Wednesday, May 17, 2006

And Now a Word From the B.. B... C...

Apparently not all our friends across the water liked the movie. I guess they are part of the coverup too.

To understand the conspiracy theory, it is worth considering a film called Loose Change: 2nd edition. Available on the internet, it reveals the full alternative version of what happened to the Pentagon in all its glory. It states:

  • AA77 did not crash into the building.
  • And if there was no AA77, it must have been a missile, a military aircraft or a drone that did it
  • The alleged pilot Hani Hanjour was not skilled enough to execute the manoeuvre and the plane would have stalled in the tight turn alleged
  • Street lights were knocked down but did not bring down the plane; therefore there was no plane. They could have been deliberately lifted from the ground
  • The damage was not consistent with the size of the airliner and therefore there was no airliner
  • There were no remains of either the 757 or passengers and therefore neither existed
  • Pieces of fuselage found nearby were planted
  • Eyewitnesses who said they saw the plane were confused. Others said they saw a commuter jet or a helicopter

There are, of course, answers to all of the above, to be found in the report of the 9/11 Commission, in other technical assessments and in common sense.

For example, the limited damage on each side of the impact zone was due to recent strengthening work on the building. Windows that survived were made of shatterproof glass.

Another obvious weakness in the film is that the eyewitnesses chosen are all treated as if they have equal value. And did nobody see the lampposts being lifted out of the ground?


At 17 May, 2006 14:29, Blogger nes718 said...

Apparently not all our friends across the water liked the movie. I guess they are part of the coverup too.

BBC is liken to CBSNBCCNNMSNBC network news and in that sense are obligated to try and keep the "official" myth alive. Funny how they only seem to concentrate on the weakest point of the 9/11 argument. No mention of, say, Steven Jones’s analysis of the events, not even blurb about Silverstein's insurance claims. No... Right to the "there were no bodies so there was no plane" out of context quotations.

This is more simple minded mind manipulation for those yet to see the video and to taint their minds in the direction of the official conspiracy. Take it for what it is, a hit piece.

At 17 May, 2006 14:40, Blogger jlesseig said...

Let's not forget that Big Ben in the UK was a target on 9/11.

At 17 May, 2006 14:41, Blogger jlesseig said...

Big Ben link

At 17 May, 2006 14:47, Blogger undense said...

Wow. Even the British Broadcasting Communists can see right through the lies and BS of Loose Change. That's telling.

At 17 May, 2006 14:49, Blogger Jason said...

Are there any Bloggers challenging Steven Jones?

At 17 May, 2006 15:07, Blogger undense said...

Steven Jones? Isn't he the fusion researcher who suddenly became an expert on architectural and contruction engineering?

What would be the point? Others who are actually experts in architecture, design, and construction engineering have already provided analysis that thoroughly disagree with Jones' screwy claim. And that's beside the fact that Jones can't produce a single bit of proof that explosive devices were used to bring down the towers or WTC7.

At 17 May, 2006 15:12, Blogger caguile said...

BBC is liken to CBSNBCCNNMSNBC network news and in that sense are obligated to try and keep the "official" myth alive.

The BBC report deals specifically with Loose Change, and the allegations it contains. It appears that he even took up some of his questions with a conspiracy theorist as well. He wasn't impressed. His email is listed, so maybe you would have better luck.

I'm not sure how the BBC, or any news organization, is "obligated" to keep the official myth alive. It would seem, from the recent Pulitzer Prizes, that news organizations are rewarded for revealing secrets the government would like to keep secret. You score extra bonus points for revealing secrets that embarrass the current administration.

The 9/11 truth movement would be better served by a coherent narrative that didn't rely on a "cast of thousands" of willing conspirators, and Rube Goldberg -like requirements for success.

I'll even help you out.

9/11 happened exactly according to the official myth. The hijackers were simply recruited years previous by shadowy rogue government agents.

There! Now you only need the hijackers, and the people who recruited them. Much simpler.

Occam's Razor is not kind to the theorists

At 17 May, 2006 15:34, Blogger nes718 said...

There are no "willing conspirators" only people too trusting in Government to not question what they say and in fact, perpetuate the myth. Look at the founders of this blog. I'm sure they are well meaning and not part of any conspiracy however too trusting in the governments "account."

The bigger the lie, the more people are willing to accept it.

At 17 May, 2006 15:43, Blogger Jason said...

The phrase was also used (on page 51) in a report prepared during the war by the United States Office of Strategic Services in describing Hitler's psychological profile [1]

His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it. - OSS report page 51

I like wikipedia

At 17 May, 2006 16:00, Blogger caguile said...

I was speaking specifically of the willing conspirators required to

Plant thousands of explosives in buildings with no one finding out,

Launch cruise missiles at the Pentagon,

Divert/offload/kill/disappear passengers,

Crash drones into buildings,

Detonate the charges after a fashionable period of time has elapsed,

Shoot down flight 93,

Order flight 93 shot down,

Bulldoze the flight 93 crash site,

Distribute fake wreckage,

Whitewash the 9/11 commission report,

Whitewash the FEMA reports,

Whitewash the NIST reports,

Create voice-morphed cell and airphone calls,

Recruit various witnesses to say that the cruise missile launched into the pentagon was actually an airliner,

Convince/cajole/threaten everyone who might reveal the plan,

Those willing conspirators.

The Big Lie is one thing, The Big Event requiring the participation of many completely reliable conspirators is quite another.

You've obviously formed some opinion on exactly what happened. I would like to know what you think.

At 17 May, 2006 16:37, Blogger undense said...

The bigger the lie, the more people are willing to accept it.

Strange that the CTers apparently haven't considered that that expression may apply directly to them, particularly with all the lies, distortions, and misdirection in Loose Change.

At 17 May, 2006 16:57, Blogger Jason said...

Obviously it goes both ways.

As I read from a recent forum:

"Thing is, an "official" view by definition carries more weight than any alternative view, whether it holds water or not. That makes an increasing consensus in opposition to an official view somehow compelling all by itself, to a certain type of person."

It could also be that the consensus to the 'official' version seems to be waning?

At 17 May, 2006 17:35, Blogger undense said...

Or you could be imagining that concensus is changing?

You'll pick up a few here and there with over-the-top Bush Derangement Syndrome, for which they will suspend any semblence of reason and rationale to believe this BS, because it's what they want to believe.

But even most reasonable people who have BDS don't buy into this CT garbage. They don't have to. They have plenty other reasons to dislike Bush. They don't see any reason to prop a tin-foil beanie on their noggin and stand on the lunatic fringe chanting poorly crafted conspiracy theories.

At 17 May, 2006 18:00, Blogger Jason said...

for the most part I agree undense however I have noticed more noise and more questions being asked on the Internet, I see more sites and forums come up either attacking, defending, questioning, and investigating....

It seems quite obvious that people are raising an eyebrow for some reason or another to take action.

At 17 May, 2006 20:16, Blogger undense said...


The "US never went to the Moon," "Elvis is Still Alive," and "Aliens Are Stored at Area 51" gained some traction and cult followings too during their lifetime. However, that doesn't lend them credibility.


Post a Comment

<< Home