Loose Change (2005?)

[Mr_Vindictive]

I recently read about Loose Change and decided to download a copy since I'm a huge documentary fan.  A free documentary about 9-11?  I'm there!

I downloaded the movie with BitTorrent and burned it to a DVD a few days ago.  I finally got around to watching it last night, and I must say I'm impressed....and disappointed at the same time.

Loose Change is a small, low budget documentary about the events of September 11, 2001.  It looks at each of the attacks in our nation, from the pentagon to the WTC to flight 93 and examines each one in detail.  

Now I know I'm going to catch a lot of flak for what I'm about to say, but I need to say it.  I don't honestly believe that the events of 9-11 happened the way that we have been told.  I'm still not convinced to this day that any plane hit the pentagon.

This is the type of thing the film covers.  If a plane hit the pentagon, then why was there little debris?  The answer was that the jet fuel completely destroyed the plane and the bodies and such.  Sure, there was a bit of debris around the pentagon, but as the film points out, the small airplane parts that were found would not be part of the plane that supposedly hit the pentagon.  Nevermind the fact that the lawn of the pentagon where the plane supposedly hit was far from damaged.

I know, I know.  I sound like a conspiracy theorist.  But, watch the footage that was released from the security cameras around the pentagon during the attack, and then call me a conspiracy theorist.  It's quite clear that a plane did not hit the pentagon.

Anyway, the film then goes on to the WTC and the attack there.  We get numerous perspectives and video of the attack, each shot as sickening as the rest.  But then we also get eyewitness accounts about explosions in the WTC after being hit by the planes.  These explosions seem to be what caused the buildings to fall, not the fires from the aircraft strikes.

Could there have been bombs in the WTC?  I don't know.  Loose Change certainly tries to make the viewer think that, and the evidence is certainly there....I just don't want to believe that's what happened.

Overall, Loose Change is a good film.  As I mentioned, I was disappointed and that was because of the narrator.  Everything starts off quite well, with the narration being straight and to the point.  The narrator describes each fact and piece of evidence perfectly.  Then, in about the last half hour or so, the narration becomes more and more angry and certainly does take away from the credability.

It is worth a view though.  You can either download the film, order it on DVD or you can always watch it on google video:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change	Small | Large

Give it a try, and post your thoughts.










Note:

I'm not trying to start a flame war, I just thought this is a film that needs to be talked about.  I do hope that we can have a civil and honest discussion.

[ulthar]

Skaboi Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But then we also get eyewitness accounts
> about explosions in the WTC after being hit by the
> planes.  These explosions seem to be what caused
> the buildings to fall, not the fires from the
> aircraft strikes.
>

I was watching the news when the first building fell and 'knew' it was falling even before the on-camera, live reported did.  My first thought, and comment to my wife, was "there was explosives in that building."

I'm no demolitions expert, but I have studied up on demolition engineering A LITTLE bit and the patterns sure looked familiar, even to my untrained eye.

That said, I have also read the 'official' engineering report about what caused the buildings to fall, and it does seem plausible.  Heat failure of the clips that tie beam to piers caused floor collapse which initiated subsequent floor collapses.

What is the right answer? Who knows.  But I will mention one thing.  There's a guy, a very vocal guy, out there claiming this and that about the WTC damage and collapse that has NO CLUE what he is talking about regarding thermodynamics and engineering.  He's a divinity expert (a very knowledgable man in his field), but I've read his writings and he just does not understand the physical science involved.  A lot of people on the 'Net cite him as authoritative, but he is just plain wrong in some of his assumptions and conclusions.  Sorry, I cannot recall his name.

My biggest problem with cover-ups on the scale required for something like this (no matter who you might assume put explosives into the WTC) is (1) since the absence of any evidence to deny them is taken as prima facie evidence of support, they are largely un-falsifyable which renders them pseudo-science and (2) the number of people who would know is just too big.  Many small-time crimes are solved because someone (of a very small circle of acquaintance) talks; on the scale of a large conspiracy, it just seems very, very unlikely that everyone could keep it all under wraps.

Just my $0.02

[Mr_Vindictive]

Ulthar,

I'm not disagreeing by any means.  Like I said, I don't have any clue what would have caused the towers to fall but it did seem to happen so...."neatly".  I know that's not a good word to use in this context, but it's the best one that fits.

Everything surrounding 9-11 is so strange, and there are many questions left unanswered.  I didn't see the events firsthand.  The day it happened, I was on my way to my first class of the morning at college.  If I'm not mistaken, it was The Study Of The Old Testament.  

Anyway, I walked in building and everyone was talking.  I walked into my class and people were crying and such.  I finally asked a girl I knew fairly well what had happened, and she told me that the pentagon had been attacked and that both of the WTCs had fallen.  I hadn't heard anything about it earlier as I had been listening to a cd on my drive to the school.  Now, I keep my radio on NPR most of the time.

Most everything I've seen about the attacks, has been after the fact.  I've seen the footage that was taken during the attacks, and I've seen the news coverage since then.  I've pretty much seen only what has been allowed to be seen.  I believe if we had more footage/information, such as the footage from a hotel and gas station near the pentagon (which was confiscated), then we could have a better idea of what actually happened.

But, like you said, it's quite doubtful that so many people would be involved and yet none would talk.  But, there are just too many "maybe" questions for me.  I have a feeling that in 10-15 years, some type of information will come out that will shed a bit of light on the subject.

[Scott]

All the issues should be brought forward if there is reasonable questions of doubt and "yes"  it is the goverments job to answer all the strange questions they keep being raised about 911. The goverment opens themselves to conspiracy theories by not answering the bigger questions. Why is it that they can't acknowledge all the discrepancies around the event, so the people will be happy. The goverment doesn't even seem concerned about these theories and is so arrogant as to not answer these questions in an intelligent manner to silence the "crazies". People have the right to ask questions and to be given answers by our public officials. It's to bad these people are brushed off as wacko's first without having the details explained to them.

They only explain surface questions without answering the surrounding supporting info that is also part of the question. Naturally I'm on the side of the U.S. goverment no matter what, but nobody likes to be made fool of. I'd rather see straight forward world conquest than covert action that injures or kills the innocent and leaving people in doubt all the time. It you want to stop Nuclear proliforation just do it. If you want to conquer the world just do it. Don't come up with these lame excuses to get the people to act.

All the "horrendous" things of the past happened by fake attacks. Burning of Rome blamed on the Christians, Burning the Reichstad by the Nazi's, Tomkin Bay in Vietnam, FDR and Pearl Harbor, Battleship Maine for the beginning of the Spanish/American war, and even to who fired the first shot during the Revolutionary War.

One World Goverment should happen and will happen. Who will do it and when will it happen?

I have no problem with world conquest. I just don't like people individually profiting by these events that really lead to no where.

None of us really know because we are fed info by polititians and media.

[Ash]

Some interesting theories and discussion here.

By the way, why was the documentary titled, "Loose Change"?

[Scott]

The person who goes around believing the official story is just as "bad" as the one who has a few questions about the event. Keep your mind open and the truth will eventually come out if we find that the official story isn't true.

If true the whole thing might be for our own good or someone is just trying to make a profit. Naturally people like to feel like they know what's going on.

Hopefully the rumors are not true. Who would want them to be true? People do have the right to ask.

[Mr_Vindictive]

Not sure about the title.


The story is that the director was writing a film about a group of friends who find that the 9-11 attacks were a lie and that it was a massive coverup.

During the writing of the film he accumulated crap loads of video and information that ended up making him think that his fictional script might actually be true.  He ended up scrapping the script and made the documentary instead, but kept the original title.  I'm sure that the "Loose Change" title would have played out in the script.

[Ash]

Switch the title around and you've got Change Loose which is what happened on 9-11.

Big change was loosed on the U.S. and the rest of the world.
Maybe that's it.

[ulthar]

Scott, I agree 100% with your premise that we all have the right/responsibility to ask questions.  But, to play Devil's Advocate, what do you say to a person who sees the evidence and ignores it, just to fit their own agenda?

There are people/groups that would stir up a hornet's nest just to do it, whether the conspiracy were true or not, just for political gain.  My point: though your post focuses on those who blindly follow the government's 'version' of the story, there are also those who blindly follow anything other than the government's version of the story.

[Scott]

Peoples motivations are always suspect. Each individual makes decisions not on one thing, but rather on a series of factors including conditioning from home and their social enviroment. From this they make judgement on what is good and bad for themselves. If it works for them they will believe it no matter what the truth is.

For me I can't possibly know the truth of what happened on 911 since I simply wasn't there. We may all one day have to make life and death choices on erroneous facts. That's the nature of the beast.

[dean]

This brings up an interesting point we were discussing in class a couple of years ago about the digtal medium [effects etc] becoming so realistic that we can't tell true images from fake images.

Without debating the 'conspiracy' itself [I actually didn't know that there was even any doubt to teh Pentagon crash until just now] 9/11 was used as an example, albiet a somewhat extreme one.  The question we were asked to ponder was 'did 9/11 really happen?  How can you be so sure?' the logic is, did you see it happen with your own eyes, or have you talked to someone you know who saw it?  Because what if we got to the stage [and I'm sure we will] when images we are shown are so realistic we can't tell the difference.  

This idea has come up in a few different stories, such as Metal Gear Solid 2 the game and in one of the Frank Miller Batman series [Either Dark Knight Returns or Strikes Back] where the President of the USA is actually a digital image, and got elected, despite the fact that nobody had met him: they just assumed that since he was on tv talking up a storm with people that he did exist.  Of course this was set in the future, but it is an interesting idea nonetheless.

Do you all exist?  I can never know for sure unless I met you: your pictures on frapper could be fake, your entire existence on this board could be a lie, and no-one would be able to tell [although it would explain a few things...]

Now I'm getting a little to metaphysical and a bit crazy, but I gather you all understand my vague point here, and it really is amazing how information manipulation could become a very big tool in the future [not that it isn't already]

Also on another note, did they explain what happened to the plane then, if it didn't hit the Pentagon, what the hell happened to it then?

[odinn7]

dean Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Do you all exist?  I can never know for sure
> unless I met you: your pictures on frapper could
> be fake, your entire existence on this board could
> be a lie, and no-one would be able to tell


Dean, I fully understand what you're saying as this is something that has often run through my mind too. I did want to comment on this part that I quoted: I so wish my existence was just made up...I do.

[raj]

For a good debunking on the 9/11 myths, check out the Popular Mechanics article
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=1&c=y

Page 6 deals with the Pentagon.
And there is other evidence that a plane hit the Pentagon:  the telephone calls between the passengers on that plane and their families.

[Scott]

Them squirrels are real Odinn7. You can't escape this.......

[odinn7]

Scott Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Them squirrels are real Odinn7. You can't escape
> this.......
>
>

NO! Get it away, get it away!