Groundbreaking New 9/11 Film "September Clues"

[Miller]

Originally Posted by cjh404

I guess organization was a bad word choice. I meant that it would take a few of the "cover uppers" to be in the New York TV stations to have the access they would need.

But you'd need to not only have those covert operatives in several different buildings in New York, but also in L.A, and London, and every other major city that had reporters on the ground on 9/11, plus hundreds and hundreds of amateurs with cameras who caught all this on tape. Plus, once you've got the people whose job it is to make the switch in place, you'd need some way to keep the hundreds of news professionals in each building unaware that this vitally important footage of major, breaking news was being manipulated. You'd have an editing booth full of people screaming their heads off, wanting to know why they don't have the footage yet, all in seperate locations scattered around the globe. And that's something we would have heard about by now. Unless they were all in on it, too.

But I don't believe these videos, but I like the fact that people are questioning whats going on because some of the things around 9/11 still seem sketchy to me.

Which is why you should be as outraged about this bullshit as everyone else in this thread. I don't know which particular theory you favor. No offence meant, but I kinda suspect it's about as well grounded as the one presented in the OP. But let's say you're really on to something. You're going to have a hell of a time convincing people that your theory is right, because the well has already been poisoned by all these nutcases babbling about orbital death rays. You want to talk about what the Bush administration really knew about 9/11 before it happened, a whole lot of people are going to write you off as another loon, simply because they've been bombarded by so many patently psychotic "conspiracy theories" that they put all these theories in the same box, and ignore the lot of them. Whatever view you want to put forward is only hurt by the existence of videos like those linked to above. Whatever the truth was about 9/11, the exsistence of videos like those linked to above only make it that much harder to get to it.

You really think this is the most important historic event to happen on American soil in the last one hundred and fifty years? Pearl Harbor in my mind is way more historic, in terms of well history, than 9/11.

Fair enough, I was letting my rhetoric carry me away there. Make that the second most important historic event etc.

I agree that it would take an incredible effort, but governments are in control of trillions of dollars and technology that we don't know about so you can't say it is impossible.

Actually, I can say it's impossible. I'm saying it's impossible right now. Because the government, while very wealthy and very powerful, is not magical. There are limits on what even the most advanced technology can do, and further limits to how far you can advance a particular area of technology without the antecedent developments filtering out to the general population. Technology does not exist in a vacuum. It comes about through a series of incremental improvements on previous inventions. If the technology necessary for the theory described in those videos to exist, even in a top secret government lab, those of us without government clearances should be able to see that technology on the horizon.

I mean, compare this putative government cover-up of a program designed to kill thousands of people with a very real government cover-up of a program designed to kill thousands of people: the Manhattan Project, which developed the atomic bomb during World War II. We're talking about a top secret government super weapon program, carried out at the height of war time, on an invention that had no civilian applications, in a field of science that was so new it still had all the labels attached. And it was still common knowledge that the US was working on a weaponized form of atomic energy. The theory linked to in the OP, on the other hand, would have been carried out prior to the outbreak of any hostilities, and it's not on a science that's obviously offensive in purpose, so you can't use the war effort as a whip to keep quiet the hundreds of scientists and technicians involved in the project. And it's in a field with intense private sector interest: as advanced as the computer graphics and video editing techniques available to the government may be, the ones available to Disney, or Industrial Light and Magic, can't be that far behind. (Actually, I'd wager they're significantly more advanced.) If these techniques were possible with the most cutting edge technology available, even if they weren't widely available now, we'd know they were around the corner based on extrapolations of what we have right now. But what we have right now is so far from what you're speculating about that it's not even on the radar.

Trying to believe that this is what really happened, yes I believe that the continuous footage the was shown for the months and years afterwards would play into peoples memory of what they saw.

Okay, but what about the days and weeks afterwards? Ten thousand people see a missile hit the WTC. That very same day, the TV shows a plane hitting it. Wouldn't you expect people to notice and comment on the discrepency, at least for the first dozen or so times they saw the altered footage?

Exactly so why are you even reading this thread and posting in it?

Because the truth is important.

Once again you misread what I said. I said the government OR some super secret society that runs the world. What I was getting at is that some CT's think that the illuminati or the free masons etc are "running" the world

You said, "The US government or some other super secret society." Which is a clear statement that the US government is a super secret society. Which, obviously, is an absurd thing to say. But then, so is virtually everything else you've posted here, so I had trouble telling if that was simply poor wording, or an actual statement of your beliefs. I decided to play it safe and assume the latter.

[LonesomePolecat]

Originally Posted by elucidator

True enough. If, however, they unanimously concur that you are possessed of Pazuzu...

... then you should lay off the aforementioned grass and cough syrup.

[Tuckerfan]

Originally Posted by Annie-Xmas

In the words of Richard Bachman, an asshole is someone who doesn't believe what he is seeing.

You realize you're going to wind up in Gitmo for saying that, don't you?

[CurtC]

Originally Posted by xtisme

Since we are talking about the Pentagon here, some simple thought would tell most folks that if the Pentagon was hit by a large missile (say, a Tomahawk type) then there would be a bigger hole than the 13-16 foot entry hole we observe.

The hole in the Pentagon's second floor was 13 to 16 feet. The hole in the first floor was 80 or 90 feet wide. Basically everything but the ends of the wings and the top of the tail made a hole.

[JustinC]

I think Michael Moore's doing some research on this site for his next piece - 'How Gullible Are We?'

[Fish]

You know, I read on CNN's website just the other day that they did a full sonar scan of the Hollywood set where Roger Patterson filmed the 9/11 crashes, and you know what? They didn't find the Loch Ness Monster at all.

I call that very suspicious.

[Baldwin]

Originally Posted by tomndebb

Unfortunately, this amounts to an accusation of sock-puppetry/trolling.

No, it does not. I was expressing a suspicion, not making an accusation.

Originally Posted by tomndebb

If it is only a hunch, then it should not be posted, here.

Why not? Exactly.

It is a violation of the rules to post accusations of trolling, publicly, in any Forum (with a minor exception for using "troll" as an epithet in The BBQ Pit.

Good thing I didn't do that.

[Miller]

Originally Posted by Baldwin

No, it does not. I was expressing a suspicion, not making an accusation.

What's the difference there, exactly?

[XT]

Originally Posted by CurtC

The hole in the Pentagon's second floor was 13 to 16 feet. The hole in the first floor was 80 or 90 feet wide. Basically everything but the ends of the wings and the top of the tail made a hole.

Not that it matters to the point I was making (1000 lbs of high explosives would make a bigger hole than even 80-90 feet wide), but do you have a cite for this? I did a quick lookup (when I originally posted I just went from memory on the size of the hole) and I get this:

Here is the hole in the building - it's been reported by at least a dozen different sources (including conspiracy theory sites) to be a 16 to 20 foot hole. That is really interesting when you take into account the fact that the 757 body is 12 ft 4in wide and 13 ft 6in high. (Here is where I was mistaken in the past, like so very many others I was led astray by the HEIGHT of the aircraft, which is actually the measurement from the wheels-down to the tip of the tail. That measurement is for aircraft hangar clearance, not the SIZE of the aircraft.) The 757 is basically a cylinder that is 13 feet across. It then should not be surprising that it would create something around a thirteen foot hole in the side of the building.

This is, of course, the entry hole. There is damage to the building from secondary effects (basically burning jet fuel and secondary explosions)...but the entry hole seems to be about what I said it was. Do you have a cite for an 80-90 foot entry hole? Or what exactly are you talking about?

-XT

[CurtC]

Originally Posted by xtisme

Not that it matters to the point I was making (1000 lbs of high explosives would make a bigger hole than even 80-90 feet wide), but do you have a cite for this? I did a quick lookup (when I originally posted I just went from memory on the size of the hole) and I get this:

Of course, the abovetopsecret.com site is a conspiracy den. The conspiracy crowd usually makes the case that the hole was only 16 feet across, much too narrow for a big ol' plane like AA77. But they make that case using deceptive photos, especially one showing firemen spraying water, and unless you know what to look for, you may think that the hole visible above the water spray is the first floor, but in that photo the water obscures the first floor completely and the hole you see is the one on the second floor.

The best reference is the Pentagon Building Performance Report (warning: PDF). Pages 16 and 17 of this document have two photos and an illustration that show the first floor hole very well. Go ahead and download it - it's not that long and with lots of pictures is a pretty quick read, and it gives you a very good idea of the thoroughness that this has been studied.

[tomndebb]

Originally Posted by Baldwin

No, it does not. I was expressing a suspicion, not making an accusation.

Why not? Exactly.

Good thing I didn't do that.

Anyone with message board/news group experience should be well aware that the difference between expressing a negative opinion about another poster's identity and making an accusation is so minute as to be indistinguishable.

The reason "why not?" is that, historically, "expressing one's suspicions" has exactly the same effect on the thread as "making accusations"--generally derailing the thread into a hijack discussion whether the suspicion/accusation is accurate. Therefore, such accusations (and their very similar "expressions") have been forbidden on this board for a many, many years.

It was possible that you did not recognize the remarkable similarity between voicing one's suspicions and making an accusation or that you simply forgot what history has demonstrated. For that reason, I simply called it to your attention without issuing a Warning or otherwise formally admonishing you. However, making a point of arguing about the matter in this Forum is not going to win you either the argument or any grace points.

[XT]

Originally Posted by CurtC

Of course, the abovetopsecret.com site is a conspiracy den.

It might be...but I suspect you didn't actually read the link. That guy's post was definitely NOT part of the CT...and I thought it was extremely well done.

Originally Posted by CurtC

The conspiracy crowd usually makes the case that the hole was only 16 feet across, much too narrow for a big ol' plane like AA77.

Maybe they do...but its a stupid point. Do they expect the wings are some kind of ridgid structure that would survive such an impact not only intact but with enough structural strength to make a hole in a concrete building?

Originally Posted by CurtC

But they make that case using deceptive photos, especially one showing firemen spraying water, and unless you know what to look for, you may think that the hole visible above the water spray is the first floor, but in that photo the water obscures the first floor completely and the hole you see is the one on the second floor.

Not sure what point you are making here. I downloaded what you linked too...and the impact hole isn't very clearly visible. Nor does the text on the pages you told me to read seem to list the size of the IMPACT hole in the building...which was what I was refering too. The rest of the damage looks like collapse damage (as I said, from the fire and, well, from a large airplane hitting it).

-XT

[CurtC]

xtisme, here is the picture showing a spray of water obscuring the first floor, and showing the 15-foot hole on the second floor:

http://www.loosechangeguide.com/images/image072.jpg

And here is the picture from the same angle showing the very large hole in the first floor:

http://www.loosechangeguide.com/images/image075.jpg

[cjh404]

Originally Posted by Miller

You said, "The US government or some other super secret society." Which is a clear statement that the US government is a super secret society. Which, obviously, is an absurd thing to say. But then, so is virtually everything else you've posted here, so I had trouble telling if that was simply poor wording, or an actual statement of your beliefs. I decided to play it safe and assume the latter.

You are correct, after me re-reading it I should have not put other in there.


I can now say that I believe 9/11 wasn't a cover up, well at least that it was done by terrorists with airplanes. Main reason being if someone were trying to destroy the WTC and didn't want to know it was them they would do it the easiest and most plausible way.

But I will say this, don't you think that if there was a cover up that it would look like something logical happened. Obviously they will cover their trails and not allow the truth to get out. People bring up scandals and secrets that have been leaked, but you have no idea about the stuff that isn't leaked. And that is why CTs do work, you can't prove it because you don't have access to the data and documents you would need. And that is also why it is a weak argument.

I also have started to read the 9/11 Commission Report for the first time, which is a good thing to link to in order to get someone like me to shut up about it not being done by terrorists with planes.

[Alessan]

Originally Posted by cjh404

But I will say this, don't you think that if there was a cover up that it would look like something logical happened. Obviously they will cover their trails and not allow the truth to get out. People bring up scandals and secrets that have been leaked, but you have no idea about the stuff that isn't leaked. And that is why CTs do work, you can't prove it because you don't have access to the data and documents you would need. And that is also why it is a weak argument.

But by that logic, how could you ever possibly prove there wasn't a cover-up?

[Derleth]

Originally Posted by Alessan

But by that logic, how could you ever possibly prove there wasn't a cover-up?

In the world of actual debate, you don't have to. The burden of proof is on the person making the claim. And it is possible to prove that the official story has enough holes to sink the QEII without being able to even speculate on what the real story is.

In a debate run by the credulous and read by zealots, whoever shouts loudest wins. There are people successfully shouting away the sun right now.

[CurtC]

Originally Posted by Derleth

And it is possible to prove that the official story has enough holes to sink the QEII without being able to even speculate on what the real story is.

You can show that there are holes in the official story?

I've been following this pretty closely for the last 18 months or so (that last post of mine with the links to Pentagon pictures is my own web site), and all I have ever seen are questions posted by the conspiracy theorists, indicating stuff they don't yet understand. Pretty much everything has been answered.

If you have "proof" of holes in the official story, please bring them up.

[Telemark]

Originally Posted by CurtC

You can show that there are holes in the official story?

I think he's saying that it is theoretically possible to debunk the official line without having an alternative. That's not part of the debunking process.

[ralph124c]

OK, I get it now: the US Govt. concocts a scheme to destroy two of the tallest buildings in NYC. They do this by:
-planting explosives in the building (and NOBODY sees this happening)
-managing to coordinate the blasts with the simultaneous collision of two commercial airliners (how did they do this?)
-murdering 3000 people, including a large number of NYC firemen(again everybody says nothing)
-keeping this secrect (that the USA conspired to muder 3000 of its citizens)
Yeah right!
I think beliving in a flat earth makes more sense.

[CurtC]

Originally Posted by Telemark

I think he's saying that it is theoretically possible to debunk the official line without having an alternative. That's not part of the debunking process.

On second reading, I think you're right. It sure did sound at first like he was saying there are many holes in the official story.

[Wee Bairn]

If it was a fake, they should have done it in the middle of the night- less people would have "seen" it.

[Valgard]

Originally Posted by Wee Bairn

If it was a fake, they should have done it in the middle of the night- less people would have "seen" it.

It was. If you look closely at my Groundbreaking New Film you will clearly see the gigantic floodlights that were set up all around NYC to give the appearance of daylight. I also calculate that the accumulated effect of the so-called Daylight Savings Time since inception was actually a necessary hoax on the world's clocks intended to lead up to exactly that moment, so that while everybody thinks that the "planes" struck early in the morning it actually all took place at 11:58pm. The recent shift in DST enacted by Congress was required to roll the clocks back into Correct Time (which we shall abbreviate as CT). Thank goodness that eagle-eyed patriots such as myself were able to spot the discrepancies and we are now disclosing them to the world.

[Derleth]

Once more, to clear things up:

You don't need to know what really happened in order to demonstrate that something is a lie. All you need to do is demonstrate that a given story is logically or physically inconsistent. For example, you could demonstrate that the story has one person in two or more places at the same time, or that the story requires the sun to have risen in the west. Once you have done that, your job is done: Anyone who demands you tell them what really happened is attempting to live in a movie and failing. On the flip side, people who claim the consensus story is wrong because they really know what happened are very likely to be attempting the same bogus cinematic existence. Science starts with questions, not answers.

The recent shift in DST enacted by Congress was required to roll the clocks back into Correct Time (which we shall abbreviate as CT).

The long-term impact of the recent DST change is that the days will lengthen and the sun will slow down (due to an increased amount of daylight being saved and unable to power its continued motion) until, in a few months, it halts right above the location of the WTC, obscuring vital information that would otherwise implicate the Bushes and proving, once and for all, that God is a co-conspirator who not only knew about the plot but communicated to key players who directly put it into action.

[LonesomePolecat]

Originally Posted by Derleth

Science starts with questions, not answers.

And the question to ask here is, Why would anybody come up with such a ridiculously complicated plot in the first place? What kind of rational purpose could it possibly have served?

There's a scene in the first Austin Powers movie that sums it all up for me. Dr. Evil, recently awakened from his cryogenic sleep, is speaking to his henchmen about a spectacularly evil scheme for which he plans to get ten million dollars, only to be informed by his henchmen that his organization has gone legit and is now making billions and billions of dollars legally, far more than he could expect to get from any sinister plot.

I think of that scene every time I come across someone talking about 911 conspiracies.

[D_Odds]

Originally Posted by Valgard

It was. If you look closely at my Groundbreaking New Film you will clearly see the gigantic floodlights that were set up all around NYC to give the appearance of daylight. I also calculate that the accumulated effect of the so-called Daylight Savings Time since inception was actually a necessary hoax on the world's clocks intended to lead up to exactly that moment, so that while everybody thinks that the "planes" struck early in the morning it actually all took place at 11:58pm. The recent shift in DST enacted by Congress was required to roll the clocks back into Correct Time (which we shall abbreviate as CT). Thank goodness that eagle-eyed patriots such as myself were able to spot the discrepancies and we are now disclosing them to the world.

If, in 3 months, some new WTC conspiracy loon comes promulgating this theory, I am going to have to digitally hunt you down Valgard, and say some mean things about throwing fuel on the stupid fire...very mean things.

[dropzone]

Lemme see if I got this new conspiracy theory straight: WTC7 collapsed because of all the groundbreaking by crews filming the collapses of WTC1 & 2?

[Little Plastic Ninja]

Originally Posted by xtisme

If he really were the genius mastermind (not enough in the world for THAT ) then why has he fucked up so much afterward? No one could, on one hand pull off the mother of all covert OP's while on the other hand fucking up so consistantly afterward...

While I think the conspiracy theories are so much dog food...

That only works if you assume that Bush planned the whole thing AND that his goal was to pacify the Middle East.

If he's willing to sacrifice three thousand ordinary civilians, he's willing to sacrifice at least that many combat troops to get what he wants done. If what he wanted wasn't a quick easily-won war but instead a long and expensive conflict that just seems to get worse and worse and must continue to be fought, can never really be won, one that he could use to make money for his corporate cronies and incidentally stir up the hornet's nest that is the Middle East, encouraging all those brown people to blow each other up and kill each other, destabilizing the region to the point that nations would Balkanize or collapse in civil war, leaving the place a war zone until every first-world country and UN signatory sent troops to sweep up the pieces and incidentally control a long-contested portion of land with strategic importance (not to mention the resources we all know about)...

*sigh* I watch too many conspiracy suspense thrillers. Suffice it to say that no, I don't seriously believe any of the above. I'm just saying that assuming incompetence on the part of our national intelligence and our president actually helps me sleep better at night.

[Lobohan]

Originally Posted by jack kelly

Nah. You can't post a single image with markings from 911 because it was jackass fakery. Nonsense, all of it with the exception of the orb.

You are just confused. You think it's an orb because you don't understand how video works. I can post ten videos of the plane hitting.

Of course the first videos would be of poor quality. They were live, from helicopters. They were digitally enlarged so you can see what was happening.

Just because you are inept and understanding how video works, and you have a terrible ability to recognize patterns and process visual information, it doesn't mean you are right about some nebulous conspiracy.

911 was a conspiracy. Some radical Muslims decided to take the US down a peg. They came here, lived in secret and attacked in a coordinated manner. It was a conspiracy, it just wasn't the absurd, utterly stupid conspiracy that you think it was.

Sorry.

[The Man With The Golden Gun]

What happened to most of the thread?

Did it get hit by an orb or something? Is there a second one heading for the Penn State thread?

[Leaffan]

Whoa! It's a conspiracy, man!

[tomndebb]

All the recent posts have been in response to a single troll returning as a sock puppet. We are not leaving it open as a monument to his stupidity and malice. The last few posts will probably join the others as soon as I am pretty sure that everyone has seen this post.

[GIGObuster]

Originally Posted by The Man With The Golden Gun

What happened to most of the thread?

Did it get hit by an orb or something? Is there a second one heading for the Penn State thread?

Funny you say that, the post from a moderator, that was there just before it and other were removed reported that an orb got the truther.

Originally Posted by FinnAgain

Only Coincidence Theorists believe it was an orb.
Non-sheeple know that a cube got him, Tom.

Well, I have one of those 8-ball fortune telling devices, this knockoff is called an "orb" (not kidding)

I just asked my orb what were the chances of our latest rude truther surviving the day, it replied: "Chances aren't good"!

[JohnT]

I'm sorry the thread got deleted - it had some truly top-notch wackiness. It really should be restored and locked, if possible.

[The Man With The Golden Gun]

News Flash: A second orb has struck the Penn State thread.

[GIGObuster]

Originally Posted by The Man With The Golden Gun

News Flash: A second orb has struck the Penn State thread.

Darn, Mr. Scaramanga got my hopes up, but that thread that needs killing is still active.

[JohnT]

I wish orbs would strike down the interest in Martin/Zimmerman...

[FinnAgain]

Seriously, how was it not obvious this was a troll?
Nobody is that stupid.

[Love Rhombus]

Originally Posted by FinnAgain

Seriously, how was it not obvious this was a troll?
Nobody is that stupid.

Oh, I love your optimism. It's so refreshing.

[Rick]

Originally Posted by Love Rhombus

Oh, I love your optimism. It's so refreshing.

Same here

[Fuji]

Originally Posted by tomndebb

All the recent posts have been in response to a single troll returning as a sock puppet. We are not leaving it open as a monument to his stupidity and malice. The last few posts will probably join the others as soon as I am pretty sure that everyone has seen this post.

That's too bad. FinnAgain posted an interesting link to a BBC anti-truther video which drew some non-tinfoil-hat-related discussion from myself and others. Oh well.

[Ludovic]

Originally Posted by The Man With The Golden Gun

Did it get hit by an orb or something?

I used to post in conspiracy threads, but then I took an orb to the knee.

[FinnAgain]

Originally Posted by Fuji

That's too bad. FinnAgain posted an interesting link to a BBC anti-truther video which drew some non-tinfoil-hat-related discussion from myself and others. Oh well.

No problemo.

[tomndebb]

I'll leave this last post, but I am closing the thread.