9/11 Conspiracy Film: Loose Change

[vegeta613]

Quit crying.

When you're opinions are proven to be false, it is on the intelligent person to re-think them.

Now it's up to you. You can close your ears to actual facts and whine that these facts are disrupting your opinion, or you can take a look at the facts that have been presented to you and consider your position again.

If you want to ignore the reams and reams of actual scientific evidence so you can follow the ramblings of a youtube conspiracy theorist that has been forced to revise his own silly-ass theory three times to encompass actual fact even HE couldn't overlook, that's on you.

But no crying.

~Bang

What proof did any of you bring to the table exactly??

All I see is the usual when these threads are created

A few people being ganged up on by the majority and calling them names

This seems to be standard operating procedure around here when someone questions the 911 official story

OMG the government wouldn't kill it's own citizens to start a war would they?? That's not possible..............

It's hard for a lot of people to look at all the facts and connect the dots but if anyone does it's not hard to see

[skinsfan07]

What proof did any of you bring to the table exactly??

All I see is the usual when these threads are created

A few people being ganged up on by the majority and calling them names

This seems to be standard operating procedure around here when someone questions the 911 official story

OMG the government wouldn't kill it's own citizens to start a war would they?? That's not possible..............

It's hard for a lot of people to look at all the facts and connect the dots but if anyone does it's not hard to see

precisely.....It's like "OMG we live in America, they would NEVER do anything to harm it's own citizens! NEVER, we live in the good ol' land of the free and home of the brave!" :doh:

[Mooka]

What proof did any of you bring to the table exactly??

The search is working just fine.

Most people don't care to have the same arguments over and over.

Sure facts have proven 9/11 to be a terrorist act and facts have proven it to be self-inflicted.

You'll find that your own point of view can makes things complicated. Things like melting points of steel, the color of melted aluminum, the detections of thermite, how skyscrapers fall, etc.

Sometimes things appear to be facts when they are just hypothesis that fit a particular agenda.

[Heisenberg]

I guess on a message board having your own opinions is impossible. I understand now. Cool.

You state directly: "There has never been any evidence of plane wreckage at the Pentagon"

I reply with a ton of proof that is easily found with a 2 second google search.

You ignore and continue on with your ridiculous theories.

Things like that show a problem on YOUR part, not the rest of ES.

[Bang]

Whose crying? lol I just don't feed into all the bull**** that our corrupt ass government feeds us. If that's a problem sue me.

Sure facts have proven 9/11 to be a terrorist act and facts have proven it to be self-inflicted.

I'm one who believes the facts that it was self-inflicted. If that is a problem, too bad, won't change my opinion.

Now you have a nice night Bang. P.S. I still love your cartoons.

Crying is whining that having your own opinion is a bad thing on ES.

No facts have ever proven it to be self inflicted. None whatsoever. There's a bunch of half baked theories that say it is, but no facts. And as you say, you believe it. But as I said, when actual cold hard science shoots down your theories, it's on you to re-think it.

And what you've said here is that no matter what you're not changing your mind. That doesn't make any sense. All it does is close your mind while you pretend you're being open-minded. That's always the rub with the Truthers, they claim everyone else has a closed mind. Yet when presented with actual facts that shoot holes the size of battleships in their theories, they immediately close their minds to it, and accuse those bearing facts of being ignorant.

You believe you're being a watchdog, someone who is not fooled by the powers that be. But it's not the powers that be who direct the laws of physics. And all you've done is be fooled by those who choose to ignore it.

And I'm glad you still like my cartoons. I'm not a half bad guy, y'know.

~Bang

[vegeta613]

The search is working just fine.

Most people don't care to have the same arguments over and over.

.

I've been watching and seeing no proof

You all are giving your opinions just like him

[skinsfan07]

You state directly: "There has never been any evidence of plane wreckage at the Pentagon"

I reply with a ton of proof that is easily found with a 2 second google search.

You ignore and continue on with your ridiculous theories.

Things like that show a problem on YOUR part, not the rest of ES.

That is the only photo found of the plane that "claimed to hit the Pentagon"

This is the only photo we have received to date that shows possible plane parts from the crash at the pentagon. Because this does not show up in any other photos this is considered to be rather suspect as to its authenticity. Most think that this was planted. Also, this pictured surfaced months after the crash.

No plane crashed into the Pentagon.....

This is a pic of the wall before it crashed.....

Do you see a plane? The media doesn't show this picture very often because it is a photo of the wall before it collapsed. There is no entry hole for a 767

In this picture you'll see the dimensions of a real 767 if it did hit the Pentagon at ground zero. You'll see the hole is way too small to have ever been hit by a plane.

If a plane were to crash into the Pentagon at ground zero like the government told you, wouldn't there be skid marks from the plane leading into the building? Yes there would be b/c that's what happens when a plane hits the ground during a crash landing.

See any skid marks here?

hmmmmm. All we have is that little piece of plane that wasn't released until a month after 9/11. It was most likely a missile.

[Bang]

I've been watching and seeing no proof

You all are giving your opinions just like him

So just to use ONE example given in this thread, when the laws of physics show that windows in a collapsing building show blow OUT because of air pressure, you guys just say "That's not proof".

Well, it is. It is the exact definition of proof, actually. Hard factual science to back up the explanation .

If you choose to be ignorant, that is on you. Physics doesn't change to fit theory. It is the other way around. You and the rest of you Truthers simply ignore the areas where science shoots holes in your theory to focus on another cryptic mystery that is also explainable by science.

You guys think people should question. Fine. People did. LOTS of people did. Many many more than just this all encompassing "government" that dominates the bad guy realm of your theories. As if everyone who ever investigated this was employed by this shadowy conspiracy, you simply choose to ignore any science that discredits your theory.

The answers came. It's up to you to accept them. Since you haven't, it becomes a pointless exercise to try to convince you.

~Bang

[Mooka]

I've been watching and seeing no proof

You all are giving your opinions just like him

Technically, he's giving someone else's opinion that he agrees with.

[skinsfan07]

Here's some more proof that no plane hit the Pentagon.....

http://911lies.org/full_size_911_pentagon_attack_damage5.html

If a 757 had hit the building it would be an easy matter to prove, but,

They have not.

They will not.

They can not ...Because it didn't happen.

Lets look at this again frame by frame

where's the plane??? That was video surveillance from a gas station across the street.

The rest of the info on how no plane crashed into the Pentagon is at that site.

[SkinsHokieFan]

One question

Where are the passengers?

[skinsfan07]

One question

Where are the passengers?

Flight 77 was the only hijacked plane that could not be tracked by radar the whole way as it lost radar contact near the Ohio/Kentucky border. So by this fact, Flight 77 could have gone anywhere since it's transponder was turned off and as some people claim only the military could track it and thereby staying perfectly hidden from all radar of the civil authorities.

Some people might think that it's absurd that a large aircraft such as a Boeing 757 could be flown somewhere else without anybody noticing. However, this is exactly what happened to a similar Boeing aircraft in Africa...

► "A senior U.S. official confirms that the government of Angola has reported a missing Boeing 727 aircraft.

The plane apparently departed from Angola several days ago on a flight to Burkina Faso, in northwestern Africa, but it never made it to its destination, and its whereabouts are unknown, this official said." -CNN (05/30/03)

It's been theorized that Flight 77 (along with some/all of the other hijacked planes on 9/11) was flown via remote control to it's real destination. That is why some believe the Boeing 757's and 767's were used because they both have the same flight controls. Although, there were at least two passengers on Flight 77, retired Navy Admiral Wilson Flagg and retired Navy Capt. John Yamnicky, who had extensive flight experience to have possibly flown this plane and both of these individuals also had extensive military backgrounds in the navy no less. Also, remember that the Captain of Flight 77, Charles Burlingame, was a retired Navy fighter pilot and worked as a liaison in the Pentagon (on anti-terrorism strategies no less) for most of his 17 years as a Naval Reserve officer and who was quoted as being "unabashedly patriotic" and who "embraced military life even after he retired". A prime suspect in a conspiracy such as this one.

Retired Navy Admiral Wilson Flagg (left), retired Navy Capt John Yamnicky (middle), and Navy Reserve officer Charles Burlingame (right).

Several theories as to what could have happened to Flight 77 are:

1. It was flown either by a conspirator on the plane or via remote control to a military base (perhaps a secret base) or other remote location.

2. It was flown via remote control and crashed out at sea.

3. It was flown via remote control and crashed in some remote spot inland like Flight 93 reportedly was.

If Flight 77 was crashed somewhere with all the passengers on board, then it's obvious everyone perished in the crash along with the plane. If Flight 77 was flown to a secret location, then the innocent passengers or all of the passengers could have been murdered there. It's also been theorized that the passengers could have been gassed while the plane was still in the air.

Some theorize that Flight 77 was taken to a remote location where the conspirator passengers, if any, were taken off the plane and then Flight 77 with the innocent passengers was flown via remote control somewhere else and crashed or that the innocent passengers where boarded on another 9/11 hijacked plane who rendezvoused at the same point (such as Flight 93 which had 194 empty seats on it's flight) and then was flown via remote control and crashed it somewhere else (such as the remote spot Flight 93 crashed).

(Be sure to review the passengers who were supposedly on Flight 77 and their interesting backgrounds.)

[SkinsHokieFan]

Flight 77 was the only hijacked plane that could not be tracked by radar the whole way as it lost radar contact near the Ohio/Kentucky border. So by this fact, Flight 77 could have gone anywhere since it's transponder was turned off and as some people claim only the military could track it and thereby staying perfectly hidden from all radar of the civil authorities.

Where is Barbara Olson?

[Heisenberg]

LOL . . . I seriously fear for the future of our country.

[skinsfan07]

You know what I find strange about the plane "supposedly" crashing into the Pentagon?

Isn't it kinda weird that the only picture they have is that little piece?

I mean you're telling me that the ENTIRE PLANE got destroyed except for that little piece? Really? The picture that the government didn't show us until months after the crash was really the only piece of the plane that was left? Strange isn't it? Not one piece of the plane was found except that one.

No engines

No Vertical Stabilizer

No wing sections

Nothing.... Nothing but pictures. And of course, these 'pieces' have since, conveniently disappeared and cannot be analyzed.

I'm not buying it. Find me a picture of some evidence other than that piece which is probably as big as my king size bed, and then maybe I'll believe it.

[vegeta613]

So just to use ONE example given in this thread, when the laws of physics show that windows in a collapsing building show blow OUT because of air pressure, you guys just say "That's not proof".

It's really not

Look up controlled demolition and that air presser is something they call squibs

Here is an actual demolition and an example of it

And another

Here is the Twin Tower Squibs

Notice the smoke at the base of the 2 controlled demolition example and look at this

Well, it is. It is the exact definition of proof, actually. Hard factual science to back up the explanation .

If you choose to be ignorant, that is on you. Physics doesn't change to fit theory. It is the other way around. You and the rest of you Truthers simply ignore the areas where science shoots holes in your theory to focus on another cryptic mystery that is also explainable by science.

Again it's not proof and to tell you the truth it is something that supports the evidence against the official story more than it helps it

You guys think people should question. Fine. People did. LOTS of people did. Many many more than just this all encompassing "government" that dominates the bad guy realm of your theories. As if everyone who ever investigated this was employed by this shadowy conspiracy, you simply choose to ignore any science that discredits your theory.

The answers came. It's up to you to accept them. Since you haven't, it becomes a pointless exercise to try to convince you.

~Bang

I can say the same thing for you people that believe this crap

Science and Demolition experts support 911 truth as well

There are people on both sides that support different things so to say there is proof one way or the other is just not true

[skinsfan07]

LOL . . . I seriously fear for the future of our country.

says the guy who is only 4 years older than me. rofl.

[Heisenberg]

You know what I find strange about the plane "supposedly" crashing into the Pentagon?

Isn't it kinda weird that the only picture they have is that little piece?

I mean you're telling me that the ENTIRE PLANE got destroyed except for that little piece? Really? The picture that the government didn't show us until months after the crash was really the only piece of the plane that was left? Strange isn't it? Not one piece of the plane was found except that one.

No engines

No Vertical Stabilizer

No wing sections

Nothing.... Nothing but pictures. And of course, these 'pieces' have since, conveniently disappeared and cannot be analyzed.

I'm not buying it. Find me a picture of some evidence other than that piece which is probably as big as my king size bed, and then maybe I'll believe it.

Uhhhh . . . I linked to a site showing the wreckage they found in the days afterwards - including landing gear and everything.

Of course you chose to ignore it or claim that there is "something fishy" about the pictures.

Nevermind all the parents and witnesses I know that actually saw the plane hit the ****ing building.

You're seriously unreal.

[Dan T.]

Okay, I'll keep track of the components of Skinsfan07's theory of what REALLY happened.

-A demolition team brought down the WTC twin towers.

-A missile hit the Pentagon.

-The Shanksville crash never happened. That plane landed safely in Cleveland.

-The planes may or may not have been hijacked. But in any case they were flown to a remote location, where the passengers were murdered. Or they were gassed while in the planes. Oh, by the way, one of the pilots used to do military stuff, so he was probably in on it.

Did I miss anything? I don't want to, because this is getting good. The scope of this thing is AMAZING.

[skinsfan07]

This piece of wreckage looks real, not planted!

But unfortunately, it is not from a Boeing 757!

Official reaction to this photo / part, was to claim it is a HoneyWell rotor from the rear 'APU' engine in a Boeing 757's tail-section.

But, after studying these high-resolution photos, HoneyWell, the manufacturers of the supposed APU engines, said: "there is no way that is any part of a APU engine we manufacture"

Karl Schwartz, former GOP Stratagist, patmoz nanotechnologies

-inet security systems CEO

recognizes the part as a JT8D Turbo from from a US Air Force A-3 Skywarrior.

[Heisenberg]

says the guy who is only 4 years older than me. rofl.

Exactly . . . then guys like you come along and make our entire generation look pretty bad when you ignore facts by actual experts and instead listen to a bunch of crazy guys with crazy theories and entirely too much time on their hands.

Like I said, considering the amount of people I know that actually saw the plane hit the building I guess the government thought it through so well that they managed to create an optical illusion of the plane actually hitting the building.

[skinsfan07]

Uhhhh . . . I linked to a site showing the wreckage they found in the days afterwards - including landing gear and everything.

Of course you chose to ignore it or claim that there is "something fishy" about the pictures.

Nevermind all the parents and witnesses I know that actually saw the plane hit the ****ing building.

You're seriously unreal.

read my most recent post.

[Vicious]

If you are trying to say that there was no plane and you live in the D.C. area you need to get your head checked. Thousands of people saw that plane. D.C. isn't a high rise city.

[Dan T.]

Okay, I'll keep track of the components of Skinsfan07's theory of what REALLY happened.

-A demolition team brought down the WTC twin towers.

-A missile hit the Pentagon.

-The Shanksville crash never happened. That plane landed safely in Cleveland.

-The planes may or may not have been hijacked. But in any case they were flown to a remote location, where the passengers were murdered. Or they were gassed while in the planes. Oh, by the way, one of the pilots used to do military stuff, so he was probably in on it.

Did I miss anything? I don't want to, because this is getting good. The scope of this thing is AMAZING.

Added:

-Someone planted a part of an engine from an Air Force jet to make it look like a plane crashed into the Pentagon. Stupid conspirators couldn't even plant the right part.

[skinsfan07]

where did the plane hit? These are VIDEO STILLS from the gas station across the street! Where the hell is the plane?

Even the reporters on CNN said that they didn't see any plane crash into the Pentagon, only saw an explosion and a cloud of dust.

The evidence that this aircraft was not a Boeing 757, includes among other things :

1. The width of the impact wound is nowhere near wide enough.

2. The Bush administration has refused to release the black boxes, the voice recorders or even pictures of any wreckage of flight 77.

3. The Bush administration has refused access, by independent investigators, to any wreckage it, or the FAA, may have.

Contrary to the pictures shown to the American public, after the fact, why does photographic evidence taken only a few moments after the Pentagon event show no wreckage on the lawn of the Pentagon? Where is the plane? Where is the tail, the wings, the luggage, the seats, the landing gear; the engines? What happened to the passengers?

No one reports Bodies ...They are just on paper, supposedly 177 or more bodies were identified, even though their are no eyewitness reports. Not to mention the fire was so hot it supposedly incinerated 100 tons of Aluminum and titanium steal alloy.