9/11 best video yet- As close to a smoking gun as I could find

Forum posts

• 22 March 2006, 17:11

  I liked this viedo a lot for quite a while. And then I realized the fuzzy video evidence for the supposed missile launch from the plane is far from conclusive. I would urge caution with this video!

  • 22 March 2006, 18:13

    This is an attempt to highlight the truth by people who were not inside, who are trying to connect the dots. Insiders spend their time to remove evidence (ground-zero rubble, Pentagon videos), discredit truth-seekers, promote a doubtful theory (the official one), threaten eyewitnesses etc.

    Give truth-seekers a chance to possibly make some mistakes in their analysis and don’t use that to discredit the rest.

  • 22 March 2006, 22:04

    I don’t understand, in the least, your point, Roy. When you write about fuzzy video evidence, I can’t imagine what you could be refering to. Are you saying that somehow the clarity of the video has any bearing on the implications of what Loose Change is alleging. If you are, you have missed, I would say, the point. I would never ask anyone to agree of disagree when statements of what really happened on 9/11 on any of the "video" in Loose Change. Any authenic picture, anywhere of the entry hole and and debris at the Pentagon firmly proves the case. Acting like the quality of the video in Loose Change has some bearing is a sure sign of
    1) somebody who is sort of clueless
    2) somebody who wants to obfuscate the truth

    What exact misrepresentation are you saying urging caution about. I don’t dispute the cosmetic comparison to Fahrenheit. It’s kind of like comparing a dog to a cow, because they both have 4 legs.

    I find the vagueness and causualness of you comments quite suspect.

    Scholars for 9/11 Truth

    Also, do you recommend Webster Tarpley’s Book: 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made in America?

  • 23 March 2006, 12:01

    First off, I’m not called Roy.

    Secondly, the fuzziness referred to concerns the interpretation of the flashes as the plane collides with the tower. The imagery is simply too indistinct to conclusively prove Dylan Avery’s point. The same goes for the "missile pod" on the plane’s belly - I fear Avery is confusing it with standard fairings and typical light reflection effects on the underside of such aircraft. I also can’t quite grasp WHY there would have been any need to fire a missile into the building at point blank range. Even when a missile is launched from a combat jet, it does not instantly race away; it has to accelerate first.

    Don’t get me wrong, there is a lot of good stuff in that video and I remain 100% convined the government orchestrated the 9-11 attacks. But I fear the dubious evidence in the video about the alleged missle launch from the plane discredits the video and thereby the wider 9-11 truth movement.

• 23 March 2006, 04:00

  I haven’t watched yet (and I can’t here) but I’ve been looking for a video of Mineta on 9/11. As the man who grounded the planes (while Cheney and the FAA dithered) he’s responsible for WTC 7 falling for no reason (in Ann Coulter’s fevered reasoning). Pray for him, he should talk while he can.

  • 23 March 2006, 17:41

    this may be what you’re looking for- 911 commission lee hamilton questions Mineta

    http://tyrannyalert.com/hamilton.wmv

• 23 March 2006, 10:54

  I feel that Alex Jones’s -Martial Law-9/11 is the best video out there in regard to the truth about 9/11. As a real dumb right winger stated after viewing it, "it sure makes one think" !

  • 23 March 2006, 22:35

    on adj earnings i put 0 and add a note, def of torture , def of terrorism quote the patriot act that makes funding these organizations illegal put a ? and sign it and send it. you have until april 17th to amend 2002

• 3 April 2006, 05:07

  This video is an amusing diversion but, like Michael Moore’s films, suffers heavily from confirmation bias. I know it’s fun to feed our 9/11 orgasms, but please friends, use common sense, do your own research, understand *all* the variables, and come to logical conclusions.