http://lol.chroniclesofgaras.com/videos.html

Please watch these videos within this website. The website is called "lol loosechange" which is a pretty discerning title. But please ignore that and watch these videos. I was once a 9/11 truth-seeker until I saw this video and actually sat down and really had a good thought about it all. So I urge you to watch these movies and reply to this post with your feelings and anything you wish to challenge the video with.

The videos cover everything from the explosives to the 'fake' Bin-Laden tape. It elaborates on things such as when the term "Pull it" was used. It also really focuses on and debunks all the questions/assumptions about the Pentagon and Flight 93.

Now please be mature about all this and comment on what you think, how you feel about it, if you were pursuaded, and if you have anything to challenge the videos information with.

Can tell you've been a truth seeker for a long time glad you stopped by and posted garbage :lol:

It hasn't even been long enough for you to have watched the movies. Watch them before you insult it. And if you did please describe in detail why it's garbage. Which was the whole point of this post. And how long i've been a truth seeker doesn't have anything to do with wanting feedback on these videos.

but can you see how you joined yesterday and we would find it wierd?. maybe you made this movie ??. on forums we call people like you 'blow ins' and generally try and ignore your pretend objectivity. your agenda is pretty easy to spot. don't be offended, but THE GIG IS UP.

why is it that anti-truth member people focus on the obvious bullshit? yes some of loose change contained speculation. some of it is wrong. some of it is right. its the nature of speculation. the loosechange guys have released multiple versions of this film because they are seeking the truth and when truth has come to light they have, within reason, done wat they can to revamp what they'd previously done.

some of the things overlooked by yourself and many other are the irrefutable things that aren't part of the official story. there were bombs in the basement. there were bombs and fires on floors that had nothing to do with the impact areas. there were unexplainable people given access to the sensitive parts of the building prior to the attacks. these are all a matter of public record yet implicitly ignored. why? why do you ignore the things that are not refutable and insist on focusing on the things that you can argue?

The video(s) on that website had shown that Loose Change proved nothing at all to begin with. It was clippings of quotes, pictures, and audio feed. It was using scare tactics normally used by the news media to get you interested. But this time it was to make others gullible.

Not to mention that all of the other bomb theories, such as the 'demolition squibs' were all dissproved by experts. There is no evidence to support that WTC was brought down by detonation. The seismic charts dissproved this, engineering experts dissproved it, and everytime it's presented to a 9/11 truth-seeker they just turn a blind eye, deny it, or repeat themselves on dissproven facts.

I didn't make the video, not that it matters if I did anyway. Nor does it matter when I joined. That doesn't disprove that you should watch it. Now please discuss the movies on that website and present anything you think it didn't cover, with evidence or links to information with a description of your opinion.

Also be sure to keep in mind. Some people believe half of the conspiracy, but not all of it. What if the basement bombs were real? A plane did hit the Pentagon and some people even claim a plane didn't hit the twins, which it was obviously hit by planes. There was a plane that crashed in Pennsylvania, the video focuses on this very well. But what makes it so important to prove something so very small? Thousands lost their lives just so people can bicker about what they can or can't tack on the government. If they did some of it, why not all of it?

I find it hard to believe that it wasn't a terrorist attack. Osama admitted to it, Al Queda has the capability to do it, and just by looking at the news of Islamic extremests, the attacks on the WTC are completely believable. What evidence is there that terrorists didn't do this, or better yet, that they lacked the resources. Someone show me how they could NOT have pulled this off.

checked him out, HE'S OK, just trying to be objective, not a debunker, new member, this is practically his first post, sometimes cultural differences create mis-understandings, you can help him with his post.

You make it seem like "Loose Change" is the only definitive documentary ou there about 9/11. I urge you to watch the following:

9/11 Mysteries:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003
This is a brand new public domain 9/11 Truth documentary about the controlled demolition of the World Trade Center complex.

9/11 Press for Truth:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=39...press+for+truth
The families present their 2 1/2 year struggle to create an investigation and inquiry into the events of 9/11 -- which was at first heavily resisted and even explicity prohibited by the President and Vice-President. For an example of contrast in funding; the internal disruption of a Clinton-Lewisnki "sex scandal" the event was awarded a budget of 100 million dollars in total. Initially the 9/11 Comission was only alotted 3 million dollars and their time-limit was severly cut beyond the expecations of those who brought it into existence.

The PentaCon:
http://thepentacon.com/smokinggun.htm
The PentaCon presents quadruple corroborated testimony that the plane had crossed over to the north side of Columbia Pike and the CITGO station making it IMPOSSIBLE for the plane to topple the light poles and damage the building as outlined in the “Building Performance Report” by the American Society of Civil Engineers.

Those are just a few of the many documentaries out there on 9/11. Enjoy.

I watched the video's that you recommended and found them to be somewhat informative. I have included part of your previous post in which you state that there is no support to suggest that the WTC was brought down by detonation.

I would like to take this opportunity to hear your views on the theory that the collapse of each WTC building violated the laws of physics, specifically, either the law of conservation of momentum or the law of conservation of energy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum#Cons...ion_of_momentum

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

this is my main problem with obsessing about demolition. i think the perps love it when we do that. all the evidence is scrap in china. but the OVERWHELMING evidence about the planes is still around, ffs two of the planes remained registered on an international database for two years. there is so much plane / lack of evidence that i think it's crazy investigating the demo.

the videos on that site prove nothing. they are commentary's and in the case of the programs about the hijackers are of no consequence to whether or not our government was behind 911.

first off, loose change wasnt made as a scientific analysis. it was made to bring the subject of 911 to the public. which it has done. it employed the same tactics and medium that the rest of mass media does. it was intended to raise questions, not give answers. it is up to US to find those answers. there are speculations made based what has been presented, for that they have admitted it wasn't a good idea and have worked to remove all speculation from the newest version.

as far as bombs go, i'm not talking about squibs. i'm talking about internal devices that are described over and over again and there is record of thier damage to the building and many many testimonies to their existence. are you going to ignore these? the explosions aren't denied by the officials, in all cases, but the reasons for them are absurd. fuel did not flow down a single elevator shaft and ignite under pressure 4 levels below ground and cause an explosion large enough to disable the sprinkler system, move a multi ton pump, collapse the PATH subway terminal, and kill or trap multiple people. it's not physically possible. the fact that NIST implicitly ignores this fact is cause for alarm. when you add the additional facts of there being damage on multiple key floors, floors that housed the backup sprinkler pumps and tanks, and floors that held the port authorities command center, this should be setting of alarm bells in your head like mad.

you say that bin laden claimed responsibility? we know this how? by video. ironically there are also recordings of him saying he did not do this. you believe one over the other for what reason?

yes there are alot of wild and unbelievable theories out there. most are absurd, i know, but just cause they are wrong doesnt mean all of us are.

heres what some of us, including myself, believe. al qaeda at some point in the past hatched or we given the idea of using planes on wtc. they lacked the real ability to do it so scrapped the idea. fringe members of the group upon influence by the pakistani and us intelligence agencies revived the plan and using provacateurs from both the us and pakistan the plan was set into motion. bin laden may or may not have known it was happening. the 'cells' were specially selected and controlled by intelligence handlers and it is likely that not all 19 of the hijackers were extremists or even on the planes. many of the 'hijackers' were lifted id's and there may or may not have been an actual person using it. the extremists beleieved they were hijacking the planes for whatever reason, and most likely hijacked the planes. they were however not in control of the planes after some point in the trip. the planes were most likely taken control of remotely or autonomously via some sort of software installed on the planes. the hijackers and passengers we neutralized in some way. planes hit both towers. there were strategically placed devices in both towers controlled and detonated in conjunction with the aircraft strikes. additional explosives were detonated at other times so that the towers wouldnt fall immediately but would be weakened enough to collapse under their own weight, in a pre-determined amount of time. the companies that took direct hits in the towers were chosen for specific reasons, and were likely to be aware of the attacks before hand. it was all basically done as a matter of greed and power. some say also for the occult. i'm still out on that one.


genghis : there isn't a single piece of physical evidence to support your claim. it also makes no sense. there are people miles away from the impacts that witnessed the planes. there are dozens of videos that show the planes. there isn't a single solitary piece of video that shows a small plane. not one. period. find one, maybe i'll change my mind.

the phrase "SCRAP' in china, is not a cultural slang, simple definition:
"REMAINS OF STEEL STRUCTURE"was shipped to CHINA to be melted down and made into OTHER THINGS of METAL

may be a sign of the times, if the REPUBLICAN REGIME continues to stay in POWER.

there is no evidence for my claim?.

have they brought back all the structural steel?.

you haven't even indicated which claim and you certainly haven't supplied any information to the contrary.

this forum is so tedious sometimes.

i sometimes suspect it is full of text bandit agents filling it up with nothings so it drowns any true research.

Hi TupperwareNinja,

I've decided not to bother with this forum anymore, so I won't be able to read your response to my request. I would suggest that you answer anyway, for the benefit of other readers, but I won't tell them to hold their breath. As we both know, my question is the only one that you, and those who support the official theory, will never debate upon.

genghis, are you or are you not a no planer? do you belive that two 767's hit the towers or no?

The MARX BROTHERS WILL STAR IN THIS ONE:

WHAT DID THE GOVERNMENT KNOW AND WHEN DID IT KNOW IT?
The task was simple, deny the evidence, cover-up the embarrassing arrest of two Israelis with an explosives-tainted truck, and give the media a reason to return to the mantra of "all terror is caused by Muslims".
But what started as a simply attempt to spin the news away from the Israelis arrested in Washington State has backfired on the Bush administration in a big way. In conducting the classic "limited hangout" of admitting to foreknowledge of the attacks of 9-11 in order to reassert the link to Osama bin Laden, Bush has handed opponents of his administration and opponents of World War the most damning proof yet that the reality of 9-11 is not what the US Government and media have been telling the American people it is."

The Times adds, "[t]he arrested Israelis posed a problem. History records in the Lavon Affair that Israelis willingly use bombs and lay false trails to Arabs for political gain. . .
And it wasn't too long ago that JDL Chairman Irv Rubin was arrested for plotting to blow up a US Congressman who refused to toe the Israel party line. Then there were the two Mossad agents arrested inside the Mexican Congress with guns and explosives shortly after 9-11. . .
As the battered World Trade Towers collapsed, the very first suspects arrested, caught cheering as the towers fell, were Israelis, later identified as Mossad agents. The arrested spies worked for Urban Moving Systems, whose Israeli owner promptly fled the nation."

Tupperwareninja i agree with you totally the people on this site are not into seeking the truth they are only here to make the Bush Administration look guilty. So then can then give Rosie her talking points.

Well guys and gals...we've been spotted and called out. I guess it's time to pack up and go home.

Oh well, at least we tried! :rolleyes:

got alota republicans on the payroll

You forgot, 9/11 In Plane Site, and 9/11 The Road to Tyranny :)

Loose Change is an old video and has newer evidence. Thats why everyone is saying its 'debunked'! But since the Final Cut is coming...lets see them debunk that!! :ph43r: :ph43r:

Guys, remember: We have NO evidence, we are speculating. Maybe we are right, maybe we are wrong. If somebody of "us" have critical questions about the "Truth Movement" should be ok.

We have different sights and different meanings, but if many of "us" are still talking about "Noplanes", "Holographs" and other stupit things - we are debunking ourselves.

Everyday in this forum, somebody posts "breaking new evidence" of WTC7, 1, 2 or maybe 11.

Everyday somebody of "us" is asking about the release of LCFC.

Sometimes its horrible to read all of those stupid "evidence" posts.

And now, somebody here is asking a critical question about something: He is stupid, dont know anything and what ever.

This forum is getting more and more contraprodutive, every day. "We" are working and pointing more for the that what we want to destroy and what we want to change, as what we really want.


Sorry for my poor english.

truthy> here are some suggestions for a new name: the abbreviation BS, or the word bull in this society generally means lies or nonsense, and thus could be regarded as a euphemism in itself.

I watched the first 35 min of Screw Loose Change, it didn't really disprove anything... and i watched it with an open mind... The whole pull it thing is bullshit, there were no firemen for silverstine to pull etc.

Screw Loose Change just twists words and calls us "9/11 Deniers" its a peice of propaganda...

If anyoen watches it, google some of the stuff and you can pretty much prove it all wrong except for a few small details.

EX: When they "debunk" WTC7, look at some other Controlled demolitions besides the one that Mark Iradian plays, and go to www.pumpitout.com Danny Jewenko is the a big demolitions expert and he sau WTC 7 was a controlled demolition, and he knows much more than a candian nerd and a tour giude, plus of at lol loosechange they even say he's an expert because he said that WTC1 and 2 might not be controlled demolitions...

Huh? Are you implying that they have uncovered truth and are presenting it in their films?

And for that matter, why would anyone have to "revamp" a movie ABOUT truth? Truth doesnt have different versions, interpretations do tho.

See, here's the problems i see:

1.Silverstein is NOT an expert in demoltions. And besides "Pull it" in demolition speak means to PHYSICALLY pull a building down with cables. Go watch some more Demolition videos, find me one where someone says "Pull it" right before explosives go off. Ill admit im wrong if you do.

2.SLC twists words, so does LC. "Cherry picking" and "quote mining" come to mind.

3.Looking at Controlled Demolitions does absolutely nothing towards proving WTC7 was a CD, all it does is prove that it LOOKS LIKE a CD. Fine, yes, it looks like one. Now prove it was one.

4.Same goes with Danny Jawenko (see #3). Hell, even if George Bush himself said "Hey WTC7 sure looks like a Demolition" that STILL doesnt prove it was one. Just because it looks like one to Jawenko and he continues and says it HAS to be, just because it looks like one, still doesnt mean it is one.

To prove it-you need witnesses-someone who heard or saw people planting the demolition charges. 8 Million people live in NY, so i would say theres a fair chance SOMEONE SAW SOMETHING (if it was a CD).

Until there is a witness who can then be corroborated by another witness or expert, then all this "Looks like" talk is all that it is-talk. Not proof.

What I find hard to believe is that the mistakes in LC could be made by accident. Especially the ones which persisted through several versions. Now I know people here will line up to make excuses for the mistakes, or to try to pretend they don't matter, or just one way or another try to change the subject, but it just surprises me that so many troofers enjoy getting lied to and seem to feel a responsibility to help the cover for the people lying to them.

Ummm... there was an election and the Democrats took control of Congress. It happened a while ago. I guess you were too busy searching for "truth"

I loved how he stoped posting after the first day. If he could back up what he wanted to say he would have shortly after but he hasn't because he's looking for more proof to back up his claims. Harder to find proof that it's there then proof that is. He will find something that he can cling to for a short time before that's busted and he's back to floating in truth again. Oh there will alway be new footage to come out or new proof that osama did it. To bad most will be bad quality or edited so it looks believable. Truth age is coming and nothing the NWO can do. They can only slow us down. If we fail you sceptics are next to be shipped out to a never ending war by King Bush, by the Draft then you'll be saying maybe they where right. So if you don't know you better call somebody. Best way to know is to look at history. Because this has happened before and it's happening now unless people wake up and look around nothings going to change and it's going to be WW3.

You're absolutely correct that Loose Change is completely filled start-to-finish with entirely frivolous information, strawman arguments, and completely flawed information. LC claims the twin towers fell at freefall speeds - which plainly isn't true. Although, WTC7 did collapse at free-fall (and was consistent in every way with a controlled demolition).

You're unlikely to find any good information here, but for instance all 4 aircrafts had less then a quarter of seating capacity in operation on that day. Now how often have you flown on a plane only a quarter filled!? Another example is the pentagon - LC claims it was a missile, and they use a very deceptive photo to try and prove this, when in reality the damage is consistent with a plane. With that said, it is true that the plane hit the most armoured and least-populated side of the pentagon.

Now, 20 points if you can tell me why the pentagon has roughly twice as many toilets as would be average for a building its size.

A few times.

What is the significance of the amount of passengers.

About the same significance as the pentagon being hit on the most armoured, and least populated side. It's not direct proof of anything, but it's interesting.

I'm still waiting to see if any of you yanks know why the pentagon has so many toilets - if you don't even know that then there goes your credibility as an authority of what hit it.

In relation to 9/11, why is the amount of passengers interesting? I suppose anyone can say that if the planes were full of passengers, then that would be interesting too. Many things are interesting.

That's cool. I'm still waiting for a raise at my job. Good things come to those who wait.

It's a good thing I never claimed to be an authority of what hit it. I have an opinion of what hit it based on reasonable information. But I wouldn't call my opinion "authoritative".

I have a theory too, that involves a plane smashing into the pentagon. Anyone who believes anything else hit it would believe in magical space monkies too.

The simple fact anything hit the pentagon should tell you somethings up.

Danny Jowenko also says WTC1 & 2 were not CD.

I think at the very least we can say that "we don't know what happened... but we do know what didn't happen". And even a dead dog now knows what didn't happen...

What didn't happen is what the official story says happened.

What is left is investigation, and logical speculation. The truth is coming out more and more, in dribs and drabs. I do hope the entire true story comes out sooner rather than later, but it will come out eventually I'm sure.

In the meantime, we must look to films like Loose Change to lead the way to truth. I don't think this or any film yet can provide all the answers. In fact, the aim of the film/films is not to give all the answers, but mainly to raise questions. That's what it's all about.

"Ask Questions. Demand Answers"

To the creator of this thread... how can you sit there and ignore all these questions that are raised in relation to the entire sweep of sorry events? It's quite sad I think that you are so closed off. But then again, your opinion is as valid as mine, or anyone else's, and as far as I know we are still members of the so called 'free world', so you should not be attacked. I admit, I too am closed off entirely. I am closed off entirely to the official story. It sickens me to think I ever believed it! Well, I guess this defeats my argument about being 'closed off' to the opposite viewpoint. And I'm back where I started.
I will not though, and I completely refuse to swallow even a milligram of shit that is shoveled down our throats every single day by the powers that be- corporate media, government, etc - and if this makes me as bad as you in regards to being closed minded... then so be it... better than being ass-raped while you're out cold.


Peace.

Research, steel, bombs, blah blah blah it's been disproved and disproved and disproved to the point of making ANY thinking person turn away from this stuff.

This is really my whole argument in a nutshell. This administration has shown itself to be so staggeringly incompetent that ordering a cheese sandwich would be out of their power. You really expect me to believe that they have masterminded the largest conspiracy of ALL TIME involving thousands of people working hundreds of thousands of hours, with the resulting actions being some of the most photographed and recorded spectacles EVER and have gotten completly away with it?

Lex Luthor couldn't even have pulled this off! Yet George Bush (a man clearly unable to tie his own shoe's) could? Come on!

Your opinion, while it may work for you, won't work for everyone. I'm going to say it gently before someone else comes down on you: you're hurting the side you're trying to help by saying this. This isn't the first time someone has said this, and it won't be the last; no one from either side is going to have their mind changed from it, and it makes the OCTists look bad. If you want to convince people, look around, see what has been said, and then say something that hasn't. Best of luck.

Sorry but the debunking video stinks!

Reason one: The name of it "Screw Loose change" and the Website "http://lol.chroniclesofgaras.com/videos.html"

Reason two: If that guy really want to deprove the theori make a movie by youself.

Reason three: It looks to me, that things he can't debunk he just jump over!

Last reason: it constant say something like "3 minutes in the movie, and we still don't get informatio of 9/11?? Is he stupid?

I don't say that hes maybe in the long end is right! But he really suck, for make us belive it! This nonsens in my opinion just make me angry at the guy who maked the "Screw loose change" film!

My opinion!

PS: Dylan no pressure... but i need to see final cut :D

[QUOTE=water_bender,May 13 2007, 04:36 AM][
I work in an 8 story building. Nine if you count the basement, eight if you count the top floor which is entirely mechanical--no offices.

Okay, I happen to work in the basement of this building. Seldom is the day that we restrict access to the basement. Why? Because if you made the entire 1,000 plus people who work there all pile in through the access points on the first and second floor, you'd have two log jams of people at 9 and at 5. Not fun for everyone. We have doorstops available at two of the three access points to the floor to make it easier for people to come and go. Furthermore, we get approximately 100 visitors a day who one may say "shouldn't" be down there--fellow employees without an official reason to come down there except for yuks. One employee has a spouse upstairs who comes down for lunches, etc...

Also just to let you know, we have some of what I would call ultra sensetive items in the basement. Sensetive in terms of community disaster planning. They are locked up in two secure areas only 13 people have access to these areas (I'm one of them).

The "unexplainable people given access to senesetive parts of the building" sounds juicy but it is as common as the driven snow. I'm not setting you up for ridicule here because I don't know your lineage of posting here but I think this is the primary reason the "truth seekers" (a term that makes me chuckle) get so little traction. A seemingly "big thing" falls flat in the realm of even a candle, much less the illumination of a flashlight.

Look, Bill Clinton had an intern in the Oval office. Why? We all know why. But if you were to survey every administration from Andrew Jackson forward, you'd find unauthorized people in the whitehouse offices, wives, brothers, children, friends, etc... That is a government building. Can you imagine the unauthorized log of people in a public building such as WTC in a pre-9/11 mindset?

This "evidence" is transparent in it's thin-ness (if that is a word).

PS: I work in a building where a government office is the chief tennant.

Here is my question:

If you have bombs, why do you need the planes? :ph43r: