was the Israeli false flag terrorist attack in Washington state?

Why is it spamming if I repeat unanswered questions, but it's ok for you to repost the same article in the same thread five times?

4/28/2006 4:06:05 PM

you are a fucking idiot

after claiming that the majority of americans know the us government was behind the attack you quote an article saying that as of 2004 less than half of new york and 41% of the country thought the us knew about the attack and didnt do anything.
knowledge of the event does not mean complicit or involved. as 2004 rolled around there had been a large amount of discussion about the intelligence failures. including questions surrounding the arrest of mossaui (sp?). however, much of this discussion involved things we learned less than a week before the attack. we didnt know who was going to do it. we didnt know how, and i would bet we didnt know when or what. all we knew is that something was planned and that some guy had been arrested, but he was thought to be lying.
EVERYONE KNOWS THESE THINGS, BUT THEY DO NOT MEAN WE WERE INVOLVED.
i could tell you toomorow it is going to rain, and fail to mention where or when. i would be right, but i would not not have any ability or willingness to try and stop it.

AND, since when has 40% ever been a majority, especially when that same majority has done stuff like support clinton in record numbers after he was impeached and support bush at near perfect levels while we were invading an innocent country. FUCKING IDIOT.

4/28/2006 4:07:37 PM

i really dont understand why they would lie about wtc7 if it was a controlled demolition
theres no reason to

4/28/2006 4:09:44 PM

i really don't understand why they would take it down on 9/11 to begin with. it received next to no coverage in light of the two towers coming down.

i assume that salisburyboy will say that silverstein wanted it down so that he could collect insurance, but the building was severely damaged by falling debris, so it probably would have been paid for anyway.

4/28/2006 4:14:47 PM

they could have easily said that it suffered sever damage and needed to be demolished for safety

4/28/2006 4:25:14 PM

posted here is an animated gif of the video provided by prisonplanet.com:



taking the gif frame by frame:













as anyone with an objective mind can see, the shot that salisburyboy so often uses in his arguement:



is in fact taken from the end of the video..NOT the beginning. he has demonstrated a ploy to use this as "evidence" that this particular still is taken at the beginning of the clip causing the "controlled demolition." this is a blatant use of resources to meet one's personal agenda and beliefs disregarding all credible and logical explanations. those "squibs" are the result of the building collapsing, NOT the cause.

this is a new low and now this is real evidence of the lengths he goes to to convince others and himself of this grand conspiracy of the US government.

[Edited on April 28, 2006 at 4:48 PM. Reason : embed]

4/28/2006 4:46:06 PM

THEY NEEDED EXPLOSIVES TO MAKE SURE IT FELL ALL THE WAY OK

4/28/2006 4:49:06 PM

Quote :

"those "squibs" are the result of the building collapsing, NOT the cause"

suuuuuuure

4/28/2006 4:56:07 PM

keep denying it. it's all posted right there in visual form for people to see how you're manipulating the video.

4/28/2006 5:03:31 PM

i really dont see how he can argue with your post
you went frame by frame to show that they are a result of and not the cause of the collapse

4/28/2006 5:04:57 PM

Quote :

"suuuuuuure"

Once again salisburyboy is refusing to have a rational discussion when presented with evidence that damages his position.

Though I'm sure he'll be back to saying "Show me evidence supporting the official story" within a page.

4/28/2006 6:30:44 PM

good work brianj320

4/28/2006 6:51:56 PM

HE POSTED SOMETHING WORTHWHILE
CLEARLY HE IS A TROLL

NOW LET ME MENTION SOMETHING ABOUT HOW WOODFOOT IS ALWAYS TROLLING ME

CAUSE CLEARLY I'M A FUCKING DOUCHENOZZLE

4/28/2006 8:02:37 PM

hey lets find new creative ways to insult him

or use existing ones that often get forgotten


i'll go first: stuptard

4/28/2006 8:06:10 PM

nimwad

4/28/2006 8:28:52 PM

Quote :

"i really dont see how he can argue with your post you went frame by frame to show that they are a result of and not the cause of the collapse"

Look. It's admitted the building was brought down in a controlled demolition. And even if it wasn't and it collapsed "due to fire", it would not collapse in the manner that it did--ie, as in a controlled demolition where all the structural supports fail virtually at the same time.

Those "squibs" of dust at the top of the building are not the result of floors "pancaking." They are from the explosives placed in the building.

And those few explosives at that top portion of the building did not cause the entire building to collapse, but collectively all the explosive charges placed in the building caused it to collapse.

Quote :

"what city do you live in"

wilmington
and I'm from salisbury
and I graduated from NC State in 2002
and I'm a lawyer
do you want to know my whole life story?

4/29/2006 12:08:37 PM

Quote :

"It's admitted the building was brought down in a controlled demolition. "

someone saying "pull it" is not the same as an admittance

and where did you go to law school

4/29/2006 12:12:37 PM

hitler u?

4/29/2006 12:15:27 PM

Quote :

"And even if it wasn't and it collapsed "due to fire", it would not collapse in the manner that it did"

so you're an expert on controlled demolition?

Quote :

"Those "squibs" of dust at the top of the building are not the result of floors "pancaking." They are from the explosives placed in the building."

how freakin dense and blind can you be? i showed a frame by frame look at how they are NOT explosives. those "squibs" are a result of the collapse not the cause. you're lookin at the subject matter subjectively rather than objectively which causes you to be a hypocrite (which i already knew).

Quote :

"And those few explosives at that top portion of the building did not cause the entire building to collapse"

once again, you fail to see how they are not explosives.

Quote :

"and I'm a lawyer"

i feel sorry for anyone who hires you to represent them. lawyers above all people should realize the difference between subjective and objective interpretation. lawyers use the facts at hand, simple as that. you do not.

4/29/2006 12:24:47 PM

what if he is a defense lawyer like in "the devils advocate"

4/29/2006 12:28:24 PM

he's mad cause he has to work for jews

4/29/2006 12:55:26 PM

Quote :

"Look. It's admitted the building was brought down in a controlled demolition."

kekekekeke

4/29/2006 12:56:08 PM

Have you guys seen Universal's "Flight 93" message boards? It's flooded with threads critical of the film and exposing the truth about 9/11 being an inside job. The moderators of the forum are deleting threads exposing the truth in the attempt to make it seem like more people still support the official story. It looks like those who know the truth about 9/11 may very well now be the majority...


Universal Pictures' "Flight 93" Forum
http://www.universalpictures.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=1

Notable threads from the forum:

Quote :

"VIDEO: Bombs in the WTC. the controlled demolition of WTC7 - FACT Israel's Proven Role in Causing the Events of 9-11 The 5 Dancing Israelis on 9-11 Explosions at the world trade center 911 The U.S. Government is Lying to All of Us Did mossad together with Israeli spies in US GOV.do 9/11? The story is a lie and everyone knows it 9/11 Was a False Flag Operation This Movie is Propoganda Garbage Mainstream News & Whistleblowers Prove 9/11 Coverup This Movie Is Bullshit, Just Like the Government Version HOW IS TRUTH "INAPROPRIATE"? - Universal Rep please"

And I especially note from these threads that more and more people are taking attention to the Israeli/Mossad role in 9/11. Good.


Oh, and check out this thread:

Was 9/11 an inside job - the poll of all poll's
http://www.universalpictures.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=563

Quote :

"Was 9/11 A self inflicted wound Yes 100% [ 24 ] Undecided 0% [ 0 ] Total Votes : 24"

haha. who's the majority now?



http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/290406truthseekers.htm

Quote :

"Universal's Flight 93 'Hijacked' By Truth Seekers Forum moderators deleting entire threads in real time Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | April 29 2006 Universal Studio's Flight 93 movie online forum has been completely infiltrated by people opposing the official government 9/11 fable and its moderators are having to delete entire threads in real time deeming them, "inappropriate." A cursory visit to the forum confirms that the entire website has been turned into a battle ground for countering the government apologist propaganda being regurgitated in an impetuous lunge to give credibility to a tale about as reality-based as Humpty Dumpty."

WE ARE NOW THE MAJORITY. THE GAME IS UP.


[Edited on April 29, 2006 at 1:18 PM. Reason : ``````````]

4/29/2006 1:14:50 PM

-- the fact that their message board got spammed with wackos doesn't mean that you are a majority, it just means that alex jones linked it on his site and you all dont have lives

--wow, out of 24 votes all of the wackos agreed on something, BIG SURPRISE

--i would delete your spam posts too



I mean seriously, throughout this entire thing i have always known that you are just trolling. But even knowing that, sometimes your posts make me really sad that you came from the same university that i am attending. your last post for example.

4/29/2006 1:18:32 PM

9/11 TRUTH MOVEMENT NOW TOO BIG FOR MSM TO IGNORE; USA Today RUNS STORY ON FILM Loose Change

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-04-27-conspiracies-sept-11_x.htm

Quote :

"Conspiracy film rewrites Sept. 11 4/29/2006 By William M. Welch, USA TODAY Gypsy Taub, a mother of three from Oakland, does not believe that 9/11 happened. At least not the way the government said it did."

OMG! A "conspiracy" film! But the "official" version is a conspiracy theory too, right? An Arab conspiracy! DOH!

Quote :

"A Russian émigré, Taub is one of a growing number of people in the USA who are using the Internet, college campuses and pamphleteering to get the word out. "Oh yeah, absolutely. On the day it happened, I thought it was the government that did it," she said. Taub is promoting one of the latest presentations of revisionist theories on the 2001 attacks by al-Qaeda terrorists, a film that says, among other things, that the Pentagon was hit by a cruise missile fired by the military as an excuse to go to war."

See, the article gives special attention to the claims about the Pentagon, which is one of the weaker points raised by skeptics of the official story. The MSM has consistently employed this tactic--ie, attacking only the weaker points made by the skeptics and ignoring the most compelling arguments. The Popular Mechanics hit piece used that tactic extensively.

Quote :

"Called Loose Change, it is being downloaded from the Internet and shown in small screenings here and overseas. [...] Professors and researchers of film and politics say the Internet is making it far easier to spread such theories because the traditional media are losing their hold on the news."

Hmmmmm. I wonder why the "traditional" media is losing their hold on the news? Because they are suppressing the truth, acting as a mouthpiece for the government, and parrotting government lies?


And one important note: Loose Change is one of the "softer" films exposing the truth about 9/11. And it does not expose the Israeli/Mossad role in 9/11, and certainly not the overall Zionist orchestration of the attacks. And the Zionist-controlled MSM won't touch the Israeli/Mossad involvement or Zionist orchestration of it all. That explains why they can stomach to give this film publicity. They don't care if Bush, Cheney, or any of their other puppets take the fall for 9/11. The Zionist overlords will just install other puppets to take their place.

But it doesn't matter. Once you really get into 9/11, all the evidence leads to the PNAC/Zionist/Israeli/Mossad connections anyway.


[Edited on April 29, 2006 at 1:53 PM. Reason : ```````]

4/29/2006 1:46:12 PM

stop trolling

4/29/2006 2:00:34 PM

what salisburybot left out

Quote :

"Most of what the film alleges is refuted by the evidence at hand. Anything not answered definitively by the government is interpreted by the film as proof of a coverup. Among the assertions in Loose Change is that a missile hit the Pentagon even though eyewitnesses saw the jet, numerous pieces of wreckage were found including the flight recorder, and those on the flight and in its path at the Pentagon are dead. There is also the claim that because jet fuel burns at up to 1,500 degrees and steel melts at 2,750 degrees, the World Trade Center's infrastructure could not have been brought down by the airliners. However, as reported by the Journal of the Minerals, Metals and Materials Society, steel loses 50% of its strength at 1,200 degrees, enough for a failure. "The only thing they (the filmmakers) seem to have gotten right about the Sept. 11 attacks is the date when they occurred," says Debra Burlingame, whose brother was the pilot of American Flight 77 that crashed into the Pentagon. "They aren't truth-tellers looking to save the world," she says. "They're con artists hoping to sucker conspiracy-theory paranoids or anti-government malcontents into shelling out their hard-earned dollars." Some college students who saw Loose Change and are promoting it say it's good to raise questions. The film offers "at the very least suggests that we don't know the whole truth, and that some things are quite fishy," says Matt Latham, a freshman at the University of California, Santa Cruz."

Quote :

"Conservative writer David Horowitz, a former 1960s radical, says conspiratorial thinking can offer a world view that is somehow less scary than reality. "Conspiracy theories are a kind of secular religion," he says, adding that campus faculties sometimes encourage anti-government feelings. "People feel great anxiety ... by the thought that nobody's in control." People believe in conspiracy theories because the truth "is either too simple or too remote," says sociologist Clifton Bryant of Virginia Tech University, who has made a study of "deviant logic" and behavior. "We're always ready to believe something about which we know nothing," he says."

4/29/2006 2:04:03 PM

great

we are now proving that a movie studio has more class and smarts than the wolf web

a fucking movie studio

do you hear that TheDuke

you have been outclassed by fucking movie suits
the lowest form of human

gg

4/29/2006 2:06:45 PM

so you want theduke to censor viewpoints on 9/11 that differ from the government and MSM "official" story?

hooray for viewpoint censorship!


The only reason to censor such views is because you want to suppress the truth in order to maintain the official lie, and because you know that the official story fairy tale cannot stand against the facts and evidence raised by the skeptics.

[Edited on April 29, 2006 at 2:11 PM. Reason : ```]

4/29/2006 2:09:01 PM