Loose Change; I fucking hate it.

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

I'm seriouse, if I have to hear those self-satisfying assholes bitch about how 9/11 never happened, they are going to feel me hijacking my cock somewhere near their colon.

Excuse me; send a cock-rocket directly to their colon with the governments aid and aproval. Or whatever the fuck those idiots latest excuse other then a plane was.

We had a discussion about it in class do to a news article the teacher had. In it, a reporter had completely torn the movie a new asshole, rendering all debates about it needless. Keep in mind, right before it the man had written a completely neutral, open minded article on the KKK rallying at a Union-won Civil War battle site (Antietam, if I am not mistaken). Now think for a second. If some guy can remain neutral about some cocksuckers desecrating the spot our ancestors fought and died for to gave Lincoln the momentem to make the Emancipation Proclamation with their presence, yet can't report your shitty film without getting pissed, THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH IT.

I don't see how anyone can bother watching that movie. It's lie after lie after retarded lie. They don't even do it horoscope style, I.E somewhat sketchy half truths that are so vague they can't really be blamed if they are proven to be bullshit. They make such bold, bullshit claims such as the technology to make cell phone calls on planes wasn't invented yet, and that none of the planes had windows, despite pictures of people near scraps with what are obviously windows in them. I mean, when your "evidence" goes against the testimony of every single witness (thats right, the movie lied: absolutely no one saw a missle, and about 95 percent reported seeing a plane, though what model wasn't genrally agreed upon) then maybe you should think "Man, maybe we have no clue what we are talking about"?

Rule of hand: when Mike Moore probably thinks that your some Propagandist who's just out for money, you should probably stop doing whatever the fuck your doing.

[BrooklynBrett]

Agreed 100%.

If you buy into those theories you are Grade A retarded.

[Zerok]

LC, I must admit I like you went you post.
Sadly, I am too drunk to read what you had to say.
I am therefore assuming it was well thought out and valid.

I offer my agreeance, if that's a word.

And I will attempt to remember to actually read it in the morning/afternoon.

What's more impressive is that I typed a lot of this without looking at the keyboard.

Sweet.

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

At 5/4/06 01:55 AM, Zerok wrote: LC, I must admit I like you went you post.
Sadly, I am too drunk to read what you had to say.
I am therefore assuming it was well thought out and valid.

Basically: The movie "Loose Change", which is about 9/11, is completely bullshit for a few reasons.

Ha, I need to publish a book: Rants on absolutely everything for Morons.

[Zerok]

At 5/4/06 02:01 AM, LettuceClock wrote:

Ha, I need to publish a book: Rants on absolutely everything for Morons.

Eh, just sell it to the "For Dummies" franchise.

Easier.

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

At 5/4/06 02:02 AM, Zerok wrote:

Eh, just sell it to the "For Dummies" franchise.

Easier.

Nah, the people who tend to like my work are just a tad to stupid to understand thems there big books with all thems words =D

Mine would be a picture book. With Dragons.

And penguins.

[Bwave]

Seriously though. If I hear one more faggot say that it was all a conspiracy, I'll suffocate them with my family jewels while lettuce clock terrorizes their back door.

We have video tapes of planes flying into buildings. End of story. I hate it when people make stuff up like that. They are just trying to make their hippie societies look important.

[Evark]

Explain how the buildings collapsed.

[Bwave]

Airplanes.

[Evark]

At 5/4/06 02:12 AM, Bwave wrote: Airplanes.

Have you watched the movie? He makes a convincing point on that one.

Not to mention, buildings tend to collapse as a result of forces like that DIRECTLY AFTER the hit occurs. Steel and concrete doesn't exactly burn well, so don't tell me fire caused it to collapse slowly over the course of about an hour.

The movie raises some convincing points and it raises many of them. I'm in no position to judge either way, it's just interesting to think about.

[Bwave]

At 5/4/06 02:22 AM, Evark wrote:

At 5/4/06 02:12 AM, Bwave wrote: Airplanes.

Have you watched the movie? He makes a convincing point on that one.

Not to mention, buildings tend to collapse as a result of forces like that DIRECTLY AFTER the hit occurs.

What is that based on? When a building loses some of its support, it can take up to days for the support beams to give way to ductile deformations. This is often a problem that occurs when rescue crews have to enter any kind of damaged building.

:Steel and concrete doesn't exactly burn well, so don't tell me fire caused it to collapse slowly over the course of about an hour.

The building began to fill with smoke, creating a vacuum which may have been a factor in the collapse.

[darkfiretime1]

And you state no reasons why, and are absolutely in love with your little government.

[Evark]

At 5/4/06 02:31 AM, Bwave wrote: What is that based on? When a building loses some of its support, it can take up to days for the support beams to give way to ductile deformations. This is often a problem that occurs when rescue crews have to enter any kind of damaged building.

So why were rescue crews swarming the World Trade Center towers? 300+ firefighters lost their lives. Why would rescue crews be sent into the building if they knew it was unstable and would collapse some indeterminant amount of time after the buildings had been hit? They tell firefighters to get OUT of buildings when the structures have been weakened enough to the point of danger of collapse.

But you said it could go a couple of days before the 'ductile deformations' would take effect and cause the building to collapse. So why did it take about an hour?

The building began to fill with smoke, creating a vacuum which may have been a factor in the collapse.

Buildings don't fill with smoke. Smoke is the resultant of heat, and therefore always rises. Not to mention, smoke doesn't create a vacuum.

You basically have no idea what you're talking about.

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

At 5/4/06 02:11 AM, Evark wrote: Explain how the buildings collapsed.

The article adresses it.

While the movies point that it was NOT hot enough to melt the mettle is true, they do not mention the fact that the mettle would have warped enough for the building to collapse.

And that's not even taking into account the fact that the repair job from the Car bomb that hit the WTC was shitty at best.

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

At 5/4/06 02:34 AM, darkfiretime1 wrote: And you state no reasons why, and are absolutely in love with your little government.

Actually, I named a few. And besides, when they lie about facts, claim that proven technology doesn't exist, and lies about hundreds of witnesses testimony, it's THEIR job to prove shit.

[Evark]

At 5/4/06 02:42 AM, Evark wrote: Buildings don't fill with smoke. Smoke is the resultant of heat, and therefore always rises. Not to mention, smoke doesn't create a vacuum.

Buildings, in this case, referring to the tallest buildings in the United States. Explain how the smoke would build downwards towards the supports and cause building collapse in an hour or so? It doesn't make any sense. All the windows were blown out around the floors where the planes crashed into the building/s. The smoke would pour outside, not fill the building through the airtight elevator shafts.

It's really a fairly interesting movie. I suggest you watch it. I'd be interested in seeing something that refutes all the evidence brought up in the hour-long documentary, but of course, LettuceClock hasn't provided anything.

[Evark]

At 5/4/06 02:46 AM, LettuceClock wrote: While the movies point that it was NOT hot enough to melt the mettle is true, they do not mention the fact that the mettle would have warped enough for the building to collapse.

Metal doesn't warp unless by impact, excess stress, or heat approaching melting temperature. Impact didn't do it, since the buildings didn't collapse upon impact, excess stress isn't a factor, skyscrapers are built to withstand huge amounts of abuse without threat of collapse, and the heat didn't approach the temperature required to melt the steel.

And that's not even taking into account the fact that the repair job from the Car bomb that hit the WTC was shitty at best.

Explain.

[Obliquo]

The guy makes a good point on Loose Change. And there is a new video out with extra footage, not everyone may beleieve it and im still not too belive what happened. Like the guy said in the video, if the government just released some videos from what happened that day and if they just answered a few questions. It would make this whole situation a bit clearer.

While yes, the movie was wrong about a lot of stuff, it doesn't mean that the points it made aren't valid. Take into consideration the little clips that show the EXACT same kind of little blasts that you see when buildings are being demolished on the WTC. A building falling doesn't blow chunks of itself outward like that. Also, why did the building fall STRAIGHT down? That seems a bit odd for a huge tower that only lost some of it's support from ONE side.

You'd think they'd lean over to the side that lost the support.

[KingCherry]

um...can you repeat that like a couple more times?

[Time-Traveler]

You know, I saw this interesting video one time. It showed an f-15 slamming into a concrete wall at 400 mph or so. The plane quite literally evaporated.

So, is it maybe possible, that a Boeing jetliner, which is more than capable of 400mph when going in a dive from 10,000 feet, hitting a recently modified section of the Pentagon, may do something similar?

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm a little untrusting about the plane hitting it anyway, I'm just trying to bring up some other points here to contend with the ones in that movie.

Also, I hated the movie. The narrator had the most annoying voice ever, and he tended to bitch alot.

Now, about the site 7 building, it's pretty fucking obvious that explosives brought it down. However, seeing as it was a government building, and it was brought down so carefully, that maybe buildings like that get built with explosives in them? You know, so people can't find fucking classified files and shit after an attack of that sort? It woulden't suprise me.

[capn-g]

Here's how it lines up: Anybody who thinks all that happened that day was two planes hit two buildings and they fell down is simply in denial. These people seem to take comfort in the idea that their leaders and military are incompetant, that skyscrapers are considerably more fragile than we've been led to believe and that the government would never lie about something their accused of having a hand in or manipulate the emotions of the people in order to further their own agendas. That last bit is doubly remarkable when you realize that the government is composed entirely of politicians, a group that most sane people agree are mostly two-faced egomaniacs, devoted to their own narrow vision as opposed to serving the public.

On the other hand, people who think that the towers fell because the reptilian controlled illuminati used UFOs to project holograms of airplanes over the missiles they fired in order to disctract the public need to be locked away for the benfit of humanity. Probably wouldn't hurt to sterilize them too, just to be safe.

Both views are too simplistic and 9/11 just isn't that cut and dry. Too many people have made too many claims contrary to the official report to be ignored. That doesn't mean they're correct but it does mean the official story is unsatisfactory and that more should have been done at the time to see to it this was all ironed out. Instead the investigation was rushed, the data hastily compiled, the evidence removed and the case rapidly closed, leaving a bad taste in the mouths of many. And now of course, it's way too late.

The two sides of this issue are equally intractable. People who rapidly cling to conspiracy theories are people who like order. They like to think that everything has a reason or objective, that there is a "master plan" enacted by shadowy figures and if they could just crack the code, it'd all make sense. People who reject conspiracies out of hand like control, they're WYSIWYG types who refuse to believe in some uber-group pulling the strings because secretly that idea scares the shit out of them. The truth is (historically) conspiracies do happen but they are usually enacted by those in power against other people in power, not the general populace. On occaision however, that can (and does) change.

One last thing: The guy who headed up the much touted Popular Mechanics report on 9/11 is a relative of Micheal Chirtoff (homeland security). That's not a pro-conspiracy point but it is food for thought.

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

At 5/4/06 02:59 AM, Evark wrote:

and the heat didn't approach the temperature required to melt the steel.

But it did heat it up enough to warp it to the point of being made unstable. Not to mention the countless other BS things it claims, and the fact that there are HUNDREDS UPON HUNDREDS of witnesses that claim to have seen a plane.

Explain.

Basically, the repair job done after Al Queda's car bombing the WTC was shitty, which MAY have affected the collapse, though it's not likely.

[Jake]

At 5/4/06 01:55 AM, Zerok wrote: LC, I must admit I like you went you post.
Sadly, I am too drunk to read what you had to say.

So that explains the "I like you went you post." XD

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

At 5/4/06 07:19 PM, -Platinum- wrote:

So that explains the "I like you went you post." XD

You know, I find it somewhat sad that the only people who enjoy my writing are drunks =(

[Hierophant]

At 5/4/06 07:41 PM, LettuceClock wrote:

At 5/4/06 07:19 PM, -Platinum- wrote: So that explains the "I like you went you post." XD

You know, I find it somewhat sad that the only people who enjoy my writing are drunks =(

That's because only drunks and retards care to listen to you.

[Cuppa-LettuceNog]

At 5/4/06 08:01 PM, -Hierophant- wrote:

That's because only drunks and retards care to listen to you.

El Oh El how witty you are.

Remember, everyone: insulting someone because they don't like the same movies you do is the most american thing you can do. Tolerance is for those dirty commies.

[Seasons]

At 5/4/06 04:33 AM, capn_g wrote: On the other hand, people who think that the towers fell because the reptilian controlled illuminati used UFOs to project holograms of airplanes over the missiles they fired in order to disctract the public need to be locked away for the benfit of humanity. Probably wouldn't hurt to sterilize them too, just to be safe.

I won't go down without a fight, sir.

[mexican-pride]

This topic is growing more and more interesting. You people make me think, please do go on.

[Mr-Fluffykins]

When your buying drugs, this is annoying most dealers won't take ti