Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- May 26, 2006
- Messages
- 22,358
That were equipped to handle approximately 150 pounds of pressure prior to 9-11.
LCFC - Coming soon to a cinema near you...
- Thread starter Oliver
- Start date
-
- Tags
- final cut lcfc loose change
That were equipped to handle approximately 150 pounds of pressure prior to 9-11.
Russell, while I thank you for answering my questions, you haven't provided anything definitive.
Look, if the ASCE was unable to write a good report because they were unable to get the data they needed, and they didn't say so -- which they didn't -- then they are participating in the coverup. It is their JOB as accident investigators to report their findings.
If what you say really happened, then the first finding in the report would read like this:
"1. The ASCE Investigation Team has determined that a proper investigation is impossible without greater cooperation from the Department of Defense, etc. Our team was prevented from obtaining crucial data on the structure, specifically access to key damaged structural areas, and without this information no complete report is possible."
But there is nothing like that. Just the completely ordinary sort of difficulty you emphasize above. SO, did they participate in the coverup, are they lazy, or -- perhaps -- is your interpretation greatly exaggerated?
And as before, I still don't understand what the point would be. Given that you believe Flight 77 did hit the Pentagon, why would the ASCE be prevented from seeing the damage? What could there be to cover up? I still don't follow your reasoning about how ordinary difficulties translate into a massive conspiracy.
I tells ya, LCFC is gonna get slaughtered unless they get their collective acts together.
"Funniest movie since Police Academy: Mission to Moscow" - NY Times
Something tells me nothing will be "definitive" enough. It kind of reminds me of this cartoon.
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
That cartoon highlights a critical difference between our mindsets, and demonstrates how poorly you understand your opposition.
delphi_ote
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2005
- Messages
- 5,994
I agree with the first panel. You guys seem to think the entire government is one dude in a suit.
Wow, posting a "drawing" of Killtown, of all people.
Do you agree with his behaviour?
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
On the cinema release issue...
It is possible a distributor would invest in LC on limited release as a tax write-off. Even distribution can be incredibly expensive - a single 35mm print of a typical length feature film costs around $10,000.
However any distributior who released Loose Change would be risking legal action from a host of companies that owned footage in the film. Loose Change is well outside "fair use". A disclaimer at the beginning mean nothings. Stating "we stole this footage" at the beginning of the film does not make it okay to have stolen it.
IMHO, No distributor would ever risk the legal action.
-Gumboot
It is possible a distributor would invest in LC on limited release as a tax write-off. Even distribution can be incredibly expensive - a single 35mm print of a typical length feature film costs around $10,000.
However any distributior who released Loose Change would be risking legal action from a host of companies that owned footage in the film. Loose Change is well outside "fair use". A disclaimer at the beginning mean nothings. Stating "we stole this footage" at the beginning of the film does not make it okay to have stolen it.
IMHO, No distributor would ever risk the legal action.
-Gumboot
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2006
- Messages
- 7,154
If Uwe Boll can get major movie distributions, anybody can.
I agree. I think it kind of shows a lot of insight into the CT mind.
However as a side note I DO wish the various government depts would be more forthcoming with information. When you have a vacuum of missing information, someone is always going to suspect the worst. I believe the more released information the stronger our position will be.
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 25,327
Boll continues to secure investors for the rights to future video-game-to-movie adaptations. His investors are mostly German. He carefully secures the rights for potential future adaptations, afterwards doing all of the actual production himself, and finishes the product.
-Gumboot
Just like Paul Joseph Watson and 'Big' Jim Fetzer, RP crumbles under analysis.
You are interpreting the absence of a comment as something significant. Again, as you apparently have a mental block with this:
Ridiculous theories and websites CAN be interesting. However, this does not translate into the theories and websites being credible or true. Holocaust denial is very interesting, but it is absolute rubbish. It was mentioned to show that even the worst theories can be interesting. Please do not try to play the aggrieved victim. Mentioning Holocaust Denial is an attack on the utter worthlessness of the claims involved in it. It has nothing to do with you.
Do you condemn Dylan "The victims are really secondary" Avery for deliberately leaving false material in LC? Why doesn't he tell the public which parts of his video are false so they won't be mislead? It's all about the TROOF, right?
*SIGH*
Your CT mental block is showing. You missed this key part of what I posted:
Is it a tad strange that you were able to read the first part, but unable to comprehend the last part?
Russ, please think. Take off your 'loyalty to 9/11 CTs' cap and think. When a floor collapses, it falls down. As it falls down, it pushes the air below it. As the air hits the floor(s) below it, it is pushed out the sides of the building. This is where the windows are at. Saying that it is impossible to know is actually your CT mental block kicking in to prevent you from realizing something that contradicts your CT faith.
Russ, get off what misleading thing? You weren't accused. Your CT mind-set hallucinated a question into an accusation. You mentioned something (aircraft collision) that DIDN'T cause the damage and subsequent collapse of WTC 7. Why not include what DID cause the damage to WTC 7? Why not include the gaping hole torn into WTC 7 by debris from the collapsing WTC towers and the huge amount of diesel fuel stored there for generators? Why not include WTC 7's special design? You're all about the TROOF, right? You're all about giving people a balanced picture, right?
Do you understand that in the real world, not CT-land, the WTC buildings had to have fallen 'straight down'. Absent Godzilla shoulder-tackling the WTC towers, they weren't going to tip over.
Are you agreeing that:
Would you mind enlightening the posters in this topic as to what relevance your above babbling has to do with this topic?
You are welcome.
P.S.
Russell Pickering said:
You are interpreting the absence of a comment as something significant. Again, as you apparently have a mental block with this:
Ridiculous theories and websites CAN be interesting. However, this does not translate into the theories and websites being credible or true. Holocaust denial is very interesting, but it is absolute rubbish. It was mentioned to show that even the worst theories can be interesting. Please do not try to play the aggrieved victim. Mentioning Holocaust Denial is an attack on the utter worthlessness of the claims involved in it. It has nothing to do with you.
Russell Pickering said:
Do you condemn Dylan "The victims are really secondary" Avery for deliberately leaving false material in LC? Why doesn't he tell the public which parts of his video are false so they won't be mislead? It's all about the TROOF, right?
Russell Pickering said:
*SIGH*
Your CT mental block is showing. You missed this key part of what I posted:StoneWT said:
Is it a tad strange that you were able to read the first part, but unable to comprehend the last part?
StoneWT said:
Russell Pickering said:
Russ, please think. Take off your 'loyalty to 9/11 CTs' cap and think. When a floor collapses, it falls down. As it falls down, it pushes the air below it. As the air hits the floor(s) below it, it is pushed out the sides of the building. This is where the windows are at. Saying that it is impossible to know is actually your CT mental block kicking in to prevent you from realizing something that contradicts your CT faith.
Russell Pickering said:
Russ, get off what misleading thing? You weren't accused. Your CT mind-set hallucinated a question into an accusation. You mentioned something (aircraft collision) that DIDN'T cause the damage and subsequent collapse of WTC 7. Why not include what DID cause the damage to WTC 7? Why not include the gaping hole torn into WTC 7 by debris from the collapsing WTC towers and the huge amount of diesel fuel stored there for generators? Why not include WTC 7's special design? You're all about the TROOF, right? You're all about giving people a balanced picture, right?
Gerald Posner said:
Russell Pickering said:
Do you understand that in the real world, not CT-land, the WTC buildings had to have fallen 'straight down'. Absent Godzilla shoulder-tackling the WTC towers, they weren't going to tip over.
Russell Pickering said:
Are you agreeing that:
--------------------------StoneWT said:
Russell Pickering said:
Would you mind enlightening the posters in this topic as to what relevance your above babbling has to do with this topic?
Russell Pickering said:
You are welcome.
P.S.
StoneWT said:
Last edited:
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 10,017
When they remake that movie Mark Foley should play Leslie Nielsen's pilot character.
Oliver
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 17,396
When i have the chance to see it i will press F4 within
all other windows first and i guess nearly everybody
in here also want´s to see it if it´s out.
milesalpha
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- May 4, 2006
- Messages
- 375
Peter Graves was the pilot, Captain Over.
Leslie Nielsen was the doctor, and don't call me Shirley.
Stankeye
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2006
- Messages
- 281
I find this interesting.
I know Russell believes now that a 767 hit the Pentagon, most likely even Flight 77, so the quote from Rumsfield doesn’t mean anything to him anymore.
What is fascinating is that all the quotes he or others may have used initially to back up the “missile” theory are now worthless, along with Rumsfield’s quote. His research provided him the data he needed to conclude that the Pentagon was hit by a plane, regardless of any contrary quotes or witnesses.
He still sees some problems with different things to do with the Pentagon investigation but that doesn’t detract from the conclusion that a 767 hit it.
Now this brings us to the WTC and all the quotes that lead him and others to believe there was demolition happening. This is what I find the most interesting in that now we are again relying on quotes and I guess video to create the hypothesis of demolition, without realizing he just did the same thing with the Pentagon and spent some years(?) working on it. He starts from scratch again with the assumption that the witnesses and videos that support the demolition theory are what he needs to focus on.
I just don’t understand this type of thinking I guess. If you have spent so much work and effort to research the Pentagon missile theory based on the original assumption of quotes and video/picture evidence that supported it, only to conclude that it was a plane, to start over using the same assumptions on the WTC is baffling to me.
I think this is where the hostility towards you stems from Russell, it’s difficult to understand why someone who put so much effort into getting answers regarding the Pentagon based on a bad assumption only to prove the official version (less gas in the cockpit) then to see you start on the same baseless assumption with regards to the WTC creates this tension here. These people have dealt with a lot of the wild claims that have been around for all these years now and frustration is setting in for them, if you would only use the lessons you learned regarding the Pentagon and how you got to where you are regarding it when you originally thought missile then I think things would be a lot more civil.
Edit: Forgot the qoute.
Last edited:
DavidJames
Penultimate Amazing
Russell is strong with the CT gene. He didn't have much to lose by giving up the no plane CT because he had the "it was remote controlled" CT in his back pocket.
David,
Of course, he doesn't come out and say that it was Flight 77. That still leaves open plane-switching. He also entertains the notion put forward by that incompetent dude from Canada that the passengers and crew were gassed to knock them out. 'That dude' is the same person responsible for the bogus Canadian study proving cell phones don't work on planes.
I used to have a small amount of respect for Russell based on what I had heard from others including conspiracy folk. Now I see he is just a conspiracy theorist that doesn't understand how to evaluate evidence.
Of course, he doesn't come out and say that it was Flight 77. That still leaves open plane-switching. He also entertains the notion put forward by that incompetent dude from Canada that the passengers and crew were gassed to knock them out. 'That dude' is the same person responsible for the bogus Canadian study proving
cell phones don't work on planes.I used to have a small amount of respect for Russell based on what I had heard from others including conspiracy folk. Now I see he is just a conspiracy theorist that doesn't understand how to evaluate evidence.