Loose Change - Final Cut (9/11)

SirCharles

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
15,652
I know it is not the latest movie, but the public dispute is still going on.

Loose Change - Final Cut

What do you guys think?

Was it a conspiracy? Was 9/11 an inside job?

The most interesting question for me is:
How was it possible that building no. 7 - which was unharmed by air strike - which had shortly before been refurbished, and many storeys had been made bullet and fire proof - which burnt mostly on one side - which had the most of evidence about vanished money and dodgy contracts - collapsed in a same freefall as the Twin Towers into its own ditch like in a very successful controlled demolission?
 


Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,885
Thanks Sir Charles. Haven't seen the Final Cut yet. Did you see Jason's documentary "Invisible Empire" yet?
 

Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,885
Excellent post Sir Charles but there is a huge thread on this already
But it would be nice to have a clean one without Conor the Bold contaminating it, despite the fact he converted a lot of posters on the other thread to the 9/11 truth movement with his vile behaviour.
 

saoirsegodeo32

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
694
i just cant see it as being an inside job
there are discrepancies but there always are
 

Cassandra Syndrome

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 23, 2009
Messages
16,885
i just cant see it as being an inside job
there are discrepancies but there always are
Thats what Occam's Razor is for. The official line of events is for the want of a better word, impossible.
 

Oreo Livermore

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2010
Messages
734
i just cant see it as being an inside job
there are discrepancies but there always are
Most can't.

Building 7 was 47 stories high. Even if the first 30 stories crumbled it still would not collapse the top 17. There was no force acting on them until the impact forces on collapse. These while great would not crumble a steel skeleton
 

Conor the Bold

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
3,291
I know it is not the latest movie, but the public dispute is still going on.

Loose Change - Final Cut

What do you guys think?

Was it a conspiracy? Was 9/11 an inside job?
Was it a conspiracy? Yes.

Was it an inside job? No.

The most interesting question for me is:
How was it possible that building no. 7 - which was unharmed by air strike
Which was unharmed by an Airliner, but had been standing in the path of thousands of tonnes of burning debris from the North Tower collapsing?

- which had shortly before been refurbished, and many storeys had been made bullet and fire proof -
1. Bulletproof stops a collapsing building how?
2. All buildings like that should be to one extent or another 'fire proof' for a given duration of time.

which burnt mostly on one side
I suppose this is a step up from not being on fire at all.

which had the most of evidence about vanished money and dodgy contracts -
Surely a fire would be good enough? Or does it require an entire building to be collapsed?

collapsed in a same freefall as the Twin Towers into its own ditch like in a very successful controlled demolission?
This is quite patently untrue. 7 WTC collapsed very differently to 1 & 2 WTC.

But questions that must be asked - if 7 WTC was a controlled demolition - does this mean that 1 & 2 WTC were controlled demolitions?

In short this has been covered in another thread.
 

Conor the Bold

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
3,291
Thats what Occam's Razor is for. The official line of events is for the want of a better word, impossible.
The official line of events in not impossible. As for Occams Razor it is also the simplest method.

But I'm sure once somebody has a holistic theory of what happened, which can stand up to scrutiny apart from the 'official' theory - we can judge which should hold true based on Occam's razor.
 

Conor the Bold

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
3,291
Most can't.

Building 7 was 47 stories high. Even if the first 30 stories crumbled it still would not collapse the top 17. There was no force acting on them until the impact forces on collapse. These while great would not crumble a steel skeleton
These forces, while great, would not crumble a steel skeleton? How so? How is the Skeleton held together?
 

SirCharles

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
15,652
Excellent post Sir Charles but there is a huge thread on this already
Where is that?
I tried to find "Loose Changr" on P.ie, but couldn't find it.

Thanks Sir Charles. Haven't seen the Final Cut yet. Did you see Jason's documentary "Invisible Empire" yet?
Not yet. But will google for. Cheers.
There's another film on the net: "Truth Rising" ;)

Most can't.

Building 7 was 47 stories high. Even if the first 30 stories crumbled it still would not collapse the top 17. There was no force acting on them until the impact forces on collapse. These while great would not crumble a steel skeleton
Maybe the CIA just knew from the attacks and let them happen?
Why were all fighter jets previously brought away from the scene that day?
Maybe they only helped a bit at building no. 7 (controlled demolition)?

Was it a conspiracy? Yes.

Was it an inside job? No.
Hmm, it seems you know everything right away. :rolleyes:
Did you watch the film?

This is quite patently untrue. 7 WTC collapsed very differently to 1 & 2 WTC.
1 and 2 started from the top, 7 from the bottom (which would be more likely if it was a controlled demolition). But it was also a freefall.

But questions that must be asked - if 7 WTC was a controlled demolition - does this mean that 1 & 2 WTC were controlled demolitions?
Not necessarily. See a couple of lines upwards.

But it would be nice to have a clean one without Conor the Bold contaminating it, despite the fact he converted a lot of posters on the other thread to the 9/11 truth movement with his vile behaviour.
Too late :)
 

Libertarian Contrarian

Active member
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
135
BBC reports that building 7 has collapsed, yet, it's in the background.

You can see and hear the firemen warning and saying "get back, they're going to blow it."

Even if you don't believe in 9/11 being an inside job - don't give me that crap that Bin Laden attacked America because they have women in mini skirts, that's bull.

Oh, by the way, google "Civilian Inmate Labour programme." You'll get the army document how they admit that their building camps for the public.

Also look up the Miac and Homeland security reports.
 

saoirsegodeo32

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 13, 2010
Messages
694
BBC reports that building 7 has collapsed, yet, it's in the background.

You can see and hear the firemen warning and saying "get back, they're going to blow it."

Even if you don't believe in 9/11 being an inside job - don't give me that crap that Bin Laden attacked America because they have women in mini skirts, that's bull.
Oh, by the way, google "Civilian Inmate Labour programme." You'll get the army document how they admit that their building camps for the public.

Also look up the Miac and Homeland security reports.
yes that would be crap, however were the attack to have sprung from a resurgent isdlamic fundamentalist group that had long held antipatheis to american foreign policies and regarded them inceasingly as representing a direct line of descent from crusading western christendom then maybe the attack would make sense
 

Libertarian Contrarian

Active member
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
135
yes that would be crap, however were the attack to have sprung from a resurgent isdlamic fundamentalist group that had long held antipatheis to american foreign policies and regarded them inceasingly as representing a direct line of descent from crusading western christendom then maybe the attack would make sense
True, I forgot to say as you, and everyone knows that America created Al Queda

Also, Brzezinski brags about how he funded the Taliban in Operation Cyclone.

Did you see the C.I.A actually admitted they made fake Bin Laden tapes? And did you see Fox News showing and admitting that they grow the opium in Afghanistan? They admit everything, and thee neo-cons and chickenhawks deny it.

America would never stage a terror attack to start wars. I know The Gulf of Tonkin was now admittedly staged(Robert McNamara, Harvard Univerity, 2004) but they would never, ever do it again.
 

SirCharles

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2009
Messages
15,652
True, I forgot to say as you, and everyone knows that America created Al Queda

Also, Brzezinski brags about how he funded the Taliban in Operation Cyclone.

Did you see the C.I.A actually admitted they made fake Bin Laden tapes? And did you see Fox News showing and admitting that they grow the opium in Afghanistan? They admit everything, and thee neo-cons and chickenhawks deny it.
Any proof for your allegations?
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top