Is it because "Loose Change" tells it like it is?
2006-12-12 15:14:51 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Government
The Loose Change documentary makes sense for the same reason the Law of Gravity makes sense or for the same reason why the Law of Thermodynamics seems veridical – it is merely reflecting what is most likely the truth. Usually most lies have an element of complexity in them, so as to obstruct any effort to decipher truth from falsehood. That is why the 9/11 report is inundated with so much garbage. It is so detail laden in order to give the appearance of a thorough investigation, when it more akin to a thorough cover up.
People always like to label, the few brave souls who call the government to account for their contribution to the 9/11 tragedy, conspiracy nuts not because what they say is far fetched, but because to entertain something so insidious about the government would shatter all their preconceived notions about how rosy the United States is in comparison to the rest of the world. If our government truly had a hand involved in setting up the events of 9/11, or at least knowingly allowing it to take place, we can no longer claim the moral high ground, which historically we have done. Such an acknowledgment concerning those in our most hallowed institutions would forever efface any claim we have to being the bastion of peace and freedom.
To those who insist on disparaging people who have alternate explanations concerning the impetus and participants of 9/11, I have one question to ask you. Which scenario of the two below is more far fetched?
1. The 9/11 tragedy was committed by a rag tag team of terrorists armed with home improvement utilities, with scant or no military training, and novice flight skills, who can somehow navigate several jumbo jets that require years of experience to fly and navigate, in a highly precise coordinated attack that was virtually unbeknownst to the United States law enforcement and intelligence agencies; agencies which by enlarge are among the most sophisticated in the world?
Or
2. The 9/11 tragedy was committed or aided and abetted by the United States government, which employs some of the most sophisticated men and women, who are highly skilled at numerous disciplines including flying airplanes, using remote controlled technologies, explosives, are more well versed in airport security than any foreigner and have at their disposal the most highly adept clandestine agencies of any nation in the world who are capable of carrying out broad scale attacks without being noticed and have the connections to make evidence of any subterfuge disappear?
The choice between these two scenarios is as obvious and simple to me as asking which car is capable of reaching speeds in excess of 200 miles an hour, a formula one car or a Ford Pinto, or who would win an I. Q. contest, George W. Bush or Stephen Hawkings. So who is choosing the highly “imaginative” and “far fetched” scenario here: The people who choose number 1, or those who choose number 2? The only place were people with hardly any training, or any real skill, or any true connections can pull off something of that mammoth scale successfully is in the movies, not in reality. Of course given that the Republicans have elevated two movie stars, namely Ronald Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger to high government offices, it is not too farfetched to assume that many Americans subscribe to movie logic rather than true reasoning.
2006-12-13 10:50:37 · answer #1 · answered by Lawrence Louis 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
It was once designed to make "best logical sence" and go with the flow like a well thriller novel. Look from your window -the earth is flat - logical, however fallacious. The bipartisan nine/eleven file, however, particularly is not that fascinating - it best studies legitimate and verifiable details.
2016-09-03 15:19:14 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who'm I talking with? Chucky or Lucky?
"Loose Change" makes more sense than the 9/11 report. Other videos, like "Painful Deceptions" & 911 Mysteries" do a better job. They draw fewer lousy conclusions with less character assasination.
Speaking of the 9/11 Commission report, check the link below.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/01/AR2006080101300.html
2006-12-12 15:27:18 · answer #3 · answered by bob h 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Loose Change video does make so many points. It appears the Government really dropped the ball on this cover up. The people will all find out eventually but we should have an investigation now not in 20 years when Bush and all the cronies are dead. They need to pay for their sins now.
2006-12-12 15:49:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Perhaps. neither one of them alone is enough to prove the case -though the 9/11 commission report and the people involved- 1 even had to testify under oath- might be grounds to dismiss that version of events as not fully accurate.
Loose change Attracts people because it is clear, logical, and covers all of 9/11, not just some parts (WTC7? anyone found it in the 9/11 commission report yet?)
2006-12-12 15:23:34 · answer #5 · answered by The Big Box 6 · 4⤊ 2⤋
It seems really hard to believe that anyone could pull off such a massive conspiracy,
on the other hand, it is really hard to watch something like "loose change" or "in plane site" and walk away without thinking feeling a little sick to your stomach. I doubt that the majority of the people that dismiss films like these have watched them from start to finish.
2006-12-12 17:38:23 · answer #6 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I have seen loose change, I am sceptical of everything unless I see it for myself. They certainly raise some interesting points, but they are far from presenting a case that prooves the government was behind 9/11.
2006-12-12 15:17:30 · answer #7 · answered by 3rd parties for REAL CHANGE 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
ya, you got to remember that this is still a form of propiganda, and it is edited to take the directors vision.
You have to remain skeptical on all issues, especailly like this. DId the govmt cause 911, no. Did they have the ability to stop it? possibly.
2006-12-12 15:24:57 · answer #8 · answered by duffmanhb 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋
That is true if & only if you are on drugs.
2006-12-12 18:09:32 · answer #9 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
loose change - for uneducated morons
the official reports - for people with an iq over 80
Debunk Sites:
http://911conspiracysmasher.blogspot.com/
http://www.911myths.com/
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/4199607.html
http://www.slate.com/id/1008297/
http://www.debunking911.com/
http://southerncrossreview.org/41/9-11.htm
http://www.lists.opn.org/pipermail/org.opn.lists.skeptix/Week-of-Mon-20060911/003261.html
http://www.politicalhobbyist.com/debunked/alexjones.html
http://www.lolinfowars.co.nr/
http://www.jnani.org/mrking/writings/911/king911.htm
http://gradeonegadfly.blogspot.com/2006/10/loose-change-on-upper-east-side-part-i.html
http://www.911cultwatch.org.uk/911cult.htm
http://www.infoshop.org/texts/debunking911.html
http://www.jod911.com/
http://internetdetectives.biz/case/loose-change
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/PSEUDOSC/911NutPhysics.HTM
http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html
http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/
http://thedoc911.blogspot.com/
http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2006/09/01/news/conspiracy.php
http://antitruther.blogspot.com/
http://911debunker.livejournal.com/
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/09/11/1345203
Investigations:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/
http://www.house.gov/science/hot/wtc/wtcreport.htm
World Trade Center:
http://www.nistreview.org/_media/documents/NIST/appendixl.pdf
http://www.hera.org.nz/PDF%20Files/World%20Trade%20Centre.pdf
http://www.nae.usace.army.mil/news/wtc.pdf
http://www.construction.com/NewsCenter/Headlines/ENR/20011001b.asp
http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/twintowers/twintowers.html?clik=netmain_feat1
http://blogs.nationalgeographic.com/channel/blog/2005/09/explorer_collapse.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/
http://web.archive.org/web/20010914230312/http:/people.aol.com/people/special/0,11859,174592-5,00.html
http://news.uns.purdue.edu/UNS/html4ever/2006/060911.Sozen.WTC.html
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20020707_wtc_FIRE/index_FIRE.html
http://www.usatoday.com/graphics/news/gra/wtccollapse/flash.htm
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html
http://www-math.mit.edu/~bazant/WTC/WTC-asce.pdf
http://vincentdunn.com/wtc.html
Pentagon:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3069699/
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/11/28/60II/main319383.shtml
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/build03/PDF/b03017.pdf
http://criticalthrash.com/terror.html
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/08/23/1030052968648.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0%2C1300%2C550486%2C00.html
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm
http://www.geoffmetcalf.com/pentagon/pentagon-email_20020316.html
http://renovation.pentagon.mil/history-renovation.htm
http://www.thehawkeye.com/features/2001/911/IdxThur.html
Flight 93:
http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20010912crashnat2p2.asp
http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/flight/flight.html
http://www.aviationnow.com/avnow/news/channel_awst_story.jsp?view=story&id=news/aw090971.xml
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A56110-2002May8¬Found=true
http://blogs.scripps.com/wcpo/staff/2006/02/wcpocoms_flight_93_story.html
http://www.s-t.com/daily/09-02/09-10-02/a02wn022.htm
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_90223.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3067652/
Moussaoui Trial:
http://www.rcfp.org/moussaoui/index.php?sortby=datedesc
Anniversary/Memmorials:
http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/memorial/lists/by-location/page88.html
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14571441/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14584690/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12185779/
http://cagle.msnbc.com/news/9-11anniversary2003/
Books:
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbninquiry.asp?ean=9780805076820&displayonly=EXC&z=y
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/158816635X/sr=8-1/qid=1155609077/ref=sr_1_1/104-6098036-7150331?ie=UTF8
http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/09/19/032851.php
Editorials:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12652-2004Sep10_3.html
http://www.10zenmonkeys.com/2006/09/14/911-the-wingnuts-v-the-sheeple/
http://www.news.com.au/sundaymail/story/0,,20341165-5003406,00.html
http://911myths.com/Another_Expert.pdf
http://depts.washington.edu/uweek/archives/2001.10.OCT_04/_article9.html
http://www.villagevoice.com/blogs/powerplays/archives/002835.php
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,174655-1,00.html
http://256.com/gray/thoughts/2001/20010912/1989_9_11_travel.html
http://www.tullyconstruction.com/projects/information.asp?id=16
2006-12-12 15:49:34 · answer #10 · answered by arus.geo 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋