http://www.lolloosechange.co.nr
http://www.lolinfowars.co.nr
http://www.911myths.com
http://www.debunking911.com
http://www.loosechangeguide.com
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com


Watch

YO is that you Mark the creator of this Video that posted this?

No.

Lol, the only thing I'm denying is the absurd fairy tail you believe in that has no basis in reality.

O.K. Lets have the one question, the one piece of evidence that you consider the strongest that proves your hypothesis, that 911 was an inside job?

I would say that physics of the collapse of all 3 of those building makes it clear that there was explosives involved, which is pretty damning to the official version and makes it clear that we need a new investigation. I try and steer clear of making any sort of speculations on the 'who' part, but as far as the hard facts go I don't see how 19 cavemen could pull this thing off alone.

Sometimes I think that the terrorists wanted a republican like George W Bush to win his previous term of elections. Osama got exactly what he wanted after 911. He wanted the US to invade the Middle Eastern Countries, ruin the US economy, spread the military thin and destroy the US world standing.

I agree, nahsik.

omnitribe, you're underestimating the cavemen. If you think about it long and hard, hijacking planes and ramming them into buildings was doable at the time. 9/11 wasn't as "brilliant" as it was horrific. It was a pretty cheap, lame, cowardly tactic. These days there's so much security at airports and the feds/CIA are doing their homework and are usually able to prevent this type of attack before it occurs.

Something else for you crazy, treacherous, yellow-bellied, self-loathing and ignorant truthers to think about..

Why use a crude, barbaric 9/11 type of attack in the first place? What's the government's goal here? Surely an attack like that would cause such panic and outrage that investigating it would top all other agendas and prompt massive, thorough research for decades (which it did). So what's the point of a brazen false-flag attack like this? What shadow government in their right mind would leave so many trails of evidence behind when the dust clears?

If I were a conspiring shadow government figure, the last thing I'd want is such an enormous spotlight on myself.

Ignorance is the prime factor behind 9/11. Ignorant Islamic cavemen attacked us, and our ignorant ex-President acted inappropriately and ignorantly.

Where we are now has everything to do with 9/11, there are so many reasons they would want an event like this to pursue an agenda that it amazes me that you can't think of one. This is all beside the point anyways, I'm looking at the hard evidence and you can make your own conclusions from there, because we could ask 'why' all day and never come to anything less than assumtions.

Here are the facts, Osama Bin Laden isn't even wanted for 9/11 because they don't have enough evendence. The investation done by the 9/11 Commission and NIST were a complete whitewash, ignoring the most obvious evidence, 6 out of the 10 people who of the 9/11 Commission are now admitting that it there was a cover up involved. We've found the explosive substance used in traces of the WTC dust. We have everything else I mentioned before about controlled demolition characteristics. We have over 900 architects and engineers calling for a new investigation, that number is growing every day. I really wish I could pull myself to be so gullible to buy such an ridicules story. The ignorance is in not being open to the science, ignoring the facts, and I've barely scratched the surface here. I don't want to believe these things, but these things are true. Any rational human being that looks objectively at the evidence will see the obvious problems.

'omnitribe' date='Nov 5 2009, 12:49 AM' post='843810'
I would say that physics of the collapse of all 3 of those building makes it clear that there was explosives involved,


Your assertion of "it's clear" is just that an assertion and is no way evidentiary.



http://www.debunking911.com/paper.htm



which is pretty damning to the official version and makes it clear that we need a new investigation.

Assertions are not damning to anything other the state of your own mind, when asked for evidence to support a hypothesis and you fail to do so.



I try and steer clear of making any sort of speculations on the 'who' part, but as far as the hard facts go I don't see how 19 cavemen could pull this thing off alone.

So rather than commit to a hypothesis you'd prefer the shear speculatory nature of your assertions and to top it off you're a racist too. Nice job there sport.

[quote name='omnitribe' date='Nov 5 2009, 08:43 AM' post='844049']

Cheers dude. But I also have to say something else and this is thoroughly true!
- The government has the power and does use it to control the media and the press. The general public rely on what ever airs on the local news channel or their newspapers to provide them with information whether it is good or bad. When people don't see it on any of these streams of media sources then the first thing they will believe that it is a hoax or a conspiracy.

I'm not saying that I believe 100% any side of the story for 9/11 but what I have learnt is that the government has control on what ever information is leaked to the public through these streams and whether it may be fact or even ... fiction.

I read a lot. And this book has really given me a better perspective and ability to make a judgement on what occurred and what is to be learnt.

An Ordinary Person’s Guide to Empire - Arundhati Roy

http://www.amazon.com/Ordinary-Persons-Gui...e/dp/0896087271

Didn't he state that in one of his videos? or was it Saddam ? Anyway Its working.

Isnt this in two separate threads now?

If only you could send a link to David Lynch and put his poor mind at rest (sarcasm)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQ0pOIZpFlc...feature=related

I'll watch this tomorrow, but reckon that it will hide away from questions it cant dream up "plausible" theories for. Soooooooooooo many questions, that in itself stinks like a rat.

Maybe Mark8 could post a link to FBI, so they could finally have evidence to incriminate Osama - cause he's guilty as hell right?

I have always looked at the 10 most wanted list from time to time ,and wondered when upon a time the conspiracy theorists are gonna capitalize on a very MINOR thing...I was thinking "when the "deniers" get the most desperate they will use this as ammo".....surely as hell:)

Actually I've explained a few of the evidences to you, I don't feel like I need to repeat myself. I also directed you to peer reviewed science that backs up the evidence I presesented. If you would like to see the full case for physical collapse of the buildings I would suggest you watch the lecture given by Richard Gage called "9/11: Blueprint For Truth."

Lol, I'm the farthest thing from a racist, sport. I love your red herrings.

Dont know,just asking

I think this should be added to the emoticons on this site.

'omnitribe' date='Nov 5 2009, 07:47 PM' post='844350'
Actually I've explained a few of the evidences to you, I don't feel like I need to repeat myself. I also directed you to peer reviewed science that backs up the evidence I presesented.

You must have missed the History channel thread, in post 69# I've already pointed out that a ) It is not a peer reviewed journal b ) It has already been demonstrated that it is a flawed report, by the ACTUAL scientists in the relevant particular fields of study. c ) While Jones has pulished in ACTUAL physics journals, he has failed to publish this in an ACTUAL engineering journal. d ) He gets to choose who peer reviews it, this IS NOT how science works. e ) He refuses to name these peer reviewers and what their credentials actually are .


Post 69#

http://www.debunking911.com/jones.htm
http://www.debunking911.com/paper.htm
http://www.911myths.com/html/traces_of_the...at_the_wtc.html


If you would like to see the full case for physical collapse of the buildings I would suggest you watch the lecture given by Richard Gage called "9/11: Blueprint For Truth."

Why would I listen to the ramblings of an Architect? My best mate is an Architect and he wouldn't dream of presuming he could espouse such nonsense. He knows about architecture not about being an engineer or a demolition expert. Architects&engineers for 911, only we have an architect a theologian and a software engineer... oh look we have a software engineer! That counts as a relevant field of study(!)

Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World
Trade Center and Building Demolitions
http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/b.../Papers/466.pdf
http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant.html

Top-Down building collapse
No explosives used.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EY3nj728WPY




http://www.cool-places.0catch.com/911/Open...RichardGage.pdf


Lol, I'm the farthest thing from a racist, sport. I love your red herrings.



By labeling the terrorists who hijacked the planes as simply "19 cavemen" you are attempthing to lower the credibility of their ability to commit the crime. You are also lowering them as individuals, individuals who WERE NOT cavemen as you put it but highly motivated, trained and educated men. Atta for example spoke three languages and studied architecture, not the sort of background you'd expect from a "caveman". But hey anything goes with you other than evidence. Your own words betray you as either a racist or an uneducated speculator at best.

progressive collapse 2

terrorists couldn't do it with 2 planes, but the french can do it with 2 backhoes. kinda neat that something that couldn't happen is being adopted as a new construction demolition technique. and patented too.

Explain this please.

Mark, I find your comments about racism regarding the caveman label presumtuous, a little desperate and downright petty. My take on the use of caveman in the context it was used, was to emphasise the preposterousness of how a network of islamic terrorists could orhestrate the 911 attacks, from the stereotypical underground bases the mainstream press often uses to describe the terrorist infrastructure in the middle east. To argue this was the case without any "inside" assistance does indeed beggar belief. Are you saying the NORAD drills that day were a coincidental convenience?............c'mon!

Then of course there's the scorched passport and bandana "found" as evidence at two seperate crimescenes on that day. You believe they were genuine too right?

I shall now watch the film. Hope it explains the pentagon anomalies, as well as the many, many others, but I have a sneaking suspicion it wont. Oh, by the way what's your take on Aaron Russo?

Top down crush an interesting argument, though there's not much comparison between a small block of flats and a superskyscraper. The damage shown here was well outside it's footprint. Also how could this argument be even remotely used for building 7?

Got to watch this documentary now!

Just use it as an avatar

Seen the original screwloosechange and remember how much little impact it had on me before. So far, nothing new here.

'jason' date='Nov 6 2009, 01:54 PM' post='844978']
Mark, I find your comments about racism regarding the caveman label presumtuous, a little desperate and downright petty. My take on the use of caveman in the context it was used, was to emphasise the preposterousness of how a network of islamic terrorists could orhestrate the 911 attacks, from the stereotypical underground bases the mainstream press often uses to describe the terrorist infrastructure in the middle east. To argue this was the case without any "inside" assistance does indeed beggar belief.

These people aren't cavemen no matter what spin you put on it. He should take responsibility for his use of words and not hide behind the lame excuse you're trying to offer. The IRA didn't need any inside help, why would the islamists? Timothy Mcvie didn't or any other example I could bring up. You've just presented speculation and tried to pass it off as fact. If you have evidence to support your "They need inside help" then by all means provide it.


Are you saying the NORAD drills that day were a coincidental convenience?............c'mon!

NORAD pre 911 dealt with threats outside of the USA, ie North Korea launching a missile (nuke) or for eg. Russia sending fighter planes and bombers in the direction of the USA. Not from within, which is a presuposition of the CTs.


http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology...842.html?page=3


Then of course there's the scorched passport and bandana "found" as evidence at two seperate crimescenes on that day. You believe they were genuine too right?

These items were not required to find out who the terrorists are. They are totally superfluous to the event or the aftermath and investigation. You should go through the my posts on the two threads, this is already covered. They also found personal effects of the victims, credit cards etc.... Also a scorched plane seat was discovered, they all survived the crash, why not a passport and bandana? This is the most tenuous line of enquiry the CTs have and is as I said superfluous. Ask your self, what does having the passport add to the situation? Nothing is the answer, lucky, but nothing major comes from having it


I shall now watch the film. Hope it explains the pentagon anomalies, as well as the many, many others, but I have a sneaking suspicion it wont. Oh, by the way what's your take on Aaron Russo?

About as useful as ranting Alex Jones, not very!

explained here

beam cut by workers during cleanup.

lol you idiot

are you referring to me?

There have been some interesting questions made here in these 911 debunk posts, and I'm grateful for your extensive efforts Mark, and dare I say it Maximius (just just your posts mate, not your millitary activities).

The thing is, they don't convince me at all that 911 was orchestrated without implicit or indirect meddling from the corporate/banking puppets, that make up the highest of echelons within governments and intelligence.

There are still many questions, within the debunk field, not touched that rumble in my psyche, but rather than waste time nit picking over inconsistancies and a coincidental plethora of coincidences, it would be more beneficial to focus on the causal matters at hand.

The following letter has a subtle dig at AJ and a possible agenda behind his work, which actually raises deeper concerns, please read. I'll post some seperate threads with some Micheal Ruppert lectures and debates....



Official Statement on 9-11

by

Michael C. Ruppert

November 2, 2009 – We have all seen the amazing progress of CoLLapse. The film has exceeded all of my expectations thanks to Chris Smith and Kate Noble of Bluemark Films. It is making people hungry for answers to all the right questions. And starting this Thursday CoLLapse opens for one-week runs in 12 cities in the US and Canada.

There is something important that needs to be addressed now and I am the only one to do it.

More than five years ago I completely and unequivocally divorced myself from the 9-11 Truth Movement. I did that because it had been co-opted and hijacked by people offering arguments and theories about 9-11 that were deeply flawed and absolutely inadmissible in a court of law. I addressed those flaws specifically in a 2003 essay about why physical evidence claims would go nowhere and would be used to discredit anyone who challenged the official Bush Administration version of events.

In many radio interviews and lectures throughout 2004-2006 I also said unequivocally that I was no longer affiliated with the 9-11 Truth movement because I saw that it would be publicly discredited as it has deservedly been. The current 9-11 Truth movement is indeed a circus. “Crossing the Rubicon� IS admissible in court and it has nothing to do with flawed, self-destructing and unnecessary arguments that are the tent poles of the 9-11 “movement�. I left that tent a long time ago.

I also divorced myself from the 9-11 as an issue because the window to achieve political and legal change had closed. The collapse of industrial civilization trumps 9-11. 9-11 is a dead issue. -- I cannot say it more clearly than this. Our limited energy must be focused on the future. One of my trademark lines has always been, “Nothing matters to me except for change in the political landscape.� – We can achieve that with CoLLapse.

FOR THE RECORD, Although I have discussed it I have never endorsed or used the building demolition theory as an argument. I have put this in writing too many times. There was/is no physical evidence (however compelling) that would be admissible in a court of law; and what reported evidence exists is useless because a legal chain of custody is not provable. Chain of custody is one of the first tests of admissibility. Some of the work done on building collapse – especially as it pertains to WTC7 -- is both compelling and well-founded. Some is not. But what is credible would never pass the admissibility test; and that’s on the assumption that a court with jurisdiction would ever try the case.

FOR THE RECORD Although at first I was very skeptical based on the energy around certain books that became popular in 2002-2003, I later found out that there were hundreds of independent eyewitnesses on I-395 who saw an airliner hit the Pentagon. In a court of law their testimony could never be overcome by videotapes or interpretations that have no proof of authenticity. That testimony could never be negated by speculation or expert opinion. And I have been convinced for a long time now that an airliner did, in fact, strike the building.

“Crossing the Rubicon� and its unanswered questions about 9-11 has never been remotely examined or discussed by mainstream media or the United States government. While the United States government has spent a lot of time and money easily debunking the claims of the so-called 9-11 Truth movement; and while the History Channel and Popular Mechanics went to great effort to debunk the 9-11 Truth movement; all that the press and the government have done with “Crossing the Rubicon� is to ignore it.

I stepped away from the Babel of 9-11 Truth more than five years ago. If the mainstream press wants to take me on over a book I wrote and which remains unchallenged after five years then I am and always have been prepared (and eager) for that. That book has sold around 100,000 copies and is in the Harvard Business School library. It has 1,000 footnotes; none of which have ever been challenged..

NOTE TO THE NY TIMES AND ALL MAINSTREAM PRESS: In a recent review of CoLLapse by the Times, the reviewer made reference to a negative article written about me by David Corn for “The Nation� magazine in 2003. In that article Corn maliciously libeled me by writing that I had been fired by LAPD as a mental case. That was untrue. At the time of my resignation in late 1978 I was both certified for promotion to Detective and earning the highest rating reports possible. I had no disciplinary actions (pending or prior) of any kind. That was only one of the lies that David Corn wrote and The Nation published.

The next question the press will ask is “Why didn’t you sue?� The record shows that from 2004 until the present day I have been constantly involved in legal battles on top of the work of book-writing and running From The Wilderness until its demise in 2006. I have never lost. The Oregon appeal is far from over. Does anyone ever consider the toll such legal battles take? The money, the time, the energy? I can only fight so many fights at a time and the reason why small and unethical people like David Corn get away with things like this is because they know that. But the great brutality of mainstream media is that it will dredge up inaccurate stories without checking and refer to them as truth in order to discredit anyone who opposes corporate-controlled press in this country.

Any journalist is required to do fact-checking before going to press. I left a record of between two and three million words. It is indexed, catalogued and out there for anyone to read. Sooner or later someone is going to have to read it.

And for all who cannot tell the difference between me and Alex Jones I heartily encourage you to stay with him and not associate yourself with me or my work in any way. That is where you belong.

Michael C. Ruppert

Your not grateful for my military service?

Seen the end of Zetgeist Addendum, when the soilder lays down his firearm and turns away? Or when the Venezuelan army turned their backs on the corrupt government and joined ranks with the protesting masses?

They're my types of hero Maximius. You my friend, merely serve to perpetuate a corporate agenda, thinking that by "bravely" gettin caught up in the symptoms and propaganda, you are helping this good cause.

Either that, or you are a troll.

Your avatars would suggest the former.

Well i started to watch this but .. 3hrs? excuse me if all 3hrs are packed with relevant information but i can't really see that happening...

@Mark assuming you've seen this documentary (or even if you haven't) ; Does it adress the points made in loose change and other docus concerning the thermal scans of ground zero days and even weeks afterwards that still show temperatures associated with molten metal... or why the 911 commision report wasn't given access to any of the information it would have needed to carry out a thorough investigation? If there's nothing to hide, then why all the secrecy?

On the other hand, if 9/11 truly was an inside job, surely the people with enough power to orchestrate such a stunt would also be able to provide a believable cover story... yet instead, an inconclusive inadequete mockery of what should have been an independant, transparent inquiry; but now, concludes nothing if not that the people in charge don't have thier facts straight on this one

We don't know anything and we wont find out unless a real investigation into what happened is done and the people carrying out that investigation are given access to all the information they need

IMO it's waaaayyy more likely that thepowersthatbe decided to 9/11 happen .. maybe they payed some the guys who flew the planes into the towers... maybe they were remote controlled.. either way they probably did it so they had a reason to 'Defend themselves' against the terrorists in Iraq . That way it would explain why it seemed alot of people high up knew it was going to happen... shameless, but it wouldnt be the first time would it? ...... kinda like a pearl harbour for the middle east....

I would advise people make up thier own mind on this one.. i'm still not decided....

but if the US government didn't know it was going to happen, then shit, what IS the alternative?

A bunch extremists waltz past airport security, board some commercial airliners, Take out the pilots, fly the planes around for a couple of hours and evade the (apparently) worlds most sophisticated air defence network (despite the fact you have little to no prior training in any aircaft) , then finally crash them into WTC and the Pentagon without getting an arse full of JDAM from a passing F-16
?????

I think that's scarier than the inside job theory..

"but if the US government didn't know it was going to happen, then shit, what IS the alternative?"

That people with radical beliefs are able to do anything. "With religion anything is permisable" They had the most radical religious ideology instilled in them.



"A bunch extremists waltz past airport security, board some commercial airliners, Take out the pilots,"

Yes, we have evidence for this.



"fly the planes around for a couple of hours and evade the (apparently) worlds most sophisticated air defence network"

They had turned off the responders so they were virtually invisible to the radars. Fly around for hours? No they didn't. And NORAD was set up to look for threats outside of the USA, eg Missiles and war planes from Russia... not to watch every domestic airline.



(despite the fact you have little to no prior training in any aircaft) ,

They had logged plenty of air time, the guy (Pilot, Flight School )who features on Loose change said they had enough knowledge to crash a plane into a target, (something loose change fails to mention, not exactly an unbiased edit is it?) He was just qouted as saying they were lousy at landing and takeoff, something that was not required to hit the bullseye.



" then finally crash them into WTC and the Pentagon without getting an arse full of JDAM from a passing F-16
?????"

See above, NORAD is only now geared up for this sort of defense, before they were looking at an attack from another country, not within.



"I think that's scarier than the inside job theory."

Yes it is scary, but that doesn't mean it isn't true. Just beacuse it sounds bad doesn't mean you can ignore facts and make up other hypotheticals, all without evidence and then presuppose they are true because you deem them "less scary".



"Well i started to watch this but .. 3hrs? excuse me if all 3hrs are packed with relevant information but i can't really see that happening..."

It covers Loose Change point by point, that is why it is so lengthy. It also covers all the questions you have, If you can watch Loose Change, then you should be able to watch the questions and assertions being answered.


"@Mark assuming you've seen this documentary (or even if you haven't) ; Does it adress the points made in loose change and other docus concerning the thermal scans of ground zero days and even weeks afterwards that still show temperatures associated with molten metal... or why the 911 commision report wasn't given access to any of the information it would have needed to carry out a thorough investigation? If there's nothing to hide, then why all the secrecy? "

Yes, it covers all of these tired canards you are repeating, if you refuse to watch it then here is one site that also covers every question you have.

http://www.911myths.com/

The Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) is a guidance kit that converts existing unguided gravity bombs, or "dumb bombs", into all-weather "smart" munitions. JDAM equipped bombs are guided to their target by an integrated inertial guidance system coupled with a Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver for enhanced accuracy,

Use: Fixed target, precision strike

I'll probably go watch this docu now.. must have some pretty good facts in to have you convinced... however you cant just dismiss the lack of defence by saying NORAD dont do that sort of stuff...

It's well known that on the morning of 9-11 NORAD were running exercises (drills) that simulated planes being hijacked, and flown into buildings.....

If that sort of drill isn't routinely carried out, doesn't it seem odd that it was happening on the morning of 9-11?
And similarily if they DO do they sort of drill routinely, wouldn't they surely be prepared for an attack of this nature???

No doubt this question is adressed in the documentary....


Anyway off to watch it now...


Edit: lol @ the microsoft flight simulator clip (27 mins in) .... i thought the plane was meant to be going 500MPH.... just as well it wasn't i guess because no way it could have pulled off those circling movements at that kinda speeds...


lol about an hour in now... pretty good stuff worth watching imo, although they don't have all thier facts 100% straight, seems they're a lot closer to the mark than the Loose Change crew... even still, assuming everything in LC is bs doesn't go to say that people high up didn't let 9/11 happen.... the docu looks at how the one dude who owned tower 7 doesn't have anything to gain from blowing his own shit up in order to discredit the controlled demolition theory, and while that section was, on the whole, pretty watertight it doesn't consider how much the bush administration gained from its 'war on terror' and the occupation of Iraq. Looking at the bigger picture the high-ups gained way more than they lost in the long run... with all the legislation that's been rushed through since 9/11 in order to 'combat terrorism.... I hear you guys have 'Free Speech Zones' now... what does that make everything else? If you look at the bigger picture, it's not a pretty one.

I've got a question what did the u.s government actually do to stop the attacks.The attacks did not come out of the blue. The P.D.B that george bush got in august said that bin laden was gonna attack the u.s.What was done.Nothing .The planes that crashed into the wtc didn't just appear they were hijacked.So why after the 1st plane hit why were people in the 2nd tower told to go back to work when they knew another hijacked plane was on its way to newyork.Why was Bush allowed to stay in school when,at that point,they had countless hijackings.Why on Earth was Bush allowed in the school and not taken to a safe location.For 1hour 46 minutes planes were hijacked and no f16s couldn't intercept any of the planes.Ok the people in the airforce said they were chasing up to 20 false hiijacking blips on thier radar.If that was the case with so many hijackings going didn't anybody think about protecting the pentagon.Why was the emergacy center in wtc7 empty even though that was the place to run new york if something like 9/11 ever happened.that was the point of it.Dick Chaney said he knew nothing of the attacks till half past 9 when the pentagon was hit.what the hell was he doing ,the world knew america was under attack but the vice president didnt.Why on the fbi website dosn't it say anything about bin laden being responsible for 9/11.Why in June 2001 did bush take the power away from the generals ,who before then were allowed to send f16s up to intersect suspected hijackings ,and gave the sole power to Dick Chaney.You people who believe the the official version are so stupid u would belived Bush if he said that a pink dragon knocked down the twin towers.Please think

So which of this diatribe fallacy of many questions is your actual "one question, the one piece of evidence that you consider the strongest that proves your hypothesis?"

Hmm falllacy again you are showing your ignorance,every point i made is a fact.I know what I'll give you the choice.u pick one of the points I made.There u go theres your evidence.Now u can tell me what evidence there is that the bush administrations version of events is true.Oh yeah thats right cause they said so ,and the Bush administration would never lie to forward an adgenda.Can u say WMD.Oh i forgot the editor of popular mechanics said so.WOW with his credentials how can anybody have questions about that day.Heres one more fact to show u how the bush administration lied.Out of the 19 hijackers that the Bush adminstration caused the awful event how comes the bbc and guardian newspaper in London found 7 alive.But your probable see this fact as another fallacy. I mean what on earth could the bbc know over popular mechanics.And I won't even bring up the bush bin laden connections.

And U still didn't answer my original question which was ,what was done to stop the attacks

OK. Well that was a bit childish.. the docu i mean, not the plantent attempts at semantics to 'get 1 over' on each other

i almost turned it off after 4-5 mins, it wasnt that i totally disagreed with the little sarcastic comments liked "4 mins in and STILL no connection to 911" or "now 5 mins in and STILL no evidence for links to 911"
which was of course childish 'i cant hear you, i cant see you' aka: 'your mum!'

but he was showing what he calls evidence of people planning, practicing, demonstrating the types of thing that are being thrown about in this, the greatest show on earth "weapon of mass distraction" like... plans/ideas/suggestions of potential best courses of action to created, staged or real events that could further a greedy power mad agenda of fear ( thats the fear the rich and powerfull have when they feel there 'money' 'possesions' or 'power' 'status' or 'religous dogma' might be threatened by any people(s) )
simply trying (in my humble opinion) to show that the sort of stuff that people have genuine concerns about are not beyond the realms of possability, and in fact, according to many reputable sources ie : noam chomsky, apear to be the average and/or norm throughout history.

so, history, weather you subscribe to alternative or mainstream history, will show that these things have happened, in the vast majority of nation states all over the world, again and again and again by the people who have the power of influence. ie: material wealth or status, like king or president or ceo of a multi-national ect ect.

i am not saying that because of this apparent pattern in history and current events (look at banking world, world trade sanctions, resource managment, politics, pharmicuticals, enegry control, health, food, WATER control in starving countrys) that any and all ideas are valid (true) i am only highlighting why (again, in my opinion) the maker of loose change would feel that presenting evidence of our world leaders and/or members of the administration, heads of buisness ect ect have planned, attempted, failed, succeded, suggested things like 911, things a whole lot worse.

to try and highlight the people in power and what they think about doing, why, when and how. do draw simalarities to the current disaster/agenda/military expansion/economic security/religous dogma. not to say it 'proves' it, but just to show they are more than willing and capable of killing civilians or decieving public to get what they want, be it good or bad in my eyes is irrelivant to the point it happens, again, i cba to go goole and post 100 links to noam chomsky... just check him out, p.s, argue with him if you dare, then come back and try peddle the point of view that the mainstream news and information channels are all correct.

we live in a world of billions of people, we have many basic simalarities, but also have major differences, like how much needs to happen before each person on the planet will kill another human being?
without going into a VERY POINTLESS debate about the potential essence of good and bad, to stop nit pickers pulling me up like its an issue, there are people who have and still do rape, murder, slaughter, ravage lands and rescources ect ect and 'some' of these people have very strong positions of power both in government/military and public/private sectors all over the world.

because of this very simple fact (again without pointless debate) there is a polarisation in this universe that we refeer to as good and bad. and that coupled with lots of evidence of people thinking about doing or actually doing things like the CT'ers or 'truthers' say about 911. and so it is really a huge leap of faith to be doubtfull about our current world leaders and people of huge influence. and with that in mind (which i think is the primary reason behind most debates of this kind ie: they lied/decieved in past, they lie/decieve now, lets be carefull and check on them?) how can the makers of this video make such childish comments about the maker of loose change and then expect to be taken seriously, if you laugh at people in a 10 year old bully schoolyard style, how then to be expecting others to take you seriously? its quite ammusing

i dont think everything in loose change is true, i think alot of it is fear created reality tunnels, just like the majority of mainstream reporting, but i wont sit and watch some docu be presented by a childish bully as refuting all evidence of something unfaithfull happening on that day or as a direct result of that day without getting the the real point of that day, the lives lost, yes, but also the reactions around the world.

and thats the point here... it not what happened... fuck that, we will never know, it about what has happened since, who has gained and who has paid. and who has fucking died!!! 3000+ on 911, how many since as a result? how may innocents have to die so that people can stop being affraid of the big bad wolf?
we have to see that all this war in the middle east is based on less evidence than the CT'ers bring in there wildest fantasy sirius adventures, no concrete evidence that osama was the culprit! debatable video evidence of him saying he knew! not planned, not involved, just aware.
mistake after mistake in intell gathering and actions based on them... actions that leed to war and death and horror and exploitation.

look at company like halliburton, wasting US tax payers money as fast and hard as they can so as to get more profits when the US gives them back all money spent to complete contract + the fixed percentage of profit in accordance with halliburtans average return on investment. this seems good to you? this seems like the working of a group of people that hate war?

common people, lets stop bickering like school kids and start looking at this from the point of view that looks at what happened, not the inner working of a mans head to figure out the intentions of said person.
or if 911 was planned by us or them. it crap that only distracts us from ACTUAL provable problems we have as a species, like energy, waste, pollution of eco-systems, extinction of species and eco-systems around the world.
governments and world leaders all over the world that choose to or get forced into the reality that money makes the world go round and without money you dont get to power and so we have people who basically work for the multi-nationals OR have to tow the line or recieve less campaign funding than the compitition ie: help us or we give money to the other guy and he will win instead.

its not alwats dark, its not all bad, its very beautiful and very positive.

we are amazing creatures, we have so many vast differences while being the same thing on many levels. we dont have to carry on like this, we dont have to live in a world of fear that makes us kill each other so we can provail or makes us kill each other out of fear or defense. we can change things. people all over the world from farmers in india to nation states like sweeden and germany and ceo's of multi-nationals to people like me and you are working towards a more fair, honest, open, publicly debated society.

we must realise that NO1 CONTROLS US!!

we are being dominated only because we submit to it. we donty have to attack or fight physically to fight back.

here is example got from an amazing man.
petrol is expensive and getting more and more all the time. it seems to cause big probs in the atmosphere and of course at ground level both ecologically and economically (like power struggles and fear of loss)

we want cheap energy? we want clean reusable energy? we nwant weapons contractors to stop making nukes or attack hellicopters and then selling them when old to unstable war torn countrys/states?

well if we orginise and boycot the most expensive petrol compant, what will they do?
mhmm they lower price if ZERO people buy it goes lower..... then...do it again to next compant, pretty soon we have very low (no zero haha but low) oil prices and we have something even better than that....

we have the oil companys kowning 1 thing......

they know what happens if they try raise the damn price of oil.

who hold the power? who is controled by who?

realise we are the majority, the public, not the profit makers, not the oil companys, not the god knows what fucked up government/dictator.... us.

so i got a bit distracted, all relivent to topic i feel, but not to fine point about the video and the 1 its claiming to disprove.
loose change is not 100% proven fact, nore is this docu, but in my opinion at least the makers of loose change dont result to 10 year old style tactics to discredit the maker of a fairly good film like loose change. it opened many questions to debate, some have been answered and some not, but at least the guy is doing something to try and help, not just attacking wildly like a child with no logical reason for anything.

i will accept a wrong person who can show the logical steps to there 'incorrect assumption/conclusion' as a person worth debating with..... but if all you got it random crappy digs and childish insults the i wont waste my time, cos even if they are correct, i would never be able to see how and prove it to my self because they have no way of explaining there point. other than insult and mockery.

focus energy on positive solutions, not on the problems....
focusing your energyh on the prob only helps to keep those types of mentality alive.... spend your time trying to find solutions and it will help the world more, but from a personal level it will help YOU to be a more positive player in this game, less open to 'facts of fear' and more open to just rational/logical/well understood emotional debate, feeling, path whatever.

love is the key people, not hippy land, just love.

Thank you for taking the time and also for your thoughtfulness, with a P.S. 'Only if I radically enter my own dignity can I experience the dignity of others. From a strong sense of dignity flows an organic understanding of the meaning of respect. From individual dignity comes a collective dignity [interconnectedness]...our true enemies are those who try to divide [polarize] and therefore control us.' Leonard Desroches, "Allow the Water: Anger, Fear, Power, Sexuality and the Spirituality and Practice of Non Violence "