ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags loose change , final cut

Reply
Old 11th November 2007, 08:33 PM   #41
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 15,252
Originally Posted by JamesB View Post
Talk about selective use of evidence. Dylan states that Hani Hanjour came to the US to become a pilot but failed to complete any courses, but did not finish them. Hello, he already had a license before he came!

At least he dropped the insulting Burlingame thing.
Well Hani did originally come to the US to get his licence, and he got it. He left with a Commercial Pilot's licence, but his English was still so poor that he couldn't get a job. KSM recruited him and sent him back to the States because he'd trained there and so they knew he could get in, plus he had most of his training, however when he applied for jet simulator training the school decided to check him out because his English was so bad they weren't sure that his licence was real. The FAA confirmed that he did carry a legitimate licence and so he was able to train on the simulators, but his English skills still remained lacking.

Interestingly, the only one of the four that one that didn't complete his Comercial Pilot course was Jarrah, who was flying Flight 93, but you never hear a peep about his ability, or lack there of.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)
My Apollo Page.
PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2007, 09:22 PM   #42
JMarshall
Thinker
 
JMarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 213
Originally Posted by TC329 View Post
The NORAD Tapes.

Do your homework.

Aren't you a researcher?
Have you ever been in a high risk situation, where lives actually are at stake? I have and have said things that were untrue in context to the situation, no matter how trained a service member is, or how many times you drill, there are still FUBAR situations... Taking just the NORAD tapes as fact is, quite short-sided, unless the comments on them can be confirmed by a second source. Where is the second source?

Last edited by JMarshall; 11th November 2007 at 09:23 PM.
JMarshall is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2007, 09:29 PM   #43
Mobyseven
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,671
Originally Posted by LashL View Post
Crisis? What crisis?

I love that album. Who was it that said that Supertramp were the most famous band in the world that could walk down the main street of any large city and go completely unrecognised?

Originally Posted by DarkMagician View Post
What? Errors in Loose Change: Final Cut?

What next are you going to tell me? The Pope's Catholic? Water's wet? Bears defecate in the woods?
Errors in LC? Does the Pope s*** in the woods?
Mobyseven is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2007, 09:30 PM   #44
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 13,858
Originally Posted by TC329 View Post
Why did the military believe AA11 was stilll airborne?

Oh yeah because it never disappeared off of the radar. In fact it stayed on the radar for a good 45 minutes or so afterwards I believe.
Bzzzzt! Wrong answer! Thanks for playing, though, we have some lovely parting prizes.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th November 2007, 09:37 PM   #45
JMarshall
Thinker
 
JMarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 213
Just got to the part about "Able Danger"... Huge WOO! I had a Top Secret Security Clearance, and if I was to say anything about anything that was classified, I would be detained, and charged... So this Lt. Col. comes out with information, and all they do is pull his clearance? Sorry, not the way it happens!

E4B? Oh so people on the ground can tell the difference between a Air Force E-4B and a standard airliner, from just seeing the bottom? WOW! They must be experts in Intelligence Aircraft Identification!

And what is their whole point about the drills and war games? I have been involved in many wargames, and drills, and in fact my unit was on a drill on 9-11 as well... Does that mean I was part of the "conspiracy"? No of course not!

Quote from the movie:
"Pentagon authorities will deny that the building had anti-aircraft defense..." Dylan

So your saying they did? Huh, you know that would be the first time I have ever heard of any CONUS(Continental United States) military building with it's own anti-aircraft defenses... And where are these supposed defenses? What do Phalanx pop out of the roof? Or maybe a battery of Stinger missiles? Come on Dylan! Any other truthers that care to come to Dylan's aid on these questions?

Last edited by JMarshall; 11th November 2007 at 09:56 PM.
JMarshall is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 12:58 AM   #46
ref
Master Poster
 
ref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,685
I don't know if it's an error, but omission.

They state, that those who believe flight 77 hit the Pentagon, have impact path damage, debris findings and eyewitness testimonies as their evidence.

Ok. How about also mentioning the DNA evidence, the FDR evidence that confirms the hit, the fact that no eyewitnesses saw a missile hit but over a hundred witnesses saw the plane hit the Pentagon?

They also, once again, mention that free fall from the top of the towers would be 9.2 seconds. Then they show a tower collapse with a timer. The collapses started from the impact zones below the roof, so they can not be compared to the collapse times from the top of the towers. And still the collapses took longer than 9.2 seconds. But they still like to use that "suspicious" time.

Those small inconvenient details.
__________________
9/11 Guide homepage

Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit. - Chief Daniel Nigro

Last edited by ref; 12th November 2007 at 01:06 AM.
ref is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 01:16 AM   #47
gumboot
lorcutus.tolere
 
gumboot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 25,327
Originally Posted by TC329 View Post
So you're now actually denying AA11 remained on the radar after it's impact with the North Tower?

Really?

Please say yes.

Absolutely I'm denying it. Furthermore, AA11 disappeared from radar some time before it hit WTC1.

-Gumboot
__________________

O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde
keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi.


A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.
gumboot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 01:58 AM   #48
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
 
leftysergeant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 18,863
They make a big deal about the documnets found in the wrecjkage at the Petangon and claim it is so little damaged, and then show some crappy pictures of what are obviously fire-and-water damaged passports and such.

It's surprising that the part of the wreckage that got shoved the deepest into the building didn't all burn up? Huh?
leftysergeant is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 02:11 AM   #49
ref
Master Poster
 
ref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,685
Originally Posted by Brainster View Post
Dylan also claims that Satam Al Suqami's passport was in his pocket, but of course he has no way of knowing that.
And he also says something along the lines of the passport surviving 9000 gallons of jet fuel exploding. As if all the jet fuel was used to soak the passport and then exploded. The cockpit has no jet fuel. The wings do. And thousands of papers were on the streets after the impacts. They didn't burn either.
__________________
9/11 Guide homepage

Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit. - Chief Daniel Nigro

Last edited by ref; 12th November 2007 at 02:12 AM.
ref is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 02:25 AM   #50
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by JamesB View Post
But in trooferworld that is confirmation. Thierry Meyssan said there were automated missile defenses at the Pentagon. David Ray Griffin repeated this assertion. There, so it has been confirmed now. Proven 100%. Case closed.
Truth in trooferworld.

One person tells a lie and another swears to it = Twoof.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 03:33 AM   #51
deep
Graduate Poster
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,367
Originally Posted by JMarshall View Post
Have you ever been in a high risk situation, where lives actually are at stake? I have and have said things that were untrue in context to the situation, no matter how trained a service member is, or how many times you drill, there are still FUBAR situations... Taking just the NORAD tapes as fact is, quite short-sided, unless the comments on them can be confirmed by a second source. Where is the second source?

LOL, ladies and gentlemen, please watch yourselves - they're moving the goalposts.
deep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 03:36 AM   #52
deep
Graduate Poster
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,367
Originally Posted by leftysergeant View Post
It's surprising that the part of the wreckage that got shoved the deepest into the building didn't all burn up? Huh?

Yes, because everything around it seemed to disintegrate.. so is that normal or anomalous? Make up your mind.
deep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 03:50 AM   #53
MikeW
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,910
They mention the loss of financial information in the Pentagon impact, and then say "Rumsfeld publicly made this announcement" about the untracked $2.3 trillion.

However they provide no evidence to say that loss of financial information had anything to do with the $2.3 trillion. Also the use of the word "announcement" might lead people to think this was new information, when in fact he and others had mentioned it before, and the issue first came up in March 2000.
MikeW is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 03:59 AM   #54
ref
Master Poster
 
ref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,685
Originally Posted by MikeW View Post
They mention the loss of financial information in the Pentagon impact, and then say "Rumsfeld publicly made this announcement" about the untracked $2.3 trillion.

However they provide no evidence to say that loss of financial information had anything to do with the $2.3 trillion. Also the use of the word "announcement" might lead people to think this was new information, when in fact he and others had mentioned it before, and the issue first came up in March 2000.
And the issue was an estimate on percentage, not a hard figure:

Quote:
...the military cannot account for 25 percent of what it spends

"According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions," Rumsfeld admitted.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/...in325985.shtml
It was an estimate, that 25% of what they spend they cannot be accounted for. It was not a factual statement, that they were missing $2.3 trillion.
__________________
9/11 Guide homepage

Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit. - Chief Daniel Nigro

Last edited by ref; 12th November 2007 at 04:01 AM.
ref is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 03:59 AM   #55
deep
Graduate Poster
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,367
Originally Posted by MikeW View Post
However they provide no evidence to say that loss of financial information had anything to do with the $2.3 trillion. Also the use of the word "announcement" might lead people to think this was new information, when in fact he and others had mentioned it before, and the issue first came up in March 2000.

Yes, they presented the facts and left it up to the viewer to decide what they mean. With regard to Rumsfeld's announcement, that's exactly what it was (according to the dictionary). He called a press conference to announce it.

http://dictionary.com
deep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 04:03 AM   #56
deep
Graduate Poster
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,367
Originally Posted by ref View Post
It was an estimate, that 25% of what they spend they cannot be accounted for. It was not a factual statement, that they were missing $2.3 trillion.

Yes, that was only according to some estimates. It's all stated pretty clearly in the quote (and in LC:FC).

Thanks. Hope you don't feel that you've just debunked anything.
deep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 04:08 AM   #57
ref
Master Poster
 
ref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,685
For those interested, here is the entire transcript of what Rumsfeld said.

http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/...x?speechid=430

He declared war on "Pentagon Bureaucracy".
__________________
9/11 Guide homepage

Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit. - Chief Daniel Nigro
ref is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 04:19 AM   #58
MikeW
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,910
Originally Posted by deep44 View Post
Yes, they presented the facts and left it up to the viewer to decide what they mean. With regard to Rumsfeld's announcement, that's exactly what it was (according to the dictionary). He called a press conference to announce it.

http://dictionary.com
They did not present the fact that this was first announced in March 2000. I wonder why? It's not like it's irrelevant - once you know it had been discussed for more than a year, the September 10 mention is clearly just a coincidence.

And Rumsfeld was not "announcing" this on September 10, it was already public knowledge.
MikeW is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 04:23 AM   #59
sleahead
Critical Thinker
 
sleahead's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 406
Originally Posted by deep44
Yes, they presented the facts and left it up to the viewer to decide what they mean. With regard to Rumsfeld's announcement, that's exactly what it was (according to the dictionary). He called a press conference to announce it.

No, they did not present the facts about the $2.3 trillion by only including Rumfeld's announcement. They did not report that the 'missing' $2.3 trillion was public knowledge long before September 10th 2001, nor do they report the longstanding dissatifaction with DoD financial reporting. Given this, what conclusion do you think they want the viewer to come to?

Edit: Too quick for me, MikeW

Last edited by sleahead; 12th November 2007 at 04:33 AM.
sleahead is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 04:26 AM   #60
ref
Master Poster
 
ref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,685
Originally Posted by deep44 View Post
Yes, that was only according to some estimates. It's all stated pretty clearly in the quote (and in LC:FC).

Thanks. Hope you don't feel that you've just debunked anything.
They (Loose Change) state, that there was "Loss of financial information" at Pentagon, when 77 struck. Then they mention, that Rumsfeld said that "According to some estimates we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions"

It was estimated, that they cannot account for 25% of their spenditure. Some others estimated, that up to $2.3 trillion could not be accounted for. They are estimates of something that cannot be accounted for. Not some hard facts, that "because of these transactions we are missing $2.3 trillion". And as you have seen, it was public knowledge long before September 10, 2001.

Now. Some "financial information" was lost on the impact? Did it have anything to do with those estimates, that 25% of spenditure cannot be accounted for? Did they miraculously loose all the important papers and computers, that stored all the information about those estimated sums that are not accounted for?

First, proove that some financial information was permanently lost. Then prove, that the "financial information" that was lost had any connection with the estimated figure that was not accounted for. Then prove, that they crashed flight 77 into Wedge 1 to destroy precisely that evidence. Then you have a case.

Otherwise, move on.
__________________
9/11 Guide homepage

Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit. - Chief Daniel Nigro

Last edited by ref; 12th November 2007 at 04:30 AM.
ref is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 04:50 AM   #61
Norseman
Muse
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 643
Originally Posted by ref View Post
For those interested, here is the entire transcript of what Rumsfeld said.

http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/...x?speechid=430

He declared war on "Pentagon Bureaucracy".
Here is an articel from 2003 with a status on the problem:
Military waste under fire
$1 trillion missing -- Bush plan targets Pentagon accounting


Here is a good article by The News & Observer from february 12 2006 that gives an more recent update on the problem:
http://www.newsobserver.com/front/story/399475.html

From the article:
Quote:
At the heart of the problem is what government accountants like to call the agency's "stovepiped" setup, a tangle of 4,150 different business operations. (Until 2004, the department said it had 2,200 varied systems, but last year it reported finding an additional 1,900.) It has 713 different human resources systems, for example.
Good luck wiping out all those systems with a single plane crash. And it would only turn the DOD's headache of keeping track of money and assest into a real full blown nightmare.

This is a good example of Truther's qoute mining something that has nothing to do with 9/11 at all.
Norseman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 05:16 AM   #62
ref
Master Poster
 
ref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,685
Originally Posted by Norseman View Post
Here is an articel from 2003 with a status on the problem:
Military waste under fire
$1 trillion missing -- Bush plan targets Pentagon accounting


Here is a good article by The News & Observer from february 12 2006 that gives an more recent update on the problem:
http://www.newsobserver.com/front/story/399475.html

From the article:


Good luck wiping out all those systems with a single plane crash. And it would only turn the DOD's headache of keeping track of money and assest into a real full blown nightmare.

This is a good example of Truther's qoute mining something that has nothing to do with 9/11 at all.
Thanks for the links. Exactly the point, how could they wipe everything out with a single plane crash. Just like the claim with secret government papers in WTC 7. Just a simple demolition will take care of that!
__________________
9/11 Guide homepage

Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit. - Chief Daniel Nigro
ref is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 05:41 AM   #63
JAStewart
Graduate Poster
Tagger
 
JAStewart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,521
I wonder if Dylan actually read the Nist report, or just took the quotes from what Mark said during the hardfire debate...
__________________
Ignorance and google is a horrible combination. - BigAl

Argumentum ad YouTubeum - sts60
JAStewart is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 06:13 AM   #64
SDC
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,244
Originally Posted by deep44 View Post
Yes, because everything around it seemed to disintegrate.. so is that normal or anomalous? Make up your mind.
Just a comment... "Anomalous" doesn't mean impossible. Anomalous things happen all the time.

Reminds me of the time I was translating (Polish to English) a Polish soldier's Holocaust survival story. Every step, every time he was not killed, seemed "anomalous." But each step was true. Like it says in the book of Job: "Only I am left alive to tell thee." That is, against all probabilities, something happened.
SDC is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 06:15 AM   #65
chillzero
Penultimate Amazing
 
chillzero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 15,539
Guys,
I think this could be an interesting thread, and could cover several CT claims. I would really hate to see it consigned to either Humour or AAH.

I'm issuing an early warning / gentle reminder due to a few of the posts, but the thread might be quickly set to moderated status if not kept civil and on topic. If we can keep it relevant, it could be a contender for a sticky, next to the other Loose Change threads.
chillzero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 06:16 AM   #66
SDC
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,244
Originally Posted by deep44 View Post
Yes, that was only according to some estimates. It's all stated pretty clearly in the quote (and in LC:FC).

Thanks. Hope you don't feel that you've just debunked anything.
Rumsfeld's statement comes down to audit problems, not disappearing or stolen cash. Happens all the time in large organizations. If you get anywhere near 100% reconciled at the end of the fiscal year (I always like when we call it the FY, but the mods might misunderstand) you win the prize. Rumsfeld comments demonstrate amazingly sloppy procedures, which should never have been tolerated, but not thievery.
SDC is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 06:31 AM   #67
Hyperviolet
Damnum Fatale
 
Hyperviolet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 989
"Between September 2000 and June 2001, the FAA scrambled jets to intercept 67 times.

Intercepts are routine and usually happen within 10 minutes.
"

I wonder if Loose Change will cite a case.
No.
__________________
The English are worried about the Euro being brought in because of loss of national identity and rising prices. In Scotland, people are just worried in case they have to close Poundstretcher.

Last edited by Hyperviolet; 12th November 2007 at 06:32 AM.
Hyperviolet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 06:40 AM   #68
ref
Master Poster
 
ref's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,685
And they get that 10 minute claim from David Ray Griffin, who in turn gets the 10 minute time from a PC simulation game documentation.

Originally Posted by Griffin
But an Air Traffic Control document put out in 1998 warned pilots that any airplanes persisting in unusual behavior "will likely find two [jet fighters] on their tail within 10 or so minutes."
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060405112622982
"ATC document" was in reality documentation for a PC simulation game called Air Traffic Control Center. And even that documentation speaks of incoming flights from overseas.

Quote:
The U.S. military has their own network of radars looking over the U.S. borders, and out over the ocean (NORAD). They are tied into the FAA computer to be able to get information on incoming flights from overseas, but if they see a target over international waters headed toward the U.S., without flight plan information, they will call on the "shout" line to the appropriate Center sector for an ID. Sector 66 might get a call to ID a radar target, and if 66 has no datablock or other information on it, the military will usually scramble an intercept flight. Essentially always they turn out to be private pilots ("VFR") not talking to anybody, who stray too far outside the boundary, then get picked up on their way back in. But, procedures are procedures, and they will likely find two F-18's on their tail within 10 or so minutes.
http://www.xavius.com/080198.htm
MikeW has debunked it here:
http://www.randi.org/forumlive/showp...55&postcount=7
__________________
9/11 Guide homepage

Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit. - Chief Daniel Nigro

Last edited by ref; 12th November 2007 at 06:48 AM.
ref is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 06:52 AM   #69
Undesired Walrus
Penultimate Amazing
 
Undesired Walrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 11,480
[Merged]LCFC Errors / Loose Change Final Cut: Act 1: Hijackers.

We are skeptics, this is an educational forum, and the threads are getting messy, so I think what we owe to each other and others who may visit here for questions is to answer, analyse and question each of the films claims.

I know there is a thread already devoted to the mistakes of the film, and lets continue with that, but this is more solid in each step as it were.

Therefore, I have started what I hope will be many instalments of us taking the points one by one, and who knows, maybe we will be led to the conclusion that there was an Inside Job. I feel this is an unlikely conclusion, but this is the last installment of Dylan's videos, so lets do this this.

Bin Laden denies responsibility

'No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11'

Mohammed Atta leaves will inside luggage that will be destroyed

The passport found at the twin towers

Drinking, Drugs and porno a few nights before

ISI link

Training at military bases

Rented Apartment from FBI informant

================

Right, I'm not smart enough to refute them all, but indeed, I can, outweigh the 'evidence' that Dylan has presented, with evidence that he fails to mention.


#Ziad Jarrah sent a fairwell letter to his girlfriend in Germany, with the words 'You will see the results, and everybody will be happy'. He also mentions that they will 'meet again', and ends it with 'goodbye'. He phoned her on the morning of 9/11 at 5am and told her he loved her three times.

If I was Dylan, I should ask, in an unbiased documentary, 'Why was he saying fairwell'? Why did he mention 'the results'? Why did he tell her he loved her three times at 5am?' The timing fits with morning prayer.

#Osama Bin Laden has claimed responsibility far more times than Dylan lets on. He has recently attempted to reclaim himself as the 'spiritual leader' of Al Qeada in his latest televised address. He mentions the '19 men, who by the grace of God changed their (The US's) compass.'.

#We have, which Dylan never gives an explanation to, many hijackers all declaring their impending mission in statements recorded on camera. They all say they are giving themselves up for God's will.

#MikeW has uploaded these videos released by Al Qeada. I have not seen many of these before, and it is worth taking a look. http://911myths.com/index.php/Responsibility, Again, we have no reason to suggest these were faked.
#We have the voices of two pilots on United 93 screaming for their lives.

#We have Ziad Jarrah informing the people on the plane there is a bomb onboard. The passengers on the phones confirm this. We have no reason to suggest that this is faked.

#We know that Jarrah and Atta were at Al Qeada training camps.

I'll leave this section up to you.

Last edited by Undesired Walrus; 12th November 2007 at 07:55 AM.
Undesired Walrus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 07:04 AM   #70
MarkyX
Master Poster
 
MarkyX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,157

Bin Laden denies responsibility


Easy one. The only "proof" of his denial were letters apparently written by him sent to Al-Jazeera. However, there is plenty of video evidence of him praising the hijackers, talking to them, and taking responsibility. An unconfirmed versus multiple videos? I'll bet on the latter.


'No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11'


Chain of custody, as I have discussed before. What I find somewhat annoying about FC is they were trying to use footage in like a week or two after 9/11 to confirm that OBL didn't do it. No major investigation has been done and people, including the administration, were in the dark on what exactly happened. However, they were other reasons to go after OBL, such as the Embassy Bombings. The Taliban was merely trying to stall as long as possible because they were harboring a psycho.


Mohammed Atta leaves will inside luggage that will be destroyed


Which proves what exactly? Atta existed? Bombs were put in the towers? I never really understand why they try to bring up "evidence" that results to no conclusion.


The passport found at the twin towers


And, what does this prove? Interesting that Dylan still holds onto this claim, even after the fact he stole it from holocaust denier Carol Valentine.

The other ones require a bit more detail, but they all lead to the same idea: Poke "holes" and provide no narrative.
__________________
MarkyX's Haunted Bloghouse - Read my boredom
MarkyX is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 07:27 AM   #71
Undesired Walrus
Penultimate Amazing
 
Undesired Walrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 11,480
I'm going to put this in this section as I felt the movie should have had Hani Hanjour in the hijackers bit. If somebody soon posts a new thread on Act 3 or whatever it is in, I will move it there.

Dylan returns to his flight instructor for Hani Hanjour, but maddeningly does not mention this very real and very important point.

"There's no doubt in my mind that once (Flight 77) got going, he could have pointed that plane at a building and hit it."

There is no quote mining here, nothing taken out of context. Just what he said. It doesn't prove that Hanjour was not a terrible pilot, but it shows that Dylan Avery is being dishonest and biased.
Undesired Walrus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 07:30 AM   #72
Hyperviolet
Damnum Fatale
 
Hyperviolet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 989
I'm just at the Pentagon section. Okay, same mistake as last edition.

"Those who believe a 757 did not hit, are fueled with the damage to the building..........
....... particularly the lack of damage from the wings or vertical stabilizers"


Loose Change misrepresents the damage by showing this image:




The water obscures the damage, when in reality, the wing damage was made on the lower floor, which cannot be seen due to the fire fighting operation.
As seen on the zoom out shot:


Real damage, including the lower floor:



That's dishonest.
__________________
The English are worried about the Euro being brought in because of loss of national identity and rising prices. In Scotland, people are just worried in case they have to close Poundstretcher.
Hyperviolet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 07:31 AM   #73
RedIbis
Philosopher
 
RedIbis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,899
There's obviously a need for a such a thread as this, but if I can make one sincere request.

When you address a specific point and then refute it with your own evidence, please provide the source.

I don't doubt for a second that there are errors in the film, so when conflicting evidence is presented, it has to be sourced.
__________________
(RedIbis, on the other hand, exists to me only in quoted form). - Gravy (Mark Roberts)
RedIbis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 07:33 AM   #74
MikeW
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 1,910
Originally Posted by Undesired Walrus View Post
#Osama Bin Laden has claimed responsibility far more times than Dylan lets on. He has recently attempted to reclaim himself as the 'spiritual leader' of Al Qeada in his latest televised address. He mentions the '19 men, who by the grace of God changed their (The US's) compass.'.
Coincidentally, today I uploaded a complete section from the al Qaeda video "The Nineteen Martyrs", where the hijackers are individually named and praised. It's the top video on this page.
MikeW is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 07:45 AM   #75
Alt+F4
diabolical globalist
 
Alt+F4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,997
Originally Posted by MarkyX View Post

The passport found at the twin towers

And, what does this prove? Interesting that Dylan still holds onto this claim, even after the fact he stole it from holocaust denier Carol Valentine.
I've always wondered what was the origin of this passport story. Does anyone know? If this story is true, where's the passport now?
__________________
"My folks touched a lot of kids." - Jerry Sandusky
Alt+F4 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 07:45 AM   #76
Undesired Walrus
Penultimate Amazing
 
Undesired Walrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 11,480
Again, this is about the hijackers so it may as well go here.

I do believe Dylan makes the catastrophic mistake of saying Saed al-Ghamdi was a trained Saudi fighter pilot. No if's, no buts.

I fear he may be mistaking him for the Saudi Airlines pilot also named Saeed al-Ghamdi, seeing that a name on the hijacker's list released by the FBI was his. CNN showed a picture of that Al-Ghamdi. It was likely his picture from a flying school in Florida he went to.

As far as I know, the hijacker Al-Ghamdi only fought in Chechnya on the ground. If I am wrong, I'd be interested to know.

Reference:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...23/widen23.xml

(Good idea RedIbis)
Undesired Walrus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 07:46 AM   #77
Hyperviolet
Damnum Fatale
 
Hyperviolet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 989
Originally Posted by MarkyX View Post


The passport found at the twin towers


And, what does this prove? Interesting that Dylan still holds onto this claim, even after the fact he stole it from holocaust denier Carol Valentine.

The other ones require a bit more detail, but they all lead to the same idea: Poke "holes" and provide no narrative.
Mail from the planes was also found.

Originally Posted by New York Times
On Oct. 12, it arrived inside a second envelope at Mrs. Snyder's modest white house on Main Street here, and the instant she took it out and saw it, she says, ''chills just went over me.'' It was singed and crumpled. A chunk was ripped out, giving the bottom of the envelope she had sent the look of a jagged skyline. Mrs. Snyder's lyrical script had blurred into the scorched paper. The stamp, depicting a World War II sailor embracing a woman welcoming him home, was intact.

Along with the letter was a note: ''To whom it may concern. This was found floating around the street in downtown New York. I am sorry if you suffered any loss in this tragedy. Sincerely, a friend in New York!''

Since then, Mrs. Snyder, a customer service representative at a grocery store, has discovered that she has one of only two pieces of mail known to have been recovered from the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center. At least one auction house has contacted her, saying she could sell the letter for tens of thousands of dollars.
From MikeW's 911Myths, i also found this picture:
__________________
The English are worried about the Euro being brought in because of loss of national identity and rising prices. In Scotland, people are just worried in case they have to close Poundstretcher.
Hyperviolet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 07:51 AM   #78
Dazed
Muse
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 586
This is just for my own curiosity.

The obvious impact zone from that image seems, to me, to be here.

pentagon_composite.JPG

The angle at which these columns are bent outward away from the building seems strange though. What do you think?

pentagon_composite2.JPG
Dazed is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 07:57 AM   #79
Undesired Walrus
Penultimate Amazing
 
Undesired Walrus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 11,480
Originally Posted by MikeW View Post
Coincidentally, today I uploaded a complete section from the al Qaeda video "The Nineteen Martyrs", where the hijackers are individually named and praised. It's the top video on this page.
Thanks Mike, I edited my first post with this video.

I have to hand it to them, Al Qeada have far better filmaking talents and emotional rhetoric than Loose Change and Dylan...

Last edited by Undesired Walrus; 12th November 2007 at 07:57 AM.
Undesired Walrus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2007, 08:14 AM   #80
SpaceMonkeyZero
Graduate Poster
 
SpaceMonkeyZero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,284
Originally Posted by Hyperviolet View Post
"Between September 2000 and June 2001, the FAA scrambled jets to intercept 67 times.

Intercepts are routine and usually happen within 10 minutes.
"

I wonder if Loose Change will cite a case.
No.
Of course not. Hit and run "facts" are their specialty. State it as fact, with no sources, and their minions will repeat it forever until it's "truish"
__________________
"NOBODY expects the Truther Movement! Our chief weapon is speculation, speculation and conjecture, conjecture and speculation. Our two weapons are conjecture and speculation, and youtube videos. Our *three* weapons are conjecture, speculation, and youtube videos, and an almost fanatical devotion to the "Truth". Our *four*. No. *Amongst* our weapons. Amongst our weaponry, are such elements as conjecture, speculation."
SpaceMonkeyZero is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:30 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.