It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Loose Change Video

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 01:59 PM
link   
I'm sure you guys have discussed this 1,000 times already-

I just watched it for the first time and I am amazed but what they said in it. The facts are so convincing that it's hard not to be shocked by it.

Does the majority of the ATS group think that the video is good or bogus?

Cory




posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 02:06 PM
link   
I like the video and it is almost a 9/11 conspiracy thoery for dummies but, the video has almost become "in style". It feels like it is produced by MTV. Now 16 year old girls everywhere think they are cool because they watched the video. "hey lori, did you see loose change, omg it is like so wicked cool... dylan avery is like soooo hawt"



posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Some of ther sources appear to have agendas other than truth...
www.erichufschmid.net...



posted on Jan, 20 2007 @ 03:09 PM
link   
What does your government say about these videos/theories/proofs?
Your land went to war with Iraq cuz of these attacks, and now things point at USA being the 9/11 bombers..

Any progression? Do the public belive the "official story"?
With these stories, you could bring them down from their golden chairs..
What is going on over there?

Sad , sad ,blind world


[edit on 20-1-2007 by Brage]



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 04:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by mister.old.school
Some of ther sources appear to have agendas other than truth...
www.erichufschmid.net...


LOL Alex jones is skull and bones now as shown in that diagram from your link?

[edit on 5-3-2007 by leafer]



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 07:44 AM
link   
Screw Loose Change

The above link is the counter video to loose change. It points out every hole and inconsistency the video has. It proves that the people that made loose change are liars, and scumbags that are just out to exploit 9-11 for a $.

If you still belive that the government did the 9-11 attacks after watching SCREW LOOSE CHANGE....then i'm sorry but you are making a willful choice to be an ignorant nut.

9-11 has been debunked so many times by rational people that there really shoudln't be any doubt that it was actually TERRORISTS that took down the towers....but you know some people like living in fantasy word.

doesn't really matter...no self respecting person actually takes CTers seriously anyway. now they are looked at by the mass majority of people as crazy people. Due to constant lack of evidence, wild absurd unprovable theories...the majority of the 9-11 people have gone away.

Yeah you come to ATS and you think a lot of people believe it, and they have a bunch of threads that might trick a gullable person into believing the conspirocy lie for a minute...but most people in the real world know that 9-11 was an act of terrorism, not the us gov.



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 10:01 AM
link   
So all the people that point out this amazing coincidences about 9-11 are nothing but Nut Jobs!!! So, we should all believe that since it is reported about a Highjacker's passport flying out of his pocket and crashing an airplane into a building that it falls to the ground so we can identify him. Right, and the evidence that we point out about a building coming down at free fall speed with no resistance is crazy!!!

What sounds more nuts??? Believing that a highjackers passport survives after a crash? Or asking questions about another building that was not included in the official report, not a hit by a plane, falling free fall speeds into it's own foot print at 5:20?



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 10:47 AM
link   
Sadly, in life, things tend to polarise. The "Official Story" does not stack up and the Administration has done everything to stand on those who criticise it. Faced with this, the "Deniers" have, in their frustration, begun to latch on to everything that does not seem to fit, rather than sorting the wheat from the chaff and regard that everything that the Administration is telling us is a lie.

What it needs is to go to some basicv facts.

1. Simple analysis shows that the Pentagon Photos are almost all utter bunk.
Use by "Loose Change" and by "Screw Loose Change" devalues each ones arguments.
2. Evidence given by two police officers makes it clear that it WAS A PLANE that flew at the Pentagon and that it flew to the LEFT not the RIGHT of the Citgo Gas Station which would have made its approach much easier to do, but also puts the fallen lamp posts no longer in iots flight route. It also makes it impossible for the plane to have hit the Pentagon as the traffic ach with "No Entry" on it right in its way. It also trashes a whole schedule of witnesses UNLESS there was a missile fired as well.
3. No hijacked airliner has EVER had its passengers retake it. This could not have been predicted by either a bunch of neocon conspirators NOR by the hijackers. Just as the collapse of the South Tower happened moments after the Fire Chief had reached the seat of the blaze and reported back on it, so too it is a remarkable coincidence that United 93 came down exactly as the cockpit was being overrun.
4. THERE IS NO GOD GIVEN RASON nor ANY REASON IN THE LAWS OF SCIENCE why a controlled explosion would have to be done from the bottom up to the top. Do the "debunkers" really think that the "Deniers" are suggesting that they brought in just some local building firm to rig up the towers in front of everyone? To cause a controlled explosion with STEATH, they would have timed the explosions to coincide with the collapsing bilding.
5. Compressed air blowing out the windows makes no sense here. one would not expect to see a whole bunch of windows blow on one floor yet those on the floor above, closer to the run of collapse to remain intact.
6. The suggestion that it would take months to rig up the building is nonsense. Contractors save money by planning the exact details as they start planting the first. Neocon conspirators would obviously have worked it all out before and the 36 hour window of opportunity as suggested by the evidence of one witness to the "power down" would easily have been enough.
7. Silverstein's comments COULD have been taken out of context, although he might well have knwon that something was afoot.
8. Claims by the Joe Doe Conspiracy Theorist as to WHY blow up the WTC are childish and simplistic. The Neocons had clearly achieved all their objectives in terms of war with Afghanistan etc by just flying the planes into the WTC and the impact at the Pentagon. Toi suggest that they would put them selves at risk of large scale disclosure through extra evidence by blowing up the WTC would make no sense if done for gain. Even SIlverstein could have milked the Insurers to pay for stripping out the asbestos with some of the insurance money. To identify why, one has to consider why RATIONAL people do things that do not benefit themselves. The main one is religion. Much play has been made of the Masons and their connection to the pyramids and the ancient religion of Egypt. Accoding to that religion's ancient calendar, the year started at sunrise on 11th September 2001 at about the same time as the first planes were hijacked and indeed, the first day is actually the anceint "Feast Of Martyrs". Since this is an ancient Egyptioan religion, accessing Egyptians would have been easy.
9. It was the core of the WTC that had the strength, so it was here that any cutting charges would have to have been primarily put. As a result, it would not be surprising if the outside world had failed to see flashes. (To be continued)



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 11:11 AM
link   
10. Victims' remains were first sent to a holding centre mortuary and then to another mortuary before being sent for analysis. I have no doubt that the remains are those of the victims yet they COULD have been introduced at any point into the chain if the level of conspiracy was high enough.
11. BOTH DENIERS AND DEBUNKERS are WRONG about Jane Garvey. She clearly DID NOT order the grounding of all the airspace. This was clearly done by the new guy on the block who was one of the heroes of the day.
12. The claims about the phone calls from United 93 being phoney don't stack up. People are all different and will do particularly weird things in a crisis. Refering to himself by his full name sounds quite plausible.
13. The film "World Trade Center" has been shunned as a piece of propaganda, yet has key peices of evidence that actually supports the deniers hidden away in it giving the impression that it might be closer to the t truth that might seem aparant. In it, it is clearly recorded that at one point after being buried, they are hit be a powerful and ot explosion. If explosves had been widely set in the WTC, one would expect that some might not have been set properly and have been buried. Secondly, it is clear from the film the ludicrous obstructiveness of officialdom blocking potential TRAINED rescuers (like the firemen) in to help.
14. Every plane crash is always carefully analysed. Every component found is shipped to a warehouse somewhere and lain on the floor in order and position of where it had come from. The removal of the debris from Ground Zero and its destruction by the Mayor is outrageous. Claims that its important not being realised at the time are garbage as this was ALSO an air crash site de facto. Furthermore, if the debris was regarded as being of such low importance, WHY DID THEY GUARD IT and fit the trucks moving it with GPS chips to ensure that they did not sdtray from their path, even for a sandwich and a coffee?

- To me, it really was a "conspiracy", but far, far less people were involved. Much of the "evidence" is inaccurate, irrelevant and points the finger at a wide range of innocent people when the number involved probably totalled no more that a couple of dozen of so. They relieve on people being out of their depth and screwing up as they had planned, knowing that they would have to cover-up their incompetance after the event, blocking inquiry.

I believe that:-
- United 93 was overrun, but was shot down, precisely for this reason by an aircraft which was not part of the normal chain of command. That United 93 would probably have landed some time, had the plane switched, but that this had not happened yet.
These people were true heroes.
- That they actually flew Flight 77 over the Pentagon at the same time as they hit it with a missile or blew it up.
- That the WTC was brought down with explosives.
- That the "Truth Movement" is a serious enemy to itself, by shouting "Liar, Liar" at everything that anyone in the Administration says, allowing itself to be discreditied, by the Administration being able to give out statements as obvious as "2 + 2 = 4' and telling the world that the "Deniers" are a bunch of lunatics when they give out their well-predicted knee-jerk reaction.



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by nobodyelse
Sadly, in life, things tend to polarise. The "Official Story" does not stack up and the Administration has done everything to stand on those who criticise it. Faced with this, the "Deniers" have, in their frustration, begun to latch on to everything that does not seem to fit, rather than sorting the wheat from the chaff and regard that everything that the Administration is telling us is a lie.


This is almost exactly how I feel. Why not go ahead and deny 9/11 was a Tuesday? That's opposite too...


What it needs is to go to some basicv facts.

1. Simple analysis shows that the Pentagon Photos are almost all utter bunk.
Use by "Loose Change" and by "Screw Loose Change" devalues each ones arguments.


Unclear/open to interpretation is not the same as bunk. they might be bunk.


2. Evidence given by two police officers makes it clear that it WAS A PLANE that flew at the Pentagon and that it flew to the LEFT not the RIGHT of the Citgo Gas Station which would have made its approach much easier to do, but also puts the fallen lamp posts no longer in iots flight route. It also makes it impossible for the plane to have hit the Pentagon as the traffic ach with "No Entry" on it right in its way. It also trashes a whole schedule of witnesses UNLESS there was a missile fired as well.


I don't trust this new flight path one bit, as documented in the PentaCon. The testimonies don't add up /each other and even if they did, they don't line up w/the facts.



Other points, no comment. that's just my area of specialty. Like the 9/11 defense, Loose Change is so bad it could hardly have been an accident, and the field is choked with other such apparent disinfo. Is this surprising? Would the path to truth be left wide open like the Loosers presume?



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 05:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by corsig
I just watched it for the first time


That video does raise some good points, maybe not all of it is entirely accurate, but it is a good starting point. It does make many viewers ask further questions which is a great thing and a credit to the makers of it.
There are many, many more 9/11 documentaries worth watching, some better than others, some have alot of info in them but it isn't presented with the energy maybe of the Loose Change docu.
Here is a thread in which you will find more clips to look at, scroll through the thread to find them and save some of the links, good luck Cory

www.abovetopsecret.com...'
I don't know why that link isn't working, it will work if you cut+paste. In the 9/11 section there is a "newbies thread"

[edit on 5-3-2007 by golddragnet]



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 05:55 PM
link   
Agreed with Gold. IF you do the proper follow-up, Loose Change, or any other, is a decent starting point. K Rowe, producer, admits its full of mistakes left in to encourage independent research. But the reason people watch videos instead of doing independent research is becuase they are lazy. Rowe knows that, and they didn't bother to let us know in the opening credits "some of this is wrong. We ant you to find out which parts." Instead we just see reported "fact" 'fact" 'fact" "Time to rise up.' That is not the correct approach.

But you are here Corsig, and you'll be fine re; the Truth if you want to be. Just keep your brain on.



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 06:26 PM
link   
I think its an excellent video to introduce people to the whole 9/11 conspiracys, its the first one that got me interested. Now though ive watched tons of videos and got alot of information from here and other sources. So i dont think its the best of videos but it is good for a "noob" to get into the whole 9/11 thing.



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 06:27 PM
link   
I think its an excellent video to introduce people to the whole 9/11 conspiracys, its the first one that got me interested. Now though ive watched tons of videos and got alot of information from here and other sources. So i dont think its the best of videos but it is good for a "noob" to get into the whole 9/11 thing.



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 06:51 PM
link   
For some of us, the debate is over. Loose Change has done a fantastic job, putting doubt in the minds of an ever-growing number of people, all over the World.

While it may have some facts wrong, the over-all evidence it provides is quite good. If you do some of your own research, I think you'll find - that it is the 'debunkers', who are grasping at straws these days.



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Spawwwn
Screw Loose Change

The above link is the counter video to loose change. It points out every hole and inconsistency the video has. It proves that the people that made loose change are liars, and scumbags that are just out to exploit 9-11 for a $.

If you still belive that the government did the 9-11 attacks after watching SCREW LOOSE CHANGE....then i'm sorry but you are making a willful choice to be an ignorant nut.

9-11 has been debunked so many times by rational people that there really shoudln't be any doubt that it was actually TERRORISTS that took down the towers....but you know some people like living in fantasy word.

doesn't really matter...no self respecting person actually takes CTers seriously anyway. now they are looked at by the mass majority of people as crazy people. Due to constant lack of evidence, wild absurd unprovable theories...the majority of the 9-11 people have gone away.

Yeah you come to ATS and you think a lot of people believe it, and they have a bunch of threads that might trick a gullable person into believing the conspirocy lie for a minute...but most people in the real world know that 9-11 was an act of terrorism, not the us gov.


You seem pretty damn pissed. Ahh I see, you have posted your garbage before and you are pissed off that no one believes your crap or takes you seriously. Why are you wasting everyone's time? If no one took you seriously the first time around, they ain't gonna take you seriously the 1005234432th time.



posted on Mar, 5 2007 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Just re-enforce the general trend of this thread--loose change was also my intro to 9/11, and though flawed its a major achievement.

The conclusions may not all be right, but the major evidence--WTC7 demolition, no 757 could make that small, deep hole in the Pentagon; no debris in that hole in Shanksville, no rational way to explain how the WTC towers could just explode and still crush down on themselves via the path of greatest resistance (how on earth are the shattered tops supposed to make the structure that moments before was supporting them, and that no longer has their weight to bear, simply collapse?), destroyed evidence, NORAD stand-down, war games, etc, etc--is overwhelming.

Anyone with the least understanding of physics and statics knows that no pressurized aluminum tube, no matter if it's flying at peak velocity, could shred the WTC core columns as claimed, or that jet fuel can melt structural steel. Or that...

So yeah, Loose Change simply shows what an amazing, audacious lie 9/11 really is. And it did it first. For that it's extremely important.



posted on Mar, 15 2007 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Here is a recent article by Gwynne Dyer, that he talks of the Loose Change video.

www.gwynnedyer.net...

Although the impression is that he does kinda support the notion that there was some sort of intelligence incompetence, he does not agree with the video suggesting there is evidence of a greater coverup with the government being involved.

I just thought I would post it here so others can get a look at his "influential" article...







 
0

log in

join